The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-09-03 00:00:00

CHARGE OF MANSLAUGHTER.

Thomas AV:i la1;a; indicted manslaughter of
a boy nan.ed William Wilkinson, at Bolton, on the 15th
of May last.
Mr. Hu LTON stated the case. The deceased was what is
termed a piecer to the prisoner, a spinner, and both were in
the employ of Messrs. Crook, spinners at Bolton. On the
day in question the deceased, in consequence of neglecting
his work, received a slight chastisement from the prisoner,
such as is usual, but in consequence of a push from the
prisoner, came in contact with the machinery, and was
struck by a part of it, which caused his death in a few
hours.

It was proved, though there was a slight discrepancy
in the evidence, that the prisoner used every means to
prevent the accident occurring.
His LORDSHIP went over the evidence, and the jury
returned a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was
discharged.
CHARGE OF DEFRAUDING A LOAN SOCIETY.

Jane Harvey, 3`l, George Banks, 48, and Stephen Par-
kinson, 2-1, were charged with an attempt to defraud the
Trustees of a Loan Society, at Liverpool.
The case far the prosecution was stated by Mr. Paget.
On the Bth of July last, the female prisoner Jane Harvey,
went to the office of the North British Loan Society, and
applied for one of the usual forms preparatory to obtain-
ing a loan. She was afterwards called on and told to
bring her sureties on the Friday following, and she came
accordingly, bringing with her the prisoner Banks and a
person named Woods. On being asked for the other
surety (the rules of the society requiring three) she said
lie was engaged on the river and could not come till the
next day. Banks on being asked his name said it was
George Harvey, and made his mark accordingly. Woods
also signed it. The parties were then told the money
would be paid on the signing of the note by the other
surety. On the next day Harvey called in company with
the prisoner Parkinson, and being asked his name, said it
was Murphy, and signed his name accordingly. The
money was not paid over. Some suspicion then arose, in
consequence of information that had been received, that
Parkinson and Banks were not the parties they repre-
sented themselves to be, and the three prisoners were
eventually given into custody.
The jury after a few minutes' consultation found all the
prisoners guilty, and they were sentenced to two years'
imprisonment.

- .
MALICIOUSLY CUTTING AND WOUNDING.
Timothy O'Brien, 440, (could read and write imper-
fectly,) was charged with cutting and stabbing John
Richards and William Jones, at Liverpool, in July last.
Mr, Cardwell conducted the prosecution, and the pri-
soner was defended by Mr. Wilkins.
Mr. CARDWELL briefly stated the facts of the case. On
the 11th of July last, between three and four o'clock in
the afternoon, the officer of the borough court of this
town, John Shanahan, went, with three assistants,
Richards, Jones, and Smith, to execute a writ of posses-
sion, and to give the parties, who had established their
right, possession of the premises occupied by the priso-
ner, who kept a provision shop in Charter-street. On
entering the shop, and being about to produce the war-
rant, they were attacked with an iron bar by. a person
who acted as assistant to the prisoner, but who was not
then taken. At the commencement of the attack, the
prisoner called out for a knife, upon obtaining which, he
made a rush and tried to stab Richards, and, on Jones
going to his assistance, he also was struck and received
several wounds from the knife which he had in his hand.
The police then interfered, and the prisoner was taken
into custody.
After the case bad proceeded, and one or two witnesses
had been called, Mr. Wilkins declined making any de-
fence on the part of the prisoner, provided the first count
in the indictment, namely, the charge of murder, were
abandoned. The prisoner would plead guilty to the other
counts.
The jury then returned a verdict of guilty on the counts
charging him with cutting and maiming, but acquitted
him of the intent to murder.
The prisoner was, after a most solemn and impressive
admonition from his Lordship, or; the nature of his crime
and its dreadful consequences, sentenced to fifteen years'
transportation.
Henry Hamilton, Peter Toole, and James Kean, were
discharged by proclamation.
This was the whole of the crown business.

THE QUEEN V. LOWE.
This was an action on the part of Mr. K. Tyrer, of this
town, against Mr. John Lowe, for an alleged libel, said
to have been contained in certain placards published by
the defendant, Lowe.
Mr. Watson and Mr. James appeared for the plaintiff,
and Mr. Wilkins for the defendant.
Mr. WATSON went briefly over the facts of the case,
from which it appeared that the defendant had some inte-
rest in property in this town, in the year 1843, on which
the plaintiff bad advanced money—that various letters
bad passed between them relative to it—and that after-
wards the defendant had a number of placards printed,
and posted on the walls of the town. The placard was
beaded " to capitalists," and contained several of the let-
ters that had passed between the parties, relative to the
abovenamed property ; reference was also made to some
party who was charged with " fraud, forgery, falsehood,
Sre.," which was printed in large characters to attract the
attention of parties reading., which it was alleged was in-
tended to apply to the plaintiff. The only object sought
by the plaintiff was (observed the learned Counsel) to
remove any impression that might have been made preju-
dicial to his character, and to prevent further annoyance
from the same party.
The defendant pleaded that the placard did not refer to
the plaintiff.
Some conversation then took place between the coun-
sel with the view of effecting an arrangement, Mr. Watson
requiring, on the part of the plaintiff, an admission that
the language referred to was not intended to libel Mr.
Tyrer, and an assurance that he would not publish any
placard, or annoy him in such a way for the future, either
by writing letters or in any other manner.
Mr. Wit.Krys said, the defendant could not plead
guilty to the charge, but he would make the assurance
that had been asked by his learned friend.
Under these circumstances the assurance was entered
into, and aNerilict of acquittal taken.
This was the last case for trial in the Crown Court, and
the learned Chief Baron left for London on Wednesday
morning.

NISI PRIUS COURT.—TUESDAY.
CRIM. ,CON.—WOOD V. MONK.
At the sitting of the Court this morning the hearing of
this case was resumed.
Four additional witnesses were called on the part of the
defendant; and they proved generally that the plaintiff
had frequently assaulted his wife, broken her teeth, and
blackened her eyes, and that he had upon one occasion
said he should put a halter round her neck, and sell her
at the " Obelisk," in Preston. Evidence was also given
to show that the plaintiff had made an attempt upon his
sister-in-law's chastity on two occasions, and that she was
obliged to get married to escape from under his roof. When
the examination of the fourth witness had been concluded,
Mr. KNowngs, on the part of the plaintiff, intimated
his desire to withdraw a juror, as he said* good could
arise from any further discussion of suchse.
The JUDGE, who was of the same opinion, consented;
a juror was accordingly withdrawn, and the case was thus
brought to an abrupt termination, at ten o'clock.
WILLIAMSON v. PAGE.
In this case the plaintiff was William Williamson. and
the defendant William Page. The declaration set forth
that the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff in the
sum of £46 for work and labour done, and money lent.
The defendant pleaded that, except as to £l5, he had
never promised to pay.
Mr. Martin, Mr. Sergeant Murphy, and Mr. Robinson
appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Watson and Mr.
Webster for the defendant.
It appeared that the plaintiff was a ship-owner at Bel-
fast, and the defendant a gentleman who lives at Scarbo-
rough, and the owner of a vessel called the Adventure ;
and the action was brought to recover a sum of £46,
money advanced by the plaintiff to Captain Allin, the
master of that vessel, in the month of November last.
The ship had been on a voyage to Gibraltar, and brought
home a cargo from that place for a Mr. Sims, of Belfast.
She arrived at Belfast towards the latter end of October,
and then the captain endeavoured
for the ship. The plaintiff succeeded in procuring
charter for her, to convey a cargo of timber to Cardiff,
to be used in the mines there. When the timber was on
board, and the vessel ready for sea, the captain obtained
£46 from the plaintiff to pay the necessary expenses at
the Belfast Ballast-office, and the cost of provisions for
the voyage. The captain then drew a bill for the amount,
which was transmitted to the defendant for acceptance,
and, after Berne delay, the defendant wrote back to the
plaintiff to Fay that the captain had no authority to draw
bills, 4nd tba,t, li, hq..d no occasion to raise money, as he

had the amount of his freight in his hands; and from
that time to the present no settlement was made. The
defence was similar to that stated in the letter written to
the plaintiff—namely, that the. captain had no authority
to draw bills, and had no occasion to borrow money at
Belfast.
A verdict was returned for the plaintiff for £25.
DICKSON V. 'WYNNE.
In this case the plaintiff, a coach-proprietor and inn-
keeper in Yorkshire, sought to recover a sum of £46 from
the defendant, who was another coach-proprietor and inn-
keeper, at Ashton-under-Lyne, being the amount of cer-
tain disputed accounts between the parties for running a
coa h called the Tantivy, between Manchester and Shef-
field. After the case had been opened by Mr. Baines, a
verdict was taken for the plaintiff, by consent, subject to
a reference.

WILLOGK V. GREEN.
In this case the plaintiff was Riclrird Willock, and the
defendant William Green the younger. The declaration
was for an assault, to which the defendant pleaded not
guilty.
Mr. Roebuck and Mr. 'Cardwell appeared for the plain-
tiff, and Mr. Martin for tie defendant.
It appeared that the plaintiff was an old man in humble
circumstances, a drover of cattle, residing at Skipton, in
Yorkshire, and in the employment of Mr. Slingsby, of
Moston-hall, in this county. Mr. Slingsby and the de-
fendant were cattle-breeders, and in the habit of exhibit-
ing cattle at agricultural exhibitions. In the month of
October last there was a cattle show at Tuttington, at
which the defendant happened to be the victor, and after
the show was over he repaired to an inn at Fishpool,
where the plaintiff was stopping at the time. The plain-
tiff had been the whole day in the company of a man
named Windle, and was perfectly sober, and in a most
unlikely state to cause offence. Some conversation then
took place between the plaintiff and the defendant's fa-
ther, which ended in a blow being inflicted by the former;
but after an apology had been given, and matters satis-
factorily arranged, the defendant, who was a young man,
rushed into the room, seized a candlestick which was
standing on the table, and threw it at the plaintiff, thereby
inflicting a severe wound upon his mouth, knocking out
two or three of his teeth, and preventing him, by reason
of the haemorrhage, from going to sleep. The next
morning the defendant appeared to feel that he had in-
flicted an unmerited injury, and accordingly he said he
was exceedingly sorry for what he had done, and that he
was willing to pay for the damage. This offer, however,
bad never been fulfilled ; and the jury had to consider
what was a fair and reasonable amount of damages for
such an assault, inflicted as that had been by a young and
wealthy man upon an old person in indigent circum-
stances.
Mr. MARTIN, for the defence, contended that mild and
temperate conduct was not to be expected from cattle-
drivers, they being generally rough, coarse fellows, who
were willing to give and receive injuries in a blunt man-

ner.
The JUDGE said that the learned counsel's argument
reminded him of the well-known line—" He that drives
fat oxen should himself he fat; " and he thought in the
present case the line might be rendered—" He that drives
tame oxen should himself be tame." (Laughter.)
A verdict was returned for the plaintiff—damages £lO.
BRETHERTON V. COLQUHOUN.
In this case the plaintiff was Joseph Bretherton, and
the defendant James Colquhoun. The declaration was
for work and labour done, money lent, and on an account
stated. The defendant pleaded that he was never in-
debted, and a set-off.
Mr. Knowles and Mr. Hogging appeared for the plain-
tiff, and Mr. Crompton for the defendant.
It appeared that the plaintiff is a veterinary surgeon in
Liverpool, and keeps a very extensive repository for the
sale of horses on commission : and the defendant is an
Irish horse-dealer, who was in the habit of coming to
Liverpool and placing his horses with the plaintiff for
sale. The mode of doing business at the establishment
appeared to be this: the person bringing a number of
horses, left them with the plaintiff for sale when conve-
nience might arise, arid the plaintiff paid the party money
on account of the lot; and when the horses were sold,
the money lent and the expense of the stabling were de-
ducted from the receipts, and the balance settled. In
October, 1843, the defendant was in Liverpool ; the
books were then produced, every item was gone over, and
it turned cut that there was a sum of £5O then owing by
the plaintiff to the defendant. The plaintiff paid him
that balance, and advanced him a further sum ; since
then a few transactions had taken place between them,
and at present there was a sum of £l:'.o due.
A verdict was returned for the plaintiff, by consent,
subject to a reference.
HOWARD V. WAREING.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Thomas
Howard, against the defendant, Edward Wareing. The
declaration was for money had and received. The de-
fendant paid £2O into court, denied his liability beyond
that amount, and pleaded that he was a stake-holder in
a race.
Mr. MARTIN, (with whom was Mr. Atherton,) stated
that the plaintiff and defendant were formerly friends,
and that the action was brought to recover the amount of
certain bets made on a race. The real object of defend-
ing the action was to establish that the race had been
unfairly won, but the defendant having now been satisfied
on this point, the jury would not be troubled with an in-
vestigation of the facts.
Mr. KNOWLES, for the defendant, said his learned
friend had truly stated that the plaintiff and his client
were formerly friends, and that in the running of the race
bis client was the loser of a bet to the plaintiff. Prom
certain circumstances which occurred at the time the
defendant thought that unfairness had been practised, and
imputed that unfairness to the plaintiff. He was now,
however, convinced that if there was any unfairness the
plaintiff had nothing whatever to do with it.
The Junoß : One has beard of such imputations ha -
ing been cagt in other emcee.
A juror having been withdrawn, the case was not gone
into, much to the disappointment of many persons who
had purposely assembled to hear a detailed account of
the " tricks of the turf."
SAME V. SIXSMITII.
This was an action precisely similar to the last, and it
was settled in the same manner.
DOE DEM. WRIGHT V. CUMMING AND ANOTHER.
This was an action of ejectment brought by George
Wright to recover from William Cumming and Henry
Robinson possession of the Beehive Tavern, in Fazaker-
ley-street. The defendant pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Atherton and Mr. Monk appeared for the plaintiff;
and Mr. Watson and Mr. Crompton for the defendants.
It appeared that the plaintiff was Mr. George Wright,
formerly Councillor for St. Paul's Ward, and a brewer in
Union-street. A gentleman of the name of Carver let
the Beehive to Robinson, and, by his permission, Cum-
ming, the other defendant, came into possession of the
premises. Carver made a will, and devised the property
to three or four gentlemen, all of whom renounced it,
with the exception of a Mr:Whitley, who sold it to Mr.
Wright.
A verdict was returned for the plaintiff.