The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1858-07-20 00:00:00

CROWN COURT,
WiDNIIIDAY, July 14.
(Before Mr. Baron CHAN:I'LL.)

Margaret Bay wee indicted for the wilful murder of
Frederick William Bay, at Whippingharn, on the sth of
June.

_
Mr. Beetham conducted the 0111N1 for the prosecution ;
and Hr. Collier, Q.C., and Mr. W. M. Cooke eppeared
for the primmer.
The facts were that the prisoner had an illegitimate
child born in February. She was about to be married
to the father of the child. It frequently bad fits. The
prisoner, who lived at home with her father and mother,
was very fond of the child, u were all the family, and
the father of the child used frequently to come and see
her, and bring things for the child, and the prisoner
made clothes for it, and had just wide short clothes to
bJ ready when it oould walk. On the sth of June the
child was very poorly, and the prisoner put it to bed up.
stain about 11 o'clock : she came down stain and said
she had left the child asleep. She went up and down
stairs doing the household work several times during
the morning. Soon after one o'clock she ran down stairs
in great distress and said her dear baby was dead. Her
mother ran upstairs with her and found the child wee
dead. She asked the prisoner how she had found it, and
else said that a little handkerchief which had covered
the child's face had got down its throat and suffocated
it. Aii otor who had attended the poor girl in her
confinement was sent for, and he stated that in his opi-
nion the child had been suffocated, end probably the
handkerchief might have got down the throat, and
thereby caused the death.
. . . . .

Tho jury stoppod the oase, saying it did not appear
that the prisoner had had any hand in the child's death,
and they therefore Aequitted the prisoner.
Mr. Collier said, that Dr. Leyford was in court, and
he would have stated that the story of the prisoner
was most probably correct, and he hyped she would
go out of court without the slightest stain on her
character.

The grand jury havo thrown out the bill against Hart
for the Portsmouth murder.
John Dominy and James Pagan, two respectably-
dressed men, were indicted for obtaining money from
Charles Smut by threatening to mouse him of a crime.
Mr. H. T. Cole was counsel for the prosecution, and
Mr. W. M. Cooke and Mr. Yonge defended the pri-
soners.

Mr. Baron Channell having summed up,
The jury Acquitted the pnsoners, but stated it to be
their belief that the boy had not taken any money, and
that the father had not received any.

THE BLANDFORD BANK.
COORT OP BANKRUPTCY, LONDON, MONDAY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD.)

Is Re OAK AND SNOW.—TIND bankrupts, William
Coventry Oak and Charles Hastings Snow, were hankers,
of Blandford Forum, Dorset.
This wu the certificate meeting.
The amounts, which extend from 20th November,
1843, to 13th March, 1858, have already appeared, a di-
vidend of Sa. In the 2 has been already declared, and we
believe • small amount more will shortly be paid. It will
he reoolleeted that at the last examination meeting on
May 14th, the bankrupts were allowed to pass without
opposition, all questions of conduct being reserved for
Hi. meeting.
Three notices of opposition had been filed. Mr. Bag-
ley opposed for the aasigneos ' • Mr. Roxburgh for the
Hon. and Rev. 8. G. Osborne, Mrs. Sommell, Mr. Mel-
moth and other creditors.

Mr. Lawrence appeared on behalf of the bankrupt
Oak ; Mr. Linklater supported Mr. Snow.
Mr. Lawrence said that it appeared to him and his
friend that it would be oonvenient to all parties that—as
they wished the court to have all the facts of the cue
to adjourn the oondideration of the matter until his
Honour's return. The whole of the estate had not yet
been re.lisel, and there was lilac a question of a guaran.
tee of £3,000 whieli materially affected the position of
the estate. The oourt would find that the smu of 0,000
mu paid over by some London bankers just before the
bankrupts suspended, and was afterwards repaid by
them. This would be the subject of judicial investige-
tion elsewhere, and there were other facto connected
with this case whioh would be more perfectly considered
If his Honour permitted an adjournment for two or
three months. The delay woe printot facie on the part
of the bankrupts, but his Honour would probably not
be in • position to give judgment until after the vim,
tion. They proposed that the evidence should he taken
in shorthand, which would have to be trenveribed and
therefore would not be ready for three or four days. He
therefore, on behalf of Mr. Oak, and his friend (Mr.
Linklater) on behalf of Mr. Snow, desired an adjourn.
went, to whieh ha supposed the assignee* would not
object.
Mr. Linklater said that it oertainly appeared moat ma-
terial, if this question was the chief ingredient in the
ease, and it really might be so—it then became absolutely
neoeaaary to see the result of those proceedings. The
question would be submitted to a jury, and an action
had been commenced against Messrs. Glyn and CO.. and
it might have a very great influence on his Honour's
decision.

far. Roxburgh said he objected to the adjournment,
His clients had come up from Blandford for the purpose
of attending that meeting and giving their evidence.
This they had done at very great moon venienes and ex-
pense. They had given notice of opposition, and if it
had been intended to apply for an adjournment lie
thought some notice ought to have been given, that the
necessity for their attendance might have bean dispensed
with, He was quite prepared to proceed with his oppo-
sition and thought the notice of an adjournment mune
very late.
Mr. Bagley said he appeared on behalf of the assignees
who represented a very large body of creditors, and they
had certainly Instructed him to bring before the notice
of the court a question of great gravity ; but notwith-
standing that, if any advantage WU to be derived from
an adjournment, he thought the matter might be post-
poned. It was not • bankruptcy of very long standing,
the parties nad only been made bankrupts in March last,
As the bankruptcy had not been long pending, and if
the representatives of the bankrupt' thought any ad-
vantage would be derived, he would not oppose the
application.
His Honour said the only difficulty WU the expense
of the creditors in coming there, which might have been
avoided.

Mr. Roxburgh euggested that some provision ehould
be made for the expenses of his clients. They did not
wish to piece the bankrupts in an unfavourable pod-
lien, but they had been at some expense In miming up,
and they would incur further expense in coming up
again.
Mr. Bagley: Let it stand over.
Mr. Roxbuiyli : But the railway people won't.
Lawrence said he was told that one or more of his
friend's clients had not entered opposition.
Mr. Roxburgh denied it.
His Honour laid that in far as their expenses in com-
ing to London were concerned they should be paid.
Mr. Lawrence thought they could arrange that. lie
further stated that the asseta likely to be realised were
£17,300, of which £B,OOO had been already received.

He need not remind the court that bankrupts stood In
• vary much better position when they paid a large
His Honour agreed that it was desirable that he should
be in poseemion of all the facts of the case.
Mr. Lawrence said that in this cue it was particularly
material.
Mr. Bagley did not think the action oould be tried be-
fore December.
After • aliort interval, Mr. Lawranoe said that they
proposed to take Tueaday, 10th January, as that would
carry them over the 'Mingo after term.
His Honour agreed.
Adjourned accordingly. Protection allowed.
WIDNESDAY, July 14.
In Re BARNES and BARN6B.—The bankrupts, Philip
Abraham Barnes and John Barnes, were woolstaplers, of
Blandford Forum, Doreetchire. Thie was the last exa-
mination meeting. Mews. Butler and Canning not
having prepared the balance sheet, an adjournment was
ordered.