The Sun.
London, England, 1830-04-20 00:00:00

lIALFORD V. KYMER AND OTHERS.

This was an action against the Asylum Life In-
suratice-office, on a policy of theirs for 5,0001.
Mr. F. POLLOCK stated that the plaintiff, Mr.
Richard Halford, was the senior partner in the bank-
ing-house of Halford and Co., of Canterbury. In
February, 1826, he effected an insurance on the life
of his son, a young man of 18 or 19, in the Asylum-
office, for 5,0001., the policy being subscribed by
the defendants as three of the directors. The in-
surance was for two years, and the young man died
about a month before the expiration of that period.
The office had refused to pay, on the ground that
the plaintiff had no interest in the life of his son at
the time the insurance was effected. Various ques-
tions had been raised upon the record, but the sole
question now for decision was, whether or not the
plaintiff had an insurable interest in the life of his
son. He should prove that the plaintiff had been at
considerable expense in educating his son, and be
should contend that, independently of that circum-
stance, be had an interest in his life, inasmuch as
under the statute of Elizabeth, the son was bound
to contribute to his support in case he should at any
time be incapable of maintaining himself. He
should submit also that the statute of the 14th Geo.
111. cap.4B, which enacted, that no insurance should
be effected by any person on the life of another
unless he had an interest in that life, did not apply
to a case like the present ; and that the word
'6 interest" was not intended to be confined to pecu-
niary interest.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, admitting the facts as
stated by Mr. Pollock, submitted that the plaintiff
must be nonsuited. The Act of Parliament, he
submitted, meant a legal interest.
Lord TENTERDEN—The law required that there
should be a pecuniary interest. This case was very
different from that of a father insuring his own life
for the benefit of his son, or any other member of
his family, whom he might leave behind him.. There
was no doubt of the legality of such an insurance,
and as little doubt of the illegality of an insurance
like the present. This was acceded to, and a non-
suit entered accordingly.

SPRING ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

CHESTER, APRIL 16.

Edward Brickiln, aged 60, was charged under
the 9th Geo. IV., c. 31, s. 13, with administering a
noxious herb to Margaret Cartledge, deceased, with
intent to procure her miscarriage, she being with
child, but not quick with child. _

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated that the de-
ceased was a widow living at Bollington, with four
children. Her dwelling was near that of the prisoner.
who at times travelled about the country with tapes
and other articles. On the 9th of October she was
pregnant, and on that day the prisoner bought some
herbs in the neighbourhood to cure some seat worms
in a child. On the 21st he called on and saw the
deceased. On Saturday, the 24th of October,
after being quite well in the morning, she became
so ill in the afternoon that she sent for the village
apothecary, and after getting a little better relapsed,
and died on Friday, the 30th of October. On the
Sunday before a decoction of a certain shrub had
been found in a jug in the house on a high shelf.
A bill for murder had been thrown out by the
Grand Jury.
Mr. Scofield, apothecary, at Bollington—l was
called in on Saturday, the 24th October, to Mrs.
Cartledge. I found her labouring under stranguary.
I used the catheter that night ; I did not ascertain
pregnancy at that time. I saw her on the Sunday
again ; she then laboured under the same but less
distressing symptoms. Before her death I disco-
vered her pregnancy, vithout her giving me an ac-
count of it. She had had bearing down pains of
the womb besides stranguary. She died on the
Friday morning. These sprigs in the jug are a too
well-known herb, which will produce abortion. I
can't speak experimentally en the subject. It is a
drastic medicine, acting powerfully on the womb and
urinary organs.
Elizabeth Broster lives in Bollington, half a mile
from the deceased. On Monday, the 19th October,
prisoner asked me for a little of the herb, mentioned,
for a,child who had got worms. I gave him as
much as I could hold in my hand. He went away
with it.

The Jury found the prisoner Guilty.
Mr. Justice JERVIS sentenced him to six months'
imprisonment.

SATURDAY, APRIL 17.

Samuel Dakin, aged 18, John M`Donnell, aged 20,
Joseph Hazledine, aged 17, and James Hollingsworth,
aged 17, were on Thursday tried for the rape of
Martha Fox, the first as having committed the rape,
and the others as having aided and abetted him
in such rape. On that indictment the prisoners were
acquitted; three other indictments having been found,
in which each prisoner was charged with the rape,
and the other three as aiding and abetting. The
indictment against M'Donnell as principal, and the
three others as aiding and abetting, came on to-day.
to be tried on nearly similar evidence.
Martha 'Fox, the prosecutrix, a slight pretty girl,
swore that she was 17 last Christmas. On the 16th
of March last, she • met the prisoners, and another
boy, named Thomas Phillips, who had absconded,
at half-past seven in the evening, on her return from
the factory near Macclesfield, where she worked.
Mary Boston was with her, and they were going
together to her dwelling about some article of dress.
She knew all the prisoners before. M'Donnell first
pulled her from her companion., Hollingsworth ran
after Mary Boston, who escaped into her own house,
which was close; but Dakin got prosecutrix away
from M`Donnell, and carried her 300 yards up the
road, which was rising ground, past several houses,
over a stone stile into a field. At the farther end of
it, between a wall and a stone quarry, he threw her
down, she struggling and screaming as much as she
could, and violated her person. Before his purpose
was accomplished, the other prisoners jumped over
the wall, which was not three yards off, and stood
there looking on about a yard off for three minutes
before its completion. Without. giving her time
to rise, M`Donnell, Hazledine, Hollingsworth, and
Thomas Phillips, immediately committed the same
act in turn, in spite of her screams and efforts. They
then went off through the quarry. When she got
home she told her step-mother in part what had
happened that night, and the rest the next morning.
On cross-examination, she• admitted having had
connexion with Dakin twice, and Hazledine once,
within three weeks before the event in question.
She was also out for one night with Daniel Clarke.
She said that Hazeldine was always with her when
Dakin was not. She never said to Daniel Clarke,
in presence of Dakin's mother, that she should never
have said any thing about it, if the wench (Mary
Boston) had not gone and told her father. What
She (prosecutrix) said was, that her father went mad
with her for going with them. She never said she
was afraid her father should know. Mrs. Dakin
said, " I hear he has been with you before; how is
it nothing has been said before ? and why are you
going to do this cruel deed now ?" I did not answer
that my father said if I did not go next day and get
law for them, he would murder me, and I should
not live another hour. Hazledine's mother came to
her father and mother, at their house, and said in
her presence, that she was surprised at her son's
being with the other prisoners; but, had it been
him alone, she should not be so much surprised.
Mary Boston was returning about half-past seven

in the evening in question, with the proseentrix to
Richmond-hill, where the witness lived. We met
the prisoners and Phillips at the bottom; Phillips
kissed me, and Hollingsworth ran after, but I e3'
caped home. Dakin carried off. Martha in his invo
towards the stone pit in Sitnistry's-field. In con*
sequence of my brother William's information, I
went out just after, and heard a long dismal scresca
in the direction he had taken her.

John Fox, father to the prosecutrix, said, that
after he had met the prisoners ranting and sigging
down the brow, he met his daughter; her bonnet
was crushed, her shawl torn and bloody, and her
mouth and nose covered with blood. I coked where
she had been ? she said the lads had taken her, not
•
saying who.
Sarah Fox—When my daughter came home, I
asked her why she did not . come straight herue.
She said she had been with Mary Boston about her
cap. I saw her bonnet 'and cap much crushed and
dirty, and her cap-string and shawl very bloody.
She said she thought that blood had come up at her
mouth with resist►ng Dakin's taking her why. She
cried much, and seemed so ill and confused in her
mind, that I did not say much to her, and ishe -went
to bed. The next morning, before she went to
work, at six O'cloCk, she was crying, and told me
the four prisoners and Phillips had their will of her.
The Jury having retired for half ,an
turned a verdict of Guilty against all the prisoners►
with a request to the Learned Judge to take their
cases into his serious consideration on aecount'of
their age.

Judgment of death having been recorded, Mr.
Justice dimly's •addressed the prisoners, naming
them severally—" You have been found guilty of
rape—a crime, the punishment of which, by the law
of England, is very, very seldom mitigated. la
your cases, however, the merciful recommendation
of the Jury will hare its weight. What your v.'
nishment will be I cannot now say; rest assured it
will be very considerable."

The prisoners were then removed in tears, except
Hollingsworth, who seemed little affected. This
and many other of the criminal ewes afford la-
mentable proof of the state of morals induced by
the mixture of young persons at work in the..silk
and cotton factories.