The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1845-08-26 00:00:00

BURGLARY AT MANCTIESTIER

Edward Roberts, 22, was charged viith breaking.int

the house of Thomas Morgan,- watchmaker, Oxford-
street, Manchester, on the 16th of July, and stealing
therefrom a quantity of jewellery. An accomplice, named
Ashworth, pleaded guilty to the same indictment.—

Guilty. A previous conviction we's proved against Roberts
Both prisoners were transported for ten years.

NISI PRIUS COURT,

-FRIDAY

GREEN V. ROGERS.—This was an action under
iesue, to try the validity of a seizure of a quantity of good
taken under a fieri facias issued against a person named
De Piece, of Oxton.—The jury found a verdict for the
plaintiff.
BREACT

CONTRACT.--TYILER r. KlNG.—This was
an acton brought by Mr. Tyrer, a carrier, of Liverpool,
against Mr. George King, a gentleman, residing at Beb.
bington, in Cheshire, to recover damages for the refusal
of the defendant to execute the conveyance

,f two hoi

which the defendant had by his agent contracted to sell
ro the plaintiff for the sum of £l,2oo.—Nis Lordship said
he was of opinion that the plaintiff was not entitled to
damages for the loss of bargain.—Plaintiff nonsuited.
DODD 11. WeLssit.—This was an action fur slander, the
defendant having called the plaintiff a thief.—M r. Cromp-
ton having opened the pleadings. Mr. ATIBMTON said
he was instructed by his client to withdraw the offensive
expressions.

Mr. KNOWLES said be was unwilling to take the con-
cession in the way that his learned friend put it. This
was a case in which the plaintiff could have been fully
justified in appealing to the jury, hut he was willing to
forego his right upon full justice being done him, by hay-
ing the expressions withdrawn in the most open, public
manner that they could possibly be, with a distinct decla.
ration that there was no foundation whatever for the
assertion. The plaintiff was a young man, a chemist and
druggist, formerly in the employ of the defendant, who is
a surgeon, at Prescot. The plaintiff havng left the de-
fendant went into the service of a gentleman named Gar-
ton, and at a subsequent opportunity the parties being
together, the defendant charged the plaintiff with disho-
nesty. repeatedly saying that the plaintiff was a thief.—
Mr. ATKINSON. on the part of the defendant : •' I adopt
the apology of my learned friend. I adopt the terms dic-
tated by my learned frien.: in the fullest manner."—
Verdict for the plaintiff, damages 405.; costs 40s.
KING AND OTHERS V. LANCASTER.-llhiS Was an
Action brought by Messrs. King, Hodgkinson, and Lan-
caster, of Ince-hall and Patricroft collieries, to recover
from the defendant, Mr. William Lancaster, the sum of
£1,492 leis., which he retained in his hands.—Upon the
conclusion of the plaintiffs' case. Mr. KNOWLES informed
his lordship that the parties had settled the matter.—
Verdict for the plaintiff, damages £2,000, subject to
arrangement.

BRFACII OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGF

PASS V. POTT9.—This we: an action for breach of pro-

wise of marriage. The plaintiff, Miss Pass, was the
daughter of a respectable person, formerly in trade as a
butcher, at Sheffield, but now the owner of some collieries
and land at Pitt's-moor, near that town. The plaintiff
was the eldest daughter, and was 19 years of age. The
defendant was also a young person, who had attained his
majority in the month of March, in this year. He was
the son of a late lieutenant in the army. He was in the
possession of some property in the East Riding of York,
on the sea coast. In the year 1843, Mr. Pass and his
daughter were at llornaea, when they lodged at a house
of a tenant of the defendant. Here commenced the
courtship, which was afterwards renewed at Sheffield_
He attained his majority on the 9th of March, and ap-
pointed the 3d of April for the wedding day : the dresses
were ordered ; the defendant wanted to be married in a
week ; walked out with her amongst her friends, and in-
troduced himself as her future husband. He then said he
would go to see his guardian, and left under the promise
to return in a week. He never came back or wrote any
explanation of his conduct, but after an absence of some
weeks he went to the house of Mrs. Granger, at Sher-
bourne, near York, and, when• asked to explain his con-
duct, he either did not or could not do so, but merely
said he wai much attached to Miss Pass.—The jury. atter
ten minu'es' deliberation, returned a verdict for the plain-
tiff.—Damages £2OO.

t--

CROWN COURT-SATURDAY

CHARGE OF MURDER AT WARRINGTON.
Patrick O'Brien, a youngish man of light complexion,
and apparently an Irish labourer, was charged with the
murder of Michael Duffy, at Warrington, in June last.
The prisoner had no counsel.
Mr. James stated the case. The deceased (Michael
Duffy), into the cause of whose death they were about to
inquire, resided at Wigan. He was a chairmaker;and in
the course of his vocation, was occasionally absent from
that town. On Sunday evening, the Sth of June, be w
in Warrington, with several other persons, at a public
house in the Horsemarket, the Black Bull, where they

remained drinking until nearly midnight, when thr y ad-
journed to the lodgings of one of the parties at the house
of a Mrs. Connor. While they were in the public house
a man named O'Brien, alleged to be the prisoner, sat in
the same room with the deceased and the others, and on
his leaving the house was heard to use an expression indi-
cating that he was determined to be revenged on some one.
He said, " I will have my revenge before 1 sleep," or

words to that effect
sometime at Connor's, and v
came and asked for a light, and

Deceased remained with his fr'encis
!v were there, O'Brien
thit being brought he

wanted apipe, which was refused, and be

went away, but

continued to walk up and down in front of the house for
some time. About one o'clock deceased and another man
went out of the house, when O'Brien came to the deceased

in the street with something in his band, which appeared
to be a stone or a brick, and with which he struck the de-
ceased a severe blow. He was carried bleeding into Con-
nor's house, where be remained until the following day,
and he then went home to his own house at Wigan ; but
from the time of his arrival there until his death, which
took place on the 4th July, he was unable to attend to his
work. A post mortem examination left no doubt but that
death was caused by the blow given, by a brick or stone,
as stated. O'Brien worked at the vitriol works of Mr.
Musprat, near Newton-in-the-Willows, and between the
period of the blow being given and the 4th July had dis-
appeared from his place of employment. After the death
of deceased, search was made, but he could not be found.
About the beginning of the present month information
having been received from the governor of a jail in Cavan
(Ireland), which would probably lead to his being disco-
vered, a person who was present on the night in question
was sent over, with an officer, and pointed the prisoner
out amongst a number of others. His appearance was
somewhat altered, by his whiskers being apparently shaved
off and his dress varying. He went in Ireland by the
name of John Lee. lie was brought to Wigan, and after
an examination before the magistrates, was committed for
trial.
A number of witnesses were then called, who deposed

to certain of the facts; but none of them could positively
swear to the identity of the prisoner, and one apparently
material witness in the case (belonging to the vitriol works
where the prisoner worked) did not appear. The prisoner
had certainly no appearance of having ever had anything
like conspicuous whiskers, his hair being very thin, of fine
texture, and light colour. The jury, after a short consul-
tatio❑ in the box, returned a verdict of not guilty. The
learned judge said that the prisoner (who had been in jail)
must he sent back to Cavan.

CHARGE OF MORDZA ON THE HIGH :SEA
Michael Moore, aged 30, was charged with hi

aving, in

the English ship' Afountaineer, on the high seas, -and
within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England, felo-
niously killed and murdered one John Campbell.
Mr. Blair and Mr. Drinkwater were for the prosecu-
tion. The prisoner was undefended, but his lordship re-
quested.Mr.Atkinson to watch the case in his behalf.

Mr. BLAIR stated the circumstances. The prisoner
had shipped as an able seaman on board the Mounts
at New Orli-ans, to proceed to Liverpool. The

sailed on the 24th of *March last from' the former port.
The deceased was boatswain on board, On the 14th of
April, as the ship was getting clear of the Gulf of Florida,
and about two o'clock in the afternoon, the mate, Mr.
Barrow, and the deceased were engaged near the bow of
the ship, when the former beard deceased cry out Look
out Mr. Barrow," and presently after be felt himself
pushed behind, as if to throw him overboard, when, as he
was standing on the rail getting up an anchor, be fell
down upon the flying jib-guy, which enabled him to re-
cover himself and get upon deck. He went to secure the
prisoner, who had run to the other side of the deck, not
then knowing that he had done anything violent but at-
tempt to throw him overboard. He, however, saw the
deceased on the deck, and found that he was wounded.
The prisoner was secured, and near the spot was found
open a clasp knife, with a blade four inches long, which
was covered with blood and known to be the prisoners.
Deceased was stripped, and a wound was found in the
belly, near the navel. He was attended to, but died of
the effects of the wound at seven o'clock the same night.

When questioned by the mate as to his reason for attempt-
ing to throw him overboard and stab the other, he said
he had done it, and was sorry he had not done it before.
when he had a better opportunity. The prisoner and

the parties had had no quarrel, and no provocation was
given by the deceased or the mate. A question would
however arise for the consideration of the jury, as to the
state of the prisoners mind at the time, regarding which
there were some circumstances of importance previously
to the 14th of April. He had discharged his duties satis-
factorily, no fault was found with him, no provocation
was given to him, and he had said to the men on board
that " the crew were in a plot against him to throw him

overboard." This he frequentlyrepeated. On one occa-
sion he saw the deceased and another man reading the
bible, and immediately exclaimed " You are swearing in
the crew to throw me overboard." The surgeon who
had attended him since his commitment would be called,
and from his and the other testimony the jury would have
to come to a conclusion; but it must be distinctly proved
that he laboured under a mental delusion, in order to find
that he was not a responsible being.
Witnesses were called, who proved all the facts stated,
and Mr. Chalmers, jun. of Kirkdale Gaol, (in addition
to what was stated by the crew respecting the delusion
under which the prisont-r laboured while on board,) said
that be considered from the vague manner of the prisoner,
he was not of sound mind. He had had conversations
with the prisoner. The prisoner had told him that he
bad had the yellow fever at New Orleans; and that he
had the feeling of his brain opening and abutting and after
did not know what he was doing. On the supposition
that ha had inflammation of the brain, which might linger
long after the fever bad left him, he bad bled and blistered
him. He seemed to be scarcely in possession of all his
faculties. The prisoner's statement before Mr. Rushton
was read, namely—" I don't mind their swearing my life
away here ; they all swore before to heave me overboard.
Mr. ATKINSON obtained several admissions from the
witnesses in behalf of the prisoner, as regssded his state

of mind, especially from Dr.
ward, ably addressed the jury
His LORDSHIP briefly addressed the jury, who, after
short consultation, brought in a verdict of acquittal. 01
the ground of the prisoner' insanity.

halcners ; and he after

UTTERING A FORGED ORDER.
Joqeph Cowle, 35, was charged with uttering. at Salford,
an order for the payment of money, purporting to be the
order of William Jackson, a leather dealer, with intent to
defraud William Morris, he knowing the same to bf
forged. The case presented no feature of i Th
prisoner had obtained £4 Bs. from Jacksor
prosecuted, and Mr. Otter defended. 1
consulting for some time, retired.
Another jury was called for, and a number
not being present, were fined £5 each.
In a few minutes the jury returned, nd pronounced
verdict of guilty.

,nterest.
. 111 r. Pol

The jury, aft

or jurymen

:lia LORDSHIP said the case was by no means a light
one, as the fraud was against the employer. The sentence
was, that he be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for

two years

William Smith and Joseph Hague we►e each sentenced
to one year's imprisonment and hard labour,

for having

d £24 frt;m William Whither by false pretension.

The prisoners had duped the prosecutor out of the
money at Warrington fair, on the 18th of July, by the
old trick of one of them pretending to wish to buy from
the other a horse, which the prosecutor was told the seller
would not part with, in consequence of an alleged quarrel
between him and the pretended buyer. The prosecutor
was offered a sovereign to buy the horse, and having pur-
chased it for £24, which be paid to one of the prisoners;
the hack was found to be worth not more than the price
of its carcase, and the prisoners soon decamped.

NISI PRIUS COURT.

-SATURDAY.

HUMPHREY V. LUCAS

This was an action brought by the plaintiff to recover
the difference in the value of a purchase of shares bought
by him as principal, through his broker, from the defen.
dant, another broker, and not duly delivered. The con-
tract between the parties was proved, and the amount
claimed, stated at £717 IN. It appeared that since the
transaction was entered into, the broker of the plaintiff
bad failed, and left the Stock Exchange, and the contract
had been taken possession of by some committee of that
Exchange. It was contended for the defence, that the
by the rules of the body was between broker
and the committee therefore had power to

contrac
and broker,

dispose of them by their rules, which were put in ai evi-
dence, hut refused by the Judge as inadmissible, and con-
trary to the laws of the land. Under the direction of
his lordship, the jury immediately found a verdict for the
plaintiff, damages £717 10s.
Several unimportant cases having been disposed of (the
principal part relating to iron contracts) the court pro-
cteded to tl.•e case of

LANORTOGIS V. HORSLEY,
for goods sold and delivered to the wife of the defendant,
who carried on a stay and corset business, in Liverpool,
the plaintiff conducting a similar business in Bristol.
The question was as to the liability, the defendant and his
wife having bad differences and ultimately separated. It
was contended by the plaintiffs counsel that the goods
were delivered before -- made known

ch separation was
fentiant, and that he knew nothing of tht
previously existing. In reply, defendant urged
were circumstances in the case which ought to

that ther

i suspicion, and caused plaintiff to make
inquiry, and the jury found for the defendant.

have excite

LOCAL AND PROVINCIAL NEWS.

A number of cells for the solitary confinement of pri-
soners are being erected at Kirkdale Gaol.

Two vessels ran against the landing-stage at New
Brighton on Wednesday, and carried awiorpor,4 of it.
Mr. E. Twistleton replaces the Hon. Mr.' Clements as
Assistant Poor-law Commissioner for this district.
Dickens, Talfourd, and, it is anticipated, Eugene Sue,
will be present at the soiree of the Manchester Athenteurn
on the !3d October.

The Manchester Guardian states that there have been
no less than eleven cases of suicide in that town in tbir-

teen weeks

IL Palmer, Esq., town-clerk of Preston, paid his one
hundred and thirteenth consecutie visit to the last Lan-