The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-03-31 00:00:00

STABBING AND CUTTING.

William Harney, aged 32, stood charged with having, at
Ashton-under-Lyne, feloniously and maliciously stabbed
and wounded John Degnan.

Dr. BROWN conducted the defence.
John Degnan said that on the 3d August last he was in-
vited into James Harney's house, by himself, to dinner, and
saw there William Harney and others. James spoke of
some disturbances at Staley Bridge, and witness said he
wished they were done away with, for he had no spite at any
one. Wm. Harney said, "I am not so with you," and took
the poker. and struck me on the nose a violent blow, which
cut me. James Harney then took a knife from the table,
and cut me in the cheek. I was afterwards kicked, and
became insensible. I was here at the last Assizes, when
James Harney and the other man who struck me were here.
Sarah Hunt said she heard James Harney ask Degnau
in. Witness advised him not to come in. James Harney
said he was as welcome as the flowers of May. They after-
wards talked about the disturbances amongst the men at
Staley Bridge, and the prisoner and his brother struck at him
several times, one with a poker, another with a piece of wood,
and James Harney stabbed him with a knife. There were
four upon him. Witness cried murder, and got Degnan out.
He was taken home in a state of insensibility. He lodged
with witness. They said they were happy to see the blood
of a Connaught man flow. Witness, in reply to the judge,
said that the quarrelling parties were Munster and Connaught
men. and that she and her husband were from Connaught
and the prisoner from Munster.
D. Vaughan, of Stalybridge, saw the prosecutor the same
night. There was an incised wound on the left cheek. A
contused wound across the nose. The cuticle was entirely
separated. There were appearances of other blows all over
the head. He was seriously ill for two or three days.
The prisoner said he hoped his lordship would mercifully
consider his case; and take into account that lie had been
nine months in prison.
The learned JUDGE proceeded to pass sentence. His
lordship said that the prisoner had been found guilty of
taking part in a grievous assault, for which three indivi-
duals had, at the last assizes been tried, and being found
guilty, one of them was sentenced to three years' imprison-
ment, and the other two to eighteen months each. He was
not sure, if the parties had not been tried before, but he
would have found it necessary to visit the prisoner with
transportation. This was-no disparagement to the manner
in which his predecessor had punished those who had taken
part in this offence ; because it was the determination of the
judges, finding that the crime .!ontinued to increase, to visit
it in future, with the utmost severity of the law. True, the
prisoner's was not the hand that used the knife, but being of
a party who united in attacking the prosecutor, he was
equally guilty in law of the act of cutting. He (the Judge)
should, however, take into account the time during which
the prisoner had been in prison, (since September last),
and would on that account abridge the term of imprison-
, ment which he would otherwise have had to undergo. He
did hope that he would never again have recourse to deadly
weapons, and that his case would furnish a wholesome ex-
ample to others in the same line of life. The sentence of
the Court was, that the prisoner should be imprisoned in
Kirkdale gaol for two years, and that during that time he
should be kept to hard labour.
John Grifiiths, 24, was indicted on a charge of having, at
Royton, feloniously -cut and wounded one Hannah Hall,
with intent to murder her. There were other counts in the
indictment, charein., the assault as having an intent of minor
aggravation. -
-Dr. BaowN stated the case for the prosecution, as one of
a very aggravated description. The prisoner was undefended.
Hannah Hall, an elderly quakeress, said she was upwards
of 72 years of age, and kept a small shop at Royton. On the
27th -December the prisoner came to her shop. She had
known him before',- and asked him if he worked at the same
place. 'lt was-.about nine o'clock at night. I live alone. I
have no one helping me except on the seventh day. The 27th
December was a Friday: I wits in the kitchen when he came
in. --There is a lobby between. the .shop and the kitchen.
There is a front door to the lobby, the shop being on one
side of it; and the kitchen on the other. He was in the lob-
by. He asked for a loaf and a half pound of cheese. lam
sure it was the prisoner. I went to fetch the loaf and cheese
from a back apartment, where I 'kept them. I went into the
shop to weigh the cheese. He stood near the shop door, in-
side the shop. While I was weighing the cheese, he asked
for half-a-pound of butter. The butter was•in a cask on the
floor. I was standing upright when 1 weighed the cheeie.
I had a candle with me. 1 took it in my hand, and was go-
ing to cut the butter, and I lied to stoop down to do so. The
prisoner was about a yard from me. He struck me on the
left side of the head a very heavy blow. I suppose I fell,
and cannot tell much after then. I am not conscious of hav-
ing felt any other blow, I found myself in the kitchen after-
wards, with a neighbour named Collins. I laid the cheese
on the counter after I had Weighed it, and also the loaf. The
prisoner had not put out his hand to take either of them. I
am sure the prisoner is the man. The loaf or cheese were
not taken away, nor any thing else that 1 know.
John Collins said, I live neat door neighbour to the shop
of the last witness. About nine o'clock I heard a noise like
heavy blows lighting upon something. I went into Mr.
Hall's. The outer door was shut. 1 found all was dark.
I felt my way till I got to the scales, and then I stopped. I
turned round to conic out, when I heard a groan. I found
the last witness lying on the floor. I raised her, and lifted
her into the lobby. She said, "Eh dear what is to do ?"
1 took her to the kitchen and got a light. She was very
bloody. The cut was off her head, and her hair hanging
down. She was insensible. She told me it was a young
man who did it. I went to go into the shop, but my light
went out in the lobby. I got another light. I found in the
shop the candlestick near where her head was, and the candle
on the floor, at some distance. Saw also the lid of the but-
ter cask which was broken in two. 1 got a medical man to
her. I heard like two struggles before I went out of my
house.

Robert Savage.--On the 27th December he was at a col-
liery, about a mile from Mr. Hall's. The prisoner worked
there on the 27th, but not for two or three days before.
Witness saw him covered up at the back of the engine boiler.
He was there for three or four hours. He said he was going
to Turf Lane. To go there he must pass Mrs. Hall's. I
saw him about ten minutes after, and he said he had only
been at the other hut. (There was some discrepancies be-
tween the testimony of this witness and that which he gave
before the magistrates.)
Ratcliffe Scholfield saw the prisoner that night, and he
took a direction to a lane that leads towards Mrs. Hall's.
He came back in about ten minutes, and in about half an
hour afterwards he was taken by the constable.
Another witness said, that he was in the lane that night,
and saw a man running in the direction of the coal pit.
Before I got home I found that somebody had welly killed
Mrs. Hall.

A Constable at Royton said—the colliery and Mr. Hall's
house are about 500 yards apart. After nine o'clock, on the
27th, 1 apprehended the prisoner at the engine-house of the
colliery. He wished to know what he was accused of. Wit-
ness did not inform him, but took him to Mrs. Hall's. Wit-
ness produced the lid of a butter tub, which had been broken.
He found no money or other articles on the prisoner, except
a collier's strap.
Mr. Earnshaw, surgeon, stated, that he found on Mrs.
Hall's head, neck, and shoulders, several wounds. Some of
these were triangular, and appeared to have been inflicted
with a sharp instrument. The wounds were not dangerous.
Mrs. Hall was under his care about a fortnight.

The prisoner declined saying anything"in his defence,
merely repeating that he knew nothing of the charge.
The JUDGE summed up, and the jury found the prisoner
guilty of the assault, " with intent to do some grievous bodily
harm." _ _

His LORDSHIP said the jury had found the prisoner guilty
of cutting and wounding, with intent to do grievous bodily
harm. That verdict would relieve him from a painful duty,
for had their finding been.with intent to murder, for which
the punishment was still capital, he certainly should have
found great conscientious difficulty in not leaving the law to
take its course. The prisoner had gone into the house of a
poor, defenceless old woman, and had inflicted upon her blow
after blow, and that with malicious severity. Although,
therefore, the prisoner's life would be spared, he must pre-
pare himself for a serious punishment. He hoped, however,
it would have a good effect on the prisoner, and a salutary one
on all who resorted to such cruel and dangerous attacks upon
their fellow creatures. The sentence of the court was, that
ha should be transported beyond the seas for the term of
fifteen years.
It being a few minutes past six o'clock, the court adjourned
until this day.

NISI PRIUS COURT.—MONDAY.
(Before Mr. Justice Erskine.)
STARKIE V. RIMMER.
This was an undefended action, to recover £7O from the
defendant, a chemist and druggist, in Scotland-road, Liver-
pool, part of £3OO agreed to be paid to Mr. Starkie for the
goodwill and stock-in-trade of the plaintiff, who formerly
carried on business in Scotland-road as chemist and drug-
gist, and sold his business to the defendant in July 1837.
Verdict for the plaintiff.
M'EENZIE V. JONES.
This was an action to recover £52 175., the balance of an
account owing by the defendant, who carries on business
at Liverpool under the style of R. G. Jones & Co., for coals
purchased from the plaintiff. The action was undefended.
—Verdict for the plaintiff.
BONNY V. WHITEHEAD.
This was an action !nought upon an award made by a re-
feree, appointed by the plaintiff, Mr. James Bonny, and the
defendant. Mr. John Whitehead, to determine the amount
of a debt standing between the two parties in 1838. The
amount of award was £630 2s. Gd. The action was unde-
fended.—Verdict for the plaintiff.
'WOODS V. TWEEDLE AND ANOTHER.
The plaintiff in this case was an attorney at Rochdale and
the defendants are woollen-manufacturers, carrying on iiusi-

ness at the same place. The action was brought by the
plaintiff for the recovery of £124 95., the amount of plain-
tiff's bill for defending the defendants in an action brought
against. them by a person named Smith, at the Liverpool
Summerb Assizes for 1838. In this action a verdict was ob-
tained for the defendants, but the plaintiff. either. from po-
verty or some other cause, preferred imprisonment to pay-
inr, the costs of the action, and the consequence was, that
Mr." Woods, the defendant:' attorney, (and in the present
action the plaintiff,) clamed his bill from Messrs. Tweedle.
Mr. ALEXANDER (with whom was Mr. HOGGINS) stated
the case to the jury. He said the action out of which this
debt arose originated as follows :—Messrs. John and Robert
Tweedle had taken from Mr. Chadwick, of Rochdale, a
piece of ground in the neighbourhood-cif their manufactory,
for the purpose of building upon, and they had built upon it
to the height of two stories, when a farmer named Smith
said they had built upon land of which he was tenant,
and brought his action for recovery of damages. Messrs.
Tweedle defended themselves upon the ground that Mr.
Chadwick had, when he sold them the land, the right reserved
to him of selling the land occupied by Smith. In this de-
fence, which was conducted by Mr. Woods, the present
plaintiff, they succeeded, and after some. delay, Mr. Woods
sent in his bill, which amounted to £124 19s. The defend-
ants intimated that they did not intend to pay the bill, on
the-ground that Mr. Chadwick was the proper person, inas-
much as the action arose through him. This probably was
the fact, but Mr. Chadwick refused to pay, and as Mr.
Woods had no claim upon him, he was compelled to seek the
recovery of his bill from the present defendants, Messrs.
Tweedle.

Mr. CRESSWELI. (with whom was Mr. WATSON) ad-
dressed the jury for the defendants, disputing the retainer,
and contending that the plaintiff, being the solicitor of Mr.
Chadwick, had attended the Liverpool Assizes in the action
in question as his solicitor, and not as the solicitor to con-
duct this case for Messrs. Tweedle ; and, in fact, he observed
that his learned friend, in opening the case, said the defend-
ants had refused to pay the bill on the ground, which he ad-
mitted was reasonable enough, that Mr. Chadwick having
brought the defendants into this difficulty, was bound to see
them harmless out of it. The learned counsel then called
witnesses to prove that there was an understanding through-
out the case, that the Tweedles were only nominal parties in
the action, and that Chadwick, being the landowner, was the
only person having an interest in the action, and consequently
responsible for the expenses ; that witnesses in the action
were paid by Mr. Sutcliffe, land-agent to Mr. Chadwick's
estates, for their attendance at the assizes, and that he also
paid for the plans of the estate. Amongst the witnesses
called by Mr. Cresswell were several of those subpoenaed in
the former action, and one of these proved that Mr. Woods,
in a conversation with the Messrs. Tweedle, before the
action, when they objected to it, that they would rather lose
the cost of the buildings, than dispute the matter, replied.
" Never mind. you will not have to pay a farthing, but your
names are necessary to carrying on the action."

Mr. ALEXANDER replied-. -
Mr. Justice ERSKINE said, the learned counsel for the

plaintiff had put the case to the jury as though the question
was whether Mr. Chadwick, Messrs. Tweedle, or any oue
else had retained Mr. Woods, and whether Mr. Woods was

to lose the remuneration for his professional labours. Now
this was not the question. The:question was whether he
had or had not a retainer from Messrs. Tweedle ; because,
if an attorney to a landlord undertook to detand the tenants
in an action, under the supposition that the landlord would
pay him, and gave the tenants an assurance that he would
not come upon them, he was not to turn round when he
found out his mistake and that he could not get it from the
landlord, and claim his bill from the tenants. Prima facie
there was a case for the plaintiff, but the question was, whe-
ther that was not satisfactorily answered by the witnesses for
the defendants. _ _ _ _ _

The jury found for the defendants.
ROCKLIFFE V. TOPPING

The plaintiff in this case, Mr. Richard Rockliffe, was 3
blacksmith, residing at West Leigh, and the defendant Mr.
John Topping, a gentleman residing at the same place. In
the year 1828, Mr. Topping commenced working some coal
mines in that neighbourhood, and had employed the plaintiff
to manufacture implements required in the working of these
mines. The action was brought to recover £2B. Is. 5d., the
balance of an account due to plaintiff for the work. The
action was undefended. Verdict for the plaintiff.

MARSH V. COLLARD.
John F. .Marsh, the plaintiff, is the owner of a house at
New Ferry, and some time since let that house to the defend-
ant, Mr. Abraham W. Collard. The rent became due, when
the defendant being unable to pay, gave the complainant a
promissory note for the amount, at four months, which, oa
its becom.ing due, the defendant denied. The amount was
£46 Is. 6d. The action was undefended—verdict for plaintiff.

GREENALI. AND OTHERS V. HUMPHREYS.
This was an action brought to reserve the amount of two
bills of exchange from the defendant John Humphreys, one
for £6O ant: the other for £69. The bills were drawn so far
back as 1832, and the interest accumulated upon them brought
the claim up to £155 17s. 3d. The defendant when called
upon denied that he was the party who signed the acceptance.
The action was not defended, and the jury found for the
plaintiff.