The Sun.
London, England, 1847-08-16 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.--Liverpool, August 13.
Elizabeth Jackson, an elderly woman, about 50 years
of age, was indicted for having, at Manchester, cut and
wounded Thomas Boyle, her son-in-law, with intent to
murder him. The intent was, in other counts, alleged
£0 be to do him some grievous bodily harm.
Mr. Warren conducted the case for the prosecution;
the prisoner was defended by Mr. Monck.
It appeared from the statement of counsel, and the
evidence of the witnesses, that the prosecutor, Thomas
Boyle, was a shoemaker, and married some little time
ago 'lie daughter of the prisoner. The husband and
wife were cousins, and the prisoner gave her son-in-law
ania daughter, on the occasion of their marriage, some
_
)anuses and other property, and this property had
been the cause of some wrangling and occasional
bad feeling since between the parties. The prisoner
was anxious to have the property back again and
the grievous act now oomplained of hadits origin
in this ill feeling. On the 27th
all
slept in the sameofM May the prisoner,
her daughter, and son in-law,
room in the house of the prosecutor—the prisoner in one
bed, and the daughter and son-in-law in another. The
night passed over without anything particular occurring,
but about five o'clock in the morning the son in- law was
suddenly startled from his sleep by finding that his
motker.m.law, the prisoner, had stretched over her
daughter. and had succeeded in inflicting a very serious
w'eund on his neck with a dinner knife. He rushed out
'of the bed. seized the knife, and ran into the street,
streaming with blood, and hoking the bloody knife in
his hand. A policeman was immediately sent for, and
he, on entering the bedroem, found the prisoner sitting
there, with her head leaning upon her hand. She was
exceedingly depressed, and refused to give any statement
of the reasons which had induced her to commit the
dreadful sot. She had been repeatedly heard to say,
long previous to the day named in the indictment, and
subsequent to the marriage, that she wished the prose-
cutor was stiff or dead. The knife had every appearance
of having been recently sharpened on the edge of a win-
dow, The wound was half an inch in depth, and three
inches in length ; and a great mercy it appeared to be
theAt the prisoner did not now stand before the Court
upon the capital charge.
Mr. MONCIC, for the defence, elicited from the wit-
nesses that the bargain made at the time of the marriage
was, that the prisoner should have 7s. a week from the
prosecutor, and that, not having received that stipulated
amount, and not having Hyattappily -with her son-in-
law, quarrels ensued; but there was no immediate
quarrel. For three weeks prior to the occurrence they
bad lived in amity together; and the night before it the
prisoner appeared in good spirits, and wished her
daughter and son-in-law " good night," and went to
bed before them. He (Mr. Monck) contended that the
prisoner committed the act from some impulse during
sleep, and that she was therefore irresponsible. The
Learned Counsel was proceeding to support his hypothesis
by reading extracts from Taylor's celebrated work on
medical jurisprudence when his Lordship interrupted
him by saying that the book eould not be read. He ob-
served, that if any scientific statements respecting the
physiology of the human mind, or of human nature,
were to be submitted, they must be given in evidence by
Then, and not by books, for books could not be cross-
examined, and men could. His mind on the subject was
fully made up, and his opinion was, moreover, the one
entertained by all the judges. Mr. Monck desisted from
the reading of the work in deference to the wishes of the
Court, and concluded by calling witnesses to character,
none of whom answered to their names.
The dunce., in summing up, said the jury had no
middle course to adopt, and that they must either find
the prisoner guilty or not. If they should think the
prisoner was insane at the time of the commission of the
act, that would be a defence, but an acquittal upon that
ground would enable the authorities to protect the pub-
he from a repetition of similar acts on the part of the
prisoner, by placing her in confinement. Of her in-
sanity, however, there was no evidence, and her defence
was not put on that ground by the Learned Counsel. It
was rather urged that her mind had been powerfully
acted on by previous quarrels with her son-in-law, and
that the stimulus of these constant quarrels, had pro-
duced some hallucination during sleep which led to the
commission of the act. It would be a most dangerous
thing, however, to take such a defence for granted with-
out. some evidence in the conduct of the party or the
circumstances of the case from which its existence could
fairly be inferred.
'rhe jury after some deliberation returned a verdict of
guilty of cutting and wounding with intent to murder.
Sentence was deferred.
John Gordon, who was yesterday convicted of the
manslaugnter of Thomas Price, at Manchester, by forcing
him into a flue, was then placed at the bar for sentence.
The Learned JCDGE delivered a very feeling address
on the enormity of the et ime of which the prisoner had
been found guilty. His Lordship said the jury had
very properly, upon the evidence before them, found
him guilty, and he owned he could not trust himself
immediately after a crime containing such details of
suffering on the one part and cruelty on the other—he
could not permit himself to pass sentence without re-
section, and without conferring with his learned col-
league, whose experience was greater than his own, and
having the benefit of that experience. Had every part
of this most unhappy and cruel offence the same dark
and malignant appearance which some parts of it pre-
sented, he (the Learned Judge) should have felt called
upon to inflict upon the prisoner the severest sentence
the law could attach to such a crime; but there were, in
appearance, some circumstances from which it might be
inferred that his whole conduct was not se bad as from
parts of it it would appear; and whether what there
was of apparent mitigation was the result of the con-
fiding, and hopeful, and affectionate spirit of the child,
which no unkindness could quench, and no severity en-
tirely destroy, he knew not; but it had some effect in
making the offence of which the prisoner had been con-
victed appear less dark and malignant. From the evi-
dence which the prisoner produced the deceased appeared
not only to have chosen his occupation and selected the
prisoner as his master, but on the very day when the
unlawful conduct of the prisoner deprived the poor child
of existence, he spoke of the prisoner with some degree
of kindness. The prisoner was responsible for the loss
of life which occurred through his unlawful act. It was
not lawful for him to use a child of such tender years for
such a purpose. It was contrary to a recent statute,
which had been proposed expressly for the purpose of
preventing cruelty from being inflicted on the free sub-
jects of this country worse than that which the Legisla-
ture had been desirous of suppressing in other parts of
the world. The prisoner had violated the law under
such circumstances as would have made his act criminal
even if there had been no such law in existence. It was
most unquestionable that the prisoner had forced the de-
ceased into a place which was unfit for a human being to
enter, and after death it was discovered that there bad
been many stripes inflicted on the person of the poor
child, and which confirmed the testimony of the witnesses
as to the severity of the blows which the prisoner had
inflicted on the deceased, in order to force him into the
flue. After making all allowances, however, for the
conduct of the prisoner, it was still necessary that some
severe sentence should be passed. His Lordship then
sentenced him to be transported for the period of tea
years.
Elizabeth Parr, a young woman, 27 years of age,
was indicted for having, at Bury, stabbed and wounded
Robert Grundy, with intent to do him some grievous
bodily harm.
Mr. Cross prosecuted. The prisoner was undefended.
It appeared that the assault here was utterly unpro-
voked, and was wholly inexplicable. About the hour of
half-past one o'clock on the morning of the 25th of July,
the__ prosecutor, who was a collier, was proceeding down
Bolton-street, Bury, and when he had reached as far as
Mill brow, the prisoner, whom he had never seen before,
came up and struck him on the breast, and said, " I'll do
for thee." The prosecutor staggered,
h reeled round, and
fell, and it %vas then found
_e had received a severe
punctured wound with some sharp
finsrument on the
No weapon
breast, from which blood w
was found upon the prisoner when arrested.ree
Of " Guilty of a grievous assault" Wag returnedA verdict
The prisoner was sentenced to 12 calendar months'
imprisonment and hard labour.
A number of other unimportant cases of rialto
ry
were disposed of during the jay.
On the civil side the Court was engaged the greater
part of the day with two causes—one an action for an
illegal distress, and another of trover for a quantity of
stone, neither of which were of any public interest.
August 14.
Samuel Irish, a youth 17 years of age, was indicted
for cutting and wounding Thomas Willett, with intent to
do him grevioua bodily harm.
Mr. Cross conducted the prosecution ; the prisoner
was not defended by counsel.
at
aThe prisoner and the prosecutor had been, it appeared,
public-house in Manchester on the evening in ques-
tion for many hours, the parties being engaged in play-
ing dominoes. The' prosecutor's sister was also there,
and was in and out
the house several times in the
course of the evening. On
occasions the prisoner tookhesromer ibigtieo
in
en
wo
int eh ofher, tl e
os ef
in
which the prosecutor disapproved,il and angry words took place between them, W
resulted in a fight.
The bystanders interfered to fisdwallayrate them and Irish
was turned out of the house. He
admittance, and kicked violent! emetndtheeavdouooredr. tonfeorre-
mained loitering about until
vtbenptrolecutor left the
threats, and house ; in the meantime using
tl Willett
stat-
ing his determination, if he could not
with his fists, to do so with a knife. On thateptesWeciul
Willett,
coming out the prisoner called to him, sayineogff7,
come here, and I'll cut your head
Willett approaching him struck him twice in tahnedf on
with his knife, inflicting two severe cuts, one extendiaene
from behind the temple half way down the cheek, and
the other from the temple, crossing the first. The pro-
secutor bled much, and became so faint that he was un-
able to walk, and was carried to the dispensary, He
was for some time in a precarious state from the loss of
blood, arising from the dividing of the temporal artery.
'Verdict, Guilty,
llis LORDBUIP, commenting in strong terms on the
brutal mode of conducting their quarrels for which this
county is SO remarkable, stated his determination to
suppress, if possible, the use of the knife on these occa-
elOns bY severe punishment.—To be transported for 10
lUS.

Daniel Flaherty was indicted for bigamy.
The prisoner, it appeared, in the month of May last
Came to a police-office and stated that he had two wives,
but the motive to this confession, it appeared, was that
he was claimed by both, and the uproar consequent upon
this state of matters compelled him at last to take refuge
in the police-office. He made a very circumstantial
statement of his marriage in Ireland to his first wife
about 32 years ago. He was married, he said, according
to the rites of the Roman Catholic Church, t Leitrim,
and about 10 years ago left his wife at Kildarea He was
married to his second wife at Ashton-under-Lyne in the
year 1832.
The prisoner's own statement was the only evidence trot marriage, Ind is was proposed to opcia•;the