The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1853-11-29 00:00:00

NIERCIAL ADVERTISER

for this offence to six months' imprisonment. Re
did not, however, express any confident opinion
as to the result of the change, but expressed his
intention to apply to Parliament for further powers
if it should prove to be ineffectual. It would
seem that the punishment of six months' imprison-
ment, with all the comforts which modern philan-
thropy has given to our gaols, presents scarcely
more terrors than the previous limit of two
months' incarceration ; for such offences are being
committed with a frequency revolting to humanity,
while the details which the records of the London
Police-courts present, are almost beyond the
bounds of credibility that such human fiends
should be permitted to exist.
The Morning Post of Tuesday last contains
no fewer than three of such cases ; two heard
before the LORD MAYOR, at the Mansion-house,
London, in each of which the offenders were
tailors, and another. at the Thames Police-office,
in which the offender is described as a Lancashire
collier. On Friday, the police reports contained
a similar case ; so that, within four days, as many
charges of this disgusting nature
.were heard
before the London police-magistrates. The par-
ticulars deposed to on oath on these occasions,
exceed the wildest dreams of romance, showing
too terribly that " truth is strange, stranger than
fiction." We subjoin a few extracts from the
cases we have alluded to :
Emma Curtis (the complainant) said—On Sunday
morning, between three and four o'clock, he made me
go to d stark naked, and he ripped up my stays with
a penknife, took the bone out of it, and beat me on the
body with the bone till it broke in three pieces. He was
quite sober, and so was I, for I never drink. He had
been out, and I was afraid to go to bed till he came home.
After he had broken the bone he beat me with my hair

brush. He then dragged me out of bed, made m(
the bed three times, tried to st

ngle me with
f4nlr +ha v,nlL.

has in his hand ;truck- me several times. f did not call
out, for he said if I did he would dance upon my body.
After having beaten me severely he went down stairs and
to the bottom of the court, but he immediately returned,
and began beating me again with the stick, and then the
officers came into the room.
The. Lord Mayor—How often has this occurred ?

CoMplainant-:-

-Ever since we were married in Ja

has frequently used that stick upon me. lie has also
thrown boiling water from the teapot upon me. lam in
the utmost danger, and I throw my life upon your lord-
ship's hands, for I believe it is his intention to kill me.
In the next case,
Ann Wright, the complainant, said—Yesterday he said
he would be hung for murdering me, as the man that was

sentenced to be hung that morning would be hung. He
hit me twice on the head with the sleeve-board, and cut
open my skull in two places. I bled Nery much. He also
struck me with his fist in the face, and continued to lmock
me about for three or four minutes. I called out for
assistance, and people came, and I went to a doctor to have
my head dressed. I have been married to the prisoner
three years, and he has beaten me every month since I
married him.

in the the third case,
It appeared from the evidence of two respectable NS

named" Sarah 'Valentine and Harriet Vent;

Saturday evening, about half-past six o'clock,, they —.
the prisoner and his wife in Cottage-street, Poplar. The
wife was burthened with a young child which the carried
in her arms, and could not move so fast as her husband,
who commenced swearing at her, and told her to walk on
faster. The -wife said she was going as fast as she was
able, on which the prisoner, with a dreadful oath, said he
would inake'her go on faster, and struck her on the back
with his fist. He then raised a heavy stick, which he
carried in his hand, and struck his wife a tremendous
blow on the nose with it. She fell as if shot, and the
blood gtiihed from the wound over the footpath. The
woman was insensible for some time afterwards, and her
nose was completely flattened by the blow. A policeman,
named Grimes, who took the prisoner into custody, pro-
duceda thick and heavy bludgeon,with which the prisoner
had inflicted the blow on his wife, and said her nose was
smashed.

In the fourth case, which was heard at the
Westminster Police-court,

John Rogers, a low-looking fellow, was charged with
the following brutality to his wife, who bore undeniable
preofs of his savage treatment:—
Margaret Rogers, the wife, who evinced throughout a
strong desire to screen the defendant, stated that between
two and three o'clock that afternoon he came home drunk
and asked her for money. She replied that she had none,
upon which he knocked her down and kicked her, and
then threw the dinner which she had prepared into the
street.

Mr: Simons, Inspector of the B diVision.—Did he not
:thrust his hand down your throat and hurt you very much ?
Complainant.—Yes, but I only want him held to keep
-the peace.

Simons.—She has got marks onlher arm, where he

s cut her with a knife,

The woman's arm being bared, presented the marks
alluded' to, there being one more severe than the rest.
Mr• Broderip.—How came you with those sears ?
Complainant (hesitatingly).—They were cuts with a
knife.

Mr. Broderip.—When were they done ?
Complainant. —Two years ago.
Mr. Broderip.—By whom ?
Complainant —By my husband, but I don't wish to be
hard with him.
Mr. Broderip.—How did you get that black eye ?
Complainant. —He gave me that last Friday week.
Complainant further reluctantly admitted that he had
been in the habit of treating her in the most cruel manner
for a great length of time.
Robert Adams, 158 B, stated that defendant thrust
three fingers into her throat, and attempted-to tear her
mouth open. He then struck her several blows about the
head with his fists.
Mr. Simons said that, from his knowledge of the de-
fendant and his habits, he should not at all be surprised
to find him placed at that bar for murder or manslaughter.
In all these cases the full penalty of six months'
imprisonment was inflicted.
It is fortunate for such despicable ruffians that
those who administer the law are obliged to restrain
their outraged feelings of 'humanity, or it would be
almost impossible to say what extent of severity
such savage brutality would justify. It is, however,
a disgrace to our civilization that the law should
confine offended justice to a remedy so manifestly in-
adequate, and the attention of the Legislature should
be seriously called to the necessity of rendering
it more efficient. It is becoming a question of some
importance whether the abolition of corporal pu-
nishment, which was intended to be humane, was,
in reality, a wise alteration. The successful in-
stance in which it was restored for the better pro-
tection of Her MAJESTY against assaults upon her
person, affords some proof of its efficacy, and per-
haps it might be applied with advantage for the
better protection of Her MAJESTY'S more humble
female subjects. The objection that corporal pu-
nishment tends to brutalize a man is positively
worthless, for such offenders are worse than brutes,
and no punishment can be too degrading. It is
said that in one of the prisoni of the United States
of America a precaution against escape is taken
by having the nose of each prisoner stained with a
black dye, which is rendered indelible for the time
of his sentence, and it has been suggested that
such a remedy might be applied with advantage to
savage husbands. It might be made a mark which
should exclude them from all civilized society, and
subject any publican to a penalty who supplied
them with drink. Such a plan may not be infal-
lible, but it is clear that some alteration of the law
is imperatively called for. Another mode might
be to commit them for trial, and subject them to
the consequences of assaulting with intent to
murder.

CONTINENTAL IsTzws has lately assumed such
a deep tinge of falsehood, and become such a con-
fused compound of truth and fiction, that it requires
more than ordinary skill, and some share of good
fortune, to discriminate between them, and tell
which to believe and which to reject. Of all that
has lately come over the wires, the only thing that
seems distinctly to be corroborated is the death of
the QUEEN OF PORTUGAL, and the details of that
event are accompanied with variations, the succes-
sor to the throne of DONNA MARIA being styled
Dom PEDRO 11., V., and VIII., in the several
accounts

An event which is probably, however,
of more importance, has recently occurred,and may
have a considerable influence on future events. It is
said that a fusion, as it is termed, has taken place
between the two branches of the French house of
BOURBON. Such an event a few years since would
have been highly improbable, owing to the un-
willingness of the ORLEANS Princes to surrender
the claims to the Throne of France, which they
could only assert through the doubtful title of
LOUIS PHILIPPE. Such hopes are, however, now
at an end, and the restoration of the BOURBONS
to the French Throne can only be effected throne'