The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-08-27 00:00:00

TROVER.-DAVIES V. MEREDITH AND ANOTHER.

An action in trover, to recover the value of a quantity
of timber, which it was alleged that the defendants, who
represent the Neptune Carrying Company, between Li-
verpool and Shrewsbury, had converted to their use.
Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton were for the plaintiff;
Mr. Martin and Mr. James for the defendants.

The circumstances were of no public interest, and the
court rose when the plaintiff's case had finished.
The court adjourned at half-past six o'clock.

CROWN COURT.-FRIDAY.

Eliza Daly, an unmarried woman, was indicted for
having at Manchester, on the 26th July last, attempted to
murder her new born child, and her mother, Elizabeth
Daly, and her brother, James Daly, with aiding and
assisting.
It appeared that the prisoner lodged with a woman
named Evans, and that she noticing the appearance of
Eliza Daly, had hinted to the mother her suspicion that
her daughter was in the family way. The old woman de-
nied it, alleging that it was a disease to which she was
subject, and that two of her sisters had died in Ireland of
it. On the 25th of July, the younger prisoner fell ill.
She went into the water-closet, and remained there a
considerable time. Mrs. Evans told her that she was in
labour ; but she denied, and refused all assistance. Her
brother, James Daly came in, and, after speaking with
his mother, appeared in great distress, crying, " my cha-
racter, my life I " Mrs: Evans told him that his sister
was in labour, but he said, " No." In the course of the
night, she distinctly heard a child cry, and subsequently
saw all the prisoners go down to the yard. She got up
and satisfied herself that the young woman had been de-
livered ; but on attempting to go into the yard the male
prisoner prevented her. Next morning, the child was
found alive, on some dry ashes in the midden ; and is now
doing well. This was the evidence for the
Mr. Wilkins was proceeding to address the jury for
the prisoners, when he was interrupted by his Lordship,
who desired to consult with Mr. Justice Cresswell. The
Learned Judge returned after a short time, and informed
the jury that he had consulted with his learned brother
es to the case then before them, and he had entirely coin-
cided with himself in thinking that in the evidence they
had heard there was nothing whatever to prove the charge
in the indictment. A future prosecution might be insti-
tuted, but with that they had nothing to do. The pri-
soners would be detained in custody until it was known
what steps might be taken. The jury, therefore, found
a verdict of not guilty.
DARING BURGLARY AT MANCHESTER.
Alfred Locke, Thomas Jennings, and Ellen Leech were
charged with having, on the 21st April, at Salford, broken
open the dwelling-house of Deborah Taylor, and stolen
therefrom £3lO, and a number of silver spoons.
Mr. Brandt and Mr. Monk were for the prosecution,
and Mr. Wilkins and Mr. James for the defence.
Mrs. Deborah Taylor deposed that she was landlady of
the Nelson Tavern, Salford : the tavern had several en-
trances to different streets, and persons had to descend
steps to get to the first floor: her own bed-room was on
the first floor up stairs : on the same floor was a sitting-
room, drinking-room, and closet. On Sunday, 21st
April, had £3lO in a cash-box, in her bed-room : the
cash-box was placed in a secretary, which was locked : it
was all safe at nine o'clock : most of the money (£280)
was in gold : about ten heard an alarm that it had been
entered, and, on going up stairs, found the secretary broken
open and the cash-box gone: Jennings had been there
that evening : he came with a woman, who resembled
the female prisoner, but could not say that the two per-
sons were the same.

This testimony was confirmed by several witnesses,
and to connect the prisoners with the burglary a great
deal of circumstantial evidence was offered. The priso-
ners were found guilty.

NISI PRIUS COURT.-FRIDAY.
DAVIES V. MEREDITH AND ANOTHER.

At the sitting of the court this morning, Mr. Martin
addressed the jury on the part of the defendants.
A verdict was returned at 11 o'clock for the plaintiff,
for £35 damages and 6d. costs.

MILNE V. THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE BOROUGH OF
MANCHESTER.

The following special jury was sworn to try this impor-
tant cause :—Samuel Sudlow, Liverpool, merchant ; John
Buckley Johnson, Liverpool, merchant ; David Roberts,
Liverpool, merchant ; Thomas Crowther, Everton, mer-
chant; William Wilson, Liverpool, merchant; Thomas
Smith, Toxteth-park, merchant; George Halewood Grant,
West Derby, merchant ; James Anderson Forshaw, West
Derby, merchant ; Thomas Manders, West Derby, mer-
chant; Urial Ralph Crooke, Charlton : Hughson Dutch-
man, Toxteth-park, merchant ; and Thomas English,
Kirkdale, merchant, Esqrs.
Sir Frederick Thesiger, (the Solicitor-General,) Mr.
Starkie, Mr. Cowling, and Mr, Cardwell, appeared for
the plaintiff; and Mr. Fitzroy Kelly, Mr. Martin, Mr.
Brandt, and Mr. Crompton, for the defendants.
Mr. CARDWELL opened the pleadings. This, he said,
was an issue upon a return made by the Council of the
Borough of Manchester to a writ of mandamus. The
writ recited that after the passing of the Municipal Cor-
porations Act, a separate charter was granted to the bo-
rough, end that, before that grant, Mr. Oswald Milne, the
plaintiff, held the office of Clerk to the Justices, and Clerk
also to the Stipendiary Magistrate of the division of Man-
chester, both of these offices being offices of profit, and
that he received the fees and emolurne,As thereof; and
that, in consequence of the grant of the charter, he was
deprived of a great part of those fees. The council denied
that he was an officer in the division of the county in the
view of the law, or that he had lost any fees ; and upon
these pleas issue was joined.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated the case. He said that
although the proceedings, out of which the questions had
arisen which were now submitted to the consideration of
the jury, were of great importance to the plaintiff, for
whom he had the honour to appear, yet, the questions
presented no very formidable difficulty, nor did he see
how they could possibly occupy much time. The case
,came upon a claim made by Mr. Oswald Milne, upon the
recently-created Corporation of Manchester for compen-
sation in consequence of the loss of a portion of the fees
and emoluments attached to certain offices which he held
within the Manchester division of the county of Lancas-
ter, and which loss had been occasioned by the charter of
incorporation granted to the corporation of Manchester,
and the grants consequent thereon. The offices which
were held by Mr. Milne were those of clerk to the ma-
gistrates acting for the Manchester division of the county
of Lancaster, and clerk to the sitting magistrates, who
was appointed under the provisions of on act passed in
in the year 1813. With respect to the first of those
offices, it would appear in evidence that the district of
the county which was known as the Manchester division
had existed for a very considerable period of time. Mr.
Milne became clerk to the magistrates of that division in
1812.. He had succeeded his father, who had been for
many years before him a clerk to the magistrates;
.. but,
from the year 1812 down to the present time, M • mil
within the division. The meetings o
had been invariably acting as a clerk tot.
tthbee
Bailey,
at Salford.
were invariably held at the New
remaaggiissttrraatteess
There Mr. Milne, and Mr. Milne only had officiated as

clerk for all the divisional business of that district. In
the year 1813, it was considered necessary that a stipen-
diary magistrate should be appointed. The first stipen-
diary who was appointed was Sir William David Evans,
and he appointed Mr. Milne to be his clerk. The present
stipendiary magistrate, Mr. Maude, had also appointed
him, and he acted in the same capacity towards that
gentleman also. The magistrates appointed under the
borough commission commenced their sitting in Brow
street, Manchester, and in pursuance of the provisions of
the commission, appointed a Mr, Higson as their clerk.
'f hey proceeded to discharge within the new borough all
the duties which had been discharged by the magistrates
at the New Bailey, and Mr. Higson received all the emolu-
ments which Mr. Milne would have received but for the
charter. An objection was made to the validity of the
charter, and an action was brought by the county coroner
against the borough coroner cf Manchester, which was
tried at the Liverpool assizes in 1839. Various legal
questions arose upon that occasion,- and ultimately the
matter was pending before the House of Lords when an
act of parliament was passed upon which the present claim
was based. He alluded to the sth and Gth Vic., c. 111, which
recited that, since the passing of the municipal corporation
Act, doubts had arisen respecting the validity of the said
charter, and then proceeded to legalize the several charters
of incorporation and all acts done in pursuance of the
same; and then, for the very purpose of meeting the par-
ticular case of Mr. Milne and any gentlemen similarly
circumstanced, who were not deprived of their offices,
but who suffered in the diminution of their fees, it pro-
vided that every officer of any such borough, county, or
division of a county, who was in any office of profit at the
time of granting the charter of incorporation, and whose
office should have been abolished or removed, or who
should have been deprived of any part of the fees and
emoluments of his office in consequence of any such
grant, should be entitled to have an adequate compensa-
tion, to be assessed by the council, for such part of the
fees as he should have been deprived of. This act
received the royal assent in August; and in the fol-
lowing October or November, Mr. Milne applied for
compensation. The town-council of Manchester then
summoned him before them, and, after having cross-
examined him at some length, came to a resolution that
he wps entitled to no compensation at all ; upon which
Mr. Milne applied to the Court of Queen's Bench for a
mandamus to compel them to assess compensation. The
matter was argued in the Court of Queen's Bench, and,
without hearing the counsel for Mr. Milne, the court di-
rected the mandamus to issue; and now the corporation
had returned that Mr. Milne was not an officer of any
division of the county, and that he was not deprived of
any fees or emoluments in consequence of the different
grants made to that borough. Mr. Milne traversed that
return ; and the question for the jury would therefore be,
whether he was an officer of that division: of the county,
and whether he had lost any portion of his fees by reason
of the grants. He (the Solicitor-General) would prove
that there was a division of the county called the Man-
chester division—that the office or appointment of clerk
to the magistrates acting in that division was an office
within the meaning of the act—and that Mr. Milne was
actually the officer who performed the duties of that
office. It would be necessary for him to show that in
consequence—not by the grants themselves—but in con-
sequence of the grants, Mr. Milne had been deprived of a
portion of his fees and emoluments ; and this he believed
he should be enabled to do in a manner satisfactory to
the caurt and jury. He should be really ashamed of him-
self were he to occupy more time. He believed, by means
of a witness, and admissions on the other side, he should
prove his case and entitle himself to a verdict, there being
no question here as to the amount of the fees and emolu-
ments, but merely whether Mr. Milne had lost any fees
or emoluments, and whether he was entitled to compen-
sation under the provisions of the act of parliament.
Mr. Wm. S. Rutter was the first witness. He deposed
that he was one of the coroner's for the county, and that
he was formerly in the office with Mr. Milne. He de- 1
posed generally to the nature of that gentleman's duties—
the Manchester division of the county, and the several
other material points referred to in the Solicitor-Gene-
ral's opening speech.
Edward Gorst, Deputy-Clerk of the Peace for the
county, was the next witness, and he produced a table of
the fees payable to the clerks of the justices at petty
sessions.

The charter, the commission, the act 53d Geo. 111.,
the sth and 6th of Vic., and other documents were here
put in, and the case for the plaintiff terminated.
Mr. KELLY then addressed the jury for the defence.
He said he had the honour to appear before the jury as
counsel for the Corporation of Manchester, who, in the
discharge of a public duty imposed on them, had felt it
necessary to put the present case in the course of legal
investigation ; and he concurred with the Solicitor-Gene-
ral that it was not a case which could occupy any con-
siderable portion of the public time. There was, in reality,
no one fact in dispute between the parties ; and the only
question to be determined was a question of law, which
might be decided by his Lordship here, or might ulti-
mately be decided by the Court of Queen's Bench, or the
Court of Error. Mr. Milne, as they had heard, was em-
ployed for a very great number of years, as clerk to cer-
tain magistrates acting for the division of Manchester,
and there was no doubt he had discharged many impor-
tant duties, and that after the grant of the charter of in-
corporation, a very considerable diminution of fees and
emoluments had taken place. Mr. Milne had, under the
Act of Parliament referred to, made a claim aeainst the
Corporation of Manchester for the sum of £34,000, for
the loss or diminution of those emoluments. The Town
Council of that Borough had little or no personal interest
in the question •, but, inasmuch as had they at once com-
plied with the demand, they would have ill discliarged
their duty to the inhabitants of the borough, for whom,
in that respect, they were mere trustees ; because if Mr.
Milne were entitled to any sum at all, whether £34,000
or any larger or smaller sum, it was net the corporation
but the inhabitants, who contributed by a borough-rate
to the borough funds, that must satisfy the demand. It
was, therefore the bounden duty of the Corporation to
resist the claim—a claim which, according to the advice
they had taken, was altogether unfounded in law. Ac-
cordingly, Mr. Milne applied for a mandamus to the
Court of Queen's Bench ; the mandamus was issued, the
claim made, and resisted. The ground of objection to
the claim was this—that Mr. Milne was not, within the
—inD
Division;
other
awn-odrdths,att,hasutphpeoswinags notfor aaCmle
meaning of the Act of Parliament, an officer cf any diii-
sion—that he was not the officer he stated himself to be
was
st
nofotalosso of
Parliament,
~aonfidt
Magis-
trates of the county at sessions held for the Manchester
ae'mithoilnumtheentmheaeni orkmetonttilliee wasati
sustained,n g of t
it
the officer be described himself to be, still the loss of pro-
and emolument within the meaning of the act. Those
ofi ffit
andce r
were three questions of law, and presented nothing for
the jury to consider or determine. He should call wit-
nesses to prove that, in point of fact, there were, during
the whole or a great part of the time, other petty sessions
held by other magistrates, within the Manchester divi-
sion ; and this would show that Mr. Milne was incorrect
in calling himself the Clerk to the Manchester Division.
The JUDGE.—There is an alias to that.
Mr. KELLY admitted that there was. The alias was--
" otherwise called clerk to the justice's of the petty ses-
sions held for said divisions ;" but he (the learned coun-
sel) denied that he ever was such clerk. He had officiated
as clerk to certain justices, who had held petty sessions
for that division, but that did not constitute him a del k
to the whole body of justices. There was no such office
existing in law as that of sole clerk to the special sessions
held for the Manchester division ; any magistrate had a
right to appoint his own clerk ; the clerk appointed, who-
ever he might be, only officiated on and for the single oc-
casion when the magistrates sat; his office ceased when
they adjourned : and any three or four of them might joie
in the appointment of a clerk. IThe learned counsel
argued this point to a considerable extent, contending all
through that when the business of the day was over, the
appointment of the clerk closed, and that a new clerk
might be appointed by the magistrates, or a majority of
them, on the following day. In the present case, he said
there had never been either a written or a verbal appoint-
ment, and, that as Mr. Milne had not received any sala-
ry, weekly or even daily, he was no servant or officer
within the meaning of the act. He apprehended that a
party entitled to compensation must be an officer of a di-
vision, and that the office must be of a continuing nature,
not ceasing when the business of the day was over. He
must, moreover, be acting as clerk at the petty sessions at
the time the charter received the Royal assent, or lie was
not an officer within the meaning of the act. He knew
not whether the court meant to decide the law points on
the present occasion.
The JUDGE.-1 shall adopt the course of a learned pre-
decessor cf mine, who heard a long argument, and then
said—" I am very much obliged to you for your opinions,
but I shall not decide the question in dispute." Neither
shall I ; I shall express no opinion upon it. (Laughter.)
The following witnesses were examined for the defence :
—James Smith, of Leigh ; Mr. Henry Coppock, town-
clerk of Stockport; Mr. Parte, solicitor, Wigan; and Jo-
seph Walker, after which the case for the defence closed,
Mr. Kelly remarking that he had no objection to a spe-
cial verdict.

-.-. ........,..
The JUDGE then charged the Jury. The first question
for their consideration was, whether the petty sessions
held at the New Bailey was a petty sessions for that divi-
sion of the county. If it was, then he advised them to
find for the crown ; if otherwise, then their duty would be
to find for the defendants on that issue. The second ques-
tion was, whether the plaintiff had sustained the loss, and
been deprived of the fees and emoluments, in consequence
of the grants ; and upon this point they would have little
difficulty in finding that he had sustained a loss of profits
and emoluments. The grave and serious question was,
whether a clerk to the magistrates, under the circum-
stances mentioned, was an officer of that division of the
county within the meaning of the statute.
The Jury returned a verdict for the Crown—damages
One Shilling. His Lordship certified for a special vet--
p.ar,
ver-
dict.
LIABILITY ON A BILL OF EXCIIANGE.—FARRER v. DE-
FLINNE—(SpeciaI Jury.)
This action, the circumstances of which are well known,
the case having been tried at a former assizes, was an ac-
thtooswe hheitlhlse, r
etihtheer defendant
asan aet wasual tion to determine the liability of the defendant on three
bills of exchange, accepted in the name of Todd ; and the
liabletner,
under the firm of Todd and Co., or under circumstances
to
•rcumstances
the question
plaintiff
on
which entitled the plaintiff to treat him as a
Partner in
that concern. The parties are all manufacturers, carry-
ing on business as salesmen in Manchester.
was as
Mr. Baines, Mr. Dundas, and Mr. Cowling
the plaintiff; and the Solicitor-Gene were for
Solicitor-General,
Watson and Brandt for the defendant. , and Messrs.
Mr. BAINES went briefly over the facts of the case, and
then proceeded to call
witnesses : and
after several had
been examined, the Court
adjourned.

_
CROWN COURT.—SATURDAY.
MURDER OF A WIFE BY HER HUSBAND.
Wm. Swanton, 40, ivns indicted for the murder of his
wife, Ann Swanton, at Wigan, on the 7th instant.

Atiolist 27, 18 it.

Mr. Sergeant Murphy and Mr. Serrar appeared for the
' prosecution ; and Mr. Wilkins and Mr. James defended
the prisoner.
e chargedl ildt eanl ev,oaifrt ehtdhh,
eaf
soi
enrn,g, e
rtl
etiadttnetemls)
see
ensdt,
eotafhcalt
that the
be cy os utprnri
ksel i
si
on
ngae,nrdb
ev,tahates•
ing, and kicking his wife upon the abdomen and other
parts of the body with such violence as t.) produce her de-
cease in the course of two hours after. At the time of
the occurrence he seemed to have been an overlooker and
manager in the factory of Messrs. Taylor and Brothers,
cotton-factors, of Waldgate, Wigan. He resided in 'Vic-
toria-street, about two hundred yards from the factory,
and, on the evening in question. he returned home about
twenty minutes to eight o'clock. One circumstance In
the case differed in the sequel from ordinary cases of this
description, inasmuch as nearly the whole of the evidence
affecting the prisoner, instead of depending on the extra-
neous evidence of any persons who were witnesses to all
of the acts of violence, was all derivable from the in'
ferences to be drawn from the appearances of the
body of the deceased, and the admissions of the prisoner.
Mary Anne, the daughter of the deceased, sixteen years
of age, corroborated what occurred after the time the
prisoner had left the factory to return home. She went
to the house about that time, and the only persons then
in the place were the prisoner, the deceased, one child,
who was up stairs, and another child, in the lower room.
When the girl arrived at the door, the prisoner and his
wife were both up stairs. Immediately after she heard
one of the children crying, and, presently, the prisoner
came down stairs. Upon his coming down the witness-
went up stairs to ascertain what was the matter, and spo'e
to her mother, who was unable to reply. The prisoner
followed her up, said he was very sorry for what he had
done, and told the witness to go for Mr. Pennington, the
surgeon. She went accordingly, and, when she came
back, she found her mother sitting below stairs, and she
inferred from that fact that her father must base carried
her mother from the upper into the lower room. Tbe;
prisoner then made an admission to the effect, that he had
struck her, that he was sorry for what he had done, snd
that if she recovered he would never strike her again'
The next witness who spoke to any of the facts was lkfr:
Pennington, surgeon ; and he deposed, that it was Idol'
eight o'clock when the girl came to his shop to stun'
mon him, that he accompanied her, and found the de-
ceased in the lower part of the house. She was; at the
time " cruddled" down,—by which it was meant that
nntdsh
eictraewu swaesadsa
as much
hdo
ffia
as squeeze qcutuhel eteyzpeirniasnsodunpedproourbt
couldil
supporting
hdheoer
rsteoilifih ttoohi
gc thehe tahi rep,ral
her up. At this period the prisoner appeared to be aware
of the nature of his situation, and was endeavouring to
render her every assistance in his power. One of the ap-
pearances was that there was lying under the seat where
she was sitting a pool of blood which was a yard and a,
half square. He made an examination of the lower parts
of her abdomen, and discovered that blood was still
streaming down her legs in large quantities. He directed
that she should be put in a recombent position. At that
time the pulse was nearly gone, the body was cold and
clammy, and she exhibited all the appearances of being
dead. He bled her, and ordered her to he taken up stairs.
Previous to bleeding her she was in a state of insensibility
and inaction, and his object was to give something to re-
vive her. When bled she seemed to come to herself, and
then he administered brandy and water, which fora whiles
rallied her to some extent ; but, after having continued
in this state until about eleven o'clock, she breathed
her last. In addition to describing appearances, Mr•
Pennington went on to detail certain statements made hi
the prisoner • for it appeared that• after the deceased bad
revived a little from having swallowed a portion of the
brandy, she contracted a loathing for it, and said, "
cannot drink." The prisoner immediately replied,
" Thou should'st not have been drunk, and I then would
not have done this to thee ;" and the reason here as'
signed for the violence he employed against the woman
was corroborated by Mr. Pennington, who stated that
there was a strong smell of liquor about the deceased.
He further stated, that the clothes and bedding of the de-
ceased were saturated with blood; that his remedies for
her restoration were wholly ineffectual ' • and that, besides
the other injuries, he observed a wound upon her lip. He
asked the prisoner what had caused the latter wound, to
which he replied, that he had struck her on the lip with
his fist; that it was a sad job, and he was very sorry for
it, and he kept continually moaning. He went on to
state, that the reason he committed the act was, because,
when he came home from his work, he found the house
dirty and his wife drunk in bed. He afterwards went and
voluntarily surrendered himself to the police, having
made a declaration that he had used violence to his vine,
and that the result was the death of the woman.

A post mortem examination was made, and the surgeon
minutely described the wounds.

Mr. WILKIN s addressed the jury, strongly endeavour-
ing to reduce the case from murder to manslaughter. He
called the employer of the prisoner, who gave him an ell'
cellent character for kindness and humanity; and, after
the judge's charge, the jury found the prisoner guiltyt
but strongly recommended him to mercy on account 01
his previous good character. Sentence deferred.

CASE OF GEORGE EVANS.
Upon George Evans, charged with the murder of a fe-
male named Miller, at Manchester, on the 14th instant'

being called, lordship
Mr. JOSEPH Potr.ocx rose, and applied to his I° •
to have the trial postponed. In support of his
the learned gentleman read two affidavits from Mr. Ed
ward Bent, the prisoner's attorney, which alleged that the
evidence given before the magistrate at the time of has
committal, and the evidence before the coroner, had been
published in the Manchester Guardian, and in conse-
quence of this publication, a great excitement and prejd'
dice had been created in the mind of the public against the
prisoner ; and that several of the jury empannelled to try
the said George Evans had come from the town where the
Manchester Guardian was circulated, and the prisoner,
could not be expected to have a fair trial. The ;f73"
affidavit set forth that the Manchester Guardiamofispe-i
nesday contained a letter addressed from the poitte
Bristol to Mr. Superintendent Taylor, of the Mane
"--r
application,
borough police. which contained an account of the i
pri-
soner's
former life, and was improperly pubi the
Manchester id
Manchester Guardian, and was highly calculated to create,
a strong prejudice against the prisoner. The learned
counsel suggested that there was a case where a similar
application had been granted upon similar grounds.
LORD CHIEF BARON.—It was some case before inY
brother Alderson.

Mr. Ponoock.—Ys ; the case of Bolam.
Mr. SOWLER.—My lord, I also appear on behalf of
the
prisoner. I concur in what has fallen from nay learned
friend Mr. Pollock, but I would direct your lordship 6
attention to what appears to me a very material distinc-
tion between this case and that of the Queen v. Bolar4
in the 2d Moody and Robinson, and the distinction is veF9
much in favour of cur application. Your lordship will
observe that in &lam's case the murder was committed
in December, and the trial was to take place on the 4th
of March following, so that there was an interval of wore
than two months for any excitement that might prevail
to the, prisoner's prejudice to subside. In the present
case the offence was committed on the 14th of this month
(August), and the prisoner is here on his trial within ten
days. Great excitement has prevailed and does still Pre,'
vail, and there can be little doubt that the paragraph
complained of in the prisoner's attorney's (Mr. Bent's)
affidavit has b, en seen by some of the jurymen. There
is another distinction between this and Bolam's case+
which your lordship will not fail to mark. In that case
the reports and paragraphs were on the authority merell
of the newspapers in which they appeared ; in this case
the letter of superintendent Taylor, which appears in the
paragraph, bears a kind of official authority about it'
which must have great additional weight with all vibe
peruse it. On these grounds, my lord, I support 11151

learned friend's application.
Mr. BRANDT said that no stress could be laid upon
that part of the affidavit which referred to an infuriate,
mob. Ile would not make any allusion to one affidavit'
It was his wish to have the administration of justice coo;
ducted in an honest, public manner. He quite agree?,
with what had been said about the publication of 01
letter if any police-officer of Manchester had been instrtl'
mental in its publication.
His LORDSiiip retired to consult Mr. Justice Cress'
and
well. After a short absence his lordship returned A
consulted my nt yt
01 learned r
preods
tbproont
eh
de
.r
The e v Cresswell,id evidence
sma d,
Thla that havet
is
I entirely agree with him, or rather he quite agrees with
before the coroner and the magistrates have both bee°
pul-Aished ; but there is an additional publication Pllr
duced which is alleged to have come from authority,
giving an account of the life and character of the prisonerj
thP facts of which, if possible, ought to be forgotten, B,nj
the immediate impression of which ought to have subsiae,
before the prisoner be called on to take his trial. A mot
reprehensible publication, more calculated to interfere
~,
with the impartial administration of justice I have rate!:l
ever met with ; and I think it behoves the persons,!,
authority in the town of Manchester to institute t.rP,
strictest inquiry, under what circumstance—by whose Efc
71,e
mission a letter addressed from the superintendent's cw„
in the central police station, Bridewell-street, Bristol,
M`Callum, who purports to be an inspector of police, a•
dressed to Mr. Superintendent Taylor, who probablY‘a
one of the witnesses—for I see John Taylor is one of tR
witnesses at the back of the indictment—l say, it belUge,
a
those in authority in Manchester to inquire hew: tier
under what circumstances, it could happen that a 'e;s9,
written by one official person to another found its: ot
into the public paper, to the destruction of the eel he
justice, as it seems to me at least for a time. It woo' ar•
doing mischief if I were to read the letter for the Plot'
pose of commenting upon it. Superintendent Tilos
must have known from its nature that that letteriagti
most confidential, and either some one has been Alg:tbe:
of great treachery towards him and crime towaru.-„not
prisoner, or he has been guilty of a criminal violet:011
duty, which calls for the strictest inquiry. It is no 'tbia
mischief, that, in consequence of this publication, jaue
application is made, and a trial, that ought to take rtake
for the vindication of public justice, cannot ne as the
place. I thought it right to make this observation) by no
ground on which this trial is to be postponed. 4deoce,
means say that the mere publication of the e's magiS"
taken before the coroner, or that taken before thebich rn9
trate, is of itself sufficient. The point upon
wthi
; s MOSt
brother Cresswell and myself mainly rely '5 urpOrting
improper and, I think, criminal publication, P f e.
to give art account of the life, conduct, and histor_Y,liabett
n thes-
pr6oner, calculated most deeply to affect him, Pou"
but a few days before his supposed trial. UP -,-is.ances
grounds, the trial must be postponed; the receir,tiatod/
must be respited, and the prisoner must rernaio
till the next spring assizes—or, rather, the next "'
whenever they may take place—at Liverpool.
~on. of so
Mr. BRANDT said that his lordship's sugges"
inquiry would most certainly be made.
wilt net
LORD CHIEF BARON.—I think the authorities , to jus•
discharge their duty unless some:person is br!)rticl;7.istance.
tice lor it. I car e
t( t conceive under what u
soineWhere*
it could have happened without a criminal faultij,,r imagine
It certainly calls lor public inquiry, and 1 .nL';',_Yrnot,
that it does not in some way deserve pu u