The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-03-27 00:00:00

BURGLARY.

John Walker and MichaeliFi;lit;; were charged with having,
on the morning of the 27th February last, burglariously entered
the dwelling-house of Catherine Weight, at Pendleton, and
stolen therefrom a variety of articles. Mr. BRANDT appeared
for the prosecution.
Wm. Wilcock was the first witness called. He deposed that
he slept in a room on the ground floor of Mrs. Weight's house,
and was disturbed, about three o'clock on the morning of the
27th February, by a noise at the door. He immediately got up
and, looking through the key hole, saw a light in the adjoining
room. He made an alarm, and went out of his room; in doing
which he heard a great noise in the music room, and presently
after the breaking of a window. The entrance had been effected
by taking a panel out of the door, and drawing two bolts. He
found a pair of clogs inside the door, a hat in the music-room,
in which was a handkerchief, and five skeleton keys. On the
steps leading into the garden, he saw several drops of blood,
which he could trace for about 100 yards. He was in company
with Mr. Allen when a piece of blue cloth (apparently front the
lap of a coat) was found in a strawberry bed in the garden.
There were some palings which were broken down ; the intrud-
ers seemed to have run against them, and by that means the
coat might have been torn.
Miss Weight deposed, that she resided with her mother, and
stated, that she had ascertained that all the small silver articles
from a work-box, which lay in the parlour, bad been stolen. She
had not seen the articles in question for some time before the
robbery ; but she knew that the work-box itself had been re-
moved, on the night of the robbery, front the place in which the
had left it.
Thomas Allen, constable of Pendleton, deposed, that he was
sent for to the house of Mrs. Weight, at five o'clock on the
morning of the 27th February. He examined into the state of
things there; and be saw some skeleton keys, which were de-
livered to him, as well as a hat and handkerchief. He observ-
ed traces of blood, extending from a broken window and across
the garden, in the direction of Salford. He had compared the
piece of blue cloth found on the strawberry bed with a rent in a
coat shown hint by niggles, deputy:constable of Salford, and
they corresponded. He saw the 'prisoners in custody on the
following morning (the 28th.) He took Walker's shoes from
him, and compared them with some impressions on a walk.
The shoes exactly tallied with those impressions. . _ .

Miss Gould saw four men pass the house on the evening of the
preceding day, and she was positive that the two men at the bar
were among them. Her reason for remarking them was, that
they looked particularly at the house as they passed..
John Diggles, deputy constable of Salford, in consequence of
information which he had received, went in search of Whaling,
and found the two prisoners together at a public house. He re-
marked, that Whaling had on a fresh hat, and he noticed the
fact to him. Lindsay, a police officer, hearing the remark, took
the hat from his head, which witness then observed was severely
cut at the back. The blood was still trickling from the wound
upon his shirt collar. The prisoner accounted for the hurt by
saying, that a man had hit him with a big stone on the head
that morning. He took both prisoners into custody. Whaling
had on a blue coat, from the skirt of which a strip, he found, had
been torn. He had received a piece of blue cloth froin Allen,
which had evidently come from the coat. Allen showed him
the hat found on Mrs. Weight's premises • he knew it was Whaling's, because he had had it in his baud several times.—
[The coat, the strip of cloth, the hat, and shoes were handed in
and inspected by the jury.]
Lindsay, a police-officer, had been in the habit of having
Whaling's hat in his hand three or four times a week. He bad
seen it on the Monday night, (the night preceding the robbery,)
and there was then in it a half handkerchief; the one previous-
ly produced was the one which he had then seen.
'the prisoner Walker cross-examined nearly the whole of
the witnesses at some length. He now addressed the jury in
his defence, maintaining that he had not been absent from his
own house from half-past eight on Monday evening till half-past
four on Tuesday afternoon. He called several witnesses, (his
mother, and other persons resident in the same house,) to esta-
blish the alibi. Their evidence, as far as the principal facts
connected with the prisoner were concerned, varied but slightly,
and tended to establish the truth of his statement; but, in the
searching cross-examination to „which they were subjected by
Mr. Brandt, there were' found. on all the incidental and extra-
neous circumstances, many discrepancies.
The jury, after a short consultation, brought in a vedict of
guilty against both prisoners, and they were sentenced to be
transported for life.
NISI PRIUS COURT.

- -- --
This Court opened on Friday- morning, shortly after 12
o'clock, before Sir J. F. Coleridge.

PAPER AND PENS FOR THE BARRISTERS.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said—My Lord, we are in a great
difficulty here; there is a dispute who is to find pens and paper
for the bar; there are neither pens nor paper, it is su small a
county.

Uts LotrostriP—l am afraid I cannot assist you.
Mr. Fr.wrctimi INCOCK.—The Attorney-General comes
from the county of Chester, and therefore tie•takes liberties
with Lancashire. (A laugh.)
The Under Sheriff was sent for to explain the reason why
paper was not afforded as usual.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Your lordship is aware, that.be-
fore the removal of the assizes from Lancaster, the county found
the paper.
Ills LoRDSHIP.-131t, before the removal, the Under Sheriff
says the Corporation undertook to find the paper.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—That is between themselves.
A LEARNED GF.NTLEMAN.—They had better split the dif-
ference. (Loud laughter.)
ills LORDSHIP.—The county have refused to pay for the
paper supplied for last session, saying the corporation under-
took to do it.
Mr. CRESSWELL—Whv, my lord, the funds of the corpora-

tine are now under act of parliament.
Mr. RAtticoca.—l think the barristers of Liverpool might
subscribe a quire of paper each and surmount the difficulty. (a
laugh.)
A message was sent to the Town Clerk, we believe, to in-
Forn► him of the want of paper, hilt none was supplied.
This is candle-end and cheese-paring economy with a yen-
zeance. The whole cost of the paper would not amount to £5.
)h! worthy of Liverpool Corporation None has since been
;upplied - and we understand their Lordships are furnished
.with pens at the private elpense elate Mayor!
cot PLAN') V. cuANKsttAw.
This was an action brought to recover the sum of £46 on a
znarantee, from the defendant, who resides in Manchester.
Verdict for the plaintiff lot the amount.
LORD V. namsnorrom..

The plaintiff, in this case, is atoll-bar-keeper, near Alan-
dtester, and the defendant, a Coach-proprietor at Manchester.
:'he action was brought for the recovery of a sum of 1;58 4s.
,r tolls which the defendant had run in the debt of the plain-
iff Since the action had been commenced, two sums had been
,rid in liquidation, leaving a balance of £23 is. The defend-
tut objected, also, to pay the costs of the action.
Verdict for the plaintiff for the amount.
HACKING V. I.AING. _ .

This was an action—C.lU a bill of exchange for EA and the

costs on it El Ios. which the defendant had endorsed.
Verdict for the plaintiff for the amount.
BUTTERFIELD v. BLACKBERD.
This was an action for a debt, for goods sold and delivered,
to the amount of £3B 13s 81. It was undefended. The debt
was proved. Verdict for the plaintiff for the amount.
BA liTuN V. EDGE.
This was an undefended action for the recovery of £52 4s,
money lent and interest. Verdict for the plaintiff for the
amount.