The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-29 00:00:00

EX PARTE ROTHEREY IN RE ROTHEREY.

Mr. SwANsToN applied on behalf of a bankrupt, now
lying in York gaol, under commitment by Mr. Commis-
Aiotier West, for not answering sutisfact.rily relative to
the disposal of his property. since his fir,t commitment,
three years back, he had been again brought up and re-
committed. Renewed application had been made, but
the Commissioner refused to call a meeting and taka the
examination, except at the bankrupt's expense. Being
in absolute destitution, he now appealed, in formit pan
oeris, and asked to be brought up at the expense of the
estate.

Mr. K. PARKER (for Mr. Bagshaw) urged the want of
available assets t.,) mert the expense.
The CHIEF JUDGE declined to interfere in such a stare
of circumstances, but recommended an application to the
Lord Chancellor.
Petition dismissed.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—Derby, July 27.
CROWN COUR F.—(Before Lord DENMAN.)
THE CHESTERFIELD MURDER.

Anthony Letunt, aged 26, was charged.with having, on
December 8, 1845, at Chesterfield, feloniously received,
aided, and comforted one John Platts, in feloniously,
wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, killing and
murdering one George Collis.
On being placed at the bar, the prisoner pleaded not
guilty with a firm voice.
Mr. Mellor conducted the case for the prosecution,
and Mr. Miller th fbr the defence.

Mr. MELLOR, in stating the case to the jury, alluded to
the principal facts adduced at the late trial against Platts
in order to prove that the murder was committed, that
the body was identified as that of Collis's, and to the va-
rious circumstances which !elated to the prisoner (Launt)
being supposed to be a party implicated in the transaction.
They were aware that at the last assizes Platts was tried
for the murder of Collis, and that he was convicted and
executed. The murder took place in December, 1845,
and the prisoner was charged with being an accessory
after the fact ; that is, after the murder was committed,
he (Launt) assisted and aided Platte in disposing of the
body in a way which they would hear described, and
which would make him guilty of an offence against the
law. It would be for the jury to say whether or not
they were of opinion that he was cognizant of the mur-
der. Collis was acquainted with Platts, and both of
them lived in the town of Chesterfield. On Sunday, the
7th of December, Collis and Platte had made an agree-
ment to meet a certain person. That was the last day
when Collis was seen, and it was supposed that he had
gone to Manchester. In the month of August (nine months
after this occurrence) some very unexpected circum-
stances led to the discovery of a body in a cesspool in
Mr. Bunting's yard. The remains were carted to a field
with the manure, and they were found to be those of a
human being. From the handkerchiefs, the garters,
and other things, the body was clearly identified to be
that of George Collis. Inquiries were made to ascer-
tain when Collis was last seen in Chesterfield, and it wa,
with some difficulty that any information could be ob
mined on the subject, owing to the length of time which
had elapsed from Collis disappearing to when his re-
mains were discovered. At length circumstances made
it clear that Platts was connected with the murder. The
Learned Counsel then proceeded to speak of the quar-
relling which was heard in Morley's shop, to the
scuffling that took place, and to the fact of two men hav-
ing been seen shortly afterwards leading a third, who
appeared to be drunk, into P 1 tit's shop, and which per
son was beyond doubt Collis. Having described the
injuries which were inflicted upon the skull of the mur-
dered man, the Learned Counsel proceeded to advert to
that part of the evidence which more particularly related
to the prisoner. On Monday nignt, b, tween ten and
eleven o clock, three men were seen carrying a handl,.
by witnesses who would be called before them. The
three men were Platte, the prisoner, and a third person.
who were described by the witnesses as carrying son- -
thing in a large bundle which they thought was leo;
meat. They were seen to carry it down a part of th.
town, and were traced and watched till they took it into
Mr. Bunting's yard. No attention was paid to the cir-
cumstance at the time, and it was not till after the in-
quest that the parties seeing it recalled it to mind.
Heathcote, who was examined at the late trial, safe
that he saw three men carrying a bundle on a Monday
night in December. He recollected it from the fact that
it was his club night, and he identified Platts as
being one of the men. The trial caused a good deal
of excitement, and it was published in every news-
paper. A witness would be called before them that
day. who, having read Heathcote's evidence, and
afterwards hearing it contradicted, remarked, " Heath-
cote was right, for I saw the three men myself. I knew
them very well, and one of them was Anthony Launt."
He (the Learned Counsel) apprehended that the only
question for the jury to determine was, whether they
were satisfied that the prisoner, in assisting to carry the
bundle, was aware that it contained the body of a man,
or whether he was ignorant of the fact. If the jury
entertained a doubt as to the prisoner being connected
with murder, it would be their duty to give him the
benefit of that doubt ; but, on the other hand, if they
were of opinion that he was acquainted with what the
sack contained, that he was an accessory after the fact,
it would be their duty to return a verdict of guilty.
The evidence in this case was almost precisely similar
to that given at the last assizes, and fully reported in our
paper when Platts was convicted. The prisoner was
indicted as an accessory after the fact, two questions
being necessary to be decided against him before a con-
viction could take place. First, was he there at all?
Secondly, if he was, did he know he was assisting to
carry a m rdered man?
The jury acquitted the prisoner.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

Yesterday John Smith, the driver of a post-offic
mail cart, and Thomas Goodge, the rider of a hors.
express, were charged with assaulting Mr. Osborne, a
tradesman, residing in Somerset-place, floxtun.
Mr. Osborne stated that he was driving a light chaise
along Wood-street towards the north, and had occa-
sion to pass a cart laden with long scaffold poles. The
defetdant Smith was driving a mail cart in the same
direction as complainant was going, and was impatient
to pass him before they were sufficiently clear of the
scaffold poles. The defendant, in making the attempt;
came in collision with complainant's cart and horse, and
almost forced the latter into the shop windows. To
prevent this, complainant struck Smith's horse, which
the defendant resisted resented by striking him with his
whip. Goodge, who was riding with a letter bag
behind, who had no right to interfere at all, cried out,
" Give it him, Jack ;" and when Smith had forced his
way through, Goodge came up behirel complainant, and
began to belabour him with a short whip. Several per-
sons who witnessed the affair interfered to prevent the
defendants from escaping. Two persons ran after the
cart, clinging to the back of it, and crying out for the
police till the defendant Smith was stopped in London-
wall. He struck at both these persons, and endeavoured
to escape. If the defendant had waited half a minute
there would have been plenty of room, and he wished
these persons to understand that though they carried
the royal mails, they were not privileged to drive over
anybody, or clear the way without the least regard for
the lives or limbs of her Majesty's subjects.
Sir C. MARSHALL said, the reckless driving of the
mail-carts had often been a subject of just complaint.
All these drivers had a right to expect was, that no wan-
ton hindrance should be opposed to them. That they
were in haste would not justify them if they did any
mischief either to persons or property.
Three witnesses corroborated the complainant's state-
ment.

The defendant Smith said he did not cut at Mr. Os-
borne till be had received a blow from him. Complainant
might have pulled closer to the pavement, and then there
would have been room. That there was room was
proved by his actually passing. He cut at the persons
who clung to the back of his cart, because he did not
know what they wanted.
Goodge said, the gentleman struck him first.
Sir C. MARSHALL said their conduct appeared to have
been overbearing and violent, and he should send the
case to the sessions.
The defendants were held to bail, and Mr. Osborne
said he should indict them for the protection of the
public.

WORSHIP-STREET.
A well-dressed young woman, Elizabeth Bedloe, was
cluirged with attempting to deatroy herself,

As a gentleman was passing over the Regent's Canal-
bridge, at Kingsland, at a quarter to one o'clock yester-
day morning, he saw a woman, who turned out to be
the prisoner, pacing rapidly backward and forward along
a secluded part of the towing path, and suspecting,
from the lateness of the hour, the nature of the sput,
and the evident tribulation she displayed, that she con-
templated an attempt upon her life, he hastened down
the bank to watch her ; but the instant before he got ,
to the path the prisoner uttered an exclamation of '
despair, rushed to the brink, and was about to precipi-
tate herself into the deepest part of the water, when he
rushed forward and was fortunately just in time to stop
her. The prisoner declared that she was so wretchal
she did not wish to live any longer, and struggled vio-
lently to renew the attempt, but the gentleman called
loudly for the police, and on fowling, a constable of
N division, coming up, he gave her into custody.
Upon being asked if she wished to give any reason for
such an act, the prisoner, who had all through main-
tained a perfect silence, became greatly agitated,
wavered, fainted, and was carried out of court in the
arms of the officers ; but was restored after a consider-
able lapse of time and brought in again, when she
stated that all her friends and relatives resided in
Essex, and that having become accidentally acquainted
with a tobacconist in the Hackney-road, she was
induced by him, under a promise of marriage, and the
positive assurance that he was a single man, to live under
his protection for a short time, until his affairs could be
arranged, but that, to her astonishment, she discovered
on the preceding evening that he was a married man,
and his wife having returned home from the country,
she was turned penniless into the street, when, having no
place to go to, and her feelings being wounded, she did
not care what became of her, and determined to put an
and to her existence.
_ _

Mr. COMBE said that it would be obviously unsafe to
trust the prisoner with her liberty in her present state
of despondency, and he would, therefore, for her own
protection, commit her to prison for a week, where she
would be properly attended to, and in the meantime the
officer must write to her friends in the country, appris-
ing them of her situation, that tbey might either receive
her again or do something for her future maintenance.
The prisoner, who fainted again upon being placed
in the cells, at the close of the Court was removed
in the van. _

William Brown Chadwick, who was charged at this
Court, a few days since, with feloniously inter-marrying
with a young woman named Harriet Anderson, his first
wife, Rebecca Chadwick, being then and still alive, was
brought up for final examination, arid police-constable
West, of the IC division, having produced an attested copy
from the register of Hackney church, proving the pri-
soner's maariage to his first wite on the 12th of Nov.,
1840, the solemnization of which was also proved by
John Lucas, the wife's brother, who likewise deposed to
the accused having constantly subjected his sister to the
most shameful neglect and ill-treatment, and then sold
off all the furniture and turned her out of her home.

Mr. John Rivers Fonntaine, parish clerk of St. Mary's,
Greenwich, was called, and having put in the register of
that church, containing an entry of the second marriage
to Anderson, on the 16th of June, 1846, the prisoner,
who expressed his intention to reserve his defence, was
fully committed to Newgate for trial.
W i,„STMINS7 ER.

Yesterday Joseph Sykes, a man about fifty years of
age, described as a copper-plate printer, was charged
with having attempted to strangle his daughter, and with
other conduct of a most atrocious character.

Catharine Sykes, a very genteel-looking girl, about
eighteen years of age, said that on the previous day she
paid a visit to her parents at No. 6, Lewisham-street,
Westminster. Between one and two o'clock in the after-
noon her father came home intoxicated and lay down for
three or four hours. On getting up he declared, with
horrid imprecations, that if her (witness's) mother or
brother, who were from home, came in, he would murder
them. He then commenced throwing the things about
the place, during which time complainant sat motionless,
fearful that he woul,l attack her; nor were her appre-
hensions in this respect groundless, for after having
broken a quantity of glass he seized a ehair and was
about hurling it at her, when she rose from her seat and
took it out of his hands. He then declared in the mast
violent language that he would be the death of her,
grasped her ferociously by the throat and dragged her
across the room. At first she screamed for assistance,
but he then held her so tightly that she was unable any
longer to do so. She felt that she could scarcely breathe,
and would have been strangled but that two persons,
who had been attracted by her screams, broke into the
apartment and released her.
Mr. BunitELL inquired what were the general habits
of the defendant ? The daughter, whose throat bore
evidence of the extreme violence with which she had
been treated, with tears in her eyes, replied, " It was
hard for a child to speak against her parent;; when
sober her father was extremely irritable ; when drunk,
which she was sorry to say was of frequent occurrence,
exceedingly violent."
The police•constable who took the prisoner into cus-
tody said, he appeared to have been drinking, but evi-
dently knew very well what he was about.
Defendant, who appeared to have much difficulty in
restraining himself, even before the magistrate, said, he
had been drinking on the previous afternoon, and he had
no doubt his daughter must have provoked him by pre-
venting his taking some glasses out to pawn, to procure
more liquor, which he had a right to do if he liked. A
good deal had been said about his habits, and he should
like to have his son called.

Mr. BURRELL acceded to his request.
A respectable looking young man, with evident reluc-
tance, stepped into the witness box. In answer to the
inquiries of Mr. Taylor, the chief clerk, he said, that his
father, who had been in the habit for years of drinking
very freely, was extremely violent, and frequently ill
treated his mother. When sober he made use of the
most disgusting language in the presence of his young
children, and had been for years the terror of his family.
It was only a feW days since that he beat his wife se-
verely, and repeatedly took up knives and threatened to

murder his fainily.
Mr. BURRELL said—For; this atrocious assault upon
a defencelf-ss 3 oung woman, and that woman your own
daughter, I sha!l convict you in the fu!l penalty of 5/.,
or two months' imprisonment.
Drfendavt— Then I shall go to prison.
Mr. BURRELL—And, in addition, I :lan require you
to find good bail, 3 ourself in 100/., and two sureties of
30/. each, for your good behaviour for the next twelve
wonths.

Defendant—l shall not be able to get the bail, so I
must go to prison. and they'll soon miss me.
The son and daughter said they would use their best
,ed,avours to support their mother and the rest of the
amily.