The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1852-08-17 00:00:00

daily press—is by no means the least open to the

accusation

Attentive readers may have rer

narked,

for example, that it is not an unusual thing to begin

or conclude an article with a sentence containing
the statement of a proposition, which the body of
the article either refutes or fails to support. The
day after the publication of our last number, the
Times returned to the subject of Lord DERBY'S
interference at the Bury election, and wound up a
" leader " of the accustomed length with this pithy
sentence :

" Against charges so made and so supported, the flattest
denials avail little, and the broadest disclaimers nothing."
Surely Mr. STATTER'S defence of Lord DERBY,
on which we enlarged last week, must have been
utterly annihilated by the reply of the Thunderer,

in order to justify so distinct and unequivocal a
statement ! Nevertheless, on looking carefully
through the columns preceding this bold proposition,
we have failed to discover any substantial answer to
Mr. STATTER'S letter, or fair intelligible com-
ment on its contents. With regard to the ejectment

of the three turbulent and factious stall-keepers
from the Bury market, the oracle of Printing-house-

" The real issue between us and Mr. STXTTER is whether
this sumniaryejectment was really dictated by the earnest

desire to purifOhe rr

party acrimony, as he
..sserts, or whether it sprang from a feeling of partiality
for Mr. PEEL and a vindictive dislike to the supporters of
Lord DUNCAN, as we still incline to believe. On this
point the probabilities are all on one side."
The reader will mark the cogency of the reasoning
with respect to this, the main question at issue.
Because the Times is inclined to believe that Lord
DERBY is partial to the anti-DERYITE PEEL, and
has a vindictive dislike (for some unassigned and

unsuggested reason) to the not more anti-DERBYITE

DUNCAN, it assumes that the probabilities arc all
on its side ; and having this inclination of belief,
and working on this assumption of probabilities, it
concludes with most admirably logical audacity,
that against the charge which it had "so made, and
so supported," the " flattest denials and broadest
disclaimers" of those who, instead of inclining to
believe and assuming probabilities, had full know-
ledge of the untruth and injustice of the accusa-
tion, could be of no avail. The impudent ingenuity
which suggested that the delay which took place in
ejecting the refractory stall-keepers arose from the
communication between Lord DERBY'S agent and
himself, before "a step of so much importance to a
nobleman bound not to interfere in elections, and a
minister expected to defer to public opinion, had
been taken," does not desert the journalist when he
learns distinctly that Lord DERBY had never been
consulted on the matter at all.
" This point," says the Times in its article of Wednes-
" is of little importance, for whether Lord DERBY
directed the original oppression, or whether knowing of it
now he neither disowns nor rebukes the conduct of his
agent, nor restores the persons ejected to their situations (?),
he is equally to be considered resposible for his agent's
acts."

We doubt not that the Earl of DERBY has no
objection at all to take upon himself the responsi-
bility of the proceedings of an agent who seems so
well to deserve his confidence as Mr. STATTER ;
and it will not be overlooked by any impartial
observer that no portion of that gentleman's state-
ment, in which he utterly denies that Lord DERBY
interfered in any way, directly or indirectly, in the
Bury election, or expressed to him or others any
predilection in favour of one or other of the rivals
in the field, has been endeavoured to be impeached
by the candid Times.
Thp aftamnf of +list+ innrnal fn
bolster up ;ts gratuitous and most groundless
accusation will be treated as a most egregious
failure, and visited with indignant reprobation by
all men of intelligence and honour.

THE STOCKPORT RIOTS,
...

TRIAL OF THE IRISH ROMAN CATHOLICS.
At the Chester assizes, on Thursday, Thomas Feeney,
Patrick O'Hara, Roger M•Derrnott, Michael M`Dermott,
Thomas Murphy, Thomas Garvey, and Patrick Naughton
were charged with rioting at Stockport on the night of the
29th June. There were various counts in the charge of
wounding and assaulting several individuals.
• Mr. Huddleston, of the Oxford Circuit (special), and
Messrs. Swetenham and Vaughan Williams, were for the
prosecution ; and Messrs. Welsby, M'lntyre, and Brandt
for the defence.
Mr. Huddleston having stated the circumstances of the
case, which are already so well known as to require no
recapitulation, a number of witnesses were called, several
of whom deposed to having seen the defendants taking an
active part in the first riot, which took place in Rockrow,
(to which alone those proceedings related,) when the
house of Dr. Graham and the other buildings in that
locality were attacked, and also to several of the defend-
ants having been concerned in the various assaults charged.
The general tenor of the evidence likewise went to show
that the rioters had received no provocation from the
English or Protestant party.
Mr. Welsby, for the defendants, admitted there had
been a serious riot, but contended that the identity of the
defendents was not sufficiently clear.
His lordship summed up, and after expressing his regret
that such dissensions should exist in Stockport, observed
that he felt very much obliged to the counsel on both sides
for having refrained from importing into the case anything
like party sentiments.
The jury then retired, and returned with a verdict,
finding all the defendants guilty on the first and second
counts (for riot), and Murphy guilty of malicious wound-
ing, on the third and fourth. On the sth (assault)
Naughton was found guilty, and on the 6:h (wounding)
Roger M`Dermott not guilty. Sentence deferred.
TRIAL OF THE ENGLISH PROTESTANTS.
On Friday, the following prisoners were placed at the
bar, charged with riot :—George Pell, aged 33, tailor ;
William Buttery, 18, gr3engrocer ; Mark Gleave, 19, me-
chanic; Samuel Preston, 18, steam-loom weaver; Thos.
Walker, 33, throstle-jobber ; John Slater, 32, overseer of
weavers ; Thomas Edwards, 18, mill-warper ; William
Walker, 31, shoemaker ; and Samuel Williamson and
Joseph Birch, who had been out on bail.
Messrs. Welsby, Davison, M'lntyre, and Brandt ap-
peared for the prosecution ; and Messrs. Huddlestone,
(specially retained,) Swetenham, and Vaughan Williams,
for the defence.
Mr. Brandt opened.—The defendanis were all charged
with a misdemeanour, for that they, with a number of
other persons, did commit a riot at Stockport, on the 29th
of June last. There were several counts in the indict-
ment. The principal charged them with riot, and that
they assembled together armed for an unlawful purpose.
To this the defendants pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Welsby stated the case to the jury. He commenced
by observing that, as the jury were all present on Thurs-
day, and heard the opening statement of his learned
friend, who now appeared for the defendants in the present
case, it would be quite uneecessary, in stating the case on
behalf of the prosecution, that he should take up much of
their time. They were all aware that various causes of
animosities had sprung up between the English and the
Irish residents in Stockport, and that in the week which
commenced on Sunday, the 27th of June last, these par-
ties came to an open rupture. The learned counsel then
narrated the circumstances connected with the disturb-
ances, but as they are already known to our readers, it is
unnecessary to repeat them.
On Saturday, after a protracted trial, the prisoners
John Slater, Thomas Edwards, Samuel Preston, Thomas
Walker, Samuel Williamson, Joseph Birch, and William
Walker were acquitted of the charges of misdemeanor
and riotously assembling, armed, for an unlawful purpose ;
but a verdict of guilty, on the same charges, was returned
against George Pell, tailor; William Buttery, greengrocer;
and Mark Gleave, mechanic. Sentence deferred.
During the absence of the jury, his LORDSHIP in-
quired from Mr. Weisby what he meant to do with the
other indictments.
Mr. WELSBY.—I hardly know at present.
The JUDGE.—You are aware that under a recent sta-
tute you cannot try for felony after a misdemeanour.
Mr. WELSBY.—I think that your Lordship will find
that that act of Parliament does not apply to this case.
Mr. lII:DDLESTONE asked for a verdict to be taken on
the other indictments.
Mr. 'WELSBY declined to accede to this.
The JUDGE.—Very well, then, we will begin on Aloe

.ork.,
indictments for felony
ft
sy morning, and go on.
His LORDSHIP asked Mr. Welsby whether the present
jury (they having given their verdict) might be discharged?
Mr. WELSBY.—I can hardly answer that question.
His LORDSHIP was sorry he could not discharge them
a against
itn theyst wasthad
dhreal
rsdsottnoweoords I
would ah radt
t dh ae
be y s
sevenwork.
' pressed on Monday.

YESTERDAY.
SENTENCES OF THE PRISONERS.
Previous to sentencing the prisoners, witnesses were
heard in fiITQQr Qf two of thew, cleave and Pell.

n re Iv to a statement oy Mr. Welsoy,
I is 1.0 tossup said it had been his intention to have
men, One that these trials wouid not at all influency
ulteri r It i)s that might be taken against other guilty
parties.

s \:TENCES UPON THE ENGLISHMEN.
The U Aim a JUDGE then noceeded to sentence the
English 11.50 ,re. He stated that George Pell, William
anu Mark Gleare, had been severally convicted
t attentive jury of the crime of riot, upon evi-
.
ence which admitted of no doubt whatever. After ex-
his regret that the Court had not had brought
any of the ringleaders in the riot—intimating
urther proceedings would take place, he
)f a proceeding,

commented s

upon the enormi

the dreadful of
destroy the or(

t Of Which was, to assail the persons and
rty, to sack the dwelling houses and the
.es of their fellow-subjects, Roman Catho
nen, the subjects of the Queen, and um'
. For the sake of public justice it was r
cessary to treat matters of this kind with great severil
The parties guilty of this outrage were profaning t
name of

her protection

)testantism, by endeavouring to prevent other
men worshipping God, in the way they thought best ;
and he reminded them, that at one time such outrages
were punished with death. His 1.4.-adship proceeded tosay :
With regars.l to you, Gleave, you were concerued in all

the outrages ; you were seen not only stirring the f
before Mr. Frith's house, where all the articles from t

,1 were consumed, but also coming out of

short time you were seen breaking into the houses of the
Roman Catholics in another part of the town. I am,
therefore, satisfied that you were a party in the trans-
action not only at Edgley Chapel, but in every part of the
here there were disturbances ; and the sentence
nt he imprisoned and kept to I
.e of

upon you is, that
labour for the s