The Northern Daily Times. — 1857-05-29 (Liverpool, Merseyside, England)

MRS. BROCKLEBANK'S LEVER WATCH ! —An interesting looking and lady-like dressed female, named Catherine Brocktebank, who said she was a married woman, living at 77, Christein street, charged two well-dressed men, named David Rogers and James Thompson, the former for stealing her silver lever watch and gold chain, and the latter for having pledged them in London road, for £2, knowing them to be stolen. The case was a singular one. The prisoner, James Thompson, who was the moat respectable looking of the two, was described as a grocer, carrying on business in Great Newton-street, the other prisoner was set down as a " gentleman " Mr. Bluck defended the prisoners. The c nnplainaut said on Monday evening, at half-past eight o'clock, the prisoner Rogers called at her house, and, knowing him for some time, and thinking he was hungry, she gave him something to eat. Her watch was hanging in the room of a lady named Mrs. Brown, who lived in the same house, and when the prisoner went away the watch was miesed, and subsequently she found it was pledged by the prisoner Thompson. She went to seek the prisoners at two or three betting-houses, as they were well-known characters, and at last she got them at a well-known gambling beerhouse. Alderman Helene : If you knew Rogers to be a wellknown character, as you say, how did you tolerate him in your house? Witness: Well. I knew him, and I thought he might want a dinner. Alderman Holme : Are you a married woman ? Yes, I am. What is your husband ? A. fireman, on board the Scamander steamer, and he is up at Alexandria now. Mr. Bluck proceeded to cross-examine the woman, and she was subjected to the most fearful ordeal that the learned gentleman was capable of commanding (and that is not small in cross-examination). He certainly elicited some of the most extraordinary revelations ever heard in a police court, but we can only state a portion, ' as the remainder was of such an extraordinary and disgusting character as to shock even th 3 most depraved ; and from' the appearance of the woman, and what she admitted herself to have been concerned in, it would be hard to bring the imagination to conclude that human nature was at so low an ebb. She admitted that she was what she termed a " gay woman" before her marriage ; her husband knew it, but he married her for all that. She knew and lived with the prisoner Rogers before she was married, and he often gave her sums of money and made her presents. He frequently visited her since she was married. She denied having given him the watch to pledge, as she said if her husband came home and found her without the watch he would certainly murder her. She then admitted to have participated in the most diabolical scenes, in company of the prisoner Rogers and Mra. Brown, whom she said was a married woman, and a dreesmal:er --but we must close here. Mr Bluck addressed: the court in a speech that even made the woman writhe under the laceration that he gave her, but, notwithstanding that, his Worship said the case was of such a description that he would not decide it in that court. He would send both prisoners for trial, but would take two sureties in £lO for the aprearance of Thompson. A " FLAT" CASE ----Thomas Meadows was charged with having stolen a flat and selling it. Mr. 'William Henry Hunter was the person prefering the charge, but in reply to his worship, he said he had no evidence to offer, as he had not time to gat it. Ho asked for a remand, but his worship said he could not remand him without evidence for that purpose. The man was diecharg6d. (