The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-09-01 00:00:00

THY. MILITARY OUTRAGIC AT WIGAN

Adolphus Frazer and Charles Luxatore Bennelt, were
arraigned, and pleaded not guilty for an assault and rescue
at Wigan. No evidence being offered, a verdict of acquittal

was taker

HE MANCHESTER CHARTER-THE RIVAL CORONERS

Rutter was indicted for an assault upon
is Chapman, at Manchester.
Mr. Brandt and Mr. Crompton appeared for the prosecu-
'ion, and Mr. Wilkins for the defence.
Mr. BRANDT stated that this was an indictment for as-
sault. It was a case which the magistrates had thought pro-
per to send to the assizes, and probably the jury would think
that it was a very proper course to pursue, and that the case
should not

THE QUEEN V. RUTTER

Tames Smalls

de'cided in the town Of Manchester, where so
much excitement prevailed on the subject which had given
rise to the charge in question. It was not a very material
assault, but circumstances gaVe to it a very serious aspect.
Mr. Chapman, the complainant,. was_ the coroner for the bo-

. .
rough of Manchester ; Mr. Rutter, the defendant, was coro-
ner for the county. The occasion of the assault was, these
two parties meeting together to assume the right of holding
an inquest, each independent of the other. It the defendant
should prove to be right, the plaintiff would regret the result.
If wrong, the plaintiff would naturally look for some security
that the offence should not be iepeated. The learned coun-
sel regretted that he should have to conduct this case against
Mr. Rutter, because he had a personal knowledge of his
exemplary conduct in private life, and of his having acquitted
himself with the greatest respectability and integrity in his
official capacity until this occurrence. He could not but
think, from these and other circumstances, that the defendant
at the time of the assault laboured under some degree of ex-
citement, and that he forgot the situation held by himself
and that of the gentleman whom he had assaulted. The jury
had heard that a charter had been granted for Manchester.
Where there was a quarter-session held in a chartered bo-
rough, they would understand that the magistrates in that
session assembled were calkd upon to appoint a coroner for
the borough, and this was done in Manchester. The validity
of the charter was disputed, but the decision of the judges
had not yet been given. Had that decision arrived earlier, pro-
bably this affair might not have occurred. They were not

to inquire to-day whether the charter was valid or invalid.
That Mr. Rutter, the coroner for the county, would not dis-

pute, nor that Mr. Chapman was the coroner for the borough,
if the charter should be found to be valid. Mr. Rutter,
though he had brought an action to determine this point,
thought it right to go on holding inquests within the borough,
which was to be deplored, as it gave rise to these disputes.
Mr. Brandt then proceeded to detail the facts of the case.
On the Bth of July, notice had been given by the borough
coroner for an inquest on a child named Marsham, at the
Robin Hood public-house, at half-past three o'clock on the
following day_ The messenger for the county coroner, on
hearing of this, fixed the inquest to be taken by his employer
a quarter of an hour earlier. The juries met, and Mr.
Rutter got the start. The principal witness was the mother
of the deceased, who, when she had finished her examination,
fiat down in a chair in the room. The mother was taken
from this room to that where Mr. Chapman was sitting, and
the jury of that gentleman then went to a house across the
road to view the body. When they had left, Mr. Rutter
went into the filling-bar, which Mr. Chapman would neces-
sarily have to pass in returning. After the inspection he
was proceeding to his room, when Mr. Rutter, who appeared
to be in a state of great excitement, said to him, " What are
you doing with my business ? I have not done with her."
Mr.• Chapman replied, " Neither have I done with her."
Mr. Rutter, on this, seized and struck him, and threw him
with his back against a table. Mr. Rutter said that this was
not true, but that Mr. Chapman assaulted him first; that he
put up his hands before him, and in fact touched him. Now
111 r. Rutter, as a lawyer, must know that, even if this were
the case, the law did not recognise anything in the way of re-
taliation, except no other mode was left of defending himself
from imminent danger ; and he could be under no danger
Mr. Chapman, and whilst he bad his
Mr. Chapman was then called and
h.—The learned judge interfered and
Luco, - appeared to be wasting the time of the
public on a very trifling matter.--Mr. Wilkins observed
that his client had not instituted the proceedings, and
if a mutual concession 'were made there might now be
an end to the matter.—Mr. Brandt remarked that he
should have no objection to hear what the other side
bad to say. The prosecutor thought that his honour
was concerned.—The Judge smiled and said, there appeared
to be no imputation. His lordship inquired were there not
two indictrnents.—Mr. Brandt replied there was only one at
-Mr. 'Wilkins observed that there was one at
He did not mean to say that Mr. Chapman

from so weak a man as
constables about him.

was guilty of a wilful perversion of the truth, but that be was
in such a state of excitement that he was not capable of stat-
inc, the facts with correctness.—The Judge said it appeared
to be a misunderstanding. Both the parties were highly re-
spectable, and he thought it ought to be carried no further.
—Mr. Wilkins said Mr. Rutter had been always willing to
meet Mr. Chapman half way.—Mr. Chapman said that what-
ever his lordship might direct he should submit.—Mr. Brandt
observed that after what his client had said, he wished to
carry the case no further. He hoped it would lead to such
an arrangement as he had suggested in his opening._ His
client would stand

well as'ever with the world
vas no imputation on his character.—Mr. Wilkins;
that of Mr. Rutter.--Mr. Brandt, of course not

There
Nor on
-The Judge

again recommended an arrangement.—Mr. Rutter said it had
been his wish to be on amicable terms with Mr. Chapman
from the commencement.—A Juror was then withdrawn by
consent. The business of the Crown Court terminated at
two o'clock, and his lordship immediately retired.

NISI PRIUS COURT.—FRIDAY.
(Before Mr. Baron RoLve.)
LONGRIDGI r. NIANCHESTER AND LEEDS RAILWAY.
At the opening of the court this morning. Mr. Alexander
ddressed the jury on the part of the plaintiffs. He called a
Teat number of witnesses, whose examination occupied till
e evening. The JUDGE then summed up,
rued a verdict as follows :—For the road
1,5, 6, 7. 8,9, 10; LI. For the com-
Specially in plea 12.
uninteresting.

The case was

SI PRIUS COURT.—SATURDAY.
Mr. BARON ROLFE and a Special Jury.)
:ARNE, CLERK V. STOWELL, CLERK.
Df this eae_excited intense interest among all

classes of Protestant s and Catholics. Every part of the court
was crowded, for some time before the proceedings com-
menced, and many were compelled to retire unable to obtain
the slightest chance of admission.

ing gentlemen were sworn of the special jury
Prescot.

John Chirke
William Lin

Liverpool, merchant

Toxteth-park, do

,on, Liverpool, 63

William, Liverpool, merchant
do. do.

William Itiebard.,on,
Edw. Jones, Walton-on-the-Hill, do
Counsel for the plaintiff"—Messrs. Dundas, Q.C., Wight•
man, noggins, and Murphy. Solicitor—Mr. —. Gibson

Manchester.
Counsel for the defendant—Messrs. Cresswell, Q.C.
Alexander, Q.C., and Watson. Solicitor—Mr. —. Goulden
Manchester
Mr

MURPHY opened the pleadings. In this case the Rev.
Daniel Hearne, of Manchester, was the plaintiff, and the
Rev. Ilugh Stowell, also of Manchester, was the defendant.
The first count of the declaration set forth that the plaintiff
had been and still was a clergyman and priest of the Roman
Catholic religion ; and thatthe defendant, intending to injure
him in that character, hail published of him a false, scanda-
lous, malicious, and defamatory libel. The second count of
the declaration stated that the defendant had .spoken of him
certain words for the purpose of bringing him into disrepute,
-Ad injuring him in his profession. To these allegations the
-sleaded not guilty ; and thereupon issue was joined.
arose to address the court and jury.
nearly as follows :—May it please your lordship—
_emelt of the jury : I have the honour to attend you as
amtiff in this action ; and, upon rising to address you on
his behalf, I do most unfeignedly bespeak your earnest at-
-ntion whilst I am stating to you the circumstances of the
whilst I um stewing to you the grounds upon which
Ny it is, that my client, the plaintiff, is compelled to
`o this court of justice to demand it, and to ask at
redress for injuries inflicted upon him by the de-
Alernen, I dare say you caught from my learned
try me (Mr. Murphy) what is the nature of
to try. It is defamation of a clergyman,
-man in his office, defamation of such a
, Mr. Hearne, the plaintiff, would be
of which he is now an ornament, he
a gentleman among the persons who
he would be dishonoured in his calling
.ieGospel, and the bishops, or those with
,ority belongs, would be justified in suspend-
%ink! be bound to suspetal him—and deprive
beneti:v. Very serious matter this, therefore,
.‘en, you perceive, into which you are to inquire; very
Asary, therefore, 1 should entreat your earnest attention,
. order that between the parties justice may fairly be done.
For my own part, in the name of my client, Mr. Hearne, I
have no manner of doubt, any more than I have of the fact
of my own existence, that justice will be done him if he has
a right to it at your hands—and that, according to the injury
which such violence as has been offered to his character, re-
quires compensation—for compensation at your hands will
my client undoubtedly receive. Gentlemen, before I pro-
ceed to state to you the details of the libel and the slander
which we lay at the door of the defendant, Mr. Stowell, bear
with me for a while, whilst I lay before you some facts inci-
dental to the question you have to enquire into, but, as I
think, necessary to the proper understanding of the issues
you have to try. I will tell you, then, what you probably
know much better than I do, but I state it for the sake of
convenience, that in the town of Manchester there are thou-
sands upon thousands of our Roman Catholic brethren. I
believe that I speak within bounds, and at a moderate aver-
age, if I say there are not lees than from between .70,000 to

plaintat I
Mr. DUNDA

friend who
the issue's

re true,

80,000 human souls in Manchester of that persuasion ; and
right, meet, and fit and necessary it should be, surely, that
this vast number of persons should have the due administra-
tion of the sacraments according to the services of their
church—that they should have religious instruction and
spiritual edification, being responsible beings as we all
of us are, travelling through this world to another. There-'
fore, I say the Roman Catholics have done what I
I hope is reasonable service in your eyes. Besides
providing for those who are in the, Infirmary of their
T 1 • 1 11

own people, they wait in the gaols. nesines allow-
ing the sick to be visited there, and the persons who are in
prison to be come unto, they have provided, for a flock so
large as I have described, places of worship, chapels, four in
number, I think, in the town. They have provided these
chapels with suitable ministers, for the due celebration of
t' ' - church, and for carrying on, in the ms-

ne services of rue. .
ner belonging to their communion, divine service, to the be-
nefit of the Christian-public. There may be in Manchester
and elsewhere persons who think all this very wrong, or very
vain, and of no effect whatsoever ; there may be persons who
think that, after all, this is but the blind leading the blind;
there may be persons—l hope none of us here are such—who
think that within the pale of that ancient church salvation is
not to be found, and that if you speak of a Roman Catholic
who is living in piety and faith, and good works within him,
you are speaking only of one who lives in the midst of dark-
ness, and who does not see his way at all. Gentlemen, such
things might be thought at Manchester, such things might
be said at Manchester, and they might be said and thought
elsewhere too ; but the persons of that persuasion, they who
attended on the ministry, the ministers of religion themselves,
nevertheless proceeded with their work of duty, going through
what is theirs to perform 'for the edification of their Clock ;
and I believe, gentlemen, you will find Mr. Hearne, who is
one of those clergymen, has carried on, as a clergyman, the
duty of several chapels, in piety towards God, and in useful-
ness towards men. Mr. Hearne, the plaintiff in this action,
is, as I have already told you, one of those clergymen. He
is a gentleman who was educated at the College of Maynooth
for the Roman Catholic ministry. He came over out of that
country to Garstang, in your county, where he served as Ro-