The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-06-21 00:00:00

1414414Ft' eihai-Aluitiltn.

Ann Murphy was brought,tip on rith2ijd at the
County Magistrates' Court,. yesterday, before' Messrs.
Thomas Drocklebankand William 'Laird, charged with
having attempted infanticide. The following witnesses
were examined,

Mr. Ed4atd Bough, governor of the West Derby
Workhouse. proVed hafing ddiiiitted the prisoner into
' the workhouse on the 31st of "May, and . discharged her
on the 11th of June, when she took her child away with
her. Between six and eight o'clock on the evening of
the 12th inst., the child was again brought to the work-
house by Thomas Harris, gardener to Mr. Jeremiah
Chaffer, Bellevue, Anfield. Witness gave information
to the police, grid the same evening he accompanied-
James Vooney, a constable, .to the prisoner's lodgings.
Upon being asked where the child was, she stated that
she had sent it to Ireland that morning by a woman,
named. Jones. She was then taken into custody.
Elizabeth Ward, nurse at West Derby Workhouse,
gave corroborative evidence.
Thomas Harris deposed that on the 12th instant,
about six o'clock in the evening, he and two other
persons heard the cry of an infant in the plantation
belonging to Mr. Chaffers. "Upon getting into the
plantation, he saw a heap about two yards from the
wall, the sods mid grass dared fresh. On removing
the sods, he discovered the child lying on its back. He
immediately took it out, mid, having taken away the
soil from As nostrils, went in search of ari officer, and
conveyed the child to the Workhouse.

jdnie,s 3iOdneY ,stited that the prisoner,-when charged
by him with the offence, answered, "dh yes, I did it;
I am sorry I did it ; I did bUry it in a field ; I thought
it was better dead than alive ;" and she also inquired if
the child was alive.,

Mr. John B. Nevins, medical officer at the Work-
house, gave evidence tending to identify the child.
Elizabeth, wife of William Griffiths, 31, Beau-street,
Everton, with whom the prisoner lodged after she had
been discharged from the workhouse, stated that while
she staid at their house the prisoner seemed to pet the
child very much. On the morning of the 12th, prisoner
said that she was going to send her daughter to a place
three miles from Wexford. In the evening after she
returned home and cried very much, and alleged that
she had sent her child f 6 ireland.

This waq the whole of tho cTiclence for tho p;oecoletiort-,
and the prisoner was fully committed to take her trial
at the assizes on the charge of attempted murder.

:EARTLESS BREACH OF PROMISE OF
MARRIAGE AND SEDUCTION.

DAIWAGES £500.--WRIGHT v. WALKER,

In the Secondaries-court, London, yesterday, a case
of considerable interest was heard.

This was a suit of inquiry to assess the damages, laid
at £l,OOO, in a breach of promise of marriage, defendant
having suffered judgment to go by default.
Mr. Flintoff (instructed by Mr. Brady for the
plaintiff) stated that this was, perhaps, as heartless a
case as had ever come under the notice of a
jury. Plaintiff was the daughter of a small farmer at
Barkingside, Essex ; the father was dead, and had
left a widow, with nine children. Plaintiff, being anxious
to relieve her mother from pressing, expenses, took a
small cottage, and kept a school with great credit to
herself. She had many pupils, was much respected, and
everything went on prosperously. In 1859, defendant
came from Wolverhampton and settled down at Bark-
ingside, where he carried on business as a dairyman:
In February, 1859, plaintiff and her friends went
to visit defendant after a most pressing invitation, and
in the evening defendant offered plaintiff marriage.
Plaintiff said it was very sudden, and objected to: give
any answer then ; bat on the following morning de-
fendant wrote a most pressing letter, and plaintiff having
consulted her friends, accepted him as her betrothed.
After a courtship, on the 10th May, 1859, defendant
paid plaintiff a visit at her cottage, and having
obtained a great hold upon her affections, succeeded
in seducing her. In the morning he renewed his
promise of marriage, and said he would marry plain-
tiff before the end of the month, A London, to save
trouble. He continued his attentions, and again, at a
later period, he succeeded in overcoming the virtuous
scruples of his victim, who at his request gave
up her school and went to live with her mother. She
soon after this became enciente, and instead of fulfilling
his promise defendant actually went to Romford, and
returned with a woman with whom he lived, and whom
he had since married. He was expostulated with by
plaintiff's friends, and he then expresed a wish to see
her, but when she met him at a lone spot near his
house, though far 'advanced in . pregnancy, he used
her ' most brutally, and attempted to ravish her. A
child was born on the 18th of April ;. and the jury
would, he (Mr. Flintoff) trusted, give exemplary
damages, as defendant was well off, and plaintiff's pros-
pects were utterly blasted, as no one would entrust a
child to her now.

Plaintiff, a most interesting young woman, was called
and preyed the promise to marry; and evidence having
beeflobi of defendan.Vs position, the jury assessed the
damage at £5OO.

ANOTHER BREACH OF PROMISE OF
MARRIAGE.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-YESTERDXY.

ALLEN V. CROZIER

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a young
woman about 20 years of age, against the defendant, a
colonel in the army, between 50 and 60 years of age,
for a breach-4
his promise of marriage, and the seduc-
tion of the plaintiff under that promise. The defendant
denied the promise.
Mr. Macaulay, Q,C., and Mr. Girth; appeared for
the plaintiff; and Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., .and Mr.
Coleridge for the defendant.
It appeared that previous to the year 1857 the defen-
dant had become acquainted with the plaintiff, and pro-
fessed great attachment toiher, and promised marriage.
She, confiding .in the defendant's promise, yielded her-
self to the defendant—the result being the birth of a

Defendant had paid all the expenses of the acconche-
ment, and had taken lodgings for the plaintiff, where he
used to visit her, and for which he paid ; but he refused
to fulfil his promise of marriage, broke off the connection,
and ultimately married the barmaid of a country inn.
Before the evidence was fully gone into a consultation
took place between the counsel on both sides, which
resulted in a compromise, it being agreed that a juror
should be withdrawn, the plaintiff being paid by the
defendant £lOO.

EXTRAORDINARY LIBEL CASE.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.--YESTERDAY.

STONE V. LORD LLANOVER.

This was an action to recover damages from the defen:
dant for having published slanderous and defamatory
words of the plaintiff. The defendant pleaded not
guilty, and a justification. - -*

Sir F. Kelly, Mr. Sergeant Pigott, Mr: Hawldn
and Mr. Phipson were counsel for the plaintiff ; Mr. E.
James,llir. Bovill, Mr. Haddlesfon, and Mr,
.11. James
represented the defendant.

Sir F. Kelly, in opening the case to the jurY, said he
had the honour to appear before them as counsel for the_
plaintiff in this action, the nature of which. they would
have discovered from the pleadings. The issue which
they would have to try was of such deep and unspeak-
able importance, that he was guilty of no exaggeration
when he said that all earthly considerations of fortune,
of success, or failure of health, nay, of life itself, whex
compared with it sank into utter insignificance, and became
as nothing. He should endeavour to discharge his duty,
the most arduous that had ever fallen on him in an
experience of 36 years, to make a statement of the facts
calmly, and without any high colouring, tending-to
direct their, attention from the great issue which they
had to try. The plaintiff complained of the deepest
injury which any human being in this country or in any
civilised country could inflict on another—the charging
him with the commission of unnatural crimes.
The learned counsel then entered into a detailed
statement of the case, and the plaintiff was placed
under examination.

The London and North-Western traffic retUrns'for
the week amount to £81,380 ; increase, £1,602.
LORD PALMERSTON'S IRISTI TENANTA.—The Sligo
Independent states that in the course of lait week a
number of young persons from among the tenantry of
Lord Palmerston, in that county, were despatched as
emigrants to Quebec, their passage and outfit being
defrayed by his lordship.
SINGULAR RECOVERY OF LOST NOTEi.—Same months
ago Mrs. Sturges, of Beeehfield House, Doncaster., wife of
one of the oldest West Riding magistrates of tho dis-.
trict, had her pocket picked of a. purse Containing four
ten-pound notes rind £2O in gold. AlthOugh every effort
was made.by the police at the time, to find out the thief,
no success attended their efforts, and: the notes and
money weralooked upon as lost. However,. on Friday
last the notes turned up in a rather unexpected manner.
Mr. 11:•' Hartley, bookseller at Doncaster,--receive
d a
letter, bearing the Manchester post-mark, in which
person signing himself as " X.. Y. Z.rforwarded the
four notes, which he stated had been. found by him at
Doncaster some, months ago; and, from the. fact that
Mrs. Sturges lost her purse on the same day, hecosn-.
cludcs.that they belong to her. No mention is mad eo
the £2O in gold. .

ALTERCATION AND correspondent, of a
Cork paper, dating from Duleek. ou Saturdayoays :
On this evening, a bex-cart, bslonging to R. Clousten,
Esq., of Ballymagarvey, near Balrath, was driven home-
waisby
two men at a very quick pace; on the Platten-
road leading Dfa.ustleeekn.ou-gr
aonfdtahesmeuffistaeteedstuheedas
otherth
was not driving
who should have the reins. Coming up towards the
bridge of Platten one of the men in the scuffle was
thrown out of the cart and killed on the spot. The de-
ceased,-whose name is Patrick Reid, was a married man,
but had no family, His, wife was in the cart, but got
down from the figisai manner in which it was driven.