The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-03-22 00:00:00

prisoner on the day of the robbery, at Oldham.—Verdict Guilty.
—Death recorded.

BURGLARY.—Thomas Preston 17, Thomas Heteson 18, and
Charles Ribbed 24, were indicted fcr burglariously breaking
and entering the dwelling-house of William Johnson, at Barton-
on-Irwell, in the night of the 20th of August, 1832, and stealing
therein seven bottles of wine and one mallet, his property.
The prisoners were observed in the vicinity of the prosecutor)s
house on the night in question, and being suspected, three
persons watched them and took two of them into custody with
the stolen property in their possession. The other, who was
seen coming out of the cellar window, escaped at the time, but
was taken the next day at Manchester.—Verdict Guilty.—
Sentence of Death recorded.

CHARGE OF MANSLAUGHTER ON THE RAILWAY.--Nathaniel
Eckersl y. was indicted for manslaughter in killing and slaying
Benjamin Cropper, at Manchester. The prisoner was the
engineer of the locomotive steam engine Liverpool, on the Ist
Feb. last, when three persons were killed, and the deceased so
severely injured that he died in consequence, by the Liverpool,
with a train of loaded coal waggons running over them, as they
were standing on the railway, at Parr Moss, where the blue
train by which they were travelling to Manchester had stopped,
in consequence of au accident to a train conveying goods a-
head of them. The particulars of the accident, which were
fully stated in all the papers at the time, must be fresh in the
recollection of our readers. After hearing the evidence of the
guard of the blue train, his lordship put it to Mr. Hulton, who
conducted the case for the prosecution, whether the evidence
was sufficient to establish a charge of gross negligence on the
part of the prisoner. Mr. Hulton said he thought that when
the prisoner could not see his way clear, as was the case in this
instance, in consequence of the steam escaping from a pipe that
had burst, he ought to have stopped his engine. Mr.. Justice
ALDERSON. Then a coachman ought to stop his coach as soon
as it becomes dark. A gentleman on the jury observed that he
thought the parties who suffered had incurred the danger by
their own impropriety in getting out of the carriages, and
standing on the road.—The prisoner was acquitted.

' • THURSDAY.
AGGRAVATED CASE OP MANSLAUGHTER.
Edward 0' Neale, 18, and James Callaehan, 25, were indicted
for killing and slaying Edward Al' Phelan at Manchester. Mr.
Arinqroug in stating this case to the jury, observed that it was
a most serious outrage, and amounted, at the very least, to the
crime of manslaughter of the most culpable description. Mr.
Justice Alderson :—" Do you not think it amounts to murder?"
Mr. Armstrong:—" I say, my lord, that, at the least,it amounts
to manslaughter." The case then proceeded, and sever a: wit-
nesses were examined, from whose testimony it appeared that,
on Sunday the 25th of November last, the deceased and several
other persons were assembled together at a beer-shop kept by
a person named Connerskey, in Manchester, where a large par-
ty, among whom were the two prisoners, entered the honse and
made an attack upon the deceased and his friends, one of whom
took refuge in the cellar. The deceased was knocked down and
O'Neale jumped upon his back; he then got into the yard and
seized a mop-handle, with which he defended himself resolutely
for some time, but was at length overpowered by numbers, and
severely beaten by both the prisoners and others of their party,
who ultimately left him extended on the ground in a state of
insensibility. -He was afterwards taken to the Infirmary and
for some time appeared to be recovering, in consequence of
which the parties who had been taken into custody for partici-
patingin the outrage were discharged. On the Bth of December,
however, he suffered a relapse, and died on the 10th of inflamma-
tion of the brain, upon which, after death, a quantity of matter was
found extravasated. The learned judge having summed up the
case,the jury, after consulting together a few minutes, returned a
verdict of guilty against both the prisoners. His lordship then ob-
served; that the case was one of the most brutal that he had ever
heard, and he had doubted much within himself, whether it was
not bis duty to stop the case and direct a bill for murder to be
preferred to the grand jury, which he should have done had he
not considered that it was always better not to proceed to
the extremity of the law when it could well be avoided. It
would, however, be unsafe to others of his Majesty's subjects,
and, therefore, improper to allow the prisoners auy longer to
remain in this country, wherefore the sentence of the Court
was that they should be transported beyond the seas, for the
term of their natural lives.

MINT CASE.-William Howard, 45, and John Smith, 25, were
convicted upon an indictment charging them with having
feloniously in their possession at Wham, on the 12th of
November last, a mould of Plaister of Paris, on which were
mad and impressed two impressions of the similituue of
sixpence.—Sentence deferi ed.

NISI PRIUS COURT—Tut.spAy.

13EFORE !OR. BARON GURNEY

One hundred and forty-four Cilll6CS have been entered for
trial, of which seven that were undefended were disposed of to-
day. The following was the only one tried:—
MMUS AND OTHERS' ASSIGNEES t. STUBBS AND OTHERS.

• The defendants in this case were creditors of a person named
Davis, residing at Birmingham, against whom they had reco-
vered a verdict in an action at law for £271, the amount of his
debt to them. Before, however, they had entered up judgment,
a docket was struck against him, and, being aware of that fact,
they entered into a composition with him, by which they agreed
to take 12s. in the pound, in full discharge of their claim, which
he accordingly paid them—amounting to £l6l. A commission
having been afterwards sued out against him, this action was
brought by his assignees to recover that sum on the ground of
the payment having been unduly made, to the prejudice of the
bankrupt's other creditors.—Verdict,/'or the
'1 he celebrated \VU cause—Due on the demise of TATHAIU
O. Wl:win, has been entered in the third list, and is expected
to occupy several days at the close of these assizes.
WEDNESDAY.
The causes tried to-day have been singularly destitute of
terest.

HOYLE V. FEATHEKSTONIIMIGH

This was an action brought by a corn-dealer living at Roch-
dale, against a coach-proprietor at Chorley, to recover damages
for an injury done to a mare belonging to the plaintiff, by a
coach beionOng to the defendant, through the alleged careless-
ness or negligent driving of the coachman.
Mr. Serjeant JONES, with Mr. BRANDT, conducted the case
for the plaintiff, and Mr. PoLtocx for the defendant.
It appeared that, on the 2nd of August last, a man in the service
of the plaintiff was sent to take the mare in question to Chorley,
and not being used to riding, was directed by his master to be
sure tokeep on the proper (left-hand) side of the road. In going
up a hill, at some distance from Chorley, he was met by the
coach belonging to the defendant, which runs between Ch;rley
and Bolton. The coach was descending the hill, at the rate of
about six miles an hour; there was a turn to the right in going
down the hill, om that part of the road, and the ground on the
left was much more worn and out of repair than on the right,
which caused the coachman to keep rather more to the off than
the near side. The distance between the coach and the foot-
way on the off side was 2 yards and a few inches, and on the
near side there was a clear road way of about 23i or 3 yards.
The plaintiff's man was riding close to the footway on his left
or the off side of the coach, and as the coach was passing the
mare shyed and turned away, placing her fore feet on the foot-
way, which was ten inches above the level of the road, and
the roller bolt of the splinter bar striking her in the flank,
wounded her very severely. She was taken immediately to a
stable aliout fifty yards from the spot where the accident
happened, and remained there a fortnight under the care of
a farrier. The defendant was informed of the accident soon
after it occurred, and went to see the mare, and desired that all
possible care should be taken of her. On the Monday follow-
ing, the plaintiff's son called upon him, when he expressed his
sorrow for what had happened, and hoped that the plaintiff
would not be hard upon him ;" and said he was willing to
pay what was reasonable for the damage, adding that the mare
would be none the worse for what had happened for his work,
and, therefore, he thought the best thing the plaintiff could do
would be to let him have her at a fair valuation. The plaintiff,
in answer to this proposal said that the mare was a favourite
animal of his, and had no wish to part with her, and refused
to take less than 1.30 for her. The defendant conceiving that
sum to be much more than she was worth, would not give it,
and this action was the consequence.
Verdict/'or the Defendant.
None of the other cases tried presented any thing worth
reporting.