The Express.
London, England, 1860-07-28 00:00:00

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.

Jct 27.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)

DE MORA AND !MANNEQUIN r. CONCHA (EIT HER GUARDIAN).
This was a nuit relating to the will of Don Juan Joss
Concha, late of Adam•street, Adelphi, who died at Mar-
seilles oil the Bth of February last. The instrument was
propounded by the plaintiffs, the executors and was op-
posed by Senora Concha, an illegitimate daughter of the
deceased, who appeared by her husband, Ramon Concha,
his brother.

Sir F. Kelly, Dr. Phillimore, Q.C., and Dr. Spinks were
counsel for the plaintiffs ; Dr. Ibis, Q.C., and Dr. Wad-
dilove for the defendant.

The deceased was born in 1817, and was a native of Chili.
He was an officer in the army which invaded Peru ; awl he
afterwards served in the Peruvian army. While in that
country he went into business, and amassed a fortune of
180,000/. On the fall of President Echinique in 1837,
the testator (who had attached himself to that Party) let
Peru, and after paying • visit to his friend* in Chili he
came to Europe. While in France he formed • connexion
with • Madame mum., by whom he had • eon ; sod it was
principally in favour of this boy and his mother that he had
executed the will in dispute. Ho hail been on bad terms
with his brother; and there had been a chancery suit be-
tween them, which was abated by the death of the testator.
The will was opposed on the ground that the deceased's
domicile was Chats and that the instrument was not in
conformity with the ehilian law.
On behalf of the plaintiffs evidence was given of the de-
ceased's renunciation of all intention to return to South
America. Mr. Parker, • solicitor of long standing, whom be
had employed to draw a previous will, stated that he had bad
• clause inserted in that document, describing himself as
"of London, in which city he had lately come to reside
permanently." He told Mr. Parker that he did not like to
cross even the Channel, and that he would certainly never
make a voyage over the ocean again. Ho made proposals
to Mr. J.ll. De Mora, one of the plaintiffs, who bail been
his schoolfellow in Chili, fora partnership, in order to carry
on what he termed " • huge financial business with the
governments of South Amenat." He told another witness
that though he had travelled all over Europe, and though:
Pm:, a beautiful city, he preferred England to live in, and
especially London, on account of its commercial importance.
Seeing some boys playing cricket, he said, " That is one of
your great English games," adding that lie should send his
son to a school in this country, for ho wished to Wing him
up as en English gentleman.
The case won proceeding when the court rose.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS 00IIRT.—JuLy 27.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Nichols.)
RR ISAAC BOTD.—DANKRCPTCY AND DiSOLVINCT

This insolvent, who bad been • silk manufacturer in
Spital-square, and who bad been more than twelve mouths
in prison, applied to be discharged.
Mr. eargonel appeared for a creditor ; and it was elicited
that the insolvent was a bankrupt in the year 11151, end did
not apply for his certificate till June, as be had hoped to
supersede the bankruptcy.
The insolvent said he had applied for his certificate
through a lawyer's clerk who was in prison. The party
alluded to was • judicious person, and had done a good deal
of good since lie bad been in prison.
Mr. Surgaal was glad to bear some good was done in
prison. (A laugh.)
It appeared that the application for • certificate was re-
fused by Mr. Commissioner Holroyd, and at the hearing it
was stated that the insolvent had received • sentence of 12
months on a criminal charge for fraudulently obtaining
goods. As the certificate wee wholly refused, he was com-
pelled to come to this court. His bankruptcy debts, which
were inserted in the schedule, exceeded 11,000!.
Mr. Sargood said he did not know whether the court
would consider this was • case to proloug the impriaonment.
Mr. Commissioner Nichols said there was no evidence,
and l'e could not act without evidence, awl therefore the
insolvent would be discharged.
The insolvent, after his long imprisonment, was accord-
ingly discharged.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.—MAIDgroNE, JULY 27.

The commission for the county of Kent was opened on
Thursday, end yesterday morning both courts proceeded to
business. Lord Chief Justice Cockburn presided on the
Civil Side, and Mr. Justice Blackburn in the Crown Court.
CaowN Stoz.—(Before Mr. Justice Blackburn.)
EXTRAORDINARY CASE OP TRAM

Loriers Reed, 39, a well.dressed ladylike woman, was
charged with unlawfully obtaining, by false pretences, the
seveml sums of 121., 23/., and 301., with intent to defraud
Me,.. is. Henke), and Co., the bankers, and other persons.
The circumstances of this case were of a very extraor-
dinary nature. The prisoner is said to he the daughter of
a deceased admiral, and to be very well connected ; but
in consequence of her vicious habits she appears to
have been discarded by her family at an early period
of life, and for aever.il years she has been
subsie.ing by frauds of the most extraordinary description,
and on several occasions she has suer-m.11,A in obtaining
=ion of very considerable sums of money. The bus-
the prisoner was tried at the last spring wires for
fraud, aril although the jury found him guilty, they at the
same time expressed an opinion that he had been deceived
by the prisoner, and a very light sentence was consequeutly
passed upon him, and since then he has received a free
pardo s. It appeared in this case that in October lot the
prisoner and her husband were living in good style at
Chatham, and that on the 31st of that mouth the prisoner
went to the shop of Mr. Jarman' a chemist in the town.
who was acquainted with her husband, and who believed
that she was well connected, and showed hint a letter
which else represented to have been written to her
by Mr. Mulkey, the banker, who she said was her
trustee, and which reprerented that her guardian,
Sir C. Frenuurtle, was coming to England, and would
make an appointment to meet Ler at the Bank of England,
and she at the same time produced a bill of exchange or
promissory note for 1,20 W., which she said hail been scut to
her by Mr. Hankey and that it would become duo in
January, 1300, and 'she asked Mr. Jarman to lend her wane
money until the bill came to maturity. Upon the faith of
her repreeentatious, and believing that the promissory note
was a genuine instrument, Mr. Jarman gave the prisoner at
different times the sums of 124, tell., and 301., and the pri-
-80014 signed promissory notes for the different SOMA.
The prisoner was called upon to produce the promissory
note referred to, a notice to that effect having been served
upon her, but re said she had not gut it, and secondary
evidence was consequently given of the contents of it. Mr.
Jarman stated that it was upon tinted paper, partly litho-
graphed and partly written, and presented nll the appear-
ance of a genuine note, and it was made payable at the
London and Westminster Bank, Lothbury.
111 answer to a question put by the Court, Mr. Jarman
stated that he woo quite eure the prisoner told him that the
note was signed by Mr. Mackey, the hanker, and that be
was her trustee, and that Sir C. Fremantle was her guardian,
and he let Ler have the money solely in consequence of
those representations, and believing them to be true.
Packman, one of the detective officers of the City of
London police, proved that he apprehended the prisoner at
a lodging in the Commercial-read, and that upon searching
her room he found a letter addressed " H. Mr. Reed, Esq..
Literary Institution, Nine Elms," and a letter signed " T.
Hawkey," which war the one the primmer appeared to have
shown to Mr. Jarman. He also found a number of other let-
ters signed " T. Mulkey" and "Thomsen Hanker," and also
a copy of a Lill of ex,hange for 4,9001., signed "THackey."
The prisoner's husband was present, and he said that all the
papers belonged to his wife, and that he knew nothing
about them.
Mr. T. Mulkey, one of the firm of Hankey and Co.,
bankers, 7, FenchurehUreet, deposed that the letter pro-
awed bearing his signature was a forgery, and he had never
signed a bill or promissory note for 1,20 W. for the prisoner.
He was not her trustee, and in point of fact he knew
nothing at all about her.
Mr. Thomson Mulkey, M.P., deposed that ho carried on

business as a merchant in Mincing-lane, and was formerly
one of the governor* of the Bank of England. The letters
produced bearing his name were forgeries, and he knew
nothing of the prisoner, except that on the 14th February
she came to his offices and told him a plausible story of
having let apartments to some person who stated his name
to be Hankey, end that he was connected with his family,
and she wished to know if it was true. Ho told her she
had been imposed upon, and the prisoner then left, and he
saw no more of her until she was in custody.
The prisoner, in answer to the charge, told a touching
tale of having been discarded by her family at an early age,
and said she fell into the bands of a man who was married,
but who, nevertheless, went through the ceremony of ma.--
liege with her, and afterwards treated her ii, the most
cruel manner. She said that a gentleman who knew her
family, sod who pitied her position, advanced a sum of
money to enable her to go abroad. but her supposed
husband got poseeision of it and deserted her, and she hail
suffered the greatest misery. She declared that she had no
intention to defraud Mr. Jarman, and that she was entitled
to property that would have enabled her to pay all the
claims upon her.
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty.
Mr. Poland informed the court that the prisoner was con-
victed in 1855 of obtaining goods by false pretences and *en-
tenocd to six months' imprisonment. Lpon that occasion
she represented to Mr. Sutton, a tradesman in London, that
she was entitled to c nsiderable property out of Chancery.
Mr. Justice Blackburn, in pining sentence, said he saw
nothing in the case that would justify him in coining to
any other conclusion than that the prisoner was a practised
swindler and engaged in a systematic course of fraud and
deception. She appeared to have dragged her own husband
into trouble, although, from all the facts in Vac case, lie
had evidently been made a dupe. Under these circum-
stances, he felt it his duty to order her to be kept in penal
servitude for the space of three ye.us.
There was a second indictment against the prisoner, for
obtaining money from another person by similar false pre-
tences, but it was not proceeded with.

NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—NORWICH, JULY 27.
Nisi Paws CQUlCR—(Before the Lord Chief Justice Erie
and a Common Jury.)
CRACK V. LYNN.

This cause, which was tried yeeterclay, and lasted the
whole day, arose, togetFer with three others, out of a very
trifling dispute. It appeared that Mr. Lynn had held a farm
atCoulton, in this county, for about 16 year', of a gentleman
of the mune of Ives. i.tl42rear 1859 the farm was let to
' a Mr. Corner, which a
tocanes Mr. Lynn very great
anonvanoe. As every fact in the case was disputed, and a
totally different version of it given by the respective parties,
it is somewhat difficult to ascertain tbe truth, but this much
is certain, that on the morning of the 13th of April in this
year, Mr. Corner, accompanied lay Crack (the plaintiff), who
was Captain Ives's woodman, and a policeman, presented
themselves at a gate leading into a field on the farm. He
had also brought with him • drill and the neces-
sary equipments for sowing the field with small seeds,
armording to a stipulation in the defendant's lease. Their
arrival did not appear to be altogether unexpected, for they
found the gate secured by • lock and chain ; and the defen-
dant, his daughter, and Miss Dix, his niece, drawn up in
battle array, prepared to resist what they considered an
aggression. Mr. Corner thereupon ordered the plaintiff to
advance, and, as the defendant described it, to ' cut in."
This the plaintiff did in a very resolute manner, and an en-
gagement ensued between himself and the defending party.
Miss Lynn defended the binges and Miss Dix the lock, while
Mr. Lynn skirmished between them. The plaintiff, how-
ever, who made ti very skilful attack, at length :;ucceedeil in
carrying the position ; but in doing so very nearly carried
away the lower part of Miss Dix's dress, who had nufor-
tunately got her legs under the gate. Upon this Mr.
Corner, who bad been a quiet spectator in his
is ray gig, was about to drive into the field, when
Miss Lynn from behind hit him a violent blow
with the handle of • spede. He, turning round to see
who was his assailant, received two other blows from the
same quarter, and was about to receive a fourth when the
policeman interfered, and the parties appearing to be by
this time exhausted, the fray
ended.

Out of this contest arose four actions. In the present one
Mr. Crack sued Mr. Lynn for an assault ; in the second,
Mr. Corner sued Miss Lynn for an assrult ; in the thinl,
Mr. Lynn sued Mr. Corner for trespass; and in the
fourth, Miss Dix sued Mr. Crack for the injury to her
person.
In the present action Mr. Keane and Mr. Couch were for
the plaintiff ; Mr. O'Malley, Q.C., and Mr. Balwer for the
defendant.

The jury found a verdict for the defendant.
An attempt was made this morning to get rid of the
other three actions, but the parties insist on having them
tried out. Accordingly the action of " Corner v. Lynn"
was this morning proceeded with, the same counsel being
engaged.