The Liverpool Standard, and General Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-08-15 00:00:00

SOUTH LL.

of a merchant vessel are charged with having, by ill-usage
and starvation, caused the deaths of two unfortunate
.otified that the compersons, who could not, of course, get out of the vessel,
Assizes for South Lan-
but who were in reality imprisoned there. But we must
St. George's-hall on Wed-
look at what we are about here, because I need not tell
,)ened till Thursday. The
you there may be fault upon both sides. A lazy crew may
protracted sittings at Lan-
make it necessary to inflict punishment, and we must take
..ecasionedb the la e amount of business before
care, in endeavouring to do what is right, to do justice.
y rg
, .
.te courts there. The judges, Mr. Baron Platt We should not on the one hand encourage insubordina-
and Mr. Justice Crowder, arrived at the Lime-street tion, nor on the other brutality. If you are satisfied,
station of the railway, and were received by Richard Fort, however, that the treatment of those persons produced
Esq., the High. sheriff, and J. B. Lloyd, Esq., Mayor. death, and that treatment was exhibited with the intention
Immediately on arriving, their lordships proceeded to St. to cause death, the crime is murder. So, gentlemen, if it
George's-hall, where the commission was formally opened ; is of that brutal character which was likely to produce
subsequently their lordships, attended by the High- death—if it was such as was natural to end in the death
sheriff and his Chaplain (the Rev. S. W. King, rector, of of those men. the crime is murder. But if there has been
Northwich), the Mayor, and Mr. Alderman J. an illegal beating and illegal treatment, but without the
-4 to St. George's Church, where Divine intention I have mentioned, or without the probability of
At its conclusion, Mr. Baron death resulting, then, gentlemen, the crime would be bat
.-us-house, when the criminal manslaughter, because they would be doing an illegal act,
which was not naturally directed to deprive the party of
life, nor an intention to do so. In that case the crime
would be manslaughter, because by an illegal act death
had followed. I am sure, gentlemen, you will discharge
your duties diligently, and the sooner you retire and send
some bills to this court the sooner we shall be enabled to
repair the loss of time which, I am sorry to say, a pressure
of business at Lancaster has occasioned to this town.
The grand jury then retired.
Tin PRESTON "Loci-orT."—George Cowell, weaver;
Michael Gallagher, schoolmaster ; Mortimer Grimshaw,
weaver ; Luke Wood, weaver ; John Brocklehnrst, weaver ;
John Lang, weaver; John Gardiner, spinner; William
Parkinson, spinner ; James Waddington, draper ; Joseph
Dolphin, spinner; and Thomas Gregson, spinner—all of
whom were out on bail—surrendered to answer a
charge of conspiracy at Preston. The indictment, which
was found at the last assize, arose out of the unfortunate
state of things which so long endured at Preston, and
which had become a matter of general notoriety. That
very unhappy state of things having now come to an end,
the masters, desirous not to revive any past feelings, and
hoping that what had passed had passed for ever, desired,
with his lordship's permission, not to offer any evidence
against those parties, and that they should be acquitted.
His lordship having assented, the jury found a verdict of
--A the - -ors were discharged -fter b:

NCASHIRE ASSIZES

f the dela.

was th

H. Turner,

Service was ce

Platt proceed,

WN COURT.

Ick, Mr. Baron P]

I.tt took his

following gentlemen were

worn ZS

BARD a- t%

William Brown, Esq., Richmond-hill, Foreman.
Sir Elkanah Armitage, Manchester, knight.
Thomas Baziey, Esq., Hayesleigh.
Robert Bean, Esq., Liverpool.
Sir J. Bent, Knight, Edge-hill.
David Bromilow, Esq., Haresfiach-house.
John Campbell, Esq., Liverpool.
Nathaniel Eckeraley, Esq., Wigan.
William Hosken Harper, Esq., Hatham-lodge.
Alexander Henry, Esq., Manchester.
Hugh Hornby. Esq., Wavertree.
Cephas Howard, Esq., Bronnington-hall.
'William Jackson, Esq., Liverpool.
Edward Johnson, Esq., Allerton-Hall.
John B. Lloyd, Esq., Liverpool.
Elkanah Moss, Esq., Ravenscroft-hall.
William Neild, Esq., Manchester.
Benjamin Nicole, Esq., Manchester.
Edward Parry, Esq., Liverpool.
John Rosson, Esq., Moorhall, Ormakirk.
Alfred Sylvester, Esq., Alderbouse.
Absolom Watkin, E.q , Northenden, near Manchester.
George Woodhead, Esq., Oldhall, Hollingworth.
The ordinary c^-1- • - --^,e through, his

, •
the course not guilty, ana ti.. _ , attei
to the publicity with which the
lordship had expressed his satisfaction that the matter had
administered, and pointing out
taken so gratifying a turn. He hoped all parties would
roper discharge of the duties
take warning by what had passed, and avoid the recur-
-
remarked the gratifying fact,
rence of such evils in future. The court next proceeded
no case is contained in the calendar resulting in feuds with the following •
between master and man ; that not a single case arises Mrsr CASES.—Mary Rogers was indicted for having, on
out of the late strikes of workmen, misled by wicked the 7th of August, at Liverpool, been found in possession
and designing persons for their own private benefit to of a certain mould for the manufacture of counterfeit coin.
the destruction of those who have been misled by them— In this case the prisoner was actually taken. by detective-
by men who have dared in this country, in this country of Povey manufacturing counterfeit money. She was found
intelligence and commercial enterprise, and the knowledge guilty. Sentence deferred.—Ann Kane, Bennett Lovatt,
which men have of trade, especially in this county—who and Mary Jones, were indicted for a similar offence. The
have dared to come forward with such a theory as that a facts in this case, as regarded Kane, were almost the same
gentleman's capital, if he will adventure it in trade, as in the former, she being actually caught in the act.
should be the subject of a partnership between him and The other two prisoners had nothing to do with the offence,
A more wild, a more untenable, a more dan- and they were discharged, Kane was found guilty.—George
never could exist with respect to trade. Burgess pleaded guilty to having, at Ashton-under-Lyne,
ejoice that those deluded men appear to on the 24th of July, uttered a counterfeit half-crown.—
opened, and they have seen the folly of Matthew Mclnnes was indicted for having, at Liverpool,
•.en doing. Now master and man are on the 22rd of March, feloniously uttered several counter-
`o assist each other, each obtaining a feit half-crowns, having been previously convicted of a
-ans of the other ; and according similar offence. The jury returned a verdict of guilty.—
ects the capital, and according Thomas Smith pleaded guilty to an indictment charging
'rection makes it productive, him with having, on the 17th of July, at Heaton Norris,
happily and in comfort. uttered a number of counterfeit half-crowns.

6rand Jury'

f which, after allud

tance attached to a

Grand Jul

his men

zerons theory 1
I r

have their eye:
what they hav

the calendar, I grieve to see so I
creasing, I am sorry to sa:

BrRGLARIES.—Patrick Donoghue pleaded guilty to a
fl charge of having, at Woolston-with-Martinscroft, on the
g towns Sth of May, burglariously entered the dwelling-house of
mns are to be found even of Richard Ashton, and stolen therefrom three pounds of
ad in which there is a nume- bacon. His lordship sentenced the prisoner to nine
growing crime of attacking months'imprisonment,with hard labour.—Johu Thompson
ghway, Her Majesty's sub- pleaded guilt• to an indictment charging him with having,
is well as taking from them at Manchester, on the night of the lith of April, burglari-
i
this kind are brought home ously broken into the dwelling-house of Joseph Horsfield,
ty of the judge to severely i and stolen four shirts, £4, and various other articles.—

here manufacttir

ALLEGED ILLEGAL DISTRAINT —ASHTON t 7. FORT.—
This was an action to recover compensation for goods,
taken under a writ of fi. fa. issued against the plaintiff's
father, and for the injury done to the plaintiff's credit by
the seizure. The plaintiff was a young man named Henry
Saxon Ashton, who for some time had carried on business
as a baker and flour dealer at Gorton Brook, near Man-
chester; the nominal defendant was the high-sheriff of
the county, but the real defendant Edward Collins. In
February, 1849, the father of the plaintiff carried on busi-
ness as a provision dealer and baker in Ashton-road,
Ardwick ; and in the course of that month, feeling him-
self unequal to the business, he suggested to his landlady
that the premises should be transferred to his son, the
plaintiff, who would continue to carry on the business.
The landlady agreed, on condition that six months' rent
due from the father should be previously paid. The
father was unable to raise the money; and as the pay-
ment was a condition precedent to the plaintiff's tenancy
commencing, the landlady distrained upon the father's
goods, and they were sold by auction, and the rent paid
out of the proceeds, £l7 7s. Most of the goods were
bought by the plaintiff, he having borrowed £l7 for that
purpose, from Mrs. Duesbury, a relation of the landlady's.
In order to repay that amount, he applied to a relation of
his own, who gave him £2O. The plaintiff continued to
carry on the business in Ashton-road; and he realised
sufficient money to purchase (with the aid of a building
society) some premises at Gorton-brook, to which he
removed in September, 1851. His father and mother
resided with him, and the mother suggested that if the
plaintiff"tvould furnish a small portion of the premises,
they would supply it with goods, and so be enabled to
contribute towards the expenses of the establishment.
Accordingly the plaintiff purchased canisters, &e., and the
father and mother commenced a small tea and coffee shop,
subsequently dealing in flour and provisions, but keeping
a perfectly distinct concern from that of the plaintiff.
The father incurred a debt of £4B for flour, with Mr.
Edward Collins, whose traveller called for and obtained
£l9, which was all that was really due at the time, and
the father then ordered five more bags of flour. On the
17th March last, execution was issued by Collins, and all
the plaintiff's stock, &c., was seized under it, nothing but
his implements of trade being left. It appeared from the
evidence that the name of the plaintiff's father was over
the door of the shop at Gorton-brook, consequent upon
the license to sell tea and coffee. Evidence was given
showing that in February, 1852, when the plaintiff was
sued for a debt of £9O, due to Mr. Birchall, corn dealer,
Manchester, he stated to the solicitor that it was of no
use to proceed, as the "shop and everything" belonged to
his (the plaintiff's) father; that proceedings were conse-
quently stayed : and that £l2 only had been paid upon
the account. Verdict for the plaintiff for the amount
constable claimed.

AN INFANT.—NUTTALL n. WARBITRTON.—Thomas
Nuttall was the plaintiff, and William Warburton the de-
fendant ; the amount claimed was £77. Ss., for board and
lodgings and for money lent while the plaintiff was a
minor. The defendant pleaded, first, never indebted ;
secondly, that he was " an infant ;" and thirdly, the statute
of limitation. The plaintiff is a cowkeeper and boot and
shoemaker; and the defendant is a young man of some
property, and brother-in-law to the plaintiff. While a
minor, and an apprentice to a druggist, at Bolton, the
defendant boarded and lodged with the plaintiff, under-
taking to pay when he attained his majority, and received
his property under his father's will. When these two
events occurred, however, he repudiated the agreement,
and hence the present action.—Verdict for the plaintiff;
damages, £65, with immediate execution._
_ . . .

s case, which did not terminate
the court adourned till nine

At the conclusion of
till close upon eight o'clock
o'clock next morning.

SATuEDAY,

ACTION ON A PROMISSOBT NOTN.—ROYLII v. Moss.--
This was an action for the recovery of £5OO under a pro-
=awry note, dated Decemtker 213th, VW, Payable fiZ