The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-11-30 00:00:00

MR. O'CONNELL.

(From ;he Oxford Herald.)
Mr. O'Connell is making his annual agitation tour, pre-
paratory to the collection of "the tint." He has been rather
more violent than usual this year, but that is easily account-
ed for. by the decline in the ragged man's" and "starving
man's" emit' ibutions. The public ought to thank him, how-
ever, for one piece of very c:andidly•given instructing of his
former and his present relations to- the parliament and to
the English people, he said—" I cringed to them while we
were weak, but I kick them off now we are strong."
These are actually the impudent words of this audacious
and disgustingjperson. Who can keep any terms with a be-
it4r so lost to shame, as well as to honesty?
It is remarkable that this season of preparation for the
collection of Mr. O'Connell's excise—and every similar sea-
son in former years—has presented a comparative repose
from murders and other kindred crimes. The O'Connell-
ales are too busily engaged to find leisure for their ordinary
pastime of bloodshed.

ANOVER, Nov. 17.—1 t seems that the operation nn the
Crown Prince is to be deferred till May next. It is again
reported that the Assembly of the Estates will meet immedi-
ately after the new sear.

Papers and letters have been received from Caraccas to
the lsth ult. It was stated to be probable that General
O'Leary, now envoy from Venezuela to Rome, would be
named to proceed to this country as commissioner for ar-
ranging with the bondholders on the part of that republic.
The government, it is mentioned, intended punctually to re-
mit the sum allotted, say 80,000 dollars, in January next, as
their proportion or account of interest on the Colombian

EXTRA OR DINA It Y SUICIDE.—On Saturday night one of
the most extraordinary and incomprebensiLle acts of self-
destruction that has, perhaps ever come within our notice,
occurred, under the following circumstances :—At ten o'clock
on the above night a young gentleman named Henry Curtis,
accompanied by two friends named Quenton and Ludlow,
having spent the evening at the Theatre Royal, entered the
oyster-shop, 13, Triudy-street, and called for supper. Mr.
Curtis asked for a bottle of soda-water; it was in the act of
being uncorked, when he leaned his head towards the table
as if drowsy or fatigued. His companions did not take par-
ticular notice of the circumstance, but, at the same moment
the soda-water bottle was uncorked, the explosion of a pistol
was heard, and in an instant Mr. Curtis fella lifeless corpse
at the foot of the table intended for the festive board. lie-
ceased was of extremely handsome exterior and prepossess-
ing manners. He appeared to be 26 or 27 years old. He
enjoyed an independent fortune of £3OO per annum, and no
visible cause whatever existed for the perpetration of the
horrible act. The gentlemen who were sitting with him at
table had not the slightest notion of his frightful determina-
tion until they saw him drop down dead. He was perfectly
sober at the time, at least as far as regarded the influence of
spirituous liquors, and had been previously as gay as usual
at the theatre.—Freeman's Journal.

LONDON LAW COURTS.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-MONDAY.

THE QUEEN r. CALCHAFT.—The prisoner In this case was
brought up for judgment, upon an indictment on which he
had been convicted of an offenee of secreting a material and
necessary witness, who ought to have appeared to give evi-
dence upon an indictment preferred against a man fur mur-
der. The indictment was tried at the last assizes for Liver
pool, when a verdict of guilty was returned. The affidavits
now produced disclosed the following facts :—The person in-
dicted fur murder was a man named Duffield; the witness who
had been carried off by the prisoner now before the court was
Sarah Duffield, the daughter of the person charged with the
murder. The prisoner himself was the brother of Duffield's
wife, and Sarah Duffield was the only person on whose testi-
mony her father could possibly have been convicted. The
prisoner went, at the desire of his sister, to the house in Man-
c esterweliee.,saidthatilse came.

from her mother, who was very ill, and asked for her to ac=
company him to her mother. -Having then got her away he
took her to Nottingham, and she had never since been heard
of. In consequence of her absence her father was acquitted.
The affidavit of this prisoner alleged, that when he had taken
the young woman to Nottingham, he ceased to have any con
trol over her—that she was 20 vears of age, and might have
returned to Manchester if she had pleased. There were se-
veral affidavits from neighbours of the prisoners, describing
his character in the very highest terms.

„
M r.NVightinan addressed the court in mitigation of punish-
ment. After the conviction that had taken place, he could
not possibly deny that the prisoner had been guilty of the of-
fence charged, and that it was one of a very grievous kinJ ;
but there were some circumstances of mitigation connected
with it. The prisoner bad notsordid
acted
from a base or
motive; he found himself placed in circumstances too pain-
ful to think of. The young woman was the daughter of his
own sister. She was the only person whose evidence could
have convicted her father,, awl if he had been convicted, his
life would most certainly have been forfeited to the laws of his
country. The prisoner was called on by her mother, by the
wife of the man charged with murder, to take away his daugh-
ter, on whose evidence that charge could be made out. Tbe
mother WAS at that time suffering from illness, on account of
this charge—an illness which nearly terminated in death. No
wonder, then, that the prisoner had acted as he had done.
These circumstances almost confounded our notion of right
and wrong, and almost made them rejoice that the public were
spared the exhibition of a father brought to destruction by the
evidence of his own daughter. There was one other circum•
stance which ought to be mentioned. The prisoner had been
in decent circumstances : since this affair he bad been driven
from his home, and in consequence of this prosecution had
wandered up and down the country and was now a ruined
man. His trial had once been put off, and when it did come
on he had in the mean time become so -poor that he could
afford neither the expense of counsel nor witnesses. No
blame whatever was attributable to the prosecutors on that
account, but such was the fact, and the consequence was that
no appeal could be made to the jury, who might otherwise
have given a recommendation in his favour. He should not
trouble the court with any further observations. Their lord-
ships knew the circumstances of the case, and would, no
doubt, give every proper weight to them.
Mr. Starkie, in aggravation of punishment, admitted that
the circumstances of the case were of a painful nature, but
the prosecution was one which one of the judges of assize
had directed, and which the corporation of Liverpool had
therefore undertaken.

Mr. Justice Patteson, addressing the prisoner, said that he
bad been convicted at the last assizes at Liverpool upon an
indictment, which charged. him with having secreted a wit-
ness whose testimony was material and necessary to prove a
charge of murder against another person. It appeared that
she was the daughter of the person charged with the murder,
and that the prisoner was brother to her mother. The pri-
soner stated, that the mother being ill, he had assisted in
taking her daughter from Manchester to Nottingham to see
her. That when the daughter arrived at Nottingham, she
being 20 years of age, might have returned to Manchester if
she had pleased, for that she was perfectly her own mistress,
as soon as she had arrived at Nottingham. That might be
the case, but it was clear that the prisoner had assisted in her
going away in the first instance, and that her doing so was
with the purpose of avoiding giving her evidence in a court
of justice. The court took into its consideration all the
circumstances stated in the prisoner's affidavits; but it must
be understood by all persons whatever, that the offence
which the prisoner had committed was one of a most serious
description. The prisoner had assisted in producing a per-
version of justice, and his object had been to prevent a
person front being tried for, and convicted of, a foul and
atrocious murder. Every body must be aware that it was the
duty of every subject in the kingdom, not only not to take
any person away out of the reach of justice, but to use all
his eudeavours to bring all offenders to justice. It was true
that this was a painful case, in some respects, as the person
secreted from being a witness was the daughter of the man
who was charged with the murder. It might not, therefore,
surprise any one that she should want to go away, and that
the prisoner, being her relation and the brother of her mo-
ther, should wish to remove her; but still he ought to have
resisted his own inclination, and done his duty in forwarding
the ends of justice. The court had been informed that he
had already suffered in circumstances, and had undergone
some imprisonment; end in the hope that the example which
his present condition afforded might prevent all other per-
sons front imitating his offence, the sentence would be but
comparatively light. The sentence of the court was, that he
should be imprisoned in Rutland Gaol for two calendar
months.

LANCASTER INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.

On Saturday se'nnight, N. J. Law, Esq , commissioner,
opened his Court for the Relief of Insolvent Debtors, the
first under the new act of Victoria, at Lancaster Castle. The
number of persons waiting to be heard on their petitions was
much smaller than ou former occasions.

Counsel present—Messrs.Venables, Wilkins, Bateman,
James, and Boileau.
The following is alist of the cases adjudicated up to Thurs-
day night. The commissioner brought the business to a close
on Friday morning.
Fifteen calendar months.—ltobert Meaden.
Nine months.—lsaac Jacobs.
Seven months.—James Bury.
Six months.—John Low, Joseph Chatterton.
Five months.—John Liptrott Hatton.
Four months.—Piers Wiert Walmsto7•
Hill.
Adjourned y übwr,
Adjourned to next circuit.—George Royle, Samuel Brett,
John M'l nty re.

Discharged cunditionally.—Mary Swarbrick, on payment
of £45 into court.

Nations dismissed.—Ricbard Wells, John Ingham, Geo.
Gregson, John Turner.

Discharoed forthwitli.—James Pollard, Christopher Orr,
William Hume, John Simpson, William Robinson, William
Holt, Andrew Moon, James Shoreman, Daniel Potter,
Wil!iam Wells, Robert Lee,. George Shackleton, Francis
Derellin, John Rutter, Robert Prestwich, Elizabeth Ashton,
James Newton, Jane Tyldesley, Hugh Thomas, Thomas
Sinister, Hannah Whitehead, Henry Thornley, Patrick
Doran, Henry Holden, William Clayton Adlington, Francis
Cooper, Richard Preston, Robert Woolstenholme Robert
Harrison, William Hartley, the elder, William Chapman,
James Greases Blackhurst, Thomas Beckett Bamford,
William Harding, Henry Marriott, Caroline Stokes, Henry
Harper, Dennis Leeson, Matthew Standen, Thomas Buck-
ley, Joseph Kirkpatrick, Adam Martin, Houghton Walsh,
Robert Collins, William Cook, James Scowcroft, John
Procter, Thomas Hall, James Bennett, John Heys, the
younger, Robert Howe, Thomas Holland, Robert Sutcliffe,
Catherine Hatton, Thomas Oldham, William Parkinson,
Edward M‘Alister, John Ormrod, James Westhean, James
Armstrong, Thomas Addison, jun., David Flight, John
Wentworth, Alexander Smith, James Warbrick, William
Morgan.