The Express.
London, England, 1848-03-03 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.-111=1,01113, MAUCH 2.
Before ford Denman aria a special Jury.
Coons,. TANNBIL.—Carr. COS.—fhe damages in this
case wens laid at 5,0001.
Mr. Berjsant Shee, in opening the case, said that the
plaintiff is a poulterer on Holborn-bridge, and the defendant
is a solicitor in New Basinghall. street. The lady who was
the =fortunate subject of this inquiry was possessed of con-
siderable attractions, and at the time of her marriage was
about twenty years of age. The plaintiff is six years her
senior. Four children, two of whom are now alive, re-
sulted from the marriage. About six months after their
marriage, the plaintiff became acquainted with the defen•
dant, who acted for him as his legal adviser, and an intimacy
sprang up. The plaintiff took &country residence at M unwell-
hill,near to one occupied by the defendant. The defendant was
also a married men, and his wife and daughters were on
very friendly turns with the plaintiff and bis family. For
some time aim this the wills of the plaintiff was in the ha-
bit of coming to town to saga her husband is the business
but she very seen diestatiawni doing so, and the plaintiff
observed a genet dilkstaws la har spandost towards him, and
also more $i bras shildion, one of whom
was im e awl alliaMil Tbis west on for some
time, and the 4601 Sti memos and de-
meanour of his wife spread to Wm* more sad more es-
tranged, and matters asatinued to this Mats for a period of
two years, until at leas* his suspicions became aroused, but
no suspicion was entertained of the guilt of the defendant,
who professed the wail friendship. They continued to
live very unhappily mita the year 1846, when
a deed of separation was drawn by the defend-
ant at the request of the plaintiff, and the plaintiffs
wife left her husband's roof, and took up her abode with the
defendant's family. It woe then that the plaintiff obtained
satisfactory evidence of his dishonour. Shortly alter the
lady had gone to live at the defendant's house, it was ob-
served that his wife wan frequently seen by the servants in
tears, and apparent great distress of mind; and this was,
no doubt, occasioned by her conviction of the guilty con-
nexion that existed between the plaintiffs wife and her hus-
band. It would be shown on several occasions that the
parties were walking together in the grounds, ha with hie
arm round her waist, and she with hers round his, and they
also frequently addressed one another as " My dear." Then
were also various other circumstances which would bat pan
duced in evidence that would leave no doubt, he was Mira
tied, in the minds of the jury of their guilt; and when they
had heard all the facts, he felt enured that they would give
exemplary damages.
Mr. J. Bull prised that he was acquainted with the plain-
tiff and his wife for several years after their marriage, and
he laid they always appear d to be on the most affectionate
terms. Tao plaintiff's wife was an exemplary and kind
mother.
George Daniel, an occasional assistant to the plaintiff, do-
wsed that he first knew the defendant in consequence of
his coaling to his master's shop iu 1936, and he always
understood him to be a friend of the family. The plainttff
used to go to market every mooning, and the defendant used
frequently to come to the shop at that time, and go into the
parlour to Mrs. Cooke, and he had frequently seen them
with their hands locked in each others, and the defendant
pinching Mrs. Cooke's arm. Ile had gone into the parlour
when they were so engaged, and they both appeared very
much confused. When the plaintiff was present the de-
fendant never acted in this manner.
Joseph Jamas Clerk, another of the plaintiff's shopmen,
also spoke to the familiarity that appeared to exist between
the defendant and the wife of the plaintiff.
Samuel Josiah Flight, gardener and groom to the plain-
tiff at Muswell hill, said, that upon three occasions he saw
the defendant at his master's house in his absence, and ob-
served him walking with Mrs. Cooke in the grounds playing
and toying together. Upon another occasion he saw from the
lawn that they were sitting together quite close, and when they
observed him they pulled down the blind. On another day
plaintiff's wife went out with defendant in a chaise, and she
did not return home till the next day.
Jeremiah Crump, formerly groom to defendant, proved
that in the autumn of 1846 he went with Mr. Tanner's
horse in • fly to the house of the plaintiff with defen-
dant. On the road defendant told him there would be
a lady awaiting ha arrival at Mr. Cooke's, and
be got out about half a mile from the house. He after-
wards took up Mrs. Cooke with her luggage, and drove back ,
and rejoined the defendant, who got into the fly, and he ,
drove them both to his house, and Mrs. Cooke stayed there '
until he left. During the time he was there, he frequently
saw the defendant walking about the grounds with M.
Cooke, with their arms round each other's waists, while Mrs.
Tanner was in the house, and they used to all each other
my dear, and they very often went out together in a chaise. I
Upon one occasion, while witness was engaged in the garden,
the defendant and Mrs. Cooke came up, and his master
ordered him to another part of the grounds, and
his suspicions being aroused, he watched their movements, ,
and observed Mrs. Coots and the defendant go in different '
directions towards a shed in a secluded part of the grounds.
He was prevented from seeing whether they entered it, but '
in about half-an-hour he saw them coming in a direction I
from the shed. He went in and saw a quantity of hay
strewed about, and there was an appearance as though some '
persons had been reclining upon it ; and he found a hand-
kerchief lying on the hay marked E. C. On several other ,
occasions he SSW the defendant and Mrs. Cooke go towards
the shed, and afterwards observed the same a
lie had frequently seen Mrs. Tanner crying, w=theclet
fondant and Mrs. Cooke were waßsing about the lawn. Ono
morning, while Mrs. Tanner was absent, he saw Mrs. Cooke ,
in the defendant's bedroom in her night-dress, and shortly '
afterwards he saw the defendant dressing himself in this
same room.
some other evidence of an immaterial character was then
adduoed, and this closed, the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Petersdorff them addressed the jury fee the defendant,
and he urged ''..aat it would be monstrona to convict a man
of such see offence as this upon such evidence as had been ad-
u","' .oys the plaintiff. It was alleged that there bad been a
If'thinal intimacy subsisting for a period of 13 years, and
)set there was not an atom of direct evidence to show
;hat such haricots; yr connexion had ever taken place
retween the parties. Ile said he should be in a pcosition to
show that, although for the first few years the plaintiff and
his wife had lived happily together, yet that after that
period, from an ill-founded feeling of jealousy or some other
cause, the plaintiff's conduct to his wife had completely
changed, and he constantly abused her, and on one occasion
proceeded to personal violence ; and she was at length com-
pelled to leave him, and a deed of separation was drawn up.
With regard to her taking up her residence at the house of
the defendant, it was not at all unnatural that she should
have done so, considering the intimacy that subsisted be-
tween them ; and all the little familiarities that had been
spoken to were merely, as he contended, acts of good breed-
ing and innocent familiarity, and ought not to be ascribed to
any impure motive. This action would in all probability
never have been heard of, but for the fact of the defendant
having sent in a bill to Mr. Cooke for professional services,
a portion of which bad been incurred for consultations upon
the conduct of his wife, Mr. Cooke having consulted the de-
fendant upon the subject of his wife's supposed infidelity
with other persons. The learned counsel concluded by
Milling the following witnesses;
Mary Duffy deposed that she was in the service of the
plaintlff at iluawell.hill. He frequently abused his wife
and in-cupd her of inVelity, and upon one cecassin he
struck her several times in the face in the presence of witness
and the children, and he also locked her in her room and
fastened the wthdows—Cron-ezamined She never upon
any occasion saw the defendant come to the house by him-
self when the plaintiff was absent.
Serjeant Shee briefly replied. The Lord Chic'. Justice
summed up, and the jury, after a very short deliberation,
returned a verdict for the plaintiff. Damages 5001.
OXFORD CIRCUIT.—Oxroan, blAacu 2.
The judges of assize (Mr. Justice Patteson and Mr.
Justice Croswell) reached Oxford yesterday, and procee
to the County Hail, where the commission was opened. After
attending divine service this morning their lordships com-
menced business. There are no less than 78 cases in the
intender, but none of a very serious nature. In the Nisi
Prins Court there are hut four cases set down for trial.
Caowe Coenr—Before Mr.Justiee Putnam.
POST-OFFICE ROBBERIES.T. Brown Oa
to letter car
-
rier at Tetsworth) pleaded guilty to the charge et accreting,
embezzling and destroying certain letters, containing monies,
the property of the Postmaster-General.—Sentenc Tets e deferrwas
ed.
B. Jon.. of the late post-master at worth,
Thomas Brown to secrete, embezzle,
-, containing monies, and afterw sorbs
es, knowing them to be stolen.—
wetted thatthe Rev. Mr. Peers,Vicar
'abet last solicited subscriptions to-
`lurch, anionsequence of not
staining moony sent to him, he
dice authorities, who suspended the
person named Lawson to take his
a fter ho was there a letter came, con-
. addreued to the Rev. Mr. Peers,
', but the money had been ab-
...at on that day a half-sovereign was
letter-carrier, who said lie found it ait
which he was in the habit wf
d to deliver.—The prisoner VIII
deferred.
Wilmshurse was charged
uttered a forged cheque of Sir E.
1. 10s., acheq forged cheque
forgedcheque of Pi. Taylor for
.and the London and County Bank.
set Guilty.—Mr. Keating stated the
.1 which it appeared that, on the 9th of
prisoner, who had formerly been in the
on and County Banking Company, at
at Aylesbury, visited Oxford, and after
veafully to open an account at the bank
Parsons, and Co., went to the London
-k, representing that his name was'
taken a house at Paybourne,
banking account at Oxford. He de-
purporting to be drawn by Sir B. Filmes.,
of J. M. Brown, for 3,7241. 10s.' payable
' County Bank ; he also deposited another
purporting to be drawn in favour of
• 3101. payable at the Buckinghamshire
a and County Bank. He also left •
' contained scrip for 100 shares in a
ie was &director. Upon the faith of
301. in cash. About an bear of

MIDLAND ClRCUlT.—Nonusewrrow, WEDNESDAY.
The judges appointed to bold assizes for the county of
Northampton (Chief Justice Wilde and Mr. Justice Mauls)
arrived here on Tuesday evening, when the commission was
opened. The court opened about 12 o'clock, the Lord Child
Justice presiding. in the Crown Court, and Mr. Justice
Msule at Nisi rnus. The cause list contains six cases, one
of which is a special jury.
The calendar contains the names of 61 prisoners. The
offences with which they are charged are generally of a light
and ordinary description. The following are the exceptions..
murder, 3 ; arson, 3.
CROWN COVET.
Tits QUEEN D. MARTHA RANDS.—CEILD
INSANYIY. —Mr. Miller appeared tor the prosecution, aid
Mr. Macauley for the defence. It appeared that the pri-
soner, who is a native of this county, wos the wife of a
shoemaker at Southampton, and the mother of two children,
one of whom was six months old. Some time previously to
the 21th Nov., 1845, she had been in a very bad state of
health, and subject to such mental aberrations as to require
to be continually watched. She was ordered to try her na-
tive air, and while residing in this county, on one occasion
being left alone, she threw her youngest child into a caul-
dron of boiling water, by which its death was caused. She
was at that time in such a state of mind that she was com-
mitted to a lunatic asylum by order of the magistrates. She
had now recovered and was out upon her trial On the
facts above stated being proved a verdict of Not Guilty on
the ground of insanity was immediately retenied. and she
was ordered to be detained during her Majesty's pleasure.
SOUTH WALES CIRCUIT.--Sweesha, Fen. 29.
Before Melustice %velem'.
THE ROBBERY OF DR. BOWILING.—J. Lloyd and B.
Mahoney, were indicted for robbing C. Bowring of gold and
bank notes value LOOM—The prisoners in answer to the
usual questions as to whether they were 'guilty or not guilty,
pleaded guilty.—The prisoners were then ordered to stand
down, and E. Evans, 38, weaver, and ft. Thomas, 26,
woollen-spinner, were indicted for feloniously receiving a
portion of the above 1,0001, knowing it to have been stolen.
—Mr. Grove, for the prosecution, remarked that the circum-
stance of Lloyd and Mahoney, the principals in this robbery,
having pleaded guilty to the charge preferred against them,
would materially shorten the case for the prosecution. How-
ever, as their confession was not in law evidence against the
two prisoners at the bar, it would be nece-sary brie*, te
narrate the circumstances under which the robbery was
committed. It would appear in evidence that on the 4th
of November last, Mr. C. Bowriliwith his brother, Dr.
Bowring, left Bowrington for B • end, and about no
they commenced their journey omewards, in a els. ,
After having proceeded some mile*, and while going up a
hill, they wen attacked and robbed of 1,0001. by the two
men, Lloyd and Mahoney, who had pleaded patty. They
went up to the two gentlemen, at whom they presented '
pistols, and used threats of violence unless the money was
delivered up to them. The result was, that the 1,0001.
which had been procured from the bank for the purpose of
paying the wages of the men employed at their works, were
delivered up to the thieves, who then made off, Lloyd hewing
first shot the hone which was in the gig. The alarm was
given, and a considerable number of men—in fact, nearly
the inhabitants of the district, went in pursuit of the ,
prisoners. Mahoney was apprehended by a person named '
John Jones, who found upon him 1381. Ids. Ted., but none of
this money was in notes. Late the MEW evening another
rzon, named Jones, apprehended Lloyd, at Taibaeh.
ant Wright' was also present. At the time he
wsec rt
aeCepireteneled, Jones heard the chinking of money, and
en subsequently searching the spot in which the prisoner
was taken, he toured a handkerchief containing 515
reigns. Tea Tea pounds were found upon him, but no notes.
These were in brief the circumstances under which the rob-
beg was committed. He would sew come to the ease
against Evans and Thomas, the two prisoners at the bar,
who were charged with feloniously receinng the notes. It
would appear that two days after the comarmass of the rob-
berpe reward of 601. was offered for the recovery of the re-
maining property. About this time the prisoner Beans, toge-
ther with a farmer's son, residing in the neighbourhood of
Bridgend, went out together in search of theme esth.e
pro-
They
visited a wood called Cwoinant-gwyn,
poaal, the jury would bear in mind, of the prisoner Evans.
In the course of the search Evans suddenly left his partner,
and in a short time returned, announcing
_that be had found
Reign to the spot
the bag of money. On accompanying
pointed out, Daliel lliontas =CI Evans found a bundle of
notes, secured by a strip of paper pioned round them by
the manager of the bank at the time they were delivered to
Mr. C. Bowring. The bundle of notes was examined, and,
when the witness David Thome first saw them, they con-
sisted of thirty-four 51. notes, amounting to 1701., whereas
the missing notes, the jury would bear in mind, amounted to
2701. Subsequently these notes were delivered up to Mr.
Bowring, who paid to the prisone r six of the notes, and two
sovereigns, as a reward for the recovery of the money. It
would be proved that the prisoner, on the same day, changed
these notes at the bank, and re dived for them 30 sovereigns.
Consequently, he bad ne notes remaining. He would now
carry the jury forward 20 days afterwards, when the prisoner
Evans appeared at the Union Inn, Swansea, a public-
house kept by Abraham Hopkins. Whilst there he sent for
the prisoner Thomas, and both drank very freely. Evans
displayed fifteen or sixteen five-pound notes, and treated all
' around. These notes, be it remembered, were those of the
Provincial Bank of England, corresponding with these deli-
vered to Mr. Bowring at the Bridgend branch. Two of
these notes were paid to Mr. Hopkins, the one by Evans
and the other by Thomas, in payment of spirits and beer
1 supplied to the prisoners. Three two notes wou
ed ld
thou, be pde-
re- I
duced beton the jury, and positively identifi as
livered him by the prisoner'. It would be for the jury to
say whether they were a portion of those stolen from the
Messrs. Bowring, and whether the prisoners had
Bardenppriated them knowing them to have been stolen.—
having been heard the jury found both prisoners Guilty.
Lloyd and Mahony were sentenced to transportation for
life, Evan Evans to eighteen months' imprisonment, and
Richard Thomas to six months' imprisonment, each with
hard labour.

CENTRAL CRIMmAL COURT.
OLD COURT.—Before the Lord Chid Baron and Mr. Justice
Coltman.
A BUTLER MARRYLNO A WARD LN CHANCERY.
Samuel Brown was brought up in custody of a tipstaff be-
longing to the Queen's Bench prison, to which place he had
been committed under attachment of the Court of Chan
wards,cery,
for contempt of its jurisdictionjurisdictionin marrying one of its
to take his trial upon an iwlictment framed upon the statute
of the 6th and 7th Wm. IV., known as the Births, Mar-
riages, and Deaths Registration AM, charging bun with
misdemeanor in having wilfully given a false statement be-
fore the occasion of his marriage given a Hester Field, and
caused the same to be inserted in the marriage register,
whereby he had incurred the penalty affixed to the crime of
wilful perinry.—The Attorney-General, Mr. Bodkin, mid
Sir John Bayley conducted the prosecution S.r F. Thesi-
ger, Mr. Clarkaon, and Mr. Ballantine appeared for the de-
fendant.—When the cue was called on Sir F. Thesiger ap-
plied to the court to allow the defendant to retract his plea of
not guilty and to demur to some of the counts in the indiand
ct-
ment, which gave rise to a long technical argument,
eventually the court refused to grant the application.
The Attorney-General addres‘ed the jury, and stated that
the prosecution was instituted by the authority of one of the
Vice-Chancellors of England, and he proceeded to detail the
circumstances which led to the indictment being preferred.
He said that in the year 1810 the prisoner lived in the ser-
vice of a gentleman in \V impole.street, as butl,x, but he left
that service, and went to reside with his brother, at Tring,
in Hertfordshire. The marriage in question was contracted
in June, 1847, between the prisoner and Miss Hester Field,
the daughter of a gentleman residing at Berkhampstead,
and who, under the will of her mother, would, upon coming
of age, be entitled to very considerable property, amounting,
he believed, to 1,1001. a year. It *as considered ad-
f.sable that this young lady, who was now only 18 years old,
should be made a ward of Chancery, and while she
was in that position the prisoner induced her to
accompany him to Trinity Church, Marylebone, where the
ceremony of marriage was performed between them, and
upon that occasion he made statements which he must have
known to be false, and it was upon these false statements the
preaent indictment was founded. They separated very won after
the marriage, and the defendant was subsequently commit-
ted to prison for a contempt of the Court of Chancery, and
the circumstances being laid before one of the Vice-Chan-
gallon, it was referred to him, as Attorney-General, to gee
whether there were grounds for a presecutioa
touttuted; and upon a scrutiny of the foots he felt ituy to
direct the present prossecution, ss a first step the
marriage, and thus W restore her property to the unfortunate
yowls may

-I.Anes, son of the late p
charged with inciting Theism
i . and destroy certain letters, con
receiving the same monies, kn
From the evidence it appearec
of Tetaworth, in December 1
wards the repair of his ehurcl
receiving certain letters contai
complained to the Pest-office ,
post-master, and sent a peso
place ; and a few days after h
• taming a haltsovereign' addr
which letter was delivered, 1
stracted. It was proved that o
given by Brown, the letter-ca
cryottom of the basket in 1
ing the letters he had I
found Guilty.—Sentence del
1, EXTENSIVE FOROIET.-
With having, at Oxford, utte
Filmer, Bart., for 3,7241. li
i Flaisted for 2311., and a for
3101., with intent to defraud
The prisoner pleaded Net 0
i case to the jury, from which
September last, the prisoner
employ of the London and
their branch bank at Ayle
111. endeavouring unsuccessful],
of Mews. Robinson, Farm
and County branch bank, i
Brown, and that he had
and wished to open a banl
posited a cheque purportin
Bart., in favour of J. M.
at the Loudon and County
cheque for 3101., purpos
i 1 11
1 B. Brown, Esq., for 3101. 1
branch of the London and
cash-box which he said cos
railway line of which he w
these deposits he drew 301.
1.
'`
\\.,