The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-04-06 00:00:00

CROWN COURT,..--FitipAY
MURDER wIGAN.

Robert Anderton, 45, was
jsition for the wilful muri

With-La

ed Mr

counsel pro.
Mr. Srm

icted upon the coroner's in-

Colton, at Standish-

amsnay conducted the prosecution :
led, but the learned Judge request-
•take his defence, and the learned

opening the case

id the evidence I

Lave to produce in support of the indictment would
ily he of a circumstantial nature. He should, how-
.cc the course which the de,. ' Sohn Colton, took

upon the 2.5 th of July last. On that day the deceased, who
lived at Haigh, a place about three miles from Wigan, and
was an underlooker at the coal-mines of Lord Balearres, set
off from Haigh in order to go to Bolton. He had in his
possession a watch and some' money. On his return from
Bolton, instead of going by the direct road to Haigh, which
was about eight miles,
phe returned through Wigan. He
was at Wigan between six and seven o'clock that night,
and purchased a handkerchief at a shop kept by a per-1
son named. M`Martin. After that he was seen by Mrs.
France, his sister-in-law, and ' they two agreed to go
home together. About twelve o'clock, however, the de-
ceased set out alone, and before Mrs. France. Between
twelve and one o'clock he passed through the turnpike-..ate
upon the road to Haigh, which was about two miles from
Wigan. Mrs. Roberts, the wife of the toll-gate keeper,
would inform the jury that at that time the deceased was the
worse for liquor, that she told him he had three-halfpence to
pay, but he took out a five shilling piece which he mistook
for a penny, that she said to him, There is another half-
penny to pay," whereupon he took out a shilling, that she
gave him the change, and, of course, returned the crown
.piece. At that time, it appeared, a person in a dark dress
passed through. the stile on the causeway attached to the
turnpike-gate. • About 200 yards beyond the bar, and near
the spot where the deceased met with his wound, a person
named Smith lived. Mrs. Smith heard the„report of a pistol,
and presently afterwards she heard a horse gallop past
towards the Boar's Head. About five- o'clock in the
morning a person 'limed Reed saw the deceased lying upon
the ground, and gave information at the Boar's Head,
but no notice was taken of the circumstance. At half-
-past six three persons named Finch, Ward, and Ber-
wick saw him, took him to the public-house, and
thence he was conveyed home. It was found that he
had received a pistol shot wound under the left ear, and had
been robbed of all the property which he had had upon his
person. The deceased lingered till the Wednesday following
when he expired.—The le&rned counsel then detailed a great
variety of circumstances, tending to show the connection of
the prisoner with the watch of the deceased, the handker-
chief bought from Mr. M'Martin ; also, a variety of ex-
pressions used by him on several occasions, and some facts
concerning his having been seen in the lane near the spot
where the alleged murder was perpetrated.
Margaret Colton, the daughter of the deceased, an inte-
resting girl of about nine years old, was the first witness
called. She proved that on the morning that her father left
home to go to Bolton he had a watch upon his person.' There
were three keys, (but only one would fit it,) a brass chain
and seal, with a plum-cnloured glass or stone attached thereto.
Hehad also some gold with him, which witness saw. He
was brought home about nine o'clock the next morning.
John M`Martin said he was a draper in Wigan. Between
six and seven o'clock on the evening of the 25th July, the
deceased came to his shop and purceased a silk handkerchief.
Witness had only another handkerchief of the same pattern
among his stock, and this he subsequently sold to a police-

officer.
In cross-examination, the witness said that there were
many other handkerchiefs of the same pattern as that which
he had sold to the deceased.
Abraham Syddal, a pattern-maker, said he lived near
Wigan. Between twelve and one o'clock on the night of the
25th July, witness was in Wigan-lane, and saw the deceased
on horseback, and another man following him, who was
dressed in a dark coat.
Cross-examined.—Witness could not clearly see the fea-
tures of the man in the dark coat who was following the de-
ceased.
Ann Roberts, the wife of the toll-gate keeper referred to,
said she did not know the deceased. She got up between
twelve and one o'clock on the night in question to open the
gate for a man on horseback who was going towards Standish.
The witness then described the circumstances of the mistake
which the deceased had made relative to the deceased giving
her the crown piece. Whilst the man on horseback stood
there, a man in a dark-coloured dress went through the small
gate on the other side, in the same direction as the man who
had paid the toll. After she had got into the house, and not
more than five minutes from the man on horseback leaving,
witness heard the report of a pistol. The Boar's Head is a
little further on, nearer Standish than the toll-gate.
Cross-examined.—lt would take perhaps five minutes for
the men to have got from the tollgate to the Boar's Head.
Mrs. Smith said she lived a little further nearer Standish
than the Boar's Head. About five minutes before 1 o'clock,
witness being in bed, heard the report of a pistol, which
seemed to come from about the Boar's Head. In a few mi-
nutes after witness heard the noise of a horse galloping to-
wards Standish. Next morning, between six and seven,
witness saw some men carrying deceased into the Boar's
Head. He was wounded; and witness, on looking at the
spot from which lie had been taken up, saw a great quantity
of blood.
William Berry said he was a weaver, and lived at Worley,
near Wigan. About a quarter to one o'clock, on the morn-
ing of the 25th July, witness, William Woods, and Thomas
Yates were going along Wigan-lane. They went through
the tollgate. After going through the gate about 68 yards
they met a man going towards Wigan, who had a dark co-
loured coat on. Witness said to him, " Good morning. Sir,"
and he made witness a reply in the same words. The man
then said to him, " There is a man lying In the road, on one
side the Boar's Head, and his horse on the other. Wil-
liam Woods said, " We will awake him," but witness said
they should not, for if the man they met had picked his
pocket. they (witness and his friends) would be suspected.
This was not said in the hearing of the man. The man was
a " slow talking man." 'Witness saw the prisoner in the
Town-hall, Wigan, a few days after his apprehension. Wit-
ness had not seen the man either before or since, but he had
no doubt the prisoner was the man be had met on the road.
When he met him he had a stick in hishand, and a-" bundle"
under his arm. Witness was present at his examination at
the Town-hall ; upon that examination the prisoner asked
him if the coat he then wore was the coat he had on when he
met him ? Witness replied. " No,,it is not."
Cross-examined.—The man whom witness met was walk-
ing at a leisurely pace towards Wigan. Witness and his
friends did not hear the report of a shot. They passed the
place where the man lay, but did not observe him. They
did not look. They walked on the footpath. Were not pre-
sent when the man was afterwards found. Witness examined
the pool of blood afterwards, and they had walked nine or
ten yards from that spot. One of witness's companions was
a weaver, and the other an engineer. They were going a-
fishing at Blackburn Locks at the time. They were not
going poaching, but they had no permission to fish. The
night was not very dark. The man merely walked past, and
spoke casually. It was 20 minutes after 12 o'clock when
witness and his companions started, and it would be about
a quarter to one when they met the man.
Re-examined.—Witness and his companions did go to the
locks to fish, and they arrived there about three o'clock. It
was two miles from the place they started from to the place
where they met the man.
William Woods said he was a brickmaker and weaver, and
was with the last witness upon the night referred to. The
man they met was dressed in a dark-coloured coat, which
was mended off at the " laps." This was not a shape com-
monly worn. The prisoner seems about the same height as
the man they met. Wm. Berry said " good night," and the
man answered him in the same words. The man then said,
" there is a man lying at the other side of the Boar's Head,
and if I were you would get him up ; and his horse is stand-
ing about five yards from him." Witness and his com-
panions did not go to him as they were afraid if he had been
robbed they should be suspected. The prisoner was the man
they met that night. Witness was sure of it. Witness heard
him speak at the Town-hall afterwards, and was sure that
his voice was the same as that of the man they met. He was
a slow spoken man.
Cross-examined.—Witness is not a poacher. They walked
on the footpath when they met the man. Witness had twice
fished in the locks before.
Re-examined.--Fishing at the locks is not prohibited.
By the JUDGE.—Went to the fishing-place so early be-
cause it was such a great distance. They caught about 3i
lbs. of " dace, " some of which they sold.
Ellen France, sister-in-law of the deceased, said she parted
from the deceased at the Queen's Head public-house, in
Wigan, between 12 and 1 o'clock, on the 25th. They agreed
to go home together, and were to meet at the Golden Cross.
Witness and her husband arrived there about a quarter before
twelve at night, and found the deceased was gone. It
rained, and witness turned back, but started again at a quarter
before one, with two men named Mason and Atherton.
Would have to go the same road as the deceased. Was
on foot and when they came to Mr. Powell's. where the
footpath crosses the road, saw some men coming in the mid-
dle of the road. 'When she had got about a dozen yards
from where they crossed, which is half a mile from the Golden
Cross, witness heard a man running as hard as he could to-
wards Wigan. When he came within about three yards of
witness he stopped of a sudden as if he had been shot. He
leaned his bead upon the wall. Witness went up to him,
put her hand upon him, and said, " Mester don't fall asleep
here, or you'll be robbed or beaten." lie put up his head
and put it down again in the same posture. This place is
half a mile or more from the toll-gate. Mason shouted
to witness not to stop with the man. Witness went about
fifty yards further when she heard a man coming at a great
• speed and with a heavy foot in a direction meeting her. He
' made a sudden stop before he came up, and turned himself
into a corner of the wall about two yards from witness. He
turned with his face from witness. Witness passed him,
and he still kept his face from her. He had a dark blue or
black coat on and dark trousers. Was not sure this man was
the prisoner, but on the examination before the magistrates
he said to her, " if she had met him, it was near the Inde-
pendent Chapel, as he was no further on the road that night."
The prisoner favoured (resembled) the man whose dress she
had described. Witness went on, and about forty yards over
the Red Rock Bridge, which is a mile or more further from
Wigan than the Boar's Head, she saw a horse. It was that
which Mr. Colton was on. Witness did not know the first
man she met.
Cross-examined.—Witness thought she had seen the first
man in Mr. Gaskell's office. He ran very fast. He was a
low stiff man. Told a gentleman she believed this was the
man. Believed his name was Haigh. Had never seen him
since. The second man was examined before, the justices
about- a fortnight or ten days after she • had met him.
The second man had nothing in his hands that witness
could see. It was three miles from Wigan where she saw
the horse. Did not pass the place where the deceased was
found, as she went a nearer way to the Red Rock Bridge.
The horse was standing at a dead side, near a quarry.
Joseph Reed.—ls a labourer, at Wrightington. 'Was
going to 'Wigan from Standish, about five o'clock on the
Sunday morning. Saw a man lying in the road, about mid-
way between the Boar's Head and the tollbar. There was
• some hay trailed out of a field, and he was lying upon it.
He was in a poor condition, and said, " Where am I ?"
Witness went to the Boar's Head, and having told them,
went on his way to Wigan. Witness did not know him.
There was some blood on his ear, and on the road.
Cross-examined.—The hay appeared as if it had been
thrown over the hedge from the field, and then-placed under
the man.
Henry Finch said he was a rope-maker, at Wigan. He
was on the turnpike, between the Boar's Head and the toll-
gate, with Woods and Bennett, about half-past six on -the
morning of the 26th, and saw a man lying upon some hay in
he road. Witness knew him. It was John Colton. He
was resting upon his elbows and upon his knees. He ap-
peared to be in a very bad state. Witness and the other
men took him to the Boar's Head ; examined his pockets at
the Boar's Head, and found some breach but neither money
nor watch, nor silk handkerchief ; nothing indeed but the
bread. There was a great quantity of blood about four feet,
near the place where they found Colton.
B
middle.
nlewas lying nearer the hedge, and
the
Examination the
morej Gm
ET
in
resumed.—The
d.
—The pockets, in which the de-
ceased said his money was in—which was in the waistcoat—
was turned inside out.
Cross-examined.—The
h s -eaxvae takenmined t.. T e phrase used by the deceased was,
"
By Mr. STARKIE.—He said he had about £2 in his left
waistcoat pocket, and they had taken it. This was all he
said.
Mr. George Daglish said he was a surgeon at Wigan, and
was called in to attend the deceased about_eleven; o'clock on

the iiivAday xfoonting2 at his own house, Lie bad triangu
lar wound at the stein of the left ear. Witness probed it,
and felt a bard substance. Extracted a piece of lead, which,
weighed 32 grains, and which had been in contactwith the

, .
external substance. At that time he complained of a great
pain in his head. Witness attended him several times, and
on the Wednesday night afterwards he died. After death
Witness opened the head, and
.found a large piece of lead,
which had passed through the opening of the outer ear into
the internal ear. It was contained in the bone of the internal
ear, which it had destroyed. There was a considerabht
effusion of blood between the bone and the dara mater; and
also in the membranes of the brain. On the substance of
the brain there were clots of blood. The piece of lead weighed
95 grains, and a portion, perhaps five grains, were left in the
substance of the bone, which witness could not extract.—

[The witness here produced the two pieces of lead, and they
were inspected by the court and the jury.]—lf a ball were
fired from a pistol, it would be likely to assume the shape of
these pieces. In witness's opinion the cause of death was
the gun or pistol shot in the ear.
By theJUDGE.—Witness's opinion was that the two pieces
of lead had formed one ball only, but being softish and di-
vided when it came in contact with the bone.

Thomas Welsh said he was a butcher, andlived in Standish-
gate, Wigan. Saw the prisoner in custody at the Town-hall.
Witness did not on that occasion tell him it would be better
for him if he would tell him where his (witness) horse was.
The prisoner then told him he was standing on that night
with his back to the Independent Chapel at twelve o'clock,
nearly opposite witness's shop. Colton came to witness's
shop at ten minutes past twelve that night. He was then
on a pony. Witness had his watch in his hand at the time.
He went towards Standish. He said something to witness,
but witness did not understlind him, as he appeared to have
had some little drink.

Cross-examined.—There would be many people going the
way that Colton was on
,Saturday night.l He was sober
enough to ride.
William Heath, police-officer, at Wigan.—The prisoner
was apprehended about the twelfth of August. Witness saw
him in custody in a room in the town-hall, Wigan, on the
22d. • Witness and prisoner were alone together. He began
to talk himself. lie had talked with witness before. Witness
never held out any inducement for him to tell. Whittle was
not present on the 22d.
John Whittle was here called at the request of Mr. Mutt-
P HY. He said that the prisoner was apprehended, but not
on the present charge, on the 12th August. When he was
in custody, witness had conversations with him on severaL
occasions, and had never held out to him the slightest in-
ducement to confess anything, nor had any one else. Wit-
ness went with another officer to a cellar in Akroyd-street,
Manchester, in which he found, two boxes and one trunk.
Met with Jane Roberts in Salford.. Did not see ler in the
cellar. The boxes anti trunk were searched in the Man-
chester Town-hall. They were locked, and witness got the
keys from Jane Roberts. In one box witness found a hand-
kerchief. Witness shewed the prisoner this box in Wigan,
and be said it was his.

Cross-examined.—A person named Eliiah Row was appre-
hended on suspicion of this murder and committed to Kirk-
dale, where he died. Another man named Haigh, was also
apprehended. This man was now in Wigan.
Re-examined.—The prisoner was not apprehended on this
charge. Row was taken on suspicion, as he was supposed to
be in connection with the prisoner in this charge, but he was
condemned for another offence. Witness found the handker-
chief produced in the box. He bought one like it at Mr.
M`Master's, but cut it up and sent it as samples to different
police offices, except one piece.
Mr. M`Master was then recalled, and he identified the
handkerchief found in the box and the sample as being of
the same pattern as that which he had sold to the deceased.

Cross-examined.—The price he sold the handkerchief for
was ss. 6d. The buying price from the manufacturer was
about 2s. 10d. The handkerchief produced did not appear
to have been used or worn.

Mr. Whittle recalled.—Row and Haigh, who had been
spoken of, were considerably less men in stature than the
prisoner. They were both acquainted with the prisoner.
William Heath recalled.—On the 22d August had some
conversation with the prisoner in the inner room of the
Town-hall. He said he had pledged a watch in Bolton,
which he had received from Elijah Rc w. Witness took down
what he said at the time. He said, •• the night after they
say Colton was murdered, and the same night that Elijah
Row gave me the watch, which was Sunday night, about a
quarter past twelve o'clock. I went the same afternoon
to Billinge, about two o'clock. I had been in a stable
in Poolstop-lane since between one and two o'clock the
same morning. I was in the Millgate, at the bottom of
Chapel-lane, about one or a quarter past one the same
morning. About two the same afternoon 1 went to Billinge
for the purpose of stealing a horse, which was in a stable by
the roadside. The stable was built of wood, and there was
a large pond of water on the opposite side. I believe the
place is called Higher Billinge. I brought the horse to
Smithy Brook. A little past Smithy Brook I turned on a
tram-road, which leads to Hawkby Hall and the Leigh canal.
I left the horse near the canal bridge, and went to Poolstop,
where I had appointed to meet Elijah Row. I met him on
the canal bank, before I got to Poolstop. It would be
about half-past twelve o'clook on Sunday night. [The
prisoner here burst into tears, and was provided with a
seat.] Row said, Has thou brought it ?" I asked him
if he would go to look at it : he said, " No, I will go home
again." He gave me a handkerchief wrapped in a piece of
paper. I asked him what it was, and he said it was a hand-
kerchief, and I must make something of it ; and if any one
asked me where I had got it, I must tell them I had bought
it from a hawker. He then gave me a watch—an old watch,
and said, " Thou must fasten that somewhere, and make
what thou can of it." I said it was good for nothing, and
not worth carriage. He then said. " When shall thou be
here again ?" I said, " I don't know ; I think of going
home ; but if I come this way this week again, I will either
come or send for thee, and if not thou will know where to
find me." Row said he was very poorly. I then went for
the horse, and we parted. I took it to Bolton. I got there
about Bin the morning. I took it to a public-house on Bol-
ton Moor. I went then to a man named Whittle, on Bolton
Moor, but he was in bed poorly. I (lid not see him that day.
I went to him the day after, and told him I brought the
horse which I had mentioned to him. I had it with me. He
looked at it, and asked what 1 would take for it, and I said
£B, but he said he would not give it. An old woman, who
I believe is his wife, said it was worth 1. Whittle said he
would not give such money, but he would give me £2 10s.,
which I took. I pawned the watch in the Market-place,
Bolton, for 7s, the Tuesday after Row gave it to me." He
then said to me, was it you who took my trowsers, and said
they were bloody. I said yes. He said if it was blood it must
have got on when Wm. Williams was killed on the Manchester
and Birmingham Railway,near Rusholme toll-bar' about 100
yards from a bridge between Manchester and Stockport, six or
seven weeks ago ; but Peter Ashworth, the inspector, will be
able to say. When Williams was killed I was about 30 yards
from him, and assisted to get him up. William Bradbury, a
ganger, saw me assist to get him up. I believe that was the
time I got the blood upon my trousers. There were many
navigators round Williams when he was killed, or imme-
diately afterwards. The day after, I sold the horse and
pawned the watch. I sent for Elijah Row. He came to me
in Scholes. We had a walk together, when he said said to
me, " Hast thou heard about Jacky Colton being shot ?"
I asked him, " What Jacky Colton ?" and he said, " Of
Haigh, collier and under-looker." I said " No." I asked
him whether he had been shot by some of the colliers,
who had a spite against him. Row said "No ; he was well
liked among the colliers." I asked Row if they had robbed
him, and he said yes, they bad taken a sovereign or two,
some odd money and a watch; and some thing he said about
a crown piece. I said, it is not the watch thou has given me,
is it ? He said no ; his was worth nine guineas. Row said
when Colton was shot he stunk very ill, and he believed he
had the bad disorder. I asked Row if Colton was married,
and he said yes ; but he did not live with his wife. On the
28th August witness was present when Whittle had some
more conversation with the prisoner. Whittle asked him in
what name he had pledged the watch. He said in the name
of Robert Crook, as his mother's name had been Crook. I
had got 7s. upon it. Witness took his trowsers from him on
the 17th of August, and observed some spots of blood upon
them. There were not many spots. Witness got the watch
from Mr. 'Duckworth, assistant to Mrs. Bradshaw, pawn-
broker, Bolton, _ _

Cross.examined.—Row and Haigh were both men of bad

character. Row was a shortish man. There was another
road to Wigan from the place where the murder was sup-
posed to have been committed, besides the highway in which
the men were met. It was a shorter road across the fields.

Re-examined.----There was no way to Wigan from the
place where the body was found. 'You must get over hedge
and ditch if you would go to Wigan from that place ; it would
be a mile round, and you would have to go through the turn-
pike-gate.

Jolln Duckworth, assistant to Mrs. Bradshaw, pawnbroker,
of Bolton, proved that the watch produced was pledged at
the shop f his mistress on the 28th of July, in the name of
Robert Crook, for 7s.

Margaret Colton was then recalled, and she proved that
the watch, key, chain, and seal were the same which her fa-
ther had taken with him when he left, home to go to Bolton.
William Needham said he was a servant to the deceased,
and proved that he saw him with the watch at half-past one
in the afternoon, just before he set off for Bolton. He had
it in his hand. _

Cross•examined.—Witness was sure the deceased set off
at two o'clock.

Mr. MURPHY said the little girl had stated her father had
set off at nine in the morning.

The JUDGE said she had been led in that question, but she
might he recalled.

The girl was then recalled ; she said she did not know
what time her father set off, but he had had his dinner first.
Robert Torbock said he knew the watch produced, and
that he had let the deceased have it on trial about a fortnight
before his death. Witness had the watch from his cousin,
James Woods. The pendant turned round.
James Torbock, son of the preceding witness, also iden-
tified the watch, produced as one which his father had given
him to repair. It had--a pendant. Whilst witness was
wearing it, he gave it to Mr. Green to repair, and he put a
new glass and a new hand to it. Witness had no doubt it
was the same watch.

The JUDGE said this evidence was entirely beside the case,
as Robert Torbock did not shew that he had lent the same
watch to his son which he had given to the deceased.
Robert Torbock was then recalled, and he said he had so
lent the watch to his son.
In cross-examination, James Tarbock said he could not
have identified the watch unless he had opened and examined
it, or been led by the questions put to him.
Wm. Green, watchmaker, of Wigan, said the watch was
brought to him to repair by James Torbock three months
before Mr. Colton was murdered. The watch produced was
the same watch.

The JUDGE intimated that it was unnecessary to pursue
further the examination with the identity of the watch.
Jane Roberts was then called. She said she had lived with
the prisoner aA his wife, but was not married to him. She
refused to be sworn, on the ground that she knew nothing
whatever. _

The Learned JUDGE, with great patience, explained to het
the consequences of her proceeding, and told her that she
need not answer any questions which would criminate herself.
The Crier said she had been sworn upon the bill before the
Grand Jury.

The witness said she knew nothing.
The JUDGE said she must be sworn, even if she knew
nothing. He directed the Crier to administer the oath.

The witness still refusing,
The JUDGE.—Let her be taken into custody for this con-
tempt, in refusing to be sworn.—She was then committed.
Mary Brown said, she lived with Adam Brown, in a cellar
in Akroyd- street, Manchester. Tho woman who had refused
to be sworn lived with the prisoner, in the next cellar, under
the name of Jane Anderton. Witness remembered the Wed-
nesday on which the prisoner was apprehended. He came in
in the morning, and, having changed his clothes, went out
again, The same day, and Thursday, which was the next
day, Jane Roberts, or Anderton, came into witness's cellar.
She came in twice on the Thursday. Witness was out once
on the Thursday, and she could have got in in witness's ab-
sence. On Friday morning, about nine o'clock, witness
found a bag in her house. It was in one of the drawers.
Witness and some of the neighbours examined the bag.
There was in it a pistol stock, a bullet mould, and a little
box with some powder in it. Witness did not then know
who had put the bag there. Jane Roberts was called in.
Did not know to whom the pistol belonged. Had never
seen it in the cellar before. Witness had seen a dark-blue
coat hanging for three days in Anderton's cellar, three
weeks before the prisoner was apprehended. It was an
old-fashioned coat, rounded off in the " laps." The
colour of it was dark blue. The next time witness saw
it at her father's, who lives in Ashton-road. It was on the
Monday after the prisoner's apprehension. Her father's
name was John Blakeley.
Mary Blakeley, mother of the last witness, said that Jane

Reket4: had giver, hat a coat, Vtlinoss vrao I tor danglitor's
cellar at the titna, and Janp Roberta came in and gave her
the coat. It was an old.fashioned farmer's coat, with the
laps rounded. This was before the prisoner was taken up,
but she did not know the day of the week. She was a
stranger to witness. She gave her the coat on some day near
the middle of the week. Witness took it to her husband
the same day she got it : he came out of the smithy, and she
let hirn look at it.

John Biala:ley, husband of the last witness, confirmed her
testimony as to her bringing the coat, and added that he gave
it to Bernard Corner, a tailor, to be altered, two or three
days afterwards.
By the JUDGE"

Had not heard of Mr. Colton's murder
till a week after he had got the coat.
Bernard Corner, the tailor alluded to, said he received a
coat from the last witness, on Wednesday, the 26th August.
He was to make it into a double-breasted dress coat. When
he received it, it was rounded off at the skirts : he took off
that round, and made it into a dress coat. Lipsett, an
officer, came to his house, and witness gave it to him. The
coat now produced is the coat be so altered.

David Lipsett, a police-officer, proved that he received the
coat now produced from the last witness.
John Johnson said he was a farmer at Pendleton. On the
20th July the coat now produced was taken from his house,
but it wis not in the same form now as it was then. It was
an old-fashioned coat rounded off at the laps.
By the JUDGE.—Witness's house was broken into and the
coat stolen.

Mary Dilworth said she lived in Manchester, about a mile
and a half from the prisoner's cellar. On the morning of
Sunday, the 16th of August, Jane Roberts came to witness's
house, and again about eleven o'clock at night. She then
gave witness some money wrapped in a paper. It consisted
of a sovereign and some silver. The constables apprehended
her in witness's house the same night.

Edmund Harris said he lived with his mother in a room
adjoining that occupied by the last witness. As witness was
going to his work at half-past six o'clock on Monday morn-
ing, the 17th of August, witness found in the passage a num-
ber of pawntitkets in a " uzzard," which was a sort of
pocket-book. He found it about a yard from the door.
There were 19 pawntickcts. Witness gave them to his
mother.

Mrs. -- Harris, mother of the last:witness, said her
son gave her the " uzzard." She gave the pawntickets,
which it contained, to Lipsett.
David Lipsett recalled.—Received the pawntickets from
the last witness, but had only retained one of them, as the
others were wanted.

Duckworth, the pawnbroker, here identified the ticket to
be the one which he gave when the watch was pledged.
Charles Jackson said, in August last he was an inspector
in the Manchester police. On the 16th August he went to
the prisoner's house, and found a key and seal in a tea-cup.
He gave them to Lipsett.
Lipsett, on being recalled, said that the key he received
would tit the watch, but the other two on the chain, would
not.

Margaret Colton recalled. She identificd;:thelkeys as
having been worn by her late father.
Mr. John Whittle, the constable of Wigan, was again
called. He said that on Saturday, the 15th of August, the
prisoner made some statements in the Town-hall, Wigan.
He had been committed on another charge the day before.
Witness had asked him the day before whether he
knew anything of the murder of John Colton. The follow-
ing morning he said to witness, " I was in Wigan that
night, and Elijah Row and me had arranged to steal some
mutton from a butcher's shop opposite the Dickenson's Arms.
We did not steal it, and what Haigh or Elijah did afterwards
I cannot tell." The prisoner then deposed as to an intention
on the part of Elijah Row, to shoot Mr. Part, to steal Mr.
Whittle's horse, and that he (the prisoner) was to have shot
a man named Fletcher, who was in the habit of going every
Saturday with money from Wigan to pay the colliers, and
rob him of his money, which was supposed to be at least £lOOO,
and he and Row were to go to America with it.

Frederick Taylor, clerk to Mr. Gaskell, clerk to the ma-
gistrates. Witness produced the statements of ;the prisoner
taken before the magistrates. _ _

This document Caving been put in, it was read by the
Clerk of the Court. It was of great length, but generally
had little relation to the subject of the indictment. It re-
peated the account the prisoner had already given of stealing
the horse, of receiving the watch and handkerchief from Row,
and the account which he said Row had given to him of the
murder of Colton.

Jane Roberts was here ordered by the learned Judge. to be
brought from the dock, and again placed in the witness box.
_ This having been done,

The Crier said she still refused to be sworn

The JUDGE.—Take the book and be sworn instantly

The woman again refused

The JUDGE.—I give you warning, that if you do not take
the book and be sworn, you will be punished severely for
contempt of Court.
Mr. MURPHY.—Do take the book, woman : you will do
more injury to your husband by not taking it.
The prisoner, addressing the woman, told her she had no
reason to be afraid of taking the oath.
The JUDGE.—Take the book directly. Yon are bound to
be sworn whether you know anything of the matter or not ;
and if anything which will implicate you in guilt be asked,
you are not bound to answer. But you must be sworn first.
Having waited for some time without the hope of obtain-
ing an answer, _ _ _

The JUDGE asked when sire was committed to prison.
The CLERK of the CROWN replied, she was apprehended
on the 17th August, and committed on the Ist of September.
The prisoner here requested permission to speak to the
woman.
The JUDGE immediately assented.

The prisoner then told her there was nothing in taking the
oath which was likely to do her harm. It would make no
difference to.her, and he hoped she would speak the truth.
All the blame lay upon him and other persons, and he hoped
she would answer.
The woman taking no notice,

The JUDGE said-4 will not waste any more time about
this. Do you refuse to answer ?
The witness paid no regard to these words.
The JUDGE—WiII you tell me whether you will be sworn
or not ?
Witness—l will not be sworn.
The 3 UDGE—Give her the book.

[At this point the prisoner burst into a flood of tears, and
seemed scarcely able to restrain his emotions.]
The witness persisting in her refusal—

The JUDGE.I—WeII, Sane, as you refuse to he sworn, the
court has your refusal recorded, and you are, committed to
prison for six calendar months.
The witness was then removed.
Mr. STARKIE.—That is the case, my lord.

Mr. MURPHY then addreSsed the jury, and commenced
by entreating the jury to dismiss from their minds any un-
favourable impression against the prisoner which they might
have conceived from the unfortunate exhibition which had
just taken- place. He thought the conduct of the woman
was referable to the anxious feelings of human nature, arising
from the terrible situation of the man with whom she had coha-
bited, rather than to an apprehension of the effect of any evi-
dence she could adduce against him. His learned friend
had opened the case as one of circumstantial evidence. In
other words, there was nothing tangible to implicate the pri-
soner in the transaction ; and consequently the jury were to
infer, from a series of circumstances, whether important or
minute, made into a continuous narrative, which should be
strong enough to account for his having been the hand which
perpetrated the offence, although no human eye could have
seen him except that of the murdered man. The learned
counsel then offered some observations upon the nature of
circumstantial evidence, his argument being, that although
the prisoner bore a bad character, he was not 1 cs be considered
as a murderer, for the principle acted upon in courts of jus-
tice was not one of surmise. The learned gentleman was
proceeding to detail a rather singular instance of the convic-
tion of an innocent man upon circumstantial evidence, when
The JUDGE said a message had just been conveyed to him
from which he understood that Jane Roberts was now willing
to be examined.

Mr. STARKIE said he was in his lordship's bands, but ano-
ther difficulty would arise, if, after having been sworn, the
woman should refuse to answer the questions.
The witness was then introduced into the witness box.
The JunGE addressing her, asked her whether she was now
willing to be sworn ?
Witness.—What I swore before was false.
The JIIDGE.—Are you .willing now to be sworn and ex-
amined ?

Witness.--Yes, my lord. What I swore before was false.
The JUDGE repeated the question.
The witnesslgave no answer.

The JuDGE.7—WeII, Jane, do tell me what you mean to
do. Do you choose to be examined or not? You should
not have sent this message to me unless you do. If you
have altered your mind say so.
The witness still keeping silence.
The JUDGE.—WeII, Jane, tell us whether you meaulto be
sworn or not?

The witness again maintained silence.
The JUDGE.—Offer her the book, and if she does not take
it let her go back to prison.
The witness took the book and was sworn.
She was then examined by Mr. STAnxiz. She said that
what she had sworn before the magistrates was false. She
lives in the same cellar with the prisoner. •
The JUDGE, at.this point, cautioned the prisoner against
implicating herself.

Examination resumed.—Had seen no pistol in the pri-
soner's house. Had not sworn so before the magistrates.
She had not seen any bullet or bullet-mould there; and had
never said anything of the sort before the magistrates. Does
not know how long she bad lived with the prisoner. Did not
know how old she was.

Mr. STARKIE asked her whether she was above ten years
old.

The witness again refused to answer the questions.
The JUDGE told her she was still liable to be sent to pri-
son, and she should be unless she answered.

Mr. STARKIE asked her whether she had taken a bag
containing a pistol to May Browne's ?

The witness refused to -answer

The J Doe again endeavoured to prevail upon her to an-
swer, but as she obstinately refused, he ordered her to be
conveyed back to the prison, to undergo her term of impri-
sonment for six months. His lordship further intimated to
the woman she would not have the same opportunity_ again.

Mr. MURPHY then resumed his addres;'on behalf of the
prisoner, and commented most ably on all the circumstances
in the case.

The learned JUDGE commenced his summing up at ten
minutes to four o'clock.

At a quarter to Seven o'clock, the Jury found a verdict of
NOT GUILTY.

The prisoner is detained to take his trial upon other char-
ges of a serious nature.

NISI PRIUS COURT.—FRIDAY.
(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE and a Special Jury.)
The first case taken this morning was the following :
DAVID'SON, REGISTER OFFICER, V. STANLEY, BART.

This action was specially fixed for this morning.
On the part of the plaintiff there appeared Messrs. Cress-
well, Alexander, Cowling, and Brandt; for the defendant
Sir J. Campbell, attorney-general, who came down on a spe-
cial retainer, the Attorney-general for the county palatine,
and Mr. Watson.

The following gentlemen were sworn as a special jury :
ALEXANDER SHAND, merchant, Liverpool.
Thomas Birkett, merchant, Walton.
RObert Aked, merchant, Everton.
John Rimmer, merchant, Toxteth-park.
Richard Jones, merchant, West Derby.
Wareham Jeminett Brown, merchant, Wavertree.
Daniel Bell, Merchant, Wavertree.
Robert Lowe, banker, the Larches Lea.
Joseph Maunder, merchant, Much Woolton.
George Stubbs, merchant, Moseley-hall, Wavertree.
Lawrence Rostron. merchant, Salford.
Daniel M'Nichol, merchant, Liverpool.
Mr. COWLING opened the pleadings, and Mr. CHESSWELL
stated the case to the jury. This was an action brought by
the Commercial Bank of England, in the name of their pub-
lic officer, Alexander Davidson, to recover the value of seve-
ral bills of exchange, amounting to between £7OOO and
£BOOO. This was an important case, involving a great ques-
tion; for the whole of the bills were drawn and endorsed by
a person named Richard Blundell, who was the steward and
agent of Sir Thomas Stanley, of Hooton-hall, in Cheshire;
and the question would be, whether he had or had not the
authority to draw, endorse, and to pledge such bills of ex-
change. Blundell came into the service of Sir Thos. Stanley
in the year 1829, as under steward, and in 1831, on the death
of the head steward, he succeeded him. Sir Thomas Stanley
was then engaged largely in farming, and his steward, Blun-
dell, bought and sold cattle for him, for which he paid and
received money, sometimes in cash and sometimes in bills.
He was also in the habit of receiving the rents of the defen-
dant, which were occasionally paid in bills, and' those bills

were mimed and pall away by Blundell to tradesman and
others. It was clear from the evidence, as he should lay it
before the fury, that Blundell was acting by the authority,
and with the full knowledge of the defendant (Sir Thorna.
Stanley). The learned counsel then proceeded to state tht
nature of the evidence he should lay before the jury, anti
concluded by observing that, after proving that the defendant
must have been acquainted with the fact of Blundell being
in the habit. of drawing, accepting, and paying these bills, he
should confidently look for a verdict in favour of his client.

The following Witnesses were then called :
Thomas Warburton said, he was in the service of Sir
Thomas Stanley for twenty-five years. Witness was in the
habit of buying.and selling stock. Mr. Ashurst was formerly
steward to Sir Thomas Stanley, and on his death, about ten
years ago, he was succeeded by Mr. Blundell. Witness was

in the habit of receiving money from Blundell, and paid him
money when he sold stock. Blundell had the management
of the cash. Witness was in the habit of giving to Blundell
both cash and bills, for`the cattle he sold. He also was paid,
occasionally, money by Mr. Blundell, by means of cheques,
on the Chester Branch of the Commercial Bank of England ;
and, on one occasion, received a cheque on that hank for be-
tween XlOO and £5OO. This cheque, together with a letter
from Blundell to the manager of the bank, were put in. In
his cross-examination, by the Attorney-General, the witness
admitted being the acceptor of three bills, part of those for
which the action was brought, and that he.put his name on
the stamps before any thing was written on them. Witness
was shepherd to Sir Thomas Stanley, and that was known to
the Commercial Bank, at Chester. Sir Thomas Stanley is
a large land-owner, both in Cheshire and Flintshire.- Some
of the customers were in the habit of paying in cash and bills,
both in Ashurst's and Blundell's time; but in Ashurst's
time, cash was always given to witness, to purchase cattle
with. Blundell bad two offices, one at Hooton-hall, and
another at his own house.

William Rigby, a butcher, residing in Liverpool, stated,
that he was in the habit of purchasing cattle from the last
witness, and generally paid in. bills.
Thomas Weaver, a farmer, in Cheshire.—ls tenant to Sir.
Thomas Stanley. On two or three occasions witness paid
part of his rent in bills. These were drawn on his cheese-
factor, who lives in Southwark.

Three of these were put in, dated in November, 1835, for
£350; in May, 1838, for £282 2s. 7d. ; and the third in No-
vember, 1838, for £385 19s. 7d.
Joseph Jones, contractor for the Stourton Railway, proved,
that about five years ago he commenced the railway, and
finished it about three years ago. He was paid the first sum
by a cheque on the Royal Bank of Liverpool. Afterwards
he was always paid by bills drawn per procuration of Sir
Thomas Stanley, by Blundell. _

Eighteen of ihese bills were handed to witness, and were
afterwards 'put in and read. They were signed It. Blundell,
per pro Sir Thomas Stanley, and payable at Messrs. Robarts,
Curtis, and Co.'s, London.—ln cross-examination the wit-
ness said, he did not give notice of they way in which Blun-
dell paid him to Sir Thomas Stanley, until after Blundell
was in goal on a charge of embezzlement. Witness under-
stood he had been transported.
Mr. John'Tomlinson, a builder, in Liverpool, proved, that
in 1837, be was employed by Sir Thomas Stanley, to look at
a slip at Eastham, and also at some other works. He fur-
nished some plans and specifications, for which he was paid
the sum of £39 ss. by a bill drawn by Blundell.

Two or three other- witnesses were called, who gave similar
testimony.

A number of tradesmen were next called, to prove that for
some time previous to Blundell leaving Sir Thomas Stanley
they were paid their bills by cheques drawn by Blundell on
the Chester Branch of the Commercial Bank of England,
and, on one occasion, Sir Thomas was present in the steward's
office, when a cheque was given for a bill due from Sir Thos.
Stanley, on the bank before mentioned.

Mr.-George Bridges Granville, of the firm of Williams,
Granville, and Co., who arc the private bankers of Sir Thos.
Stanley, at Chester, was called, and he proved, that Sir Thos.
Stanley kept an account with the bank. There was a pass-
book kept. This was produced, and it was proved from them
that a variety of money was paid into the bank to the credit
of Sir Thomas Stanley in bills and cash, some of which bills
were endorsed by Blundell, per pro. Sir Thomas Stanley.

From the cross-examination of this witness it was elicited
that Sir Thomas had always a good account with the bank,
and always signed his cheques himself, with one exception,
and that was in April, 1839, when a cheque was brought to
the bank drawn by Sir Thomas Stanley, but not signed by
him, he having forgotten to do so. This cheque was signed
by Blundell in the bank, and cashed.
The manager of the Royal Bank of Liverpool was next
called, and he deposed to having had transactions with Sir
Thomas Stanley. In 1836, a letter was received by the bank,
authorising the payment of £450 to Blundell, on account of
Sir Thomas Stanley ; and, in 1838, two bills for £5,000 and
£lO,OOO were paid into the bank, endorsed by Blundell.
Subsequently, Sir Thomas Stanley ordered the bank to pay
to his credit in Drurnmond's and Co., London, the sum of
£6,000. _ . • . .

The bills of exchange having been put in, the plaintiff's
case closed.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL addressed the jury for the de-
fendant at considerable length, contending that there was not
one tittle of evidence to show that Sir Thomas Stanley ever
authorised Blundell to use his name, or that he was aware of
his having done so. He contended that the inference to he
drawn from the evidence was rather the. contrary ; for Blun-
dell had received, on one occasion, a special authority, which
was totally unnecessary if he had a general authority. The
learned gentleman went minutely over the whole of the evi-
dence, and concluded by observing, that he should sit down
with the most perfect confidence, that the jury would return
a verdict in his favour, which would have the effect of
causinc, such banks to act more cautiously fur the future, in-
stead of winking at the fraud,, and lending a helping hand to
such characters.

The learned JUDGE summed up in favour of the defend-
ant, for whom the jury immediately found a verdict.

CROWN COURT.—SATURDAY.
Mr. Justice Alanle took his seat at nine o'clock
THE LAUREL-STREET GANG.

Henry Stevenson, aged 47, John Frances, 30, Henry
Mitchell, 22, and Louisa Mitchell, 23, (wife,) were placed at
the bar. The male prisoners were charged, on 10 indict-
ments, with feloniously stealing, at Liverpool, a variety of
valuable property, consisting of plate and jewellery of almost
every description, watches, tine articles of wearing apparel,
pieces of muslin, needle-work,• coin, &c. &c., the property
of live individuals. The female prisoner stood charged with
having been accessory to several of the felonies, and with
having received several of the articles, knowing them to
have been stolen. Amongst the numerous articles. stolen
from dwelling-houses were the following:—

From David Thom :—Twenty silver';poons, a gold watch,
four gold lockets, two gold seals, arid tour gold rings.
From Jarnes Robinson :—Twenty-four silver spoons, one
silver fish-slice, three silver knives, three silver forks, one
silversnuff-box, one gold watch, &c.
From Robert Bell :—Five silver cruet-pots, one silver tea-
pot, thirteen gold rings, and a gold watch.
From. Thomas Nicholson :—Fivegold rings, ten sovereigns,
two necklaces, and five tea-spoons.
Burglariously, from John Forsyth :—One riding-habit,
five shawls, five scarfs, one hundred yards of muslin, one
hundred yards of silk, twelve pairs of shoes, twenty pieces of

silver coin, &c.
The burglary at Mr. Forsyth's was first proceeded with.
Mr. 'ARMSTRONG addressed the jury in support of the
prosecution.
Mary Cornish, cook to Mrs. Forsayth, and another ser-
vant said, that on the night of the 2d November they went to
bed at eleven o'clock, and they described the condition of the
rooms on going down stairs next morning at six o'clock,
when they called up Mrs. Forsyth. •
Mrs. Forsyth sworn.—l was called up and went into the
back-parlour. I had been sitting, there reading till twelve
o'clock the night before. Ido not recollect whether I shut
the door. I left two candles on the table. One of them I
found burned down •to the socket, the other was as I left it.
I saw the China trunk broken open, and missed a quantity
of muslin, children's gloves, silk dresses, shoes, &c. It is a
very large trunk, about two feet high. There was an iron
box in it containing some rupees. A chisel-or some other
instrument had apparently been used to cut it, and it was
forced open. About eleven o'clock I saw Stevenson and the
other policeman. 'When I was called up, it was just a slight
streak of day. The bell I have frequently beard, and I un-
derstand it rings at six o'clock. Mr. Parke brought me, on
Friday, the 6th November, several of the articles missed
from the trunk, children's dresses, edging, " insertion,"
muslin, &c. I afterwards was shown a box of articles out of
the chest by Mr. Dowling.
Mary Park, wife of Park.—l live at No. 5, Lawson-
street, corner of Laurel-street, next door to the house of the
prisoner Mitchell. On the morning of the robbery, the ser-
vants came and told me. Mrs. Forsyth's is four doors off.
The female prisoner, Mitchell, came, on the sth of Novem-
ber, with several articles, including a piece of " insertion."
She came for ale, as usual. I took them to Mrs. Forsyth's
on the 6th. Same day I went with the policeman to Mit-
chell's • house, and pointed out the female prisoner as the
woman. I also saw the male prisoner, Mitchell, whom I had
seen go into the house before, as also the other men. I
went out of the house immediately, and instantly heard awful
screams of murder.

John Stevenson, police-officer, said—l was called in on the
morning, and found the back-window opened (apparently as
described.) I went to Mrs. Parke's, and she showed me
some worked muslin, &c. I went with the officer, 512, and
Mrs. Parke. I told the officer to keep watch at the back. I
knocked at the door three times before I was admitted. The
female prisoner let mein. She denied all knowledge of the
muslin, &c. shown to her. 1 saw the prisoner. Mitchell, who
said I had got to the wrong place. Mrs. Parke went away,
and I sent Kirkham .to bring her back. When she came back,
she said the female was the woman who gave them to her.
We said, " That is enough for us." Kirkham found Steven-
son in the kitchen below. We afterwards found the prisoner
Frances, who was attempting to escape behind. I saw the
prisoner Stevenson with a hammer, and warned Kirkham to
take care of himself. He struck Kirkham on the head, and
he fell instantly. I tried to draw my staff, but had no time to
prevent him. -When near the parlour door, Mitchell drew a
stick loaded with lead, and struck me with it. (The instru-
ment was produced—a murderous weapon.) It was of
twisted whalebone or cane, with a long knob. I received se-
veral blows. The other prisoners were there. I suffer yet
from the blows, and will, I fear, all my life. I bled pro-
fusely. Stevenson struck Kirkham. When I got better I
endeavoured to go after them. I fell when I got out from
faintness. At the corner of the street I found the female
prisoner, and took her into custody.
Cross-examined.—We did not use our staffs. We were so
suddenly struck that we could not. Ido not know whether
Mitchell is a shoemaker. I believe some shoemaker's tools
were found in the house. _

John Kirkham, police-officer.--I accompanied Stevenson
to the house on the 6th November. The other officer was
stationed at the back door. Stevenson asked the female pri-
soner if she knew the muslin, and she said she did not. I
afterwards saw Mrs. Parke at the door, and she identified the
female as the person who gave it to her. I saw the prisoner
afterwards in the back parlour. I was hit with the hammer
by Stevenson, the prisoner, and the hammer stuck in my
skull. I was struck three or four times on the head, and
once on my arm. I struggled with him, but he got away.
I was covered with blood, and stupified for a time. I after-
wards saw Frances in the street, and knew him to be one of
them, and he was apprehended.
Henry Tomlinson, police-ollicer.—l was stationed at the
back of the house in a lane, and looked through the keyhole.
Stevenson, the prisoner, came to the door and looked alarmed,
and desirous to escape. He listened, and rushed in and out
still holding the door. I afterwards saw the prisoner scale
the wall, and he and Mitchell came into the lane. Stevenson
had the hammer in his hand. Stevenson ran and went under
a cart, and with the assistance of a young man, a butcher,
I took him. He had the hammer in his hand, which I took.
He afterwards kicked and was very violent, and I struck him
with the hammer to make him quiet. (The hammer produced,
a shoemaker's, was still marked with blood.]
Stephen Kitchen, a butcher, assisted the last witness to
apprehend Stevenson, who had a hammer in his hand. It
was all over blood. There was blood on the blade.
James Moore, a labourer, heard of the robbery. Went to
the back door.of an empty house, in Laurel-street, about
three o'clock on the same day. I also found the necessary-
door closed, but afterwards open, and the back-door half
open. There was another man with me, and we searched
euery where, but fonnd nothing. Soon afterwards the man
shouted to him, and, on going up, lie lifted up a horse-mid-
den ,lid, and found the prisoner Mitchell under it. They se-
cured him, and gave him to the police. He had no hat,
handkerchief, coat, or shoes (as described by the police-
officers.) . - -

Lawrence Moore said, he also had heard of the robbery,
and found the prisoner Mitchell in the litter. When he took
hold of him, he said, " For God's sake let me go, I am
quite fatigued every night this week."
The Bridewell-keeper spoke to receiving Mitchell. Hiti

Ing Nlitehellgetover the wall.

Francis Eggii

on, djoiner, suid,---Oit the 6th November
I was working at the Deaf and Dumb School, A door
opens into Laurel-street. About three o'clock I saw the
prisoner Frances, walking quickly, followed by police-officer
Kirkham, slowly. Kirkham appeared in a dreadful state,
and cried " Stop him !" Frances ran, and I followed him.
Another person came towards Frances, and, seeing he must
fall into the hands of one of us, he made a stop, and we se-
cured him. We took him to the corner of Russell-street,
and gave him to Watson, police-officer No. 165.
Watson, police-officer, who took charge of Frances, said
he afterwards searched the house where Mitchell and the
others lived, in company with another officer. They found,
in the back parlour and front parlour, lucifer-matches, skele-
ton keys, two leaded life-preservers, &c. There were marks
of blood about. Also, shoemakers' tools, and a vice fixed
on the arm of a chair, apparently recently in use, as there
were steel-filings about. Theme were also other skeleton
keys. Up stairs there was a bedstead, and no other furni-
ture ; also, a large box, with things claimed by Mrs. For-
syth. In the closet he found three glass jars, sealed up with
wax. They were pickle jars, filled with jewellery. He took
them to the witdow. They were tilled with pins, brooches,
and rings. He also found a quantity of table-spoons, coffee-
pot, candlestick, &c., all silver ; three tin cases, tilled with
jewellery ; a case containing jewellery, another with a gold
chain, and another with a gold watch. They also found a
box containing wearing apparel, and a drawer containing
foreign coin. In the back room there were a quantity of
keys spread about, arranged in sizes, and occupying about
two-thirds of the room. In the same room he found the
" Jack in the box." Witness described the use of this in-
strument, which has a powerful screw, and is for the purpose
of forcing open locks. On the second floor up stairs, he
found a large coat which attracted his attention. The coat
was exhibited, and was of black velvet, with a large inside
pocket lined with leather, and going quite round the back
from front to front, like a large bag, but in which a child of
three years of age might, apparently, have lain at full
length.

Another police-officer found some books, &c.
Mr. Dowling, commissioner of police, said he heard of the
robbery and went to the house : the two officers were there.
Be saw the pickle jars in bottles. They had the appearance
orpkkle bottles. Frances said, before the magistrates, that
all found in the front room of the attic were his. In that
room the coat shown was found, also six old volumes of
" The Ladies' Monthly Museum." (All the property was
produced in court.)
A large chest was shown filled with clothing, &c., which
Mrs. Forsyth identified as hers. About £2OO was taken.

She also identified the rupees to the best of her belief.- Ti;;;
were amongst them some silver Turkish and Venetian coins.
Some gold and silver coins were also in the box, but these
were not found.

A police inspector produced some edging and muslin given
to him by police-officer Stevenson.

James-Ainsworth, police-officer, searched the lodgings of
the prisoner Stevenson, on the 9th November, in Hepworth:
street. He was not known as Stevenson there. He found a
trunk with a brass plate with the name of " Stafford" on it,
by which name he passed there. He (witness) before knew
him as " Evans." Amongst other things found was the Ist
and 2d vols. of " The Ladies' Monthly Museum ;" also
some knife and fork handles. There were knives and forks
found in Lionel.street, without handles, and the handles
fitted them. He also found a gentleman's dressing-case.
The keys found in Lionel-street were all here. There are
311 keys of various sizes, he might say, from a prison down
to a tea-caddie. They were produced, and excited much
astonishment. The largest looked like a chnrch-door key.
There were 87 keys blank or uncut, 57 skeleton keys, large,
87 small do. ; a small hand-vice, two dark lanterns, a large
vice (fixed to a chair) ;• a number of punches ; eleven saws,
of different kinds and sizes, for cutting wood and metal ; a
plate for taking patterns of keys, a quantity of pick-locks, 37
files of various sizes ; a breast plate and drill, 3 crucibles,
containing keys and pieces of metal as if used, screw plates,
&c., 2 small crow-bars, or " jemmies." The knives and
forks, with their corresponding hafts, were also shown by the
witness.

Spencer Williams, a tailor, of No. 5, Hepworth-street,
said, that in March, 18-10, the elder prisoner (Stevenson)
came and lodged at his house. He knew him by the name
of " Staffbrd," and called him so. Witness had seen Ste-
venson and Frances walking together.
Samuel Lloyd, police-officer, went to Stevenson's lodgings
with the last witness. He found three books in the cellar
kitchen.

Spencer Williams said, that the books were the prisoner's.
He saw him bring them into the house.
Ditchfield, who lives in Great Howard-street, said
the prisoners Mitchell and Stevenson took a house, twelve
months ago, opposite to him, and they both had a key to
the door.

William Burrow, who also lived in the same street, said,
that Mitchell lived next door to him. He had observed him
and Stevenson and a third person going in and out. Mit-
chell left the house about three weeks before the prisoners
were apprehended.

Another inhabitant cf Great Howard-street also spoke to
having seen Mitchell and Stevenson frequenting the house,
and here ended the evidence for the prosecution.
Mr. WILKINS spoke at considerable length, and in a very
ingenious manner, for the defence. He contended that there
was no direct proof that the house was entered by any of the
prisoners, or indeed that, being entered, the act took place
between nine at night and six in the morning, which was
required to constitute the crime of burglary. He could not
conceal that Mitchell was the occupant of the house, and
that the articles were there found. He was, therefore, bound
to say, that for him he would offer no defence. But he con-
sidered the evidence was not sufficient to justify a verdict of
guilty against the other two prisoners, whose resistance and
assault of the officers might be attributed to their horror of
being dragged to prison and exposed at parties to the offence
charged, of which, whatever might have been their offences
previously, they might feel that they were innocent.

The learned JUDGE summed up in a clear and conspicuous
manner, and the jury, after a short consultation, found all
the prisoners Guilty of the burglary.

The Learned JunGE then sentenced the prisoners Steven-
son and Mitchell to transportation for life, and Frances for
fifteen years.

The prisoner Stevenson having expressed himself dissa-
tisfied with the sentence, the JUDGE ordered them to be
placed again at the bar, and to be tried for the assaults O❑ the
two officers with " intent to murder them."

The police-officers then gave evidence similar to that
brought forward under the preceding charge.

• . . Mr. Brandreth, surgeon of the Infirmary, said that Kirk-
ham, when brought in, was in a very feeble state, as if he
had been fainting, and a restorative was administered to him.
There were streaks of blood running from his head, and his
hair, round the larger wound, which was afterwards cut
away, was saturated with blood. There were four wounds,
which might have been inflicted by the hammer produced.
The principal wound was a contused one, and his life was in
danger up to the period of his leaving the establishment.
It was even yet doubtful, whether his faculties would ever be
so vigorous as before. There was no fracture of the skull.
The patient had fever, in consequence of the local injuries.
The learned JUDGE summed up with great care, and the
jury in about two minutes found Stevenson and Mitchell
Guilty of wounding the officers with intent to do them some
serious bodily harm, and acquitted Frances in this indict-
ment.

His Lon.DSitir, after some feeling remarks, repeated the
former sentence in precisely the same terms.
The prisoners were then put down.
Louisa Mitchell was then put up, when it appeared there
were four indictments on which she had been arraigned,
three in conjunction with the other prisoners, and one in
which she alone had been arraigned.
No evidence was offered against her on either of these in-
dictments, and the jury formally found her Not Guilty on
each, and she was discharged.

STEALING MOLASSES.
James Parr, 26, Thomas Ilrown. 23, Levi Miller, 33, and
John Holborn, 37, were indicted for having stolen four pun-
cheons of molasses, the property of William Swan Dixon.
Miller and Holborn were charged with feloniously receiving
the property, well knowing it to have been stolen.
The case was so recently before the Police-court, that it
were superfluous to supply the evidence adduced. Suffice it
to say, this was one of those mercantile robberies from the
docks, for the commission of which the quantity of goods
necessarily lying about at all times affords peculiar facilities
to peculators. The casks were taken in a float, or low hung
cart, by Parr and Brown, from the Manchester Basin, and
carted to a Warehouse belonging to Holborn, who, with Mil-
ler, received them, and obliterated the marks. The prison-
ers, with the exception of Holborn, who was very respectably
dressed, were apparently working men. Parr and Brown
had before been convicted and imprisoned for stealing sugar.
Holborn's warehouse was a receptacle fur such ill-gotten
property. 'They were all found guilty, though two of them
were defended by Mr. Murphy, and two by Mr. Wilkins,
who indulged in some amusing sparring on the occasion.
The JUDGE, in passing sentence, dwelt in a forcible and
judicious manner on the frequency of such robberies, and on
the higher offence of men such as Holborn keeping ware-
houses for the reception of, and partaking more largely in,
the iniquitous booty. He sentenced Parr and Brown to six
months' imprisonment each, Miller to eight months' and
hard labour, and Holborn as the major offender and inducer
of the others, to twelve months' imprisonment.
CHARGE OF CHILD MURDER.

Mary Jones, 26, was charged, on the coroner's warrant,
with the murder of her child, at Liverpool. It appeared that
the prisoner, a good-looking young woman, had merely con-
cealed the child in a box in her room, and afterwards had
buried it publicly. As this was not considered an offence
strictly within the statute, no evidence was given against the
prisoner, and she was acquitted and discharged.
The court adjourned at twenty minutes to six.

NISI PRIUS COURT.--SATURDAY

COLLISION AT SEA

WALKER AND OTHERS V. FLETCHER.

This was a special jury case. The declaration stated that
the plaintiffs were the owners of the ship Hunter, and the
defendant the owner of the ship Robert ; and the allegation
was, that, owing to the negligent and improper management
of the defendant's vessel, the ship of plaintiff's was sunk and
lost, to the grievous loss of the plaintiffs. To this the de-
fendant pleaded not guilty.

Mr. Cresswell and appeared for the plaintiffs :
Mr. Alexander, Mr. Dundas, and Mr. Martin for the de-
fendant.
Mr. CRESSWELL said, the action was brought, as the jury
had been informed, to recover compensation for the loss of
a vessel called the Hunter' which belonged to the plaintiffs,
and which was run down by a vessel belonging to the defend-
ant. The Hunter was a small schooner, of seventy-eight
tons register, and the defendant's vessel, which was called
the Robert, was of the burthen of one hundred and thirty
tons register measurement. The Hunter had been in Lon-
don, and she left there for Sunderland some time in January.
She was detained in Yarmouth Roads, from which she sailed
on the 22d January. It was then blowing very fresh from
the S.S.W., in consequence of which it was usual for the
masters of small vessels, particularly of this description, and
rather light, when they passed Cromar, not to make a
northerly course from Flamborough Head, but to steer for
Spurn Light, which would make their course N.N.W., or
rather more to the westward. The Hunter was steering this
course at six o'clock on the evening of the 22d January, and
she was brought as near as the wind could be. It was a very
dark night. The Hunter had a crew of four men—the
master, the mate, and two hands,—which was sufficient for a
vessel of that size. It was the mate's watch, and he had
with him a man named Cousins, the master being below, but
he was to come on deck to take the watch with the other
hand at six O'clock. Cousins went below to see what o'clock
it was a little before six, and he went on deck again : he had
been there for about five minutes when the vessel of the de-
fendant ran aboard. The night, as he had said before, was
exceedingly dark ; the weather had been squally ; and, from
the northward, there was a thick black cloud, which made it
impossible to see anything ; but it was light to the southward,
and vessels could be seen for some distance. He understood
from the mate, who was at the helm, that they were not able to
discern the defendant's vessel till she was athwart their hawse.
They had, therefore, no time to do anything ; and a collision
took place, so violent as to occasion the `almost immediate
loss of both vessels. Both of them went to-the bottom. The
crew of the Hunter got into their boatas quickly as possible,
and having contrived to'bring with them a light, they were
picked up by a ship called the Halifax, which happened to be
near. The jury would learn from the master of the Halifax,
and from one of the crew, that the night was exactly of the
description he had mentioned, that to the north nothing could
be seen, but that to the southward there might. The master
of the Halifax was steering the same course from Cromer to
the Spurn Lights, which brought him near to the Hunter,
and he could not discover a light more than two hundred
yards. The captain of the Halifax had just got the men out
of the Hunter's boat when the crew .of the Robert came up,
and they got on board in like manner. When they were on

board, the jury would and, that some of the Robert's crew
eta ted, that they had seen the Hunter before the collision.
The jury should hear their account of the accident, It was
this : that they saw the Hunter kept the wind, that they tried
to luff, and they did NIT. So far they were right : the Hunter
was upon the larboard tack, the Robert upon the starboard :
therefore, they had a right to luff. But instead of continuing
to do so, the captain of the Robert bore up, and allowed the
vessel to fall off the wind about four points ; that, again,
thinking he had done wrong, he put the helm down, which
brought the vessel so near that the starboard bow of the Ro-
bert came in contact with the starboard bow of the Hunter.
The jury would find, from the man who was steering the Ro-
bert, that, if the master had not taken the helm, the accident
could not have happened. Under these circumstances, the
present action was brought to recover compensation for the

loss of the plaintiff 's vessel.
The learned counsel then called Thomas Smithson, cap-
tain of the Hunter, and Adam Sinclair, mate, Edward Cou-
sins, the sea►nan alluded to, and the captain of the Halifax,
who confirmed his statement of the facts.
Mr. AnExaNnEn addressed the jury on the part of the de-
fendant. He said he should be able to show that the accident
had been caused by the Hunter. The helm of:the Robert
was never out of the hands of the captain till after the acci-
dent had occurred, and all her crew were upon the look out,
whilst on the Hunter there was but one, for it would be re-
collected that the captain was below, another man was at tea,
the third was gone to see what o'clock it was, and the fourth
was at the helm. There was, consequently, no one upon the
look out, as there ought to have been. When the vessel
approached, the Robert hailed the Hunter and received no
answer. lie should also be able to show, that the Hunter
might have altered her course three or four points, and yet
have jieen before the wind; had she been disposed, and that
she must have seen the Robert if a proper look out had been
kept. He would ask the jury, whether a vessel, under such
circumstances, could claim for damage ? lie should further
show, that the Robert was sailing only at the rate of two and
a half knots per hour, whilst the Hunter was going at eight,
so that it was ridiculous to talk of the collision having pro-
ceeded fr.un the Robert ; and further, that a considerable
portion of the Hunter was burnt. He should call those who
would prove, that a blanket had been on fire in the forecastle ;
that parts of the ship took fire in consequence; that part of
the mast was burned ; and that the vessel floated for six hours
after the collision, whilst the Robert sunk immediately.
Thirteen witnesses were then called, whose evidence sup-
ported this view of the case.

The jury found a verdict for the defendant. The damages
had been laid at £750. The trial lasted the whole day.
The court rose about six o'clock.

CROWN COURT-MONDAY.
MURDER BY TURN-OUT SAWYERS AT ASHTON

John Hulme, 31, and John Williams, 30, were indicted
for the wilful murder of Ben. Cooper, jun.. at Ashton-under-
Lyne, on the 11th of December last.
Mr. Sergeant Ateherley, Mr. Brandt, and Mr. Wortley,
appeared for the prosecution ; Mr. 'Wilkins and Mr. Over-
end for the prisoners.
The indictment was of great length, and consisted of four
counts. The first count charged them with having, of maliCe
aforethought, assaulted one Benjamin Cooper, a sawyer, and
that Hulme, with a certain metal pipe, plugged at one end,
with lead and wood, and made to serve the purpose of a can-
non, then and there charged with gunpowder, and charged
with twenty bullets or slugs, discharged them at and
against Benjamin Cooper, of which he died instantly. The
other counts varied the charge.
Both the prisoners pleaded not gtkilty.

Mr. Sergeant ATCHERLEY then proceeded to state the
case. The jury had heard from the officer of the court, that
this was an indictment which imputed to the two prisoners at
the bar, the crime of murder.

Mr. WILKINS here begged his lordship to order all the
witnesses on both sides out of court.
The JUDGE.—Certainly.

Mr. Sergeant ATCHER'LEY also requested that an officer
should be appointed to take charge of them.
Mr. WlLxiss.---Your lordship will pardon me if I invite
your attention to the opening of the Attorney-General. it
it is what I anticipate, I shall be obliged to raise some objec-
tions.

Mr. Sergeant ATCHERLEY said that the witnesses being
withdrawn, he Could proceed. He was stating that the con-
sideration of this being a charge of murder, involving a ques-
tion of considerable importance to the public on the one band,
and of the last importance to the two prisoners at the bar on
the other, was sufficient to bespeak their calm and serious at-
tention to the facts of the case, which he meant to open
with as much brevity and simplicity as lay in his power. The
person whose death formed the subject of the present enquiry
was a man named Benjamin Cooper. The day upon which
the transaction occurred was the 11th of December last, and
the place was the town of Ashton-under-Lync. In Ashton-
under-Lyne, he understood, there was a considerable traffic
in the building and sawing business, and a considerable num-
ber of hands were employed in it. About the month of Oc-
tober last the prices which had been paid for labour to work-
ing sawyers in the town of Ashton had been higher than those
paid to the same sawyers in the town of Manchester. The
master sawyers thought proper, whether rightly or not did
not signify to day, to reduce the prices which they had before
been in the habit of paying, in order that they might be able
to compete with their rivals in trade in the adjoining town of
Manchester. Notice was given that from and after that day,
sth of October, the reduced prices would alone be paid. This
notice naturally begot considerable dissatisfaction on the part
of the working sawyers in the town of Ashton; they did not
enter into the feelings of the masters, who had to compare
their means with those of the master sawyers of Manchester,
the working sawyers only considering the diminution in the
wages which they had been in the habit of receiving for them-
selves and their families. This dissatisfaction produced what
was commonly called a " strike" or " turn out." He meant
to go over this part of the case as shortly as possible, because
it was only material, on the present occasion, in so far as it
supplied the motive for the deed which formed the subject of
this enquiiy. A man named Whitfield, he understood, was
a considerable sawyer in the town of Ashton, and, he believed,
a builder too, and lie employed several hands. Some of his
workmen turned out, or " struck," on account of the reduc-
tion of wages ; and Mr. Whitfield was forced to apply else-
where to endeavour to obtain hands, who should take the
place of some of the men who had struck and ceased to work
for him. Two men were obtained. One of them was named
Benjamin Cooper, the deceased, about whom they were about
to enquire, and the other was James Cooper, his brother,
who would be a witness to-day. These men worked in Whit-
field's yard. In the yard there was a sawpit. That pit was
partially concealed by a sort of boarding intervening between
the road and the
place where the men were working, probably
for the purpose t
in. Hese he 'rmaking it more warm for the men to work
would mention at once that he proposed to give
in evidence certain attempts by the prisoners at the bar upon
days antecedent to the 11th of December--
Mr. Win
case, take his NTr said, he would then, in this stage of the
Mr. sergeanto ajection.
the trouble
ATCHERLEY would save his learned friend
would ower o' he would not state the facts referred to, but
them in evidence. Whatever might be his own
opinion with regard to the admissibility of that evidence, he
would not statet a single fact, but reserve to himself the right
of proving it, under the direction of the learned judge, when
the proper! time should have arrived. He came then to the
11th December. About six o'clock in the evening of that
day, probably the
jury might be of opinion it was a little
before
six, the two Coopers were working at the sawpit in
question. Here he thought it right to state, if anything
turned upon the exact or precise point of time, that any person
who
was at all practised in a court of justice must be aware
that no great faith or dependence was to be placed upon the
accuracy of different country clocks. It was only just to-
wardst the case for the prisoners, to remark, that no depend-
ence could safely be placed upon the accuracy and conformity
of country clocks. Even with regard to public clocks, factory
clocks, and church clocks, for instance, within the distance
of 'a mile, there might be a difference of five or ten minutes,
so that upon the matter of clocks he placed no dependence
whatever. However, somewhere about six o'clock, these
two men were engaged in their labour. Benjamin Cooper
was the top sawyer, and he had a lantern attached to his knee,
or near his knee, which would, therefore, make him an ob-
ject clearly to be seen. His brother James was the man in
the pit. Suddenly a great report or explosion was heard.
Benjamin Cooper immediately called out for help. He (the
learned counsel) forgot who first went to him; but the un-
fortunate man was found to be much injured. He reeled ;
and he was afterwards conveyed to some distance, upon a
board or shutter. Two surgeons were called in. He was
told his situation, and he exclaimed, " What will become of
my wife and children ?" or some language of that sort; also
some expressions strongly indicative of pain, such as, " Will
nobody, for God's sake, stab me?" or some phrase of that
sor. He remained in that state till eight o'clock the same
evening, when he died. Upon examining his person it was
found that different slugs had entered his body. One, he
thought, but he did not charge himself with accuracy in this
matter, had entered the liver, another had penetrated the
spine, and a third was lodged somewhere near the hip.
Of course an alarm was given, and different persons were
taken into custody, and among others a man named Davies,
who would be examined to-day. On the following morning
a pipe—a sort of metal pipe—was found ; and he apprehended
there would he no doubt whatever that the prisoners were the
persons that used that pipe, and that it was the instrument
which caused the death. It was a large metal pipe, plugged
at one end, capable of holding a eonsiderable number of
slugs, and a considerable quantity of powder, with a touch-
hole which had been drilled for the purpose of communi-
cating with some train, which, when ignited, would set fire to
the pipe. Slugs, or marks of them, were found in the board-
ing before described as being; a screen or shed which pro-
tected the workmen from the weather. He had mentioned
that a man named Edward Davies was apprehended upon the
charge. He was-an accomplice who was this day to tell the
jury the history of this transaction. In this part of the case
let him (the learned counsel) tell the jury two things. In
the first place, though an accomplice was in point of law a
competent witness, and a jury might, if they thought proper,
act upon his evidence, yet in point of practice, and in
point of just and sound reasoning, it was never right to de-
pend upon the testimony of an accomplice, unless he re-
- ceived with regard to his story, from other quarters, a con-
firmation which should erect his credit, and entitle him to
the faith of the jury. But there was another remark which
be wished not to omit in this place—namely, that when the
accomplice first gave the account of his having a knowledge
of the transaction, he did not then state the whole of that
which he was about to state to-day. According to the best
information he had, and from the best attention he had been
able to bestow upon the case, he (the accomplice) stated
nothing at all inconsistent with that which to-day he was
about to disclose. But, for certain reasons, as to which the
jury would have the duty of inquiring, he certainly
did not
state all then which he had subsequently stated. He had
thought it necessary to premise these remarks with regard to
the situation in which this man would appear before the
court. • The question then would be, whether or no he should
be confirmed to the satisfaction of the jury, by other evi-
dence. With regard to that he (the learned council) did not
on the present occasion mean to enter into minute de-
tails of the smaller concurring circumstances which were
to be urged upon the part of the prosecution as being
confirmations of the accomplice, lest he should do an injury.
He would merely state that that confirmation arose from
between pre-
vious concert, which he intended to deduce,.. the two
parties charged, from their own observations accounts of
themselves after the transaction, from the explanations they
had chosen to give, from the declarations they had made to
different parties, and from their having been seen in the
neighbourhood of' the spot shortly after the fatal deed occur-
red.
He had begun with stating that he meant to open this
case
case as shortly as he was able. All he had to do was_i to en-
deavour to furnish to the minds of the jury a sort of ndex to
the evidence about to be adduced. He should, therefore. , say
_
no more at present than this—that if in the result they should
entertain any reasonable and honest doubt with regard to the
guilt of the two prisoners, whatever might be the horror be-
longing to the deed which had been committed, they were
entitled to the full benefit of such reasonable and honest
doubt; but, again, if they should see any reason to distin-
guish between the cases of the two prisoners, and should be
of opinion that with regard to one of them only the evidence
of the accomplice was !dandy confirmed, and with regard to
the other insufficient, t :Iry would, of course: make such dis-
tinction. But it', after a long trial—for he feared it must be
such—they ,nould in tire result feel no reasonable or honest
doubt with regard to the guilt of the two men—in that case,
however painful it might be, they must discharge their duty.
The learned counsel then proceeded to call witnesses.
James Cooper was the first witness ; he was examined by
Mr. BRANDT. He said he was a sawyer, in the employment
of Mr. Whitfield, and was one of the new hands who came
in the place of those who turned out. His companion was
Benjamin Cooper, who was the top sawyer. [A model
was here produced iu court, and the witness pointed out
the place where he and .the deceased were working- at the
time.l He knew the prisoner Williams by sight, and on the