The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-10-30 00:00:00

HIGHWAY ROBBERY.

John Roberts stood charged with having assaulted and fe-
loniously stolen a gold watch-guard and gold key, the pro-
perty of Thomas Wardle, from his person.

Mr. Wardle, attorney, stated that he lived in Islington ;
remembers going home about half-past nine o'clock in Septem-
ber last; when he got to the top of Shaw's-brow, he heard a
man following him, and received a dreadful blow on the back
of the neck, and, at the same time, a trip, which tumbled
him into the middle of the street ; felt a tug, and soon dis-
covered that, while his watch was left, the guard, chain, and
key were gone ; several persons surrounded him, but lie could
not identify the prisoner ; subsequently received back the ar-
ticles stolen.

Thomas Croskell examined.—Saw the prisoner strike Mr.
Wardle, and run up Mill place ; saw two persons follow and
bring him back.
John Edwards examined.—ls a stonemason; saw Mr.
Wardle fall ; heard him cry out that he had been robbed of
his watch ; witness followed the prisoner to the bottom of
Hunter-street, where he was seized by a policeman, but no-
thing was found on his person.
James Glover recollects his little boy bringing him Mr.
Wardle's watch-guard and key on the morning after the oc-
currence, which he found in the middle of Hunter-street, in
the dirt.

The prisoner was immediately convicted, and sentenced to
be transported for the term of his natural life.

YESTERDAY.
UNFOUNDED CHARGE OF FELONY.

Joseph Crouch, a respectable-looking man, was indicted,
having possessed himself of his books of account as a trades-
man, with a felonious intent, after he had made an assignment
of his estate and effects.

Mr. James was counsel for the prosecution,—Mr. Cornth-
waite, attorney ; Mr. Venables defended the prisoner, attor-
ney, Mr. Toulinin.. _ _

Mr. JAMES stated the case to the jury, and called
CHARLES PEMBERTON, who being sworn, said :—I am
managing clerk to Mr. Cornthwaite, solicitor. I attended
the meeting at the prisoner's small-ware shop and house on
the 23rd inst. It was convened by himself, and for the pur-
pose of making an arrangement with his creditors, An in-
vestigation of his affairs took place. A deed was drawn out,
and executed by the prisoner. 1 am the attesting witness to
that deed, and I saw him sign it. (The witness here pro-
duced the deed, but it was not then read, and Mr. Venables
claimed his right of cross-examination on the points spoken
to.)
Cross-examined by Mr. VENABLES.—I am paid by Mr.
Cornthwaite by a salary. I took the deed to the meeting in
blank. I received no directions from the prisoner as to the
manner of drawing it up. I brought it ready prepared.
I did not furnish a copy of the deed to Mr. Crouch, nor did
I tell him of it. Two hours had elapsed at the meeting before
I produced the deed. During those two hours, Mr. Crouch
was under strict examination by the meeting. No one gave
me directions to produce the deed, but I produced it. It
was prepared by Mr. Cornthwaite, or at least (said the wit-
ness after severe cross-examination) at his office. Mr.
Cornthwaite (continued the witness in reply) was not cog-
nizant of the deed. He had not seen it. I told him of it
immediately after the meeting had taken place. I told him
after I came from the meeting. Mr. Hetherington attended
on behalf of the prisoner. Several of the principal creditors
were there, including the assignees. I gave the deed to Mr.
Hetherington to read. The prisoner signed it, but not under
an agreement that the creditors should also sign it. I believe
(said the witness hesitating 50111 e time) that I took the deed
up, and told the assignees not to sign it. No individual took
up a pen and was about to sign it, that I saw. The assignees
were Mr. Lilwell, Mr. Morrison, Mr. Alanson, and Mr'
Walker. A docket has been struck against the prisoner, and
the ground or act of bankruptcy was that assignment.
Re-examined by Mr. James for the prosecution.—Mr.
Hetherington was acting there on behalf of the prisoner. I
attended at the instance of the heaviest creditor. I handed
the deed to Mr. Hetherington. He said there was nothing
but what was straightforward in it. I have been employed
15 years in a solicitor's office. It is not usual to consnit the
principal in such an affair on all occasions. I am managing
clerk, and can originate such matters myself. The deed is
an assignment of the prisoner's stock in trade, his books and
book debts. It is a single deed of assignment to trustees.
The prisoner lived in a house attached to the small-ware
shop, and had access to the latter. Books of account were
produced at the meeting by the prisoner. There was a day-
book, ledger, and cash-book. They were given up to Mr.
Lilwall, one of the assignees, in a white paper parcel, and
Mr. Alanson, another trustee, took possession of them.
He took them away from the small-ware shop. I saw the
assignees take possession of the books. A person was left in
possession of the small-ware shop, appointed by the as-
signees. On the following day, at night, Mr. Walker and
Mr. Alanson came to me; and I accompanied them to the
prisoner's house. I asked him what he had done with his
books of trade as I understood he had carried them away.
He made no answer. Mr. Walker then demanded them
from him, and he refused to give them up. I asked
him in whose hands they were, and he said they were
in the hands of Mr. Toulmin, his attorney. Mr. Walker
went for a police-officer, and he was apprehended.
Cross-examined by Mr. Venables.—l did not advise the
assignees to send for a police-officer. I took such part in
the conversation as shewed that the deed was executed and
the books taken away. The creditors were met to sign the
decd.
court, to tliourthpoertefrofectthethdaetedthwae
psritshoennerread conbvy theeyed chliesrk of the
stock in
trade, both as hosier, small-ware dealer, and his debts, bonds,
bills, &c. &c., all his estates and effects, to the assignees ;
considerationand h a t tlies same
whiche s debs
he soldu ld bteo
released. the best
e s
A advantage—in
clause
w was
to the effect, that if all the creditors should :not sign the
deed within one week, thheadteneod siasledsahteodulod
etat.k2e3pdl, d acaen is the
.
Cross-examined.—
T
act of bankruptcy on which the fiat is grounded. The fiat is
dated on Monday last the 26th, and the bill was found by the
grand jury on the following day. The fiat was found before
the bill went to the grand jury. (Witness repeated the
names of the assignees.) There was a provisional assigneee.
I am not aware that the property would vest in the assignees
from the date of the fiat.
Mr. VENABLES said—Then, sire for your future informa-
tion and guidance, I now inform you that such is the law.

(Laughter.) When did you sue for the fiat-? Wait before
the books were taken ?
Witness.—l sent for it before the prisoner stole the books.
Mr. VEN ABLES.—You are a pretty witness to use such an
expression ! What business have you to presume that the
prisoner stole the books?
Cross-examination continued.—l sent for it before I took
Mr. Crouch before Mr. Rushton. The prisoner was not
empowered to conduct the business of the shop after the
meeting. The parties put into the shop were to buy and sell
in the name of the trustees, not of Mr. Crouch. I sent for
the fiat on Saturday night at ten o'clock. I dont knoW whe-
ther the prisoner could or could not have procured bail on
Sunday. I don't know that there is not a morning train to
London on the Sunday morning. I received the docket on
Tuesday. I sent for the fiat on Saturday, went before the
magistrates and preferred a charge of felony against the pri-
soner on Monday, and received the fiat on Tuesday ! The
prisoner told me at once, when I asked him, that the books
were in the hands of Mr. Toulmin, his attorney. I knew
Mr. Toulmin. I served him 14 years.
Mr. VENABLES.—Were you discharged from his service ?
Witness.—l walked out.

Mr. VENABLES here put it to the court whether there was
anything like felony proved against the prisoner. He con-
sidered the charge most unfounded.
The REcottnEn. said that the case, if tenable at all, ap-
peared to be cognizable only to the civil law. He was of
opinion that it did not call for a prosecution for felony.
The jury expressed their concurrence ; a verdict of not
guilty was taken, and the prisoner was immediately dis-
charged from the dock.
Mr. VENABLES remarked that he had never known a more
slanderous' prosecution, and intimated that an action would
be brought against the assignees and Pemberton for false im-
prisonment. A feeling of approbation was evinced in the
court on the opinion of the court and jury being given.