The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-10 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGEA CB.

OXFORD CIRCUIT, WORCESTER, March 6.
(Before Mr. Justice Crompton.)
Charles Pugh, 24, tailor, was charged with cut-
ting and wounding Diana Mason with intent to
murder her, and also with intent to do her some
grievous bodily harm, on the 25th May, 1861, at
Worcester.
Mr. J. Best prosecuted, and Mr. J. J. Powell de-
fended the prisoner.
It appeared that the prisoner and the prosecu-
trix had formerly lived together as man and wife,
but the prosecutrix had recently broken off the
connexion, and on the day in question was
living in a room at a house situate in a low part of
this city, named Dolday. At about 12 o'clock on
the 25th of May last the prisoner went to her in her
room, and asked her to make it up and say no more
about it. The prosecutrix said she would not, and
prisoner asked her whether she had not served him
a nasty trick. She said she didn't know. The pri-
soner then accused her of walking with another
man before him, and the prosecutrix answered,
" No, I must see to those who will treat me better
than what you have." The prisoner had beaten her
several times, and at this moment the prosecutrix
sent a woman who was in her room at the time to
fetch the landlady, and also told her to fetch a police-
man, for she would not have the prisoner there to
beat and ill usa her, as he had done before. When
the young woman had left the room the prisoner
went and stood with his back against the door, and
took a razor out of his pocket. The prosecutrix
stood with her arms folded before him, but said
nothing. The prisoner said nothing, but prevented
her from going out, and then caught hold of her by
the hair of her head and pushed her back across the
bedstead, and cut her with the razor on the throat,
breast, and both sides of the face. The prosecutrix
cried out, and, the door being opened by a person
outside, she made her escape, and was taken to the
Worcester Infirmary. She was there examined, and
it fortunately turned out that her wounds were only
superficial, and were cured in three weeks.
The prosecutrix, on cross-examination, stated that
the prisoner was drunk when he assaulted her ; that
he was fond of her and kind, except when he was
in these fits, and then he did not know what he was
about ; and that he never had these fits except when
he had been drinking. It appeared the prisoner
had been taken to the infirmary on the same night
as the prosecutrix, and was suffering from a dan-
gerous wound in his throat, nearly two inches in
depth, which he had inflicted upon himself, and for
which he was confined several months in the infir-
mary.
Mr. Powell addressed the jury for the prisoner,
and contended that, from the highly excited state
in which he was, he could not be convicted of either
of the intents charged in the indictment, and urged
the jury to convict him of unlawfully wounding only.
Mr. Justice Crompton summed up the evidence
to the jury, and cautioned them against too readily
giving way to the suggestion that the prisoner did
not intend the consequence of his acts. It would be
for the jury to say upon the evidence whether either
of the intents laid was proved; but if not they must
find the prisoner guilty of unlawfully wounding.
The jury found the prisoner guilty of wounding
with intent to do grievous bodily harm.
Mr. Justice Crompton, in passing sentence, said
he feared the prisoner had taken the razor with him
for the express purpose of using it as he had done,
and then sentenced him to 15 years' penal servitude.

NORFOLK CIRCUIT—AYLESBURY, March 7.
The commission for this county was opened yes-
terday by the Lord Chief Baron. There is an entry
of five causes, two of which are marked for special
juries. The calendar contains 40 charges onclud-
ing three of manslaughter, one of administering
poison with intent to murder, one of rape, one of
assault with intent to commit rape,
one of abduction,
and several minor offence. This is an unusually
heavy calendar far these assizes.
(Beforeatheey.r,
ag
eLordd 4 3 Chiefwa was
indictedß r Baron.)
n )for having
.
Abraham
feloniously administered to his wife, Mary
quantity of corrosive sublimate, with Kaley, a
intent to mur-
der her.

Mr. Newton appeared for the prosecution.
It appeared that the prisoner was a labourer
living at Wooburn, near High Wycombe, in this
county. His wife was a person of about the same
age as himself, and stated that she and her husband
had lived uncomfortably together on account of
some jealousy with reference to her alleged miscon-
duct with some other men. The wife denied that
there was any foundation for this suspicion, and
said that on Jan. 14 last she and her husband went
to a publichouse in Wooburn, called the Mother
Redcap. They had a pint of beer together, and
the prisoner then ordered a second pint, part of
which they also drank, when the prisoner went
to give a drink to a friend
o
g he was going
When he came back he said to his wife
ouutt, sisdaey. in
" Here's:a drop of beer in the pot, sup it up, and I'll
light my pipe and go home." She accordingly took
the pot and proceeded to drink the beer that was
left. The moment however she tasted it, she dis-
covered that there was something wrong about the
beer, and said to her husband " What's in the beer?"
He said there was nothing in it that he was aware
of, and ordered a third pint to be brought to see if

int was

there was any difference in it. A third r
accordingly brought, which the woman tak:ten, and
subse
which she pronounced to be different. She
quently became very sick, and suffered severe pain
in her stomach. She went home in company with
her husband. The second pot was put on one side,
and was produced in court with a considert;ble
quantity (said to be about a drachm) of a browrifr:h
powder edit-As:lring to the bottom and aide. Mr. Reeil
a medical genti,?man residing at Beaconsfield, said
that he had tested a portion of this powder, and
found that it was corrozive sublimate, a compound
frequently used by farmers for agricultural purposes.
He also said that he had attended Mrs. Kaley, and
found her suffering tram such symptom:4 as would
be produced by taking that poison. Another wit-
ness also stated that the prisoner, speaking of his
wife, had threatened "to lay her stiff," and also
that " he would give her a pill that would do for
her."
The prisoner, who was undefended, informed the
Court during the progress of the trial that he had
been twice in a lunatic asylum, once at the instance
of his wife and once at that of the parish officers.
In his defence he stated that he had seen a man
with his arm round his wife's neck.
His Lordship, in addressing the jury, commented
upon the strange conduct of the prisoner at the
public Louse on the occasion in question. He said
that the la allowed them to acquit the prisoner of
i?
the felony charged in the indictment, and to find
him guilty of administering poison to fishife with
ld
intent to grieve, injure, or annoy her,
think the expressions attributed to the prisoner
were not serious expressions of an inteut to take her

life.
.The jury took this view of the matter, aud found
him guilty of the minor offence.
The prisoner was then sentenced to 15 Months'
imprisqnment, with hard labour.

_ --- ---
A T.RUSI DEED UNDER THE BAN.
.RUPTCY ACT.

On the 27th of February, an application Was made by*
Mr. Orford, to Mr. Commissioner Jemmett, at Manchester
Bankruptcy Court, under the 192 d section of the Bank-
ruptcy Act, 1861, to dismiss a petition for adjudication on
the ground that the debtor (Henry outham) bad exe-
cuted and registered a deed of assignment in pursuazice °f
that act, according to the provisions of section 194.
Honour deferred judgment. —Mr. Orford renewed his
application on Friday, and produced the deed, signed
by the debtor and the trustees; also the registrar's certifi-
cate, according to the 198th section of the Act. —Mr, Robin-
son, for the petitioning creditor, argued that the application,
had not been sufficiently supported. Under the 192 d sec-
tion, registration was one of the essentials by which a deed
was prevented from being an act of bankruptcy.. The ce
ficate that had been produced was only evidence that the
deed had been registered. His Honour ought to be safes'
fled that all the requirements of the Act had been cow'
plied with. The fact of registration would not therefore
be enough. Mr. Commissioner Jemmett said that the
question arose simply upon the construction of the sevc"
ral sections of the Act of Parliament. It seemed to
him that under the 192 d section, every deed between °'
debtor and his creditors would be effectual and binding/
provided certain requirements were accomplished, 0
mentioned in the rules under that section. It was per.
fectly clear that, as far as that deed was concerned, pro.
vided the requirements of the rules were satisfied, the cer•
ficate of the registrar was quite available for all purposes,
and was binding on all creditors. There was another see
tion (the 199th) which affected the present motion. TM
facts were that a petition had been filed, and the deed had
been duly registered ; therefore the question was, what was
to be real effect of the words in the section he had named
" that the petition shall be dismissed." The question before
him was simply what the Court of Bankruptcy required for
the purpose of dismissing a petition. It seemed to hiin that
he could not enter into a discussion as to whether the chef
registrar had duly performed his duties. His (the Com-
missioner's) was simply a ministerial act, and he was bound,
to dismiss the petition upon the production of that deedt
and the certificate of the registrar. At the same time, 11°
thought there ought to have been some affidavit of identity
respecting the person executing the deed.—The petition
was dismissed.