The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-06-21 00:00:00

on Monday afternoon, about half-past six, the prisoner and
his companion, had brought a handcart to the warehouse,
and had filled the bags from the wheat then lying in a bulk
in one of the rooms, and, with assistance, conveyed them
away. He was observed; and the police being informed, an
officer with some difficulty traced him to a bakehouse, in
Finny-lane, where he was found at work. He denied all
knowledge of the matter, but his replies, and his subsequent
conduct confirmed the suspicion that the wheat might be
traced to his possession. The prisoner afterwards removed a
sack that was observed in the bakery, and was disposing of
another, when he was seen by the police officer and another,
and the sack was taken from him. He said it contained
flour ; but on examination it proved to be wheat.
CHARGE OF STEALING MONEY.
Lewis Lavin, a well-dressed man, apparently a foreigner,
stood charged with having taken from the counter of a pawn-
broker's shop in Sir Thomas's Buildings, a sum of lls. 6d.
in silver that did not belong to him, but was left for another
person, who had pledged two watches for £2 1 ls. 6d., and
had in his hurry taken up the two sovereigns, and left the
change. The prisoner, who was defended by Mr. Daven-
port, had, it appeared, been in the habit of purchasing un-
redeemed plate from the shop, and, when apprehended, had
in his pocket six sovereigns and eleven shillings and six-
pence. The case was not quite clear as to the precise amount
of money which was booked as being found upon him, and
he was remanded.
ROBBERIES FROM THE PERSON BY WOMEN OF DISRE-
PUTABLE CHARACTER.
Several females were brought up yesterday and previous
for this offence (District cases), but as the parties who gave
them in charge (one of whom lost £ll 10s.) did not appear
to prosecute, being ashamed of their own conduct, or so
much intoxicated that he could not identify them, they were
necessarily discharged, but with a warning from Mr. Rush-
ton that, from the prevalence of this offence, he was resolved
to send all for trial against whom sufficient evidence ap-
peared ; and if they were convicted at the sessions, few of
them, he believed, would escape transportation. Nor has
he spared the complainants in cases in which it appeared
they were so foolish or intoxicated as wilfully to commit
themselves to such company—telling them that they richly
deserved to lose their money.
A FROLIC. •
A young man of respectable and rather dashing appear-
ance was placed at the bar under the following charge :—A
police-officer saw him dragging a hand-cart at a rapid pace in
Brownlow-hill, and shouting as he went along. Thinking it
a strange occupation for one so genteelly dressed, and seeing,
moreover, that he was far from being sober, he took him into
custody. The young man said the cart belonged to Mr.
Humble; and as it appeared it was but a drunken frolic, he
was dismissed on paying a fine of five shillings.
A FINE JOB FOR A PIG JOBBER.
A pig-jobber, in homely but appropriate raiment, appeared
to prefer a complaint of a robbery of considerable amount,
against two prisoners, John Matthews and Eliza Matthews.
The complainant was so defective in his " brogue," that it
was difficult to gather his story. So far as we could make
out, it was briefly this. On 'riday night last, he had gone
to lodge at a house where the prisoners also were. He had,
however, got drunk, and when he came a little to himself,
he found that his money was gone, to the tune of £5O,
namely two £2O Bank of England notes, and two £5 notes.
He had the money in his inside waistcoat pocket. One of
the £2O notes was afterwards found, and was produced in
court. The male prisoner, who was very badly clad, and
who, it was stated, was almost destitute, being a common
labourer, and out of work, went on Tuesday to the shop of
Messrs. Franklin, in Lord-street, and wished to get the note
in question changed. One of the partners questioned him
as to his possession of it, and not being satisfied with the
reply, had the prisoner apprehended. Upon him were found
three sovereigns and other money; and on the female pri-
soneer £1 Is sd. The note was received from the Market
Harborough bank, in Leicestershire, and in order to com-
plete the chain of evidence from that quarter, the prisoners
were remanded until Saturday.
CHARGE OF ASSAULT AGAINST A POLICEMAN.
A youth named William Atkinson, whose head was covered
with a bandage from the crown to the ear, that was com-
pletely covered on one side with clotted blood, appeared at
the bar, to answer a charge against him of having on the pre-
vious night, struck one of the police officers, No. 288, John
Lansborough. That officer stated, that when he and two
other officers were going along Scotland-road, near Sawney
Pope-street, they saw the prisoner and another young man
very drunk, and ordered them home, when the prisoner be-
came insolent, and struck him. Another policeman stated
to the same effect. Another officer, No. 6, said the pri-
soner was insolent at first, when he came up. The prisoner
said he might be tipsy, but was molesting no one, or making
a noise, and that the officer had struck him very violently on
the head with his stick. The prisoner's witnesses were then
called. Thomas M`Guire, a biscuit baker, said he was com-
ing along Scotland-road, when he saw the two young men
going peaceably along. One of the officers gave the prisoner
a push, and said, I have seen you prigs in the coal-hole.
That officer was No. 288, and he was quite intoxicated.
Four females were then examined in behalf of the prisoner.
They all lived' close by. The first said that she saw the whole
affair, and that the two policemen attacked the young men
first, one of them saying, " I have seen you in the coal hole."
One of them replied, that they were liars, and the little officer
(No. 288) struck the prisoner violently. The second female
said she was standing about half-way down Sawney Pope-
street, when she saw the two, after the first affray, walking
gently away, when the officer (288) ran after him and struck
him violently with his stick. The big man (No. 6) behaved
well, and wished to guard off the blows struck at the pri-
soner and his companion. The third female said she was
standing at the door when she saw the two young men
walking with their arms round each other. The officer 288
struck the prisoner with such violence that he drove him into
the cellar window, so that panes and all were broken.
The fourth said she saw the same, and that it was after the
young men were walking away.—Mr. Rushton called police-
officer Garvie (No. 6), who stated, in answer to questions,
that after the first commencement of the affray, the young
men were quiet and going away. He kept the blows off.
The prisoners were taken to Rose-hill Bridewell.—The
Bridewell-keeper, on being called, said the prisoner was
booked to officer 288, who was not tipsy, so far as lie could
judge.—The inspector was also called, and spoke to the
young man being drunk.—Mr. Rushton said it appeared to
him to be a serious case against police-officer 288, who had
acted in so inhumane and brutal a manner, that he would
take care he should not go unpunished. Had it not been
for the interference of the taliltnan (No. 6), the injuries in-
flicted on the young man might have been fatal. On the
other hand, the prisoner had certainly himself to blame for
much of what had happened, as it appeared that he had in
the first instance behaved ill to the officers. He must,
therefore, pay a fine of ls. without costs, and be discharged.
Mr. Rushton then intimated that he should consider until
to-morrow what he should do as regarded the police-officer,
who, it appeared, had been in the force from the time of its
commencement.

CURIOUS ASSAULT CASE.
Mr. Henry Aaron appeared in court to answer the com-
plaint of Mr. Levi. The Old Testament was tendered to the
latter, but he stated that he had been, but was not now, a
Jew. He said, that as he was passing Mr. Barned's shop,
in Lord-street, without molesting any one, the defendant and
a female were standing at the door, and one of them applied
an epithet to him (which he repeated in Hebrew,) the mean-
ing of which, he said, was, that he was "an outcast of God
and'of man." He was provoked at this, and (he admitted)
made a course reply, whereupon the defendant set upon him,
and violently assaulted him. Mr. Aaron said that the complain-
ant had called Mrs. Barned " a damned Jew -," and
that he did not strike him until the plaintiff first struck him.
Mrs. Barned, defendant's sister, being in court, Mr. Rushton
said he would hear her testimony. On being sworn, she
stated, that when Levi passed she certainly did say, " that is
a converted Jew ;" and (to a question put from the bench)
admitted that he was then near to them. Mr. Rushton said
that no one had a right to make offensive and provocative
remarks on the conscientious opinions of others, and the de-
fendant had no right to abuse the complainant on account of
his religion. The balance of testimony (which was contra-
dictory) was rather against the defendant, but not such as
would induce him to do more than to caution him not to do
so again, otherwise he should certainly require him to find
bail.

ASSAULT.
A decrepit and wretched- looking old woman, named
Mary Watson, charged a Mr. Carney, a publican, with vio-
lently assaulting her, and striking her in the face with a key,
so as to give her a black eye. She said she had long known
him, and had only accosted him in the street, saying—" How
do you do, Mr. Carney?" when he struck him. Mr. Car-
ney said that he and his customers were continually annoyed
by her, and that he did not assault her as stated. He did
not produce any witnesses, and was fined 2s. 6d. and costs.
CASE OF AN APPRENTICE.
Mr, Crosskill, cabinet-maker, &c. appeared to answer the
complaint of James -Bird, one of his apprentices, for whom
was Mr. Davenport. Complainant said that he had been
bound to Mr. C. to learn the trade of a cabinet-maker ; that
the cabinet work which his master had was very limited ;
that he was in the fourth year of his apprenticeship, and had
learned little of the trade, being kept to snaking and painting
window blinds, and other occupations not appertaining to
the trade, and that he could not learn the business there, as
there was no foreman, and Mr. C. was seldom in the shop.
He wished to be released from his indentures. Mr. Cross-
kell said that the complainant had ample opportunities if he
chose to acquire the business, and was prepared to prove
that all he had been required to do was strictly within the
term " cabinet-making." After a long examination of the
case, Mr. C. having promised to teach the lad his trade, the
latter was dismissed with an injunction to make another
trial, and if matters did not run smoothly, to apply to the
court.