The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-27 00:00:00

The two prisoners, Ann Fisher and Mary Hodge, were
then placed at the bar and indicted ; Ann Fisher for the
wilful murder of Richard Fisher, on the 27th of August
last, at Cruwys Morchard, by administering a quantity
of white arsenic to him in mashmallow tea, of which he
languished until the 28th of August, and then died.
Mary Hodge was indicted for feloniously making, pro
curing, and commanding Ann Fisher to commit the
said murder. There were other counts varying the
charge.
Both the prisoners pleaded not guilty.
Ann Fisher is a rather pleasing-looking woman, ap-
parently about thirty years of age, and her sister, Mary
Hodge, a little older. Both preserved the greatest firm-
ness and composure during the trial.
Mr. Greenwood, Mr. Leigh, and Mr. Kerslake con-
ducted the prosecution; llr. Cockburn, Q C., and Mr.
Rowe defended the prisoners.
Before the jury were sworn, Mr. Cockburn applied
that the prisoners might be tried separately, on the
ground that the main evidence to be adduced against the
principal was a statement which she was alleged to have
made, which contained statements which materially in-
volved the other prisoner, Mary Hodge. Now, iu order
to meet the case on the part of Ann Fisher, it was of
the greatest importance that Richard Hodge, her hus-
band, should be called as a witness to disprove it. This
could not be done if the prisoners were tried together.
This course was adopted in Reg. v. Seeley; which was
a case of a charge of murder against two sisters, tried
at Taunton. In that case two sisters were jointly in-
dicted for the murder of their father, and each made a
statement accusing the other of the crime. Upon the
application of Mr. Sergeant Kinglake, the prisoners
were tried separately.
Mr. Baron PLATT said that he felt considerable diffi-
culty in distinguishing this case from the ordinary one
of a principal and accessory. In the case of the Sealys
both were indicted as principals. He would, however,
consult Mr. Justice Wightmate
The Learned JUDGE then left the court, and on return-
ing in a few minutes,:said, With regard to the application
that has been made, I entertained considerable doubt; that
doubt is confirmed after my conference with my brother
Judge. I cannot regard this case otherwise than as that
of principal and accessory. The indictment charges a
principal and an accessorial offence, and the pursuit of
justice might be defeated by allowing the two offences to
be separated; fortified as I am, thereore, by the opinion
of Mr. Justice Wightman, I feel bound to refuse the
application.
It appeared from the evidence for the prosecution that
Mr. Richard Fisher, the deceased, was a farmer, of 71
years of age, and in the month of June last he was mar-
ried to the prisoner Ann Fisher, whose name at that
time was Leigh, she being the widow of a Mr. Leigh, a
farmer, who had lived at a lone farm called Stubborn,
about eight miles from Tiverton. The prisoner Ann
Hodge was her sister, and lived with her husband,
Richard Hodge, at a place called Black-dog, about
four miles from Stobborn. Fisher was a man of some
property, having accumulated some 5001. or 6001. in
the service of a Miss Partridge, an old lady living at
Witheridge. After the marriage of Fisher he went to live
at Stobborn with his wife, the other inmates of the house
being William Hawkes, Mrs. Fisher's brother, and a boy
called Alfred Hodge, Mrs. Fisher's nephew. They lived
on at Stobborn about three months, when, on the 26th of
August, there was some reaping and harvesting going
on at Stobborn, at which a young man, named Thomas
Leach, was present. He, it appeared, had been a lover
of Mrs. Fisher before her marriage with Fisher, and on
this day, as they were coming from the harvest field,
some romping took place between him and Ann Fisher,
and he kissed her. This made Richard Fisher very
angry, and he had words with his wife, lie went to
bed early, but the others remained carousing until a late
hour; Richard Hodge, Mary Hodge, William Hawker,
and some others being there. About one in the morn-
ing. Hodge, his wife, and the others, with Thomas
Leach and Ann Fisher, lett the house in a cart together,
and when the old man Fisher awoke in the morning, he

found his wife gone. He was very angry, got up, and
went away to Witheridge, where he saw Miss Pa-tridge,
who owed him some money, and desired her not to pay
it to ,his wife if she should call for it, but only to
him. He came back to Stubborn about nine o'clock
in the morning, when his wife was returned. They had
more words, but he sought to make it up. About mid-
day he was unwell, when his wife, at his request, made
him some marshmallow tea. He went to bed, sad the
next morning was a corpse. An inque,t being held, a
post morkm examination of the body was made, and a
quantity of arsenic was found in the body. The motive
supposed to actuate the prisoner in committmg the
double crime with which she was charged was that she
wished to obtain the money of the old man Fisher (he
having made a will in her favour, leaving her all his
property), and then to marry Thomas Leach.
Mr. Hughey, a surgeon, who was called in to see the
deceased, stated that on his arrival the prisoner said that
" he. Fisher," was " gone," and then detailed, at some
length, the mode in which he had been attacked by ill-
ness, and that he died " very quietly."
Johannah Brooks, who had been a prisoner in Exeter
gaol with the prisoner, swore that the prisoner Fisher
had confessed to her that Leach had bought the arsenic,
which she put in the marshmallow tea, and gave to her
husband. That some time after, as he was not dead,
she placed a feather bed upon him, and all four of them,
the two prisoners, R. Hodge, and Leach, laid upon it
until he was dead.
On cross examination by Mr. CocimunN, the witness
admitted that she had made five charges of rape against
fire different men ; and disclosed so many instances of
falsehood and depravity, as to render herself completely
unworthy of credit.
Mr. COCIBUUN, whose speech for the prisoners
occupied upwards of four hours, called upon the jury
to disbelieve the story of the confession sworn to

by Brooks, as she was a witness upon whose
statement not the slightest reliance could be
placed, owing to the infamy of her character and the
baseness of her previous conduct. He should prove
that she was not a woman who could be believed on
her oath. He did not deny that Fisher died from the
effects of the poisin; in all probability they would find
that the arsenic was taken in mistake. At any rate,
there was no evidence to show that Mrs. Fisher admi-
nistered it. The Learned Counsel proceeded to com-
ment at very great length upon the evidence, and then
stated the case which he had to lay before the jury.
Several witnesses were then called, who swore they
would not believe Brooks on oath. _

The Learned JUDGE went through the evidence with
the utmost perspicuity, and the jury, after consulting for
about five minutes, returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
The trial commenced on Friday morning, and did not
terminate till one o'clock on Sunday morning.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HO USE.
On Saturday, William Brown and James Dewey, who
were on the 16th instant charged with having committed
forgeries upon the Reading Bank, were brought up for
final examination.
Mr. Alullens, of the firm of Bush and Mullens,
citors to the Committee of Bankers for Protection
against Felonies and Frauds, attended for the prose-
cution; and Mr. B. V. Hutchinson appeared for the
prisoners.
Daniel and John Forrest -r, having heard that the
prisoners were engaged in concocting forgeries upon
banking houses, watched them both for some time, and
at last apprehended them with some of the evidences o
their guilt about them, in a pubhc• house in Poland -
street, where they attempted to burn the spurious
notes, but were prevented by the activity of the ex .
perienced officers by whom they were taken.
The following is a summary of the additional evidence
adduced against the prisoners:—
Charles J. G. Sparke, engraver, of Meard's court,
Wardour- street, said—On Thursday the 17th of Febru-
ary, the prisoner William Brown called upon me, and
was introduced by a neighbour, whom I knew. Brown
showed me some railway scrip and a Reading 5/. note,
and said he wanted an estimate of engraving the scrip
and note. I looked at them, and said he should have the,
estimate in a day or two. I remarked to him that I sup,
posed it was all right, anal he said, " Oh, yes; it is per-
fectly right. I have received the order of a friend -of
mine in the country to gut it done in town." He left me,
taking with him some specimens of my engraving. On
the 29th he came again, and gave me orders to engrave
two plates of the .51. note of the Reading Bank, and he
left the note I now produce (a genuine one) fur a pat-
tern. The signature was then cut off, as it now appears.
The note he showed me on the first occasion had a
signature to it. Brown said he was having the signa-
ture lithographed. He had called on the 25th, returned
my specimens, and asked me what would be the
price of engraving plates for the patterns of articles
he produced. I told him abont 101. for the railway
scrip, and about 41. for the Si. note, exclusive of the
for
each for the plates and the printing, five shillings
each fifty. After I had several interviews with Brown,
Mr. Mullens, solicitor to the prosecution, called on me,
and I afterwards acted under his directions and those of
JOhn Forrester, the officer. On the Bth of March he
called, and I
paper I had promised,
gave him an impression
plate .‘ Five," and a specimen of
and ho wished to have the other plate on the 11th
instant, as the party he was acting with was coming
from the country, and wished tc look at it. Ile
brought upon most of these occasions small sums of
money in payment of the work I was doing. He spoke
about the numbering, when I recommended single
numbers without a frame. He said the paper
I bad given him was highly approved of. fait
could not match better, and they had examine
it with several of the notes then in their pos-
session. He said he
_had a dispute with them
about the "FIVE," they persisting that being
capital letters, the F should not be higher than the
other letters. I said I was satisfied I had dono it to a
hair's breadth. He asked me to produce the original. I
did so, and then he said "I- was quite right." After
enumerating several occasions on which Brown had
called and seen the progress of the work, the witness
proceeded :—" On the 14th of March he called upon me
about seven or eight in the evening. I told him I was
much pushed, and hoped to have some money. He said
he had not a farthing from his friend, but if I would let
him have the note left for a pattern, they could turn it
into money immediately. I said 1 could not then, as it
was at a printer's to have the blue ink matched ; neither
could I think of letting anything go until I was satis-
fied. lie said if I could get it all ready by two o'clock
next day, I should have the money. I promised him ho
should then have the plates with the impressions, and
the original note left for a pattern. He said he would
not take the plates, but if I could give five or
six impressions to make money of, that would
do, and he would return and give me the order for
printing the remainder of fifty. lie left mo on the un-
derstanding that everything should be finished by two
o'clock next day, when he said he would talk about the
Making of the stamps for numbering the notes. On the
15th of March he came to me about hall-past two, and
waited till Mrs. Sprake came in with the impressions. I
showed them to him. lie said the imitation Ives quite