The Sun.
London, England, 1852-12-16 00:00:00

852.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.

VICE-CHANCERY.
JUDGMENT.-COWMAN V. HAnnrsofr.
In this claim, by various persons, to participate in the
savings by the widow of the testator, on the ground that
a trust had been created in favour of the claimants by
the will of her husband—the testator having particularly
recommended and desired his wife to divide what money
she might have saved among all his children in equal
parts—his Honour (Vice-Chancellor Turner), after stat-
ing the facts, this morning, held that the bill must be
dismissed, and that with costs.
Judgment accordingly.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT-THIS DAY.

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Wightman.)
MURDER.

Amelia Elizabeth Burt, 30, married, who stood re-
manded from last session, was indicted for the wilful
murder of her daughter, Annie Philadelphia Burt.
Mr. Ryland conducted the prosecution, and Mr.
Bodkin appeared for the prisoner.
James Fendall, a fisherman, residing at Greenwich,
deposed to finding the body of the child while he was
dredging in the Thames, off Rotherhithe, about 8 o'clock
on the morning of the 16th of November. It was fully
dressed, and had on a bonnet. He delivered up the
body to the beadle of the parish. The tide was then
about half ebb—that is, half run down.

Anna Cowley, a widow, residing at 82, Cornwall-road,
Lambeth, said she was the mother of the prisoner's
husband. The deceased child was her grand-daughter,
and was 10 months old. The prisoner and the baby
had li'red with her six weeks before the 15th of Novem-
ber. She was then residing apart from her husband,
who allowed her 7s. a week. The prisoner's mother
was also a widow, and lived in Oakley-street, Lambeth.
Witness left the prisoner at home at 9 o'clock on the
morning of the 15th, and on returning at 11 in the evening
found the house closed, and could not get in. She then
went to her mother's, where she had been with the baby,
but learnt that they had both left some time previously.
Cross-examined.--The prisoner had been married 11
years. The husband was employed as a gas-fitter at
Greenwich Hospital. They had three children, to whom
she behaved very kindly. Up to the time she came to
my house, when she left her husband, they lived very
happily together. In Nov., 1851, one of the children died
from small-pox. She supposed the child had caught it
from her mother, who had nursed a sister of hers, who
died of small-pox. After this occurrence there was a re-
markable change in her manner. She was previously a
person of cheerful and lively spirits. She was at this
time in the family way with the child whose death is the
subject of inquiry, and she remained in a de-
sponding state until it was born. •On the 17th
of January last I tried to rouse her, but did not
succeed. She could bear the idea of any one
laughing, and never liked to go out of the house.
She often expressed a wish to die, but said she could not,
as she was disturbed dying. She used to place her head
in her hands, and remain in that posture for a long time
without saying a word. She complained -that her head
was burning, while her legs, feet, and hands were quite
cold. Her memory was also affected, and she some-
times could not remember that she had a husband and
children. When I spoke to her it was sometimes seve-
ral minutes before I got an answer. She said she was
not herself, and could not talk. In consequence of her
desponding state it was thought advisable to keep her
separate from her husband. She appeared to grow worse
afterwards. I occupied the same bed-room with her.
She always appeared awake when I looked to her. She
did not seem ever to sleep. She continued in this way
until the day before the unhappy occurrence.
Mrs. Gibson, the prisoner's mother, said I remember
the 15th of November. I saw the body of the child
after it was found—it was that of my grand-daughter.
The prisoner came to my house on Monday the 15th,
about 12 o'clock at noon, with the baby, and she suckled
the child while she stayed. She left with the child at
10 o'clock, and I did not see her again -until she was in
custody.

Cross-examined—l have unfortunately had two mem-
bers of my family afflicted with insanity—one died
raving mad, and the other is confined in a lunatic asy-
lum. They were both females, and the latter became

insane after her confinement. I had observed a change
in the prisoner's demeanour before her confinement, and
she became worse afterwards. She complained of great
weight on her head, and was very reserved and singular
in her manner. I was in the habit of often leaving
home, and thinking it would be unsafe to leave her
alone, I induced her to go to her mother-in-law on one
occasion. She 'attempted to take some arsenic, which
her husband was in the habit of using, but he prevented
her. She used to sit for hours with the child in her lap,
without speaking. She told me that she was dead with

the exception of her head, which was the only part of
her not affected. She used to sit in this lonely way
without fire or candle, though she had both in the house.
I considered her of unsound mind. She was once under
the impression that her husband would blow out her
brains.

Osborne, policeman, said, a little after two on the
morning of the 16th of November, he saw the prisoner
wandering about the streets in Greenwich. He asked
her where she was going, and she replied that she did
not know. She also told him, in reply to other ques-
tions, that she had three children, and that she had
given one to a boy to throw over Hungerford-bridge.
He then took her into custody. She had the cloak of a
child under her arm.

Mr. Justice Wightman said it would be for the jury
to say whether they thought the prisoner could dis-
tinguish Wright and wrong, so as to be a responsable
agent for her acts.

The jury almost immediately Acquitted the prisoner.

NEW COURT.
(Before the Recorder.)
FORGERY.
Frederic Steans, 39, corn dealer, charged with forging
a bill of exchange for 271. 10s., with intent to defraud
William Townes, pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Payne appeared for the prosecution, and Mr.
Parry for the defence.

M. Payne, in stating the case to the jury, said the
only point for consideration was whether the prisoner
had altered a bill of exchange for 201., given to him by
Townes for 271. 10s., as he should be able to prove, the
prisoner having confessed that he made the alteration in
the hearing of two witnesses.
The utterance of the bill for 271.105. was then proved;
but the two principal witnesses, Mr. Townes and Robt.
Dackman, did not answer to their names when called.
Mr. Payne said that they would be in court shortly,
as the train by which they would come to London-
bridge had not yet artived.
Mr. Parry said there was no excuse for their being
absent then, as the case had been postponed from the
previous day to meet the convenience of the prosecutor.
The learned Recorder concurred with Mr. Parry,
and, the parties having been again called without effect,
directed the jury to acquit the prisoner, which was ac-
cordingly done.

FORGERY AND ROBBERY.
Samuel Finley, 26, draper, pleaded guilty to an indict-
ment charging him with the uttering of a forged request,
with intent to defraud ; and with stealing 300 yards of
silk, value 501., the property of George Merrington, his
employer,

Counsel for the defence:submitted to the Court that the
prisoner had yielded to pressing temptations, and that
up to the period of committing the offence he had borne
a good character.
On the other hand, it was urged that the prisoner,
before entering into the service of the prosecutor, had
been engaged in extensive betting transactions, and had
even kept a betting-office, from which he had absconded
without satisfying the liabilities which he had incurred.
The learned Recorder, in a feeling address, in which
he solemnly warned all young men to avoid betting
transactions, glanced at the mitigatory circumstances
connected with the prisoner's offence, and sentenced him
to twelve months' imprisonment and hard labour.
William Weekes, 21, John Hughes, 19, and Michael
Hurley, convicted at a late hour last night of having
burglariously entered the premises of Mr. Robert Burgh,
and stolen therefrom 60 dozen bottles of port wine,
value 601., were brought up for sentence.
The learned Recorder remarked upon the bold nature
of the robbery, in which the prisoners, who lived in a
low lodging adjacent to the prosecutor's premises, which
were the remains of an old monastic building, had skil-
fully dug their way through six feet of solid wall to
accomplish their object ; getting drunk with a portion
of the wine, and selling the remainder. He sentenced
the prisoners to be each transported for seven years ; to
which Hughes responded by wishing his Lordship a
" Merry Christmas and a happy new year."
This finished the business in the New Court.

IMPORTANT JUDGMENT.-THE BIRMINGHAM AND SHREWS-
BURY RAILWAY COMPANY V. THE STOUR VALLEY RAIL-
WAY COMPANY.
• The Lords Justices, this morning, gave judgment in
this suit and appeal, which was brought by the plaintiffs
against the refusal of the Master of the Rolls to inter-
fere by injunction at the instance of the plaintiffs. The
main objects of the bill were to obtain for the Birming-
ham and Shrewsbury Railway Company the right to run
over the Stour Valley line, under the provisions of the
Stour Valley Railway Act of 1847 ; and also the joint use
of the railway station at Wolverhampton. In the course
of the dispute, an award had been made by Sir William
Cubitt in reference to the latter matter, making a parti-
tion of the station ; but the plaintiffs objected to this,
and contended that the authority of the arbitra-
tor had been revoked, that the award was ultra
vires of the reference, and was uncertain, absurd, and
impracticable. The dispute was, it appeared, in fact,
one between the Great Western Railway Company and
the London and North-Western Railway Company, as
the chief allegation of the defendants was that the plain-
tiffs had forfeited their right over the Stour Valley line,
by having, contrary to the act of Parliament, and by
means of various agreements, amalgamated with the
Great Western Railway Company. The Court, after
going through the facts at some length, stated that they
were of opinion that Sir W. Cubitt's award could not be
maintained, he having exceeded the limits of his autho-
rity, but with the best intentions. With regard to the
use of the Wolverhampton and other stations, the Court
stated thaeit would be difficult and delicate, in the pre-
sent state of affairs, to interfere, but if the demands of
justice required it, they would grapple with it. The
Court were of opinion that, in declining to grant the in-
junction, neither of the parties should have costs ; and
they should, in conclusion, declare the award of Sir W.
Cubitt void as against the plaintiffs, with leave to the
plaintiffs to bring any action which they might be ad-
vised, and the injunction to stand over until further
orders.
Judgment accordingly.