The Sun.
London, England, 1847-09-24 00:00:00

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Sept. 23.

IN RE RICHARD ROWED.
This insolvent was opposed by a creditor named
Cook, who complained that he had been deprived of
3/. 6s. by the society of which the insolvent was
manager, without enjoying any benefit therefrom.
The insolvent (who described himself as late ma-
nager of the United Kingdom Mutual Emigration
Society) stated that he had been a barrister's clerk,
which situation he resigned upon starting the above
company, of which he was the orignal projector.
The creditor (Cook) saiet that the clerk at the so-
ciety's office assured him, week after week, that a
vessel was to sail for Texas ; but, at last, that func-
tionary declared the whole society to be "a set of
humbugs ;" ar, d the consequence was, that no vessel
was provided for his (Cook's) passage, a circumstance
for which, under present circumstances, he felt
thankful..

The Learned CHIEF COMMISSIONER said he was
sorry the creditor should have wasted so much time
about so trifling an amount, which was too small to
allow of a remand, whatever might be the circum-
stances of the case.

The insolvent was ordered to, be discharged.
IN RE EDWARD COOPER PULLIBLANK.

This insolvent, a dramatic pert() rmer of some cele-
brity, under the cognomen of Hooper, was opposed

by ;Mr. Cooke, on behalf of Mr. Cobb, and was sup-
ported by Mr. Dowse.
The iiisulreut, on being examined, stated that he
passed through this court in November, 1828, owing
724/.; of which he had since paid about 6001. After
that he was concerned with Mr. Braham in the St.
James's Theatre, which he took after the abdication
of the latter gentleman. In 1839 he became bank-
rupt, as a commission agent, dealing in wine, and ob-
tained a certificate. In February, 1844, he petitioned
the Bankruptcy Court as an insolvent, but was pre-
vented by illness from attending on the day appointed
for obtaining his final order. In April, 1845, he again
petitioned, and obtained his final order.
Mr. Cobb, the proprietor of the Brighton Theatre,
complained that the insolvent had pleaded to an action
brought to recover 336/.; but the particulars of the
demand not being forthcoming, the insolvent's counsel
successfully contended that no vexatious defence
could be proved.
The insolvent was ordered to be discharged

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.

,Before Mr. Baron PLATT and Mr. Justice IVILHAms.)

MURDER OF A WIFE BY THE ADMINISTRATION OF
POISON.—John Hutchings, aged 43, described in the
calendar as a cooper, was indicted for the wilful
murder of his wife, Mary Hutchings, by the admi-
nistration of poison.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Mr. BALLANTINE, in his address to the jury, urged
that the evidence was not by any means sufficiently
conclusive to warrant them in convicting the prisoner
of having committed the cold-blooded and deliberate
murder imputed to him ; and he argued that it was
just as possible that the deceased might have obtained
possession of the arsenic and taken it herself as that
the prisoner had administered it to her.
Mr. Baron PLATT summed up the evidence to the
jury with great minuteness, and very favourably to '
the prisoner.
The jury retired at half past four o'clock, and were
absent an hour and forty minutes, when they returned
into court and gave their verdict, Guilty.
When the verdict was delivered the prisoner burst
into tears, and on his being asked whether he had
anything to urge why sentence of death should not
be passed upon him, he exclaimed with great earnest-
ness, "I am innocent. lam not guilty, my Lord
and gentlemen ; I declare lam innocent. I have not
had any arsenic in ray hands for two months."
Mr. Harker, the chief usher, then made the usual
proclamation for silence.
Baron PLATT, having put on the black cap, ad-
dressed the prisoner, and said that the jury, after a
most patient inquiry and great deliberation, had
found him guilty of the crime of wilful murder, and,
taking into consideration the circumstances of that
crime, he could not hold out to him any hope of
mercy on this side of the grave. The offence of
which he had been found guilty was of a most ag-
gravated character; he had destroyed the wife of his
bosom, whom he had sworn to cherish and protect,
in a most cruel manner, and while pretending to give
her the cup of kindness he had exhibited to her deli-
berately the cup of death. The Learned Judge then
passed sentence of death in the usual form.
The prisoner, who seemed dreadfully affected
during the address of the Learned Judge, exclaimed,
as he was leaving the bar, "I am innocent ; you have
murdered an innocent man."

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

GUILDHALL.

Henry Frederick White, a young man of respect-
able appearance, was brought before Sir Peter Laurie,
charged with committing an impudent robbery in
New Bridge-street, on the preceding. afternoon.
The Rev. Mr. Penny, of Phillimore-place, Ken-
nington, stated that as he was walking in Bridge-
street, between three and four o'clock the previous
afternoon, the prisoner accosted him, and asked if he
knew a Mr. Taylor. Witness told him he did not;
but the prisoner followed him, and repeated the ques-
tion. Opposite Radley's Hotel the prisoner suddenly
knocked his hat and gold spectacles off, picked up the
spectacles, which were worth 41., and dashed off
through the cab rank. He fortunately ran up Cres-
cent-place, which is not a thoroughfare, and was easily
secured. The prisoner entered a wine-merchant's
cooperage there, but the spectacles had not been found
there or elsewhere. He was quite positive the pri-
soner was the man who robbed him.

Cross-examined by the prisoner's solicitor—The
prisoner was drunk, or counterfeited being so ex-
tremely well.
Daniel Cook, a cab driver, and Edward Fruen,
another driver, who were waiting on the rank, con-
firmed the rev. gentleman's statement. The prisoner
had a companion, who tried to pick the clergyman's
pocket while the prisoner amused him. The prisoner
appeared to be drunk.
The solicitor represented that it was the frolic of a
drunken man, and not a serious attempt to rob the
gentleman ; but he did not call witnesses to the pri-
soner's character.

The prisoner was committed for trial.
WORSHIP-STREET.

A young woman, Ann Smith alias Cannon, was
placed at the bar for final examination, charged with
stealing a cashbox, containing bank notes and gold to
the amount of 1001., and a quantity of jewellery,
copper moneys, and other articles, the property of Mr.
Thomas Furley, a grocer at Upper Clapton.
The prosecutor's house was broken into in the
middle of the night, by forcing an iron grating in
the front of the shop, whence admission was obtained
to the back parlour, in which a closet, containing a
large quantity of pence and halfpence, was broken
open and the money stolen. The whole of the lower
part of the house was next ransacked, but so expertly
as to occasion no noise, and a large quantity of plate
and linen having been packed into a clothes-basket,
and placed in the yard ready for removal over the
back wall, a woman, who it is believed was the pri-
soner, entered the bedroom of the prosecutor while
he was awake, and, having answered him as though
she were the servant, took the cashbox off a dressing
table, and disappeared with it. This cashbox, and
nearly all the other property, were afterwards reco-
vered, the prisoner having been pursued and captured
after she had secreted them in an outhouse in her
flight; but about the same time that the cashbox was
stolen from Mr. Furley's bedroom, that of his daugh-
ter was entered also, her drawers broken open without
disturbing her, and her watch taken from a watch
pocket at the head of her bed. This watch could not
afterwards be discovered, although the prisoner was
known not to have thrown it away, and her person
underwent a minute examination by the female
searcher directly after she was taken ; but
Mrs. Elizabeth Bewick, matron of the Refuge for
the Destitute in the Hackney-road, now attended,
and stated that, having read the former examination
of the case in the papers, she was satisfied she had a
previous knowledge of the prisoner, and that after
coming to this court and being admitted to the cells,
she found that her suspicions were correct. About
seven years ago the prisoner was an inmate of that
institution, and, having apparently thoroughly re-
formed her previous conduct, was recommended by
some one to the wife of the prosecutor, who, though
he seemed to have no recollection of the circumstance,
took her into his service, in which she remained for
some time, and quitted it without any imputation of
fault. The prisoner now informed her that she had
been living honestly for some months past with her
sister, and that, being destitute and out of a situa-
tion, she went late on the evening previous to the
burglary to the prosecutor's house, in the hope that
his wife would recommend her somewhere, but that,
finding the house closed, she wandered about Clapton
all night till an early hour next morning, when,
finding the street-door open, she entered the passage,
and was met by the female servant, who, after some
friendly conversation, and ascertaining the particu-
lars of her position from her, asked her to wait
there and she would give her something; that after
the lapse of a few minutes the servant returned, and
hurriedly gave her the cashbox and a bag containing
the daughter's jewellery, together with the young
lady's watch, and directed her to convey them to a
secluded passage near Hackney Church, where she
would speedily meet her and share the contents, but
that she was overtaken on the way, and the property
recovered, with the exception of the watch, which
notwithstanding the search she had undergone, she
had contrived to secrete about her, and would be
found, if looked for, in the cell at the police-station.
A police-constable was accordingly dispatched to
the station-house, and shortly after returned with the
watch, which he had discovered in the spot the pri-
soner had described.

When called upon for her defence, the prisoner now
repeated the same statement she had made to the
matron; upon which the prosecutor's servant was re-
called and closely questioned by the magistrate, but
she declared in the most impressive manner that there
was not the slightest foundation for what the prisoner
had stated, and that they were entire strangers to each
other until she encountered her in the passage on the
morning of the burglary, as she was about to open the
parlour shutters.

The depositions of the witnesses were thereupon
ordered to be taken, and the prisoner, who is a quiet,
demure-looking zirl, of about 25, was fully committed
to Newgate for trial.