The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-04-04 00:00:00

April 4, 1848.

LANCASHIRE SPRING ASSIZES

Ps CROWN COURT.—TUESDAY.
7,4 SHOOTING WITH INTENT TO MURDER.
Atm..Thg, Harrison, 35, Adam Gillibrand, 30, John.
livi-'eY, 55, and Joseph Eccles, 21, were indicted with
it Of, at Tarleton, on the Ist February, feloniously shot
Anll.; pert Cookson, a gamekeeper in the service of George
hito."„,Y Leekek, Esq., near Rufford, with intent to kill
Went he Prisoners, with three others not in custody,
appu.tpaching upon the premises which Cookson. was
watcherted to watch, and when the latter, with other
barrei,s, went up to them, Gillibrand fired a doubl-
bis b led gun at him, and about 130 shots were lodged in
approody. The chief witness against the prisoners was an
Ins named Halliday, on whose unsupported evidence
son 4ashiP refused to direct a conviction. 'I he pin-
k, cts were then arraigned on the charge of being found
la brain grounds armed. The same objection applied
case, and the prisoners were consequently acquitted.
NANdbrah
SLAUGHTER.
j;atn Ashworth, 33, was indicted for feloniously
drivfklllio! Colclo ugh, at Bury, on the 28th Feb., by
effect"g that th over her with a cart. The evidence was to the
totee prisoner, who was drunk at the time, did
se,t!eltise sufficient caution. He was found guilty, and
eneed to one month's imprisonment.
HIGHWAY ROBBERY.
tlieteT"B Weisby, 23, and James Morris, 32, were in-
tolt for the assault and robbery of John Nuttall, at
took", on the night of the 19th of January last. They
alar awaY the prosecutor's bat, but in consequence of an
werteof outheY were prevented from taking his money. They
poazarttsi , h
twzieisg4ltye, and a former conviction being proved
was sentenced to fifteen years' trans-
' on; Morris to twelve months' imprisonment.
DISMISSAL OF THE JURY.
intAo.t the close of the above trial the Grand Jury oa_me.
c°llrt, and announced to his Lordship that they had
thseP:B,e.d ef all the business before them. They were
utschargrd.

R
BURGLARY.
"17:4/4 Slater, 26, was indicted with having, on t_h_a.
night of the 9th December, feloniously entered the dwell
stolen of Robert Sutton. a farmer at Widnes, ands
founen therefrom
. er Sir Ch 1 a cheese
and other articles. He va!
suo:dmdeV.t.iltYal riansotlsented to eighteen months' impri7
er Was a pensioner,. and had served
him of L. ar es Napier. His conviction will deprive
his pension in future.

, appearancei_
oia//ey 35, 'and
:0
en es g BURGLARY.
able Gore, a youth of respect-
thewe indicted with having, at Blackrod,
7iliv ni;ht of die 24th February, burglariously entered
house of James Massey, and stolen £2 10.5.,
lain cu, and other articles. They were also charged with
the g Personal violence towards the prosecutor. None ?
;") property was found upon the prisoners, and their
Ratification not being complete, they were acquitted.
117 .
. m• Robinson 26 and William Rodgers, 20, were
d
14dict • ' 26,
Band
jes,„ with having burglariously entered the house of

148.ePh Dobson, and stolen two chats and one waistcoat,
p lell were found pledged at Warrington for 9s. Both
befog
were found guilty, and a previous conviction
eing proved against Robinson, he was sentenced to 15
,e4l'B' transportation ; Rodgers, two years' imprison-

NISI PRIUS COURT.—TUESDAY.
02.ANDISH v. Ross.—This was an action brought by
djuam Standish, late sheriff of the county, against the
....,"'ittidant, Thomas Ross, for the recovery of the value of
rht ain goods which the defendant had sold, but which of
ht ht to have been to the ,in hie of damages obtainedsurren indered an action triedsheriff at the
irmteill°ol, Assizes in the spring of 1846. The plaintiff
to- obsuited, with liberty to his counsel (Mr. Martin)
tirve for such a sum as the Court might think fit.
the P4,1;°11 v• AsirroN.—The declaration stated, that on
aed September, 1845, the defendant broke to pieces
ton §attered fifty 'panes of glass in certain houses be-
iatlil,g to the plaintiff, situated at Falesworth, near
w ilndenester. The defendant pleaded not guilty; that the
that the bore not in the possession of the plaintiff ; and
Bessio Ises were affixed to a certain close in the par-
to tilieoafutli,eadtndant. When the case had been par-
t() a refere diet was taken for the plaintiff, subject
mother and v."AvroN.—The parties in this action were
_
"7,
Pr
Which thp, so on, and the mother sought to recover x3u7el.
band's sOn Owed to her, as administratrix to her b
woioPerty. Re had been employed as manager
the
alills, near Manchester, carried. on by
at s
alarY of £2OO per year, in which capacity
Nlntt!nud to act up to October, 1847, whei.itheamoimt
Dube recovered was found to be owing by h
teall'aterlda admitted that the owed the money, but:
ta, „e-, that he vvas a partner. A verdict was returned
iontre plaintiff.
the Ppi"ll v• BaowNnivr.-,-The plaintiff is a trustee of
B,,lee's Tavern Building Society at Manchester, and
bee,cll.int to recover possession of a:title-deed which had
Uliadi'Lehosited as security for a loan of £360 to one
"ay Makin, and which deed subsequently made its
le4dan",` of the Society's box into the hands of the de-
with sk-',„ There was virtually no defence, and a verdict,
bt re,yr damages, was found for the plaintiff, subject to
ced to £4O if the deed were given up.

...._.
CROWN CO- URT.-WEDNES DAY

~,joh,,, BORGLAR'Y AT BOLTON.
'l,Ohn rii.C`?4,-., Anne Jonas, John Hickson, John
_Johnson,
",ere-',o,nie, Thomas Thornley, and Christopher Cox,
4' the indicted for having, at Bolton, on the night tkt- Indicted
thus
Janua last, burglariously brokr,
.an
Itl',vi 4'4, „t,tua dwelling 13.0.. a.
2011,;:,,0ien therefrom 100 y:rfdsjoirwoollen cloth and
`Q,arp.;,-,,`'...8 of velveteen, his property. A
ecosuani
said
(t''iliii''en.as with havi received 30 yards
titheNkilgoiving the same goy ave been stolen. The jury
Prisoner not g
* 'or ROBBERY.
r,t'te Se Johnston, Peter Parr, and Jonathan Potts,
pel:iitldicted with stealing from the. house of Mary
loebtlza,..4lol, of Darcy Lever, on the night of the 4th of
41. •'Y last, four 1.:10 Bank of England notes, eleven
71.1ilre,,eults, one gold watch, one gold chain, and one
foie hldict '
'en the Property of the said Mary Greenhalgh.
, t re„,,. ment also charged Samuel Harrison with hay-
'tee rivi_ed Part of the above property, knowing the
tlinliOty:°. have Part
been stolen. The prisoners pleaded not
h 4. chief it'nt Fogg, who
_turned ueen's evidence, wi.i,
nerl sitorue"rs against the prisoners.—His Lordship
Potts Joqett: the case i. a careful and lucid man-
transp'oratrladtionllll2ed
a_yeillsinct of guilty as regards Parr,
'l9n. Po was sentenced to ten years'
, and the other to seven years each.
; /lb, ROBBERY AT WIGAN.
Itlg hZ,"Urahain was indicted for breaking and en. ter-
ad s,-,ewelling-house of Luke Standring, at Wigan,
4 -4"ng two glasses and four plates, his property.
Ita, I• Monk conducted the prosecution ; the prisoner
It defended by Mr. Pollock.
Coh,aPpeared that the shop of Mr. Standripg, who is a
i :',eetioner, had been broken into by making an open-
-4,4° el the shutter, and two. glasses containing confection-
It"ild some plates with fruit, had been taken away.
ernPPeared that these glasses andplates were found
ThPtY
wat the house of the prisoner about ten days after.
The on the top shelf of a cupboard in his h oup
otii
ha '°ese had been visited and searched by the police for
not thenurpose about three days before, but they were
Part nrPerceived. They were now clearly identified as
tithe the Property which had been taken away at the
/ler the robbery.
tilae I°,!re the magistrates the prisoner stated that some
tone i'll'e the glasses were found at his house he had
te4" an earlY hour to a well in the lieighbourlieo_ for
wtl'eertiaci,e:'.4nd that he had there, beside thewellll(3),ouninde
het Cart 41 question ; that he had brought them
!e they and that they had been placed by his wife
Ir. t) ,Were found.
ham eore°4-°C; for the defence,
.contended that the jury
!Itaterne,:sen to come to the conclusion that the prisoner's
It wail was untrue From the nature of the robbery,
the sake
nue which would be committed by blioykes,
the
Priso„ eOf he sweetmeats, than bY person-
ttle 'el%
If these glasses had been takaento.rtheefsakliettolef
W°4l°lltents, they would probably, as being
Nild' be abandoned in the way described. The prisoner
!.0 th,,,lave o corroboration of his story. He had gone
14faiti well at an early h ur and his wife was, besid_e_seheisf
course
ceohil,dren, the only inmate of his house. Sh
1! : Rig LORDu'd not be called as a witness to
.prove it.
Ztthe 117,, suip in the course of summing up, said that
t tile 't,,genlyds in tlu' estion had been found by the prisoner
all ev esenbed, he would, one would think, have,
to
11:,ke of
this
mentioned so, no-ular calledua te
- show tls neighbours, who migit be ms
witnesses'
, kr PO at be had done so.
444; would stated that he was not aware such evi-
to th would b
Dri -e admissible, or that it would be competent
blente,- -sener to Prove that t he had made such a state-
-9f the to the modebv hi hhe Ind become possessd
la his PlePerty,
his ozv. favour. o
It w.. tiAld be hut his own statement in
1:1,eoe %%snip said he thought that if the prisoner,
,se t',:t4Y suspicion had fallen upon him, had proclaimed
Zeieh 1, °,l his finding the property, and the modei "ealtih"oo had become possessed of it, such statement
The a teeeivabl evidence in his favour.
illlilty. CrY, after some deliberation, found the prisener
To he i.,...
",Prisoned four calendar months.
aatkt NISI Kr,

k OF
P-CORT.-ESDAY.
°I4IBE OFU MARRIWAGDNEE - FURNIVAL t

ttßeli
R.
which
w an
Ilittteq
11?ttDI to hear this cause,
lady w action Was exci e
Ryder a Miss for, breach of promiseenotflommaarirawgaes• a Tmh.re
.
that b The d ,urnaval, and. the g___,
liviii.°th Partieat4
life. The lady wa
ages were laid at £5OO, and it was said
tberlaw until
reeseZoved in respectable
quaint eut to reside Y itTo2 ethct-park,
all ed with ‘,.. in Manchester,
n engraver, and h
*eked b, Atr. Ryder, who is a
mr. martin
where in
shethi s
becametown, atan_cdo-
..i4l fn. ',each was Committedac-
.hr
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins for the.
on the part or
418 eii rhe learned Sergeant stated, up
off wing to
the era, that the match had been broken
o ground for
the ;',,P2ie,e of the latter, and that there was no
erllia-1.91 of contract. 'Mr. Martin was content with thishe
tietiniiiie4on, and said the young lady did not bring
to
zikeewnivaitthshtehewvasienwootfinoabntayining money, but r". Y Consent, for the plaiwnatiyffaftorfaVBo. A verdict was
Thi GALLEY V. TAYLOR.
the 8 w 55 an action brought by Mrs. Charlotte Galley, as
a sorr:Prosenaive of her deceased husband,
letire(4l3tle on a guarantee given by the defenda4 te
Illso dee e PaVrnent of a debt due from one James MYIn ,
to recover
kr. Neiase, to Mr. Galley.
4144" tit. . artin Knowles Crompton appeared for the plain-,
M• (Attorney-General for the county)
It
~ '• Slinon for the defendant.
'441V1 that P. ;
IPrevious to
to the year 1842, Mr. Galley,