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

CROWN COURT.-THURSDAY

James Travers, 20, was charged with having, at Win-
stanley, shot at Joseph Birchall, with intent to kill and
murder him. Mr. Pollock stated the case. The prisoner
was a poacher, and, on being pursued, fired. Mr. James
addressed the jury for the prisoner, remarking that a
greater curse could not exist in a civilised community than
the game laws. The prisoner was found guilty of a com-
mon assault, and sentenced to twelve months' imprison-
ment and bard labour.
MANSLAUGHTER AT WARRINGTON.
Peter Brown, 21, was charged with killing and slaying
his own father. John Brown, at Warrington. On Sun-
day, the 10th of May last, the prisoner was at 'Warring-
ton with some companions, and returned about ten in the
evening, much intoxicated. The deceased was at home
with his family, and some other persons, and he also was
4, If anything happens," (tbe mother being in_
in liquor. On the prisoner coming home, he said to the
'at the time,) you will have to go to Wargrave
disposedd ceased
Moss Workhouse. The deceased replied with an oath
that it was never made for him, after which a quarrel an-
sued, and the prisoner. repeated the assertion he had pre-

viously made. Deceased then struck the prisoner, when
the latter laid hold of the deceased, threw him down on
the floor, and repeatedly kicked him with great severity on
the left side. The injury inflicted was described by the
surgeon as the cause of death. The prisoner was in bed
when his father died, and on being told of the circumstance
said, " I wish they would hang me now." The jury
found the prisoner guilty, and his lordship, after a very
appropriate and impressive admonition on the nature of
the crime he had committed, sentenced him to seven years'
transportation._ .

James Brierley, 21, was charged with having feloni-
ously counselled, aided, and abetted Hannah Gee in com-
mitting bigamy. The principal witness not appearing,
the prisoner was discharged.
Roger Barracks, 41;, was charged with having assaulted
Thomas Greenhalgh, and robbed him of a sovereign and
half sovereign, at Bolton. The innocence of the pri-
soner was made manifest, and he was acquitted.

DISCHARGE 0

THE GRAND JURY

Shortly before four o'clock, the grand jury eptered the
court with the last of the bi'ls which had been entrusted
to them for their consideration. Wm. Entwisle, Esq.,
the foreman of the grand jury, read the following pre-

sentment :

"The grand jury having concluded their examination
of the cases submitted to them, feel it their imperative
duty to place on record their opinion as to the prevalent
habit of drunkkenness, so forcibly alluded to in the charge
delivered to them by Mr. Justice Wightman, as being at
least the cause of four-fifths of the offences comprised in
this and almost all other calendars, as well as with regard
to the best and most efficient means that can be adopted
towards the extinction of that degrading practice.
" It is obvious, from all the records of crime, that a
large proportion of offences are committed by those who
are imperfectly or not at all educated ; and on this most
striking fact the grand jury rest their conviction, that no
great improvement can be expected until the means of
education are placed within the reach of all classes of the
people.

"They are, at the same time, sensible that such an ob-
ject can only be attained by means of a provision for na-
tiontil education to be made by the state; and, for this
purpose, they do respectfully call upon the government to
introduce, in the ensuing session of parliament, a measure
which, by its comprehensive and conciliatory nature, shall
be likely to obtain a general consent, and which shall have
the effect of securing the general education of the popula-
tion of these kingdoms.

"The grand jury are satisfied that, while ear'

tion alone- can gradually eradicate the vice, and prevent
the evil consequences of drunkenness, it is also most im-
portant that a better spirit and tendency should be pro-
duced in the mass of the community, by providing the
means of recreation, and employment of leisure hours in
other pursuits than those which now so unhappily prevail ;
and they point with great gratification to the exertions
which have lately been made in this town and in Manches-
ter, by the establishment of public parks, museums, and
libraries, for that purpose. It is in vain to look for any
amendment in the national character until an inducement
can be offered to those who have now hardly any other
enjoyment, to relinquish the evil indulgence of habitual
unkenness.

" 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.

" On behalf of the grand jury,
" WM. ENTWISLE, Foren
Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN said, he was sure the

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 de-
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, Crtrapton, 18, and Thomas Grepson, IS, were
charged with having assaulted Thomas Whitehead, at
Littl 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.

John Hoyle was acquitted on a charge of robbery at
Worsley, 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 wilh forgery.
Hannah Gee, 25, charged with bigamy. Thos. Simms,
17, charged with bigamy. Mary Bell, 23, charged with
Laving, 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.

NISI PRIUS COURT.--TiltrasnAy

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
Manches'er. 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 had 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,fendan tagreeda
yw3aosoeon tleoraed dsintoo f
his y
best which
fi nt
eh emdeea-1
at 21s, 6d. free on board, freight 4s. 6d. to Runcorn, to
be delivered at 500 loads per month, commencing Octo-
ber, 1844. 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
the matter to arbitration, and said he should be glad to
have an opportunity, in a court of law, of proving that
he had 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. 6J. 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
not 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, 1845, 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 flat, 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. 6J. ver
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 consderation
was 3000 of fine oatmeal, and 300 loads pin-head meal ;
and the other 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 cal

severa

prove that the meal was good. The learned judge sum-
med up, and the jury, after a few minutes' consideration,
found for the plaintiff, dama2es £3OO.

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. Gd., 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. Verdi .1 for the
defendant, on the ground that the order bad been revoked.