The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-03-21 00:00:00

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

BIRKENHEAD HOSPITAL.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE LivEurooL STA.NDA.RD.

Sru,—Appended to the report of the proceedings of the
late meeting of the governors of the Birkenhead Hospital,
in the Birkenhead Advertiser of the 11th instant, appears
a copy of a letter, addressed by the Rev. Dr. Baylee to Mr.
Dixon and others, assigning eight distinct grounds why,
in his opinion, the recent appointment of Messrs. Ha-
milton and Jennette, as consulting surgeons, should not
be rescinded. It is much to be regretted that, as such a
letter was not read at the meeting, where many of its
statements might have been disproved, it was afterwards
allowed to appear in print.
Containing reasons founded on erroneous data, and
bearing so justly-influential a signature, I fear it is cal-
culated materially to damage the interests of the valuable
institution to which. it refers. I therefore venture to
request the favour of your inserting a few remarks upon
the subject, as the Birkenhead Advertiser, in which I
had intended them to appear, has been since discontinued.
The rev. doctor first objecte that the subscribers had not
received notice of the intended proposal. Such a course
would have been without precedent in the history of the
charity, and unwarranted by any of its laws. The several
appointments of Messrs. Stevenson, Smith, and Dixon, are
equally open to the same objection. No such proposal ever
yet emanated from the committee, but has invariably been,
as on the late occasion, a spontaneous vote at the general
meeting of governors ; and I submit that, had the secretary
given notice of any particular motion, he would have
thereby departed from the invariable practice of the calling
of stated public meetings.

The second objection sets forth that the annual meeting
was not a representation of the body of subscribers. The
rev. writer belieres only 13 subscribers Were present,
of which only four voted for the appointment, and then
dwells upon the absence of the president, treasurer, and
secretary. We have since had the public assurance of the
secretary, that the- usual notices convening the meeting
were issued by post ; therefore, if it did not represent the
body of subscribers, I am at a loss to know what body it
did represent. As to the numbers in attendance, I can, if
needful, furnish the names of a greater number than the
rev. doctor " believes" to have been present, besides those
who were strangers to me-
Having, I think, attended every annual meeting for the
last eight or nine years—though I have no recollection- of
once meeting the rev. gentleman—and having had on theoe
casion in question; and on rnanyothers, the duty of selecting
movers and seconders for the. vraious resolutions, I do not
hesitate to state that there wasa full average attendance:
I know not how mait voted in favour of the motion, but
there- were no adverse votes. The president was certainly
absent, and his chair was occupied by Mt. Watson, a cir-
cumstance which favors the validity of the appointments
made. The treasurer and secretary found substitutes.
The-third ground assigned is, that " the medical officers
justly conceive themselves to be• slighted in appointing
superior medical officers without reference to them."
Surely Dr. Baylee cannot be awarelhat the appointment
of Mr. Jennette was made on the motion of Mr. Dixon,
consulting surgeon, seconded by MI--; Vale, honorary sur-
geon. Therefore, on these two gentibmen must rest en-
tirely the-charge of slighting each other and their medical
brethren,as the appointment of Mr. Hhtnilton was merely
a promotion of a late senior officer to a still higher position.
This objection also will equally militate against the ap-
pointment of Messrs. Stevenson, Smith,and Dixon.
The fourth reason states that "the present senior hono-
rary surgeon will not be entitled to the distinction of
consulting surgeon until he shall have served ten years ;"
and implies: that Mr. Hamilton had retired after less
than six years' service, and was only then made senior to
him. Sir, what shall we be told next ? Let your readers
only refer to the often-quoted 14th law, and they will find
that "EVERT honorary medical officer may be appointed
on his resignation," &c., &c. ; there is no exception with
reference to the present senior surgeonc—why should
there be ? Again, had the writer referred to the books of
the hospital, he-would have found himself in error as to
the period of Mr. Hamilton's service ; and I have already
mentioned that he was previously senior to 'Mr. Vale. The
late Mr. Smith was appointed consulting surgeon after a
service of only fire years.
Dr. Baylee next states his belief that the reason the
appointment was not proposed last year was, that it was
ascertained " that the opposition would be- too strong."
He "can see no- other grounds for the delay." It is well
known to many members of the committee that I was
myself the principal objector to the proposal being then
made. My reasons were—first, that I feared that an
honour so immediately conferred might act as a premium
on resignation ; and secondly, that I believedtwo consult-
ing surgeons were sufficient. My object was "delay"—
I borrow the appropriate term of the rev. gentleman,which
conveys the very reverse of final disqualification. The
limited interpretation of law 14 had nen:a-at that time
been heard of ; had it been so, I would have; at once with-
drawn all objection, rather than jeopardise the services of
two gentlemen of unimpeachable character and professional
reputation. As- the case now stands, the lapse of a year
has removed one obstacle, and the lamentedalecease of the
late senior consulting surgeon the other.
The rev. doctor next objects to the distance of Dr. Ha-
milton's residence from the hospital,—a difficulty which
may be overcome by half an hour's walk, in addition to
which, I believe, Mr. Hamilton's private practice brings
him to Birkenhead daily ; yet this is urged as a reason for
rescinding, not only his appointment but, strange to say,that
also of Mr. Jtnnette, whose residence is in the same street
as the hospital! It may be reasonably asked, at what
distance would all the honorary medical officers have re-
sidpd, had the-plan, onl,o-ecently abandoned, been carried
into effect—of building the hospital at thafoot of Bidston-
hill ?

The seventh ground is, that election tome]) offices ought
not to be a matter of personal influence or favour' but that
candidates should be elected solely on theirpersonal merits.
This objection does not apply in the present case, as the
appointments in question were made .with the strictest
adherence to that principle.
The rev. writer, referring to law 14,.states, lastly, that
he " thinks the recent election a viblktion of the plain
letter of the rule." I respectfully differ from him in this,
but I rejoice to observe that he does not mention it as
being a violation of the plain meanitag and intention of
the rule;: and, as the only surviving-member of the sub-
committee who revised the laws and rules, I may state it as
my conviction that the election was in perfect accordance
with the intentions of the sub-committee.
Deeply regretting that Dr. Baylee should have lent his
name and influence unwittingly to. promote the ends of a
professional jealousy, without having- first informed himself
of the• facts and bearings of the case,. I have felt it my duty
to.enter into the above explanation, in the earnest hope
that it may stay the evil which threatens a most valuable
institution. . _

With every sentiment of esteem and respect for the rev.
gentleman upon whose letter Ihave presumed to comment,
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
THOMAS FRY,
A Member of the Committee and late Hon. Sec.
Birkenhead, 18th March, 185-1.

"RECEPTION OF THRRUDGET IN LIVERPOOL!'

TO THE EDITOR OW MIN LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

Sir,—A paragraph as. above headed has been going the
round of the local papers during the past week. I have
waited till now to see who were the influential citizens
who composed the highly respectable meeting which ven-
turedthough to sp fourteen exponent for the town of Liverpool;
and teen the exponent
have elapsed since the reception
of the Budget in town, the only names published are• those
of Mr. Carmichael, and a Mr. Morris, secretary to same.
We are not favoured with the names of the, remaining
portion of this influential meeting, but no doubt they are
of the hoc genus, and though their number within the
Bar-parlour of the "Union" could not be very numerous,
yet "we are informed it afforded the company the greatest
pleasure to have duly reported to them the, speech of the
Rt. Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
whilst he still spoke before the house, whilst the speech
itself was hailed with the greatest satisfaction."
This, Sir, is really amusing in the extreme,
" The joy (!) of the company was however only completed
when the important measure (doubling, the income-tax, to
wit ! how very joyous?) of the Chancellor was announced !"
This is thrillingly interesting and agreeably gratifying
" so much so, that it was immediately suggested, in flowing
bumpers,that a telegraphic message should be immediately
forwarded to the right hon. gentleman, conveying the
thanks of the meeting and expressing the delight which
doubling-the income-tax had given his fellow-citizens in
general," but those of the Bar-parlour in particular!!
Any commentary on the above would be unnecessary.
It may be added, however, that there is but one opinion
generally expressed, which is, that the public of Liverpool
repudiate the idea that a few private gentlemen within
the bar-parlour of any hotel, sad under such circumstances,
should publicly put themselves forward as the exponents
of public opinion on such a national question. It appears,
however, that the above suggestion was drunk super
naculum when the Hebe of the establishment made her
appearance to replenish ; and the secretary, Mr. Morris,
gave the following to the company :

(TENDERLY.)
I give thee all, I can no more,
Though poor the offering be;
I give thee leave to extend the tax
Across the Irish sea.
(JAUNTILY.)
And if they ask thee why it is
I give this leave to thee,
It is because "we all ha'e got
A drappie in our ee."
Yours, OMEGA.

A CURIOSITY IN NEWSPAPER LITERATURE.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

Sin,—l have been highly amused to-day, by reading one
of the most extraordinary leading articles ever penned—
one even unworthy of a Grub-street scribe in former times,
and which, for richness, raciness, and originality, deserves
to have public attention directed to it, albeit that therein
criticism has found a subject for infinite merriment. The
leaders of a daily paper especially ought to be written with
that degree of judgment and common sense which demands
attention and begets confidence. Leading articles gene-
rally contain so much good sense in well-expressed lan-
guage, that it is no wonder they should exercise a most
important influence over public opinion. Judge then, Sir,
my astonishment upon reading an article in one of your
local contemporaries of Saturday, to find it characterised
by inflated nonsense, grandiloquent phraseology, insipid
bathos, and grammatical inaccuracy—a kind of Bombastes
Furioso style of writing ! Take as specimens the following
gems. First, Corporations are compared to "fixed planets,"
which are said to display " the sublimity of wisdom and
beauties of Providence ! Again, we are told that—
" The twinkling star would fail to guide the benighted
traveller, if its face were veiled by the gorgeous light of
more majestic bodies even in the world of celestial bright-
ness. In the scheme of creation, there was much laid
down for man to follow in the construction of his own
humble fabric of existence. Purity of purpose, the
use of atoms in working out the perfection of the
philosophic end of all things, and that ceaseless watch-
fulness which alone preserves the exquisite harmony of
nature, and guards and supplies the material wants RP

man. When cities and boroughs were first infested,
and inflicted by the creation of Corporations and Town
Councils, it was not the custom to consult such authorities
as NEWTON as to the latitudes in which the greatest
luminary bodies were likely to appear in subsequent ages,
therefore, society was left without that data which would
have enabled them to have .copied the great laws of
nature, in selecting those localities, which were in the
nineteenth century, to become the foci of human
refulgence."
I have pored over these brilliant sentences, Mr. Editor,
with the hope of eliminating therefrom their meaning,
and " working out the perfection of the philosophic end "
intended, until I became fearful of the effects on my
brain—for some physiologists contend that insanity is con-
tagious. So transported from earth to heaven, and anon
from heaven to earth—so bedizzen"d and bedazzled with
" twinkling stars, " " great luminaries, " " gorgeous
lights,"' " celestial brightness," and " human reful-
gences,".it cannot be wondered at, that a poor mortal like
myself, so accustomed to the ordinary language of this
working-day world, should find my understandine, com-
pletely nonplused, being deluged with "excessive bright,"
which, like an ocean, rushed in upon it ! I hardly dared
to read further; but, after a little, I resumed courage,
and proceeded :
" Such being the case, we are left to infer that
corporations were originally forked out upon the
land to fertilise it, and preserve the productiveness of
the political strata of those regions where the shepherd
suffered most from the ravages of wolves. A kind and
considerate feeling here shows itself on the part of the
early originators of corporate bodies. Nor has this kindly
feeling been suffered to diminish in the slightest degree
through the many centuries that have passed since corpo-
rations were first invented. We we will here instance,
par excellence, the Town Council of Liverpool. Mark the
spirit of brotherly esteem and inextinguishable friendship
that dwell there! Once a councillor, for ever a brother.
The outside world may reject thee twice brother Shand,
but we will receive thee thrice. Thy qualification is re-
gistered on many a deed, and in this representative coun-
cil chamber shalt thou be enshrined without that vulgar
appendage,—a constituency.' "
Splendid scribbler! Magniloquent declaimer ! What
were the nature and quantity of that inspiration
by which thy pen was guided ? At what Pierian
spring didst thou,- ()scribe ! imbibe immortal' draughts ?
And art thou the protégé of Bacchus or Apollo? Per-
haps, after all, the darkness of the writer's mental vision
is not more sublimely visible throughout the weary
article, than in the introductory sentence, descriptive of
provincial corporations-:
"The provincial corporations of this country occupy the
same position in the social and political world, that the
fixed planets do in the firmament. They are the centres
of reflection from which sufficient light
F is thrown upon
the earth to render `darkness visible. "

After perusing this specimen of what MOORE would.call
" blatherum-skiteum" composition, I determined "to fork
out" no more for your contemporary.—l remain, &c., &c:,
COMMON SENSE.

Liverpool, March 20, 1854.

LIVERPOOL SPRING ASSIZES.

ME Spring Assizes for the southern division of this
county commenced yesterday, before Mr. Baron Platt and
Mr. .Justice Cresswell, at St. George's Hall. The calendar
contains the names of 100 prisoners.
Mr:-Baron Platt arrived at the:Lime-street Station of
the London and Northwestern Railway soon after four
o'clock,. on Saturday afternoon. The High-sheriff, Mr.
Richard-Fort, of Read-hall, in this, county, attended by
his chaplain, the Rev. Samuel King; .were in waiting with
an elegant equipage, drawn by four handsome bays, and
attended by the usual complement of .javelin men, in sub-
stantial livery. The Mayor (Mr. J. B: Lloyd,) in his state
carriage; was awaiting the arrival of the learned baron.
His lordehip proceeded in the first instance to the Judges'
lodgings, in St. Anne-street, and thence to St. George's
Hall, where the commission was opened in the Nisi Prins
Court. Notice was then given that business would be
commenced. on Monday morning in the Criminal Court at
eleven, and in the Nisi Prins Court at twelve o'clock.
Mr. Justice-Cresswell, who had been detained by the two
concluding-cases in the Civil Court at York, did not arrive
until ten o'clock on Saturday night.
On Sunday. their lordships and the high,sheriff attended
divine service at St. George's Church, prayers being read
by the Rey. J. B. Monk, M.A., incumbent.and the sermon
being delivered by the sheriffs chaplain, froze Isaiah xxxiii.
v. 6:—" Wisdom and knowledge shall be the stability of
the times, and the strength of salvation the fear of the
Lord is his treasure." The Mayor and a number of ma-
gistrates, witlithe officials bearing the Corporationinsignia,
walked in procession to and from the church:

CROWN COURT. v. -_ESTERDA.Y.
(BEPORE ME. JUSTICE CRESSIVEL.L.)

HIS LORDSUIP took his seat at eleven &clock ; and the
Court having been opened with the usual formalities, and
the proclamation against vice and immorality read, the
following gentlemen were sworn on

THE GRAND JURY:
William Earle, Esq., Spekelands, Foreman;
Samuel Ashton, Esq., Prestwich ;
James Bourne, Esq., Heathfield-house
Wm. Hill Brancker, Esq., Greenfield;.
Joseph Ewart, Esq., Liv,rpool ;
Thomas Fairbairn, Esq., Northwood ;
Robertson Gladstone, Esq., Higlifield ;.
Alex. Pow en Haliburton, Esq., Whitley;
Thomas ninon, Esq., .Manchester;
Robert Horsfall, Esq., Mere Bank;
James-Kay, jun., Esq., Turton Tower;,
John Rohi9son Kay, Esq., 13ass-lane House;
John Buck Lloyd, Esq., Mayor of Liverpool;
Duncan McVicear, Esq., Liverpool;
Thomas C. C. Marsh, Esq., Ashy Hall;.
John Myers, Esq.; Crosby House ;
Peter Ormerod, Esq., Chamber Hall;
Robert Needham' Philips, Esq., The Park;
William Rotheram, Esq., Sandheys ;
William Rathbone, Liverpool;
William Edwards Royds, Esq., Greenhill ;
Edward Toots!, Esq., The Weaste;
Charles Turner, Esq., Dingle Heed.

Mr. Justice CRESWELL then deliveredlis charge to the
Grand Jery. He was sorry, he said, that he could not
congratulate them upon the state of the calendar which
they had to deal with that morning. They would not be
surprised that he said so, when he told; them that there
were 10-charges of robbery by several persons together,
with considerable violence; 18 cases. of burglary, 13 of
stabbing, seven of manslaughter, and., two of murder—not
to mention other cases of fraud and violence. It might
be matter of surprise to some that they should have
crimes.of that description, and to such an extent, when
the 'material condition of the people has been so prosper-
ous.. He said this especially in reference to the charges of
robbery and burglary,—but to those who had had much
experience of courts of justice, that would not be matter of
surprise, because he believed that those who perpetrate
robberies of that description, andcommit burglaries, were
a.class of people who would not avail themselves of the
opportunity of working, even for considerable wages ; they
preferred a dissolute and reckless. life. With regard to
stabbing, the same observationwould hardly apply, as they
would find that that and charges of manslaughter arose
principally out of that fatal habit of drunkenness which
prevails in this as in other countries. That was ascribable,
in a great degree, to the ignorance of the people, and the
want of religious and moral, training in the early part of
their lives ; for, looking at that calendar they could not
but be struck with the dense. ignorance in which most of
those people seemed to be involved, He said that not in.
reproach to this part of the country, for he had reasorsto.
think that a great part of those crimes were committed'
by those who were not born here, and, probably, did
not come into this part of the country till they had
arrived at an age when,they could not avail themselves of
that education of which. they had been deprived in past
life. There were one or two cases to which he' would
refer, rather in extenuation of the charges in the calendar
than in aggravation, of them. There was, however, one
in which he advised that a more serious charge should be
made than that stated, iu the calendar. It was. No. 50, a
case in which, a. person was charged with wounding a
woman named, Boon, with intent, it was said, to do her
grievous bodily harm. But they could not suppose that
such injuries could be inflicted with any other object than
killing; awl, as there was nothing to reduce it below
murder if the woman had died, he thought the charge
should be" intent to murder." There were, then, two or
three cases of manslaughter, where death had occurred
from parties fighting in a public-house; when drink had
aroused their passions and obscured their reason, they had
fought, and the result had been the death of one or other
of the. parties. There was a charge against four men,
Nos.. 80 to 83 in the calendar, of manslaughter ; and
he could not help thinking that, at the inquisition held
by the coroner, the verdict of manslaughter must have
been given under some misapprehension of the law.
Those parties appeared to have been out poaching by
night, no doubt an unlawful proceeding. During that
sport of theirs they had to cross a broad ditch. One got
in. Another was helping him out, when his gun went
off, by accident, and killed this man. No doubt it was
as pure an accident as ever could happen, but the coroner's
jury bad returned a verdict of manslaughter against the
whole of the party. Now he held that that arose from a
misapprehension of the law. The law was : " If a person,
doing an unlawful act, though not intending bodily
harm to any one, as throwing a stone at another's horse,
and it hit a person and kill him, that is manslaughter."
And so here the coroner's jury might imagine that as they
were out poaching, if that man was killed, it was neces-
sarily manslaughter. If one had been firing at a pheasant
and killed his comrade, perhaps it would have been so;
but there the act was wilfully done ; here it was pure acci-
dent, and in that case he should certainly, unless there
was very different evidence from that which came before
the coroner's jury, reject the bill. There was another
charge of manslaughter, No. 93, against a man for driving
a cart over a child; and if a man doing a lawful act, such
as driving a cart, did it in a reckless manner, he was cri-
minally responsible for the death of any one, Perhaps
they would be able to judge from the evidence whether
there was that degree of negligence which would be cri-
minal, for he collected from the depositions that the man
saw the child and endeavoured to avoid it, but he was not
soon enough in doing that, or doing it effectually, and the
child was killed. That might be an error of judgment,
but they could hardly call that criminal negligence which
would justify a charge of manslaughter. There was then
a charge, No. 77, against a person named Flower, for mur-
der. Now this appeared one of those unhappy cases, not
unknown in this town, of sailors using knives. He col-
lected from the depositions that there was some fight or
quarrel in the street. They were then separated, and the
two parties were taken in different directions ; but the de-
ceased man afterwards, with one or two comrades, passed
the door of the house where the prisoner was taken, when
he rushed out, renewed the fight, and in the course of it
gave him a mortal wound. Now, if two persons fought,
and one of them in the course of it used a knife, that was
manslaughter; but if a man armed himself and then
entered into a fight, and they were of opinion that he had
a preconceived intention to use it, then it would be
murder, though blows were interchanged between them
Now, here there was reason to, believe that the man
brought the knife out with the intention of using it, but
there had been a previous fight ; and if they (the grand
jury) thought that it was so recent that there had not
been time to cool, then they could suppose that he had
obtained the knife during that struggle, and it would be
manslaughter, not murder, as the coroner's jury had
returned. There was a charge of murder against a person
named Jordan, a ship's steward ; and he could not help
feeling surprised that such A YgrciiCt should have been

returned by a coroner's jury upon the evidence that was
before them. For, from the depositions, the evidence
before them simply came to this. A noise was heard at
night at one of the docks,—a policeman heard a sound
like a door falling—another policeman like a body falling;
they went on board a ship, and found a boy all but dead.
He had received a slight wound at the front of the head,
and on a post mortem examination his skull was found to
be fractured. On searching about the deck, they found
nobody there, but they found two men in the forecastle
asleep. They asked if there was any one else on board.
They said yes, the steward must be about the ship ; and
they found the steward lying on the cabin floor, very
drank. There was no other circumstance to arouse sus-
picion against him, but they found him guilty of murder.
It seemed very range ; but whether any depositions
were omitted, would turn out before them (the
grand jury.) If the facts were aceording to that
statement, of course it would be preposterous• to make
a charge of murder against a man on such evi-
dence as that. There were two cases to which he must
shortly draw their attention. One from 73 to 75 in the
calendar, was an outrageous outrage indeed by several
persons upon a female. Probably they might find that
her life was not a reputable one, but that was not an excuse
for an offence of that description. No. 85 was one of the
same class of cases, but he begged their attention to the
evidence which would be detailed before them, to see if
there was sufficient ground for a public investigation in
such a case before they found a bill. The only other case
he would mention was against two persons, Nos. 97 and 98,
for beirr, concerned in a riot at Preston, and he could not
help deeply' regretting that any of the persons in Preston
should at last have forfeited that singularly good character
they had preserved during the long and unhappy differ-
ences between the masters and labourers. He had cer-
tainly been struck with the remarkably orderly demeanour
exhibited during the whole of that unhappy contest. But
it appeared at last that some persons from a foreign
district were introduced to supply the places of those who
refined to work for the wages offered; a riot took place,
and those two prisoners were charged with the riot. Now
the operatives should know and remember that while they
arrogated to- themselves the right to work for certain
wages, at least they should grant the same privilege to
others, and others should be permitted to work for such
wages as they chose to accept. There was a sort of. one-
sided liberality about the contrary course which was- not
to be enchired. They should remember that they were fel-
low-subjeets; were free as themselves, and that if by acts•
of violence they endeavoured to deter others from working:
that would work, they must expect the law to interpose:
These were the only cases which he should trouble them
with remarlokupon, and he.felt sure it was unnecessary to:
go further, from- therespectable assemblage that he had'
the honour of seeing before Wm
The grand jury then retired, and shortly afterwards
returned into court with, several true bills. The trials
then proceeded.
STREET ROBEERV AT MANCHESTER.—Richard Preto,
aged 21, described- as a labourer, was indicted for having,
at Manchester, assaulted and robbed John Buckley of 245.
Mr. Milne prosecuted, and the prisoner was undefended.
' It appeared that the prosecutor, who is an engineer, went
:to the George and! Dragon Inn, in Hulme, Manchester,
about twelve o'cloel on the night of the 17th December.
He there met the prisoner, whom, he had known before,
and they had something to drink-together. When they
came out they went together to another public-house,
where they had more, drink. There were several people
there who left before the prosecutor.- On his coming out,
after he had gone a little way, he was seized from behind
amthis chin chuckat up" by three or four men, when
one-of them, whom he positively identified as the prisoner,
came before him and ripped up his trowsers, getting the
money stated out of his rale pocket. Before going to the
latter house, the prisoner had become aware that the pro-
secutor had his money in. that pocket; as he had advised
him to put it where it would be safe?' When arrested
next morning the prisoner admitted to the policeman that
he was e witness of the robbery, but denied any participa-
tion in it. His lordship having summed up the evidence,
the jury, after a moment's consultation, returned a ver-
dict of Guilty. Sentence deferred.
GAROTTE ROBBERY IN LIVERPOOL--JOhH Joyce,
aged 21, described as a labourer, was indicted for having
assaulted Robert Spencer, and robbed- him of 9s. 6d., a
knife, and a tobacco-box. Mr. Raffles- prosecuted. The
prosecutor is a plumber, living at the- Old Swan. On
the night: of the 24th December,-a: Saturday night, he
was in Liverpool with a friend. They had something to
drink together in Dale-street. They were passing the
Queen's Hotel, Lime-street, about one- o'clock in the
morning, when he lost sight of his friend.. He thought
that he saw him going up Gloucester,street. He met
two women • and, in consequence of what they said, he
went up gmstreet. They followed, and; whilst he was
talking t 3 -them, the prisoner came up, and asked him
what he was doing ? He said that he was looking for
his friend, and asked the prisoner to • go up an entry,
which the- women had pointed out, an look for him.
The prisoner told him to do so himself. He then felt
something twined about his neck, and. turned round,
when he saw the prisoner, who was almost strangling him.
He was rendered almost insensible, and while the prisoner
held him, the two women rifled his pockets: The prisoner
asked, " have you got all ?" when they said, " yes," and
the parties all ran away. He recovered, soon after, and
missed from- his pocket the money stated.—Verdict,
Guilty. A previous conviction against the- prisoner, who
had then gone under the name of Pierrepont, was proved.
Sentence deferred.
ANOTHER ROBBERY AT MANCHESTER.— Geo. Stowe,
aged 22, _Dennis Bennett, 18, and TVln..Redden, 22, all
factory operatives, were charged with having, at Man-
chester, assaulted John Henry Ertkamp,. and robbed him
of 95., a handkerchief, and his hat. The prosecutor is a
warehouseman at Manchester, and on the night of the 4th
of February went to the theatre. After that, he went to
two or three public houses, and was going home about two
o'clock in the morning. He had 9s. in his waistcoat pocket,
a handkerchief •nin his coat pocket, and a hat on.
When he was in:Albion-street, Your men tame up to him.
The prisoner Stowe, who was one of them, seized him by
the throat and. pushed him against the wall, whilst the
others surrounded him and rifled his pockets. When all
was over, he-found that his money, hat,und handkerchief
were gone: He called loudly for the police, when the pri-
soner Bennett• hit him a severe blow upon the mouth.
There was further evidence to show that Stowe, Bennett,
Redden, and,another man unknown, and not in custody,
were together immediately prior to the robbery, and a
policeman la' observed them following the prosecutor.
The whole of•the prisoners were found. guilty. Sentence
deferred. _ _ _ _ _ _

----____
BURGLARY AT BEDFORD.—Rose Clark, aged 20, a
domestic-servant, pleaded guilty to a charge of having, at
Bedford, on the 19th of January, stolen from the dwelling
house of James Kearsley, an apron, a:chemise, and a loaf
of bread and further with having_ after the robbery
" burglarzonsly broken out" of the • premises. Sentence
deferred.

ANOTHER ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AT MANCHESTER.
—Thomas. Maleroy, aged 20, a French-polisher, was in-
dicted.for having, at Manchester, on the 14th of January,
assaulted John Owen, and feloniously robbed him of 15s.
and:a purse. Mr. Saunders prosecuted. The prosecutor
is a cask dealer, and on the day stated, after having previ-
ously,•been in two or three public houses, he went about
eleven o'clock at night into Green's vaults, in Spring-
gardens,, where he had a glass of rum and water. The
prisoner was also in the vaults. The prosecutor left, and
went into Clarence-street, and while walking along he was
knocked down by a person, who.put his hand in his pocket,
and, took out a half-sovereign, 55., and a purse. He looked
up, and saw that it was thee prisoner. The prosecutor
immediately got up, and shouted " stop thief," when the
prisoner was pursued by a man named Robinson, and
never lost sight of till arrested by a constable. The
prisoner, with much ingenuity, endeavoured to show in
defence that the prosecutor: had brought a woman of had.
character into the house with him (which was admitted),
and that he had called for-oysters which he could not pay
fbr, but that was denied. He also stated that he had had
an altercation on religious subjects with the prosecutor,
but that statement was totally contradicted by the barman.
—Verdict, guilty. Sentence deferred.
HIGHWAY ROBBERY AT MANCHESTER.—Ann Vernon,
aged 46; Ann Leneghan, aged 23, hawker; and John
Leneghan, aged 26, labourer, were charged with having,
at Warrington, assaulted James Harding, and stolen, from.
him 255. Mr. M'Oahrey prosecuted, and Mr. Simon de-
fended the male prisoner. It appeared from the state-
ment of the prosecutor, that he is a forge hammerman,
residing in this town, but, on the 21st of February, he left
Liverpool for the purpose of going to Crewe. Having
walked all the. way from Liverpool to Warrington, he
arrived there about half-past ten o'clock at night, It was
then too late to go further, and intending to lodge that
night in Warrington, he accosted a female, and asked her
to recommend him to a place. She said she could if he
would give her a glass of ale. He did so, and they after-
wards went to another public-house, kept by a man named
Prescot. Anthony Leneghan and the female prisoners
were in the house, and shortly afterwards John Leneghan
came in. The prosecutor treated them to two or three
glasses of ale, and at two o'clock he left to go as far as
Acton station, intending to take the railway to Crewe.•
He got some more drink in a bottle, when he inquired
from Anthony Leneghan the way to Acton. He was told
to go down the street, and then turn to the right hand,
which would have led him a wrong direction. On getting
to the Horse Market in Warrington, he saw the three
prisoners standing at the end of a narrow street. When
he got a few hutdred yards more on his way, his attention
was attracted by hearing footsteps behind him. They
were those of the female prisoners and John Leneghan.
John Leneghan struck him on the head with his fist a
blow which knocked him down. The female prisoners
then knelt on his body, and rifled his pockets. He struck
the woman a blow on the face, when John Leneghan gave
him a severe blow on the head, which deprived him of all
sensibility ; but on coming to himself, he found the woman
still leaning upon him. She crossed the street, and handed
something to Johu Leneghan, when they separated; and
went in different directions. He watched the female pri-
soner to her lodgings, and acquainted the police with the
robbery. Vernon's nose was bleeding when arrested.
Upon Anthony Leneghan a marked shilling was found,
which the prosecutor positively spoke to as having been in
his possession when he left Prescot's house. Mr. Simon
addressed the jury in defence of the two Leneghans, and
his Lordship having summed up, the jury returned a ver-
dict of guilty against all the prisoners. Sentence deferred.
GAROTTE ROBBERY, AT MANCHESTER.—Sarah MOSS,
aged 21, dress-maker, was indicted for having, at Man-
chester, on the 21st of January, in company with two
men, assaulted Joseph Davies, and robbed him of 15s. 6d. ,
a watchguard, and a hat, his property.' Mr. Ray prose-
cuted. The prosecutor had been to Huntsbank station,
in Manchester, to meet his brother. When returning he
lost his way, and inquired from the prisoner how he could
get down Shude-hill. She pointed out, a street, and fol-
lowed him. She made a noise like coughing, and imme-
diately afterwards some persons seized him from behind,
throttled him, and rendered him almost insensible. When
he recovered, he found the prisoner pulling at his pockets,
and articlesmentioned.He and missed the money
fol-
lowed hertoashbeeearthtoemuspet,eadnted gave
the
er
policeman,i n t into
When arrested
slipping ally intoenst°d byy
his hand 4s. 6d. Guilty. Sentence
deferred.
The Court then adjourned till nine o'clock this morning.

NISI PRIUS COURT.
(Bnponn UR. BA.HON Pi A.TT.)
Donsow v. HIGGINBOTTON.—Mr. Monk, who appeared
for the plaiatitl; stated that it WM an action for the reco-