The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-04-07 00:00:00

POACHING AND ASSAULT

Samuel Cowburn, 39. convicted last week of poaching
with others, and violently assaulting a gamekeeper, was
brought up, and after a severe address from his lordship, was
sentenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for 18
months.

The court rose at a quarter past six o'clock. There re-
mained about 80 cases to be disposed off in this court.

NISI PRIUS COURT.-WEDNESDAY.

HOYLE V. HOWARD

This was an action to recover damages for injury done to
the plaintiff's property in Cheetham-street, Rochdale, by a
nuisance from the works of the defendant. Mr. Dundas and
Mr. Cowling appeared for the plaintiff, who is a corn-dealer;
Mr. Knowles, Mr. Wortley, and Mr. Hogging for the de-
fendant. After the .case had been opened, and the first
witness, who was the tenant of the plaintiff, had been ex-
amined, it was agreed between the parties that the defendant
should buy the plaintiff's premises at a valuation to be fixed
by a party to be named by the plaintiff. A nominal verdict
was consequently entered in favour of the plaintiff.

ACTION AGAINST THE SHERIFF.-RICHMOND V. FRANCE

This was an action in trover against the late High Sheriff
of this county. Mr. Rotch and Mr. Hardern appeared for
the plaintiff, Mr. Robert Richmond ; and defendant was re-
presented by Mr. Knowles and Mr. Crompton.
The plaintiff is a spirit dealer in this town, and the assignee
of 'William Halliday a bankrupt. It appeared that 1841 the
bankrupt took the Commercial Hotel in Dale-street, in this
town, from the previous tenant, whose name was Leicester.
Not having sufficient to purchase the whole stock, the bank-
rupt gave Mr. Leicester a warrant of attorney for the amount
which he was unable to pay. About six months afterwards,
Mr. Leicester put in an execution, under the warrant of
attorney, under which the Sheriff sold the goods to Mr.
Adam Eccles, a tanner, who was, in fact, the real defendant.
Mr. Eccles, willing to be a friend to Mr. Halliday, allowed
him to retain the property in his possession as reputed
owner, taking an assignment, and to carry on the business
as usual. Mr. Halliday continued the business a few months
longer; when Mr. Eccles becoming uneasy about his money
wished Mr. Halliday to give him a warrant of attorney upon
the goods. Mr. Halliday, by the advice of his attorneys,
gave Mr. Eccles a cognovit for £lOO, on Wednesday, the 30th
of March ; but on the following Friday Mr. Halliday found,
instead of being relieved from the pressure of his difficulties,
his goods seized under a warrant from the Sheriff. The
general creditors interfered, and on the 7th of April a fiat in
bankruptcy was issued; on the Bth, the provisional assignee
was appointed, and notices were served upon all parties con-
cerned that Mr. Halliday was a bankrupt. Notwithstanding
all this, the Sheriff sold all the goods ; to recover the value
of which the assignees brought the present action.
For the defendant it was contended that the sale was made
under the assignment to Mr. Eccles, to which a bill of sale
was attached, and not under the warrant of the sheriff. Pos-
session was taken under the assisgnment, before the warrant
was issued. The sale realized £412 55., of which
£256 3s. Ild. was paid to the landlord, Mr. Rigby Wason,
for rent ; and the difference, it was contended, was the pro.
perty of the plaintiff for the general benefit of the creditors
of the bankrupt. _ _ .

The jury, after retiring, returned a verdict for the plaintiff,
damages £156 Is. Id. ; costs, 40s.

TIIOVER

EDWARDS v. BIRD.—An undefended action, in trover, to
recover the value of a quantity of cases containing certain pro-
perty belonging to the plaintiff, which the defendant, it was
alleged, had improperly converted to his own use. Mr.
CROMPTON, for the plaintiff, stated that the plaintiff was a
military gentleman, who, upon retiring from the army, en-
tered into partnership with some parties in carrying on a
coal mine near Wigan. His occupation was to look after the.
business in Liverpool, where the defendant was employed in
collecting orders. The partnership in Wigan was dissolved,
and Captain Edwards was 'about to leave Liverpool for
another part of the country, when the defendant, in whose
possession the boxes in question were left, detained them on
the ground that a sum of money was owing to him for com-
mission on his collection of orders. .The learned counsel
said if the defendant would give the boxes up he would con-
sent to a verdict with nominal damages. After the examina-
tion of three witnesses, the jury returned a verdict for the
plaintiff,: damages, £29.

THOMPSON AND ANOTHER V. CROSSLKY.—The plaintiffs
are wine and spirit merchants in Liverpool, and the action
was brought against the defendant, a surgeon in Manchester,
to recover a balance of £6B for goods supplied and money
lent. The action was undefended, and a verdict was re-
turned for the amount claimed.
BENTON V. PLUMPTON.—The plaintiff in this case is a
house and land agent in Liverpool, and the defendant is Mr.
Plumpton, one of the representatives, in the Town Council, of
West Derby ward. The action was brought to recover the
sum of £132 Ns., commission on the !sale of a quantity of
land by the defendant to a Mr. Gosling, ni the
year 1839,f0r
£5,300. The defence rested on the ground that the plaintiff
had not introduced Mr. Gosling to the defendant ; but it
failed ; and the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for
£132 ; costs 401.

MADDOCKS v. BALL.—An action to recover damages for
an illegal distraint upon the plaintiffs premises in Southport.
After the case had proceeded some time, Mr. Knowles, who
represented the defendant, said it was clear some mistake had
been made, and he would therefore consent o❑ the part of
his client for a verdict for the plaintiff, with .1.:10 damages.
This offer was acceded to, and a verdict for that amount was
returned for the plaintiff.

CROWN COURT.—YESTERDAY.
His Lordship entered the court at a quarter past nine,

MURDER.
Mary Hunter, aged 29, was placed at the bar, charged
with the wilful murder of John Hunter, at Manchester.
Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Monk were for the prosecution ;
and Mr. Joseph Pollock for the prisoner.
Mr. WILKINS stated the case to the jury. He opened by
making a very feeling and eloquent address, alluding hu-
manely to the awful position in which the prisoner stood
before them, and calling upon them to discharge their solemn
duty conscientiously to her and to their country. He then
narrated the leading particulars of the case, as they after-
wards appeared in the evidence, recapitulated the facts that
bore most heavily against the prisoner, and concluded by
solemnly disclaiming all attempt in what he had said, or
should say, to add a prejudice that would weigh, even as a
hair, in inducing them to convict her. He was heard with
painful and silent attention.
Alice Belshaw, a girl, said, I live at Harrison's-terrace,
Ancoats. On Saturday fortnight and two days, before going
to the coroner, I saw the prisoner in the street. She asked
me to go with her as far as Dr. Howard's. I asked her what
she wanted there. She said she was almost Sneed away with
twitch clocks and mice, and wanted some arsenic. I went
with her. Dr. Howard keeps a druggists' shop in Ancuats-
lane. When she got me to the door, she said I must say that
I lived with her, if they asked me anything. She asked me
if I would say so, and I said I would not mind. We went in
together. She asked for arsenic, but I can't tell for what .
quantity. She asked a young boy who was the shop. He
asked her what it was for. She said for twitch-clocks and
mice. He asked her where her witness was, and she pointed
to me and said, " that is her." The boy said I cannot let you
have it, she is too young. " Come," said the prisoner, " can't
you let me have it, she lives in the same house as I do." He
did not let her have it, and we left the shop together. She
stopped at the door, and said will you take anything to drink.
I went with her to the Abercrombie, and I had two penny-
worth of gin, and she half-a-nuggin of rum. I never saw
her before that time. That is the youug man I saw in the
shop.

Cross-examined by Mr. JOSEPH POLLOCK.—It was quite
light when we went into the shop. (The witness here said
spontaneously, that when the prisoner mentioned arsenic she
looked in her face so as to know him again if anything hap-
pened.) She stopped at the door; she did not try to get
away, or show a desire for concealment.
Thomas Wolfenden examined by Mr. WILKINs.---I am
apprentice to Mr. Howard. I remember about four o'clock
on the 12th November, two women came in. One asked fui
arsenic, and referred to the other. I refused, as the witness
was too young. She said it was to poison vermin, and men-
tioned twitch-clocks. I believe sh 2 said the other lived with
her. He could not identify the witness nor the prisoner.
Mr. Davies, druggist, Travis-street, examined.—My shop
is about 200 yards from the house of the deceased. I had
known the prisoner. From ten to fourteen days before the
inquest prisoner came to the shop and asked me for some
arsenic. She did not ask for any particular quantity then.
I asked what she wanted with it. She said to destroy mice.
I asked her if she did not keep a cat. She said no, she was
frightened of cats. I did not give it her, telling her I did not
sell it without a witness. She did not mention her husband.
I told her to fetch her husband. She went away. She came
to the shop again that day with another person, Mrs. Dunn
(now present). She said she had brought her as a witness.
I asked her it she (Mrs. D.) knew what prisoner wanted, and
she (Mrs. D.) said it is all right, it is for the arsenic. Mrs.
Hunter asked me how I sold it. I said id. per ounce. She
said let me have two ounces. I let her have it. It was
wrapped up in two papers, in one parcel. I wrote upon it
" poison" only. While I was making it up, she said I sup-
pose there is as much there as would poison a person, and I
said yes, a dozen persons. I cautioned her not to let it come
in the way of children. It was not in a metallic state. By the
JUDGE.—No, it was in powder—arcenous acid. That is not
metallic. She said she would soon make use of it in oatmeal
balls and put it in the cupboard. I have sometimes admi-
nistered medicine to her children when they were poorly.
No one came to me on the 25th November to say that Hun-
ter was ill.

Cross-examined.—She made no mention of her husband.
I have not given a different account from. what I now give.
She went away, as I inferred, to bring her husband. Arse-
nic is purchased for rats, mice, beetles, twitch-clocks, bugs,
&c., and is frequently sold for that purpose. On the 27th
November she came again to me, between seven and nine in
the evening, for some mustard. She seemed in great trouble.
I asked her what was the matter. She said her husband was
very ill. I asked her what was the matter with him. She

aid she did not know, and that the doctor had ordered a

mustard bath for him. She did not mention a doctor's
name. To the best of my remembrance she did not mention
Dr. Harrison's name. I swear she did not.
Re-examined.-1 never heard of deceased's illness till
Sunday night. I said nothing about porridge. I always re-
quire a witness in selling arsenic, or require them to bring
the colouring matter it is to be mixed with, and mix it with
it myself. By the JUDGE.—The prisoner was not intoxicated
when she got the arsenic.
Elizabeth Dunn.—l lived at the time in Walton-street.
I remember the Friday on which John Hunter fell ill. On
Saturday before (the 19th) I saw the prisoner between six
and seven in the evening. She came to my house. She was
not in the habit of coming. She asked me to go an errand
for her,—to go to the pawnshop for her hitsband's clothes.
I went to comply with her request. She said she was sorry
I was so badly off, and had such a family to contend with.
She gave me twopennyworth of whiskey. We got to Davis's.
She had not before mentioned Davies. She said, how do

you sell that stuff, Mr. Davies, for we are very near s2zeived
out of the house with twitch-clocks? She said her husband
had gone to her club,—the Odd Fellows. Mr. Davies took
the drawer out and asked how much would do, and she said
about two ounces. She asked the price ;he said Id. She
asked him if he would please to write on it what it was, and
he wrote on it " poison." She asked him to put it in two
papers, and he did. She asked, " Would this poison a per-
son." He said, " Yes, a dozen of people." We went
away and she gave me a pennyworth of beer. She said she
would come for me again. On the Monday morning follow-
ing she sent for me. I went and asked her then if that stuff
was of any service in destroying the twitch-clocks. She said,
" What stuff, my dear," and when I told her she said, " I
lost it on Saturday night, when I parted from you."
Cross-examined.—l do not recollect saying when she
asked for the arsenic that it would be all right.

Elizabeth Bedford, a girl of eight years-of age, was then
called. In reply to Mr. Wilkins, she said that God would
send her to the bad place if she told lies.
Cross-examined by Mr. Pollock.-1 was only told to say
that this morning in the house. I was told so before by the
same person. (The witness appeared to be quite confused.)
I have seen the person since in the court, but I don't re.
him now. He wore a jacket like a factory man. No other
person told me so before. ih,„
Re-examined.—l atteng%lSunday school, and the clergy-
man talks of God and Heaven. I learn the catechism. A
lady tells us it is wicked to tell lies. A gentleman present,
whom I now see, told me it was wicked to tell lies. That
was when I went before the gentlemen (the grand jury.)
By the JUDGE.—What do you think will be done to you
if you take an oath, and then tell a lie ?—lf I told a lie I
believe I should go to hell. Hell is a place of torment.
She was then sworn, and placed on the table of the court.
She said in reply,
I knew Mr. Hunter, and remember when he was taken ill.
It was on Friday night. I used to go there to nurse. Mr.
Hunter used to come home to his supper at six o'clock. I
had been there that day. I went at tan o'clock in the fore-
noon, and stopped till Mr. Hunter came to his supper. I
took the children out before he came. Mrs. Hunter told me
to take them out. It was about half-past five. Mrs. Hunter
was then cleaning, Mrs. Hunter put their bonnets on. She
told me to take them and play with them. I took them to
the top of the street. She told me to bring them back about
seven o'clock. I stayed out till about half-past seven with
them. While I was out I met my sister Caroline, who took
the children from me. In about five minutes after I went to
Mr. Hunter's. I did not see him. I saw Mrs. Hunter.
Mr. Hunter was up stairs. I often went there to play and
nurse. There were two children. I have seen Mr. Hunter
eat his supper. He had it generally as soon as he came
home. He had milk porridge, with a bit of meal in. When
he took it he had
generally one child on his knee and the
other beside of him. He often gave them some of the por-
ridge. If the children were out at the time, their porridge
was put in the oven. Mrs. Hunter used to clean on a
Friday. She had sent me out before with the children when
she was cleaning; and she put their bonnets on. She was
generally cleaning before at three in the afternoon, and was
cleaning then, and sent them out again. They had not been
so long back that day when she sent them out again. When
I went out with them there was water to boil on the fire in
an iron pan that was used for porridge. The porridge was
made with a little water, and a little meal and milk. Mrs.
Hunter put the meal in the porridge when he came in. Sire
put it in with her hand. She had frequently sent roe out
with the children after dark. I have before taken the
children out at supper time. When they returned they had
their porridge, which their father gave them in basins.
Sarah Street sworn.—l am wife of a warehouseman. I
knew Hunter and his wife about three months before his
decease. I occasionally went to their house. On the even-
ing of the 25th November, I heard somebody vomiting in
that house. Soon after, the prisoner came for me—about
twenty minutes after 1 heard the vomiting. She said, " Will
you come in? Mr. Hunter is very sick." I went, and found
him vomiting at the slop-stone. I asked had he the bowel
complaint? He complained of pain in his bowels, and said
his throat was very hot. He said he thought it was from
Cayenne pepper or snuff. I held his head. Prisoner came
in and said, " John thought it was his porridge that had
made him ill," and he said, " Give the porridge to the dog."
She (prisoner) said if it was not fit for him it was not fit for
the dog, and she had thrown it away. She said it was in a
basin, and she had thrown that away too, into the midden.
She said she had tasted it herself, and that it had made her
sick. She said she had taken about two spoonfuls. She did
not say what quantity the deceased took. The deceased vo-
mited into a tub in the slop-stone. There was much vomit
in the tub. Mrs. Hunter threw it away into the midden.
She emptied the contents of the tub twice. He said in her
presence that he would require help. Prisoner in conse-
quence went out, and stopped about half an hour. On re-
turning, she said neither Mr. Lonsdale nor Mr. Cook, the
druggists, were in. Deceased was then in the petty. He
was very sick, but could not throw up anything. I and a
neighbour assisted him out of the petty. He also complained
of his stomach. The prisoner did not offer to go for any
other doctor. I thought she had had some liquor—she cried
so and made such a noise. Late in the evening a neighbour
brought Mr. Willis, surgeon. He came about nine o'clock.
Deceased made use of the pot. The prisoner emptied it once.
Mr. Willis saw the last motion. I stayed till 3 in the morning.
Mr. Lonsdale, Mr. Hunter's doctor, came next day. Hunter
mentioned the porridge to him in prisoner's presence. She
said she had taken some of it, and it had made her sick.
Mr. Lonsdale said lie did not wish to attend deceased, as
Mr. Harrison had been called. I noticed what the deceased
had vomited. lie vomited carrots out in round pieces. I
observed no curd in the fluid. On Thursday, the 10th of
November, prisoner came to my house, and sighed very
heavily. I asked her what troubled her. She said, " No,Y
Mrs. Strut, it is a dream that I dreamt." She said she
thought they had brought John home dead,and lie was not well
himself, and fancied he he would not live long. I never
heard him complain ; I thought him a healthy man. I never
heard them cornplain of twitch-clocks or mice. We have none
in our house, which is next door. Prisoner had never spoken
to me of arsenic. She had no cat. Prisoner brought a box
to our house the day after deceased died. It was locked, and
afterwards delivered to Jackson. Mr. Hunter told me some'
time before that they had money in the savings' bank. I
went the day after he died with her to the bank to get her
name put in. (A small box was produced, containing a bank
book.) I have been shown this book. It appears that there
is £66 due to them. The prisoner, I believe, cannot read,
and I did not read the balance to her. There is a pawn
ticket in the box, which prisoner also left with me.
imThe
unporretamnati.nder of the witness's evidence, in chief, was
Cross-examined.—Mr. Hunter and the prisoner lived very
comfortably together. I never heard them quarrel. The
prisoner was a very good mother to her children. I always
thought her more attentive to her children and husband than
most people in her line of life. She took a deal of pains to
make him comfortable. She kept her house very clean and
neat, and took time over it. It was her great distress at the

time she called, that made me think she had been drinking
--nothing else. She appeared to be much and sincerely dis-
tressed about her husband's illness. He vomited pieces of
carrots. They were not at all digested. He said he had had
a herring for his dinner. Ido not think the prisoner men-
!:1( ned her dream. The deceased was not a very strong look-
ing man. lie looked delicate in the face. lle was very sal-
low, and dark about the eyes. We have twitch-clocks (cock-
roaches) in great numbers in our houses. When the prisoner
came to me about the Savings' Bank, she said she was afraid
that her brother-ip-law, Jackson, would take the money
from her. The prisoner's mother came on the Monday. She
could not read or write, and asked me to assist her at the
bank. She expressed great fear that if the money was not
soon put in her name, the Jacksons would get it. She wanted
moiey for the funeral expenses. She had a little mcuey in
the house, but not enough to meet the expenses.
Re-examined.—Deceased was, I believe, in two burial
clubs. He told me there was a sum to be received from
each.

Mrs. Sarah Tonge called :—I live in Walter-street, near
the deccased's—two doors off. I remember the night decea-
sed was taken ill. I heard the prisoners' voice in the street
that night. She was going to Mr. Hills, and asked me to
lend her 6d to get some brandy, for her husband was taken
very ill. She asked me, for God's sake, to go in, her husband
was so ill. When she came back with the brandy she said
she knew he was a dead man. About three weeks before
she mentioned a dream to me. She said she had been
dreaming a curious dream. I laughed. She did not then
tell me the dream. When she said he was a dead man she
said now Mrs, Tonge you laughed at me when I mentioned
the dream. I told her it was nonsense and asked if she had
any young person In the family, as it was a sign of mar
nage or some nonsense like that I went to the house
and sawthe deceased in the petty very ill. He sail' his
throat smarted after he had eaten the porridge. I assisted
him into the house. He could not get in himself. I advised
him to go to bed. My husband came in and carried him op
stairs on his back. He was then very sick and very sore.
My husband went out for a medical man. I remained till
three in the morning attending him. The prisoner was not
sober at the time when I went first there. Mr. Willis came
that night to see him, about nine. Deceased was very sick.
I did not ask her, nor did any one in my hearing, tell her to
empty the tub. She emptied it every time it was used. On
the same night Mrs. Horsfield saw prisoner down stairs smok-
ing her pipe. She said, " Mrs. Hunter, where the devil is the
meal that made John Hunter ill." Prisoner said, it's there,
at the back of the fire ; if it has made him ill, it shan't make
any body, else ill. I saw some of the meal on the fire partly
burnt. Other meal was got to make the deceased some
gruel. The fresh meal was got before the other was burnt.
It was brought by a girl. I did not see the prisoner sick at
that time. Deceased was a very steady man. The prisoner
used to keep herself neat and clean till the last six months.
She was given to drinking. When I saw her she was always
in liquor. I have known her four years. There was a great
change within the last six months. She became less tidy
and less clean. Deceased said he should like to see Mary
Ann Jackson, and I told the prisoner rt..'
s.tutday. rrisuuer uaneu me into the back room, and said I
don't like them, and they don't like me, and for that reason
I shall not send for her.
Cross-examined-1 went very little to prisoner's without
she sent for me. I never found them quarrel. Th.y had the
reputation of living comfortably together. She went up
I stairs with him, and assisted to make him comfortable in
bed. She did not take pains to make him comfortable dur-
ing his illness. The prisoner, when deceased was taken ill,
ran out and alarmed the street. She called out that he
would die. Deceased said the moment he tasted the por-
ridge he became ill. He said when he had taken a few
spoonfuls his throat smarted. Mrs. Hunter did not oppose
my husband in going for a doctor. He looked melancholy
and fatigued, and perspired. The vomiting was dark coloured.
Next day he said his stomach was very sick, but that he was
much easier than on the Previous night. I saw him on Sun-
day, and he said his feet were very cold. His stomach was
still sickly, but a little easier. He did not vomit on the first
night after ten o'clock. She mentioned the meal being got
about three weeks since. (The witness's desposition before
the coroner was here put in. This was read by the Judge.
The witness had then said, " the prisoner was sober for any-
thing I know." Also, " I never saw anything against her,
and I always saw her tidy and clean. I have seen her only
once in liquor, and then she was not drunk.") No one told
me when I was before the coroner to tell all I knew about
the matter. The first time I was asked about the meal was
three weeks ago. I forgot it when I was before the coroner.
I can remember things better that occurred six years ago,
than six months.
Re-examined. Deceased was very ill at half-past six'
when I first went in. Deceased did not say anything about
the taste of the porridge. He screamed out when my hus-
band took hold of his shoulders to lift him up. I meant to
say that there was nothing but vomit in the pot that smelled
ill, when we asked the prisoner to take it out. There were
bluish marks on his face after he was dead

(The jury here left the court for about twenty minutes,
under charge of a bailiff.)
Thomas Willis called.-1 am a surgeon. At the request
of Mr. Harrison I attended his patient in November last.
On the evening of the 25th of November, about eight o'clock,
I went to deceased's house. Deceased was up stairs in bed.
Prisoner came into the room two or three times. Deceased
said he was sick and purged—be was sick to death. He said
nothing of the cause, or the porridge, in the prisoner's
presence. I asked her about the porridge. She said she had
thrown them out. She said the porridge was very good, made
from milk thickened with meal. The prisoner said he had
had a red-herring for his dinner. I saw an evacuation. It
was of a dark greenish colour, indicating absence of bile. I
took his complaint to be an attack of English cholera. He
appeared in a colapse sitting up in bed. The symptoms were
those of cholera, or of the effects of arsenic, of which I had
no suspicion at the time. 1 prescribed a drachm of tincture
of opium, alkali, acid, &c. I also administered pills. 1 was
apprenticed in Yorkshire to a surgeon, and attended lectures.
The second day the symptoms were those of poisoning by
arsenic. The tongue was whiteish. The countenance
palid, and expressive of great anxiety. The feces not very
offensive, indicating absence of bile. The prisoner said he
had come home well. If he had come home well at six, he
might have been in the state he was in when I saw him, from
cholera. I think he said the porridge tasted as if there was
pepper in it.

Cross-examined.—l know something of cases of arsenic.
I thought deceased was suffering under cholera, and so
recorded it in Mr. Harrison's books. I thought it a very
severe attack. I thought the liver was disordered. 1 believe
I said that the liver was slightly disordered, but I can't
swear positively to the words. There was the sour smell of
vomiting. It first occurred to me that it might be arsenic,
from the symptoms. His countenance was pallid, and indica-
tive of anxiety. I should select that expression even if 1
did not think it was arsenic. There was nothing to ine.lico
me to believe, from what I then saw, if I had heard n&bnig
further of the case, that it was other than cholera. A strere
bilious attack might, after a time, produce a painful sensation
in the throat.

Re-examined.—l have seen more severe cases of cholera
than that. I think the arsenib might affect the ducts or the
liver. The continuance of the symptoms on Monday induced
me to suppose there might be arsenic. If I had found d,ffi-
culty of breathing, &c., on Sunday, I should have sus-
pected poison. I have always found a reaction after the
attack of cholera. If there was not, I should take it as a
symptom of poison being taken. I never said his liver was
no bigger than a walnut. I anticipated his recovery. P. F.
glish cholera may arise from taking improper food, or eating
much fruit. I did Lot say he was sure to die. I said the
liver was disorded.

[The judge here said, that there was no chance of the case
being concluded this day, and the jury must make up their
minds to remain for the night in a state of seclusion.]
Mr. Harrison, surgeon, of Manchester, said, I first saw
the deceased on Saturday, the 26th of December. He was
in bed, in a state of collapse, almost pulseless, great diffi-
culty of breathing, no particular pain. Hearing from Mr.
Willis that he had suffered from cholera, 1 examined the ab-
domen, and expected to find pain. He had had great irrita-
tion in the rectum. I inquired of his wife about his general
health. Prisoner said be was a very sickly man, and quite
done. I cannot say whether that was true or false. He
said he was better than on the previous night; the vomiting
and purging had entirely ceased. He was indisposed to speak
of his complaint. I never said anything about his liver. I
took it, from the representation of his wife, that he was very
sickly, that it was a violent attack of English cholera.
Acute gastutus, or inflammation of the coats of the stomach,
would have produced the same symptoms. Any irritant poi-
son would have produced these symptoms. I repeated Mr.
Willis's prescription, with one drop of Prussic acid in place
of the laudanum. On Sunday there was no improvement.
There was a pressure on the chest, and he was restless. He
did not mention to me that he had cramps. I considered him
in danger. I told his wife so • She did not seem to be much
alarmed about it. She was always in the room, and did no-
thing particular to excite any remark. I ordered a blister to
the stomach, and a bottle of water to his feet, which I found had
been done. I also ordered a mustard bath, and afterwards an
aperient draught, and a mixture of tincture of opium, potass.
&c. On Mondty morning he was sinking fast, and evidently
dying. I ordered him half a drachm of carbonate of am-
monia, tke,, with lemon juice. A message came that lie had
suffered from cramp ; that the knees were drawn up, and
that he died. The prisoner did not at any time press me
on the subject of his illness. On Tuesday morning she
came to me with Mrs. Street. She was in great excite-
ment, and I smelt liquor, but she was not intoxicated. When
I first went to deceased her breath smelt strong of liquor. On
On Tuesday she wanted to get me to sign a certificate to get
his money at the bank. She said his relations and she had
been quarrelling, and wished to take the money, and do with
it as they pleased. She wished to get it out immediately. I
refused to have any thing to do with it. I made a post
mortem examination along with Mr. Harrison, on Tuesday
evening. On view of the body everything appeared perfectly
healthy. On making the usual incision in thelabdomen, we
found every thing externally quite healthy in appearance.
The incision was made from the pit of the stomach to the
bladder. On reflecting the integuments, and laying open the
intestines as far as the rectum, considerable inflammation
presented itself, particularly in the stomach. (Witness de-
scribed the appearance technically.) Great corrogation of
the bladder. The nucleus membrane of the stomach was
considerably inflamed, particularly in the upper part. The
contents of the stomach were gone—nothing left but a coffee-
coloured fluid and a small piece of potatoe. I examined the
stomach carefully. The mucous coat was highly inflamed in
distinct patches, and destruction of a portion. The destruc-
tion are well marked in several parts, and highly inflamed.
The edges of the patches had a distinct termination to each
abrasion. The patches were dark red. The paches could
easily be scraped off with the finger. These patches pro-
ceeded from some foreign irritating body causing inflamma-
tion. The same appearance was in the duodenum, but in a
less degree. I examined carefully with Mr. Dyson, and nei-
ther could detect anything. I don't think any combination
of disease would have produced the same result. The symp-
toms of poison are so anomalous that it is dangerous to give
a positive opinion. I am confident, taking the symptoms
before death, that no disease could have produced those ap-
pearances, which were quite sufficient to account for death.
Those were quite such appearances as arsenic would pro-
duce. If arsenic had been taken, and purging and vomiting
supervensd, the pain would not be so urgent as in the first
degree, by reason of the vomiting and purging carrying off
the arsenic. If I had known the deceased to be well, and
immediately after taking something to eat, cholera rriLtit
come on, but milk porridge would not have produced
the symptoms that have been stated. Suppose the poison
were given in solution. and went into the system, the pein
would thereby be diminished, as if it were vomited. The
liver was healthy. The intestinal canal was inflamed. In
ordinary cases nature does not support inflammation
in two places at once, if arising from common disease.
Nausea is a usual attendant before vomiting in cholera. In
taking arsenic vornitting might come on in twenty minutes.
If a large dose were given at a time, vomiting, I should say,
would not be immediate, but in twenty minutes. An imme-
diate burning of the throat. Sickness might come on in
a few minutes, twenty minutes, or an hour. If the stomach
were empty, vomiting would likely come on earlier. Look-
ing at the body alone, without adverting to the other symp-
toms, I would say that the deceased did not die of cholera.
From the symptoms I saw, I am enabled to decide this point
with more certainty. I have seen Asiatic cholera. In the
first instance I thought it an aggravated case of English
cholera. I was sent to Newcastle by the magistrates of
Manchester to watch the progress of the cholera there. I was
four years connected with the Manchester workhouse. I was
nine years engaged as medical inspector of the factories. In
cholera the abdominal vessels are distended with venous or
arterial blood. Whe destruction in the centre of each patch,
as in the stomach of the deceased, is not observable in cases
of cholera. It is usual in irritant poisons. The effusion in
cholera is chiefly mucus, but not coffee-coloured. Iu cases
inflammation
arising arsenic grumous or sanguiverous. In cases of
arising from cholera, there are generallY premonitory "95" 4

toms. In cases of irritant poisons it comes On immediately.
I have seen cholera commence with colapse as a first symp-
tom, but generally preceded by diarrhoea during the day. I
have known no instance of colapse within an hour. The
ilium is generally more effected than the jejunum. I have
never tested arsenic, and authors differ on the point. I be-
lieve it to be acrimonious. I had difficulty in finding pulsa-
tion at all on my first visit to the patient. On my succeed-
ing visits he was pulseless altogether. If the vomiting and
purging had ceased on Friday night, I should have expected
re-action would have taken place.
Cross-examined.—l first called on deceased about three
o'clock. I apologized to his wife for not coming sooner.
She said he was surprised I had not come before, or words
to that effect. I can't say she said she was sorry I had not
come sooner. I have not changed my opinion on this sub-
ject. When I went a second time deceased said he was
better. He said he was purged and sick after taking his
supper, but did not say immediately. (The deposition of
the witness before the coroner was here put in and read. It
appeared that witness had then said that the prisoner bad
said she was sorry he had not come sooner.) The vomitings
and purgings had ceased when 1 went there. I thought it an
aggravated case of English cholera. In Asiatic cholera, sharp
features, sunk eyes, cold breath. He had a remarkable ex-
pression of anxiety, being distressed by violent vomiting. I
could not distinguish by one symptom. He had. no pain as
in peretonytus. There was no hernia. All species of violent
vomiting would produce the same anxiety of appearance and
prostration. He appeared to be about 35 years of age. Sup-
posing his stomach disordered by eating herrings, and fat
beef and carrots, vomiting might be caused by taking porridge
afterwards, but that does not correspond with the other
symptoms. I believe the medicines prescribed were given
regularly to him. Up to Sunday I believed it to be com-
mon cholera, and then thought it was a very mys-
terious case. I know a little of cases of arsenic. I
had no suspicion it was arsenic, until I heard on Tuesday
that the prisoner had purchased some gastro interitus acutus.
The alkalis given him would have had a good effect in a
case of arsenic. I can't tell whether the acids would have
destroyed the effect of the alkalis on the arsenic. He told
me he was costive, but that was from the disease. Gastro
interitus accutus is a continuous inflammation of the stomach
and intestinal canal. There would be heat and dryness of the
throat—excessive thirst—the eyes an expression of pain and
anxiety. The complexion would be sallow. Hunter was
always sallow. In that disease he would have pain. It
sometimes attacks very suddenly, but always with previous
symptoms. If Martinet (a good authority) says it comes on
suddenly I would still exercise my own judgment, unless I
saw a distinct case. Spasms and pains would result. Stupor
and prostration of strength would follow after some time.
The urine would be defective. The deceased's tongue was
moist, not dry. He bad no tension of the abdomen as in
gastric diseases. The inflammation of arsenic is generally
more confined to the stomach, than the inflammation of
gastro interite, which generally extends to others of the in-
testines. The patches in the deceased'n - -
dark red cninnr more red tnan florid. The
,uscb were distinct, and no appearance of searing or burning,
Red patches have been observed after death from natural
diseases, and even when there was no previous disease in the
stomach. There was a thick sanguineous fluid in the stomach.
The asaphagus at the lower part was inflamed. I should
say there were some appearances of poison. Not such as
common disease would produce. The soft state of the
mucous membrane of the stomach might appear after chblera
and other diseases. The bladder is corrogated in cholera.
It may arise from natural disease. If I had never heard of

any suspicion of arsenic at all, from what I ;E:s;-Of-1;e-de-:

cesed on the post-mortem examination, I ;Could-tieClicalry
and confidently believe that death arose from arsenic. The
best authorities say that death may be caused by arsenic, and
none of it be found. I found no appearance of arsenic. The
whole of the stomach and bowels were analysed, and no ar-
senic was discovered. Ido not know of any case in which
arsenic has produced death, and arsenic could not be found,
in so short a period as between Friday and Monday. Four
grains and a half have been known to destroy a child. But
the best authorities give 20 to 30 grains. If such a quantity
was taken in six table-spoonfuls of milk porridge, a very
small part only would be in solution. If in solution, it
would produce secondary symptoms. If not in solution, it
would be ejected by the vomiting. I remarkel the body was
less decomposed than I expected. I attributed this in some
degree to the preservative nature of the arsenic on the cor-
poreal tissue. If the arsenic prevented decomposition, it
must have been absorbed. I cannot speak positively to this.
I gave him laudanum. It would not have prevented the pain
arising from arsenic. Where pain exists from arsenic, the
pain generally continues to the end of life. The pain of
arsenic generally returns as acutely as before. Supposing
pain, such as that described which Turner endured in the
shoulders, &c., I cannot say with certainty whether it would
not continue ; but I believe that is the opinion of the best
authorities. Arsenous acid may adhere more or less to the
mucous membrane. It adheres more closely than a piece of
potato. If the arsenic remained long enough in the stomach
to cause death, I would expect it to be found, but it was not
found.

Re-examined.--I don't recollect the prisoner asking me
anything about the progress of the deceased's illness. A-
rsenic will terminate in gastro interite, if it does not cause
death. He had no pain as in gastro interite. The liver,
heart, and brain were perfectly healthy. In my estimation
the patches were produced by irritation causing inflamma-
tion. They might proceed from the arsenic after absorption.
I attribute the death to inflammation from some foreign
irritant body. From the combination of symptoms carefully
revised I cannot help thinking that it was arsenic. I cannot,
after due reflection, come to any other conclusion.
Thomas Wilson Dyson, sworn.—l am a surgeon in Man-
chester. I have been in practice about 8 years. lam a
member of the College of Surgeons. I assisted at the post
mortem examination. I can come to no other conclusion than
that of Mr. Harrison—that death was caused by the introduc-
tion of some substance, and arsenic was the most probable.
After the examination of the body, the conclusion I came to
was that deceased had taken arsenic. I did know of the pre-
vious symptoms, and taking these with the post mortem
examination, my opinion is more strong that arsenic was the
cause of death. I judge from the extreme inflammation of
the mucus membrane of the stomach and bowels, the great
degree of softness of the membrane, the spots suffused, the
great number of points of abration throughout the stomach
and intestines, which were most present in these parts,
which in cases of natural disease are most free, and from the
quantity of red sanguineous appearances. The rectum was
inflamed. The whole of the large as well as small intestines
were inflamed, which rarely takes place in disease of the
stomach and small intestines. I found the bladder firmly
contracted and empty. 1 have attended six cases of poison-
ing from arsenic. The symptoms were distinct and similar
to the those cases, but more severe. I account for the
absence of the arsenic from the stomach and bowels, either
from evacuation by vomitting, purging, or from its absorp-
tion into the system. It might be carried away from the sys-
tem in 2or 3 days, in various ways. It would probably take
a week or two, or perhaps more, to remove all traces.
It is doubtful whether all traces would be taken out of the
body in three days. I have read much on poisons. My
reading assists me to come to the conclusion at which I have
arrived.

Cross-examined.—l heard from Mr. Harrison that poison
was suspected. I believe it probable that I heard all the par-
ticulars. I expected to find the appearances stated. I have
no motives of attaining notoriety by decisive testimony on
this prosecution. I never said that I once said that I would
give strong evidence and hang the woman, and that I would
take the shine out of Dr. Harrison. I never had any con-
versation with a surgeon named Worthington, or in his pre-
sence. I have inspected six cases ; I have not inspected one-
third the cases that have taken place in Manchester in the
last two years. (Witness produced a list of seventeen cases
since 1839 in Manchester.) In the six cases I inspected I
found arsenic in all of them. In every case it was taken
in substance, varying from a quarter of an ounce to an ounce.
It would be held in suspension in boiling milk more than
in boiling water. In six or seven table-spoonfulls more
than thirty grains would be dissolved,—the whole of it
The medicines given would render it more soluble. (Here
some question was put from a celebated authority relative to
gastro interitus acctus, to which the witness medically re-
plied.) If the patient lived after taking arsenic from Friday
to Monday night, there would be more extensive infiamation.
I knew cases of arsenic in which the patient has survived six
days, and still arsenic has been found ; but not in cases in
which it was taken in solution. I account for the arsenic
disappearing in this case to the alkalis administered, promo-
ting its evacuation or absorption. I have tasted milk in
which arsenic was boiled. It scarcely altered the taste of the
milk, and I took very little. I dont think it would a taste,
but as soon as it passed the gullet a sensation of heat would
be felt.
Mr. PoLLocrc stated in effect to the witness in explanatory
terms, that the questions he had put to him, which had natu-
rally elicited strong contradictory replies as affecting him
(the witness) were suggested solely from his instructions;
that he considered it his duty to the unfortunate individual
whom he defended to put them ; and that he (Mr. P.) him-
self entertained no animosity or want of respect to that gen-
tleman.
Mr. Dyson, as we understood from his manner, acquitted
the learned gentleman of any intention of offering a personal
offence.

The learned JUDGE said that the learned gentleman was
quite right, in accordance with his instructions, in putting
the questions alluded to; and that no offence ought to be
taken on that account.

Mr. Dyson, in reply to Mr. Wilkins, said—" There is not
a shadow of a shade of truth in the imputation conveyed by
the questions alluded to."
It being now past seven o'clock, the learned judge pro-
posed that as there seemed to be no chance of the case
coaling to a conclusion that evening, it might be desirable to
adjourn until to-morrow.

Mr. WILKINS said that as they had still a number of wit-
nesses, besides medical gentlemen, to call, such an arrange-
ment would probably be agreeable to his learned brother,
who would have his notes to arrange, as it would be to him-
self.

Mr. POLLOCK expressed his assent, as the case for the
prosecution would, be learned, occupy a considerable time.
The Court was then adjourned till nine this morning; his
Lordship stating that the grand ljury would he accomodated
at the Adelphi for the night, and be under the care of three
bailiffs. They would, hawever, be made comfortable.
The Court then adjourned.

NISI PRIUS COURT-THURSDAY.

Before Mr. Justice COLTMAN

SAMUEL V. MORRIS.—Mr. Baines and Mr. Compton ap-
peared for the plaintiff ; Mr. Martin the defendant. The
declaration was for the use and occupation of certein premi-
ses belonging to the plaintiff in North John-street, Liver-
pool, and on an account stated.
The case, as shewn for the plaintiff, was as follows :—The
plaintiff, who is retired from business, is the owner of a shop
in North John-street, between Lord-street and Harrington-
street, which he let in 1836 to a person of the name of War-
burton, who carried on therein the business of a tailor.
Warburton became insolvent in 1841, and in the month of
May in that year he executed an assignment of all his estate
and effects, in trust for the benefit of his creditors, to the de-
fendant, Mr. Thomas Morris. Under that assignment the
defendant took possession of all the personal estate, of every
kind, of Warburton ; and it was contended that he had, there-
fore, become liable for the rent of the shop. Originally the
rent was £47 10s. a-year. but shortly before Warburton's in-
solvency it was increased to £57 10s., after which rate there
were now due three half-years' rent, amounting to £B6 ss.
The defendant had acknowledged his liability, under the
assignment, to the son of the plaintiff, and promised to pay,
but he had not. The plaintiff was indebted to Warburton for
clothes £6 15s. Bd. ; consequently £79 9s. 4d. were now due.
Mr. MARTIN, for the defendant, said, he should put in
the assignment made by Warburton to the defendant, which
would show that the term in the lease had not been assigned,
but only the stock in trade, book and other debts, and
monies. He therefore contended that the action was not
maintainable, on the ground that the term was not assigned;
and further, that an assignee could not be sued for use and
occupation ; and that no sufficient proof of occupation by the
defendant had been given.
The assignment was then put in and read ; and the nephew
of the defendant was called, who stated that he bad heard
his uncle deny his liability to pay the rent.
Mr. BAINES was about to reply, when the jury said they
would not give him the trouble, as they were of opinion there
had been a sufficient occupation.
.eyverdict was then returned for the plaintiff for the amount
claimed; but on the application of Mr. Martiin, the Judge
said he would give leave to move for a new trial on the legal
objections which had been raised on the part of the defen-
dant.

FIELDING AND OTHERS v. FAWCETT.—The declaratiln
in this case was for work and labour done, and on an account

*fated. Mr. Martin and
plaintiffs; Mr. Dundas nn,

The trial of this ca

shortly after ten
and of no interes

Atherton any

cerned. The
and Richard Stou
place near Clithero
in London, who, at
also carried on busin
The plaintiff Mr. Stout atten
in Manchester, and his partut
Clithero. The defendant
number of mousseline de
tiffs' works, according to en
cially provided for him; upon t
of much investigation, the eis
ments should be made monthly
printed, the last parcel which v
The plaintiffs, not receiving pays
ditions, detained the last parcel,
action to recover the amount d
Is. 6d. The defendant paid £9O
liability to pay the remainder, on
damaged in printing, and returne
order of court) at a period when
market.

Ir. Stout to send a

I that they were

ng cross

mencing

semin

tworks at

they were un-

The case closed at a quarter to five o't
retired to consider their verdict
they returned into court with
wages £l5B Is. 6d. ; the bloc
defendant

.nd pgterns

for the

when a

to go to the

FAWCETT V. FIELDING A:,
action referred to above. The dee'
recover from the defendants comp
tained from the plaintiff the 170 pieces of nz

—This was the cross

he plain

After the statement of the cast,
DUND &s, and the examination of the th
Mr. DUNDAS said he was willing to leas,.
to say what sum his client was entitled to,
abide by his Lordships decision, without the tn.
going through the facts.
Mr. MARTIN assented on t'
The JUDGE thought £lO wou►u
addition to £9 which had been pr
A verdict was then entered fr

in traver to

SEDUCTION

seline des

it to the judge
, and he would

OBEREND V. WATKINSON—
which Mr. Wilkins appeared for t
ley for the defendant, the parti,
Mobberley, near Knutsford. WI
dering their verdict in Fielding V. FAV

s is a (

plaintiff, and Mr. Wort-
belong to the village of

Mr.WourLuY requested the (
till Saturday. His learned friend,
PY:A, tiff 4
unto to-morrow (Friday). In the,meantit
ley's) client's solicitor, Mr. Roscoe, who s
roners for Cheshire, was required to-morrc
an inquest at Northwich [upon a femal
been killed by her husband] ; so that it we
ence to all parties if his Lordship would allow the case to
stand over till Saturday.
The JUDGE said that, under the circumstances, he had no
objection.

Ir. Wilkins, was

for the

)uld contir

Nit. Wort-
of the co-
ing to hold
d to have

SWAINSON V. SWAINSON AND ANOTHER.—In this Case
a verdict was take❑ by consent for the plaintiff for £15,000,
subject to a reference.
The Court adjourned a few minutes before six o'clock.

THE CAUSE LIST

The Cause List, when the Court rose la
as follows:

FIRST LIST.-SALFORD
Plaintiff.—Nos. 1, _
8, 20, 22, 23, 21, 25, 27, 30, 31, n,
Defendant.—Nos. 8, 12, 16, 26, 33, 34, 3t,
.Referred.—Nos. 28, 29, 43, 50.
Withdrawn.—Nos. 19, 32, 41.
Struck Out.—Nos. 45, 46, 48.

SECOND LIST

fling, stood

14, 15, 17,

Plaintif—Nos. 1,3, 4,7, 8, 12
34, 39, 46, 55, 64, 65, 68.
Withdrawn.—Nos. 2,5, 6, 9. 11
23, 24, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 37, 41,
85, 86, 88.
Referred.—Nos. 44, 49.
In the first list, the only causes ri
special juries," Farrarr. liefiinne," and
The former will be tried this morning 1
ted to occupy the whole day; the o
Tuesday next. In the other list there are six special juries,
and 38 common cases to be disposed of. Easter term Com '
mences to-morrow week (Saturday) when both the lord
Judges must be in town ; in the ntiantime they have plenty
of occupation here.
-

or trial are two

Friday) and is e-x-1.)-ec.

twenty miles fro the capital of the Ameers. The latter
hastened at the head of 22,000 men, to attack the British