The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-08-05 00:00:00

CHESTER APSIgER,

CROWN COURT.—WmgEgnAt.
(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
CHILD MURDER.

Elizabeth Barrett, who was described in the calendar a.
a servant, aged 23, but who had lately been a pauper in the
Stockport Workhouse, was indicted for the wilful murder of
her illegitimate child, Ellen Barrett, at Cheadle Buckley, in
this county (Cheshire).
The Attorney-General (Hill) and Mr. Trafford appeared
for the prosecution ; and, at the request of his lordship, Mr.
Townsend undertook the defence of the prisoner.
The facts of the case, which occupied the attention of the
court a considerable portion of the day in the investigation,
were briefly these :—On the 2nd of April last a person named
Ann Stokes discovered the body of the child in a midden at
Cheadle, covered with water, except one hand. A police-
officer and a surgeon were immediately sent for, and the
body was extricated. The child was about eight months old.
Mr. B. Lupton, a surgeon, who examined the body, deposed
to the child having a healthy appearance, that there were no
marks of internal disease, and his opinion was that it had
died from strangulation, in consequence of a ligature having
been tied round its neck, which, by pressure on the wind-
pipe, had prevented air from passing into the lungs. He was
also of opinion that the body had not bee❑ put into the water
until after death, and that it had not been in the water more
than two days.—A pauper from Stockport Workhouse iden-
tified the body as the child of the prisoner. In cross-exa-
mination, she stated that the prisoner had always behaved
kindly and affectionately towards the child.—lt was next
proved by two witnesses, that the prisoner was in the tap-
room of the Farmers' Arms, at Cheadle, on the afternoon of
the Ist of April, with the child ; that she appeared to be in
want, and some bread and cheese and two glasses of ale were
given to her by the witnesses. The prisoner said she had
been in the Stockport Bastile. The prisoner then went to
Moulton to a relation, with whom she stayed until she was
taken into custody, and to whom she said the child was dead
and buried. When told of the murder, she seemed in great,
distress.—This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr. TOWNSEND addressed the jury in a long and argu-
mentative speech for the prisoner.
The learned JUDGE having summed up the case,
The jury, after half-an-hour's consultation, pronounced
the prisoner Guilty.
The learned JUDGE having put on the black cap, after a
brief address, sentenced her to death without holding out
the least hope of mitigation.
The prisoner was then removed from the bar, uttering the
most pitiable exclamations.

CIVIL SIDE.—TUESDAY.
(Before Mr. Baron GURNEY.)

BROCKLEIIURST AND ANOTHER V. ALEXANDER AND

ANOTHER.—(SPECIAL JURY.)
Mr. WILLIANIS opened the pleadings, and stated that this
was an action for libel brought by John and Thomas Brockle-
burst against Robert Alexander and Thomas Carter. The
defendants had pleaded " not guilty."
Mr. JERVIS appeared for the plaintiffs, whom he stated
the jury might possibly know as extensive manufacturers of
silk, in the borough of Macclesfield ; one of them (Mr. John
Brocklehurst) being a member for that borough. The de-
fendants of whom they complained were one of them the
proprietor and principal editor, and the other the publisher,
of a newspaper called the Liverpool Mail. The plaintiffs
complained of the following paragraph, which appeared in
the Liverpool Mail of the 24th May last. It was headed
" Cheshire and Wales—Birkenhead, 24th of May, 1842,"
and read as follows :

" THE SILK TRADE AT MACCLESFIELD.—There are
tricks played sometimes in the silk trade, it appears, as well
as in the cotton, woollen, and corn trades. An extensive
firm in Macclesfield, one of whose members represents in
parliament the opinions of the liberal portion of the consti-
tuency, has lately, we understand, been complimented by a
process from the Court of Exchequer, at the instance of go-
vernment, for the recovery of a sum of nearly two hundred
thousand pounds, certain goods manufactured by them of
cotton and silk having been exported as silk goods, and the
drawback received thereon."

He (Mr. Jervis) apprehended the jury would be of opinion
that the Messrs.Brocklehursts were bound to come and seek
the present public vindication of their characters. They
came to defy the charge, and let the country know the author
of it. They sought not for exaggerated damages in a case of
the kind where the editor might have been innocently led
into the charge, although he ought to have made inquiry
beforehand. Mr. Jervis concluded by saying that, if the
case proceeded, he was sure the Messrs. Brocklehursts
would receive at the hands of the jury such an amount of
damages as would satisfy them and the country that the
charge was made without foundation.
When Mr. Jervis had concluded his address,
Mr. TEMPLE said he appeared for the defendants. He was
concerned for the editor of the Liverpool Mail, who was not
the author of the libel in question. He was free to admit
that, iu point of law, it was a libel. He was also free to ad-
mit that, although the editor, who was said to have published
it, knew nothing of its publication until after it had been cir-
culated, and, by letter from Mr. Brocklehurst's attorney it
was called to his attention, he was nevertheless legally
answerable ; but he was ready to express the sincere regret
of the editor that such a libel, or such a statement, ever got
into his paper, to assure Mr. Brocklehurst, and to assure the
world, for the sake of his (the editor's) own character, that
it was no introduction or invention upon his part, but that it
had been written and inserted by an assistant editor, who
heard and believed it. The defendants had come to court
satisfied that the statement was wrong ; that it had been
founded on absolute mistake and falsehood, and that there
was not an atom of ground for it, though they had given cur-
rency to it ; and he (M r. Temple) was truly glad to know
that Mr. Brocklehurst stood in that situation with regard to
character that he could not be really harmed by the publica-
tion, and that, receiving the apology of the defendants, he
would be satisfied to have a verdict for-

Mr. JERVIS.—Forty shillings.
Mr. TEMPLE said he had been in hopes that a nominal
verdict would have satisfied the parties ; but that the defend-
ants were willing to submit to a verdict for 40s.
A verdict was accordingly returned for the plaintiffs for
405., and his Lordship, at the request of Mr. Jervis, pro-
mised to certify that the case was a fit one for a special jury

. -
BROCILLERURST AND ANOTHER V. SMEDLEY. (S. J.)
This also was a special jury case, in which Messrs. John
and Thomas Brocklehurst were plaintiffs, and Mr. Joseph
Smedley defendan, Tb.. declaration alleged the publication
of a libel, to which the defendant pleaded not guilty.
Mr. JERVIS stated the case for the plaintiffs, who were
the same as those in the previous action. This second action
was brought for the malicious dissemination of the paragraph
mentioned in that case. After noticing the respectability of
the plaintiffs, the learned counsel proceeded as follows. On
the 24th of May the Liverpool Mail arrived in Macclesfield,
whereupon Mr: Smedley, the defendant, went about the
town, inquired of various parties if they had heard the news,
and, in spite of the dread which must have been created in
the minds of those who had had transactions at the bank,
took the trouble to copy the paragraph in manuscript, to
take it round the town and to read it to the various parties.
Not satisfied with: directing public attention to the paper—
not content to let his poison in this way slowly and surely
effect his object, but having got the paragraph, although he
(Mr. Jervis) was unable to prove that he was the author, he
spread the report that the libel would be found in the paper,
and, making it certain that all might see it, who might not
be in a condition or in the habit of reading the newspapers,
and who might be excluded from seeing any retractation, he
went round with a manuscript copy to the various shops,
and read it to them, as attacking the character of Mr.
Brocklehurst. The matter was rife in the town. The report
was circulated that the plaintiffs had suffered in the enor-
mous sum of £200,000, and this report spread rapidly
through the town. The defendant expected the insolvency
of Mr. Brocklehurst. A run immediately followed on the
bank, which was after a short time checked by the known
respectability and opulence of Mr. Brocklehurst. But the
jury were well aware that much slighter occurrences than
those had often affected the stability of firms to a vast ex-
tent ; and his lordship would recollect that the accidental
circumstance of a party falling down opposite a bank in
London—he meant Sir John Lubbock's—and a crowd hav-
ing collected around, had absolutely caused a run upon that
bank. The effect in the present case was immediate, and
that effect had been mainly produced by the anxious circu-
lation of the libel in question by Mr. Smedley, who could
not have any possible object in circulating it except he wished
to see that which he had originally concocted, widely spread
among his friends, and wished to destroy the character of
political opponents. So far as Mr. Smedley was concerned
he had never made the slightest retractation. He had now
been dared to prove the truth or falsehood of the charge, but
he had shrunk from inquiry, and contented himself with the
cowardly plea of " not guilty." After a few further obser-
vations, Mr. Jervis sat down.
aPotts
owi
oapsk thee epe
rfi,r s
living wit called.naetssmacc les
Hq
Messrs. John and Thomas Brocklehurst carried on the thaStamheuewlfie adne thatsed
bu-
siness of silk manufacturers in that town. Mr. John Broc-
klehurst was one of the members of parliament for the bo-
rough of Macclesfield. Witness was in Mill-street, in
Macclesfield, on Wednesday, the 25th of May last. The
defendant, who was a master tailor, living in that town,
came up, accosted, and asked him whether he had heard the
news. Witness said, "No ; what news ?" He then began
to state a portion of the paragraph already read, saying that
the firm was under very great difficulty, in being fined in
something like £200,000. Witness asked for what, and he
replied, " for fraud on government." The Messrs. Brockle-
burst had a bank at Macclesfield, and witness felt alarm
about the matter, although he did not bank with them.
After they had been speaking together for a short time, the
defendant said that witness must see and read the Liveepool
Mail. They then parted. Witness was exceedingly anxious
to know where the Liverpool Mail was, and he believed he
never left his door until the defendant returned down the
street, when he asked him the question. He said lie believed
it would be found at Swinnerton's. Witness said he would
not go there, and they parted. In the course of the evening
defendant came to witness's shop, and said—" I have taken
the paragraph out of the paper, and I will read it you." He
did so. It was in writing. He pulled the paper out of his
pocket to read it. Witness recollected what it was, although
he bad never seen the newspaper until he had now come to
Chester. He could tell the paragraph without looking at the
newspaper. When the defendant bad come to the middle
part of it, which alluded to the liberal party in Macclesfield,
he commented upon it, and went away a few minutes after
he had read the paragraph. He appeared pleased with it.
Witness had no acquaintance with him before. They had
met on this occasion promiscuoualy together.
Other witnesses were called, who gave somewhat similar
testimony as to the defendant going about from place to
place with the paragraph in question, anxiously disseminating
the information contained in it.
Mr. TOWNSEND addressed the jury for the defendant,
who, he said, as secretary to a newsroom in Macclesfield,
merely told the news as was his duty.
His LORDSHIP then charged the jury. He said, the libel
was undoubtedly one of a most formidable description, and
that it was an act of most culpable negligence in the publisher
to insert it. It attacked the character of the plaintiffs, and
was calculated most materially to affect it. The defendant
appeared to have manifested a degree of activity not at all in
accordance with innocency. It was no part of the business
of a secretary to acquaint the public with the news of the
day and to circulate slander. There were most honourable
men on all sides in politics ; yet it was not fair warfare, but
warring with poisoned arrows to assail a political opponent
after the present manner. Beyond all doubt the defendant
had been very active in the publication of the libel, and he
appeared to have done so with the intention of injuring the
parties. The jury, however, should not " punish" him.
That was a slip on the part of the counsel for the plaintiff;
plaintiffs for the injury, because the question of damages
the
but they would say what damages they ought to render to
was entirely for them to decide.
brief consultation, found a verdict for the
plaintiffs for 40s.
The jury, after a

CIVIL SIDE.—WEDNESEAY.
AN ELECTION BILL—PARRY V. MAINWARING, at.
SPECIAL JURY.
111 this case Messrs. Jarvis and Welsby were counsel for
the plaintiff, and Messrs. V. Williams and It. G. Temple
.or the defendant.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Mr. William
Parry, landlord of the Gredington Arms, at Holt, in the
county of Denbigh, to recover from the defendant, Mr.
Townsend Mainwaring, M. P. for the Denbighshire bo-
roughs, the sum of £122 for refreshments furnished by him
to the voters and friends of Mr. Mainwaring during the last
election contest. The defendant had paid £3O on account,
and the sum of £5O into court in discharge of the amount
due,--and had also pleaded the statute against tipling, and
that the demand was illegal, as it came under the denomina-
tion of treating the electors.

Mr, jrtivt, tuliiros4lnt the inry far thg plaintiff PA
he Mt !leantly ashamed for Mr. Malnwaring ltt conix-
quence of the defence he had set up. He could well under-
stand a candidate at once stating that he would neither bribe
nor treat,—that he despised and set his face against such
corrupt practices, but for his life he could not understand
how the honourable member could set up the defence he had,
when, beyond all doubt, he had ordered refreshments to be
given to his friends ; that he had led off a ball with an old
lady, which was given by him in honour of the victory he
had obtained at the election, at which refreshments were
furnished in considerable quantities to the guests ; for there
was charged no less than forty-nine glasses of brandy, at
4d per glass. The refreshments were ordered by the agents
of the defendant, who had, after the election examined the
bill, pronounced it correct, and had attached their signa-
tures to it. . _

Several witnesses were called, who proved that they bad
been engaged by Mr. Mainwaring to manage his election—
that they had his authority to order refreshments for the
electors and their friends, and had done so at the plaintiff's
house. One of them, a Mr. John Harrison' said he had
worked like a slave for Mr. Mainwaring, and had got no
thanks for it. In cross-examination, he was asked whether
a person had not been drunk at the Gredington Arms every
night for 9or 10 days previous to the election. The witness
said he had seen him drunk once only.
Mr. JEavts.—Did he vote for Mr. Mainwaring
Witness.—No ; they stole him away. (Laughter.)
Mr. JERVIS.—Who

Witness.—Why, your party—the Whig party, to be sure.
(Loud laughter, in which the hon. M.P. for Chester joined.)
Mr. V. WILLIAms addressed the jury on behalf of the de-
fendant. He observed that in spite of the hard words of his
learned friend (Mr. Jervis) he hoped to be able to satisfy the
jury that the defendant was perfectly justified in defending
the action, and in adopting the line of defence he had the
hon. gentleman did not descend from that high position
which he held as a gentleman and a man of honour. Mr.
Mainwaring had never refused to pay what was right. He
had in fact paid already £7O towards the bill, which more
than satisfied what was really due, but, contrary to his wish,
the house had been kept open for ten days previous to the
election, and this he contended the defendant was not liable
to.

The Learned JUDGE, in summing up the case, observed
that the questions for the consideration of the jury were
what orders bad been given by the defendant, and what li-
quor had been served in consequence of these orders. On
the latter point there was no evidence at all, and the bill cer-
tainly appeared a heavy one, for only about 50 voters were
in the borough, and on one day
.111 glasses of gin were
charged, on another 360, and another no less than 740. They,
however, were to say what damages the plaintiff was entitled
to above the £7O which bad been paid.
The jury found for the plaintiff—damages, £llO.

THE PROSPECTS OF THE DRAMA IN AMERICA

In the American journals exchanging with the LIVERPOOL
STANDARD, we have often observed very flaming accounts
of the reception of the members of the theatrical profession
" hailing " from this country during their progress through
the States. We have seen statements of " crowded houses"
and " thousands of dollars " honouring and rewarding their
efforts; and these have struck us as being surprising, consi-
dering how depreciated everything connected with commerce
is, and how great is now the scarcity of money. We have
been led to make some inquiries amongst those who are con-
versant with the real state of things across the water, and
we shall leave our readers to judge whether there exists
much encouragement at present to any one to undertake a
voyage across the Atlantic in the hope of realising a hand-
some profit by a twelvemonth's tour. That some members
of the profession have won not only golden opinions, but
silver dollars, we admit ; but we suspect it will be some
years before any adventurers will again " garner in good
store." The New York Herald has puffed and bepraised
Fanny Elssler to a ridiculous extent ; and the statements
made by that journal—its eulogia, and its " curious statis-
tics" of the number of times she has danced, and " made
speeches in various languages"—cannot but appear to us
sober-minded Englishmen as bordering upon absurdity, or
savouring of being well-paid puffery. We are told in the
publication of the Herald which appeared previous to the
departure of the steamer, that she has "danced in the United
States and Havana 199 times-21 of them gratuitously, for
the benefit of various institutions and individuals. She has
realised near 140,000 dollars, of which she has expended near
40,000 dollars, and given away to individuals and societies in
the United States alone above 5,000 dollars. She has lost
from the defalcation of managers but the trifling sum of
3,000 dollars, which gives loud contradiction to the infamous
aspersions afloat in Europe upon American managerial ho-
nesty. She has made fifty-two of her pithy harangues in
four different languages—English, French, Spanish, and
German—twenty-two of them in New York alone." The
portions of the article from which this extract is taken, revel
in the highest-flown compliments imaginable ; in fact, the
writer, unless he is well paid for saying what he does, must
be in a similar case to the foolish old philosopher, who, at
threescore-and-ten, sickened and died of love for the " di-
vine danseuse." That Madlle. Fanny Elssler has re-
alised a tolerable sum, is very likely—that she has given
away money with a liberal hand, no doubt ; but there is such
a thing as " giving a sprat to catch a herring." In all her
proceedings there has been a great deal of coup de theatre.
Simpson, we believe, lost money at the Park by her engage-
ment : she was to have had 500 dollars per night—she did
not frequently bring so much in to the house, while on the
" off nights" the theatre was completely deserted. That
she has been beyond any other artiste of late, successful,
there is no doubt ; but it is only a comparative success. The
Park is now closed : it has not been paying its nightly ex-
penses for some time, although the company were on half
salaries. Forrest, the most popular tragedian of the day in
the States, has been playing at the Chatham Theatre, which,
in the scale of rank and respectability, is somewhat equiva-
lent to the Sans Pareil. The prices are very low. This theatre
is doing well. This fact speaks loudly as to the state of the
drama in America. Mr. Buckstone and Mrs. Fitzwilliam
will come back with very little more money than they took
out with them. At her farewell benefit at the Park Theatre,
previous to their appearing in Halifax, whence they return
to England, Mrs. Fitzwilliam, in her address, said—" I am
happy to thank you for not only past, but present kindness ;
and though my engagement now will individually be not very
lucrative, still I have the gratification of knowing, before I
receive any emolument, that the nightly expensEsjirerepai:
a rarity nowadayx. it ;.= eartr.t. h.Pe is still
drawatie taste and pride enough in this city to support the
Park Theatre. I should be sorry on my return home to be
asked, and say it was not near its old and proper position,
not only of being the most successful, but most legitimate
theatre in the Union. It ought to be ; for my experience
tells me you are in possession of not only respectable, but
the first-rate native talent, and a most worthy, indefatigable,
and, amidst all his trials and reverses, a very philosophical
manager. lam proud, though neither loaded with dollars
nor showered with bouquets, to have had an opportunity of
playing my farewell night on the boards of this theatre,
where I first achieved my great success in this country, and
a success which secured it to me all over the United States."
The rueful note of the words we have italicised is worthy of
remark ; and these desponding expressions are used in the
face of asserted " crowded houses, throughout the progress
of this couple in America. Hamblin, Browne, Abbot, and
Mrs. Shaw, have been starring it at the Bowery. This
theatre did not pay expenses, and was expected to close.
The New York Morning Herald states, they are, with Wil-
liams and Placide, all now doing nothing; but some of them
are engaged at the Park at the reopening. Mitchell's
Olympic has been the only paying concern; the prices are
low, being only a quarter-dollar to the boxes, and equivalent
to our sixpence to the pit; this theatre is now closed. In
Philadelphia, the Chesnut Theatre is closed, and to be let.
It was opened sometime ago at reduced prices, but the
" move" was not successful ; the price to the boxes was
lowered to half a dollar. The stage-manager of the Chesnut,
Mr. Ritchings, after twelve years' residence in America, has
stated his intention to come to England, believing that he is
only wasting his time in America. He is a light comedy
actor, and very clever.—At Baltimore and Washington, both
the theatres are closed ; in fact, look were we will throughout
the States, the drama will be found at a discount. There is
no hope whatever of its reaction for four or five years at the
least.—At the Charleston Theatre, Mr. and Mrs. Seguin
have been singing, with Manvers ; the receipts occasionally
being five dollars.—The Tremont, in Boston, is closed, and
to be let.—The Rochester Theatre is closed; as, also, is
that in Providence.—There is a great deal of talk that Miss
Cushman, a clever " actress of all work,' is about to build
a theatre ; but the undertaking is not probable.—A new
theatre was proposed to be built by Hamblin, by subscription,
such as would be worthy of the representations he intended
to give ; but, as the subscriptions were not forthcoming, the
trouble was saved him.—Brahain and his son are stated to
be drawing " crowded houses'' everywhere; but a large dis-
count must be taken off.—Jim Crow Rice is at Montreal.
Forrest is now at Cincinnati and Louisville.
To show the tricks sometimes played in the States, one
anecdote respecting an actor who is well known on' the
English boards, will amuse. After a bad season, Mr. 8.,
who was the manager, announced a benefit, the proceeds of
which, it was understood, were to pay up the actors' salaries.
It was made public that a certain description of dollar rail-
way notes, then at half the value, would be taken at full
price; this being tantamount to admitting the audience at
half price to all parts of the house. The theatre was filled.
The manager, at the close of the performance, offered his
railway notes as payment to his company. They were
refused unless paid at their actual value, and not at their
nominal. That night the manager bolted, and the next
thing heard of him was, availing himself of the bankrupt
law ; thus proving that half a loaf is better than no bread.
With all these theatres closed, the most unpromising accounts
of trade from all parts of the States, we can only offer our
advice to English performers to stay at home, and be satisfied
with whatever offers. Indeed, we could bring forward
abundant proof to add to what we have stated, if we con-
sidered it necessary.

NOTTINGHAM ELECTION.—The writ was proclaimed on
Sunday at a quarter past one o'clock (a rather unusual cir-
cumstance for a Sunday) in the market place, and the nom-
ination declared for Thursday at ten o'clock, the polling on
Friday. The election will thus be over in five days, and the
town saved from much extra-excitement.

PRESENT TO HER MAJESTY.---A most extraordinary
horse (perhaps the smallest in the world) arrived at the Royal
Mews at Windsor, on Monday afternoon, by the Great
Western Railway, from town, as a present to her Majesty,
from Java (in which island it was foaled), of the diminutive
size of only 271 inches in height—indeed, not near as tall as
many of the Newfoundland and other dogs belonging to her
Majesty and his Royal Highness Prince Albert. This ex-
traordinary little animal, which is rising five years old, is of a
dark brown colour, well-formed, and extremely quiet and
playful.
CORRECT NOTION OF " THE BEALTIFUL."—TaIk in-
deed, of your pantomimes and gaudy shows—your proces-
sions, and installations, and coronations ! Give me, for a
beautiful sight, a neat and smart woman, heating her oven
and setting in her bread ! And if the bustle
idoes make the
sign of labour glisten on her brow, where s the man that
would not kiss that off, rather than lick the plaster from
the cheek of a duchess ?—Hr. Cobbett.
THE WESLEYAN MISSIONARY SOCIETY.—A bazaar has
for the last few days been held at the Centenary-hall, Bishops-
gate-street, London, for the benefit of the Wesleyan Mis-
sionary Society. The walls of one of the. rooms is covered
with rare skins and furs, and sundry curious articles, sent
over for the purpose by the missionaries in connexion with
the Wesleyan community in every t
quarter or the globe. Se.
veral costly presents from the King f Ashantee, and various
curiosities from the Celestial Empire, and elegan
manufactured at the mission stations in France, adorn the
counters of the fair show-women.
MURDER.—At the Flintshire: Assizes, on Friday last,
Hannah Roberts was indicted for the murder of her husband,
Robert Roberts, at Caerwys, in June, by poison. The de-
ceased was an old man seventy-five years of age, living at
Caerwys, and in the possession of some little property. In
May last he was induced, by some means or other, to marry
the prisoner, who was only nineteen. The deceased had
made his will, and left the prisoner what Wle he possessed ;
but in consequence of some irregularities which he had ob.
served in her conduct, he threatened to alter it. This was
the motive alleged by the prosecution for the commission of
the offence. Soon after, the deceased was taken ill, and
eventually died. The purchase of the arsenic by the prisoner
and her declaration that she had administered it to her hus-
band were proved, It was argued, in reply, that there was
not sufficient to show that the prisoner knew the fatal quali-
ties of the drug, and that there was no proof that poison was
the cause of death. The jury, however, found her guilty,
and Baron Gurney passed sentence of death ; but as a jury
of matrons subsequently discovered that she was Pregnant
he execution was of course deferred until after her delivery'
t