The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-08-29 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STA*DA-RD.

name of Thomas, who was some-time ago transported. Two
years after his transporzation she married the prisoner, but this
marriage was null and void, because Thomas was still living,
and also because the prisoner was himself a married man at
the time he contracted marriage with the deceased. She (the
deceased) lived with the prisoner as Ins-wife for some time, and
then certain disputes having occurred between them, she left
him and proceened to London. There, she visited her married
sister, but she shortly after returned to- Manchester, in order
to pursue her own occupation; that of working at the Hanover
mills. She was frequently impot tuned by the prisoner to go
and live with him again, but she declined die oiler. About haif-
pastlive o'c ock on the morning-of the 251 - of June, she was
on her way to the mills,. and when she hail got to Stevenson-
sqiiare,. a witness named Murray saw her in company with the
prisoner. Some quarrelling was then taking place between
them. She was angry, but he was comparatively calm. 'They
went on until they got to the corner of friday-street, and there
she was heard to say to the prisoner" if you don't leave me I
will alarm die neighbourhood." The prisoner said to her
" You-mean to die, do you?" He then took a pistol trom his
pocket. She ran, and he followed her. She screamed, and
several persons were attracted by the screams. He pulled the
trigger of the pistol, and snaiped it at her, but it did act go off
the first-time. He then caught her by the triothes, and turned
her head round towaids him ; he then tired the pistol ; the
bullet passel tnrough her brain, and in a very few minutes
afternards she was a corpse. He was taken into custody on
the instant. He appeared at the time perfectly coo), sobtr, and
collected, but the smell of drink was upon him. tie put the
pistol quietly in his pocket, and said, " I loved the woman and
I will die for her." To another person he said, " I am quite
satisfied with what I have clone." He then took out anoider
loaded pistol, with which he said he intended to " exterminate"
himself, had he not been so suddenly apprehended. About
seventeen days before the murder, he scent to the Hanover-
mills, and asked to see the deceased, but she having declined to
leave her work, he said, 6` If ever mini had woman's life, t will
have hers." He then pulled out a pistol,.and said. This is the
weapon that will do it. Two loaded pistos having be n found
upon his person at that time, he was taken before the magis-
trates, but he was shortly after discharged,. and the pistols were
restored to him, and in about a fortnight afterwards he put his
many threats into execution, 1.. y shooting the unfortunate
female through the head.
The prisoner was found guilty.
The Judge pissed sentence of death upon him in solemn
terms, and said that he coved not hod out to the prisoner the
slightest hopes of mercy being extended to him.
dillllirrrn Pravers,. 26, was indicted for having, at Liverpool,
feloniously ut6ereil two curtain forged undertakings for the
payment of .t'3 each, with intent to. deiraud John Pearson.
The prisoner, who was the steward of a ship called the Chusan,
in May last, lodge l with the prosecutor; and on the vessel's
being ready for sea, he produced two shipping notes, which
prosecutor cashed for him. The notes were found to be forge-
nes, and on the discovery the prisoner was given into custody.
Guilty of uttering.—Sentence deferred.

ledge of the affair,-the Learned Sergeant allowed him to-state
what he had heard•which was to the effect that, on tiled., rig
question, a imy, a perfect stranger to him, met the prisoner,
and asked him to go with him to the tan-yard to sell the hirse•
which he was leading, .promising, at the same time, to remu- •
nerate him for his trouble.. The prisoner went, and thus be-
came implicated in tile t "ansaction. At the close of this state-
ment, the counsel for the prisoner analogized, and said, that in
consequence of the short notice he had received, he was unt
able to read the whole of his brief; but on referring to it he
perceived that there was-au important witness in the prisoner's
favour, whom, by permiasion of the Learned Sergeant, he•
would call. Accordingly ,a 'fliompson, joiner, came for-
ward, and deposed to seeing the transaction as stated by the
of the jury. Mr. Sergeant Murphy compAmented the-
juryman, and sail, if it had not be9i for this statement, he
would have sentenced the prisoner to seven years; as it was,
he should consult with Mr. Justice Cresswell. Before the court
rose the Learned Sergi ,ant ordered the boy forward, and asked
hint if lie had ever been to school. He replied—" To Mr.
Cropper's." The Learned-Sergeant then asked if the boy
con' be put to school in the g-aol, without the chance of con-
tamination with the other prisoners. After being answered in
the affirmative, he ordered the. prisoner to be imprisoned fur
four months, during which time he was to he kept in school.
Mornay Fox, 37, was sentenced to eighteen months' hard
labour, for stabbing police-Alder Joseph Thompson, in June
last, in this town. .

Daniel Davis was convicted of uttering', or forging, tss•o notes
for the payment of ,£3 13s. upon Mr. Richard Williams. The
only remarkable feature in die case was the obtuseness of the
jury, which drew down a severe rebuke from the Learned Ser-
geant. sentence deferred. _ _ _

•James Barr was charged with having forged a shippinz note
for 155., on Saturday, thr 30.1 i of May. The prisoner• was
found guilty, and recommended to mercy. Sentence deferred.

NISI PRIUS Cf4URT:-TFIURSDAY.
RIGHT OF AGENTS TO DETAIN GOODS

CASEY AND ANOTHER V. fiLAI ZIVA2,IOIFIER.—(Specia/
.htrd.)—The plaintiffs in this case were Messrs. Francis and
George Casey, and the defendants Messrs. Blair and Sumner,
all the parties carrying on business at Manchester. The action
was in trover to recover the value of 230 nieces of cloth, de-
tained by the defendants from the plaintiffs.—Messrs. Martin
and Asp!and were for the plaintiffs, and Messrs. Baines and
Cross fur time defendants.—The plaintiffs were merchants at
Manchester, who bought goods to a considerable extent, as
was customary, throutrh commission agents. The defendants
were bleachers' carrying on business in the neighbourhood of
Manchester. In connexion with the case was the firm of
Messrs. Bills, Watson, and Co., commission agents, who,
transacted business to a large extent in their line of business.
The practice at Manchester was to buy goods in the gray.
They were sent to the person acing as the agent or 'winnow ;
a bleacher was employed, and-his cart was sent round to the
warehouses to take them to the place where they were to, be
blealled. In a few days afterwards the bleacher called at the
place where the goods were taken front, received directions as
to what should be done with them, and acted accor In
this case the oods were part of a quantity bought from Messrs,
W. minim W. Sterling, manufacturers, in September, 1847 ; the
goods were sent to flirts, Watson, and Co., and thence to. the
bleach-works of the defendants, who received directions from
the plaintiffs as to the bleaching. Subsequently Birts, Watson,
and Co. failed, and were at that time indebted to the defend-
ants in a sum of £l9OO. The plaintiffs demanded their goods
from the defendants. offering to pay the price of bleaching,
but the defendants refused to give them um alleging that they
would hold them for the £l9OO due to them from flirts, Wat-
son. and Co. The-question would be whether or not the de-
fendants had a right to hod the goods for the .el9OO owing to
them by Bins and Co.. or whether they were bound to give
them up, merely charging the price of bleaching. Time question
was one of great importance, as it affected a number of bleach-
ers at Manchester. who were the real defendants.--Verdict for
the plaintiffs, damages .&114 11s. Bd.
CLARK AND OTHERS V. Lost As. —This case was decided by
the previous one, and a verdict taken for the plaintiffs.
MORRIS AND ANOTHER V. LOMAX.—This case also went off
under similar circumstances.

HEATON (CLERK) V. MOORE AND OTHERS.—An action to
recover a debt of Lll7 17s. 5d., alleged to be due from defend-
ants to plaintiff Verdict, by consent, for the plaintiff.

ALLEGED ILLEGAL DISTRAINT.
CLARKE v. HuLFOßD.—(Speeial Jury.)—Mr. George Clarke
was the plaintiff, and Mr. John Uolford the defendant. The
action was brought to recover compensation in damages for an
alleged illegal d,straiut. Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Crompton ap-
neared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Baines and Mr. Henderson
for the defendant. The facts of the case, as appeared from the
statement of the plaintiff's counsel, were as follow :—The
plaintiff was a sculptor, at Manchester, and the defendant a
gentleman of property, residing at the same place. In October
last, the plaintiff took a shop and cellar from the defendant, in
King,-street, Manchester, at an annual rent of .tllO, payment
to be made in advarrce if the lambord required it, In January
the defendant's collector called for a quarter's rent, hut, as the
pl intiff was abvent, no decisive answer could be given. In a
week or two afterwards, the plaintiff, while at Sheffield, was
much astonished to see in a Manchester paper that his effects
were advertised for sale by Mr. Fullalove, the auctioneer. He
immediately notified to the dufendant, through hie solicitor, iris
objection to the sale, but defendant proceeded, and sold off all
the tff,cts of the shop at a great sacrifice. There was only a
quarter's rent due, amounting to £27 Its., but the defendant
sold off property valued at £4OO for £6O, thereby oc-
casioning a loss to the plaintiff of .t 340. It was contended by
the plaintiff's counsel that Mr. Fullalove had shown great ig-
norance in the sale of the goods, which consisted of the va-
rious pieces of sculpture. plaster, casts, models, &c. In proof
of the ignorance displayed on the occasion, it was stated,
amidst the laughter of the court. that a figure of Vesta was
sold for Madame Vestris, Lord Bacon for Bacchus, John Wes-
ley for Voltaire, and Jenny Lind for Her Most Gracious Ma-
jesty. The action was brought to recover compensation in da-
mages for the injury the plaintiff had sustained by the reckless
sale of his goods, and the tyranny exercised by the defendant.
The case was tried at the last assizes before a common jury,
but the defendant being dissatisfied, made an application to the
court above, and it was thus brought on for trial a second time.
Witnesses were called, who proved that the plaintiff's property
was sold off' at a ruinous sacrifice, the auctioneer, in selling the
busts, being unacquainted even with the figures of Sir Robert
Peel and the Puke of Wellington. He put up John Wesley for
Voltaire, and a bust of Sir Charles Bell, author of the " Bridge-
water Treatises," he described as Deaf Burke, the celebrated
pugilist .--s Laughter.) There was also a piaster cast of Chantry,
which the said auctioneer designated " the bald-headed chap;"
and one of Raphael, the painter, who was called, "the long.
headed show-boy." The evidence extended to a great length,
and at the close of the plaintiff's vase the Court adjourned,