The Express.
London, England, 1855-06-12 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 1L 1855.

ibis b.-
piaea 01 • 1.04 A almost lassesible,
end nwesweeistes or nnet *se pies e-A.
imam Jim ask hull tap, mid, that she
qty Mihnhiftft titri/the alarm led bee& ghee,
mad ni lasi bt hue M besesit. Het linshined was
sent Iffm sod • siossoss suss ME, sad deka-
dads *ea senile • staMilintof her baring Men tabbed and
assaulted by a man. The deisedeas Masse then said
that at Ma time the bed NM Ws is tem wee that eanae-
thing terrible mittli berms, es she bed had a dunned
dream Me night Mho% GO Ills dsimisas repeated whet
bar blob's* seid.
Crospezesdaed—Wheess remised with the defendant
during the weenie'. Ma abs fainted twice, and also was
seised with violist essmilimo, and it was with oonsidm-
able difficulty that she was able to keep her from injuring
bereslf. the had se illenbt that they were real fits.
Is enema to • question put by Mr. Ryland, the witness
said that she did not think any me meld ham put oe such
ea appearance as that exhibited the defendant.
Kr. J. H. Cook, a surgeon rah 1. Me Minorite, de-
posed that he was called in to me the en the even-
ing in question, and found bar Ades 0.11 the hate of the
witness Koster, insensible, sad WIWI to speak. he was
bleeding from the nose ; and ars essinining Shehe dis-
covered two abrasions on the eight temple, and also a con-
tused wound on the bask of the head. He was now of
opinion that all these injuries might have been caused by
the defendant herself.
Crom-examined—Upon the trial of the man Mellott, wit-
sem was examined es • witness for the prosecution. He did
not then say that the injuries might have been caused by the
promentris, because he was sot asked the question. He
considered that the wound at the back of the head might
have been occasioned by the &toadies knoeking it against
some hard substance, such as the corner of a mantel-shelf.
He had never is his experience met with a ems where a
had wilfully caused himself sash an injury
r. I:evidence at the former trial he stated that the injuries
ware is all probability inflicted by a stick that was fined in
the his.., and such en instrument would certainly bevel
messiened them. There was blood on the stick herself
saw it. If the defendant had indicted the injuries
by that moms she must have tied her own bends after-
wards. On the 11th December he was aware the defendant
was Wes tamithe;advanced in the family way, and she had
sine, bees delivered of the child that was now in her arms.
During the mining the defendaet bad • violent fit. It
was undoubtedly a real one.
By Mr. Hyland—ln the fint instance witnesswron of course
had not the least idea that there was anything gin the
matter, and his suspicions were only aroused upon the de•
fondant making the sewed charge, end be then formed the
opinion that she might have caused the injuries herself.
By the Court—lie did not consider It would be a very
easy thing for a woman to have mused such injuries to her-
NIL She mat have received &Ivory violent and painful blow
to hays issued the injury that appeared upon her nese, and it
bled profusely for • missiderable time afterwards. He bad no
doubt whatever that the convulsive flu were gesuine, and
the defendant was lasensible and almost ribeless when he
tint saw her. The whole of the injuries were of a nature
likely to be produced by such a weep= II Oa stick that was
produced at the former trial.
James Litt le,:a City policeman, deposed that the defendant
made a statement to him with regard to the circumstances
ender which the robbery had been committed, and described
the man, and in comequence of that description he appre-
hended Mellott.
By Mr. Ballantine—lt was entirely from the descrip Mrs.tion
given by the defendant that he apprehended him.
Harrison particularly deo:Abed him as having on a neck.
kerchief of a particular description, and Mallen was wear-
ing one of exactly the same sort when he took him into eus-
tody at the ;many theatre. Penny theatres, he mid, were the
resorts of bad otteracters.
Flank =ether officer, who accompanied Little, proved
that Mellott &palmed he was innocent of the charge, and
gave his riot Wiese.
Charles Ilallett was then examined. He said that his
real name was Limos Marriott, and he described his occu-
pation as that of a labourer, and at night he acted as
" officer," end keptorder at the penny theatres where he was
taken into custody. He declared moat posiively that he
was quite innocent of the robbery, and said that he did not
even know where the Bull Inn-yard wu,and he accounted for
tie manner is which he had passed the whole of the even.
log on which the robbery was represented to have been
committed.
Upon being aces.ezantined he said that the reason he
assumed the name of Mellott was that he had formerly been
a bad character. which he explained by saying that he had
been a fighting man. He said that when hi was liberated
from custody a half-sovereign was gives to him, and since
then he had received an allowance of five shillings a week
from the Mansion-home, sad this was all he had to subsist

upon,
Some other witnesses were then examined, who, to a
certain extent, confirmed the statement of Mallets as to the
manner in which he had passed the ereniag of the robbery ;
and this elouid the ease for the prosecution.
The Recorder, when the wink of the evidence had been
adduced, said it appeared to his be be insaisient to support
the charge. They might in ekes*, te the conclusion
that the man Mellott was lassos% sad dist the defendant
had made a mistake as to his ideadtyreally could
not see how the jury, spas the facts basal them, could
ease to the conclusion that so robbery bed Y velst of fact
boss committed, wbishthey must do beim they could con-
cise the defesleat. TM aeumstanese of the ease were
undoubtedly meet nrpterions and eztaseedinary, and it was
a very primer matter to be fully inquired into, but it ap-
peared to him to be very doubtful whether the defendant
had not told the truth with regard to the robbery, and that
she had merely made a mistake with regard to the identity
of the man who had committed it.
Mr. Ryland said he was certainly in his lordship's bands,
and after the opinion he had expressed he felt no difficulty
in withdrawing from the prosecution.
A verdict of Not Quaff wee accordingly taken.
There was a second charge of the same kindaint the
defendant, but it was arranged that it should not best
tken
until Friday morning.

is the Dean /Ceres of this day week, was mini
;1:41.! the her. before Mr. Elliott.
Mr. Solomon, who *tended for the pesseesties, said EMI
shim the former examination eireuesessrimag bikes OM
iNdesieg the defeadast to altar his sod be reser
expressed hie anilines. to take the proliemeelMilie_ Me
In feet the families of the parties led irmini .slyagend
the matter, and it wee the wish of tie (lb. MlMenteles)l
silents not to 'any the ease say further.
Mr. Elliott asked whether the mosey *biased by Me
=free the
infor tria bed be
autioe snei nthrerneda ,
no
etier
row armeeabl
Me.
tomes the prisoner, when KW Hill, the pstrix,
stepped Into the witne.s-box. end after some limitation
stated that she had got back 601., all she required, or wished
for.
Mr. Elliott—At the last examination it was sedentood
the whole of the money obtained from the Toting woman
&mild be restated to her. Under the cleats/titaness the
ease must go to the session.
Mr. Binna—l hope your worship will give us a day or tyre
to reflect.
Mr. Elliott—l have so objection to remand the peleseer
for a week, and if in that time the money is brought beat
the emanate': and her friends may do as they please.
The prisoner was then remanded, bat ro
ta short time after
Mies Hill appeared before Mr. Elliot, and, present.
ins a Bask of England note for 1001. to him, said she had
ju.t received it, and was perfectly satisfied. Eke aim
begged that the prisoner might be discharged.
Mr. Elliott having been made 'mandated with the fast
that this note wee the property of her mother, and formed
no part of the money obtained from her, and that in point]
of fact the pawner had not returned &shilling, said the re-
mand should stand as before.
Oa a subseouent application by his solicitor the prisoner
was admitted to boil, himself in 4001. and two sureties in
2001. each.