The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-05 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Feb. 4.

(Sittings at Nisi Prius, after Term, before Mr. Justice
COLTMAN and Common Juries.)
MIGOTTI V. WATIIERSTONE.

This was an action of trespass for the false im-
prisonment of the plaintiff's wife. The defendant
pleaded the general issue.
Mr. Sergeant Byles and Mr. Henderson were
Counsel for the plaintiff.
It appeared from the evidence of the plain tiff's
witne'ses that on the 9th of May last the daughter
of the plaintiff, a child twelve years of age, on leaving
St. Paul's Church, Covent- garden, picked up a gold
chain in the churchyard, and took it home to her
father, a goldsmith, living in Maiden•lane. The
chain was handed round, and admired by the several
members of the family, and was taken next day to
the plaintiff's workshop, in Wigmore-street, for the
purpose of being tested to ascertain whether it was
gold. On Wednesday morning the defendant, the
owner of the chain, who is a goldsmith, residing in
Henrietta street, called at the plaintiff's house, in
company with a friend named Gay, and asked for the
chain. Mrs. Migotti said she did not know where
it was at the time, that her husband was ill in bed ;
but that if Mr. Watherstone would leave his ad-
dress the chain should be sent to him, or he might
call for it at three o'clock. The defendant then
departed with his friend, but returning in a few
minutes, said he had changed his mind and must have
his chain at once. She again told; him she did not
know where it was at that moment. He threatened
to procure a search warrant, and ultimately sent Gay
for a policeman, to whom he gave the woman in
charge. She was taken to the Bow-street station,
and charged by the defendant with stealing the chain.
She then stated that it was at her husband's work-
shop, in Wigmore-street, upon which the inspector
sent a constable with the defendant to that place.
Upon applying there for the chain, the mother of
Mrs. Migotti, who appeared to keep the shop for her
son-in• law during his illness, admitted that the chain
was in the shop, and gave it up to them. They the❑
returned to the station-house after the absence of an
hour, during which time Mrs. Migotti had been locked
up, and Mr. \Vatherstone declined pressing the charge
against her. The present action was brought to
recover compensation for that imprisonment.
On the part of the defendant evidence was adduced
to show that he had caused printed handbills, offering
a reward for the chain, to be stuck in the windows of
several shops in Maiden-lane and the neighbourhood,
and that Mrs. Migotti was seen reading one of them
on Tuesday evening; that she had at first denied all
knowledge of the chain ; that it had only been sent to
the shop in Wigmore-street after application had been
made for it in Maiden-lane; and it was contended
that all the circumstances of the case had warranted
the suspicions of the defendant, and the conduct which
he had accordingly pursued.
The cause lasted the whole day, although the facts
lie, as will be seen, in a very narrow compass ; and
the jury, having retired for about ten minutes, after
hearing the summing up of the Learned Judge, found
a verdict for the plaintiff—damages 301.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins and Mr. Lush appeared for
the defendant.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
DIURDER OF TWO CHILDREN IN ST. LUKE'S.

The trial of Harriet Parker (continued from our
Afternoon Edition of yesterdtty).
Mr. Thomas Mallet, the chief clerk at the Cler-
kenwell Police-court, proved that when the depositions
were read over to the prisoner, on the Bth of January,
she made a statement to the magisttrate which was
afterwards reduced to writing.
The statement was then read. It; was simply a
detailed account of what occurred :from the time
Blake came to tea till she missed hi= from the Duke
of Bedford public-house.
George Maddox, a police-constible, stated that
after she made this statement she told him that she
watched the children on the night of the murder for
a long time, and fancied they would. never go to sleep.
At length, however, they did close their eyes, and
putting out the candle, she sprang; upon the bed and
seized the female child by the throat, when she felt
that if there had been a thousand. children she could
have murdered them ; but she sho wed them na mercy,
and she did not want any mercy shown to her.
Mr. Frederick Wright, a surgc.on, deposed to being
called in on the morning of the 1. at of January, about
four o'clock, to examine the bodies of the two chil-
dren. He found marks of violence on their faces, and,
upon a post mortem examination, he discovered that
death had been caused by forcibly holding the nose
and mouth, so as to prevent breathing.
This was the case for the prosecution.

Mr. CLARUSON then addressed the jury for the
defence, entreating them, before they returned
their verdict, to take into their serious consi-
deration the frenzy and madness which the
cruel conduct of the witness Blake had produced
upon the mind of the prisoner on the night of the
murder. It was extremely doubtful whether the
prisoner was in her right senses when she committed
the dreadful act, and although it was beyond the scope
of human evidence to prove putative insanity in a case
like this, the jury, he was sure, would not disregard
the tantalising brutality she had been sub-
jected to by her paramour Blake. Na evi-
dence, however, could more strongly prove an
unsound state of intellect, could more strongly illus-
trate an instance of momentary insanity, than that
they had already heard, and as they were just as com-
petent to decide whether the prisoner was of sound
mind when she murdered the children as the most
experienced medical men, the ends of justice would
not be accomplished if they overlooked the proofs of
insanity with
which the case for the prosecution so
much abounded.

Mr. Baron ALDERSON having summed up at great
length,