The Sun.
London, England, 1862-09-25 00:00:00

'HIS DAY,

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Byles.)
THE ALLEGED WHOLESALE POISONINGS.
Constance Wilson was indicted for the wilful murder of
Ann Atkinson by administering poison. There was an-
other indictment against her for causing the death of Maria
Somes.
The Attorney-General prosecuted; and Mr. Oppenheim
and Mr. M. Williams defended.
The cases against the prisoner were very complicated, but
the following outline contains all that is interesting to the
public :
The first death was said to have taken place as far back
as October, 1856, and evidence is to be adduced to show
that the deceased woman lived in the same house with
the prisoner, and that she was taken suddenly ill and exhi-
bited all the symptoms of choleraic diarrhcoa, and the pri-
soner attended upon her and gave her medicine. She
died, it appeared, very shortly afterwards, and the
medical man who had been called on was so struck by
the character of the symptoms and the suddenness of the
death that he refused to give any certificate as to the
cause of death until there had been a post-mortem exami-
nation. This examination took place, but no poison was
discovered. In this particular instance the poison that was
suggested to have been given to the deceased was celchi •
cum. It would seem that, very shortly after the deceased
died, the prisoner made a very extraordinary statement to
one of the witnesses, which was to the effect that she was in
possession of a very great secret respecting the deceased,
which secret was that she had committed suicide, and she
at the same time said that her reason for doing so was that
she had been engaged to bo married to some man whom she
had discovered to be an unworthy character, and that this
man had borrowed £BO of her, and she could not get any of
the money back. The prisoner also said that this man was
in the constant habit of applying to the deceased for money,
and that in all probability a letter would be received from
him on the following Saturday. It appeared that on this
day a letter did arrive purporting to come from some man
who admitted that he had borrowed £BO of the deceased, and
stated that he could not repay her unless she made him a
further advance of £lO. It would appear that none of the
family of the deceased had the slightest knowledge of the
existence of such a connexion between her and this man,
and, in addition to this, there was evidence that the letter to
which he had called their attention was in the handwriting
of the prisoner. In the second charge against the prisoner
it also appeared that the transaction took place a considerable
time ago, namely, in the year 1860, but the evidence was
not so strong against the prisoner as that in support of the
former charge. The deceased resided at Kirkby Lons-
dale, in Yorkshire, where she and her husband carried
on some business, and she was in the habit of coming
to London every three months for the purpose of pay-
ing for goods that were supplied to her, and she
generally brought with her £BO or £lOO, and it ap-
peared that she was in the habit of stopping at the residence
of the prisoner. She was taken ill almost immediately
after her arrival in town upon the last occasion, and ex-
hibited the same symptoms as were shown in the other
case by the deceased, and the medical man who attended
her found that the remedies he prescribed failed together
in alleviating these symptoms, and the deceased died a
very few days after she was attacked. A suggestion ap-
peared to have been made that there should be a post-
mortem examination of the deceased, but this was opposed
by the prisoner, who said that the London doctors always
desired to be cutting of the bodies of their patients after
death, and the decceved was buried From what after-
wards took place, however, the body was exhumed, and in
this case also there was no trace of poison discovered.
The prosecution appears likely to occupy the Court at
least a couple of days.

NEW COURT,
ALLEGED MURDER.

Three women, named Flynn, Rose, and Riley, were in-
dicted, under the Coroner's inquest, for the wilful murder
of John Riley.

There was also another indictment preferred against the
prisoners, but the grand jury ignored the bill.
It will be recollected that the child John Riley was left
in charge of a girl to nurse, who, it was stated, administered
some laudanum to the child, and the prisoners were taken
into custody, in consequence of not obeying the directions
of the surgeon to prevent the child from sleeping.
Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted, and Mr. Ribton defended the
prisoners.

The learned counsel said, as the grand jury had thrown
out the bill, and the evidence being the same in the present
case, he did not intend to proceed with it.

Mr. Ribton said he was instructed to defend the prisoners,
but after the statement of the learned counsel there was
no need of his making any further observation.
The prisoners were then ordered to be discharged.
CUTTING AND WOUNDING.
Emma Sophia Sheppard, a married woman, was indicted
for unlawfully cutting and wounding George Austin.
Mr. Dickie prosecuted and Mr. Orridge defended the
prisoner.

The prosecutor and prisoner resided together at Wool-
wich, and some jealousy having taken place between them
the prisoner took a razor and severely cut the throat of the
prosecutor.

The jury found the prisoner guilty, and the learned judge
sentenced her to 10 years' penal servitude.