The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1849-08-21 00:00:00

BURGLARY.

Thomas Bate,l9, was indicted for burglary in the house
of a man named Wells, in Warrington, and robbing it of
some copper money, and removing articles within the pre-
mises, so that they might be readily removed.
The prosecutor, a tailor and shopkeeper, said that on
the 6th April he was awakened by the barking of a dog.
He went out, but found nobody. He spoke to the police-
man, and search was made about, but no one found. Some
drawers had been forced, and ls. 6d. in bad copper was
missed. The officer afterwards heard some noise, and re-
turned to the house. It was then found that some person
had forced a shutter, and that within there were marks of
soot about, as if a party had been in the chimney of the
cutting room fronting Horse Market-street. The con-
stable afterwards heard a door open, and the prisoner came
out, but escaped. Two iron bars were found to be forced
from the shop window, and the top hanging of the shutter
was so forced that a person of the size of the prisoner
might be got in. The prisoner surrendered himself three
days afterwards to a police officer.
The prisoner said he was innocent.
His LORDSHIP summed up perspicuously, and the jury
returned a verdict of guilty.
He had previously been guilty of slight felony, and was
sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for
twelve months.

ARSON.
Robert Tetlow, 62, was charged with having at Accring-
ton set fire to a cottage, belonging to James Partington,
with (as stated in the several counts of the indictment) in-
tent to destroy the hous:,, loom-house, and shippon, and
to do injury to the occupant.
Mr. SPINRS opened the case for the prosecution. The
prisoner; had lodged in the house ; had had a quarrel with
the prosecutor; and had used threats towards him that he
would burn down his castle.
The prosecutor said the premises were under one
thatched roof. He had known the prisoner for 40 years.
He had lodged there for 18 months. He used to come
home drunk, and prosecutor told him he must not tarry
there any longer. He had frequently said he would burn
down the prosecutor's castle. Prisoner was a weaver, and
worked at the house. On the previous Thursday he had
some gingham in his loom, which he took away and sold.
The prosecutor and prisoner lived alone in the house. On
the night in question the former heard an alarm from
neighbours. who cried, " Get up or you'll be burned !"
He got up and found the shippon and loom-house in
flames. There had been neither fire nor candle in the
house for some weeks. The crowd saw the prisoner, and
remarked that the prisoner had done it. The prisoner
denied it, saying he had not been there, or in the town-
ship, that day. On cross-examination by the prisoner,
witness said the threat was used three or four days before
the fire. _ _ •_ _

A witness, who kept his clock an hour fast, said he saw
the smoke issue from the cottage at about half-past ten on
the night in question. lie dressed and went to the spot.
He saw the shippon and loom-house on fire, and the
flames were approaching the roof of the cottage. It was
sworn by another witness that prisoner left his beer-house
at half-past ten that night. Witness kept lucifer matches
in the kitchen, and the prisoner sat there. Re missed
some matches nest morning, and did not again see them.
Another witness saw the prisoner passing towards the
prosecutor's house about half-past ten that night. He
was staggering in liquor. About an hour after he was
roused by a knocking at the door, and went •and saw the
fire. Other witnesses were called, who had seen the pri-
soner before the tre, which they saw soon after.
The JUDGE, in summing up, stated the slaw as regards
the igniting of a building in which there was s person who
might be burned or injured. The shippon, it appeared,
had been fired, but the house part took fire from that, and
the offence was the same in law as if the dwelling part of
the house had been set fire to.
The jury, after five minutes' consideration, found the
prisoner guilty of setting fire to the house of James Par-
tington, at a time when the prosecutor was in it.
The Junen said the offence of setting fire to premises
in which no one was living at the time was not capital,
but in this case the law remained as it 'was formerly, and
the prisoner was consequently liable, to forfeit his life.
But he should not pass sentence of death ; but should re-
commend.her Majesty to spare his life, which recommen-
dation he.doubted not would be graciously attended to,
but only on the condition that the prisoner should be sent
out of fheeountry.
The prisoner was then removed from the bar.