The Sun.
London, England, 1840-04-16 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

WESTERN CIRCUIT—APRIL 10
GEORGE V. ROCKES, CLERK.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff against the
defendant for a malicious prosecution.
It appeared that the defendant was a clergyman, resid-
ing at Exeter, and that in the beginning of the year 1838
he had gone to Bath, for the purpose of inducing his wife,
who had been separated from him, to return to live with
him. When he arrived at Bath, he had several interviews
with his wife at the house of her solicitor, Mr. Turner,
and on the 13th of January the parties all appeared before
the Magistrates of Bath, and Mr. Rookcs was then charged
by his wife with having assaulted her in Mr. Turner's
parlour ; and it was also stated that he had gone to a
policeman for a handcuff or slip to drag her away from
Mr. Turner's house by force. The defendant was then
bound over to appear at the next Bath Sessions to
answer any charge that might be made against him, and ar-
ticles of the peace were afterwards preferred by Mrs.
Rookes against her husband. In the mean time an eccle-
siastical suit was instituted by the wife for a separation, on
the ground of cruelty ; but that suit was dismissed, and the
decree appealed against by Mr. Rookes. The plaintiff in
the present action was clerk to Mr. Turner, and in the
ecclesiastical suit gave evidence of the occurrence on
the 13th of January, whereupon the defendant indicted
the plaintiff and Mr. Turner, the solicitor, fora con spi-
ii tile le
defendantl Ze
racy to charge him falsely with having assaulted his w.f._
This indictment was tried: before Mr. Jaitinne
corder
of Bath, at the last October sessions, w
swore that he was sent out by his wife for the handeuson the
pretence that she was curious to see them, and that when he
had brought them into the room, Mr. Turner had taken
him by:the throat and
policeman,
who him in charge to a
who had been previously planted at the door. The Re:
corder held on that occasion that there was no evidence

PRICE sd.

that the present plaintiff was engaged in the transaction
which took place in the parlour, and upon that ground di.
meted the jury to return a verdict of not guilty.
The evidence of the short-hand writer, who was present
at the Bath Sessions, was then given.
Mr. CROWDER, for the defendant, contended that the
Recorder was wrong in having refused to leave the case to
the jury, although ho had bet:n requestei to do so by the
defendant's counsel.

The LearnedJunoa summed up the evidence, and left
the jury to say whether the defendant had any reasonable
or probable cause for believing the truth of the cherge
which he had made against the plaintiff.
The jpry found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 1501.
APRIL 11.
TURNER V. ROOKS% CLERK.
This was a similar action to the last, brought by Mr.
Turner, who had been engaged to act as Mrs. Rookes's
solicitor against the defendant, for being included in the
indictment for the conspiracy.
The Learned Judge left the case to the Jury, who re-
turned a verdict for the plaintiff with 2501. damages.

A ram 13.
DOB LEM. EARL OF EGREMONT V. WARDEN.
This was an action of ejectment brought to recover cer-
tain premises in the county of Somerset, which had been
demised to the defendant for three lives, by the late George
Percy, Earl of Egremont, in 1817. It appeared that the
late Earl was tenant for life, with a power of leasing ; and
the lessor of the plaintiff, who was the next heir, on the
decease of the late Earl, contended that the lease had not
been executed in pursuance of the power, and that the lease
was therefore void.

The Jury returned a verdict for the lessor of the plaintiff.
There are several other ejectment cases brought by the
same plaintiff now remaining on the cause list. Special
Juries have been summoned in each case, but it is expected
that the points of law will all be decided in the Court
above. Mr. Justice Coltman has still several cages re-
maining undisposed of in the Criminal Court, and the
business of the Assizq will scarcely be finished to-morrow.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT

OLD COURT.
(Beforo Mr. Baron ALDERSON and Mr. Justico
LITTLEDALR.)
_ _

CHILD MURDER.—Catherine Michael, aged 22, was in-
dicted for the murder of her child, George Michael, by
administering to it a large quantity of a deadly poison,
called laudanum, whereby it became grievously sick and
distempered in its body, and languished and died.
Mr. Ryland conducted the prosecution ; and Mr. Bal-
lantine defended the prisoner.
Sarah Stevens deposed that she resided in Praed-street,
Paddington, and she knew the prisoner, who bad placed
the deceased child in her cate. The child died on the itt
instant. On the Sunday preceding it was quite well, and
on that day, in consequence ofa letter she received from the
prisoner, she went to the house of a lady named Kelly, with
whom the prisoner lived as wet nurse. The prisoner asked
her how her child was, and she told her it was very well.
The prisoner then gave her a bottle containing some black
liquid, and requested her to give the child some of it.
\Vitness took the bottle, placed it on her mantel-piece, but
never gave any of the liquid to the child. It appeared,
hot► ever, that during her absence her own boy had given
the child some of the stuff, in consequence of which he fell
asleep, and remained insensible till the following day,
when he died. Sho sent for the prisoner, and told her
that her little boy bad given the child the medicine out of
the bottle, and asked her if the doctor had given it to her,
and she said that he had. Witness then asked the pri-
soner where she got it from, and she said from a doctor
who lived near her. The prisoner went away, and did
not return till after the child was dead, and witness asked
her to go and see it, and she said " No." Her cousin
Esther Jones persuaded her to do so, and they went togo-
ther, and looked at the dead child, and the prisoner said
"He was better off," or words to that effect. Tho pri-
soner afterwards told her that sho had got the medicine
from Dr. Reid.

Mr. Philpot stated, that upon a post mortem examina-
tion of the body of the deceased, he found all the ap-
pearances of its having died from laudanum. He had a
conversation with the prisoner, in the course of which she
told him that Mr. Reid, of Bloomsbury-square, had sent
it to her, and she also said that the medicine was for the
purpose of removing something offensive from the child's
stomach. She added, that she had understood Mr. Reid's
young man had made some mistake in the mixture.

Dr. James Reid deposed that he first knew the prisoner
when she was delivered of the deceased child at Queen
Charlotte's Lying-in Hospital, and he recomtnended her
to a place as wet nurse in the family of a gentleman
named Kelly. He never furnished any medicine to the
prisoner for her child, neither was any furnished by his
orders. The prisoner came to his house on the Ist of
April, and told him she had a favour to ask of him. She
appeared to hesitate for some time, and at length said that
her child was dead, and a Coroner's inquest would pro-
bably be held, and she wished him particularly to attend.
The prisoner then told him that the child had had lau-
danum administered to it by a little boy, and the medical
man wished him to attend, The prisoner, in the course
of what took place, said, " If I am to be hanged for it, I
could not support the child upon my wages."
Cross-examined.—The prisoner appeared anxious to
impress upon him that there was no label or directions
upon the bottle. She had been in service, but was se-
duced, and lost her place.
Mr. William Jones, a chemist and druggist, in Tavis-
tock-street, Russell-square, proved that the prisoner,
whom he knew as the servant of Mr. Kelly, came to his
shop in the month of March last, and purchased some
laudanum, which she said was for her mistress, who was
a bad sleeper. He put two labels upon the bottle, marked
" Laudanum," " Poison."
Mr. John Mortimer Bowen proved that he was assist-
ant to Dr. Reid, and that he never, upo❑ any occasion,
sold any landanum or other mixture to the prisoner.
This was the case for the prosecution.

Mr. BALLANTINE said th-at the present was altogether
a novel case, and he should be glad to know if the Court
considered that the charge could be sustained by the evi-
dence that had been adduced.

Baron ALDERSON expressed his opinion that in law the
endeavour applie4to the principle of law 'that had been
laid down. If a person with a guilty intent gave any
thing containing poison to a person with intent to
destroy him, and that person, instead of taking it laid it in
a position where it was taken by another person, the of-
fence amounted to murder in the person who had ut-
tered the poison in th• first instance. The Jury would of
course have to judge of the facts and of the intent of the
prisoner in the first ii,stance_

Mr. BALLANTINE then addressed the Jury, and said that
he did so, under circumstances of very great difficulty.
The unfortunate young woman at the bar had no friend
to come forward to assist her, and in the hour of distress
the man who had been her ruin had left the wretched pri-
soner without either pecuniarj assistance or advice, and
she would•that day have been brought up for trial without
any assistance or legal advice whatever, but for the kind-
ness and humanity of the Sheriffs.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON summed up the evidence.
The Jury retired, and after being absent about an hour
they returned into Court, and gave a verdict of Guilty,
coupled with a strong recommendation to mercy.
Baron ALDERSON—On what ground, gentlemen ?

The Foreman replied that the Considered that from
the fact of the prisoner's having been .seduced and turned
upon the world, and from the ether circumstances in the
case they thought the prisoner was entitled to great com-
miseration.

Baron Ar.nEnsox then directed the judgment to be re-
pited, in order that the opinion of thu Judges might be
taken upon the point of law.

NEW COURT
SENTENCES.

The following prisoners were sentenced to tsansportation:—

For Life,:tieut. John Turner Flynn, and Ignatius
Brath water.
For Fifteen Years.—Robert Chandler.
For Fourteen Years.—Ann Sheen, John Thompson,
Ann Smith, J. Smith, Henry Catlin, and Wm. Wildey.
For Ten Years.—John Brown, W. Pinfoid, John Wil-
liams, W. Monro, John Mayon,,Bliz. Trowler, D. Barry,
arts' G. Burton.
. For Seven Years.—Thos..Fisher, Thos. Garrett, Geo.
Alexander, Henry Hope, Mary Silverton, Mary Searston,
G. Andersen, G. A. Austin, Isaac Egerton, George
Warren, Mary Watson, Thos. Cooper, Agnes Critchell,
David Owen, Mary A. Morris, Geo, Farnsby, John
liard, G. Smith, Edward Robinson, Frances Roberts, R.
Tyler, W. Walker, T. Robertson, Chas. de Cestarora,
Jas. Hazell, John Gasper, Mary Farrell, Henry Herring
alias Cooper, Charlotte Evans, Frances Green, J. Taylor,
Fred. Hoyter.
Imprisoned and kept to hard labour for the following
terms :
For Two Years.—George Smith, W. Johnson.
For One Year.—John Bullock, James White, James
Wyatt, H. Hope, Henry Vernon, Daniel Watson, John
Newton, Ann Barker, Charlotte Jones, John Kelly, Mary
Connor, John Jones,.James Smith.
A great many others were sentenced to shorter periods
of imprisonment.
The Court adjourned to Monday, the 11th of May.

KENSINGTON PETTY SESSIONS

CHARM' OF FBI. ONY
Tuesday Mr. Welsh, a AGAINST A GIINTLEMA.N.—On
of North End, Hammersmith,
man, son of Captain Welsh,
was brought before
de Messrs.
Barlow and Sutton, the sitting
war-
rant, charged with having stolen; a Magistrates,
watch,
twoun brooches,
a r
oo
e
andother valuable articles, the property of a lady named
Goring, residing in Canning-place,Gl t r raid, Ken-
sington. The Gloucester-road,
e - • d
warrant against the risoner was obtained
about five weeks since, when Mrs.p Goring, on oath,
stated that she was the wife of Mr. William Goring, the
brother of the Member for Shoreham, and youngest son of ,
Sir Charles Goring, Bart. of Horsham, Sussex ; that her
husband sas at present in America, from whence she had re-
cently returned, and that the accused bad been in the
habit of visiting at her house, from which, in December
last, Ise, without her leave, took away some jewelery, and
that she could not get it back. Mrs. Goring, however,
yesterday said she was now persuaded that Mr. Welsh had
no intention of theft. The msther of the accused gentle-
man said she had that morning given her a bond, securing
attend a
the restitution of the property within two months.
The BENCIT said that wus very like compromising
charge of telony,..atid__§,aitl Mrs. (wring Weston
IVeiln-esdiF,;i when the property would no doubt be produced.
The parties then quitted the office.