The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-04-30 00:00:00

KIRKDALE SESSIONS.

THE ST. HELENS COLLIERY RIOTS : EXTRAORDINARY

SCENE

On Saturday afternoon John Knowles, John Penketh,
John M•Donough, and Tuernas Burrou?hs were arraign-
ed before the Rev. Rea r Brooks, at Kirkdale Sessions,
on a charge of having been concerned in the late serious
colliery riots at St. Helens. The prisoners pleaded " not
guilty." Mr. Hutton and Mr. James appeared on the
part of the prosecution, and Mr. Monck and Mr. Pollock
for the defence.
The case, which has appeared in detached portions
from time to time, may be briefly summed up as f .11 .ws ;
—ln the neighbourhood of St. Helens there are several
collieries, the men employed at which, with the exception
of a few, turned out, on a strike in January last, far an in-
crease of wages. The collieries were consequently almost
stopped, and had been so about a month wnen the coal-
masters finding that the workmen were more obstinate
than was, at first expected, determined to procure workmen
from other places, and accordingly, deputed four of their
body, who proceeded to Shropshire and succeeded in engag-
ing about seventy men, who were to be sent to St. Helens,
and, on their arrival there, deposited among the collieries in
its vicinity. The Shropshire colliers arrived at St. Helens
late on the evening of Monday, the 26th of February, and
were accommodated with apouse in the New Market-
place, belonging to Mr. David Brovvnlow, otie of the col-
liery proprietors, until they could be distributed and sent
to their work on the following morning. The turn-out
colliers bad evinced their disapprobationOf the proceed.
ings of their late masters in attempting to engage strangers
and fellow-workmen who hid not turned out ; and, on
Tuesday morning, the 27th of February, they assembled
at an early hour, in great numbers, in front of the house
where the Shropshire men were lodged. About 10 o'clock,
a party consisting of about 20 of the nea men. escorted by
Mr. Storey, the Superintendent of Police, and six con-
stables, and also by several of the coal proprieters,
started to go to the collieries belo.ging to Messrs. Bourne
and Robinson and Messrs. Johnson and Worthington, in
Parr.; and, in passing through the street or place called
Smithy-brow, half of which is in Windle and the other
half in Parr, both in the parish of Prescot, they were as-
sailed by a mob, consisting principally of the turn-outs,
who had followed them, and who succeeded in violen.ly
dragging away the strangers from the prot.ecton of tne
police and colliery proprietors. At the same th e the
police were driven back, and several of them received
injuries from the stones and other missiles hurled at them
by the mob. During the remainder of the day great ex-
citement prevailed throughout the town. The prisoners
Knowles, Penketh, and M'Donougb were apprehended
immediately. after the riot and covarnittetL to take their
trialtand warrants were obtained against several" 'others
"of.the-rioters. At.-asubsegnent period -of the-day. white
Mr. Superintendent Storey was endeavouring to appre-
hend a turbulent fellow named Thomas Leyland, in toe
-New Market-place. he was again assailed by a mob who
had gathered: round the Town-bah; where the magistrates
were then sitting, and received a dangerous wound on the
head; and eventually both the officers and himself were
obliged to release the prisoner and seek safety in flight.
The magistrates then determined to send for a €l,-taebnient
of the military force stationed at 111 nichesser: and de-
spa,ched an order to that purpose ; and about eight o'clock
the same evening a company of the 'infantry en ered the
town, where they remained until within the li,t few
weeks. Several of the rioters had since hen apprehended
and summarily committed under the combination act.
Mr. Mortcx moved on an affidavit, made by Mr. Ro-
berts, the attorney in the case, resident at Newcastle•on-
Tyne, that it might be postponed until Tuesday morning.
In the affidavit, which ran considerably into detail, Mr.
Roberts swore that he was the attorney for ten prisoners
against whom a habeas corpus had been issued, and that
it was necessary for the ends of justice that he should be
in London, to give evidence in the Court of Queen's
Bench, on Monday. The learned counsel apprehended
that a more satisfactory affidavit could not have been sub-
mitted, because it must be clear that the trial itt the pre-
sent instance could not be c nducted with satisfaction to
the parties concerned if the gentleman immediately inte-
rested in preparing the defence was absent from the
court, as he must necessarily be on Monday. He assured
the bench that there was no wish on the part of the tra-
versers to seek unnecessary delay, inasmuch as they were
ready at that moment to go to trial.
The CHAIRMAN said it was impossible to proceed at
that late hour, (half-past three o'clock) as the jury would
have to go to their homes for the night.
Mr. HULTON also admitted the impossibility of pro-
ceeding with a case, in which there were a large number
of witnesses, at that advanced period of the attei noon, but
contended, that it would be inconvenient to postpone it
until Tuesday. He stated, that, in the case of habeas
corpus, affidavits, and not evidence, were received by the
Court of Queen's Bench.

Mr. JAMES followed on the same side, and said that,
if Mr. Roberts bad any material facts to communicate to
the Court of Queen's Bench, he could as well do so by
affidavit sent from Liverpool as by affidavit sworn in
London.

Mr. ROBERTS here rose, and, looking towards Mr.
Holton, said : The man who states anything against my
veracity tells an untruth. He that quest ons the truth of
my affidavit imputes a falsehood to me.
Mr. H ULTON.—I call on the court to protect me.

Mr. MONCK was about to interfere, when
Mr. ROBERTS said, I have sworn that I am to give
evidence before the Court of Queen's Bench, and you
deny it. You have uttered, sir, what is false.
The CHAIRMAN (who had been, up to this time, in
consultation with his brother magistrates,) here observed
that he had not beard what was said.

Mr. HULTON.-1 call upon the court to protect me
from the observations made by my friend's client. He
has charged me with uttering a falsehood.
Mr. ROBERTS.—I said that, in stating what you have,
you have uttered a falsehood.
The CHAIRMAN.—You must know enough of courts of
justice to be aware that, in opening your mouth here, you
have no right to do so at all. Certainly, disrespectful
language of any kind is not to be tolerated. If you ar3 a
professional man, I hope you will see that you have done
wrong and that you ought to regret it. That's what you
ought to do.
Mr. H uvroN : I stated that the affidavit was an extra-
ordinary one, and I referred to the practice of the Court
of Queen's Bench ; and it was upon that that this gentle-
man chose to make use of language which I call upon the
court to protect me from. . . _

Mr. ROBERTS ! Will the court allow mP to state how I
am circumstanced? You, Mr. tlult n should have called
upon me to explain, before you imputed a falsehood to
me;

The CHAIRMAN: I think those remarks exceedingly
improper, and that you ought to make an apology to Mr.
Hulton for the language you have used.
The conversation here dropped. Mr. Roberts retained
his seat, and did not
,apologize.
The case was then fixed to come on at the sitting of the
court yestet day (Monday) morning, a report of which will
be found in our eighth page.