The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-05 00:00:00

NARY RUSH, DECEASED.

Dr. ADDAMS said the testatrix was the wife of the
late James Bloomfield Rush, who had made himself no-
torious by being an actor in the late wilful murders at
Stanfield Hall, Norfolk. The testatrix made a will in
1844, and died in 1848. Rush proved this will and also a
codicil, purporting to be that of the testatrix. The
will bequeathed the property to the children, nine in
number, but the codicil gave it to Rush, and made him
sole executor. The Learned Advocate said he applied to
the Court to set aside the probate granted to the codicil.
as being a forgery, and not the writing of the testatrix,
the appicaiion being made by Mr. John Soames, who
was guardian of the children, on the affidavit of Emil
Sandford, who was subscribing witness to it. The affi-
davit stated that it was written after the death of the
testatrix, by direction of Rush, and attested by them
both. He (Dr. Addams) felt the position the Court
as placed in, to be call.- d on to revoke a former act
upon ;he evidence of such a person as Emily Sandford,
but he hoped the Court would take into its consideration
!he situation of the younger children, and that the party
making the affidavit could have no interest in asserting
an untruth.
The Learned JUDGE thought he could not act without
some further evidence to prove the signature was a for-
gery. He must, therefore, direct the motion to stand
over until he had some corroborative evidence.

WESTMINSTE,. COUNTY COURT.
(Before 1). C. MOYLAN, E,cl , Judge.)
PIRACY OF CRUIKSHANICS "TOOTH ACHE "—BOGUE v,

ELLIOTT.

This was an action brought by David Bogue, pub.
fisher, of Fleet-street, to recover from the defendant,
Mary Elliott, a publisher of Holy well-street, damatzes
for the infringement of the copyright of a work entitled
" The Tooth-ache, imagined by Horace Mayhew and
realized by George Cruikshank," of which the plaintiff
was the proprietor.
Mr. English appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. Roberts
for the defendant.

ENGLISH stated that his client sought protection
against the piracy of the work in question, " The Tooth-
ache," under the sth and 6th Victoria. He should show
the plaintiff to be the proprietor of the work; that it had
been du`y entered at Stationers'-hall, and that he had
suffered by the infringement of the copyright.
The JUDGE said the right was not in the publisher,
but in the author. The nlait,tiff must show that the
work was assigned over to him.
Mr. ENGLISH said he was prepared to prove the plain-
tiff's possession of the copyright.
Mr. James Brownless, chief clerk to the plaintiff,
stated that Mr. Bogue was the registered proprietor of
the work. He engaged Mr. Horace Mayhew and Mr.
George Cruikshank, the former to write. and the latter
to illustrate the work. Witness knew the extent of the
sale of the work. Of one edition, plain, at Is. 61. per
copy, 3,000 were sold; and of another, coloured, at 3s.
per copy, about 1,500 more. The sale fell off cont,id,r •
ably shortly after the pirated edition of the defendant.
(The witness produced the original and the imitation,
both of which were handed to the Judge.) He went
into the defendant's shop himself, and purchased the
pirated edition. The defendant told him at the time that
it was not an original work, hut that it was copi- d tram
another, published in the Man in the Moon, at 2s. Wi!-
Hess knew that it had never been published in the Man
in the Moon. There was no pretence tor supposing that
the work had been copied from anything but the plain-
tiff's publication.
Mr. ROBERTS, on the part of the defendant, submitted
that the plaintiff must be nonsuited The work was not
registered until the very day the action was commenced.
The entry at Stationers'-hall should have been made
before the action was brought.

The JUDGE expressed himself of the same opinion,
but thought technical objections not the best way of
meeting the case. He suggested an arrangement between
the parties.
An arrangement was then mode, by which the de-
fendant was to give up the blocks of the pirated work,
and the plaintiff to cease all proceedings.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COI,RT.

(Before Mr. JusticP CoLTMAN and Air. Justice MAULE.)
Mary Ann Hogden. 34, a married woman, was in•
dieted for the murder or her female child by drowning it.
The prisoner was arraigned before Mr. Bullock at the
sitting of the Court, and a plea of Nut Guilty was re-
corded.

Mr. CLARKSON, upon the Judges taking their seats,
applied to their Lordships to have the plea of Not
Guilty erased from the indictment, upon the gr dind that
the prisoner was not in a fit state of mind to plead, or
to understand what she was called upon to answer. Tne
Learned Counsel said that the trial was postponed from
the last session in order to give an opporainity for the
production of evidence of her insanity, and he had wit-
nesses in attendance to prove that fact, but if their
Lordships would hear the evidence of Mr. M'Murdo,
the surgeon of Newgate, upon the subject of the pri-
soner's present condition, he apprehended that they
would consider it unnecessary to proceed further with
the inquiry at present.
Mr. Justice Covrstex, having made some inquiries,
and reformed to the Act of Parliament having relation to
the subject, ordered the plea of Not Guilty to be erased,
and directed that a jury should be impanelled to dispose
of ttiv quesion of the prisoner's sanity or insanity.
Mr. M•Murdo. the surgeon of Newgate, was then ex-
amined upon the voire doire, and in answer to questions
put to him by the Court, he expressed his opinion that
the prisoner was at the time insane, incapable of under-
standing what was going forward, and incomi,etent,
therefore, to plead to the indictment against her.
explained
returned
ainedthe
ir
naturehe of the Learned
j inquiry D t Gthe having
y , briefly
th at o
a verdict in accordance with the opinion of the surgeon,
and Mr. Justice Coltman directed the prisoner should
be kept in safe custody until she should be in a fit state
of mind to take her trial.

Wm. Anstead, 32, clerk, was indi<•ted for feloniously
forging and uttering a cheque tor 631. 135., with intent to
defraud the London and Westminster Bank.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. LAW prosecuted; Mr. Parry was
for the prisoner.

The offence imputed to the prisoner appeared to have
been committed in a very ingenious manner. It ap-
peared that some years ago he had been known to
Mr. Vokins, a coal-merchant at Pimlico, but he had
been lost sight of since 1845, leaving an account unpaid.
On the 21st November in last year the prisoner made
his appearance at the counting-house of Mr. Vokins
after banking hours, and having introduced him-
self to him, expressed his willingness to pay his
debt, at the same time giving an order for coals to the
amount of 2/., and he produced a cheque for 181.,
upon Messrs. Cox and Greenwood, and Mr. Vokins
gave him the difference in gold arid a cheque upon the
London and Westminster Bank for 3/. 13s. The cheque
appeared to have been drawn in a very careless manner,
the word.three being written at some distance from the
margin, and the first letter being a small " t", instead of
a capital, and the cheque being altered by the word sixty
being placed before the thre,-, it was presented in that
shape to the bankers, and was paid with four 10/. and
four 5/. notes and cash. The cheque was presented by
a woman, who was evidently acting in concert with the
prisoner, for immediately after the cheque was paid the
greater portion of the notes which were the produce of
it were traced to his possession.
Mr. Justice MAULE, in summing up the case to the
jury, said that although the cheque in question had cer-
tainly originally been drawn in a very careless manner.
yet if the jury should be of opinion that the prisoner had
made the alteration in the amount, or had caus,al it to
be presented, knowing that it had been altered, he
would, both according to the letter and the spirit of the
law, have rendered himself amenable to the charge of
forgery.
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty, and the pri-
soner was proved to have been on a previous occasion
convicted of felony._ _ _

He was sehteneTed to be transported for ten years.
(Before the COMMON SERGEANT.)
Sarah Mills, who was indicted with a person named

Hansel' for conspiracy, in endeavouring to extort money
Crom a gentleman named Bevan, by-a, threat -to pubiish
libellous matter concerning him in the Satirist news-
par-r, was yesterday placed at the bar to ple.d.
There was an indictment against the same parties for
felony, arising out of the same transaction.
Mr. PALMY, who appeared for aansell, applied to
have his trial postponed until the next session, on the
ground that he was in such a bad state of health that it
would endanger his life if he were to take his trial at
this time. _ _ _

Mr. BALLANTINE, who appeared for the prosecution,
said he believed the statement of the condition of the
defendant Hansell was quite correct, and, therefore, he
could not oppose the application.
The defendant Mills pleaded " Guilty" to the indict-
ment for misdemeanour, and " Not Guilty " to the
charge of felony.
Dlr. CLARKSON, who appeared for this defendant, said
he was requested on her behalf to offer a most humble
and sincere ,ipol,gy to the respectable prosecutor fur the
act she had committed. He at the same time said he
believed there was very little doubt that the defendant
had been made the instrument of a more guilty party,
acid und-r these circumstances he trusted the Court
would pass as lenient a sentence as the justice of the ease
would admit of.

Mr. BALLANTINE said that the defendant was charged
jointly with a person named Hansel!, who had the
mantigement of a newspaper called the Satirist, with
endeavouring to ex•.ort, money from Mr. Bevan, the
prosecutor, by threatening to publish libellous matter
concerning him in that journal. He was instructed to
state that the prisoner was known by the prosecutor to
have been formerly in a respectable position, and that her
friends and connexions also filled a position of respecta-
bility, and he believed that the prisoner when
she first applied to the prosecutor for money was
driven to do so by the pressure of poverty. Those ap-
plications were not paid any attention to, and the defen-
dant, there was very little doubt had after this got into
the hands of flansell, who had made use of her to further
his purpose of extor ion, and from this tiint, a series of
most brutal attacks had been made upon the character of
the prosecutor in the journal to question. The prose-
cutor, however, believed that the defendant Mills was
merely a tool in the hands of the other person, and
he wks therefore desirous to recommend her to the
merciful consideration of the Court. With regard to
the charge of felony, he should refrain from offiering any
evidence.

The COMMON SERGEANT, in pissing sentence, said
that he thom4ht the defendant had b,en v,-ry well ad•
vised. and had acted most prop,rly in pleading guilty, as
the only atonement in her power. The Court, however,
had a duty to perrorm, and he did not know of any
more serious off,nce, or one that was more lik..ly to
create misery in families. than this of endeavouring to
extort money by threatening to rn eke ch.trges of a des
graceful character. Taking into consideration, howev. r,
that the defendant had plead, d guilt), and that Mr.
Bevan had recommended her to mercy, the sentence
would be much more lenient than it otherwise would
have been, and that Has that she be imprisoned for six
months without hard labour.

POLICE IN TELLIG EN CE.
M AR LBORO UG H-STRE ET.
Mary White, an elderly woman, was brought before
Mr. Hardwick charged with manslaughter, by cutting
the throat of her husband, Peter White, with a knife,
Charlotte Tucker deposed that she was a single wo•
man, and occupied the second floor fr•+nt room, at No. 15,
Hertford-street, Fitzroy-square. The prisoner and her
deceased husband lodged in the front parlour. About
nine o'clock on the night of the sth of June witness was
in her room, when she was alarmed at hearing screams
of murder issue from the front parlour, accompanied
with the breaking of glass. She looked out of the win
dow and saw several persons about the door. She then
ran down stairs, and when near the bottom she heard
the deceased say, "For God's sake mike haste down,
fur my wife has cut my throat." She tried to open the
parlour door, but did not succeed, in consequence of its
being locked inside. She then went to the street-door
and sent a lad for the police. The prisoner and deceased
frequently quarrelled, and witness had seen the deceased
strike the prisoner several times. She never heard the
prisoner make use of any threat towards the deceased.
Golseen, 85 E. said that about twenty-five minutes
past nine on Tuesday night, the sth June, his atten-
tion was called to 15, in Hertford-street, by the cries of
" Murder and police." The parlour•door was fas-
tened; he got in at the window; the room was
in darkness, and he heard a man say, "My
wife has cut my throat." He then opened the dour
and let his brother officer in. They got a light, and
found the deceased standing up in the room near to the
door, and bleeding verymuch from a wound in the throat
The deceased said, pointing to the prisoner, " My wife
has cut my throat." She was standing up near the fire-
place, and said " He (the deceased) has struck me three
times, and then he got the razor to cut my throat. I
wrenched it from his hands, and drew it across his
throat." Witness then took deceased to the hospital,
and the prisoner was taken to the station by the other
constable.

Wiley, 77 E, corroborated the evidence of the last
witness, and in addition stated that on searching th,
room he found the knife now produced covered with
blood.
Mr. "'leery Searle Etuye mild he was house-surgeon
at the University Hospital. On the night of the 5,h of
June, about half-paSt nine, Peter White was brought to
the hospital. He appeared faint from the loss of blood
which had flowed and was still flowing from a wound in
the throat. The wound was two inches and a half in
length, and in depth nearly an inch, injuring, but not
severing, the windpipe. He lingere. until Sunday, July
15t. The immediate cause of his death was infl imita-
tion of the lungs, but the prifnary ca!ise was the wound
In the throat. Such a wound would be inflicted by the
knife now produced.
The depositions made by the deceased previous to his
death were then put in and rend, and the prisoner was
committed to take her trial for manslaught,r.