The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-08-16 00:00:00

for stealing a horse

23rd of June, was

and sai!tenced to scverhyears' transportation

ROB:BERT' WITH YIODENCE
beth Fisher, aged 20, and Sarah
indicted for felonicnaly assaultium

iNCIIESTEFE—EIiza-
-4rin Kelshaw, were
nd robbing

mumaru..4,„ us Inancnester, on the ;irct or slay last. The
prosecutor is a pensieher of the East India Company, and
on: the 3rd of May lila had received. 305., a portion of his
pension. On his way home, about four o'clock in the
afternoon, he met the prisoner Fisherrwhom he treated to
at a public-hau.se,. where he also met the prisoner
He left them both in the public-house and
In a street called Islington he suddenly
a blow in theofaee from a matt who ran away, and
immediately afterwardi,Fisher sebed him by the throat,
while Kelshaw took fibm• his pocket-28s. and a penknife.
The jury found Fishier guilty, and auquited
Shntence deferred.
The court rose at task minutes pastsir o'clock.

went home
reeeiv

NISI PRR COURT. —Trru-ssiur.
SPORE THE' HON: MR. JUSTICE EEL

In trNe-Nisi PriuS Court, which oioeuedat twelve o'clock,
tit& list of civil cases it very heavy, including 82.
Joy v. BEOWN.—This was an action brought by Mr.
Gebrge Jones, of Leigtr, near Bolton, against John Brown,
aso+of that neighbourhood, to recover a farm in the pos-
session of Brown: 1l appeared thatiin March, 1852, the
draft, of a lenge of a- ffirm, called Heakherston farm, con-
tuining between sixty and seventy acres, with house and
outbuiLdings, was claim-ft out, for 14-years, at a yearly
rental of 1;220, to be paid in half yearly instalments,
between Jones and Brown. When the: draft was after-
War& shown to Brown, in the solicitor's office, at Man-
citester, he denied the various items„ and that he had ever
given, authority for .his-name to be patio it. Afterwards,
when asked for Nat,. he stated his .inability to pay, but
proposed a bill of exchange to be drawn out upon his son-
in-law for £2OO, tnbe paid two months after date. The
dishonourekiand, excepti.,2B. in cash, no rent
Irati been paid. Asia months' notice- to quit had been
served in September last, and Mr.... Tones now sought for
an action of ejectment. Verdict forrplaintiff, with imme-
diate execution.
BENNETT AND,ANOTEEER V. BE4I)SICAW.—Messrs. J.
M.-.and H. A. Bennett, timber and. slate merchants, of
MAnchester, sought to recover the sum of £57 ls. 11d.
from .Messrs. W. 0. Bradshaw and W. F. Higginson,
reiners,&c., of Baton. The partnership of Bradshaw and
Prigginson having been dissolved about the time of these
transactions, Bradshaw himself stood as defendant. The
defendant Il paid into court 219.195. ld. In October,.
IBs2,_the defendants, who had a yard in Folds-road, Little.
Belton, rdereitslates from the plitiutiffs to the amount of
f:,(70 10s. In tile: month of March„lBs3, a rumour (which,
was without foundation) of the anticipated insolvency of.
the, defendautr came to the ears, of Mr. Wood, a boob,t.
keeper of the: plaintiffs, who aLso,ascertained that a bill of
sale had beemgiven to Messrs. :lackey and Co., of Liver-
pool, one of -the chief creditors, upon their stock and
effects, .now and hereafter. Mr. Wood, anxious -for the
interests of iiis employer,. immediately went to Bolton: to
get the:plaiatiffs' account. The, defendant could not pay
at that time4but expressed his intention to pay ultimately.-
-Mr. Wood, then suggested the returning of what slates
might remain unsold. The . defendant, Bradshaw,_l.vho
,was dissolving partnership with Higginson, consented; and
,here lie the two points of dispute Wood, on behalf
of the plaintiffs, wished the, slates to be returnedat the
:original price ; Mr. Bradsbaw contended that they:wete
• sold' at the regular market price, (which was near per
cent, over the wholesale,).to the value of £57 lls. ; and
again,, the plaintiffs maintained that only certainknumbers.
of "-duchesses," " countesses," and " viscountesses," and
other,qualities of slates, were returned, and weights, and
in. certain condition. Whereas the defendant, Bradshaw
contended that other and more numbers, qtudities, and
weights, were returned; which, at market pries, in addi-
tiba to the £l9 19s. lcl. paid in court, would., meet all the
legitimate demands of- the plaintiffs, £76 1013. The case
had been removed front the Manchester Co-Auty Court. A
great number of witnesses were examined._ The case pre-,
sented considerable difficulty. as the defendant was at his
home when Mr. Wool called privately to ;urge his propo,
sition of returning.the slates, and had many witnesses in
his behalf, liis Lordship very careUly, and pointedly
stated the case totthe jury, who, after 4,leng consultatiou,
gave a verdict for,the defendant:—This case, althougit only
involving a dispute as to about occupied the, court
nearly seven hears.