The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-04-13 00:00:00

LOCAL NEWS,

YOUNG MEN'S ESTABLISHED CHURCH SOCIETY.-It
will be seen from an advertisement, that on Thursday even-
ing next the Rev. Hugh M`Neile will address a lecture to the
members and friends of the Young Men's Established Church
Society. The character of the lecturer, and the important
and interesting subject of the lecture, are more than suffici-
ent to secure a numerous auditory.

THE LATE MURDER NEAR BRISTOL.—On Thursday last,
at the Bristol assizes, Charles Rudge, aged 18, was charged
with the murder of Mrs. Shedden, at Horfield, near Bristol,
the particulars of which appeared in the Standard at the time.
After the evidence had been fully detailed, the jury considered
it of so contradictory a nature as to stop the prisoner's coun-
sel before the conclusion of his address, and immediately re-
turned a verdict of not guilty.

INLAND WAREHOUSING.—Just as the House of Com-
mons was abOut to adjourn on Wednesday morning, Mr.
Labouchere brought in a bill " for the Warehousing of Fo-
reign Goods at Inland Towns." It was read the first time,
and ordered to be read the second time on Monday, April 26.
THE LATE MURDER AT MANCHESTER.—An inquest was
held at the Infirmary, on Thursday last, before Mr. Chap-
man, the borough coroner, on the body of Frances Bostock,
whose throat was cut in Liverpool Road, on the Bth ult.
William Hampson, who has been in custody ever since,
charged with committing the deed, was present during the
holding of the inquest. After the hearing of the evidence,
the jury brought in a verdict of " Wilful Murder', against
the prisoner.

TRIBUTE or RESPECT.—On Wednesday, the ladies of St.
George's congregation, Bolton, presented their pastor, the
Rev. J. Lyons, with a set of rich robes, together with a
valuable and beautiful copy of Strype's works, consisting of
25 volumes. The robes were procured from Oxford, and are
" beautiful exceedingly." An eloquent letter accompanied
the gift, to which Mr. Lyons has replied in a most finished
epistle, abounding in every sentiment capable of proceeding
from a pious minister of our ancient and venerated church.
Mr. Lyons, it will be remembered, was formerly the minister
of all Saints' Church in this town.

•
EXPLOSION OF GAS.—Some operations have recently been
carried on at the house of the Rev. Hugh M`Neile, in Ros-
common-street, with the view of draining off the stagnant
water which has lodged beneath it. For some days, previous
to Saturday last, a very offensive odour of gas was perceived
by the inmates of the reverend gentleman's mansion. On
Saturday morning an individual, who superintended the for-
mation of the new sewer or drain, was, with his son, exami-
ning the direction of the old sewer. They had a candle with
them, and had just opened a passage from one of the vaults
into the sewer, when the pent up gas which had accumulated
in the place exploded. Both individuals were slightly injured.
The explosion blew up several large flags in a small front
yard where a pump had recently stood over a well of stag-
nant water, and broke three or four panes of glass in the
scullery window.

BURGLARY AND EXTENSIVE ROBBERY OF WATCHES,
JEWELLERY, &C., AT LIVERPOOL.—On the night of the
4th instant, some thief or thieves effected an entrance into
the shop of Mr. Allwood, pawnbroker, Vauxhall-road, Li-
verpool, and succeeded in carrying away with them the fol-
lowing valuable property, namely, sixty silver lever and verge
watches, which, having been cleaned, will have whiting be-
tween the cases; a silver-chased snuff-box, fifty gold wed-
ding rings, from fifteen to twenty gold seals, a large quantity
of American dollars, as also a large quantity of half and
quarter ditto, a twenty franc gold piece, a large quantity of
old coins of various sorts, two silver gilt pieces. (on the
size of a doubloon, the other of a half ditto,) a few ahil:ings
of the reign of Elizabeth, several silver table spoons, and a
quantity of silver tea spoons. A reward is oftereu for the
apprehension and conviction of the offender or offenders.
BREAKING INTO AND ROBBING A SHOP.—Robert Weaver
was charged before the magistrates, on Saturday last, with
having broken into the shop of Mr. Steven Meredith,
auctioneer, Marybone, and stolen a quantity of dresses,
merinos, and other articles. When Mr. Meredith found that
his shop had been robbed, he gave information to the police.
The prisoner had, some weeks since, taken lodgings from a
Mr. Ford, who discovered, in a recess in the floor of the
prisoner's room, a number of skeleton keys and housebreak-
ing implements. He informed Mr. Dowling, who sent
constable Thos. Ainsworth to the house, where most of the
property missed by Mr. Meredith was found. Same few of
the articles had been pledged. The prisoner was committed
for trial.

STREET-ROBBERY.--Mary Dunn, a little woman, of dis-
solute character, was placed before Mr. Rushton, on Satur-
day, charged with having robbed Thomas Patton. The
complainant stated, that on Friday night, or Saturday morn-
ing, a little after twelve o'clock, he knocked at the door of a
public-house, in the Old Haymarket. He was accosted by
the prisoner, with whom he walked a little way up the small
avenue, known by the name of St. John's Village. He had
in his pocket a purse, at one end of which were three five
pound notes, and at the other four sovereigns and five half-
crowns. Suddenly he missed his purse, and, seizing the
prisoner, accused her of having taken it, and demanded its
restoration. She stooped to the ground and picked it up and
gave it to him. He found, however. that, though the notes
were safe, the gold and silver had disappeared. Two other
girls came up and clamoured for him to set the prisoner at
liberty, but he refused, and desired a man who was passing
to send him a police-officer. Constable 134 came to his
assistance, and all the girls were taken to 'Bridewell and
searched, but nothing was found in their possession. The
prisoner denied the charge and was committed for trial.

The PADGATE BURGLARY.—Through the vigilance of Mr.
James Jones, the very able and active deputy-constable of
Warrington, there is every reason to believe that the parties
who committed this burglary are now in custody. They form
one of the most complete and organised gangs ever met with
in this part of the country, and will in all probability turn
out to be the parties who have, within the last twelve months,
committed so many depredations upon church property in
Cheshire and Lancashire. They were apprehended in Man-
chester ; and at the house of one of the gang was found a
bunch of picklock keys, of about two hundred in number,
capable of opening any lock from the size of a trinket box to
the largest church door. Two black jackets, made with full
bodies, admirably adapted for the concealment of the parties
wearing them, with crapes and black caps to match, a pair
of rifle-barrel duelling pistols, of foreign manufacture, with
flint locks, a very handsome fowling-piece (percussion lock),
a various and well-selected stock of bullets, shot, and pow!
der, together with bullet moulds to match the fire-arms ;
three dark lanterns, one without a slide—a slide to fit the
latter lantern was picked up on the day after the robbery, in '
Mr. Shaw's house, at Padgate ; two crow bars and a blud-
geon, the key of the front door of Mr. Shaw's house, a good
stock of new clothing, and sundry account-books (maker's
name
Smith"), and six silver spoons. The prisoners were
brought ' '
up for examination, before the magistrates, yester-
day, at Warrington.

- -
MORE TRICKS UPON TRAVELLURS.—Newcomb Procter,
a respectable looking young man, was placed before Mr.,
Rushton, on Saturday, charged with having in his possession
a quantity of tobacco. The prisoner was walking near the
King's Dock with a large parcel in his hand, when he was
stopped by a police-officer, who, on opening one end of the
parcel, found that it contained tobacco. The Excise officer
who appeared as a witness in court stated, that the paper
taken from the prisoner was, at first, believed to be filled
with tobacco. On opening it, however, it was found to be
filled with sawdust, with a small quantity of tobacco at each
end. It appeared that Procter is a very respectable young
man, who has recently arrived at Liverpool. for the purpose
of proceeding to Jamaica in the ship Sydney. As he was
going to the vessel, on Thursday last, he met a man attired
as a sailor, who offered him a parcel of tobacco at so low a
price that he was induced to become a purchaser. He bought
what purported to he 14Ibs of tobacco at the rate of 2s. per lb.
and was proceeding with his prize to the ship when he was
stopped by the officer. It was stated that several fellows,
dressed as sailors, prowl about the docks for the purpose of
practising frauds similar to this on the ignorant and unwary.
The prisoner was discharged, and his parcel of sawdust de- j
livered to him.

SOUTH LANCASHIRE SPRING ASSIZES

CROWN COURT.—FRIDAY. -
Friday last, being Good Friday, the judges attended divine
ervice at St. George's Church, in consequence of which Mr.
Justice Maule did not take his seat on the bench of the
Crown Court until ten minutes to one o'clock.
EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF BIGAMY.
Elizabeth Daniels stood indicted for, that she being the
wife of John Daniels, feloniously did marry one Joseph Smith,
on the Bth of October, 1840, the said Daniels being then
alive; and John Daniels stood indicted for having coun-
selled, promoted, and incited his wife Elizabeth to commit
the felony. Both the prisoners having pleaded not guilty,
the following jury were sworn to try the case :
John Bolton, Thomas Collins, John H. Collins, Charles
Cusack, Peter Hope, George Kenworthy,- -Alfred H. Hen-
shaw, William Folds, Edward Woods, John Taylor, Thomas
Starkie, and John Arnold.
The prisoner Elizabeth was defended by Mr. MURPHY,
and the prisoner John by Mr. Wit.x/Ns. --
Mr. ARMSTRONG stated the case. He said the prisoner
Elizabeth had been indicted for bigamy, and that the indict-
ment further charged that the other prisoner, who was her
real husband, had been an accessory before the fact to its
commission. if the latter allegation were proved, there
could be little doubt that he was the worse prisoner of the
two._ The evidence against the female prisoner would be
very short. It would be proved that skie had been married
to Daniels at St. David's Church in September, 1839, and
that she was subsequently married to a person of the name
of Joseph Smith, on the Bth of. October, 1840. Though the
case would be a short one against the female prisoner, it was
necessary that be should enter into the facts in order to show
that the male prisoner had been an accessory. It would ap-
pear that Mr. Smith, the second husband, met with the
female prisoner at a tea-garden ; that he formed an acquain-
tance with her there; and that he met her in the streets after-
wards, when she represented herself to be a widow. It
would further appear that after some time he proposed mar-
riage to her. At first she declined the proposal, saying that
she was living with her brother-in-law, Mr. Edmund-
son, at Mount-pleasant, and that he wished her to
marry a man of the name of Lee. ' She had a bro-
ther-in-law of that name, but he was not residing in
Mount. pleasant. Subsequently, Mr. Smith went to Bolton-
street, the residence of the female prisoner, where he had
interviews with her, and where he also saw the male pri-
soner, whom she represented to be her brother-in-law, Mr.
Edmundson. This having gone on for some time, she at
length consented to he married to Mr. Smith. They went to
church accordingly for that purpose, but her heart failed her,
as he (the learned counsel) supposed. She wished her mar-
riage to be postponed. "A
short postponement then took
Place, but, having gone to church again on the Bth of Octo-
ber, they were married. On the evening of the day on which
the marriage had taken place, the male prisoner, who repre-
sented himself to Mr. Smith as the Mr. Edmundson, came
to the lodgings to which Mr. Smith and the female prisoner
had retired after the ceremony had taken- place. On enter-
ing, Mr. Smith addressed him as Mr. Edmondson, where-
upon lie said his name was not Edniuddson ; but it would'
appear in evidence that he frequently called at the lodgings
afterwards and represented himself to be Mr. Edmundson.
With reference to his conduct previous to the marriage, evi-
dence would be given tending to show that he had been a
party to what was going on between Mr. Smith and his wife ;
because after she had made appointments to meet Mr. Smith,
she wrote notes to put him off; and he (the learned counsel)
believed that he should be able to prove that those notes had
been written by the male prisoner. What motive, then,
could the male prisoner-have for aiding in the promotion of
the second marriage, particularly as it seemed he had been
on good terms with her, and that he was constantly with her
after the ceremony had taken place ? Why, it must have
been that he might live on the wages of her prostitution, and
by the plunder of the man who had mistakenly supposed
himself to be her husband. He had been living with her in
Bolton-street ; but when she went to live with Mr. Smith,
after her marriage with that gentleman, and that he had been
visiting her there, she took lodgings for him elsewhere. She
paid the weekly sum for his lodgings, and when she went to
market on Saturdays she bought more than was wanted for
herself and Mr. Smith, and took part to the lodgings of the
male prisoner. Under these circumstances, it would be for
the jury to say whether the male prisoner had not been aid-
ing, assisting, and counselling her to commit the felony.
William Edmundson was the first witness called. He was
examined by Dr. BROWN as follows :—I am a tailor and dra-
per, living at 28, Oldhall-street. I have lived there seven
years, and married a sister of the female prisoner. Her
name was Eliza Whittaker. She had another sister besides
the female prisoner. Her father was an innkeeper in Dale-
street. The marriage between the male and female prisoner
took place in September, 1839, in St. David's Church, Liver-
pool, by license. I was present at the marriage. They were
married by the Rev. Mr. Davies. I never visited them after
the marriage, but they continued to visit me for tree or four
months after. I have not seen them together since that
time. I did not know where they were living. I never lived
at 73, Mount-pleasant.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY.—I had no particular
reason for discontinuing my intimacy with them. The rea-
son I did not visit them was because I have been too much
engaged in the week-days, and on Sundays I had something
else to attend to. I never warned my wife against receiving
their visits. -I never heard that they were in the habit of
quarrelling, nor can I say that I heard anything against them.
I never heard anything about her mode of living since her
first Marriage, but I heard before she was married that she
was leading rather an indifferent life. I do not know
that she was leading that indifferent life after the marriage.
The male prisoner was a clerk to Mr. Ripley. He left that
employment, and I heard the wife supported herself and him
after that by taking in sowing. I never heard he was in the
habit of drinking at public-houses. I never saw Mr. Smitl
until she was taken into custody. He never had any convey
sation with me about £BO a-year that she was entitled to, bu
he asked me if she was entitled to it after she was taken into
custody.
Joseph Smith, examined by Mr. ARMSTRONG.—I am ar
engineer, living at Great Orford-street, Liverpool. I firs
became acquainted with the female prisoner in July or Au.
gust, 1840. I first became acquainted with her in St
James's Gardens. At the next interview I had with her
she described herself as Mrs. Elizabeth Daniels, a widow,
living with Mr. Wm: Edmundson, a draper, and her brother.
in-law, residing in Mount-pleasant. I asked her respecting
her friends. She said she had several
,residing in and new
Preston, and that she had £B5 a-year left her by her grand•
father, and that some other property hinged on her younger
brother coining of age. I proposed marriage to her after
wards. She declined my proposal, and gave no reason. Shi
afterwards consented to marry me. When she describe(
herself as a widow, she said her husband Daniels was :
captain of a merchant-ship, and that he was drowned on hi:
passage to America. I was married to her on- the Bth of
December, by the Rev. Mr. Blundell, at St. Anne's Church,
Liverpool. Before the marriage I visited her at Bolton-
street, where I saw the male prisoner sometimes. lam not
aware that he saw me, for I did not speak to him. She re-
presented him to me as her brother-in-law, Mr. Wm. Ed-
mundson. While the courtship was going on, I received
notes from her. The one now handed was the first I re-
ceived. I got it on the 4th. The second one produced was
received on the sth. The third one was received on the 6th,
the fourth on the 7th, the fifth the same day, and the sixth
on the Bth of December (the morning of the marriage). I
saw the male prisoner on the evening of the day I was mar-
ried. He came to my lodgings in Great Orford-street, where
I had taken my wife. I addressed him as Mr. Edmundson,
and said I was glad to see him. He said his name was not
Edmundson. He asked me in a very confused tone, if I
were married, to which I replied that I had the happiness
then to be a married man, and he left. I then continued to
live with my wife until I discovered about the first marriage.
The male prisoner continued to visit me, and he always ad-
dressed the female prisoner as " Elizabeth," and he was
always represented to me as her brother-in-law, Mr. Ed-
mundson. When the female prisoner came in on the even.
ing of the marriage, I told her that he had denied being Mr.
Edmundson, and laughed and said, "Oh!it is Mr. Ed-
mundson." I always addressed him as Mr. Edmundson.
After that she told me that Mr. Edmundson had detained
her clothes, and I urged him to give them up. He said he
would give up the clothes provided she gave up a deed she
had, which deed related to some property that he bad con-
trol over as an executor. She told me that the deed was hid
behind a picture-frame in his house in Mount-pleasant. It
was agreed that he and I should go to Mount-pleasant about
the clothes, and an hour was fixed for the purpose. When
the time came she would not allow me to go, but she said
she would go herself, and she then went away herself. She
told me she went, and that she had quarrelled with her un-
married sister that lived in Mount-pleasant with Edmund-
son. . I first ascertained that she was a married woman on
the Ist of March, and I continued to live with her as her
husband up to that time. She told me she was about to be
married to a Mr. Lee, in Preston, and the male prisoner
told me that he was out of pocket £3OO in preparing for tha
marriage

Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY.—i was employed as an
engineer by the Irish government about three quarters of a
year since. I never told the female prisoner that I had dis-
covered certain gold mines. When I met the female prisoner
in St. James' Gardens an elderly female was with her. They
were sitting in a chair, and I sat down beside them. I got
no smile that encouraged me to go on. I felt myself very
weak that day, and in consequence sat down. I then ad-
dressed some children that were playing there. The elderly
lady commenced the conversation. I don't know what has
become of that elderly lady. I don't recollect that I ever
said before that an elderly lady was present. Afterwards, I
met the female prisoner in Great Charlotte-street. She ap-
peared to be in gre,af agitation, and I went up to know what
was the matter. I spoke first. She said she had quarrelled
with her brother-in-law. She then told me her name was
Mrs. Elizabeth Daniels. There was no coaxing on my part
before she told me that. It is no part of the business of an
engineer to go up to agitated ladies in the street. (A laugh.)
I was about two or three months acquainted with her before
I proposed marriage. I was not at that time in receipt of a
large income from my engineering. I never asked her whe-
ther she was in the receipt of any money, but she told me her-
self and her sisters were in the receipt of £B5 a-year. It was
after she told me that I proposed marriage. I don't know
how it was that inever went to Mr.-Edriluddson's to enquire
whether her statements were true. As she was on the point
6 of fainting on one occasion, I took her into a public-house
for sympathy. We did not remain in that house until one
o'clock in the morning. I took her into a public-house on a
second occasion, where we remained until about twelve
o'clock at night, she being in a state of agitation at the time.
I took down the items of £B5 a-year in a memorandum-book.
I never told her I was in the receipt of ten guineas a-day as
an engineer, nor did' I say that I had made a great discovery
which I could not tell the present government because they
were whigs, but that I would tell the next government be-
cause they would be tories. (Great laughter.) I never said
that my discoveries would tend to make " Sir Joseph Smith."
We had wine and brandy together at the public-houses. I
never asked her on those occasions to go home with me to
my lodgings. • Shetold me on one occasion that I had pressed
her to marry, that she was going to Preston. I recommended
her to go as her brother-in-law was so unkind to her, and as
it was not prudent for her to remain in Bolton-street. After
I thought she had gone to Preston I met her near St. John'.
market. • Her presence on that occasion surprised me. Whei
she told me that she was about to be married to Lee, I tole
her to make her election, but I went on my knees, conjurer
her to throw Lee by and to take me, and we bad some brand)
and water after to make it more pleasant. (Laughter.) Jr
consequence of her agitation the night but one before the
marriage she and I stopped all night together at a public-
bouse. I remained with her to console her. (Great laughter.)
On more than four occasions she disappointed me in coining
to the church to be married, she represented herself to be so
agitated and unwell. On one occasion we went into church
to be married, but I refused as she was not dressed as
she should be as a bride, because I thought I would not get
the clothes that were bought for the marriage with Lee.
Shortly before the marriage I went to Mr. Owens, a drug.
gist, to borrow £5 to get a license. Mr. Owens refused to
lend it. I told him my intended wife was a rich widow, and
that I would lose about £3,000 if I was not married.
Cross-examined by Mr. Wriacisrs.—On the day of the
marriage she received a note in the church. I had a glimpse
of that note ; but she prevented me from reading it. I know
a Mrs. Cornett, of George's-street; but that lady never told
me before the marriage that the female prisoner was a mar-
ried woman. The female prisoner told me that the house in
which she lodged, in Bolton-street, was kept by an old female-
seryant of her mother's. I drank brandy and water in that
house, and stopped there all one night consoling the female
prigoner. The woman who kept the Bolton-street house was
not the old lady that was with the female prisoner in St.
James's Gardens. I think I met that old lady afterwards
walking up Mount-pleasant in company with the female pri-
soner. I. believe I saw them together on two occasions. I
sal, the male prisoner on two occasions in the house of the

female before the marriage ' • but when I was told she was
engaged with him, I left the house. On one occasion I asked
if it was with Mr. Edmundson she was engaged, and they
replied in the affirmative. It was a person of the name of
Mrs. Jones who made that reply. , Mrs. Jones is about 45
years of age ; but she was not the old lady I met in St.
James's Gardens. Sometimes I sent the major part of the
brandy and water out to Mrs. Jones for her kindness to my
intended.

To-ilie Court—Whilst we were living together as man and
wife, the money that supported us came out of my pocket.
I got male from her,
THaaas Holden examined—l cm clerk of St. Ann's
Church. 1 remember Smith and the female prisoner coming
to that church to be married about a week before they Were
actually married. Smith came about seven o'clock in the
morning, and told me to be at the church at eight o'clock,
but they never came. The next time he came to be married,
but she did not. The fourth time they both came; but
Smith said they would defer it to another day. On the
morning they were married I saw the male prisoner at my
house. He asked if Smith and Daniels were going to be
married. I said, " Yes." ',He shook his head and said he
was her brother-in-law; that he had been to Mr. Daniels to
stop it, but, as he could not do so, he begged of me to try to
stop it. He said her husband, his brother, had gone to sea
about three years before, and that she did not know whether
be was alive or not. I said the marriage could not be pre-
vented unless it was shown that her husband was alive. He
asked me if I would deliver a note to her. I said I would
with pleasure, and that if I had an opportunity I would speak
to her. He then got a slip of paper and wrote, "Elizabeth,
consider what you're about : the man is mad." He then
went away, and I went to church, and soon after they came
to church arm in arm. I gave her the note, saving that some
friend or relative told me to give her that. She looked at it,
read it, looked at Smith, smiled, and folded it in her hand.
They were then married. •

This witness was not cross.examined,
Mr. MunPnY here rose and stated to the court that he
apprehended there was a fatal error in the indictment, inas-
much as it described the female prisoner as Elizabeth, the
wife of John Daniel Daniels, whereas it appeared his name
was John Daniel.

His LORDSHIP did not believe the fact referred to by the
learned counsel was in evidence.

Mr. Mun.PHY admitted that it was not, but believed it was
in his power to show by the evidence of the clergyman who
performed the ceremony, that it was as " Daniel" she had
been married.

His LORDSHIP said there existed a propensity to place an
"s" at the end of various names, such as "Wood," &c.,
and that he did not consider the point a valid one.
Mr. MURPHY referred to the. misnomer in the case of
Tucker on the Earl of Cardigan's trial, and urged again that
the error in the present instance was fatal.
His LORDSHIP intimated his desire of not stopping the
case for the reason alleged.
Mr. MURPHY hoped court would give him the bene-
fit of the point.

His LORDSHIP again said it was not as yet in evidence.
Mr. MURPHY had Holden, the clerk of the church, re-
called, for the purpose of giving it in evidence. Holden,
however, merely stated that he had nothing to do with the
female prisoner, and that it was the clergyman who had
taken down her name in the certificate.
The Rev. William Blundell examined by Mr. MURPHY.—
The name of the female prisoner was " Daniels." lam sure
of that. I have a copy of the entry which I compared. In
the license and register it was Daniels but she signed her
name " Daniel." ,

Examined by Mr. WILKINS.—About half an hour before
the marriage, a person called on me and said he came from the
female prisoner's mother, who was ill, and requested I would
not marry them. Being convinced that there was nothing in
the request, I married them.
Thomas William Brown examined.—l know the prisoner
Daniel, who was clerk in the employment of Bateson and
Horsfall, merchants, Liverpool. I was clerk in their em-
ployment also. I know the male prisoner's hand-writing.
Witness here identified several of the notes received by
Smith as being in his hand-writing.
The Clerk of the CroWn here read notes as follows .
(I)
" Dearest of Friends,—Sorry I have been not to comply
with your wishes, and communicate with you by post, but
not being able to do so, being unwell. Would be happy to
meet you at the door of Mrs. Holland's or Jenny's, if conve-
nient, at nine o'clock, as I can then tell you more than I cau
per bearer.—l remain, yours, most respectfully,

"E. DANIELS

" Mr. Smith, 38, Great Orford-street."
[Five other letters, something similar to the above, were
read appointing meetings with Mr. Smith.]
Cross-exaMined by Mr. MURPHY—I have known the
male prisoner ten years, and have always known him as
John Daniel, and not Daniels.
Sarah Jones examined—l lived in Bolton-streetin a house
kept by Mrs. Holland. I lived there thirty years. The
prisoner lived there three months and a half. She occupied
the front room when she first came, but during the last
three weeks she lived in the parlour. The prisoners lived
together as man and wife. Their names were John Daniels
and :Elizabeth Daniels. I saw Mr. Smith three or four
times with the female prisoner. 'The morning she left she
gave me a note to give to Mr. Smith. That was about a
quarter to seven: Mr. Smith came to the door after I got
it, and I gave it to him. I never saw her until after she was
brought before Mr. Rushton. The wale prisoner remained
two or three days after she left.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY—The female prisoner
said she was going out of town the morning she left.
Cross-examined by Mr. Wu:rusts—The person who lived
in the parlour :before the female prisoner occupied it was a
Mrs. English. I don't know what Mrs. English was, but
two or three gentlemen visited Ur. I never saw any gentle-
men visiting the female prisoner. I fetched spirits for Mr.
Smith. I never fetched any spirits for any one else. Mrs.
Holland's husband is alive. They are both too old to do
anything. They have only 4s. a-week from their lodgers.
I got a drop of the spirits from Mr. Smith.
Frederick Smith examined—l am Joseph Smith's brother.
I live in Liverpool occasionally. I. visited my brother seve-
ral times after his marriage. It was on the first of March I
suspected the female prisoner was married before, when I
went with a man named O'Brien to the male prisoner.
O'Brien went up to the latter, in Harvey's public-house, and
said " How do you do, Mr. Daniels?" The male prisoner
answered " very well." Then my brother who accompanied
us, went up and addressed him us Mr.. Edmondson. He said,
" How do you do, Mr. Edinundson ?" Then, as I knew
the real Mr. Edmundson, and that the male prisoner was
not the man, I went out for a policeman. About a year
and a half ago my brother had a paralytic stroke. My
brother was employed on the Shannon navigation and at
some extensive works which were carried on at Limerick.
the paralytic stroke did not affect his mind. I called the
male prisoner a " rascal" on the occasion in question, and
he made an effort to run off. We then took the male pri-
soner to the upper-room at my brother's lodgings, in Great
Orford-street, when a Mr. Elliot said to Mrs. Barker, the
landlady of the house, " This is Mr. Edmondson." Mrs.
Barker said, " This is the roan that has always passed here
as Mr. Edmondson." We then took him into Mrs. Daniels'
bed-room, and she caught !hold of Mr. Elliot in a violent
manner, and ultimately we took both the prisoners to the
real Mr. Edmondson's, in Oldhall-street. The female pri-
soner told me twenty times that her first husband war
drowned in the packet-ship Oxford. I said it could not be
the packet-ship, whereupon she said it was a merchant-ship.
On coming down Brownlow-hill, O'Brien told me that the
male prisoner had confessed he was married to the female
prisoner on the 26th September, 1839. I then joined the
male prisoner, and he made the same confession to me. He
said, " I am married to the same woman that your brother is
married to." He then came down to the real Mr. Edmund-
son. The family were in bed at the time. We rapped.
Edmondson put his head out the window, and said he would
not have anything to do with the female prisoner ' • but after
some time he came down, and we had a lengthened conversa-
tion on the subject of the two marriages.
Cross-examined by Mr. MURPHY.—I am an engineer.
My brother never found any gold mines. I have brought
forty-five swindlers to justice. lam under bail at present
for breaking an old woman's leg. (A laugh.) I paid my
addresses once to Mrs. Beale, but having found out that she
was a bad 'un discontinued the courtship. (Great laughter.)
Patrick O'Brien examined—l am a private teacher in Li-
verpool. I lodged with Mrs. Barton, in Great Orford-street,
for three years. I saw Smith and his wife there. I saw the
male prisoner at the door of the place about a month before
he was taken into custody. I went with the last witness to
the real Mr. Edmondson, in company with the two prisoners.
I met the male prisoner that night in a publio-house in
Brownlow-hill. I accosted him as Daniels, shook hands
with him, and said I hoped he was well. I told him to come
forward and speak to his brother-in-law, meaning Mr. Thos.
Smith. I asked him to come up to his wife. He came, and
we went into the bed-room there. A good deal passed on
that occasion. I asked Mrs. Barton what should be done
with them. She said they must be put out. We then came
down Brownlow-hill, and on the way I impeached the male
prisoner for having lived on his wife's prostitution, and he
admitted having been married to the female prisoner. I said
he should have explained the matter to Mr. Smith, and he
said he was afraid to do it lest his wife should cut her throat.
He also said, when I told him be should have prevented the
second marriage, that he did not care, so that his wife was
comfortable.

Cross-examined by Mr. WniiiNs.—l heard that two ladies
called at our house to see the female prisoner, but did not see
them.

Ellen Barker examined.—l am a widow, and keep a lodg-
ing-house in Great Orford-street. Mr. Joseph Smith took
lodgings on the 7th of September, and came there to live
with his wife the day he was married. The male prisoner
came to the house on the evening of the marriage, and asked
for Mrs. Smith. He entered very abruptly but gave no
name. He called frequently after, and told me to annonnce
him as Mr. Edmundson. Sometimes he called himself Mrs,
Edmundson's brother-in-law. On different times I heard
' Mr. Smith press the male prisoner to come to some terms of
reconciliation about Mrs. Smith's clothes and property. I
recollect the prisoner being brought to the house on the even-
ing he was arrested, when I said he was Mr. Edmundson,
He asked me if he had not said his name was not Mr. Ed-
. enundson. I said he never said so to me.
Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS.—I can't mention any
time when he told me his name was Edmundson. A young
lady, who represented herself as Mrs. Smith's cousin, called
to see the female prisoner after the marriage. A Mr. Bate-
son, another cousin of her's, also called to see her.
Jane Eaton examined.—l live in Bittern-street. The two
prisoners called to take lodgings there about a fortnight be.
tore Christmas. The female prisoner spoke. She gave her
name as Mrs. Smith. She said she wanted the lodgings for
her brother, and that the male prisoner was her brother. I
let her the lodgings. She agreed with me for five shillings
a-week, and she said she would see me paid. Sometimes
she paid me and sometimes he paid me himself. I was to
provide the dinner for him on Sundays. He remained with
me until he was arrested. The female prisoner came every
day, and sometimes on Sundays ; sometimes she asked for
" John" when she came. When he was in she used to go
up stairs, and when he was not in she left notes for him. On
Saturdays she used to bring the market-woman with her,
and brought marketing for him as well as herself.
Ann Rice examined.—l keep a stall in St. John's market.
I know the female prisoner. She was in the habit of corning
to the stall opposite mine, every Saturday, to make pur-
chases. The male prisoner was sometimes with her. I car-
ried home her purchases. First, we called at Mr. Eaton's,
in Bittern-street, and left part of the purchases there, and
then went on to Great Orford-street, and left the remainder
there. I heard her tell the woman from whom she made the
purchases in the markets, that she had a pensioner to keep.
The case for the prosecution having here closed,
Mr. MURPHY addressed the jury on the part of the female
prisoner. He did not deny that she had married a second
time, because the fact was plainly proved in evidence ; but
before he closed he hoped they would be of opinion that
there were circumstances of extenuation accompanying the
ease which merely called fur a mild and gentle admonition
to the unfortunate woman. There could be no doubt that
she had been placed in a situation by her husband which ex-
posed her to risks and difficulties which coerced her into
marriage : and even it it were proved that the husband had
been present when the second marriage took place, it would
be his duty to tell the jury that there had been something of
coercion used on his part. He would commence by tracing
the.history of the woman. That history had been unhappily
exhibited her as a person who at an early age had been led
away from the paths of virtue into the opposite paths of vice.
This was not a theoietical point, but a fact which came out in
evidence, because it unfortunately appeared, from the state-
ment of her own brother-in-law, that previous to her marri-
age with Daniels she was a woman of indifferent character. It
was plain, therefore, that Daniels happening to be inveigled
with her person, had married, and that he had subsequently
discovered the character of his wife. Daniels, however, bad
lived with her for some time ; and for three or four months

after, she had visited her brother-in-law, and he had permit-
ted her to be-on terms of intimacy with his wife ; but after
the lapse of three or four mouths, a different state of things
arose—the intimacy ceased—the husband got out of employ-
ment, and she herself was the person who had maintained
Win. She appeared before the court as one who had unfortu-
nately been then coerced into the second marriage by the
man who, before all others, was bound to interpose between
her and infamy ; for she, having tied herself to him, and
having cherished for him an affection, with the strength of a
woman's nature, preferred supporting him by prostitution to
suffering him to be in want. And now, he would ask, what
constituted bigamy au offence in the eye of the law ? The
law regarded two classes of individuals in a case of the kind.
It regarded the original husband on whom the injury was
committed, and it also regarded the entrapped husband ; but
if he should satisfy them, in reasoning, on the evidence, that
no injury had been inflicted on either party, and that
Smith had acted in a manner which showed him to be the
willing dupe of the woman, then 'would they agree in opi-
nion that it did not affect him to any material extent. He
would shortly dismiss the case of the husband; for the way
in which he had intermingled himself with the transaction
showed plainly that he had been animated throughout by the
base motive of providing himself with the means of subsist-
ence by her prostitution. The jury found that she had gone
to the house where he lodged. after her marriage with
Smith, with provisions to maintain him during the week, so
that, in point of fact, disgraceful as it might.appear, she was
a woman, who, by her prostitution, was maintaining her
husband. If that were so, could it be said that he sustained
any injury, If, instead of being on that side of the court,
the jury were on the other, was th

re any on

would give one halfpenny domages to a husband for injury
done to his wife, with such facts before them as appeared
throughout the present cause? And how stood those facts ?
It appeared that Mr. Smith met a nerson walking in a pub-
lic garden in Liverpool, and that lie sat on a public chair
along side of her. He might be called a fortune-hunter, for
he was going about seeking whom he might devour. Having
found her in the first instance in a meretricious dress, he sub-
sequently drank with her in a public-house, and asked her
what was the amount of her property. He learned that
it was £5B a year, and that she bad repudiated Mr- Lee.
He then rushed forth to borrow £5 to buy a licence. He
walked five times to the church to get married to her, and
on the fourth or fifth occasion he smelled a rat, because she
happened not to be habited in a suitable bridal dress ! (Con-
tinued laughter). At length he married her ; and if ever
there was a man who had swallowed the hook with the bait
on it, Mr. Joseph Smith was that individual. (Laughter).
In fact everything in his conduct had been ineffably disgust-
ing. Finally, he never went before the marriage to see
whether the pretended inheritance had been secure to her ;
but, after it, when he found that it was all moonshine he had
been marrying instead of £B5 a-year, off he went and had
the woman arrested.

. ,
Mr. WILKINS next addressed the jury on the part of the
male prisoner. He commenced by saying that the case, so
far as Mr. Smith appeared in it, exhibited a pretty specimen
of Cwlebs in search of a wife. it appeared that he went out;
met an elderly and a young lady ; entered into conversation
with them ; and without any more ado, made up his mind,
as it would seem, that the younger was to be the future Mrs.
Smith. Then he went on to talk about her subsequent agi-
tation, sufficient, as Mr. Murphy observed. to remind one
of Mr. O'Connell's constant agitations ; his own anxiety
about her inheritance which resembled, to carry out Mr.
Murphy's idea still further, to Mr. O'Connell's anxiety
about the rint, and he concluded by stating that when he
found her robbed of her virgin purity, his languishinents and
sufferings withered, and blotted out his affections. (Great
laughter). The jury had perceived from the case that the
wants of Mr. and Mrs. Daniels had driven the male pri-
soner to resort to the basest. modes of procuring subsist-
ence • that, from some cause or other, he had fallen from the
standing in life he once held ; that he had lost all respect for
himself ; that he had not philosophy nor christianity enough
to bear up against the tide of misfortune which had set in
against him; and that he gave himself up as a lost man. He
(Mr. Wilkins) was not there to urge anything in the shape
of a palliative for that of which he believed Daniels to have
been guilty ; but, at the same time, lie thought him not
guilty of the charge alleged against him in the indictment.
He did not believe that he had adopted any expedient to ac-
complish this second marriage ; and the jury would bear in
mind that the indictment charged him with having coun-
selled, incited, and promoted it. He did believe that he had
been living on the wages of her shame ; but he could not
find any evidence which would justify any man in coming to
the conclusion, that he knew the marriage was about to take
place, or that it had had his sanction. Mr. Wilkins then
proceeded to say that the male prisoner had denied to Smith
that his name was Edmundson—that he went to the church
to prevent the marriage from being solemnised—that he had
written a note to his wife, telling her to consider, what she
was about, that Smith was mad—and that he had used va-
rious expedients to prevent her from having anything to do
with him.

His LORDSHIP then charged the jury. He thought they
could only come to one conclusion with regard to the female
prisoner, namely, that she had been regularly married to both
Daniels and Smith. With respect to the male prisoner, it
was very material, as had been remarked by his counsel, to
consider whether or not he had counselled, incited, and pro-
moted the second marriage. His lordship theh proceeded
to read the letters and some portions of the evidence, and
concluded a lengthened charge at five o'clock.
The jury, without leaving the box, convicted the female
prisoner, and acquitted the male, remarking that they wished
to express the strongest feeling of disgust at his conduct.
His LORDSHIP then passed sentence on the female pri-
soner in the following terms He said---Elizabeth Daniels,
you have been convicted, on the very cbrarest evidence, of
bigamy, an offence which interferes with the security of the
institution of marriage, which lies at the foundation of all
civil society, and in this country subjects the party guilty of
it to transportation or imprisonment, according to the cir-
cumstances of- the , case. Yours is a peculiar case. It is
stripped of some circumstances which are an aggravation of
the crime. You seem not to have done any serious injury
to your first husband, because, although I think he may not
have consented to your second marriage, yet he consented to
what must be quite as painful to any husband who possessed
proper feelings ;—I mean, to your intercourse with other
persons ; and', in all probability, he might have written the
letters. Therefore I do not think you inflicted any serious
injury on his feelings ; and with respect to Joseph Smith—
a strange sort of person, easily deceived by the arts you so
successfully applied---I do not know that any great suffering
has been inflicted on him either. Still a violation of the sa-
cred ordinances of the church, and a trifling with the rite of
matrimony itself, is not to be permitted ; but, at the same
time, taking all the eirenmstnn,... ;ntr, r

into consideration, 1 am
not disposed to sentence you to anything more than the
lightest punishMent, and that is to six calendar months' im-
prisonment.

Upon the application of Mr. WILKINs, the male prisoner
was then discharged.

The trial excited very considerable interest. A number of
respectable ladies were in court during its continuance. The
male prisoner was quiet and reserved, but the female exhibited
a levity of deportment not at all in keeping,with the serious
nature of the crime charged against her. "When first

forward she held her handkerchief to her face and shed
some tears, but she shortly after became cheerful ; laughed
heartily ; exchanged nods of recognition with her acquain-
tances in court ' • amused herself by writing with a pencil on
the boards of the bar; and laughed heartily ou receiving her
sentence. She was very respectably attired in a handsome
cloak, bonnet, lace cap and satin ribbons—appeared about
twenty-four years of age, and had a remarkably handsome
and intelligent cast of countenance,