The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-19 00:00:00

NORFOLK ClRCUlT.—Bedford, July 18.

CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice MAULE.)
Robert Fenn was indicted for having, on the Ist of
April last, set fire to two stacks of straw, the property
of George Thompson, at Sundon.
Mr. Prendergast conducted the case for the prosecu-
tion; the prisoner was undefended.
From the evidence it appeared that about two o'clock
in the morning of the let of April, two ricks in the pro-
secutor's strawy and were discovered to be on fire. The
prisoner, who was in the prosecutor's service, was
found at the spot without his hat by some of
the persons who went to the fire, and after-
wards went away. A witness whom he met as he went
home, observed that he looked very dejected; and to
another person with whom he had some conversation
respecting the fire, he made some observations which
were construed to signify that he was glad that some
sheep had been destroyed by the flames. The words
used by the prisoner, however, would more naturally
bear the construction that he wished those who had
caused the fire had been burnt instead of the sheep.
A police constable further stated that the prisoner
admitted having caused the fire.
The jury found the prisoner guilty.
It was then shown that the prisoner had been con-
victed two years ago of stealing wheat, the property of
the prosecutor, in whose service he then was, and by
whom he had since been taken back.

The Learned JUDGE then sentenced the prisoner to
be transported for ten years.
The business of the assizes was brought to a close in
the course of the day.

NORTHERN CUI T.—York, July 17.
The cause lists are not yet published. The list for
the North and East Ridings, however, is said to be com-
pleted, and to contain about twenty causes, which is
considered small as compared with the generality of for-
mer lists. It is probable, therefore, that there will be u
small total of causes for trial, as there has been at the
last two preceding assizes for the county of York.
The crown calender is, on the contrary, heavy, and,
including ell cases of offence, perhaps there has never
before been a calendar exhibiting so large an amount of
crime. There are 170 persons named, 160 of these
being in custody, two charged with manslaughter, six
rape, twenty-three burglary, two sacrilege, eight felo-
niously cutting or wounding, one arson, three horse
stealing, two shooting with intent to murder or maim,
one robbery, one cattle stealing, two forgery, seven coin-
ing, twenty-six stealing from the person, three embezzle-
ments, two sheep stealing, one perjury, four stealing in
a dwelling house, four bigamy, three concealments of the
birth of children, one sedition, and fifty-five riot, or riot
accompanied by military training.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice ERLE.)
William Wrigglesworth, aged 36, was indicted for the
offence of wilful and corrupt perjury, in having, upon
his oath, falsely informed against John Foster and John
Hawkins, and accused them, in his examination before
justices, of the crime of larceny.
Mr. Hall and Mr. Pickering appeared for the prose-
cution. The prisoner, a man of very decent appearance,
was undefended.
It appeared that Mr. Holmes, the prosecutor, who is a
farmer near Sherbourne, having, on the 25th of Octo-
ber last, lost two balks, or chains, and two plough-
scathes, which had been left in one of his fields, he took
the precaution to advertise those articles, and some
handbills were printed and posted up, offering a reward
of 51. to the person who might discover the offender.
The prisoner was present when one of these bills was
posted in a public-house, and he was heard to say that
he knew who had committed the theft. On being told
that he would receive 5/. for the information, and that
he ought to tell if he knew, he said he would, and pro-
ceeded to state, that it was the two men before named,
and who, on the 27th, were accordingly brought before
would
Foster;
edletdohim." dropth
thate expression,
bn eoi now had
l h
asked
tsdhk aae t
Idl" thel e
op-
portunity,
ground for his malice against the man, he said it was
about a load of teazles that he (prisoner) had bought of
Foster.

The statement made before the justices by the pri-
soner, and put into writing, was read. It contained a
circumstantial account of having seen Foster and Haw-
kins in a field in possession of the lost property, and of
Hawkins having asked him not to mention what he had
thus observed.
Several witnesses were called to prove the utter false-
hood of the prisoner's statement. The accused them-
selves (Foster and Hawkins) denied that they had been
near the field at the time in question. They said, on
the contrary, that they were at that moment about five
miles oft; attending a Methodist meeting; and they were
corroborated by a Mrs. Bunting, the housekeeper of
Foster, by Mr. Matthew Banks, Methodist minister, and
several other persons. The prisoner had said that ho

had met his own brother just after seeing the alleged
thieves, and spoken to him respecting a sum of money
which he asserted the brother owed him. But the bro-
ther, on being now called for the prosecution, denied the
fact of the meeting, and said that nothing of the kind
had ever occurred.

Verdict—Guilty.
His LORDSHIP addressed to the prisoner some words
of comment on the seriousness of the offence and the
atrocious motive by which he had professed to have been
prompted in this perjury—a crime the nature and ten-
dency of which called on him (Mr. Justice Erle) to make
the punishment such as would be a strong example.
Sentence—To be transported for seven years.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT, Northampton, July 17.
CIVIL SIDE.

(Beforo Mr. Justice PATTESON and a Common Jury.)
EDWARDS AND OTHERS (ASSIGNEES OF PETER MARTIN)

V. JOHN HIGGINS.

This was an action to recover the sum of 4081. on the
ground of the fraudulent preference of the defendant by
the bankrupt.
Mr. Iluaffrey, Q.C., and Mr. Mellor, were counsel for
the plaintiffs ; Mr. Whitehurst, QC., and Mr. Macau-
lay, conducted the defendant's case.
The bankrupt, Martin, had been a corn-dealer, miller,
and baker, in Bridge-street, iu this town. Some years
ago he had borrowed the sum of 2001. of a Mr. Whit-
worth, hiving as a security a promissory note, in which
his two brothers-in law, Messrs. John and Thomas Hig-
gins, joined. More recently the amount of the debt
increased to 40N., and a fresh note, in lieu of the
former, in which also the brothers-in-law joined,
was given for that amount. Mr. Whitworth, to
whom the bankrupt owed 1601., beyond the amount of
the note and interest, became pressing for the pay-
ment of the note and interest, which he insisted upon
having by the 25th of March. The bankrupt promised
that he would see that paid, and in the months of Fe-
bruary and March made extensive purchases of different
species of corn, from Saturday to Saturday, from nume-
rous farmers, saying in each case that he was short of
money just then, but would pay on the following Satur-
day. The great bulk of the corn so acquired was imme-
diately sent off to Coventry and converted into money,
in order, beyond doubt, to discharge the claim of Mr.
Whitworth upon the note, and the bankrupt presented to
the present. defendant the 4081., with a request that he
would go and take it up. To this the present defendant
replied, " that whatever transactions he had with him he
wished him to have it through Mr. Arrowsmith, his soli-
citor." The money was then accordingly, by the bank-
rupt, given to Mr. Arrowsmith, who therewith took up
the note. The duped farmers then, to the number of
nearly a dozen, called upon Martin, whom they found
with his friends, drinking and smoking their pipes.
Martin invited them all in to have pipes also, and
they went. One of them said to Martin, " Why didn't
you send me back my sacks ?" To which he made
answer, "I'm afraid it's not the sacks you want; I'm
afraid you want the money." The farmer replied, " Yes,
I do ;" and then they were all informed, " It's of no use
to put off the ball ; the trap's down, and I'm done. I've
got nothing." He told them also that he was obliged to
pay the note, as his brothers-in-law were in for that, and
that as soon as he had paid that note it was all up with
him. Martin was then made a bankrupt, surrendered,
and ran off to America or elsewhere.

His LORDSHIP left it to the jury to say whether Mar-
tin paid the money by way of fraudulent preference, or
honestly under the pressure of Whitworth, and to find
their verdict accordingly.
The jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs for the full
amount sought, that is, in effect that it was a fraudulent
preference. _ _

- The Counsel for the defendant had leave to move the
Court above to enter a verdict for him on the ground of
his non-liability under these circumstances, he never
having been a creditor or received the money.
July 18.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Lord Chief Justice