The Liverpool Standard, and General Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-08-29 00:00:00

rverts of Ox

their chttrc

in Mis,

1, came over t,

Dublin to deliver
lectures at the Rotunda on collegiate education, and when
• commenced he had an audience of about 300, which
lied down to 150, when the Protestants opened a
v. ---...,;011t5. Indeed, after

lectures on a
ire b ti

-Newma'

her, and never rest
two years ago the R

vanished

.ce, and dre

L his course. (Applause.)
Catholics had originated
e " Catholic Defence
Wil-

t whia

assemblage at

ded the

n, and tt
IPW (thP

i saints of Ireland
)f Larry O'Toole.'

ns of man, we find that here, in spite
RS, and the balmy influences of her

er clear blue

y landscape

pre" lives :saer
than are destroyed in tt

e murderous

s see, that in so far as ern

indic

land offers no anomaly to the condition of Romish
In Protestant England we find the num

murders amounts to four in a million ; in Ireland it rises
to eighteen; in France the number rises to above forty;
in Austria it is above fifty, and in some portions of the
Pope's dominions it reaches sixty-eight. In this com-
parison we may readily perceive the full effects of Popery ;
proportionately as it is undisturbed in its operations, crime
increases. We are told, and told truly, that this in a
great degree depends on the bad laws which prevail. No
doubt this is in part true ! But what is the cause of this?
In Protestant England, with an enlightened press spread.
ing its aegis over the land, such laws as those which give
its chief virulence to Romish power &annot find a place.
But in Romish countries, where opinions of every shape
and of all dimensions must, as it were, lie down in a Pro-
crustean bed, and be trimmed to the fashion of prescribed
rule, we find such bad laws prevailing. Are we not thus
taught that the laws of Romish countries are not fitted
for restraining the evil passions of men ? It would
be unfair to charge the Church of Rome with wilfully
and directly preaching advocacy of crime. (Hear, hear.)
She, like every other Church, whether Christian or
heathen, professes to discourage crime ; but by wishing to
make a disburthening of the guilty conscience an equiva-
lent for innocence, she introduces an element readily
converted into the most drngerous agency. In our Pro-
testant Church we inculcate the doctrine that as the tree
falls so it must lie—we know and teach that there is no
alteration beyond the grave. We thus associate something
terrible with the idea of sending an immortal spirit into
the presence of its judge. The murderer is haunted by
the belief that he must meet the judgment in his own
immortal spirit, and he is tortured by remorse at the idea
of being confronted by the spirit of his victim. The
believer in the doctrines of the Church of Rome sees all
these matters in a different light. The murdered man,
in his view, is not sent before his judge : but is sent to
purgatory, where the spirit of the victim undergoes a
change. By a series of masses which his frie,pds can
readily purchase, the Romanist is taught to believe that
his victim is released. The fall horror of the dreadful
effect of murder is thus lessened. In Rome, at
least one church exists in which it is believed by the
populace, that all souls for whom masses are said in that
church are relieved from purgatory ; and to this church
great numbers of the people resort daily. The priest—he
had seen it himself—keeps a regular book of entry in
which the names of all the souls relieved, or to be relieved,
are written. He had seen the monk get the money and
give receipts for it (cheers and laughter). In Milan he
saw a similarly privileged church, and being desirous of
having one of those receipts, furbishing up his best Italian,
he addressed the priest, saying, he wished to have the soul

of a friend relie

it done, and

d from purp, tc

that it could be done

ese curre

(Mr. Seymour) would

an
. He r

asked if he could
lied at once

and said the cost liould

POssessed of the
ite in it the nam

not in purgatol

halves,

augh). He

hen said, to pre-
e wished that he
I him the book.
finned, I was re-
iiich I knew was

art Seym

I place ft

mitted into gaol. The turnkey, however, who had had
charge of him during his incarceration, denied this.

Iu sum'.

e clearest

1g up, his Lordship told the jury there was
evidence that the prisoner had struck the
th violence, and had caused her death ; and
hat the only question was whether he was in a sound

state of mind at the time.—The jury at once found the
prisoner guilty of murder ; and his lordship proceeded to
pass sentence of death upon the prisoner, who was re-
moved, apparently unaffected at the fate which had just
been assigned to him.

MANSLAUGUTEB AT BIBBY, BY A FARMER.—Henry
Mercer (50) was indicted for the murder of Henry Shack-
lady, his brother-in-law, in Kirby, on the afternoon of
Thursday, the 10th inst. The case was one of a very
painful nature, as it had arisen from the intemperate
habits of the deceased. From the evidence, it appeared
that the prisoner had been subjected to a good deal of
irritating conduct on the part of the deceased, with whom
he had had a drunken fight on the preceding Tuesday,
and had been made the butt of some amount of what is
understood to be practical wit. Under the influence of
the excitement so produced, he had struck the deceased on
the head with a pitchfork, with which he had armed him-
self. The severity of the blow caused concussion of the
brain, and ended in the death of Shacklady. —The jury,
under direction of his lordship, found the prisoner guilty
of manslaughter, and he was sentenced to be imprisoned
for six months with hard labour.

MANSLA.IIMITEE AT WlGAN.—Daniel Brown, engine-
driver, was charged with causing the death of Joseph Bate,
a collier, at Ince, near Wigan, on the 27th July. It was
prisoner's duty to draw up the tubs from the four-feet
pit. About eleven o'clock on the morning in question, the
deceased and others were proposing to ascend from the
bottom of the pit. The prisoner drew up the tub before
the signal was given, which resulted in the death of the
deceased. The printed rules of the pit stipulated that no
human beings should pass up in the buckets between six
o'clock in the morning and twelve at noon. The prisoner

was acquitted.

FRAIT7D BY A GARDNER AT REDDIS/L—Richard Faulk-
ner, gardner, was charged with having, at Reddish, on the
28th of July, 1852. uttered a forged document, by which
he fraudulently obtained six shillings and nine pence.
The prisoner was acquitted.
FIGHT IN A COLLIERY.—Robert Newton, 23, a collier,
was indicted for wounding John Brockston, at the
Walthem-house Colliery, Pemberton. About half-past
four o'clock on the morning of the 29th of July the prose-
cutor, his brother, an uncle, and the prisoner, were quar-
relling in the pit, and (as alleged by the prosecutor) the
prisoner struck the prosecutor with a pick which he had
in his hand, and inflicted a flesh wound in the hip. The
jury acquitted the prisoner.
STEALING A RlNG.—Alice Latham, factory-worker, was
indicted for stealing a diamond ring. On the 28th of
September last, the prisoner went into the shop of Mr.
John Dean, jeweller, Bradshaw-leigh, and lopked at some
rings. On the day following, the ring in question was
missed, and it was subsequently found in the possession of
the prisoner. Verdict, guilty. Sentence, six months' im-
prisonment with hard labour.
GAROTTE ROBBERY.—Mary Ann McDonald, factory-
worker, was indicted for a garotterobbery on the person of
Henry Duckworth, an old farmer, of Oswaldwistle, near
Accrington. On the night of the 3rd inst. the prosecutor
_ _

Ccrington fa

when a

female came

and solicited him to go with her. He refused,
till persisted, and while she was soliciting him a

and threw hini down,

her ma

iaLso as-
A

1, and prosecutor was rendered almost insensible

ig six sovereigns, was t
i anmp cilvar from

on from

Sentenced to fifteen years' transportation
NISTERING DIIIIGS.—George G. Tootal, 20

of administeiir

waist-

tam d

Prisoner and the young female in ques
he service of Mr. Hayward, chemist

citn DelaP) gui

of cutting and wound-
d cohabited,) at Liver-

nom he t

30th of M
ton, 14

plaintiffs, to have the vessel removed in safety from the
dock-gate and taken to au anchorage in the river. The
dock-master said that she had all but cleared the bank
hen the accident happened, and that two inches more of
e floated her over. For the defence it
s contended that, on getting the David
into dock, the second tug was of no further
it was in accordance with the ordinary and gener

water would ha'

.r ieming
se; and that

obserxed practice for her to leave at the time she did.
Evidence in support of this view was adduced at
great length. It was also contended that the damage
sustained did not necessarily arise out of the unsuccessful
endeavour to have the ship put into dock.—His LORDSIIIP,
after alluding to the nature of the claim, and of the
defence, and remarking upon the pecuniary damage in-
volved in the case, although the jury would not be required
to pronounce an opinion as to that amount, as if the
verdict were in favour of the plaintiff, that would be made
a matter of reference, then, with much minuteness,
went over the various points of the evidence, remarking
that, in many instances, the witnesses on each side per-
fectly agreed. He next directed the attention of the jury
to the points on which they disagreed, stating that the
points at issue in a very great degree depended on the fact
of assistance being rendered at a critical period of the
tide. On this there appeared to be no conflict of opinion
between the parties ; although considerable disparity
existed in the evidence as to the particular nature and
amount of the assistance required, and rendered. From
all of which, however, it appeared that, if the Express
steam-tug had remained, and if her power had been
applied in endeavours to extricate the ship, she would
have been got off. At all events, such was the bearing
and body of the evidence for the plaintiff. He next, in
the same minute and painstaking manner, went over the
evidence for the defence, making such remarks as to bring
the tendency of that evidence clearly before the jury,
remarking that, in a great degree, the case turned on the
particular time at which the operations were carried into
effect, as related to the ebbing or the flowing of the tide.
He further remarked that much of the case necessarily
depended on the fact that the vessel, by the efforts made,
could not be docked at all ; the contract being in the usual
terms for docking the ship. It seemed, however, to be a
prevalent notion among the tug-people, that the second or
starboard tug should go away whenever the ship has got
her stern in so far as the dock-gate, unless ordered to
remain by the pilot or harbour-master, or some party in
authority. All the evidence went strongly to establish
as a fact, that the presence of the second steam-tug would
have been of very great utility. An important element
for the jury to consider would be, whether the damage
sustained was such as might be reasonably anticipated to
arise from the breach of the contract. If such damage
could not have been fairly anticipated, or if the plaintiffs
had been guilty of any manifest impropriety, from which
impropriety the damage might have arisen, they would
not be entitled to recover. He considered the jury might
have three different forms of verdict—the first, for the
defendants, in which case ther would be an end of the
matter; the second, for the plaintiffs, with nominal
damages, which would be to the effect, that the defendants
had been morally guilty of a breach of contract, but
—*Lug responsible for the absolute damage received;
or, they might find for the plaintiffs, with substantial
damages ; in which latter case, the amount would be a mat-

without being

ter of-reference. The jury retired at five minutes to nine
a'clock, and, after a quarter of an hour's absence, returned
The

a verdict for the plaintiffs, with nominal damage:
Court then adjourned.

THURSDAY.

,nd claimed
1 hence the

portion of the cargo to cover the amount of the bill. The
vessel was lost, and the defendants, with whom portions
of the freight were insured, refused to pay the plaintiffs
the insurance. A verdict for the plaintiffs, for £6O
damages and 40s. costs, was given in each case, with leave
for the defendants to appeal to a higher court.
DELIVERY OF GOODS—HOWARD V. SUITH.—This was
an action for the recovery of £lOO 19s. 6d., the value of
goods sold and delivered. After some evidence had been
gone into, it was agreed to refer the matter to a third party,
a verdict being given for the plaintiff, subject to reference
as to the amount.
ACTION ON A CHARTER PARTY—PRESTON AND
ANOTHER V. PowELL.—In this case the plaintiffs, who are
the owners of the ship Giaour, sought to recover from Mr.
Powell, the defendant, the sum of £BOO upon a charter
party. It appeared that, in the month of July, 1852, the
Giaour, a vessel of 270 tons register, was at Monte Video.
At that time the defendant entered into a charter party
with the captain as the agent of his owner, under which
charter the captain was to proceed with the vessel to
Penguin and Jova Island, on the coast of Patagonia; and
having there received a complete cargo of guano, to pro-
teed thence to St. Pierre, Martinique, or to a good safe
port in the United Kingdom, calling at Cork or Plymouth
for orders. The shipowner was to be paid 255. per ton
freight on the cargo, and was also to share with the ship-
per the profits arising from the sale of the cargo. Sub-
sequent to the signing of the charter-party, the defendant
gave the captain instructions by letter not to part with
the cargo at St. Pierre, Martinique, unless he could obtain
for it at least £5 per ton. On his arrival at St. Pierre,
the captain found that the defendant's agent, to whom he
had been directed to deliver the cargo within the limit
above stated, was dead. The successor to his busi-
ness offered to effect a sale of the guano ; but the selling
price being only £6 per ton, whereas there was a duty of
£2 per ton upon guano, and the captain being informed
that iu England the selling price was only about £3 per
ton, whilst in New York it was £7 or £8 per ton, he con-
veyed his cargo to the latter port, and there disposed of it.
The plaintiffs received the half of the profits of the sale,
but it was contended that they should receive freight from
Martinique to New York. On the other hand it was
urged that, by sailing to New York instead of to England,
the captain had broken the contract, and that the plaintiffs,
therefore, ought not to charge freight for that voyage.
After some consultation, the defendant agreed that the
matter should be referred to a mercantile gentleman in
this town, and that a verdict should be entered for the
plaintiff for £BOO damages and 40s. costs, subject to that
reference.

STEEL v. BUGGIANI.--0/1 this case being called, it was
intimated as having been agreed that a verdict should be
entered for the defendant for £lOO damages with 40i.
costs.

DISPUTED QUALITY OP GOODS-STAG AND OTHERS V.
THORPE.—This was an action for the recovery of £33
9s. 2d., balance of an account of £43 Os. 2d., due for a
quantity of steel delivered by the plaintiffs to the defen-
dant. The defence set up was, that the steel was bad,
and that, when it was sent back to the plaintiffs for that
reason, they refused to accept it. A verdict was given for
the plaintiffs for £3l Os. 2d.
This case closed the business of the day, and his lord-
ship dismissed the jury, leaving the remaining cases to be
disposed of by Mr. Justice Crowder.

(Before Mr. Justice Crowder and a Special Jury.)

ACTION UPON A GUARANTEE

OMPANY V. LLOYD.-