Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-08-22 00:00:00

CAUSE LIST

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

80IITH LANCASHIRE—LIVERPOOL, Auousr 21.

CROWN COUR r.

Mr. BARON WATSON entered the Court at nine o'clock
yesterday, and proceeded with the hearing of the criminal
business.

CHANGE AGAINST A MOTHER Off' POISONING HER
Cetienase.—Bridget Cochrane, aged 30, was charged, on a
coroner's warrant, with having, at Liverpool, feonioulty
killed and murdered Catherine Cochrane and Margaret
Cochrane, her children. The prisoner was accommod-ited
with a scat in the dock, as she had given birth to a child
-only a few days before in the gaol. She held the newly-
born infant in her arms. Mr. Aspinall and Mr. Fenwick
conducted the pees ention. Mr. Davison, at the request
of his Lordship, defended the prisoner. Hr. Aspinall
stated the case for the prosecution. The prisoner was the
Rife of Michael Cochrane, a lab. wring men. She and
ter husband were extremely poor, and in December last
they were living in the house of a person named Roland,
in St. Martin's-street, Scotland-road, Liverpool. The
family cansisted of herself, her husband, and two children.
_the eldest child aged six, and the younger four years.
There had-never been any apparent want of kindness to
the children, on the part of the prisoner, previous to the
circumstances on which the prosecution was founded. On
the 2eth of December the prisoner returned home from
selling herrings, about six o'clock in the evening, and began
to prepare supper. She sent the little girl, Margaret
Cochrane, for a farthinfee worth of buttermilk, and a
farthing candle. The person who sold the buttermilk
would prove that it was in goad eonditioe, and that she
herself and her family had partaken of the same butter-
milk of which she sold a part, to the prisoner's daughter.
The prisoner prepared the supper in the presence of the
landlady of the house. The children only drank the
buttermilk. The prisoner poured it out for them, but took
no part of it hereele Tne landlady then left the room
to attend to her own business, and saw no mere of the
children until after their death. As soon as supper had
been finished, the mother took the children up-stairs into
the bed-room, and remained about twenty minutes. She
then came down and remained in the room below for about
an hour said a half. A woman who lived in the house,
uncapping a room immediately underneath the children's
bed-room, perceived a quantity of smoke issuing through
the floor of that bed-room. She itnneediately
raised an alarm. The prisoner jumped up and
cries uur, •• My ..children are =dead." They at!
vent upstairs. The bed-room door wes opened,
and the room was found to be End with
smoke. Both the children were dead. Suspicron
having been aroused, a pool moreem examination washeld,
and the stomach of the girl, Margaret Cochrane, was
- handed to Dr. Edwards for analyst.. Da Edwards found
in the stomach oxalic acid in quantities sufficient to cause
death. The conjecture was, that the prisoner bad adani-
-.niste:el the poison, and then set the room on fire, in
-.garner that it might be seppesed that the death of the
children had arisen from suffecation. De. Edwards would
prove that the symptoms of death liana suffocation by
smoke, and those whioh would be caused by oxalic acid in
small quantities, were very similar, so mach so, that it was
difficult sometimes to decide whether death had resulted
from suffocation by smoke, or from the administratien of
oxalic acid; or whether the smoke had assisted the effscts
of the acid. The learned counsel stated that the ~nly
motive which could beeonjectured as baring impelled the
prisoner to the crime wa., that she and her husband had
trevsntly expressed a desire to go to America as soon as
possible, and the existence of the children probibly
obstructed their carrying oat that object. His Lordship said
he bad read over the depositions, and he did pot see
the slightest trace of evidence to show that the prisoner
had had. oxalic acid in her possession either befee or at the
time of the deaths. In ordinary cases of poisening, the
prisoner hail bean in possession of poison either at or before
the time it.was administered. The jury must be satisEcd
that not only was the poison administered by the prisoner,
but that it was administered with a guilty knowledge. The
-difficulty would ba to prove the: the prisoner knew ef the
poison being.in the buttermilk, or that she herself put it
there. 'rhe jury, however, would hear the evidence.
Mary Roland deposed that she was the wife of Richard
Roland, and had a house iw St. Martin-street, in wkich
she let rooms to lodgers. She had twenty-three lodgers.
The prisoner lodged there with h€r husband and ter)
-children. The prisoner and the cA•laren took their meals
in the kitcbeu. There were two beds in the prisoner's
-room made of .shavings. The prisoner's hcsband was a
labourer at the docks, and the prisoner used to go out
with a basket, selling small articles. Nchody took
-care of the children. They ran in and out. The
prisoner seemed to be a kind mother. On Saturday,
the 20th Dicember, the prisoner came home at three
o'clock in the afternoon. She sent one of the) chileren out
for a farthing's worth of buttermilk. She then took
two cup., and gave the children a portion of the buttermilk
each. Witness went out to market, and on coming back
found that sin, ke was issuing from the top bedroom, that
where the prisoner and the .children slept. One of the
women lodging in the house rushed to go np, when the
prisoner said she was going up hereelf. Tae room was
fall of smoke. The prisoner went in and came ant with
one of the children in her arms, crying out that it was
dead. Witness took the child into the kitehen. It was
dead. The prisoner brought out the other child, weich was
also dead. Tile childrens' night dressier were not b ant. An
alarm was made and the police cum in. The prisoner
.did not stay in the house white the bodies of the children
were being examined by the doctors. She suddenly left
the house and di I not retain). Cross-examined by Mr.
Davison : The prisoner herself took the elder chill to the
doctor after the fire. Emma Kelly, a lodger in the house,
corroborated the evidence of the previous witness. The
children appeared in good health on the day in q les!ion.
Hes heard the prisoner say several times th.t she was
going to America with her husband. It'. ary Butler and
Patrick D ewd gave evidence of a geeerallv similar nature,
The latter witness seated in reply' to kr. Davison that
oxalic acid was used by shoemakers to cit-an leather.
Johanna Roach deposed that she kept a small provision
strop in St. Martin':-street, and on the night in question
sold some buttermilk to the prisoner's eldest child. 'lke
vessel into which the buttermilk Was poured appeared to
be quite clean. Never heard any complaint ..boat
buttermilk from any person. Mr. Arnold, surgeon, deposed
that be examined tke body of Margaret C .chrane, and his
suspicions were aroused be the apeardnees he saw.
therefore sent th stomach for analysis to Edwards.
Mr. Kemp, surgeon, deposed that he made a pot mortens
examination of the body of the younger child, and. judging
from the appearances, bethought suffocation wes the cies°
of death. He made a arcand examination in the presence
of Dr. Arnold, and detached pinions of the body, which
be sent to Dr. Edwards. Dr. Edwards deposed that oxalic
acid was very commonly sold to straw bonnet mak ete and
shoemakers. It is very soluble in liqied. The acidity of
buttermilk would probably prevent any alarm from
being felt by children if oxalic acid were in it,
Although an adult might detect its presence. Made
su analysis of the contents of the stomach of the deceased
Margaret Coubrane, sad detected the presence of oxalic

LIST.-SALFORD 13 UNDRED.
Plaintiffs' Attorneys, Plaintiffs, Defendants.
2 QB..Slater and C 3 Tampion and ano (sJ) v Hartpson..
g Ex ..Sam e ..Moorhonse.. (SJ) V AletiCk Sian
10 QB...Same ..The Queen (sJ, v Spence • . .. Cooper and Sons
25 Ex,. Hold en and __Hamer .. (5.,) v IfLowles and ors ..
QB
.. F Andrew .. Mackay and ore.. ... (e. 7) v Stephenson . an! J
31 QB.. Worthington and E Nowell.. .. (es) v -The Mayor, Src of Wigan .. Lori and A

SECOND LIST.—WEST DERBY HUNDRED.
3 QB..L^wndea and Co —Smith (NJ) v Pile Young and CO
4 QB .. Rade t1e........8r0wn and ano (u) v Leicester . „stone
15 Ex... P o'y . • • • • • .. ..Peet ..v Ha' lam .. Henry
6 QB..Binney.. • • • . Yeomans v Gray and ors.. .. Chambers and NV/
10 Ex... It Wells ..L B of Health King upon Hull (sz) v T. inity Ho :se of Hall.. E S Wilson
11 Ex.— Powson and Co .. ..11,arhtun . (a) v Beattie
15 CP .. immer • .. —Same „ v Brown Francis and R
16 CPL.J Y des jun.. .. McManus v Lan. and York. Railway Co „Higham an-I C
12 CP.. Same _ Ellis (sr) v Barber ..• ..Fletcher and H
IS Ex... Stamp and J Rarkstr,rth ard ano (as) v Mason .. ,„
•
19 Ex.— Pell and S Holmes .. v Kidd and ano .. Evans and Son
20 QB.. Statham and Co .. ..malomon .. • • ..v Rawns ey Brierley
22 Ex... Barrow .. 3? ',ley admix .. ...v St Helens Canal and Rail Co .. Whi:ley
SI Ex... same Hawksey v Carter
„, „. .. ..„
24 QR.. Holden and Son Wooliscroft v Watson —Bell and S
25 Ex... T Easrham ...Eastham . v Whsrey Coltan and B
26 EX...Fletcher and H .. Taylor .. (u) v McCalman .. Neal and 11
2S CF ..J P Marrtnigh —Hargreaves . ..v Thomas _ Chester and Ce
Ex,..Thackerah Fitzpatrick.. v Lan. and York. Railway Co ..Lewis an iCo
31 CP.. J Yates jan .. Raven .. ..v Bell Pemberton
32 CP ..Same ..Callan .• v Jameson .. .. Ward
23 QB- • R Stevenson • • .. ..Ye.d .. (as) v Lon. and N. West Rail. Co.. ..Swift and Co
34 Fr.. Rowe —Warier, Jun.. v Everth..Woodcock andCO
36 Ex...He:ld !' Nail ..v Acton Leigh
361 CPL.Blackhurst Wright ..v C owes ..
37 QB .. Carson and E Brooks and ors exors ..v Bainbrldce Gregory and Co
39 QB.. Moss and L.. .. . • .. Samuelson and ors ~ (as) v H ins ar d ors.. .. Preston
36 CP.-Goodwin and A .. —Cooke •(u) v Wilson and ano owndes and Co
41 CPL.Fenwick ..Vose admix ••. ..v Lan. and York. Railway CO.. T A and J Grundy
66 CP.. J Yates, jun.. .. .. Wright and ano ..v Kirby.. .. • • .. • • ..Hinda
42 Ex.. R Wore .. ..S..ott and ano ..v Hernaman
44 ('P.. Evans and Son Stevens and ano v Clementson ••
45 Q8..0 and 11 Frost .. Wadsworth .. v .. • • .. ...wells and S
47 Ex ...Fl. tcher and IL Higgin •• ..v Robins .. •• .. •, .• ~Chilcott
4S Ex... Broker.. .. Hatton and ano ..v Boyle . Ss a. kin on and Co.
• Ex...Co3way.. ..Nelson (e.l) v Seddon .. Holden and Son
ae CFL.Turner and Son.. .. Waddington admor ..v Lan. and York. Hallway Co. ..R and W Ascroft
si CP L..larne . same ..v Same.. .. ..(demurrer) Same
12 Q. Littledale and B. .. Pemberton ..v Arkle and ano..
is CP.. Bog ie Buxton . v Venn and ano Fra- els and A
u Ex...T s Smith .. .-Collins v Murphie ..Sw.ft and Co
Sit CPL.Faekhou•e gagar and ano ..v Brannand and ano Sale and Co
raj CPL Same ..Same v same.. (demurrer) Same
S 7 CFL.same ..Sagar v S Lme , sa-re
se CP L.Saowbsli .. • • .. Woodhead v Hackharst W Black burst
• C PL.llrethetton .. •. .. ..Assop ..v Yates. ..Ward
61 Ex. .Cobb .. —Grant .. •• ..v Denham ..
QB.. Littledale and Co .. Day es .• ..v Critehley _ Holden end Son
64 Ex —.Barber _Weisman ..v 'l'aylor Higham and C
64 Ex... Conway.. —Nelson ..• v Brownel and ano _Miller and P
65 Ex... T S Smith .. Mnirbead v Moore and ano. J B ..loyd
• CPL.R and W A scroft ..Blackburn and ano ..v Adams

Defendants' Attorneys.