The Express.
London, England, 1860-05-11 00:00:00

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.

MAT 10.
Ware tiro Judge Ordinary.)
HARTLAND AND HANTLAND V. CADLI AND DINERS.

In this awe, which occupied the court three days, the
sole question was whether a codicil appointing new execu-
tors to the will of Mr. Cattle, formerly a solicitor at Newent,
Gloucestershire, was a valid instrument.
The jury having found a verdict in favour of the testator's
capacity,
The court decreed probate of the codicil.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS COURT.—MAY 10.
(Before the ChidCommissioner.)

IN NE WILLIAM POUR? HAM-OA/TAM HANOI CASIL
This insolvent. known as "Captain Hare," who figured at
Marlboroughetreet polios.court on Saturday, when he pre
ferred a charge against • young woman named Arnie Ban-
croft, appeared under the Protection Act.
Mr. B.•rgood opposed for Mr. Mitchell Knox, a clerk in
the Custom., and Mr. Robertson Griffiths supported.
The insolvent was arrested in July, and in August was
discharged by this court on an interim order. He appeared
for hearing in November, and his OW was adjourned till
to-day to effect a settlement with his creditors, and remove
his schedule from the court. An application was now
made for • further adjournment, to carry out this object, and
an affidavit made by Mr. Longcluse, • friend of the family, was
read. The case proceeded, and 11r. Knox stated his coin-
tibia. In December, 1857, Mr. Knox was an inmate for a
dart time of Whitearoseetreet prison, and there he met
the imelient who was till then a stranger to him. After
they both got out of prison the insolvent called on him, and
be lent him some money to pay his subscription to his club.
The inaolgent told him he had property which he derived
from hie mother. Mr. Knox had lent him money on two
or three occasions. Afterwards he accepted a small bill
which was paid. Subsequently there was a bill of 35/. on
which he (Mr. Knox) was arrested. He had to compromise
the matter by paying 34/. tn., and he sued the insolvent,
who had been detained.

After a considerable discussion, the Chief Commissioner
required a balance-sheet, and adjourned the case until next
month with protection.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.
(Contained from yeeierday's Express.)
THE CASE OF THE REV. YR. HATCH.

(Before Mr. Bens Chaanell sad Mr. Justice &sting.)

The court was here adjourned for • short period. Upon
the return of the Miss Howe, the governess, was
examined. She deposed that she went into Mr. Hatch's
family as governess to the children ou the 11th of
August last, and she saw Mrs. Plummer on that
day, and was introduced to her as the governess who
was to take charge of her children. Mrs. Plummer was
very anxious that the door of her children's bedroom
should be kept constantly open. Witness was constantly
with Eugenia Plummer and Lucy Hatch, and the former
had plenty of opportunities to speak to her if she pleased
to do so. She never made any complaint or suggestion to
witness that she had been improperly or indecently treated,
or hurt, either by Mr. Hatch or any one else. She remem-
bered Mrs. Plummer going away on the evening of the 11th
of August. Tea at the time was quite ready and waiting,
and Mr. Hatch and the two children came into the drawing
room in lees than two or three minutes after the car-
riage left. Witness was watching them all the
time from the drawing-room window, and she was
quite sure that no nit of impropriety took place.
The child Eugenia passed the rest of the even-
ing in her company, and she did sot make the
slighted complaint of any kind, and did not exhibit the
least appearance of having been disconcerted in any manner.
Theother sister, Stephanie, wee left in witness s care as
governess, on the 25th of August, and while they were at
dinner Mr. Hatch told Mn. Plummer that the child Eugenia
came to his bed is the morning as she had done at a former
schooL On the following day Mrs. Plummer came to Mr.
Hatch's is • very excited manner, and rushed into the
schoolroom and exclaimed—" What, my children in the
study, and Lucy in the hall ?" and she then said that
she should take her children away, and she and the
two
girls
then walked into the garden. Mr. and Mrs.
were out at this time, but they returned
in the noun of the afternoon. Witness remained at Mr.
Hatch's until November following,
tend she had many op-
rinturisotehlbzzliogl.itccrl:luratci; butium ithnarlraridagil
goag...° .
By serjeant Shee—The child Eugenia appeared to be
attached to both Mr. and Mrs. Hatch and also to witness,
and they did not appear to have any cause of complaint.
There was nothing in Mr. Hatch's appearance that induced
her to watch him, and, of course, she did not suspect any-
thing wrong. She saw Mr. Hatch running away from the
little girls and saw him rui, after then, and this was all she
observed. She did not hear of this charge until after Mr.
Hatch went away. Mrs. Hatch told her that there was a
charge of some kind spinet her husband, but she did not
know the particulars until he was examined at Wandsworth
Police Court.
Re-examined—The whole of the front garden warn visible
from the drawing-room window.

Mary Anne Reed deposed that in August Let she was
in the service of Mr. Hatch, anti went to him with a cha-
racter from another clergyman. She remembered Mrs.
Plummer coming with her daughter Eugenia on the 11th of
August, and she showed her the bedrooms. After Mrs.
Plummer went away in the evening, witness wee standing
on the doorsteps, sod she saw Mr. Hatch mud the children
run round the carriage-drive. This was all that occurred ;
and if anything else bad happened she must have seen it.
The witness then gave some further evidence in oorrobom-
lion of the previous testimony, and also said that Eugenie
Plummer never made any complaint whatever to her.
During the time she was in Mr. Hatch's service she never
saw anything in his conduct unbecoming.
By •je.ant Shea —Bhe was not asked any questions
until after Mr. Hatch had left in November. She saw the
children running after Mr. Hatch, and she saw them catch
him. Witness watched them all the time, and she was
sure they were not more than two or three minutes in the
garden. Upon some occasions she saw Eugenia and Mr.
Hatch in the bed, after Mrs. Hatch and Lucy bed left.
Ellen Farr, another servant to Mr. Hatch at the time in
question, gave evidence of a similar character.
Mr. F. A. Ccgblan deposed that he was at Mr. Hatch's
house on the evening of the 18th August last. There was
a party of trlends. In the course of the evening Mrs.
Hatch asked him to go upstairs and tell Mr. Match to
come down. He went to the becbrooni ; the door was ajar,
and he knocked, and Mr. Hatch told him to come in. Wit-
ness did not go Into the room, but merely asked him to
come down, and he said, " We will be down directly."
Witness west downstairs and Mr. Hatch followed hint
shortly afterwards, with the children Eugetiia and Lucy.
By Mr. Oonper- Mr. Hatch came down with the children
two or three minutes after wiener.
By Suva Channel)—He might have been in the house

half-an-honr before Mrs. Hatch asked him to go upstairs.
He bad seen Mr. Hatch in the drawing-room, but he could
not say when he left the room. Mr. Hatch said, "Come
in," the instant he knocked at the door.
gwegx,iesua Leonia Rafael, a young French lady, who
was on a visit at Mr. Hatch's at the time in question, de-
posed that she was also in the drawing-room after Mrs.
Plarnmer bad left, and she saw what occurred in the garden,
and give • similar account to that deposed to by the other
witnesses ; and she also stated positively that no act of im-
propriety was committed by Mr. Hatch towards Aber of
the children. This witness also stated that daring the
time she was stopping in Mr. Hatch's house she never saw
anything in his conduct unbecoming the character of a gen-
tleman and the guardian of children.
Cross-examined—Witness and her sister were boarders at
Mr. Hatch's. They paid him for the accommodation he
afforded therq. She had no particular reason for watching
or looking at Mr. Hatch on this occasion. They had their
es„and she thought no more of the matter until it was
ailed to her recollection about a month ago. Mr. Hatch
always a=.. to treat the children 'With the greatest
possibleMsAemoiselle Valisce Rafael, the sister of the last witness,
gave evidence to the same effect. She also said that
it appeared to her that Mr. Hatch did everything in his
power to make his house happy and comfortable to every
one in it.

By Mr. Cooper—Mr. Hatch was exceedingly kind to
both the children. He acted more hie a father than a tutor
to them. _

This closed the case for the prosecution, and the court
then adjourned.
The defendant's father again entered into a recognisance
for her appeanuice on the following morning, and she went
away in his charge.
A great many applications were made to the under.
sheriffs during the day for admission, but when the court
wee full to its extent of affording proper accommodation,
those gentlemen very properly refusal to allow any more
persons to be admitted, and thus a good deal of confusion
mad inconvanienos was avoided.

iiiiringthiTtYlerasCeoltliejiTry, upon the adjournment of
the court in the middle of the day, a prisoner named Wit-
ham Dowses was placed at the bar.
This prisoner was convicted at the February session o:
taking a girl under sateen yes of age out of the custody
of her parents without their consent, but a point of law
having been named by his counsel, Mr. Sleigh, judgment
was respited, and the judges in the Court of Criminal
Appeal have not yet been able to come to a decision.
Baron Channell told the prisoner that pending the deci-
sion of the court, the learned judge W6O tried him consi-
dered that he might be admitted to bail, and it was origi-
nally ordered that he should enter into a personal recogni-
sance in AIN., and find two sureties in 401. each. He
understood, however, that he was not in a condition to Plod
sureties to that amount, and the court would, tbera:ore,
consent to his being liberated upon his entering into his own
reoognisance in 80/. ; but as there was some doubt whether
the act of parliament did not also require sureties, he would
also find two sureties in ls. each.

The prisoner then entered into the required recognisant:es
and was discharged.

NEW COURT.

(Before the Recorder.)
The trial of Edward Weltzeneeein, Eliza Weltzenageis,
Madeleine Jourdan' and Herman Frisk, for conspiracy,
was resumed yesterday morning at the sitting of the court.
Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., Mr. Sleigh, and Mr. Poland,
Merfor the prosecution ; and 11r. Canal, Mr. Best,
.dßenealy for the defendants.
Evidence was given to prove that some letters which the
prosecutor denied having written were in his handwriting,
and the witnesses only spoke to the writing as being like
that of the prosecutor.
Mr. Hu(Weston then rose to address the jury in reply, and
said that it was not his intent to enter into the extraneous
topics which his learned friends had, but he could not let
the remarks made by the counsel for the defence u him
for the manner in which he conducted the
without notice. The learned counsel, Mr. had, V:
very vehement address, accused him (Mr. H ) of
having conducted the prosecution in an unfair asaaor. Ho
denied that there was the slightest cause for Mr. Parry's
condemnation of him, and thought be would have done
better if he had explained his cause for complaint, and not
descended to personal abuse. He (the learned counsel) in
his address for the prosecution had but use
object in view, and that was justice. Mr.
though
it accused him of conducting the case as t
it was one at Nisi Prius, and not with the pro.
priety which should characterise proceedings in a
criminal court, and alai, that the ease ought never
to have been brought here. He (Mr. Huddlestou) knew
no distinction of courts in the manner of conducting a ease,
but always endeavoured to do his duty with fairness to both
parties: and with regard to the case being brought here for
trial, he thought there never was one more fit fur a criminal
court than this. The defendants had charged a highly re-
spectable gentleman with perjury and adultery, and the
issue which the jury would have to decide was, whether
Mr. Stohwasser, who had come forward to resist an impu•
dent claim, warn the witness of truth. The learned counsel
then at some length reviewed the whole case, and urged
that the defendants had failed to prove that the prosecutor
was not the 'ranee@ of truth.

The Recorder, in Bumming up, paid a high compli-
ment to the jury,for the extremely careful attention which
they had paid to the evidence, and said that after the full
and able manner in which it had been brought forward and
argued by the counsel engaged in it, he should not think it
neceseszy for him to read over the evidence. He should
merely refer to it, and point out the bearings which it had
upon the accused. He begged the jury to dismiss
from their minds all that had been said about the
position of the parties, and be guided by the evidence
only. Referring to the letters which Weltzenstein
had sent to the prosecutor, and the evidence given
by him in the Court of Queen's Bench, he (the Recorder) did
not think there could be any doubt that prosecutor had lent
him money. The Recorder then, in • most lucid and
im-
manner, referred to the leading points of the evi-
and pointed out how the defendants wore affected by
it. At the coaclusion,
The jury retired, and, after a somewhat protracted ab-
sence, retuned, finding all the defendants Guiltg.
Mr. (Allard then applied to the wart to assign error on
the part of his client, Madame Jourdan, on the ground that
the crown had not joined issue to her plea. She had been
out on hail, and had not pleaded until Monday last, when
the court was without a clerk of ensigns, or any legally-
appointed deputy, to make the necessary replication.
rßecorde said that he should not then pass sentenoe.

THIRD COURT.
(Before the Common Serjeent.)

Yestertky morning, et the sittiog of the court, Mr.
Sleigh, on the part of James Pea rre and Emily Larrenee,
who stand indicted for stealing jewels al the value of
2,3101., applied for the postponement of the trial until neat

Mr. J. Lewis having objected,
Mr. Beard, the solicitor to the prisonens, was sworn to
an affidavit made by them, stating that !oaring only
been committed on Saturday last, they had not had time
to prepare their defence.
The Common Serjeant granted the application.
Julio Baxter, 20, clerk, pleaded guilty to an indictment
for embezzlement.
The prisoner bad been collector to Mews. Christie, hat.
tors, in Gracechurchetreet. His defalcations amounted to
3281.,and when taken at Weynnouth, by Haggett, the officer,
1741. was given up by him.
tientenced to 12 months' imprisonment, the Common Ser.
jeant taking into consideration the atonement he had made
by giving up the money, and the inadequate salary he
received.

William Broom, 30, William Murray, 21, and George
Tarpix, 24, artillerymen, were indicted for a riot and
assaulting John James Abraham, William Atkins, and
Edward Hayward, police °unstable&
Mr. Beale y and Mr. Abram prosecuted.
It appeared that on Easter Tuesday, in the evening, an
artilleryman had been taken in the Trafalgar-road, Green-
wich, by the police for some felony, when the prisoners and
a part)• of the company tried to rescue him, and assaulted
the officers in a most brutal manner. They also broke into
some shops, assaulted the inmates, and did great damage.
The jury acquitted Turpin but convicted the other two.
Brown was sentenced to 12 and Murray to 18 months'
imprisonment and hard labour.