The Express.
London, England, 1851-03-07 00:00:00

the rice away. _
Dr. Taylor, professor of chemistry at Guy's Hospital, was
then examined. Ile deposed that he examined the contents
of the bladder handed to him by Mr. Lewis, and applied
the usual tests to them, and the result was the discovery of
the presence of arsenic. He also said that the intestines
presented the appearances which usually accompanied the
exhibition of arsenic. The whole quantity of arsenic found
by him was about the twenty-fifth part of a grain, which
be said was insufficient to occasion death.
By the Court—The whole of the arsenic was expended by
the various tests that were applied to it, but he could state
positively
that
arsenictts t ton intestines, itcnntth he
efZ'll of the
was
By Mr. Bodkin—lt was possible that the arsenic be
found was the remainder of a larger dose that bad been
administered some days before, and he did not believe that
it bad been administered very recently before death. If
the poison had been taken seven or eight hours before
death, he was of opinion that a larger quantity would have
been found in the stomach itself than on the coats of that
organ. The portion of the poison that was absorbed and
deposited in the stomach might have been administered so
long as twelve days before, but that which was contained
in the fluid might have been administered much more re-
cently. The symptoms exhibited by the deceased would,
in his opinion, be entirely explained by the adminis-
tration of small doses of arsenic.
By the Lord Chief Justice.—Witness was of opinion that
the arsenic must have been administered in small doses,
not at all calculated to produce death at once, and when
the administration of the poison was relinquished for a

time the man got better.
By Mr. Bodkin—The effect of the continual administra-
tion of small doses of arsenic would be to gradually cause
the powers of the body to languish, and would thus tend
to develop any constitutional malady—such as consumption
—that might be in the system. Witness subsequently exa-
mined a quantity of rice that was handed to him by Clarke,
the police-offleer, and he found that it was all over
arsenic, and according to the calculations he had made
he was of gpinion that in the rice, which was about a
pound in quantity, there were about sixteen grains of
arsenic. Every grain of rice was covered with a minute
portion of the poison, and the whole appeared to have been
carefully mixed up together so that every part of the rice was
poisoned, and the interior of the bag isintaining the rice
was likewise covered with arsenic. The poison consisted of
the common white arsenic, which had the appearance of
flour. Witness was examined upon the previous trial of
the prisoner for poisoning her children, and he upon that
occasion in her presence described the nature of arsenic and

its toode of action.
Mr. Bodkin then again proposed to put in the statement
made by the prisoner upon her examination before the

coroner.
The Lord Chief Justice said that before he admitted the
evidence, be would consult Mr. Baron l'arke upon the
point of its admissibility.
Upon his lordship's return be stated that his learned
brother concurred with him that the statement was admis-

sible.
'Cho statement was accordingly put in and read. It wa,
to the effect that her husband had been in good health
until about twelve months before when he was seised with
pains in different parts of his body, and they eventually
settled in the bottom of his body, and he then complained
of suffering very great pain, and was almost mad for two
or three days when Dr. llawkes neglected to visit him.
She also stated that the deceased was repeatedly sick, and
she thought the doctor had given him something in his
physic to make him sick. The most material part of the
statement was that the prisoner denied positively ever
having given the deceased liuy rice.
James Parker said—The prisoner is my daughter, and I
lived in the same house with her and her husband at Cla.
vering. I remember her husband dying. Before that hap-
pened I had purchased two pounds of rice, and had eaten
a portion of it on two occasions, and it took no effect upon
me whatever. I ate some of the rice the first night I
bought it, and the second time was a week afterwards. I
kept the rice in the kneading trough, and I never put any-
thing into it.
Hannah Phillip., the wife of a labouring man at Cla-
vering, proved that she knew the prisoner before her
former trial, and remembered her coming home
after it was over. Witness was passing by her cottage
some time afterwards, when she called her in, and began
talking to her about her children being poisoned, and
she said that she did not poison them, hut that
some one else had done so. She mentioned the name
of the person, and said that he had given the children
a halfpenny a piece to take what he gave them. The
prisoner then mentioned arsenic, and witness told her that
she must wit talk to her about arsenic, for she did not know
what it was, and the prisoner then said there was very little
difference between the look of arsenic and a little Hour.
She also said that the arsenic she had had before she was
sent to Chelmsford for trial she had hid under a stump of a
tree in a lane at Clavering, and when she came back she
took it again, and she said that was the poison she had in-
tended to poison the woman with, but had not the
opportunity, and that she poisoned the child first.
She mentioned the name of the woman whom she'
meant to poison. The prisoner did not tell her all
this at one time, but upon several different occasions.
Another time the prisoner told her that she had bought
some liver and lights and made a mince pie of them fur
leer husband, and she advised witness to make one too, and
said that if she did not know how to " season " it, if she
=hi it to her she would season it for her, and she
that it would be no more harm to kill such a
man as her own or witness's husband than it would be
to kill a mouse. Witness hail had a quarrel with her
husband a short time before, and had told the prisoner of it,
sod she said that her hushaud would not dare to hit her, and
if ever he did so, she would put him under the bricks.
While the prisoner's husband was ill, she met her one day
us she was coming from the doctor's, and asked her how her
husband was. She replied that he was very ill, and she
had toren for some medicine fur him, and that Mr. llawkes
bad made a mistake, and put the bay's medicine into his
father's bottle. The prisoner then said they hail taken the
bay's allowance off, and wanted him to go into the union,
and she then turned aide and cried, and said she had sent
her soul t p hell all through him. Witness did not know
who she meant by " him." On the Tuesday after the death
of the deceased the prisoner tame to her, and said that her
mother-in-law had heard what she had been saying
about the poison, and she asked witness not to say
any more about it, and she added that her trouble was great.
Shortly after this request the prisoner came to her, and
thanked her for what she had said before the coroner, and
began to abuse her; she replied that she had not said so
much hut what she could say a good deal more; and she
then called the prisoner Sally Arsenic, and told her that she
might have had her husband alive as well as other people,
if she had treated him properly. The prisoner then told
her that she might have gone in and poisoned him if
she had liked, and witness called her a good
for nothing wretch, and said that if she had
gone in she (prisoner) would have mixed something
up and given it her to give him,—and she also told the pri-
soner that if it had been her she should have been hung
long ago. The prisoner replied to this that she did not care
about the "under-set" so long as she had the good-will of
the heads of the people. The prisoner also told her upon
another occasion that when she wad at Chelmsford before,
she did not intend to go home to her husband. but to go
and live with another man, and she said this man was wait-
ing for her to take her away while she was being tried.
Charles Clayden, a labourer of Cleverlng, deposed that in
the harvest of 1849, he was at work with the deceased in
the harvest field, and he saw him eat his dinner, which
was a meat pasty. The deceased complained of pain in his
stomach after he had eaten the pasty, and he frequently
said that he had a gnawing and a sinking in his stomach,
as though something was feeding on it.
Dr. Taylor re-called—A sensation of gnawing and sink-
ing in the stomach would be one of the symptoms conse-
quent upon the administration of arsenic.
Caroline Cole, a neighbour of the prisoner, deposed that
while the deceased was ill, she had some conversation with
the prisoner upon the state of her husband's illness,
and she told her that he was very ill, and that
his body was very much swelled, and she said
she thought that Mr. liawkes had put something
in his medicine. Witness told her that Mr. Ilawkes
had doctored her and all her family, and he bad never done
them any harm. The prisoner in reply to this said she
knew what her character was, and if any poison had been
put into the medicine, it was done in order to get rid of
her. The prisoner afterwards said, "If I have poisoned
my children, I have not poisoned my husband," and she
Wen began to abuse the witness, Hannah Phillips, and said
that if she had an opportunity, she should like to season $
pie for her, and make her a " croaker."
This closed the ease for the prosecution.
The prisoner, when called upon for her defence, made a
long rambling statement, in the course of which she as-
serted that she was innocent, and declared that if her hus-
band had been poisoned, the poison must have been token
in some of the thingswhieh pimple were continually sending
to him while he was ill.
The Lord Chief Justice then summed up the case with
great minuteness, and the jury almost immediately re-
turned a verdict of Guilty.
His lordship then put on the black cap, but his
emotion was so great that some time elapsed before the
learned judge could recover himself sufficiently to pass the
mntenee. lie at length addressed the prisoner, and said
she had been convicted by a jury of her country of the
heinous offence of administering poison to her husbaiid with
intent to murder him; and he must say that the evidence
was altogether overpowering. He had not taken upon him-
self to intimate any opinion until after the verdict was
delivered; but now that the jury had stated their opinion
upon the case, he could not refrain from observing that he
entirely concurred in the verdict they had given ; and he
must add, that there would be no safety for man-
, kind if, when such guilt was clearly established, condign
punishment did not follow. lie was afraid this was not
the only crime of which she had been guilty. She had
confessed to having murdered two of her children ; and,
although she had escaped from that charge, justice had at
last overtaken her, and she had now only a short time to
live. He therefore entreated her to employ that time in
repentant and prayer, to endeavour to obtain pardon for
the many crimes she had committed. The learned Judge
than passed sentence of death in the usual form.
The prisoner did not betray the least emotion during the
learned Judge's address ; and, when he had concluded,
she walked with a firm step from the dock.

OXFORD ClRCUlT.—Woactarza, MARCH 6.
The commission was opened yesterday eretaing by Mr.
Julien Talfriard. His lordship proceeded alone to hear
divine service at the cathedral this morning, Mr. Justice