The Express.
London, England, 1858-02-25 00:00:00

• ; I? .
THE EXPRERF, THURSDAY EVENING. FFBRITAIIY 25, 1858.

liataace-sheet which was said to have contained frau-
dulent statements was settled on the lath, 22ad,
and 29th of January. The •Itolo care against Mr, Stapleton
wee that be was parent at the time. He would leave the
My to judge of the triumphint answer made by his learned
end the Attarne •Gentral (Mr F. Kelly), but what would
they say to Mr. Kesemidy's ease when he had not
been there at all? Mr. Alderman Kennedy bad not attended
the board hove the 10th of Await to the 6th of February,
when he introduced his own brother-in-law as a director, mid
who from tbls set was brenrbt In to share the honour and
ersdit of It charge of her 3lopeity's Attorney-General for cum-
sptracy. Was such a ease probable Wash consistent with
human nature that Mr. Aldermen Kennedy would have
brought in his own nephew, who was a clerk in the Foreign-
dim to deposit in the bank a small sum he had gained
no a pine at Cambridge? Nay, more, Mr. Alderman Ken-
nelly bad brought in his sothec-in-law, Ladyte whim credit there was a balance of 600 f. when the bank
darned ppyyssenent. Could they believe that a gentleman who
bare a dYtfagplibed name—for he was the son of General
Kennedy whose name lived in the annals of this country as
having gained fbr her a large tenitory—would have periled
his own fair name—that he would bare sacrificed his nephew,
his brother-in-law, and his mother-in-law by joining tn inch
a omegfracy ea wee laid to his charge? They would recol-
lect that Mr. Alderman Kennedy wan a creditor of the bank,
sad sever had accommodation from It to the extent of a far-
...

thing. When they recollected that their mediae of guilty
woad deprive him the troops of friends" which should
aecomplay his old age, and woqld embitter every moment of
his Eh to know that a jury of his fellow-countrymen had
found that he had ruined hi dearest relatives by conduct
the most fraudulent description, they would hesitate long and
anxiously beton they diked such a disgrace to his name as
would attend such a verdict. I have, in conclusion, said the
learned counsel, to 'Dude only to one other matter, and that
is the put taken by Mr. Aldermen Kennedy awing his
she-
af ahrlev•lty, at the meeting of the shstabolders. The e-
rirs carriage drove up to the door of the bank all the meet-
ing wee being held, in all that state which, I fear, Is regarded
y ara A
y a sheriff am perhaps inconvenient. Now, if a gen-
rad go to • meeting, in the object of which be
sympathises, and a resolution I. not put into hie hands to
move, I am net a serjesnt-at.law. (Laughter.) Why the same
thing mowed to myself the other day, but then a shaft you
know. (Renewed laughter.) Well, Mr. Alderman Ene-
mata), made a speech, which if an extempore one, was pro-
bably not so good as he would have made st one of the gnat
civic entertainments which gram your City. He Maned
there was a reserved fund of from 16,0001. to 16,0001., and
no doubt there wee, according to the balance-sheet on which
he relied. Redly, gentlemen, I think there is nothing In
this, and I submit that there is nothing whatever In the
sea which I now close. in the confident hove that you will,
with great and heartfelt satisfaction, say, u not's ailty," as
rerards Mr. Alderman Kennedy. (Appian/ie.)
he lordship then, at half-past Eve, adjourned.
SECOND COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Erie and Common Judie.)

PRIX V. THE NORTH STAP7ORDIRIRM RAILWAY COINPANT.

provisions of the Anatomy Act, and particularly upon the
vealon that tippoared to be most relied en by tha prosecution,
the deleadent was entitled to en soquittsl. He said that be
clearly bad the legal comedy at the dead bodies of the
paupers, and be had the power to awns* of them, and he
had templed with every we of Rio requirements of the act of
parfilmeat Win the bodies wore sent to the hospital, and
there being no evidence that the relatives of the deceased
required that they should be buried, he submitted that the
detendmat wee justified in what he had done, and therefore
wes entitled to his acquittal.
Mr. J umice Wisotwan limited Mr. Robinson which of the
counts of the indictment he considered waa made out by the
evidence!

Mr. Reblason mid be should contend that there was evi-
dent,. for the jury in support of the whole of them.
Mr. Justice Wighunan mid that the first four mats,
which charged that the defendant, es the master of the work-
house, had these bodies entrusted to his charge for the pur-
poses of burial, and not otherwise, clearly bad not been
eupported m he was of opinion that the defendant bad the
legal euatudy of the bodies, and had the power of deal*
with them according to the Anatomy Act.
Mr. Matthews thee proceeded to urge several technical
objections to the other counts of the indictment, and be con-
tended that the facts had not established any offence at exa-
men law, sad that there was no evidence to show that the
bodies bad been dimmed of, or sold, for the profit of the
defendant, and that there wee also no evidence that the rela-
tives required the bodies to be Meted, which was abso-
lutely essential to be proved under the provisions of the
Anatomy Act.
Mr. itobinson, in reply, urged that there was ample evi-
dence to go to the jury upon the point that what wee done
by the defendant was for lucre and gain sooerdiug to the
form of the indictment, and with regard to the other point,
that the relatives had not required the bodies to be buried, he
mid that the deception that was practised upon them by a
day being appointed far the funeral, and seeing the
bodies in the conies ready, apparently, for interment at
the tiros so appointed, effectually prevented them from asking
• distinct request that the burial should take place. It was
I clearly, however, their intention that their relatives shoal be
buried, and it would be likely to be attended with very he
ful consequence, if such • trick ea appeared to have hem
practised in this cue should be allowed to have the Abet of
defeating the act of parliament.
Mr. Justice Wightman, after some further diseamket bad
taken place, mid the questions he should reserve for the wa-
nds-Wu of the jury warn whether the defends= had dis-
posed of these dead bodies for hie own profit, and whether
them had been any act on the part of the relatives that
amounted to a request that the bodies should be buried.
Mr. Matthews then proonded to address the jury for the
defeadant, and after remarking that it was absolutely neces-
sary for the requirements of science that dead bodies should
be obtained for the purpose of dissection, and that the act of
parliament that had been referred to was passed for the specific
purpore of giving greater facilities to effect that object, he
proceeded to urge that the defendant had done no more
then he was legally justified in doing under that act
of parliament, and he said that if there had been any
irregularity, the witness Hogg, who had been introduced on
the part of the prosecution ea an accomplice, was much more
likely to have been guilty of it than the defendant. Hs
then commented at considerable length upon the cooduct of
I that witness, and reminded the jury that he had in the ant
instate* refused to amwer any questions until an marine*
was given to him that he should not be prosecuted, and that
he had • direct inducement to substitute one body for
another in the fact that he received 31. 10a. for the
burial of every body that was taken to the hospital, while he
only received 6a. 6d. for the ordinary perish funeral.
Several highly respectable witnesses were called, who gave
the defendant a most excellent character.
Mr. Jastioe Wightman having intimated his intention to
seem some of the legal points that had been raised on be-
half of the defendant for further consideration, in naming
up the emu to the jury said that although the indienseent
was very long, and the ems bad occupied a emaiderehl•
liras, yet it marred to him that the imbetantial quietens
to be sniSied to then were, whether it was made out to
their eatideolics that the defendant had delayed the Motel of
them bodies is order that they might be used for the peewee
of disseotkm, aid whether be intended to make • profit
himself in so &leg, and also whether they thought that the
relatives of the deceased had intimated • request that the
bodies should be interred, and that they should not be sub-
jected to anatomical examination, or whether they were pre-
vented from doing so by the proceedings taken by the de-
fendant to get up a pretended funeral. His lordship them
went through elf the material facts of the ass. sad be con-
cluded by reading the written questions to the jury, request-
ing that they would answer each of them separately.
The jury retired, and in about half-an-how they returned
into court, sad expressed their opinion with regard to all the
questions in the alfirmative—namely, that the defendant, with
Hogg, had delayed the burial of these bodies in order that
they might be disposed of for anatomical examination, for
hie own profit; that the pretended arrangements for the
funeral sweated the relatives from making a formal request
that the bodies should be buried without anatomical exami-
nation, and that if they had not been deceived in this man-
ner they would have made such a request.
The learned judge upon this finding directed • verdict of
Guilty to be recorded upon the fifth, sixth, and seventh
collate of the indictment.

—ThethensazTtbey were &axiom' to uproot their re-
gret that, owing to the promise that was made to him by
the guardians, the man Hogg had not been placed in the
dock with the defendant.
Mr. Robinson said that the guardians felt bound to adhere
to their sgTeement, end probably the promise would sot have
been made if it had not been felt that there would poisibly
have been a difficulty in making out the cue without the in-
formation that was derived from this parson.
A verdict of Guilty war then recorded,
to be beta. sentence was
reand the defendant was allowed at large upon
prte'uring at:truism to appear sad motive jment in case
the questions of law that aro moseved saM be decided
against

NEW COURT.—Fms. 24.
(Beton the Reoorthr.)

George Richard itatelife, who was yesterday tried in the
Old Court and acquitted, upon a charge of forging a cheque
fer SO/., was this day indicted for stealing a pato, of piper
rained at one penny, the property cd William blockford and
another, his masters.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. T. Atkinson prosecuted, and Mr.
Sleigh and Mr. Orrklp defended.
The evidence adduced wee precisely the mine as that liven
yesterday, the charge being for stsweliag the blank cheque
upon which the forgery was
The Jury returned a verdict of Gouty. and the prisoner
was sentenced to two years' imprisonment.

Nary Anse Pepin*, • respectable-leaking woman, sur-
rendered to take her trial for stealing • Bank of England note
for 201. the property of Lewis Hardin.
Mr. Bodkin prosecuted, end Mr. Neigh defended.
The prosecutor, a fanner, residing in Hampshire, stated
that on the 23rd of December he went into a peM•ymok's
shop in St. Martin's-court, Westminster, and WM that time
In his pocket the 201. note In question in a mill bag, from
which he took at:peace to pay for what he bed. At a later
period in the day the prosecutor mired the sots in question,
sad the nent day he went to the shop In St. Martin report,
and there saw the prisoner, who we about removing her
pods. she having let the I:Meitner. When prosecutor told
her of his loss, she said she was sorry for it, that he most
have dropped it before the counter, end some one else tout
bare picked it up. She said she was going to remove to
Westminster or Lambeth, pro.ecutor did not know which.
She seemed in • great hurry. Prosecutor told her that he
Use the number of the note' end meant to advertise it.
The other evidence went to prove that the note wan
changed at Messrs. Dakies, the tee diadem of Ludgate-hill,
upon the 28th of December, and prisoner was sworn to as
being the person who had changed it. Prisoner was then
traced to Frederick-street, Hampstead-road, and upon
Mose, the City detective, seking her about the note, she sad
she remembered the prosecutor calling about it, but she had
sotseah.

for the prisoner, briedy urged upon ths court
to the most recent decisions, the fact.did not
= g
lislt way ease to go to the jury.
The Rounder meld he entertained the same view, and told
the jury that as the prisoner had no mesas of knowing who
the owner alike mote wes when she got pommel= of it, they
were boned to acquit the prisoner.
Mr. Mesh raid, that althnngh he felt it his duty to take
the legal objection which he had he wee bound to state that
be could produce °Odome to show that his client, who bore
a high character, was not the party who changed the note.
The Recorder said if that wee so it would perhaps have
been more sedshotory had the case gene to the jury. Still
the coarse Mr. Sleigh had taken WOO jeetiSed by the Lots
which bed been proved.
lit. Bahl:61861d it wee rather stress* hr a monad to
mks a sktemst of feels which be wee not geseg to rove,
end that ohs a ems wee closed.
TM seaweed wee this disoherged.

one of the principal offici its of the establishment informed his
lordship that a more h—vy ponialiment awaited the delin-
nnemt at the halide of the root-office authorities.

GUILDHALL.
Daumond Louis, a respectably-dressed Frenchman, about
30 years of age, dark hair, sallow complexion, motudacha,
and wearing spectacles, was placed at the bar, charged with
feloniously uttering one forged 101. and two forged V.-notes,
with intent to defraud Mr. Thompson, cigar manufacturer,
of Finsbury-pavement, and Mr. Herring, pawnbroker, of
A Mon.:rode-street
Evidence was taken on these charges, and the prisoner was
then remanded for further inquiry, ma it was anticipated the
prisoner had been doing the same thing in other planes.