The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-08 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

AHD LAN D ClRCUlT.—Warwick., Aug. 7.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice RertrasoN.)
Edward' Jenning.q, aged 40, was charged with setting
lire ,to his dwelling-house to defraud the District Fire
Insurance Company.
The prisoner by trade is a woodcutter, in Birming-
ham,' and had insured his stock in trade and furniture,
in thl office in question for 120/., the insurance being
effected ten days before the fire. On the day in ques-
tion, which happened to be Sunday, the 30th day of
April, the prisoner was seen to go out in the evening,
with his wife and child, for church, but having pro-
ceeded with them a few yards he returned home, leaving
them,
,to go to church alone. In about ten minutes he
came. out of his house again, and went on to church.
Shortly after this smoke was observed coming out of the
first-floor windows, and apon the neighbours forcing an
entrance, they found the premises burning in three dif-
ferent places. The inference was, this was not acci-
dental but premeditated, but there was nothing but
inference to fix it upon the prisoner.
The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
NISI' Him's. COURT.—(Before C. H. WHIT/3EIIMT,

Q: C.)
Michael Curley, 25, Daniel M'Carty, 31, Denis
M'Carty, 37, Michael M'Grave, 22, Margaret Kelly, 30,
John Linnen, 30, Susan Gay, 18, Michael Kelly, 38,
Thomas Coyne, 28, Michael M'Kew, 28, Michael
M'Neave, 29, James Graham, 26, and O'Hara, 29, were
indicted fora riot, and assaulting William Tovey.
The prisoners were undefended,
On the evening of Sunday,. Jane the 18th, some men
met at a shop in Beach-street, Birmingham, which re-
sulted in a fight between an Englishman and an Irish-
man. The police interfered, and soon there was a mob
of at least 300 persons, a great many of whom were na-
tives of the Emerald Isle. A most brutal assault was
commenced upon the police, but particularly upon Wil-
liam Tovey, who was thrown down, and whilst down
was kicked and jumped upon until he.was rendered in-
sensible. All the prisoners were upon the spot, and,
with the exception of two, were identified as taking part
in thq kicking and jumping, notwithstanding the alibis
nearly the whole of them attempted to set up.
The jury found them all. Guilty save Michael M'Kew
and Margaret Kelly, and,recommended Michael M'Grnve
and Thomas Coyne to mercy.
The Learned JUDGE sentenced M'Grave and Coyne
to fair months' imprisonment with hard labour; 4nd
the remainder to be sentenced to six months with hard
labour.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
CLERKENWELL.

William Merrick, a sullen looking fellow, who was de-
scribed in the police sheet as a labourer employed at the
General Post-office, was charged with the 410 murder
of Amelia Merrick, his wife.
_ Joseph Lawrence, having been sworn, deposed that he
resided at No. 2, London-passage, Whitecross-street, j
St. Luke's. On Sunday afternoon, ust before two o'clock,
he was in his parlour, when he was attracted by a noise
and scuffling outside. On looking out of the window he
saw._ the prisoner dragging a female (now deceased) by
the left arm, in a violent manner. She was trying to get
away from him, and saying, "I will go with you. The
prisoner said nothing, bat seizing her by both arms near
the shoulders, dashed her head against a wall and some
railings. He was in a passion. Ho repeated his violence,
and put his knee against her stomach, and struck her
with all his force, when she fell down, and never after-
wards uttered a word or a cry. The prisoner let her lie
there, when several neighbours proceeded to her assist-
ance. A woman said to him, " You have killed your
wife." The prisoner, replied. " Then go and get some
brandy and drink it all round. I will pay for a bottle.of
brandy if she is dead." The crowd followed him, telling
him that his wife was dead. A surgeon was imme-
diately sent for, when the prisoner and others helped the
body into a house. The doctor arrived, but the woman
was quite dead.
Mr. COMM asked the prisoner if he wished to put any
questions to this witness ? Prisoner (crying)—He has
told many things very false. I never dashed her against
the railings.
The witness added, that during the whole of the time
he was ill-treating the deceased he was smoking a cigar.
Charlotte Westbury deposed; that at about two o'clock
on Sunday afternoon she saw the deceased lying on the
ground in London-passage. The prisoner took hold of
her arms and dashed the back part of her head against
the wall and some railings. She fell down. Witness
told him his wife was dead. He replied, " Go, and get
some brandy, and we'll soon see whether she is dead."
He then lifted her up, and placed her head between his
knees. He forced his knees against deceased's stomach
in a violent manner, whilst her back was against the rail-
ings. She then fell down.
Caroline Miles gave similar testimony.
James Hooker, of No. 5, London-passage, deposed that
he is a .packing-case maker, gain confirmatory evidence,
and added that the prisoner struck deceased a most des-
perate blow on the head with his clenched fist, when she
fell down on the ground insensible and motionless.
William Taylor, glass-cutter, Barbican, deposed that
he saw the prisoner and the deceased together at half-
past ten o'clock on. Sunday morning, when the prisoner
handed her some money, and told her to get his dinner
ready by one o'clock. Witness was in London-passage
about two o'clock, when he saw the prisoner strike her
on the bead with his clenched fist, and knock her down.
Heard him' 'ay, "I told you to have my dinner ready at
one o'clock." He then lifted her up, and dashed her
head against the wall, and some iron railings. Witness
saw her fall insensible on the ground.
Richards, 77 G, apprehended the prisoner. Witness
said he hal been informed that he had killed his wife.
He denied the charge, saying he did not strike her head
agailist the rait hies
v.. ucr s tnnuallea with the prisoner all
night in his cell. He said it was a very bad job. He
was very sorry. He little thought it would have come
to that occurrence when he came out in the morning to
look after his wife. Witness cautioned him that he
need not say anything to him.
Mr. Parker, surgeon, deposed that he was called upon
to examine the body of the deceased, which lay at a
house in London-passage. She was quite dead.
Mr. COMBE now asked the prisoner if he wished to
say anything in defence of the charge. He was no
bound to do so. He declined saying anything a
present.
Mr. CONDE then remanded the prisoner for a week.
WESTMINSTER.

Mr. Higginson Fayle, surgeon, Great Smith-street,
Westminster, was charged with the following serious
assault upon David Kirkland, a pianoforte-maker,
Palace-street, Pimlico.
Complainant, whose head was strapped up, and who
appeared so weak that he was assisted to a seat to give
his evidence, stated that at half-past twelve on the pre-
vious night, he had occasion to go to the defendant's to
fetch him to a poor woman in her confinement. Having
rang the night bell, defendant opened the second-floor
window, and complainant then told him that he had got
an order for a woman in her confinement (the order was
from Mr. Levies, one of the medical officers of the
parish, to defendant). Defendant said he would
be down directly, but finding that he did not come
fur half an hour, complainant took the liberty to
ring again, when defendant opened the same
window as before, -and calling him an impertinent
scoundrel, asked him what right he had to ring
in that way ? Defendant then came down, and demanded
the order in a very austere way. Complainant gave it
to him, and then went away. After he had attended
the woman complainant asked him how he came to call
him an insulting scoundrel ? and he (complainant) then
told defendant that he was a-- rogue, and ought to
have a good thrashing for having called him an insult-
ing scoundrel, as he had .done nothing to deserve it.
Defendant immediately began belabouring complainant
on the head with a stick, striking him ten or a dozen
times, and breaking the stick into three pieces.
Mr. BRODERID—W ere you bare-headed ? Complain-
ant—l had my hat on at first, but he knocked it off, and
then he struck me bare-headed.

Mr. BRODERIP—Did he inflict the wounds you now
beard Complainant—He did.

Complainant concluded his evidence by stating that
defendant ran away, but shortly returned with a police-
man. Complainant afterwards wont to the hospital and
had his wounds dressed.

In answer to questions from the defendant, com-
plainant said he did not make use of most offensive and
disgusting language to him before ho was struck. He
only called him what he stated. Complainant admitted
that he sparred up to defendant before the latter struck
him, but denied that he jostled him, or impeded his pro•
press. Complainant did not recollect defendant having
cautioned him not to obstruct him in his progress.
John Marshall, a police-constable of the 13 division,
proved that the defendant came up to him, breathless,
in the street, and said he had given a man a thrashing
who had grossly insulted him. He (defendant) believed
he had inflicted some injuries, and therefore requested
the constable to go and see the man, and upon the
officer suggesting the propriety of defendant accom-
panying him, the latter willingly did so. The officer
having-entered into a lengthened statement made to him
by defendant respecting the provocation he had received,
produced a stick about two inches and a half in cir-
cumference, broken in three pieces, one portion of which
the defendant had in his hand at the time he accosted the
constable.

Mr. BRODERIP observed that it became necessary for
him to state that this was a case of by far too serious a
nature for him to deal with summarily. It would be his
duty to send the case to the sessions, where the defen-
dant would have an opportunity of calling witnesses; but
if he wished to say anything at present to the charge he
was perfectly at liberty to do so.
The defendant replied, that he should like to state the
circumstances. After he answered the complainant the
first time, and told him that he would come down
directly, but scarcely two minutes had elapsed when the
complainant rang the bell again. As he had not time
to get half his clothes on, ho asked the complainant
what he meant by ringing the bell in that way; when
the complainant, in a most impudent manner, told him
that he took a precious time to put his clothes on. After
he had come down and the complainant had given him
the order, the latter, in a most insulting tone, told him
that " he would let his master (meaning Mr. Lavies)
know of it in the evening, and added, " that he knew
Mr. Levies well;" upon whieh the defendant observed,
that he was an impudent scoundrel to speak to him in
that way, and the complainant then applied very filthy
language to him. While visiting the woman complainant
watched for his return, and on his leaving the house re-
peated the disgusting language to defendant, obstructed
his path, and threatened to punch his ---- head. De-
fendant walked on, but complainant followed in a
turned
when o
o m roundpl
complainant
naanndt
threateningsaattpipturde, ehonasnd iveatsbuitt
hwtsasasyseary ilandtawrloc,ualdndaudde:
de-
fendant
desired complainant n
placed
expression, with s disgusting declared he would have one
denly knock him dowont,
todfeoilelonwdahn
t himself before him in a fighting attitude, and,
blow at him at all events. lie hesitated to use his stick

at first, hut, on complainant making a blow at him, he
struck him with the stick across the arm. Complainant
then made two other attacks upon him, when defendant
wed the stick in the best way he could for his own pro-
tection, and the place being extremely dark, bad no op-
portunity of seeing exactly where the blows took effect,
the last of them breaking the stick, He then called
police, and went to the constable as described by him in
his evidence.

Defendant stated that he was accompanied from the
house by a girl, who was to take back some medicine to
the lying-in woman, and that on his making his state-
ment, as above, to the policeman, the girl admitted that
it was quite correct, but at the station-house refused to
say anything against complainant, as she worked for his
wife and would lose her employment if she did so.
Mr. BRODERIP recalled the complainant and said—
" You have heard the statement made by the defendant,
and you are on your oath. Now, did you strike him?"
Complainant—l did not strike him at all.

Mr, BRODERIP—Did you attack him at all? Com.
plsinant I certainly sparred at him, but I did not strike
him.

The witnesses were then bound over to prosecute at
the Middlesex Sessions, and bail, two sureties in 501.
each, and Mr. Fayle's own in 100/., was immediately
put in for that gentleman's appearance to answer the
charge.