The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-03-28 00:00:00

SOUTH LANCASHIRE ASSIZES

These Assizes commenced on Friday, before Barons
Alderson and Rolfe. At half-past two o'clock the former
entered the Crown Court, attended by the High Sheriff,
Sir T. G. Hesketh, Bart., his curate, the Mayor of the
town, and others. The Commission was opened in the
usual form, after which his lordship attended divine ser-
vice at St. George's Church. On his return, the Court
resumed, and the following gentlemen were sworn of

THE GRAND JURY

John Ireland Blackbarne, Esq.,Warrington, foreman

Reece Bevan, Esq., Freckleton;Wigar.
James Bonnie, Esq., Heathfield.

William Earle; Esq., Abercromby-square, Liverpool.
James Fenton, Esq., Bamford Hall, Rochdale.
John Frederick Foster, Esq.. The Priory, Sale, Manchester.
John Grundy, Esq., Culwood Lodge, Manchester.
Alexander Fowden Haliburton, Esq., Whitby-le-Wigan.
John Pemberton Heywood, Esq., Liverpool.

David Hodgson, Esq:„Fiverpodl

Hugh Horiby, Esq., Waveriree, Liverpool.
Thomas Berry Horsfall, Esq., Mayor of Liverpool,

James Lawrence, Esq., Park-bill, Liverpool.
Robert Lomax, Esq.. Lomax Fold, Bolton.
Thomas Parr, Esq., Grappenhall Heys, Warrington.
John Rosson, Esq., Moorhall, Ormskirk.
Clement Royds, Esq., Rochdale.
Malcolm Nugent Ross, Esq., Astley Hall, Manchester,
Richard Bryan Smith, Esq., Lydiate, Ormskirk.
Samuel Taylor, Esq., Eccleston Hall, Prescot.

Matthew WilsOn, junior, M.P.,'Eshton, Skipton
Henry Woods, Esq., Wigan.
. _ . . .

The proclamation against vice, &c., having been read,
the learned judge addressed the Grand Jury.
. .

His LourisniP said that he had had little time to read
the depositions, and could therefore give the grand jury
very little advice. He alluded particularly to a case of
murder, pointing out the manner in which they should
view it as regarded the law. The weapon used was not
one of deadly kind, such as a pistol or gun, but it might
be made deadly by its violent use. The question was
whether there was any excuse for the violence used. He
then alluded to the case of the child murder, stating that
In law it must be clearly proved that the child was born
alive, and was entirely separated alive from the mother.
If they were not satisfied of this, the crime would be only
concealment of birth. The other cases in the calendar
were not of a nature to require any directions from him
(the learned judge). There was, however, one on which
he felt it his duty to offer a few observations to the grand
jury. It was one of that very unfortunate description
arising out of persons being employed with arms for the
preservation of game. His lordship was very sorry to find
crimes of that sort increasing, as undoubtedly they were.
He had come from art assizes where two men had been
convicted with the crime of murder, in connection with
the preservation game. He (the learned Judge) did not
know whether they would have to suffer or not; that would
depend upon the mercy of the crown ; but it was awful to
consider the consequences which arose from the present
system ; and it was desirable to ascertain whether some
means or other could not be adopted to ameliorate it. He
could not but think that excessive preservation of game in
many parts of the country was little less than laying traps
for crime, and to such persons the observation of St. Paul
might well be repeated,—" If meat make my brother
to offend, I will eat no flesh, while the world standeth,
lest I make my brother to offend." Surely what is
said of that may be very properly applied to the excessive
preservation of game. He need say no more on that point,
for he trusted he was speaking to Christian gentlemen.
There were some other matters going on in the world, to
which he might well allude, because every one must feel
some apprehension for the result, and in which the grand
jury might be called upon to take part. Disturbances had
occurred in different parts of the country, and the duty
might devolve upon some of them to preservethe peace of
their districts. If so called upon, all he had to say was—
do it firmly, but at the same time do it kindly. Let there
be that mixture of firmness with kindness, which, whilst
it convinced transgressors that the law would be main-
tained, at the same time won their approbation and esteem.
If reforms were called for, and there was no country in
which they were not required, let a spirit of kindness and
conciliation be shown towards those who called for them,
which would have the effect of uniting altogether in defence
of all that is dear to us—our liberties—our lives—our
laws, because he really believed there was no country in
which we enjoy all these in such perfection. Above all,
they should endeavour to convince the lower classes of
society, that they above all were most interested in the
preservation of order. They depended upon labour for
support—labour depended upon capital for payment, and
labour would not be paid unless peace was preserved. In
that unfortunate country to which he alluded—unfortu-
nate, because of the effects which had been produced—
he did not mean to offer any remarks upon the change
which had taken place there, though he would not refrain
from looking forward to the result with anxiety—in that
country, The first effort had produced suffering to the poor
—the Savings' Bank had stopped payment—workmen had
lost their wages—they were the first to suffer, and he
hoped their fate would be a warning to those for whom
these observations were intended. If so, the instruction
would not be thrown away. He said it in kindness to
them, and with a sincere wish for their welfare. His
lordship then dismissed the grand jury to their duties.
The trials then proceeded.
FORGERY.

Edward Wilson, who was found guilty at the last
assizes of having filled up a blank cheque, at Liverpool,
for a greater amount than he was authorised to do by his
master, was brought up for judgment.—Mr. Baron Alder-
son said the case of the prisoner had been reserved for
the opinion of the judges, the question being whether the
offence amounted to forgery, or obtaining money under
false pretences. The opinion of the judges was that the
crime amounted to forgery. But under all the circum-
stances, the learned judge before whom the case was tried
(Mr. Justice Coltman) did not wish to punish the offence
with severity.—Sentence, to be imprisoned three calendar
months.