The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — 1849-12-11 (Liverpool, Merseyside, England)

WIGHTMAN.)  The S  al Comm  this count 3 before Mr. Jus light, when con season of the y Two of these were men of a superior education ; 22 could read and write well ; 31 could do so imperfectly, and 25 could neither read nor write. The following gentlemen were sworn as  or a general gaol delivery in ?,sterday, at the Crown Court, an. The calendar was not aat usually presented at this were 87 prisoners for trial. _ _  TAR GRAND JURY Sir Thomas B. Birch, Bart., M.P. Charles Ashton, Esq. Thomas Bourne, Esq. Thomas Bridson, Esq.  John Holn  Major, Liverpool  James Heywood, Esq. J. P. Heyv;ood, Esq. H. Harrison, Esq. Alexander Henry, Esq James Heald, Esq.  William Moss, Esq. R. H. Norris, Esq. Nicol. Esq  William Peel,Esq  The royal proclamation again rality, having been read, his for iury to the following effect :  four me  lemen of the Grand Jury onths since the last assize  ver the ealend  , foreman  vice, crime, and immolip addressed the grand  —lt is now not quite and general gaol deli d yet there is now upon .ly short period, no fewer  than 87  rendering, no matter hoe  mission absolutely ne  of mal  sorry to find that not only was the  at of nt  upon r  There  but the crime  t serious character  en ce bet for the (  net charges of  ere alio a numbei  harm,  quarrel, not reso  g to homicide, were There were sixteen cases . and attempts to kill—  Could not to the crir  bodily I  iudden  the per  It was n  d that the injur: it would be for t  murder. 'I  given wh  This rule  charge Nr  from vi class ti  to this port, we] with the death c  that robbery was the  There were thirty cases distinguished from those proportion of that class of Ld could only be accounted tiling vice of intoxication. appeared to be the result of  atemperance acting the slightest moral  .nstpyoperty  and i c  urglara  aurder it was difficult to asy to define the differdaughter. The question listinguish, as far as they manslaughter. In cases  the prevailing causes  )n, and such aweapon.  or grievous bodily  y to tl  used occurred in a ler whether it would But if an  ito a ca ;d like]  :ely to  Lughter  death, or amount to one of  rievou:  eu pri for th,  s had been vous bodily harm.  Lore blo  ide of an adult • but in infant, if the Child died  3 place it in any oth,  s a particular case of He referred to that er steamer, belonging  charged, upon a coroner's inquisifion, by upsetting their boat in the pon that subject might be thus  general law u  w some act done by  the person navigiting the steamer, to make it amount to the crime of manslaughter; a mere omission on his part would not be enough. A mere omission of not performing the whole of his duty will not amount to manslaughter ; but if these was sufficient light to enable him to see what in such a position as to and if, that being the  enable I  en ma  duty, or dicla  forgery on the c,  Comm.  fine, w  iery of this  was an lute  sioners had no the fraud cod effect of this fc  would not det neral cl  .th, then it certainly  e view of having a :flitted. To establish a sary to shew that there this case the commis) the fine, and therefore !d by showing that the to cause them to do an act be their duty to do. He sr comment upon the ge) be brought before them. to them a prima fade a bill. If at any time quire any advice from be most happy to give ewer. With these few ss them to their duties.  There was a charge of  non was charged with  the stipendiary magisxi, to a memorial to the  toms, with en mfli  em by furtt  T the evidence I  stance in his I would disc