The Sun.
London, England, 1851-11-28 00:00:00

31ILLER V. DEAR.

This was the second trial of an action for debt. At
the former trial, which took place before Mr. Justice
Cresswell last week, the jury, having been unable to de-
cide which of the parties was guilty of perjury, were
discharged without returning a verdict.
Mr. Sergeant Byles and Mr. Peteradorff were counsel
for the plaintiff ; and Mr. Collier for the defendant.
The plaintiff is a coachbuilder, living at Paddington;
the defendant is a fly-master in Marylebono. The par-
ties had dealt together for some time, and at:Christmas
last the amount due to the plaintiff was 69/, The plain-
tiff stated that he from time to time received small sums
of money from the defendant, for which he gave written
acknowledgments, and that on the 9th of April, 1851, an
account was settled between them, no other person being
present, and the previous payments being allowed, a re-
ceipt, which included them, was given for 111. 2s. Bd.,
the amount of a particular item; but the written acknow-
ledgments previously given to the defendant for those
payments were not returned nor cancelled. The defen-
dant having paid all the money claimed into court, ex-
cept 111., the question in dispute
_between the parties
was as to the payment of this sum, and the plaintiff
swore that he had not received it from the defendant or
his wife, nor had he given any receipt for it.
Mr. COLLIER. for the defendant, said the matter in
dispute was trivial, as compared with the more impor-
tant question, whether the plaintiff, or the defendant, and
the defendant's wife, were guilty of perjury? For his
own part, ho wished th© matter to be thoroughly sifted,
and that the party who swore falsely, whichever it was,
might be punished for it. He should, therefore, as he
did on the former trial, call the defendant's wife, and
prove by her evidence that she had paid the money to
the plaintiff.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said, although he under-
stood his brother Cresswell had admitted the defendant's
wife to be called as a witness by the consent of the par-
ties, he bad well considered the question, and if it were
now objected to be was prepared to reject her evidence.
He was satisfied that she would not be a competent wit-
ness under the late statute, and, therefore, that she would
not give her evidence under the same peril as other wit-
nesses. He had consulted the rest of his Learned Bre-
thren of that court on the subject, and they were agreed
in opinion upon it.
Mr. COLLIER said he was informed by his Learned
Friend, Mr. Warren, that the Lord Chief Baron had
that morning decided that the wife of a party to a cause
might be examined.
Mr. Sergeant BYLES —My information is, that the
Lord Chief Baron's decision was the other way.—
(Laughter.)
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE—WeII; I will :ask him
himself about it.
His LORDSHIP then went and consulted the Lord
Chief Baron, and on his return said—lt is true the
Lord Chief Baron gave a decision on the subject, but
there is a slight inaccuracy in the report of it which
has reached us. It was the other way.—(Laughter.)
Mr. WARREN explained that ho was in court that
morning when the Lord Chief Baron
.admitted the wife
of a party to give evidence, and that it she were ad-
mitted by consent, or with any qualification, ho did not
hear it.
Mr. COLLIER said, that as the Lord Chief Baron had
permitted the objection to be waived, he hoped his
Lordship would also do so, and that the other side
would not press the objection, this being a question of
character.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said it was highly 'im-
portant that the practice on this !matter should be set-
tled, and he knew that the majority of the judges were
of opinion that the evidence was not admissible. As to
waiving
the objection, did the Learned Counsel before
the late Act ever hear of waiving an objection to
calling the plaintiff or the defendant ? "Brother
Byles," added his Lordship, " what do you intend to
do? For as I deal with this case, so must I deal
throughout the term with other cases that come be-
fore me.

Mr.iSergoant BYLES said that as the present ease could
not he thoroughly sifted without the wife's evidence, he
would waive objection to it.
The LOAD CHIEF JUSTICE,—The Lord Chief
Baron tells me he had some doubts this morning whe-
ther he ought to admit the wife's evidence, notwithstand-
ing the waivor.

—After some further discussion it was, however, re,
solved to call her.

Mr. COLLIER then addressed the jury for the defen-
dant, and called the defendant's wife, who swore that
on the 9th of April the plaintiff called fora settlement
of his account, and that she then paid him 11/., and gave
him 2s. for beer for the men, and that the plaintiff then
wrote and gave her a receipt for 11/. 25., which she now
produced. The defendant also was called, but he said
he left all to his wife, and knew nothing of the transac-
-tion. [On his Lordship referring to Air. Justice Ctess-

well's notes it appeared that at the former trial the de-
fendant swore that he was present, and saw his wife pay
the money.] Defendant's mother,in•law was also called.,
and swore that the saw the plaintiff on the 9th of
April at the defendant's house ; and a man who was
also called swore that he had some beer given to him
that day, but said that he did not know who paid for it.
Mr. Sergeant BYLES, ill reply, contended that as there
was only a balance of 11/. due to the plaintiff on the
9th of April the defendant arempted to account for a
receipt for 11/. 2s. (which had been given in respect of
the money previously paid by instalments) by the im-
probable story that it included 2s. the defendant's wife
had given for beer for the men, and ho called upon the
jury to disbelieve the defendant and his witnesses. _

•
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, in summing up, said the
object of the Legislature would not have been obtained
in this caseif the counstlfor the plaintiff had not waived his
objection to the evidence of the defendant's wife; for the
law, contemplating that a wife would be liable to be under
her husband's influence, had not made her evidence ad-
missible, and yet in thiscase if she had not been called the
plaintiff would have had it all his own way, there being
no one else to contradict him. His Lordship then reed
over all the evidence, and It fc the matter to the jury.
The jury were locked up from a quarter past four
o'clock in the afternoon until nearly twelve at night,
when they returned into court and delivered (t-i the
Associate in the absence of the Chief Justice) a verdict
for the plaintiff.

POLICE IN
MANSION-HOUSE.

A young woman of r.spectable appearance was
brought before the Lord Mayor, under the following
circumstances:—

Isaac Isaacs, shopman to Mr. Jacobs, of No. 4,
Houndsditch, said the prisoner came to our warehouse
yesterday, at a quarter past four o'clock, and said that
she wished to look at some shawls. I pointed out to
her the part of the warehouse to which she was to go.
She went there and looked at some shawls, and she
selected two, and she left 1/. 7s. 6 i., and said she would
call again with the rest of the money, and she went out.
Mrs. Isaacs immediately came to me, and said the pri-
soner had taken a shawl with her, and I fotlawed the
prisoner and said to her that I wanted her, a, d she must
come back. I told her she had stolen a shoal. I saw a
part of a shawl hanging from her at the time. She said
to me, "For God's sake take the shawl, and let me go."
I sent for a policeman, but the shawl was not found
upon her, and we let her go. Afterwards the shawl was
found by one of the warehousemen. The place was
dark at the time, and I suppose that was the reason it
was not found when she was in custody. It was tound
near the door. She afterwards came with some person,
and began to kick up a disturbance, and was given into
custody.
A policeman said at a little after four o'clock I was
sent for to No. 4, Houndsditch, to take a woman into
custody for stealing a shawl. The prisoner was the
woman charged. I asked Mrs. Isaacs about it, and she
counted over the shawls, and said she could not tell
whether one was gone or uot; but the female had left
11. 7s, 6d. on a shawl or shawls, and it would remain
till tomorrow, when it would be ascertained whether
the shawl was lost, and the female was to bring the re-
mainder of the money this (Thursday) morning.
The LORD MAYOR—Did you look round the place for
the shawl? Policeman—l did, but not particularly, as
the lady said she did not know whether a shawl was
missing.
The LORD MAYOR—Did Mr. Isaacs tell you at the
time that he had seen part of the shawl hanging from the
prisoner's person? Policeman—He did not.
The prisoner appeared to be very anxious to speak,
but his Lordship said there was no occasion for any ob-
servation from her, and that sho was discharged.
A man, who stated that he was the prisoner's hus-
band, said, in an angry tone, that the witness for the
prosecution had grossly perjured himself.
The LORD MAYOR—There is no necessity for any re-
mark here. I dare say you know what to do. The
young woman is discharged.

MURDER AT TOLLESBURY.
(From the Chelmsford Chronicle.)
With feelings of humiliation and sorrow we have to
add the details of another atrocious murder to the blood-
stained deeds which have blackened the criminal annals
of the county within the last few years. The scene of
the horrid tragedy in this case is Tollesbury, a consider-
able fishing village, lying upon the marshes of the Black-
water, and close to Tiptree-hcath; and the victim is the
wife of an oyster dredgerman, named James Cobb, 33
years of age, who was murdered while asleep in her
bed, after her husband had left her, early on Tuesday
morning. Cobb was employed in the oyster layings, of
which there is a considerable extent in the neighbour-
hood, and it appears left for his work about six o'clock
in the morning, a lodger having previously quitted the
house; the wife being at the time awake. A
little girl, seven years old, whom they had adopted,
having no children of their own, slept in a crib
close to their bed. Other houses adjoin, but nothing
was heard to create alarm or excite surprise till eight
o'clock, when the little girl awoke, and finding the woman
dead, gave an alarm, and admitted the neighbours; the
victim was then found lying in the bed, apparently in
the position in which she had been sleeping, with an in-
dentation in her skull, several other wounds on her head,
and her throat cut, life being extinct. The object of the
murderer was clearly plunder, and the presumption is,
that having entered by the window, he proceeded up
stairs, struck his victim with a hammer on the head as
she lay asleep, and having rendered her insensible, cut
her throat with a razor, thus eff,eting the murder with-
out waking the child, who lay slumberieg within a few
feet, and who, if she had been disturbed, would pro-
bably have been silenced in the same summary manner.
The murderer them appears to hare ransacked the boxes
in that and another room in search of money, but he
did not succeed in finding more than 12s. belonging to a
lodger, which was taken away; a tenecaddy, coutaining
about the same sum, standing dose to the bed of the
murdered woman, having escaped his search.
The dreadful deed produced awful excitement through-
out the village and the adjacent parishes; the police
were early on the spot, investigating all the circum-
stances, and suspicion soon pointed to Henry Harring-
ton, a young man about twenty years of age, who lodged
in a house adjoining, as it was ascertained he had not
quitted his house till after Cobb and his landlord had
gone, and the same morning proceeded to Wivenhoe.
The evidence against him at first appeared exceedingly
slight, but the officer felt it his duty to take him into
custody, and facts have since come out that tend strongly
to fix him with the guilt. A hammer belonging to the
person at whose house be lodged has been found exactly
to fit the indentation in the head of the deceased, and on
Wednesday a labourer, at Salcot, two miles off, found
near a stile in the direction the prisoner went to Wiven.
hoe, a handkerchief and a razor in a case, both bloody,
the former of which hes been identified as belonging
to Harrington, and the razor is the property of Wash,
with whom he lodged, and who, on going to look
for it, found it was gone. It was further found that the
prisoner's trousers were marked with spots of blood,
and it appeared that he had endeavoured to hide some
by putting ink over them. Ho has been sometimes em-
ployed as a labourer on a farm, and at other times as an
assistant at dredging. The husband of the murdered
woman, though in humble life, occupied a respectable
position in the village.
On Wednesday an inquest was held at the Queen's
Head Inn, Tollesbury, before W. Codd, Esq., coroner,
and a respectable jury, when, after viewing the body, a
number of witnesses were examined, who deposed to the
facts above given. The medical gentlemen agreed in
opinion that it was impossible the wounds on the head of
deceased could have been inflicted by herself. Harring-
ton made the following statement, atter being duly eau.
tioned:—

I live with my sister, Mrs. Wash, and opposite to
Cobbs house. On Tuesday morning last (the 25th inst.)
about six o'clock, I got up and lit my pipe, and went
up the yard towards the privy, when I heard some
one in there. I went indoors and began my break
fast, and in about ten minutes afterwards I again
went to the privy, and met a man named
James Coates, who lodges with me, coming from
it. I shortly after returned into the house, and made a
fire and finished my breakfast. Coates had then gone
to his work. I left home before seven to go to Salcot to
see Abraham Emmeny, who r,as going along with me
to Wivenhoe to get a beat, and he and I went to Wi-
venhoe the same day. Jeremiah Ketley, Abraham Em
many, and I had paid down is pound amongst us for the
boat about a month ago, and were to pay the remainder,
15/. 10s,, by weekly instalments of ss. amongst us. We
went to the owner of the boat, Mr. Barton, of Wiven-
hoe, and he toll us the boat was ready; but when we
went to look at her we found the well had not been made
high enough, and we came away the same day without
the boat, and reached Salcot about seven that evening,
when I slept that night at the Rising Sun with Em-
meny. I did not come on to Tollesbury, as I heard
Policeman Fox was after me, and I was told that he was
coming to Salcot for me. I was apprehended by Po-
liceman Fox at Tollesbury this morning. When
left home yesterday morning, I had 3s. in shilling
pieces. I had two shillings of it from Rullinson,
Mr. Fairhead'e looker, and the other shilling from Mr.
Wyatt, a bricklayer of Tollesbury. The coat which I
now have on is the same coat I wore the whole of yes-
terday (the 25th instant), from the time I got up. I
have only two other coats, and both of thorn are at home.
I have no razor of my own, but alma) s use John Wash's
razor where .1 lodge. I believe it was a black-handled
one, but am not quite certain. I think I should know it
if I was to see it again. I have not shaved with it for
the last fortnight. I think I got to Salcot about eight
o'clock. I went by the road as far as Old Hall Chase,
and then went along the path by the fields. I did not
leave the path at all. I have one handkerchief only, and
that is at home. I should know it again if I was to ace
it. I have had no other since I have been at Tollesbury.
I very seldom use it. I did not use it yesterday morn-
ing. I kept the handkerchr () at the head f my I 1 .
James Coates and his eon ept in the same room with
me, and did so on Monday night last. (Mute, and
son, aged about twelve years, left home before nic about
ha Thelf
eas ntehroday, a
hour.
inquestwas adjourned to Tuesday.
Yesterday,
post motto:it examination of the body of
the deceased was made by Mr. Dawson and Mr. Smith,
when it was found that the injuries from the blow on
the head were mach more extensive than had been at
first supposed, and were sufficient of themselves to
causedeath,
inasmuch as the whole of that part of the
bone on which the hammer fell was shattered to frag-
ments.
It is a little singular that when the crime was dis-
covered the general feeling of the inhabitants of the
village was one of suspicion against the prisoner, this
being in part produced by the general character which
he bore. The prisoner, it is stated, had on former oc-
casions been heard to give utterance to threats against
the deceased. It is also added that Cubb was to have
been a partner in the beat alluded to in the evidence,