The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-10 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCII.

NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—AYLESBURY, Maui
TII➢ BURNIAM 1101111111. • -
On Wednesday, after some additiomil rtOiridence ,
case for the prosecution closed, and at I o'clock the
court adjourned.
At the opening of the court this morning, some con-
versation took place between the court and counsel, and
thereupon there was called for the prosecution,
Robert James Eckford—l am clerk to Mr. Chareley,
the coroner who held the inquest on the body of Mary
Ann Sturgeon. The prisoner was examined Ms a witness
on the second day of the inquiry. His evidence was
taken down then and read over to him. He signed the
paper on which it was written. This paper now shown
to me is the paper, and the signature is his.
The paper was then read as follows :—" I live with
Mr. Goodwin in the capacity of groom. Mr. Goodwin
left home at 6, and returned a little after 11 last evening.
I was in the kitchen when he returned. I had my sup-
per between 8 and 9. The deceased was there part of
the time. She went into the house. I went to bed as
soon as I had my supper. About a quarter before 11 I
Ond a noise, like a rumbling, against a door. I then
lgy Oown, and in about a quarter of an hour afterwards
I heard the dogs barking. I got up and called to Bunce,
the foreman, and he got up. There were some colts
loose in the yard. We walked round the premises, but
could not see nor hear any one. I then went and tried
the passage-door, near to the kitchen, where I was,
and it was fastened, and there I remained till Mr.
Goodwin came in. He came shortly afterwards. I
told him that as the dogs had been barking we went
to see if any one was about the premises. Mr. Good-
win went in at the door on the north front. Ido
not know of any door being unfastened. I used
to have words with the deceased, because she wished
me to do more work than I thought I could do.
I got wet in going round the yard, and changed my
clothes. After Mr. Goodwin came home, I assisted to
take water upstairs to put the fire out, which was in the
maid-servant's room. I then saw the body lying with the
legs off and burnt, and blood against the door. I threw
gravel up at the window of the decease's room before Mr.
Goodwin came home, but I could not hear her. Ido not
know anything of the poker produced. There was a light
in the deoeased's room. The blind of the window was
down. Ido not know that she had any followers."
Mr. Parry then addressed the jury for the prisoner.
He censured the omission of the magistrates to investi-
gate the guilt of the prisoner, whereby the latter was
deprived of an opportunity of preparing his defence with
a full knowledge of the evidence against him. The
experiments made a few days ago as to the possibility
of persons in the prisoner's bed-room hearing cries in the
passages and on the staircase were based on the fallacious
assumption that the deceased must have screamed many
times after receiving the first blow ; and, were it other-
wise, the experience of persons who listened for sounds
they expected was no evidence that similar sounds would
have reached and roused a person in the same place in a
sound sleep. The blood marks on the kitchen side, if
blood marks, might have been made by the prisoner, or
any one else, after the discovery of the murder. The loss
of the razors the prisoner might have heard of from his
master, for his master had discovered it before the inter-
view of the prisoner and Mrs. Bunce. The matter of
the keys was cophtined. The suggested inference from
what took place at Maidenhead station had failed. Then
as to the main facts of the case, the prisoner's story was
not only not inconsistent with all the facts, but alto-
gether consistent with them. He had never varied in
substance from that statement. The only words even
approaching a confession were spoken to Symington,
while the prisoner was excited by the jeers of a mob.
On the other hand, it was remarkable, as showing
the prisoner's truthfulness, that he had said the de-
ceased had no followers, and so had negatived one
suggestion that otherwise might have been made
favourable to him. It was remarkable in this case that
no evidence was given of the state of the prisoner's
clothes in respect of bloodstains or other signs of
strife. The trousers which were exposed to the fire to
dry were not produced, nor any account given of them.
How was that ? They were the fit objects of experiments.
The wetting the trousers in the pool in the yard was
shown in reference to that. Then no motive for the mur-
der was shown. The little bickerings between fellow-
servants were no such motive • especially as his master
had just raised his wages. There was no vindictive ex-
pression proved, and no complaint to the master by her
was shown. The learned counsel concluded his address
by invoking the assistance of the Almighty at their deci-
sion.
The Lord Chief Justice then summed up, and left two
questions to the jury—first, did the deceased meet her
death by the violence of a third person ; secondly, was
the prisoner the person who inflicted that violence upon
her. The rule as to circumstantial evidence which he
wished to lay down was that it must be composed of some
uncontested circumstances, inconsistent with the inno-
cence of the person accused. It was the duty of the jury
to consider whether it was possible for any one else to
have committed the crime, because that consideration
necessarily arose from a review of the facts which tended
to show the prisoner's opportunities for committing the
offence, and privity to it. His lordship then read the
evidence through, commenting on it as he went on, and
expressed his approval of the experiments which had
been made in respect of the voices.
At the conclusion of the summing up the jury retired,
and at half-past five returned into court, and delivered a
verdict of guilty, and his lordship proceeded to pass sen-
tence in the usual terms.

LA W INTELLIGENCE. —March 9.

~Y~ 1I ~~F-•;

CONSISTORY COURT.Imirt
(Before Dr. Lushington.)
MITCHELL v. MITCHELL.—DIVOSCI.
This was a suit for a divorce, promoted by Mr. Mit-
chell, against his wife, by reason of adultery.
The parties had been married on the Ist of July, 1848,
at Hong Kong, where Mr. Mitchell was the chief ma-
gistrate. Mrs. Mitchell had been a widow, of the name
of Kirby, and she had had one child by her former mar-
riage, but there had been no issue from her second ma-
tritnonial connexion. The parties had resided at Hong
Kong until the end of December, 1851, when Mrs.
Mitchell came to England with Dr. and Mrs. Stuart,
and she took up her abode with her child at the house
of a lady to whom her husband had previously written
to receive her. With this lady she only stayed a few
weeks, and in June, 1852, she removed to a boarding-
house, 35, Weymouth-street. It was at this place that
she was charged with the commission of two acts of
adultery, the proof in the one case being direct, and in
the other depending upon the inference which the law
placed upon certain conduct and acts. The person
with whom she was charged with having been impro-
perly intimate was Coricoz, styling himself the Prince of
Armenia, who was lodging at the same house, and
against whom a verdict of 7501. had been obtained by
Mr. Mitchell in an action of crim. con.
Dr. Haggard, on behalf of the husband, was proceed-
ing to detail the pleadings, when
Dr. Lushington stopped the case, observing that after
a careful perusal of all the evidence, he could aot en-
tertain the least doubt that the offence had been
satisfactorily proved against Mrs. Mitchell. The court,
therefore, at once pronounced for the divorce.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.
Mr. Commissioner Murphy sat to-day in consequence
of the indisposition of Mr. Commissioner Phillips.

IN THE MATTER OP TMOMAS SMITH.
This insolvent, a corn dealer at Waltham-cross, ap-
plied for his final order.
Mr. Dowse opposed for Messrs. Birkett, corn mer-
chants, Mark-lane ; and Mr. Ernest Reed supported.
The complaint was, that. the insolvent had disposed of
his property, and instead of paying the money into court,
spent it on himself.
It appeared that the insolvent had made an offer to
his creditors, which they refused, and the money went
in the support of himself and family.
Mr. Dowse submitted that it was not a case for pro-
tection. Here was a man who had disposed of his pro-
perty, and when he had spent the proceeds he applied
to the court. He should have paid it into court.

Mr. Reed asked what a man was to do ? The credi-
tors refused the offer made, and the applicant was obliged
to support his wife and family.
Mr. Commissioner Murphy said he found a case in
Mr. Macrae's "Insolvency Protection Practice," which
was nearly all fours with the present. •In that case a
man went to the seaside, and did not apply to the court
till his money was all gone, and the commissioners did
not consider it was a case for protection. As the amount
in the case made away with was not considerable, the
judgment would not be heavy, but in order to mark the
sense of the court of such conduct the final order would
be adjourned sine die, with liberty to the insolvent to
apply for a protecting order in a month.
;4The consideration of the final order was accordingly
4mrned sine die.

-----
THE FRENCH FLEET IN THE BALTIC. SHIELDS,
MARCH B.—The harbour-masters have received instruc-
tions to clear away berths in Shields harbour for two
French war vessels, which are expected every tide. They
oome down here to make arrangements for coaling the
large war steamers that will be sent by the French into
the Baltic in the spring, along with our fleet. An Eng-
lish war vessel is also expected in the Tyne.
BURKE'S PEERAGE AND BARONETAGE roe 1854.—We
are requested to state that the revised and improved
edition of " The Peerage and Baronetage for 1854," by
Sir Bernard Burke Ulster Kin of-Arms, is published
this day. The following is a lisg-t of the principal con-
tents of this standard work :-1. A full and interesting
history of each order of the English nobility, showing
its origin, rise, titles, immunities, privileges, &o. 2. A.
complete memoir of the Queen and Royal Family, form-
ing a genealogical history of the Sovereign of this coun-
try, and deducing the descent of the Plantagenet',
Tudors, Stuarts, and Guelphs, through their various
ramifications. To this section is appended a list of those
peers who inherit the distinguished honour of quartering
the royal arms of Plantagenet. 3. An authentic table
of precedence. 4. A perfect history of all the peers and
baronets, with the fullest details of their ancestors and
descendants, and particulars respecting every collateral
member of each family, and all intermarriages,
5. The spiritual lords. 6. Foreign noblemen, subjeete
by birth of the British crown. 7. Peerages recently
extinct, of the families of which descendants, still Bur-
wive. 8. Peerages claimed. 9. Surnames of peers and
peeresses, with heirs appal;ent amd preutraptive.
10. Courtesy titles of eldest sons. 11. Peerage!' of the
three kingdoms, in order of precedence. 12. Bkronee4
in order of precedence. 13. Privy Councillors of Eng.
land and Ireland. 14. Daughters of peers married to
commoners. 15. All the orders of knighthood, with
every knight and all the knights bachelors. 16. Mottoe;
translated, with poetical illustrations, /cc &A,
.1 •