The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-09-05 00:00:00

REGINA V. LAWSON.

Mr. BAINES, with whom was Mr. Townsend, stated,
that the present prosecution was on behalf of Mr. Baker,
high constable of Cheshire, for a libel on his character,
published in the Bolton Free Press and the Bolton Chro-
nicle. He then went over the facts of the case. The pro-
secutor, Mr. Baker, was high constable of Cheshire. In
1842 a vacancy appeared likely to take place with regard
to the superintendency of police in the town of Bolton, and
Mr. Baker and a person named Boyd were candidates.
The defendant, who is a tradesman in Bolton, was a mem-
ber of the town council, and connected with the watch
committee; and it appeared that, in advocating the claims
of Boyd, he made some remarks, at one of the meetings,
reflecting on the character of Baker, to the effect that, if
there were no robberies, he (Baker) would manufacture
them and put the public to the expense of prosecutions ;
that money had, also, been paid to commit robberies, of
which the prosecutor was cognizant. The speech was
published in the two papers above alluded to : it had been
dictated by the defendant to a person named Charles Al-
dred, who wrote down the speech, and afterwards brought
the proof, and the defendant read it over. The object of
the prosecutor was merely to set his character right with
the public, which character, if the present charge were
allowed to pass, would, probably, be most seriously injured.
Mr. WILKiNs said he did not stand up to find fault with
the prosecutor. On behalf of the defendant he had to say,
that he (the defendant) said himself that the report bad
been exaggerated by the party who came for it. All that
he intended was to attribute to the prosecutor indiscretion
and over zeal. In supporting th claims of Boyd he might
have disparaged those of the prosecutor; but he never
supposed that he (the prosecutor) would be wicked enough
t,) concoct a felony to put money in his own pocket. The
learned gentleman hoped the declaration he had made on
the part of the defendant would be deemed sufficient.
Mr. BAINES said, if the defendant would plead guilty,
they would be satisfied.
The learned JUDGE observed, that a man might be in.
volved in the legal consequences of a libel without intend-
ing it, _ _ _

The defendant then, under the advice of his counsel,
agreed to withdraw his plea and plead guilty, observing
that, although he pleaded guilty by the advice of his coun-
sel, he was not guilty.
Mr. BAINES observed, that the defendant would be
liable to be called up for judgement at any time.
His LORDSHIP observed, that the defendant had with-
drawn his plea of not guilty with the understanding that
he was not to be called up for judgement at all. He was
only guilty in a legal point of view.

SENTENCES.
The following persons were brought up to receive sen-
tence :

John Leeming, for stealing post letters, transported for
life.
Charles Knight, for forgery and bigamy, 10 years each
for the charges of forgery, and 7 years for the bigamy ;
altogether, 27 years' transportation.
Joseph Smith and John Briarley, for burglary, and
James Howard, for burglary, 10 years' transportation.
James Lunt, for stabbing, 16 months' imprisonment.
Lawrence Williams, for horse stealing 16 months.
William Tyson and William Alexander, for forgery,
2 years.

Joseph Hyde and Lawrence Williams, for horse-steal-
ing, 18 months.
The following prisoners, convicted of bigamy, were
brought up and sentenced to six months' imprisonment :
—George Walker, Samuel Lamb, Edward Gill, James
Saycell, John Hardman, William Jack, James Honey-
ford, James Sumner, and Eliza Barry.
The whole of the Crown business being disposed of,
his Lordship discharged the Jury, at the same time thank-
ing them for their services.
The Court was adjourned at two o'clock.