The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-21 00:00:00

WEDNESDAY, Fes. 25.

Carlow Extension.
Cork and Passage.
Dublin, Dumdrum, and Enniskerry.
Cork and Waterford.
Sligo and Shannon.
Galway and Kilkenny.
3lidland Great Western of Ireland (Mullingar to Galwa).
Midland Great Western of Ireland (Longford and Sligo).y
Midland Great Western of Ireland (Liffey Branch and Longford De
viation).
Cork, Bandon, and Kinsale. •
Horbury Bridge and Calder.
Forth and Clyde and Monkland Navigation Junction.
Birkenhead and Llangollen.
Warwickshire and London (Hampton and Ashchurch Line).
Glasgow and Dundee Junction.
Cameron's Coalbrook Steam Coal and Swansea and Loughor.
North Devon
Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Manchester (WLaley Bridge and
Hayfield Branches).
Dublin and Kingstown Extension.
Belfast and Holywood Atmospheric.
Great Munster
Cork, Macroom, and Killarney.
Bandon and Bantry.
Preston and Wyre Extension and Darwen Junction.
THURSDAY, FEB. 26.
Wexford, Waterford, and Valencia.
Surrey Grand Junction.
Oldham, Manchester, Liverpool. and Birkenhead.
Midland (Birmingham and Gloucester Branches).
Dublin and Sandymount Atmospheric.
Cork Possage, and Kinsale.
Oxford, Southampton, Gosport, and Portsmouth.
Norfolk (Norwich Branch).
Manchester to Bury Atmospheric.
FRIDAY, FEB. 27.

Direct Northern.

ASSIZE IN TELLIGENCE.
NORTHERN CIRCUIT, Lancaster, Feb. 18.
CROWN SlDE.—(Before Mr. Justice PaTrrsole.)
Catherine Hacking was indicted for the murder of her in-
fant child.
Mr. Hulton conducted the prosecution; the prisoner was
defended by Mr. Whigham.
The prisoner, who is a middle-aged woman, had been, it
appeared, for six or ssven years before this occurrence, in
the service of a Mr. Sharpies, at Blackburn. In the latter
part of the year 1845 it was Observed by Mrs. Sharpies, and
by some of her acquaintances among the servants in the
neighbourhood, that she increased very much in size. Mrs.
Sharpies, on more than one occasion, taxed her with being
in the family-way; but this she always denied, saying that
Mrs. Sharpies knew better, and that she (the prisonea)
had formerly been tapped for dropsy, and was then labouring
under similar symptoms. On the 17th of January last Mrs.
Sharpies saw the prisoner coming in from the yard. She
went into the kitchen and told Mrs. Sharpies she was very
ill, and would be glad to go to bed. Mrs. Sharpies allowed
her to go up to her bedroom. About half-an-hour after Mrs.
Sharpies went up stairs. The prisoner was standing near
the bedroom door with all her clothes on except her gown.
She said, she was better, and asked Mrs. Sharpies to make
her a cup of tea. From some appearances which Mrs.
Sharpies saw in the lobby, she went across into a room oppo-
site, which was imperfectly lighted by a borrowed light.
She went to a closet and looked in ; but it was so dark she
could distinguish nothing. In the meantime she heard the
prisoner call out—" Why are you going there, mistress ?"
and she also heard her going down stairs. Mrs. Sharpies
went for a light ; and, on entering the closet, found the
body of a child in a pan, covered with a cloth. She imme-
diately went back to the bedroom, to which the prisoner had
by this time returned, and asked what she had been doing.
The prisoner then exclaimed,--" Oh, mistress, don't expose
me !" Mrs. Sharpies immediately sent for a surgeon. She
said the father of the child was a man she met once in
Rushton-moor, when going to her father's.
It appeared from the evidence of the surgeon, Mr. Morley,
that on going to the house he saw the prisoner in the bed-
room. He said to her, "Catherine, what is this?" She re-
plied, "Oh, Mr. Morley, I am very sorry for it, but the
child was born dead." On examining the body of the child
he found a cut in the throat, and a portion of the gullet and
wind-pipe cut away by some thin-bladed sharp instrument.
On the prisoner being asked what she had done it with, she
said she believed with a pen-knife, but she could recollect
nothing about it. She said when she came to herself she
found the pen-knife covered with blood on the floor—that she
wiped it, and put it in her pocket. A penknife, on examina-
tion,_ was found there. It was then quite clean.
Mr. Morley stated, that from a post mortem examination,
he was able to say that the child had breathed, and that he
was inclined to think it probable it was born alive. On
further examination he stated that a child may breathe when
only partially born, and die before it was wholly born. The
effect of such a wound inflicted before death, or immediately
after, would be very similar. In this case would think
the wound, if after death, must have been inflicted within
four minutes. A wound inflicted on the throat when the
child was partially born would produce appearances similar
to those observed in this case. Nothing could be inferred
from the appearance of the wound as to whether it was par-
tially or wholly born at the time.
(This witness, in a lengthened examination and cross-
examination, gave his evidence with a scientific precision
and accuracy, divested of all unintelligible technicalities
which received the strong praise of his Lordship in sum-
ming up.)
Mr. WHIGHAM addressed the jury for the defence, con-
tending that no evidence had been adduced which could
satisfy the jury that the child had been fully born alive, a
circumstance without which the charge of murder fell to the
ground.
His LORDSHIP summed up, and
The jury, after some deliberation, acquitted the prisoner of
murder, but found her Guilty of disposing of the dead body
with intent to conceal the birth.
His LORDSHIP' in a most feeling and impressive address,
sentenced her to be imprisoned for two years.
Joseph Townshend was indicted for embezzlement. In one
set of counts he was described as servant to the overseers c f
the Preston Poor-lew Union, in another set as servant to the
guardians.
Mr. Brandt and Mr. Halton conducted the prosecution.
The prisoner was defended by Mr. James.
The prisoner, it appeared, had been for some time as-
sistant-overseer to the union, and in that capacity had re-
ceived considerable sums of money, which it was his duty to
pay over fo the treasurer of the guardians. He made up
quarterly an account of his receipts and payments, and in
the last quarterly account, dated the 20th of October, 1845,
there was a balance of a few shillings to his credit. He
had given, on his appointment, a bond conditioned for his
duly accounting for the several moneys received by him in
the execution of his office. In the month of December last
the sureties were about being changed, the former ones wish-
ing to be relieved from their liability, but, in the mean-
time, the prisoner having received
considerable sums of
money, absconded. He wrote from London to a relative at
Preston, stating that there was no vessel at that port for
New York, and that he would go by Liverpool, requesting
that his wife should be asked to collect his clothes that they
might be taken with him. This letter was communicated to
the police, and in consequence he was apprehended at the
house of a Mr. Jones, in Drummond-street, London. There
was found on him a sum of 134/. 6s. sd. in gold and notes.
,The prisoner was brought before the magistrate at Preston,
and sentenced for some of the embezzlements, under the
provisions of the Poor-law Act for summary proceedings
against defaulters. The present case was sent to the as-
sizes.

Mr. JAmEs, for the defence, contended that the pri-
soner was not the servant or clerk of the overseers, and
that his duties as assistant-overseer were of a totally
different kind. The office was one, the duties of which
are specified in the 59th George 111., cap. 12, s. 7, and
the office of the present prisoner was of a similar cha-
racter. He was a public officer of the several townships
for which he was appointed, but not a servant to the over-
seers. The remedy against him for a default was either
a summary one under the Act, or a suit on the bond. The
Learned Counsel also contended that, even supposing him a
servant to the overseers or guardians, there had been no em-
bezzlement, as he was not obliged to account until his usual
quarterly period, and it did not appear but that in the books
he might have debited himself with these very sums.
His Lortosiiii. thought, supposing him to be
there was a clear case of embezzlement. thought,lie
how-
ever, there was equal doubt whether hecould aserTant
be looked
e a servant of the guardians; upon ast he servant
uoaftiahnes; b
overseers.utthat,
in
case lie might,
h tere l,a
perhaps,.s an-
other
b
difficulty as to how far the money embezzled could be
said to be theirs. He should direct the jury, however, that
the prisoner was a servant of the guardians, and the matter,
in case of conviction, might be considered afterwards. The
prisoner would suffer no hardship by this course, as he was
already undergoing an imprisonment on the summary con-
viction, which would not have expired until the points of
law could be determined.—Verdict, Guilty.