The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-08-25 00:00:00

viously made. Deceased then struck the prisoner, when ' force an-entrance into the mill; he went in the direction.. that
1 the ,defendant broke and. entered the dwelling_
the latter laid hold of the deceased, threw him down on whence the noise proceeded, where be met with the pri- house of the plaintiff, at Bolton, and distrained, as for a
the floor,,amd. repeatedly kicked him with great severity on soners, to. whom be spoke. Angry words ensued, and distress for rent, a considerable quantity of goods and
the left side. The injury inflicted was described by the prosecutor was knocked down and severely beaten, :lota I chattels, when, in fact, no rent or arrears of rent was due ;
surgeon as the-cause of death. The prisoner was in bed he became in a state of insensibility, and, upon recover.... and, afterwards, that he again broke and entered the
when his father died, and on being told of the circumstance ing, he found that his lanthorn and hat had been taken dwelling-house, and expelled the plaintiff from his use and
enjoymentsaid, " I wish they would hang me now." The jury away.—His LORDSHIP expressed an opinion that the 3/4 enjoyent of it. The defendant; pleaded not guilty ;he
found the prisoner guilty, and his lordship, after a very evidence-was not sufficient to sustain the charge of rob- also pleaded leave and license, and that the dwelling-
appropriate and impressive admonition on the nature of bery, and this being so, the minor charge of assault could house was his own soil and freehold.
the crime he had committed, sentenced him to seven years' not be proceeded with on that indictment. His lorckhip The Jury returned a verdict for the defendant.
transportation. left the court to consult Mr. Justice Cresswell upon the WALTERS--D- RATTRAY.
ofa at
he Sheffield,
name
ofi in a
Purvis,e y
we xetre:
James Brierler„ 21, was charged with having feloni- point, and, upon his return, said his brother Judge agreed „This was an action brought by John Walters agai,
ously counselled, aided, and abetted Hannah Gee in corn- with him, that unless there was evidence to show that the
vlexhaenrd, Alexander
w The
toe tplaintiff,
ile
that,apicfaar
miffing bigamy. The principal witness not appearing, intent was to commit a robbery, the charge of assault
dkenailfeer-minaLnuofnadcotunr,er
the prisoner was discharged'. could not he sustained, for if such offence was charged it of business, and the defendant was in the hardwa,
Roger Barracks, 48; was charged with having assaulted must be included in another indictrr.ent.—The jury ac- A guarantee was given to the plaintiff on the 15th No_
Thomas Greenhalgh, and robbed him of a sovereign and quitted the prisoners. and they were discharged, effect ' hardware
supplied
half sovereign, at Bolton. The innocence of the pri- CHARGE OF-THEFT OR EMBEZZLEMENT.
soner was made manifest, and he was acquitted. James Butler was indicted far embezzling £sl7s. lid., with goods to the amount of £l5O, the defendant
would
DISCHARGE OP THE GRAND JURY. the property of his employers, Messrs. William 11Iajor be answeraWe for the value in three months alter that time.
Shortly before four o'clock, the grand jury entered the and Francis James Gill, Mr. Hulton prosecuted ; the Goods to the amount cf. £ll2. 9s. 4d. were supplied to
court with the last of the bils which had been entrusted prisoner was without counsel. The prosecutors are teen- Purvis; goods to the value of £l6 were supplied to the
to them for their consideration. Wm. Entwisle, Esq., vers at Leigh, and the prisoner was employed by them in defendant himself; and tor the recovery „ ~
the foreman of the grand jury, read the following pre- the capacity of clerk, and it was part of his duty to pay '
sentment : the hands in the mill, and for that purpose, on the Lt of
"The grand jury having concluded their examination August, he received £163 7s. 6d., and after paving wages
of the cases submitted to them, feel it their imperative accounted for the balance in the " mill book," b-ot it
duty to place-on record their opinion as to the prevalent turned out that he had entered different items for greater
habit of drunkkenness, so forcibly alluded to in the charge sums than had actually been paid. Mr. Major not being
delivered to them by Mr. Justice Wightman, as being at present to prove the rendering of the account by the pri
least the cause of four-fifths of the offences comprised in sorter, his lordship ordered an acquittal, and the race
this and almost all other calendars, as well as with regard zances of Mr. Major were estreated, and his expenses
to the best and most efficient means that can be adopted disallowed.—Before the court rose, Butler was again in-
towards the extinction of that degrading practice. dieted on a similar charge, upon which occasioa,Mr. Ma-
"lt is obvious, from all the records of crime, that a jar, the prosecutor, gave evidence. The jury foeed him
large proportion of offences are committed by those who guilty. He had been previously convicted, bab•owing to
are imperfectly or not at all, educated ; and on this most an informality the conviction could not be proved. The
striking fact the grand jury rest their conviction, that no prisoner was sentenced to six, months' hard labour.
great improvement can be expected until the means of EI,LBEZZLEMENT.
education are placed within the reach of all classes of the Matthew Sherlock Hilton, 19, was charged with hav-
people. ing embezzled £7 93. 2d. with intent to defraud John
"They are, at the same time, sensible that such an ob. Woodcock. Another account laid the charge with intent
ject can only be attained by means of a provision for na- to defraud John Newton and others. Mr. Brandt prose.
tional education to be- made by the state ; and, for this elated, and Mr. Joseph Pollock defended the prisoner.—
purpose,
.they do respectfully call upon the government to Messrs. Keates, Newton, and Co. are the partners con-
introduce, in the ensuing session of parliament, a measure stituting the British and Foreign Copper Company, at
which, by its comprehensive and conciliatory 'nature, shall Sutton, near St. Helen's, and the prisoner was employed
be likely to obtain a,general consent, and which shall have as clerk under them, and it was his duty to receive and
the effect of securing the general education of the popula- check the aesounts. of the bills due from the firm, and on
tion of these kingdoms. the 4th of July he took a bill for £7 9s. 2d. purporting to
"The grand jury are satisfied that, while early educe- be receipted by. John Woodcock to the cashier. The
tion alone can gradually eradicate the vice, and prevent money was given to the prisoner, and it was subsequently
the evil consequences of drunkenness, it is also most im- ascertained that it had not been paid to Woodcock,
portant that a better spirit and tendency should be pro- neither was the receipt to the bill ;-hat of Woodcock.—
ducat in the mass of the community, by providing the The defence was, that the prisoner bad not acted with a
means of recreation. and employment of leisure hours in felonious intent, but under the impression that he had the
other pursuits than th...s which...cot...happily prevail; authority of Woodcock to do What he had done. The
and they point with great gratification to the exertions jury acquitted the prisoner.—The prisoner was then in-
which have lately been made in this town and in Manches- dicted for baying embezzled £4 Us. belonging to his em-
ter, by the establishment of public parks, museums, and ployers, by representing that he had paid divers sums for
libraries, for that purpose. It is in vain to look for any wages, which in fact he had not done. Mr. Pollock took
amendment in the national character until an inducement an objection, to the indictment. The prisoner was found
can be offered to those who have now hardly any other guilty, but Mr. Pollock's point was reserved for the opi-
enjoyment, to relinquish the evil indulgence of habitual nion of the judge.
drunkenness. MALICIOUSLY STABBING.

, w•as a

sive way

amounts the action was
tiff for £129 Os. 9d.

3rought. Verd

for the plain:

ADVENTURE IN SE

NITRATES ON THE COAST

OF AFRICA

'WINCH AND OTFIEF.S V. HAMILTON AND ANOTHER.
This was an action brought by Henry Winch, John
Stockdale, and John James Melhuish, shipowners, of Li-
verpool, against John Hamilton and James Baines. ship_
brokers, of the same place, for the recovery of £790 upon
a charter party. The defendants pleaded the large num-
ber of twenty-seven pleas. _

The defendants chartered a vessel belonging to the
plaintiffs to procoed to the coast of Africa. for nitrate of
soda and nitrate of potash. The charter-party was dated
Gth March, 1845'.

The case turned upon the point whether the instruc-
tions to the captain were sufficiently intelligib!e for send-
ing him to the Cape, where be would, have found letters
from the defendants directing him to proceed to Valpa-
raiso. The captain had gone first of all to Cape Voltas,
thence to Possession Island, Ich_aboe, Hottentot Bay,
and Spencer's Island, at none of which places could he
find the ni:rates. Acting for the best, according to the
plaintiff's counsel's statement, he sailed for Bahia ; there
no cargo was obtainable unless for orders, which he, pro-
cured, and sailed for Falmouth.

The 'jury found that " the instructions were not
ently intelligible for sending him to the Cape," and a ver-
dict was returned for the for the amount claimed,
subject to a motion in the court above.

THE WEATHER AND THE CROPS

ENGLAND,

The potato disease is spreading in the neighbourhood of
Keswick, and apparently destroying every crop that it at-.
tacks. Should it continue even a short time longer, the
destruction will be much greater than that of last year.—
Cumberland Packet.

In this neighbourhood, the potatoes are universally
affected ; and, on being due, nine out of ten are generally
found to be rotting. An "old inhabitant" of Frorne re.
members a similar universal potato blight in his youth,
which lasted four years.—Somerset Gazette.
DORSETSHIRE.—The harvest in this neighbourhood is
now all but completed ; and, notwithstanding the late un-
certainty of the whather, the crops, which have realised
Il expectation, have generally been housed in excellent
The wheat, in particular, is both abundant in
ty and ---- -

"The grand jury are aware that this is not the occasion
to enlarge further on these points, however important;
but they earnestly hope that this public expression of their
feelings, consequent on their position, will conduce to the
public good, by promoting the consideration of these sub-
jects.

Francis Riley, 21, and El;zabeth Hailes, 20, were in-
dicted for having feloniously cut and wounded Ann Sa-
vage, with intent to do her grievous bodily harm. The
prosecutor, who is a woman of some sixty years of age,
resided in a court in Manchester, in which also lived the
prisoners, and in June last a quarrel took place amongst
them. In the affray the male prisoner stabbed the prose-

" On behalf of the grand jury,
" 'Wm. ENTWISLE, Foreman."

Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN said, he was sure the public
were very much indebted to the gentlemen of the grand
jury for the consideration they had given to the subject,
and for the just observations they had made. He hoped
the matter would receive that consideration which it d--
served. He congratulated them on the conclusion of
their labours, and conceived the county was very much
indebted to them for their valuable services.
John Crrmpton, 18, and Thomas Grepson, 18, were
charged with having assaulted Thomas Whitehead, at
Little Bolton, and robbed him of 3s. 6d.—Acquitted.
Patrick Dowling was found guilty of stealing a cow at
Little Hulton, and sentenced to twelve months' impri-
sonment.

eutrix with a knife, and Hailes was assisting and abetting.
The prisoners were found guilty of an aggravated assault,
and were sentenced to twelve months' imprisanment and
hard labour.

NISI PRIUS COURT.-FRIDAY,
RAWSON V. ANTHONY.

This was an action brought by Henry Rawson against
Thomas Anthony for the recovery of the value of fifty
shares in the North-Eastern Railway, which the plaintiff
was ready and willing to deliver, but which the defendant
refused to receive. The defendant pleaded that he did
not make such a contract as the plaintiff alleged.
The plaintiff was, at the time of the transaction, a hosier
at Manchester. lie was at present a sharebroker; the de-
fendant was also a sharebroker; and the action was brought
to recover the value of a lot of shares which were sold to
him by the plaintiff. The substantial question in the case
was this : whether the plaintiff was ready and willing to
deliver the shares within a reasonable time.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff on the first
and third Issues, and for the defendant on the second.
The case occupied upwards of five hours, but with the
exception of the parties mainly interested, it was of very
little public importance beyond that of exposing some of
the tricks of the trade.

John Hoyle was acquitted on a charge of robbery at
Worstey, in consequence of the prosecutor having in-
duced him, by promise of forgiveness, to acknowledge
his guilt. _

The following prisoners pleaded guilty :—Thos. Croft,
23, charged with bigamy. Edward Darcy, 30, charged
with bigamy. Bernard Ryley, 26, charged with forgery.
Hannah Gee, 25, charged with bigamy. Thos. Simms,
17, charged with bigamy. Mary Bell, 23, charged with
having, at Liverpool, endeavoured to conceal the birth of
a child, of which she had been delivered, by secreting it
in a chimney. The sentences were deferred.

The JUDGE said he had never sat with so little satisfac-
tion to investigate facts as was the case at the present
iltas-
sizes,
ith reference to railway transactions. Perhaps,
howev the public time would not be altogether thrown
away ,because, if the disclosures made there would have
the effect of bringing some speculating people to their
senses, time would not certainly have been uselessly em-
ployed.

NISI PRIUS COURT.-THURSDAY

BREACH OF CONTRACT.-MOSS V. DICKSON,

Mr. MARTIN stated the case. The plaintiff, John Moss,
was a corn and meal merchant, carrying on business at
Manchester. The defendant, Alexander Dickson, was a
distiller and miller at Belturbit, Cavan, Ireland, and this
action was for a breach of contract for the sale of oat-
meal. In 1844, Mr. Dickson's meal bad a very good
name in the market. It was known as " Dickson's fine
meal," and brought a very high price. On the 29th of
September, a contract was entered into by which the de-
fendant agreed to supply 3000 loads of his best tine meal
at 21s. 6d. free on board, freight 4s. Gd. to Runcorn, to
be delivered at 500 loads per month, commencing Octo-
ber, 1841. After September, 1844, grain began to rise,
and the shipments made by defendant turned out to be of
an inferior quality. The defendant maintained that the
meal shipped was of the best quality, declined to leave
thomatter to arbitration, and said he should be glad to
have an opportunity, in a court of law, of proving that
he bad-fulfilled the contract. The plaintiff had the ship-
ments" surveyed by Messrs. Powell and Slattery, corn
merchants, of Liverpool, who gave it as their opinion
that the quality was not only 2s. 6d. per load inferior to
any of Mr. Dickson's former shipments, but below any
of the shipments from Ireland.—Several witnesses were
examined.—John Herd, corn merchant, of Liverpool,
said the meal that came from Ireland in 1844 and 1845
was generally of a good quality. Saw some meal at
Fletcher and Co.'s warehouse, in Manchester. It was
nut Dickson's best meal ; it had a bad colour and smell,
and was ground so small that it was almost impossible to
tell what it was made of. The dust seemed all to have
been retained. His (witness's) opinion was that the pin-
head meal had all been taken out, and the rest ground
down together.—Cross-examined.—Did not come there
with an unfriendly feeling to Mr. Dickson. Had not
made up his mind whether he would bring an action
against Mr. Dickson after this. Had offered to quash
the matter altogether, but defendant had refused. Mr.
Dickson had commenced an action against him, (witness.)
but dare not carry it on. It was not stopped by his
(witness's) misfortunes. Daniel Powell, corn merchant,
of Liverpool. On the 15th March, 1815, went over with
Mr. Slattery to the Old Quay Co's warehouses, at Man-
chester, to examine some oatmeal. The quality was very
inferior. It was very inferior to Dickson's best fine meal.
He agreed with Mr. Herd's description of it. The nutri-
tious quality was abstracted, and the remainder was unfit
for food. Examined some meal on board a liar, and it
was of the same description as that in the bins of the Old
Quay Company ; 21s. 6d. per load in September, 1841,
was an extreme price. Thomas Slattery, corn merchant
in Liverpool, accompanied Mr. Powell to Manchester, in
March, 1845, to examine some oatmeal. The meal in the
flat and in the bins was of the same quality. It was very
inferior. The best part of the oats appeared to have been
taken out, and the oats had been ground before they were
dry. Agreed with Mr. Herd and Mr. Powell as to the
quality. He thought the difference was 3s. or 3s. Gd. per
load. Mr. Knowles took an objection to the declaration,
on the ground that there was a difference between the
two contract notes, the one stating that the consideration
was 3000 of fine oatmeal, and 300 loads pin-head meal ;
and the otker only mentioning the 3000 loads of fine.
His lordship, on the application of Mr. Martin, amended
the declaration. Mr. Knowles then contended there was
no proof of a compact at all. His lordship considered the
objection of no avail. Mr. Knowles then addressed the
jury for the defendant, and called several witnesses to
prove that the meal was good. The learned judge sum-
med up, and the jury, after a few minutes' consideration,
found for the plaintiff, damages £3OO.

The case of Ogden v. Greaves was referred
FERNYHOUGH V. CURSHAM.
_

Another share transaction, in which Joseph Fernihough,
a sharebroker, was the plaintiff. and Arthur John Cur-
sham, an attorney at Mansfield, Yorkshire, the defendant.
The action was brought for the recovery of £315, being
the value of fifty Boston, Newark, and Sheffield Railway
shares, which the plaintiff had purchased by order of the
defendant. Verdict for the plaintiff.

This was an action brought by Samuel Holl against the
defendants, William Robinson Whit.; and another. The
declaration was in trover to get possession of some hops.
Mr. MART'S stated the case. The plaintiff was a
maltster, in Nottinghamshire, and the defendants were
the assignees of a gentleman named Buddington, who
became a bankrupt, and the action had been brought
for the recovery of hops to the amount of £2OOO, which
the plaintiff said he was entitled to recover by reason of
the defendants having taken possession of them upon
Buddington's bankruptcy. The question was, whether
or not the transaction under which the plaintiff became
possessed of the hops was what is called a fraudulent pr e-
ference. The jury were aware that, according to law,
whenever a bankruptcy took place, the property of the
bankrupt was taken, and it was equally distributed among
all the creditors; and the time at which the property
passed from the bankrupt into the hands of the assignees
was when the fiat was issued. Mr. Holl formerly carried
on business as a brewer with a gentleman of the name of
Hartison, at Strangeways, Manchester. On the death of
his partner, Mr. 101 l returned to Nottinghamshire; but
prior to that event, 11r. Buddington came to Manchester,
and set up business as a corn merchant. He also sold
hops for 101 l and Harrison, and being a great speculator
in hops, he purchased no less than £12,000 worth of them.
To make this purchase, he appropriated a sum of money
to the extent of £2OOO, which belonged to Mr. 1011.
When the misappropriation became known, the money
was demanded, and a letter threatening legal proceedings
was written. Buddington wanted to postpone a settle-
ment; but, eventually, he transferred the hops to Mr.
[loll, as security for the debt. He did not contemplate
bankruptcy at that time; and, therefore, the learned
counsel contended that there was no fraudulent prefer-
ence, and that the transaction was perfectly legitimate.
After an eloquent address to the jury from Mr. Wilkins,
a verdict was returned for the defendant.

CROWN COURT.-SATURDAY

John Sweelman, indicted fur an a
at Orrell, was discharged.

,bominable offence

Hamblet Ho'croft, alias Collier, was convicted and
sentenced to transportation for life for having forcibly
violated at Southworth-with-Croft, Sarah Green, aged

nine years

ATTEMPTED INFANTICIDE AT WAVERTREE.
El zabelh Davidson, was charged with exposing her
male infant with intent to cause its death.

We have recently given the particulars of the case.
The prisoner lived as servant with Mr. Blain, of Birken-
head. On Easter Monday she was taken ill, and a doctor
was consulted. She continued unwell, and engaged a car
to take.her to Sandown-lane, \Vaverrree, and, whilst going
that distance, was delivered of one of twins. which she
placed, after leaving the car, in an adjoining field, with t he
view, as alleged in the indictment, of causing its death.
She must shortly afterwards have been delivered of another
child, as an infant was found in her arms, wrapped in a
shawl, when she was taken into custody.

RAILWAY SHARES.-BARTON AND ANOTHER V. LEES

The plaintiffs, Messrs. Barton and Birchall, were
sharebrokers in Manchester, and the defendant, Samuel
Lees, a merchant there. The action was brought to re-
cover the sum of £478 2s. 6d., the price of 150 shares in
the Trent Valley and Continuation and Holyhead Junc-
tion Railway, which it was alleged by the plaintiffs had
been bought by them for the defendant. Verdict for the
defendant, on the ground that the order had been revoked.

His LORDSHIP said he thought that the poor creature
having been delivered of one child, and in labour with a
second, was not in a fit state to take care of the first one,
and the jury acquitted her.

REED V. NU G ENT.
, This was an undefended action on three bills of ex-
change, the defendant being the acceptor of two, and the
drawer and endorser of the other. Verdict for the plain-
tiff for £lB5 15s. 6d.

CROWN COURT.-FRIDAY

MALICIOUSLY SHOOTING

Charles Lvon, 29, was indicted for having, at Knows-
ley, maliciously shot at John Wainwright, with intent to
do him some grievous bodily harm. Mr. Brandt appeared
to prosecute, and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins defended the pri-
soner. The nominal prosecutor is a gamekeeper to the
Earl of Derby, and on the night of the 15th of April last,
along with another keeper named Birch, was keeping
watch on the preserves of the noble earl, and whilst doing
so they met the prisoner in company with another man,
named Lloyd, who were armed with guns and in quest of
game

No words took place between the parties, but a
gun was discharged, which was alleged to have been fired
by the prisoner, and Wainwright received slight shot
wounds in his knuckles and leg, A witness was called
who stated that on the evening of the night in question he
was in company with the prisoner and the man Lloyd, at
a public-house in Knowsley, where the prisoner said he
and his companion were goirg in search of game, and
that if they were " mislested" by Birch or 'Wainwright,
he would do their business for them.
Mr. Sergeant WILKINS addressed the jury at some
length, and submitted. in the first place, that the question
of identity of the prisoner was not made out; and next,
that if the prisoner was the man who fired the gun, it was
not done with the intent charged in the indictment.
The jury, after retiring for about two hours, found the
prisoner guilty, and be was sentenced to fourteen years'
transportation.
HIGHWAY ROBBERY AND ASSAULT.
Charles Greenwood, 20, Thomas Lawley, 21, John
Greenwood, 24, and Joseph Mills, 23. were indicted for
having assaulted and robbed James Greenwood. Mr.
Brandt prosecuted, and Mr. James defended the pri-
soners. The prosecutor is an aged man, and is employed
by Mr. Robertshaw to watch a mill at Todmorden, and
whilst on duty during the night of the lith of May last,
ht heard a noise, as though some one was attempting to