The Express.
London, England, 1846-09-10 00:00:00

COMMISSION OF LUNACY.—Firra DAY.

Yesterday morning, at half-past nine o'clock, the
inquiry as to the state of mind of bin. Catherine Cumming
wu again proceeded with at the Horns Tavern, Kennington.
Dr. Milluigen, a part proprietor of York House, and a phy-
sician who has had much experience in such cases as that
which formed the subject of the present investigation, gave
it as his opinion that Mrs. Cumming is not of sound mind.
Sir A. Morrison, M.D., expressed a similar opinion. Both
gentlemen stated several facts which had led them to this
conclusion.
After the production of some further evidence, Mrs.
Cumming (having, at her own request, fortified herself
with wine breakfast) was examined br the learned Commis-
sioner. She denied, in the meet positive but composed man-
ner ths majority of the evidence given in 'support of the
commission. In answer to the charges of infidelity which
she bad made against Captain Cumming, shc stated that the
nurses were constantly complaining of his improper conduct,
and she always discharged them. As to her expressions of
hatred against her daughter and son-in-law, they arose from
the disrespectful conduct of Mr. Ince towards her.
She always entertained affection for her daughter.
it ex2rwions mwarc's Hoocer, U:3 &tigh-
ter, she admitted were rather strong, because she
and Mr. Hooper maligned her character. As to the
neglect of her property in Newport, Monmouthshire,
the house for which she had refused the 35/. a year,
she intended to have pulled down, and to have rebuilt two
houses on the site, as there was ample room for so doing,
which would produce SOL a year. She denied ever cursing
her children. She complained of her house having been
watched by Mrs. Hooper, and said that Captain Cumming
deceived her family when she married him. She was never
happy with him. She had a son on whom her property
was settled, and when he died she became his heir; if he
had survived her, he would have inherited it. She denied
making the charges of robbery against Mr. Dangerfield and
others. She never intended to have adopted any of the
children she took as companions, but she did not deny repre-
senting Cecilia Bartolini as her daughter. Of her habits
since she became an inmate of York House, she gave a satis-
factory explanation. With respect to the fowls and other
animals, they were her hobby, they produced no unpleasant
smell. As to the general testimony of the witnesses, what
would her statement weigh against them ? Her examination
occupied nearly an hour and a half, and her answers through-
out were most clear end lucid.—On the application of Mr.
Petersdorff for an adjournment for the arrival of witnesses
from France, after a long and desultory conversation
between the counsel, commissioner, and the jury, an ad-
journment was granted until the 24th instant, for the wit-
nesses from Paris.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
Before Mr. Sericant Adams.

THE USE Of A GRAND JURT.—Ann Wilson, a young
woman, 29 years of age, was indicted for stealing one hail-
sovereign and two half-crowns, from the person of Herbert
Oliver. An interest was imparted to the case, which it
would not otherwise have , by the prosecutor's ad-
mission, that he had to receive the sum of 31. to get
the prisoner's discharge, by altering his evidence before the
rand jury. He further admitted that he had signed a paper
in the following terms :

Son. 7..—This is to certify that there is left the sum of C 3 in the
possession of Mr. Sharp, at the Grosvenor Arms, George-street, in the
ease of Ann Wilson, 111 get her final discharge in the ensuing trial,
which will take place at Clerkenwell Sessions on the Bth but., I shall
be entitled to the contents of this letter. If Ido nut get her discharge
the contents will be delivered up to John Norton. But I will get her
discharge through making a different statement when I go before the
mend jury.—Witness our hands, lisnsexr Warm, Jon', Nomme."
Mr. Payne was proceeding with the crime-examination
when it was intimated by the learned judge, that, whatever
the circumstances in fact might be, no jury could convict
on the evidence of a man who had put his hand to such a
paper. The jury concurring in this view of the case, the
prisoner was acquitted. The Court refused the prosecutor's
expenses, and ordered him to be detained for tho present,
Mr. Sergeant Adams observing, that be should consider whe-
ther his conduct did not amount to the offence of compound-
ing a felony. The grand jury soon afterwards came into
court, when the learned judge read the paper, in order to
show them how unconsciously they may be made the means
of doing serious injury to the administration of justice. Mr.
Sharp, of the Grosvenor Arms, stated circumstances, which
showed that he was totally unconnected with the transac-
tion, although his name had been mentioned in the paper
which was before read.
Fell Clierot, a respectably-dressed Frenchman, was in-
dicted for stealing a pocket-handkerchief from the pocket of
Alfred Priestly whi'e at Cremorne Gardens. An interpreter
attended, in consequence of the prisoner being ignorant of
the English language. The prosecutor stated that he was
in the Theatre of Cremorne Gardens on the 24th of August,
when he felt a tug at his pocket, and afterwards missed his
handkerchief. He turned to the prisoner and accused him
of taking it, but he (the prisoner) took his own pocket-hand-
kerchief from his pocket, to shew that he had his own. The
prosecutor then put his hand in the prisoner's breast and
I pulled out the stolen handkerchief, when the prisoner imme-
diately made a grasp at his (the prosecutor's) studs, but did
not succeed in getting them—The prisoner handed a written
defence, in French, which was handed to the interpreter,
but he, not being able to read it even with the aid of a
French dictionary, it was banded to Mr. Evans. The sub•
stance of it was, that he held a situation as agent to
L'Obserrateur Francais, and the place in which he was at
the time (Cremorne Gardens) was so intensely hot, that he
did not know what he did, and did not know what to make
11 of the charge at the time, uhe had not been long in Eng-
land. It also stated that he had a witness to speak to his
character.—Mr. Adolphe Dupart, the editor of L'Obserra-
teur Frastrais, stated that the prisoner had been recom-
mended to him by the committee for supporting poor French-
men in London, and that since he had been employed by
him, he had conducted himself well.—He was found Guilty.
The learned judge said that he would not pass a severe sen-
tence upon him, as it was very evident he was not to be con-
sidered as a London thief. —The sentence wu two morths'
imprisonment.