The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-16 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.— ll' inehester, July 14.
CRIMINAL counx.—(Before Mr. Justice

LIA s.)
Francis Andrews, aood 67, was indicted for having
cut and wounded Jane Caplin, with intent to kill and
murder her.

Mr. Sewell appeared for the prosecution, Mr. C.
Saunders conducted the defence.
It appeared that the prisoner, who was deaf and par-
tially dumb, had lodged in the house of the prhsccutrix
at Southampton; he was a man of weak intellect, but
was generally harmless unless excited. On the 26th of
Feb. he came into the house and complained that some one
had taken a piece of canvass from his room; he charged
the proaecutrix with having taken it; she denied it, and
the prisoner then became much excited, and made
towards the prosecutrix with his knife; she raised her
arms to keep him off, upon which he cut her fingers
and arms with his knife; she became faint and was
falling to the ground, when the prisoner stabbed her in
the side.

It appeared, however, from the evidence of the zur-
geon, that the prisoner had been of unsound mind for
some years, and the jury therefore Acquitted the prisoner
on the ground of insanity.
Hillier Fryer, un old man of 76 years, was indicted for
having discharged a loaded gun at Sarah Wulf NI ith in-
tent to kill and murder her.

Mr. Beetharn conducted the prosecution; Mr. Missing
defended the prisoner.
It appeared that the prosecutrix and her husband ke=pt

house for the prisoner, who lived in a cottage in the
New Forest. On the morning of the 14th of May Mrs.
Wolf's son lent two iron wedges, belonging to the pri-
soner, to a neighbour. In the evening of the day the
prisoner came home, and on hearing that the wedges
had been lent in his absence he became much excited,
and swore that Wolf and his wife should not lire with
him any longer. At this time Wolf came home, and
hearing the old man making a noise, said, " Mr. Fryer,
don't keep noising, but sit down like a good man." The
prisoner then turned round and seizing a gun, which
was lying on the table, pointed it at Mrs. Wolf, and said
to her, " your eyes, I'll blow your brains out." He
then pulled the trigger, and the gun exploded. The
shot struck her in the face, and also blew off her thumb.

lie then struck at her with the butt-end of the gun, but
missed her, and the gun was broken in two pieces.
A surgeon was called,:who stated that her life was in
danger for some weeks, owing to the injuries she had
sustained.
Mr. MISSING having addressed the jury for the pri-
soner, they found him guilty of shooting with intent to
do grievous bodily harm.—Sentence deferred.
Charles ll'qfe, a young man, aged 17, was charged
with having feloniously cut and wounded Elizabeth Ay-
ling, with intent to kill and murder her. There were
other counts in the indictment varying the charge.
Mr. Stock conducted the prosecution ; Mr. Saunders
defended the prisoner.
It appeared from the evidence of the prosecutrix, who
was an interesting girl of about eighteen years of age,
that she was nursemaid to Mr. Philip Thresher, who
lived with his father at Fareham, who was a magistrate
of the county. The prisoner was a footman, also living
there; and on the 22d of March last the prosecutrix,
being in the nursery, observed the prisoner come to the
door. She asked him what business he had there? He
said, " What?" and went away. Shortly after he came
back again, and she heard him say, " I'll do for you."
The prosecutrix being alarmed at this, went to the door
to try to get out of the room, when •the prisoner struck
her on the head with a mallet he held in his hand. This
knocked her down, and he then dragged her back into
the room. She got up. and tried to get away, when he
knocked her down again. lie then knelt down, and cut
her in the throat with a razor he had in his hand, saying
at the same time, " Brown—l'll Brown you." The pro-
secutrix tried to catch hold of the prisoner's hands, but
he cut her fingers with the razor. Atter a severe struggle
the prosecutrix succeeded in getting away from the pri;7.,
soner, and came down stairs, bleeding very much from
her throat and hands. The prisoner followed her, but
was taken into custody by some persons who were at-
tracted by the screams of the young woman, who was
afterwards confined to her bed for a considerable time
from the injuries she had sustained. On the prisoner
being apprehended, he attempted to cut his own throat
with his razor, and did succeed in inflicting a super-
ficial wound. It was elicited, in cross-examination of the
prosecutrix, that the prisoner had been much attached to
her, and had been made very jealous of her with regard
to a young man named Brown, a footman to a gentle-
man in the neighbourhood. It, however, did not appear
that the young woman had in any way encouraged the
addresses of either of these young men. The case for
the prosecution having been closed,
Mr. SAUNDERS addressed the jury for the prisoner,
contending that the whole affair had arisen out of a
jealous feeling engendered in the mind of the prisoner,
and which had provoked it to such an extent as to render
him not master of his own actions, but quito insane;
and that being so, he was not responsible for them, but
was entitled to an acquittal on the ground of insanity.
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS having summed up, the jury
found the prisoner guilty of the attempt at murder.
Tho Learned JUDGE having commented on the enor-
mity of the crime with which the prisoner had been found
guilty, directed death to be recorded against him.

HOME ClRCUlT.—Chelmsford, July 14.
(Before Mr. Baron PARKE.)
James Willesmere, 17, a remarkably innocent-looking
country lad, was indicted for the wilful murder of John
Terry, by fracturing his skull with a hoe.
There was also an indictment against the prisoner for
robbing the deceased.
Mr. Ryland and Mr. Rodwell conducted the prose-
cution.
This case was of a very melancholy character. The
evidence against the prisoner was chiefly circumstantial,
but the effect of it was to leave no doubt that the pri-
soner was guilty of the crime alleged against him. It
appeared that the deceased was an old labouring man,
living near the town of Rochfort, and on the 31st of
March, which was the day he received the injury that
terminated in his death, he was on his way to that
town about ten o'clock in the morning. The prisoner,
it seemed, had been lodging at a public-house in the
village of South Parnbridge, about four miles from Roch-
fort, and on this same morning he owed the landlord
Is. ed. for board and lodging, and he told him that he
could not pay him at that time, but promised to give him
the money on the following Saturday. He then called
for a pipe of tobacco which he paid for with a halfpenny,
saying that was all the money he had got, and shortly
afterwards left the public-house and proceeded in a di-
rection for the town of Rochfort. It seemed that soon
after this the prisoner and the old man joined company,
and they were seen by several of the witnesses walking
together towards a place called the Mead, near Dag-
gett's farm, on the road to the town above-mentioned;
the prisoner at this time having a hoe in his hand, and
the deceased a hoe stick without the iron end. About
11 o'clock the same evening the poor old man was
found lying in the Mead; in a dreadful state. Ho
was literally covered with blood, and the top
of his right ear was completely severed from the
head, and was found in a mass of clotted blood among
his hair. His pockets appeared to have been rifled, and
his watch, a canvass purse, a key, and a small sum of
money were missing. He had sufficient consciousness to
state that he had been robbed and ill-used, and he was
then taken to the union workhouse at Rochfort, where
he remained until the 22d April, when he died. It
appeared that almost immediately after the time when
the robbery and assault must have been committed, the
prisoner went into a public-house at Rochfort, where he
produced a watch which turned out to be that of the
deceased, and offered to sell it to any one in the room
for ten shillings, but no one would buy it, and he then
called for some beer, which he paid for with a half-crown.
It also! appeared that on his way to Rochfort the pri-
soner had sold his hoe for sixpence, and he shortly
afterwards sold the watch to a man named Brig for five
shillings ; and, upon his being taken into custody, the
canvass purse which contained the key of the poor old
man's box was found in his pocket. The prisoner
was afterwards taken into the room where the deceased
was lying in bed ; and on his being raised up and
shown the prisoner, he immediately said that he was the
man who bad robbed and beat him ; and he at the same
time said to the prisoner, " You know that you are the
man ;" to which' the prisoner merely muttered in reply,
"You are mistaken, old man," and made no further de-
nial. The deceased also, at the same time, identified the
watch, and the other articles that were produced as his
property.
Mr. Hodges, the surgeon of the union, proved that the
deceased died of a fracture of the skull, and he pro-
duced that portion of it which had received the fatal in-
jury; and upon the hoe belonging to the prisoner being
produced, it was found that the iron back of it fitted
exactly the wound on the skull, and the surgeon said he
had no doubt it was inflicted by it, and that in all pro-
bability one severe blow had caused the mischief.
Mr. Baron PARKE, at the close of the evidence for the
prosecution, asked the prisoner to state what he had to
say in his defence.
He replied, " My Lord, I have nothing to say."
The Learned JUDGE, in summing up, told the jury
that whether they should be of opinion the fatal injury
had been inflicted with an intention to disable and maim
the deceased, or whether it was merely to further the
object of robbing him, in either case in the eye of the
law it would amount to the crime of wilful murder, be-
cause the injury was inflicted in furtherance of a
felonious and unlawful act. The Learned Judge then
detailed the material particulars of the evidence, and said
that although no doubt it was a most painful duty for
them to decide a question which involved the life of a
person like the prisoner, who was hardly verging upon
manhood, yet both they and himself were bound to per-
form their duty to their country under the solemn obli-
gation of the oath they had taken, without any regard to
the consequences that might result from it.
The jury then deliberated for a few minutes, when
they returned a verdict finding the prisoner guilty of
murder. They at the same time recommended him to

mercy.
Mr. Baron PARKE said he supposed the recommenda-
tion was on account of his youth.
The jury said it was.
The Learned JUDGE then put on the black cap, and
silence having been proclaimed, he addressed the pri-
soner, and said that the jury had come to the only con-
clusion which their duty to society had enabled them to
come to upon the evidence, and it was now his most
painful duty to pass upon a mere stripling--a boy just
entering upon life—the sentence of undergoing an igno-
minious death upon the public .scaffold. Ile believed
that it was not his intention to have taken the life of the
deceased, but it was quite clear that the fatal blow was
struck with the intention to render the deceased power-
less, in order that be might rob him with greater faci-
lity, and, as death. ensued, his offence clearly amounted
to the crime of wilful murder. The jury had recom-
mended him to mercy on account of his youth, but he
felt that it would be inconsistent with his duty in such a
case to do more gum to transmit the recommendation to

the proper quarter, and he would advise the prisoner not
to place any reliance upon a favourable result, for he
considered it very possible that those whose province it
was to take such matters into consideration might con-
' skier the offence was one of so dreadful a character,
that they would not feel themselves justified in advising
her Majesty to interfere to prevent the law from taking
its course. Tie should, therefore, advise him to make
the best use of his time, with the assistance of the
chaplain of the gaol, to make all the atonement in his
power in this world, by a sincere repentance for the
dreadful crime he had committed, and to be prepared to
meet that sentence which the law required him to pass.
The sentence of death was then passed in the usual
form. The prisoner did not betray the slightest emo-
tion during any part of the proceedings, and when the
portion of the skull of his victim was produced by the
surgeon, he looked at it quite composedly, and seemed
to regard the ceremony of fitting it to the tool with a
good deal of curiosity. When the Learned Judge had
concluded his sentence, he turned round and walked
away from the dock with the utmost composure, and
indeed he appeared almost the only unconcerned
spec-
tator of the proceedings.
Mr. R VIAND, with whom was Mr. Rodwell. mace au
application to postpone the trial of David illeildtreid, for
manslaughter, to the next assizos.
The defendant, who was out on bail, was the captain
of the Royal Victoria Leith steamer, and he was charged
with having run down a schooner, called the Rose, while
lying at anchor in the river, and thereby occasioning
the death of two men named Thomas Emmett and Henry
Shillibeer, and was charged upon two inquisitions with
the oflenca of mandaughter.

Mr. RYLAND said ttitt the witnesses, who were nearly
all seafaring men, hail been bound over to attend, but
as no one had been instructed to conduct the prosecu-
tion, or get the witnesses together to go before the grand
jury, only two of them were now in attendance, and it
was therefore useless to go on with the trial at these
assizes. He therefore had to apply to the Court to post-
pone the trial to the next assizes.
Mr. CLARKSON, who appeared for the prisoner, ob-
jected to the trial being postponed. He said that from
the feeling entertained in Scotland with reference to a
person under such a charge, no person would employ
the defendant while it was hanging over him. He had
now been out of a situation for several months on that
account, and it would be very hard upon him that he
should be kept in the same position for eight months
longer, when is was the duty of the prosecutors to have
been prepared to go on with the trial at these assizes.
Mr. Baron PARKE said that under the Habeas Corpus
Act, if a prisoner surrendered on the first day of the
assizes, he had a right to demand to be tried at these
assizes, unless the Crown gave some good grounds for a
postponement. In the present ease he was of opinion
that there was not sufficient ground stated for post-
poning the trial. It was the duty of the prosecutors to
have taken care that the witnesses were in attendance,
and he could not help expressing an opinion that the
criminal business of the county, either from economy
or some other cause, was not conducted as it ought to
be. On the first day of the assizes, in a most serious
case of poisoning, no counsel was retained to prosecute, li
and he was obliged to hand the depositions to a Learned
Counsel in court just before the trial.
The defendant then surrendered, and he was given in
charge to the jury.
Mr. RYLAND said that, under the circumstances they
had heard alluded to, he must consent to their returning
a verdict of not guilty. He had no witnesses in at-
tendance to support the charge.
Mr. Baron PARKE told the jury that they must find
the prisoner not guilty, because proper. steps had not
been taken on behalf of the prosecution to get the wit-
nesses to attend. There was a failure of justice no doubt
in consequence of this proceeding, but it was not the
fault of the prisoner, and he ought not to suffer in con-
sequence of the neglect of those who prosecuted him.

The jury then returned a verdict of Not Guilty upon
MI inquisitions, and the defendant was ordered to be
Imediately discharged.
July 15.
_ _

At the sitting of the Court this morning,
Mr. Baron PARKE said that upon a further considera-
tion of the point of law raised by the Learned Counsel,
in the case of the two men Kimpton and Hickton, the
Dagenham policemen, he had resolved not to give effect
to it by postponing the judgment, but he should pass
sentence upon the conviction that had taken place, leav-
ing it to the prisoners to adopt the course of issuing a
writ of error if they thought proper to do so.
The prisoners Kimpton and Hickton were then again
placed at the bar and arraigned upon another indict.
ment, charging them with conspiring together to defeat
the ends of justice by giving false testimony before the
coroner at the inquest upon their murdered comrade.
Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Clark appeared for the Crown,
and Mr. Hawkins defended Kimpton.
Mr. CLARKSON was about to open the case for the pro-
secution, when

Mr. Baron PARKE interposed, and said he did not see
what necessity there was to go into this indictment. If
a conviction took place he should not pass any sentence
except upon the first indictment, and if no writ of error
was brought, or, if brought, the first conviction should
be held good, it would be quite unnecessary .to proceed
with this indictment.

Some conversation then took place between the
Learned Counsel, and upon Mr. Clarkson undertaking
not proceed any further with the indictment for con-
spiracy in the event of the conviction for perjury not
being disturbed, the jury were disoharged by consent
from giving any verdict upon this indictment.
At a later period of the day the prisoners were brought
up for judgment, and sentenced to pay a fine of 1 s., to be
imprisoned for a week, and then to be transported for
seven years.
This concluded the business of these assizes.

MIDLAND ClRCUlT.—Northampton, July 15.
The cause list contained three cases—one being an
action for debt, undefended; the second was for an illegal
distress, verdict for the plaintiff with 61. damages; the
third was a tithe cause, between University College,
Oxford, and the vicar of Towcester; but it was settled
without the necessity of swearing a jury, so that the
civil business was over by twelve o'clock the first day.
In the Criminal Court, Ruth Wells, aged 31, was
charged with the wilful murder of her new• born male
child, at Abthorpe, in this county.
Mr. Flood conducted the prosecution.
It was known the prisoner, who is a single woman, was
pregnant, and the child, after its delivery, was seen on a
chair in the bedroom; she afterwards came down stairs
and put it in the privy.
The evidence of the medical men went to show that
the child was born and died from suffocation ; but it
might have been caused by the bed clothes.
The prisoner was found guilty of secreting the birth.
Sentence deferred.

John C. Kromby, aged 38, was convicted of having
uttered a false acceptance for 491. 75., and sentenced to
ten years' transportation.
Mr. Macaulay prosecuted and Mr. Miller defended.
This case closed the business of the assizes.

NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Redford, July 15.
CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
TEBBS V. BEVAN.

Mr. Sergeant Byles and Mr. Worlledge were counsel
for the plaintiff; Mr. O'Malley and Mr. Fitzpatrick ap-
peared for the defendant.
This was an action of trespass, for assault and bat-
tery, to which the defendant pleaded not guilty.
The plaintiff is the landlord of the George Inn, in this
town, while the defendant was the head waiter at the
Swan Hotel. The case arose from a broil when the de-
fendant was intoxicated.
The jury, after about fifteen minutes' deliberation,
found a verdict for the plaintiff, with ono shilling da-

wages.
The Learned JUDGE, on being applied to, refused to
certify the right of the plaintiff to costs, so that each
party pays his own costs.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice PATTESON.)

DELIBERATE ARSON.
William Ellis, aged 20, was indicted for setting fire
to a stack of stubble, at Humbershoe, the property of
Daniel Gutteridge. _ •

Mr. Worlledie conducted the case for the prosecution,
The prisoner is an unmarried agricultural labourer,
and the prosecutor is one of the guardians of the poor
for the Luton Union, in which capacity he would seem
to have been singled out by the prisoner as the most
proper man on whose property he might commit an act
of incendiarism, and so promise to himself the benefits
of transportation, together with the trifling accompani-
ment of food. From the evidence of the witnesses called
for the prosecution it appeared that the prisoner had
been for some time out of work, and not many days
beforo the fire in question, which occurred on the night
t
of the 15th of May last, he said to a man named Wright
that he could not get any work, and they would not have
him at the union (where however, he hadneveornfire to
applied
for relief), and that he must set some place
get himself transported. On the night of thehefirwe,aisvhich
WAS confined to the destruction of the stack, pre-
sent, as many others were, and at
to his friend Wright,
" Well,
Ifire to old Gutteridge's
told you of last week ;
I set fire
stack, and if that 'ont do l settle fire to summet said
happened he told another =home thebehfiodranothwe
ofirkre,
railway,til I n
a failingiob whichsome-
where."
else." It further appeared
nthtahtar
,as,
nd that he was
nor rocroy, nor food,
should do something
nt occasion,
a few days after
gheoingto look for a job nonoarsthteo
ge
On a subsequent
-afeound lying lazily at full
the fire, he
‘rvass. Turning himself, and being
ddoo.ingl thhaez,bseaeind,t;y‘
iNngotahlionngg;
timea
length on the
wasto
I can get nothing , I
don't you
to get a job, and I cant; and ain't got a bit of bread to
asked what heg
„t," " Well, said the
,interrogator, " why
'list, and go for a soldier? " Oh," said he, "I've had
thq shilling offered to me many a day, but I 'ont go a
soldiering by no manner of means. I'd rather be trans-
ported, and so I've set fire to Dan Gutteridge's stack."
When called on for his defence, the prisoner said he
had nothing to say to the jury, and, as might be ex-
pected, they had nothing to say to him except that he
was Guilty.
Mr. Justice PATTESON then proceeded to pass sentence
on the prisoner, for whose offence lie thought that want
of work did not afford an excuse, as he had been in-
formed that there was no lack of it at the time in ques-
tion in this county. Even if he had been out of work
the union was open to him, but he had not availed him-
self of the relief provided for the poor and needy,
:con-
tent rather to do mischief to the property of his neigh-
bour, bour, under the vain delusion that his condition inain hisp I
colony would be superior to that which he filled
own country. In this he would find lie was greatly
at ho ie
greatly mis-
taken, for the worst condition of an Englih
was preferable to the life of a convict
in a penal settle-
ment. The prisoner, however,
opportu-
nity of testing the fallacy of his hopes,
would havefur, a as. r
his
offence
was a monstrous one,
the sentence of the law was that
he should be transported for 15 years.
s,
With this caw terminated the msiz e