The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-16 00:00:00

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—York, March 12.

CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE.)
Jacob Gregg, aged 29, who was said to be a Swede, and in
the sea-service, was charged with stabbing, cutting, and
wounding Thomas Rodgers, at Hull, on the ith of Jan. last.
Mr. Rains and Mr. Dearsley conducted the prosecution.
The prisoner did not understand English, and an old lady,
who could speak the Swedish, was sworn to be interpreter.
The prisoner, on being called to plead, had said that he
would like to have counsel ; but the case had proceeded some
time without his being defended, the evidence for the prose-
cution being translated to Gregg as it was delivered by the
witnesses. Finally, however, Mr. Sergeant Wilkins offered,
in order to save the time of the Court, to cross-examine the
witnesses of the prosecution, and to conduct the case for the
prisoner.
Thomas Rodgers, of North Frodingham, the party injured,
stated that he is what is called a shopman. On the 7th of
January last witness was in Leadenhall-square, in hull, at
about five minutes past twelve at night. He and another
man by the name of Joseph Lee, and some other young men,
were at Jackson's public-house in the square. The prisoner
and two other foreigners were seen coming along the square
at great speed, and apparently much excited. They stopped
in the street for a while, and prosecutor and Lee stood near
them, at about two or three yard* off. The prisoner, and
those with them, then went towards Manners• street, leading
into Broadly-street. Witness went in the same direction,
and on getting to Broadly-street, saw the prisoner and one
of the other foreigners near to a considerable crowd of per-
sons, where they seemed to be engaged in arguing with some
person. One of the foreigners (not the prisoner) held a
drinking: glass, and an English sailor told him that "he must
give the glass up, or that he would make him." One of these
foreigners was Isaac Inman, another Swede, now to be tried
here upon a similar charge, that of wounding Charles
Saunderson. Prosecutor then rejoined his companion,
Joseph Lee, and in a minute or two, while they were stand-
ing talking at some distance from he crowd, a person said,
"Here are some foreigners coming, with their knives drawn."
Two of the foreigners then made their appearance, the pri-
soner and Inman. Gregg carried a knife. It was a sailor's
common clasp knife, with a string of leather tied to it. The
prisoner first struck Lee in the forehead, and directly after
struck prosecutor several blows, one on the ribs, near the
heart, one behind the ear, and another across the cheek. By
the latter blow a wound was inflicted; it was a wound of
some depth, and caused much blood to flow, though the cheek
was not cut through. The prosecutor stated that he had
been attended by a surgeon, and had suffered much illness in
consequence of that wound.
Other witnesses confirmed all these facts, and stated fur-
ther details of the transaction. One of them. however, proved
that the prisoner and the other foreigner, Inman, had been
attacked with sticks before the prisoner wounded Rodgers.
Rodgers was shown to have had a stick handed to him just
before the assault complained of ; but it was not shown who
it was that had attacked the prisoner and his companion,
and there was nothing to indicate from what motive the pri-
soner could have inflicted the wound upon Rodgers.
Mr. WILKINS, in his address to the jury, remarked upon
the want of practical charity prevailing among some people
towards any who happened to be called " foreigners. He
said it was Meer these men must themselves have been
aggrieved before they would have deemed it necessary to
use their knivee. It was proved that they had been the
object of an attack, sad that they had been beaten with
sticks only just before the assault was committed; and,
under these circumstances, there was nothing to justify the
supposition that the act of the prisoner was done with any
other intent than that of insuring self-defence.
The jury, after hearing his Lordship's summing up, agreed
with the Learned Counsel in their view of the case. They
left the box to deliberate, but ultimately found the prisoner
guilty of the common assault only.

NORFOLK ClRCUlT.—Huntingdon, March 12.
The commission for this county was opened to-day at nine
o'clock by Mr. Baron Parke, who arrived at that hour from
Bedford, the scene cf his exertions yesterday. The calendar,
though it contains the names of twenty-two prisoners, is not
of a heavy character. It embraces one case of arson, one of
burglary, one of housebreaking, one of assault on a woman,
one charge of sheepstealing, and a few of common larcenies.
Of the contents of the cause list it is rather difficult to
speak just now, for it has not made its appearance
yet. Perhaps it awaits the arrival of Mr. Justice
Maule, who has been detained at Bedford trying pri-
soners ; but it is whispered that it can only contain
that fabulous animal, the " single case at Huntingdon," un-
less indeed it be referred before the arrival of the Learned Judge.

CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron PARKE.)
Eliza Illaycock, aged 22, was charged with maliciously
setting fire to one stack of corn, one stack of hay, and one of
straw, on the 2d of January last, in this county.
Mr. Gunning conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Prender-
gast the defence.
The prosecutor in this case was Mr. Bridgfoot, a farmer,
residing in Ramsey Fen, and at the time of the commission
of the offence the prisoner was in his service, having entered
it at last Michaelmas. In consequence of her misconduct it
would appear that the prosecutor soon had reason to find
fault with her, and to threaten to summon her before the
justices. This occurred twice, tha last time being a week
before the day named in the indictment. About five o'clock
on that afternoon the prisoner was cut of the house, and in-
stead of attending to her duties, remained absent for half an
hour. About six she came into the parlour where her master
was sitting, and told him in a very excited and alarmed
tone that there was a light in the stack-yard. On this the
prosecutor rushed out and found that the property named in
the indictment was all in flames. There being no help at
hand the three stacks were entirely consumed, and, there
being no possible ground for imputing the act to any stranger,
suspicion fell on the prisoner, whose manner had of late at-
tracted the notice of her master and his family, but espe-
cially on the previous day, when she was very different from
what she had been before. She was accordingly questioned,
and her answers lent strength to those suspicions, for they
were contradictory in themselves, and opposed to facts within
the knowledge of the family. At one time she said she had
been busy making her master's tea at the critical period just
before the fire burst out, but his sister had herself performed
that office for bins in her absence. She then said she had
been out to fetch some sticks for the lire with a lantern, and
that in passing between the stacks she fell down awl let fall
the light, and set fire to the stacks, after which she was too
frightened to stop and pick up the lantern, and ran away.
This, however, was no better than the other account, for it
was well known that there was not a stick on the premises,
the farm being a thorough fen one, and supplied with turf
alone for fuel. After this she burst out into tears, and said
she did it because her master threatened to summon he; ;
and when taken before the magistrate she finally admitted
" the job" and said that "it would not have happened if
her master had not threatened to prison' her."
Mr. PRENDERGAST addressed the jury for the prisoner,
contending that the conflagration was not malicious, as it
was the result of accident, arising from the nervous and
excited state of mind into which she had been thrown by
some unknown cause, perhaps the threats of her master ;
while he endeavoured to explain away the effect of her ad-
missions and contradictory accounts by reference to the
same all-powerful cause.
Mr. Baron l'Artsck; told the jury, that unless they thought
the prisoner absolutely insane, they ought not to pay any
attention to the accounts of her mariner which had been ex-
tracted on cress-examination from the witnesses. These ac-
counts did not amount to anything like proof of such a state
of mind as would admit of the prisoner being irresponsible
for her acts, and if the jury saw nothing; in the case to raise
any rational doubt of her having fired her master's property
maliciously, they ought to say that she was guilty of the
charge imputed to her.
The jury, without much hesitation, found the prisoner
Guilty, and she was thereupon sentenced to fifteen years'
transportation.
Mr. Justice Maule reached this place at two o'clock, and
immediately proceeded to try prisoners, the assizes having
turned out a maiden one on his side.
The cases brought under the cognizance of his Lordship
were not of a character to call for any detailed notice.

WESTERN ClRCUlT.—Salisbury, March 12.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
Elizabeth Butcher was placed at the bar, and charged, upon
the coroner's inquisition, with the wilful murder of her in-
fant child. An indictment had been preferred against her,
but the grand jury ignored the bill, at which some surprise
has been expressed.

_
Mr. Hodges appeared on behalf of the prosecution, and
stated the facts of the case to the jury.
By the statement of the Learned Counsel, it appeared that
the prisoner had been a pauper in the Cricklade and Wootton-
Bassett workhouse, and in December last was delivered there
ofanillegitimate female child. In the course of the next
month
she wished to leave the house, and accordingly gave
notice of her intention, as was required by the regulations
stripped of
of the house on her leaving. The unfortunate baby was
the
cothes it had worn in the workhouse since its
any covering
birth, and
have when she left.P '
exnaceethter was obliged to take it away without
shawl, which the mother happened to
the mother had left tll The child was quite well, but shortly after
and dead in a brook ofewwaotrekrhouse' the child was found naked
to say under all the It was, therefore, for the jury
been guilty of the crime impute circumstancestewhether the mothef• had
loiri
nwtloi whether the
stream
lc: ibl3d,
had died and had been afterwards tlhre3W,
lihnenthcealkicklade Union, and was
Cook
—arlneadinCaounnusresle
heJr.aneT
so in December last. The prisoner was there
and was delivered there of a female child. i ,eat that time,
gave
on the 9th of January that she wished to leave the notice
and at that time she had no clothes to put on the bady,"easnd 1
I told the mistress of the workhouse so. She said that she
(the prisoner) had better not leave the house until she had
obtained some from her friends, and told her that by the rules
of the house if clothes were rot brought in none were allowed
to be taken away. The prisoner said that she could not stop
to get any clothes, but must go directly. I took the union
clothes off the baby, and it was then naked. The prisoner
wrapped it up in a shawl she had, and also put a handkerchief
on its head, and a pair of socks on its feet. The matron of
the union was present when I so stripped the child. The
prisoner left the house at about eleven o'clock in the morn-
ing. I was afterwards shown the dead body of a child. It
was the same child.
[At this stage of the case the gaoler stated that the pri-
soner had employed an attorney to instruct counsel to defend
her, but no learned gentleman had, it appeared, received
any brief. The trial then proze,eded.l

Ann Coward—l remember meeting the prisoner on the 9th
of January. She was going on the road from Wootton-
Bassett. She was carrying a child; it was crying violently.
I spoke to her, taking her for a person I knew. I did not
know her before.
( Here Mr. Slade, the attorney of Devizes, came into Court
and stated he had been employed to defend the prisoner; but
as the grand jury had ignored the bill against her, he had no
idea she would be tried on the coroner's inquisition, and
therefore had not delivered any brief to counsel. He then
handed a brief to Mr. C. Saunders to defend the prisoner.]
Charles Brown—On Friday, the 9th of January, I was
going along the Trinity-road, which is a few miles from the
union-house, and met the prisoner, who had an umbrella
and a small bundle with her. About a mile after I passed
her I had to go over a little bridge, and saw something in
the water which looked like a child. I went back to a cot-
tage near. Mary Ann Longley lived there. She returned
with me, and brought a garden rake, and with it we drew
out of the water the dead body of an infant child. It was
quite dead. The child was quite naked.
Mary Ann Longley confirmed the witness as to taking the
child out of the water.

John King—l am a policeman, and apprehnded the pri-
slner on the 10th cf February. She had the shawl and
handkerchief, the same' that had been wrapped round the
prisoner's child's body when she left the union. _ _ _

Goss-examined—The child was quite healthy whel it left
the workhouse. The child had no clothes but those belong-
ing to the tnion•house. It is the custom of the house to
take away the clothes from the children when they ale taken
out of the house, even although they have no other clothes,
and were left naked The child was called Ann Butcher.
.

__—
Henry Dixon—l am a surgeon, residing at Parton. I made
an examination of the body of the child found in the brook
by Brown. I opened the body. The appearance of the
viscera was healthy, and there was nothing which was likely
to cause sudden death. I even now cannot say what was the
immediate cause of the child's death. I cannot say it wa■
by suffocation by drowning. There is nothing to enable me
to say it died from suffocation, or that it did not die of auffb-
cat ion.

This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. C. SAUNDERS then addressed the jury fur the prisoner,
and contended that there was no evidence to show that the
child died from drowning, which was the cause of death
charged by the inquisition, of which they must be perfectly
convinced before they could convict the pri,,oner. The child
might have died on the road, and as it was illegitimate, might
then have been thrown into the water by the prisoner to pre-
vent her shame being known.
Mr. Baron ROLFE, in summinrup, told the jury to take all
the circumstances of the case into their consideration' and
then say whether they thought the death of the child was
from natural causes, or from drowning by the hand of the
prisoner. It was not because the surgeon could not dis-
tinctly say whether the child died from drowning or not that
they were to acquit her, but they were to decide that ques-
tion looking at all the facts.
The jury, after a few minutes' consultation, acquitted the
prisoner.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

James Boulter, aged twenty, was brought up, charged
with being an idle and disorderly person.
Mr. Mortlock, the master of the East London work-
house, stated that the prisoner had been an inmate of
the .house for many years. He had been discharged,
with clothes and mosey, to seck work, but he constantly
returned to the workhouse. On Monday he had been
sent to a Mr. Solomons, who wanted a stout lad, and
who offered him Gs. a week, to be incrmed to 12s. as he
improved and became worth so much. The prisoner
positively refused to take the place under half-a-crown
a day. Mr. Mottlock said that persons who had been
long in the workhouse, cared not whether they were in a
workhouse or a prison ; they were, therefore, uncon-
trollable. Another lad had thrown up a place of 12s. a
week, to come and live in the workhouse.

Mr. Alderman CHALLIS said the judges were coming
to the opinion that it was a mistake to think that impri-
sonment was a punishment to such reckless, unruly lads,
and that a good sound whipping was more likely to pro-
duce a change in their conduct. A third conviction
under the Vagrant Act left it to the option of a magis-
trate to send the offender to be tried at the quart(-r ses-
sions, when the magistrates might order corporal punish-
ment to be inflicted. He would now commit the pri-
soner for one month, after which he would be qualified
for the whipping if he did not behave differently.