The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-01-22 00:00:00

EX PARTE COBBETT.

FRIDAY, Jan. 18.—Mr. J. Cobbett Moved for a rule to show
cause why a criminal information should not be filed against
Edward Baines and Edward Baines, jun. printers and publish-
ers of the Leeds Mercury, for alibel on Mr. Wm. Cobbett, M.P.
for Oldham. The libel in question consisted of a 'paragraph
beaded " Uneertificated Bankrupt." It was stated from
the affidavits, that part of the paragraph in question first ap-
peared in an evening paper, and was in the form of questions
by a correspondent—viz : first, whether Mr. Cobbett was in-
eligible to take his seat in parliament, from his being an un-
certificated bankrupt? and secondly, if a friend lent a candi-
date an estate to qualify him, whether that estate would not be
forfeited to his assignees if he were an uncertificated bankrupt?
These questions had been copied by the Leeds Mercury, with
the addition of confirmation to the first—namely, that Mr.
Cobbett had been a bankrupt, but had not obtained his certifi-
cate. The affidavit of Mr. Cobbett and his solicitor stated in
substance that he (Mr. Cobbett) had been a bankrupt in 1820,
but that he had subsequently obtained his certificate, and added
that Mr. Edward Baines the elder must have been aware of that
fact, for a short time afterwards he had congratulated Mr. Cob-
bett on his having obtained his certificate. Under these cir-
cumstance's, Mr. Cobbett, conceiving that the statement in the
Mercury was malicious, and calulated to injure him, had thought
proper to make this application.—Rule Nisi granted.

SALFORD SESSIONS, SATURDAY, JAR. 12.

CURIOUS. CASE-A MAN TRANSPORTED FOR STEALING HIS OWN

PROPERTY.

Richard Harris was indicted. for stealing, at Manchester, on
the 24th of December, one box, the property of Thomas Pickr
ford and Co., carriers. This was one of the most curious cases
tried during the sessions, the prisoner being in fact indicted for
committing a felony upon his own property, under the following
circumstances. On the 24th of December, the prisoner called
at Messrs. Pickfords' warehouse, in Manchester, to inquire
whether a box had arrived for him, which he expected trom
Birmingham. He was told by the porter that it was in the
warehouse, and was directed to go into the office, and pay the
carriage before it was given up to him. He went into the of-
fice, when he inquired from one of the clerks what the carriage
amounted to, but did not pay the amount, saying, that he would
call again about it. A fe* days after this, the prisoner again
called at Messrs. Pickfords' warehouse, and said he had brought
the money for the carriage of the box, and wished to take it
away with him ; but, on searching the warehouse, the box could
no where be found. At this, he professed to be in a violent
rage, and threatened, that if the box was not found he should
forthwith commence an action against the carriers to recover
the value of it, and with this determination he left the ware-
house. Inquiries were then made among the clerks and por-
ters in the warehouse, the result' of which was a suspicion that
the prisoner had carried away the box at the time of his first
visit to the warehouse. A search warrant was obtained, and on
searching his lodgings, the box was there found; emptied of its
contents. These were the facts proved against the prisoner;
and in his defence he called a boy named Hughes, whom he re-
presented as an orphan, taken under his care for charity, and
who swore that the box found in the prisoner's lodgings had
come from Liverpool full of dirty linen, and that no other box
had been received by him since he came to Manchester. The
boy, however, contradicted himself so grossly in his cross-ex-
amination, that his story was totally unworthy of credit, and
his falsehood was more fully established by Barke, the p.olice--
officer, who said that when he told Hughes that the prisoner
was in custody, he said, " Well, he is a good fellow, and what-
ever he says, I'll swear to." The certificate of a previous con-
viction of the prisoner, under the name of Richardson, was put
in, and he confessed that he was the person alluded to, and that
he had so told the turnkey when he was first committed.
The Chairman was proceeding to sum up the case, when the
Foreman of the Jury said, that they were quite satisfied upon
the facts, and only wished to know what was the law—and whe-
ther a man could commit felony upon his own property.
The Chairman said there was no doubt that such a felony
might be committed. When goods were delivered to a carrier
for the purpose of being carried, they became the property of
that carrier until they were delivered to the person to whom they
were directed; and if that person should obtain them from the
carrier in a fraudulent manlier, and with the intention of after-
wards charging the value of the goods, that was a felony
in the eye of the law.—The jury returned a verdict of guilty
against the prisoner, when the following colloquy took place:—
The Chairman,--Prisoner, are you the person who corres-
ponded with Mr. Spring Rice some years ago ?
Prisoner.—Yes, Sir, I am.
Chairman.—Before whom were you tried?
Prisoner_—Before Mr. Thomas Starkie.
Chairman,—Yes, and Mr. Thomas Starkie had a great deal
of trouble with. you. You followed him to London, and plagued
him so much, that he was obliged to go to one of the public
offices and swear the peace against you. I myself had a great
deal of trouble with you about that case, the whole of the cor-
re.spondence with Mr. Spring Rice being trausinitted to me.

Prisoner.—But you know I was deranged at that tieta Jr.
The Chairman then consulted with his brother magiArate
as to the punishment to be inflicted upon the prisoner, and
passing sentence he remarked—"l should have thought, p 1
soner, that the imprisonment you formerly underwent, won}.'
have been a sufficient warning to induce you to abandon UV
course of life. You are a man of very considerable and ver,
acute intellect, and the address you have displayed in this affai
shews yoti to be a clever man. Your offence has rendered VI
liable to be transported for life, but the court will not got
length, although they have had considerable difficulty 11
coming to that decision. Your conduct in gaol has been vett
bad, and you have displayed so much address in committivl
this offence, that we cannot do less than sentence you to 0
transported for fourteen years.