The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-08-01 00:00:00

TRALEE ASSIZES.-310% DAY, JULY 24.

CHILD MURDER.
Ann Roche, en old woman of very advanced years, wall indicted
forthe minder of Michael Leahy, a young child, by droltllllif him
in the Fleck.
This ease, which at first assumetLa very rerious aspect, from the
meaning imputed to words spoken by the prisoner, that the sin of
the child's death was on the grandmother, and not on the prisoner,"
turned out to be a homicide committed ander the delusion of the
grapiest superstition. The child, though four years old, could
neither stand, walk, nor speak—it was thought to be fairy smock—
ma the grandmother ordered the prisoner and one of the witnesses,
Mary /'Ltd all, to bathe the child every morning in that pool of the
sister Flesk where the boundaries of three farms met; they had so
bathed it for three mornings running, and on the last morning the
,Insotter kept the child longer under the water than usual, when
Iter companion (the witness Mari Clifford) said to the prisoner,
how can you ever hope to sec Gotl after this ?" To which the
prisoner red lied, " that the sin was on the grandmother, and not on
tier." •
Upno erns...examination, the witness said it was PAT done wi h in.
term to 1.111 the child, but to cure it—to pot the fairy out cf it.
To the policeman who apprliended her, on charging her with
drownitl tie child, she raid it was no matter if it had died four
years ago.
farm PVICNEVATIIER said, that though it was a case of sus-
Nemo, and required to be thoroughly ei.antitted into, yet the Jury
worold not be safe in convicting the prisoner of murder, however
strong their stipicions might be.
Verdict—Nut Guilty.

PROSTCUTION ne Masses. WAIBPIELD.—II is stated
in a paragraph which appeared in the San newspaper of
Wednesday last, that Mr. Tomer had given up his inten-
t ou of prosecuting Messrs. Wakefield for the abduction of
his daughter. We have made some inquiries on this sub-
-ct, and are perfectly satisfied that there is not the slightest
foundatien fur the assertion. The Attotney-General has
been recently retained for the prosecution ; and it is not at
all likely that such an expense would have been incurred if
there had been any intention of relinquishing the prosccu-
tom. The statement in the San was, in all probability,
in:ended for ►he purpose of preventing some of the con-
ci scions of other newspapers from taking measures for
securing a report of the vial, in order that the .Sou mioiit
b v. a priority.—liforiehestee Guardian.
DARING ATTCMPT AT ROBBERY.—SIIMIIIy morning,
about three o'clock, an attempt was made, which was nearly
accomplished, to rub 'the premises of Mr. Bellingham,
tailor, of Southampton-row. The way they effected an en-
trance on the premises was by means of an uninhabited
house in Gloucester-street, in the rear of Mr. B.'s house,
which was some distance from the premises, so much so,
List the thieves had to get over five walls to enter the
house. When they arrived there, they broke open the back
kitchen window, and picked the lock of the chop, and
yanked up cloth to the value of %took ; they then broke
*Ten the desk, but found there no cash. The parcels of
cloth they carried over three or four walls ; but in pitching
a parcel over one of the walls, it fell on a skylight, and
immediately awoke a lady, who raised a hue-and-cry of
thieves, when the men made their escape through the
empty house, leaving their booty behind them.
li rinse-Bars ING.—On Tuesday night the roach•otBce
of the Royal Hotel, Cheltenham, was entered, through the
hack window, by some villains, who rifled the till of its
contents. In enter to gain entrance, it was necessary to
break a pane of glass; and so wary were the thieves; that
they contrived to perform that noisy part of the business
oar!y in the eveninz, when the surrounding bustle pre-
vented the circumstance from being particularly noticed.
The glass being broken the removal of the fastenings was
an easyenatter, and the rubbers escaped with their booty
unheard and unseen.
On Sunday evening last, a lady, in consequence, we be-
lieve, of a quarrel with her husband, who was walking with
her at the time, threw herself into a brick-pond adjoining
itegent-road, Salford ; but prompt assistance being afforded,
she was fished out, without any other damage than the
spoiling of her c!othes and the loss of her parasol, which
sank to the bottoorof the water, and could net be recovered.
—l/andwater Paper.

LAW-NOTICES:

. .
cottwr AT CNA/WIRT.
6FORI TRI LORD DIANCOLLOS. IR &I 'II DM NALL, THIS PAY,

• ♦T
Remainleg

VICF! CHANCELLOR'S CO
a :roe ETHE %ICE CLIANI K 1.1.011, I' LWOW
tIALP-PA.0.71:`,
CaIISC Petdions.
In re Doll.on
Esparte 11111
Mort i.et v. White
In re Conley** Charity
Price P. Price
Hurst v. Ticisell
Peyton v. Peyton
Kyna.ton v. Trevor
Pee v. Marsh
Jemmltt v. Virrill
Bankrupt Petitions.
I Eapnrte Ifall ie Hadwln.
Stay or Allow Bankrupt Certlficater.
Vl'llcason v. Birch I Wilbraham v. G recoup
Itowbank v. Baxter
)(reborn v. Deacon
merle Commissions on Ground'of Coheert.
Hooton v. Same I Lett r. Eyler'
Brain. v. Plmock Iludiorer. Clarke.
Comm.salang on the Ground of Legal Invalidity.
Stonehouse v. Gregory I Hubbard V. Hubbard.
I Harper y. nary*:

lIRT.
Os INN, 71111 DAY, AT

Attarner-General v.
Winebevter Corpora•
lion. part heard
Cockerel% v. Barber, 2
petition., part heard
Clarke v. Lord Or-

♦Cebb v. Lord Similes-

bury
I Reynold. v. NeNon
For-ter v. Deacon
Chnoman v.Schroder,to

mond,
Limbrey r. tiorr
Anoint). -Generoi v.
Weston

be poke to
Coo-Ina r. same, ditto
Fielder v. Clarke, per
order
Weeks v. Weeks, do.

Ezparte Milroy re Rarh

Pe!ltions to
Halley ♦. Datil rwle
Collins v. Forber
Potter v. Birch

Petition., to Supet
Aton v. Itooton
iiinettel ♦. linoton
Petition 4 to SUpersede
Filth ♦. rdsvardi
Weirder v. Gregory

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, JULY 31.
PRACTICE OF •THE COURT.
A petition in a ease of no nubile importance (Town.end v.
Townsenn) having been called in ha regular course, the Junior
Counsel engaged in it intimated to his H.mour, that Mr. Hart
(who was on the same side) wan quite ready to procied, but that
Mr. Horne, who was on the opposite side, was not 'hen in Court.
It was therefore prayed that his Honour would suffer the clot to
stand over until that Learned Gentleman should be present,
Another came (The Attorney.(lenctal v. the Corporation of
Winehearer) was then ( without the Vice-Cliancellar's direction,
however) called on, and the Counsel engaged in it was about to
proceed, but
The l'ice-CtraNcEtron (addressing Mr. Hart, who had in
the interim entered the Court) said. " I am afraid Mr. Hort, I
must put you to go on. if 1 permit such a proceeding, where
ant Ito stop ?"
Mr. HART.—It Is the practice of the other Court (Chancery),
whenever Counsel at one side in a Mt should be engaged in this
Court, that the cause should be suffered to stand over, provided
other business was ready. I trust, therefore, your Honour will
extend a similar indulgence to suitors.
The VICE-CHANCELLOR.--SUCh a practice, Mr. Ilart, would
entirely paralyse this Court.
Here the subject dropped, and the cruse proceeded.
In another cause (iistley v. Baloney) the Viee-Chancellor felt
himself called upon agai I to reprehend the conduct of L'olicitors
in neglecting to instruct their (Nomad in time, to enable them to
support the claims o: their clients.
The Court was occupied throughout the day in bearing Cause
Petitions, none of which were of public interest.