The Sun.
London, England, 1834-03-24 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORFOLK CIRCUIT-Burr ST. EDMUNDS

211JRCH 20.
(Before the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE.)
Benjamin Goddard, Jasper Wright, and Josiah
Cross, were indicted for being found armed at night in a
cover belonging to W. Mosely, Esq., with intent to de-
stroy game.
The j ury, after hearing evidence, acquitted all the de-
fendants.

OXFORD CIRCUIT— Sititzwisautr, Iffixcm 21.
(Before Mr. Justice Piaix )
William Gregory, a mild looking little man, aged 29,
was charged with the wilful murder of his wife, by
striking and kicking her on the left side, and throwing her
against a wall.
Sarah Jones said—l live next door to the prisoner, at
Wellington ; the deceased was his wife ; they had two
small children. On the night of Friday, the 30th of
August, the prisoner come home. It was very late, and
I could hear plainly angry words pass between them. The
next morning, a little before six o'clock, I heard the de.
ceased curse the prisoner as he went out, and he then
pa'sed my window. He returned home at six o'clock
the same evening, I think he had bad some drink, and
he appeared in gcod humour. He went into his house,
and I beard a great noise and the voices of the prisoner
and the deceased. I heard the prisoner say to his wife—
" I will either end your days, or shorten your days."
The deceased replied that he was a rogue. I beard a cry
of murder. The deceased cried murder three times. 1
immediately went into the house of the prisoner, and
saw the deceased vying dead against the wall. The pri-
soner was wringing his hands at the door, and said, either
" My poor wife is dead," or, " I am afraid I have killed
my poor wife."
Mr. Thomas Lloyd Jones said—l am a surgeon at Wel-
lington. I opened the chest, and found a quantity of
extravasated flood in a fluid state. It was from four to
six ounces. It was sufficient to cause death. There were
no external marks of violence in that part. We then opened
the head, and found a considerable quantity of extravasated
blood on the brain; part of it occupi,d the left ventricle of
the brain. I cannot say what caused the extravasation of
blood in the chest as there were no marks of violence. A
kick on the head might have produced the extravasation
there.

Crov.eximined—l cannot account for Ile two extravasa-
tions. Either would produce death. I have been in practice
50 years, and never saw two extravasations in this way.
Verdict—Not Guilty.

CRDI CON.—ELAN V. HARDING.
Mr. Sergeant TA LFOURD said that the plaintiff was a
cabinetmaker, of the age of 27 years. In 1830 he
married his present wife, who was the daughter of a
farmer. The plaintiff anti his wife lived at Hanky, and
she had gone to see her father just before the time of the
injury complained of. The defendant, who was the land-
agent of Lady Byron, and of several other persons of
rank, was a person more advanced in life. Ile had
erected a chapel at his own expense, where he was in the
habit of preaching and praying with pretended piety ;
and it seemed that he had used this influence to enthral
and ensnare this family to such a degree that he had made
the father and mother of this unhappy girl the acces-
caries to her crime, and the plaintiff had actually received
back from his wife the ring which he bail put on her
finger when he married her, broken, as a token that she
would return to him no more. The defendant, who was
between 60 and 70 years of age, was a married man,
who had three grown-up children ; one of. whom, a
daughter, was married to a clergyman of the church of
England. It would be proved that, on Sunday, the 29th
of June, the defendant took this poor creature to his
chapel, where he performed the morning, afternoon, and
evening services, and at the end of the latter he told
about twelve of his congregation to remain, and he then
said that be was going to take a loving wife, that person
being then tht wife of another. The defendant read a
p art of the service of marriage, and then administered
the sacrament of the Lord's supper to the wife of the
plaintiff, her father and her brother, and since that he
had been living in open adultery with her. The plain-
tiff's melancholy tale was soon told, he bad lost all his
hopes, and all bis prospects and his happiness were
blighted for ever.
Elizabeth Macartney said—l am the sister of the
plaintiff. He married in 1830. I was at the marriage.
The plaintiff was 25 and his wife 27.
Joseph Elam said—l am brother of the plaintiff, who
is a cabinet maker and joiner—he worked with me and
they lived at first at her father's who is a farmer. They
always appeared to live happily together, and to be fond
of each other. After this they went to live at Hanley.
They had a house there. They had lived there between
two and three years, when I bead of my brother's wife
leaving him. He was almost insensible and unsettled in
his mind, he could neither eat, drink, nor work, and he
tame to my house and made great lathentation all night.
He gave up his house and sold his goods. The defendant
lives at Willow-bridge, not far from the father of my
brother's wife. When my brother's wife left my brother
first she went to her father's. The defendant is a mar-
ried man of between sixty and. seventy. He has put
away his wife, who lives with his daughter two miles
from him. He has ceased to live with his wife for three
years. He has the. e children all grown up, and two are
married, the ail(' being a widower. The daughter with
whom his wife lives is married to a gentleman named
Heathcote. One of his sans is a clergyman of the church
of England. The defendant is agent to Mr. Meynell, to
Dr. Lushington, qnd also to some ladies. He keeps two
women-servants and a man servant. He has a chapel.
Cross-examined by Mr. WHATELY—The defendant's
son, the clergyman, was chaplain to Mr. Meynell when
High Sheriff. The defendant's wife is a most amiable and
respectable person, and her son-in-law, Mi. Heathcote, is
a gentleman of consideration and fortune.
Mary Averil said—l was, in July last, living as house-
keeper with the defendant. He has a chapel near his house.
Tha defendant was agent to Lady Byron. The defendant
used to preach in the chapel on Sundays. The plaintiff's
wife was there on the 14th of July, which was a Sunday.
She and I attended there. Defendant preached in the
morning, and the plaintiff's wife dined at the defendam's
house. She went again to chapel in the afternoon and
evening; the defendant preached three times that day.
'f he defendant, after the third service, called back 12
persons, tie plaintiff's wife and her father and brother
present,
‘ If
id
this hand:m aen any
i being present. They were in the habit of going to
this chapel. When all were gone but these 12 persons,
the defendant made a prayer in the organ_room, which
joins the pulpit. He prayed extempore. He said to those
o❑
tnhee had
a na,nyh eombji7ht tiode pntaor t' No
his
taking
one
went away, and the defendant then administered the ordi-
nance with bread and wine. The plaintiff's wife, her father,
and brother partook of it, as did the defendant himself.
I did se likewise. The defendant then produced a ring.
He put it on the finger of the plaintiff's wife, and then
sung a verse of a hymn. It was " Praise God from whom
all blessings flow."
He after that prayed again. The
defendant and the plaintiff's wife then went to the defend-
ant's house, it being half_past nine in the evening. I
warmed the defendanos bed, and the plaintiff's wife went
into his room with him, and she has been living with tains
since. The plaintiff's wife had formerly lived as a servant
with the defendant, but at that time his wife was living
with him.
Mr. WIIATELY, for the defendant, said, that the
defendant was tar advanced in years, and had held
a most reputable situation in life. He was the hus-
band of a most excellent woman, and had a son a
clergyman of that ELI' in which we lived, and in which
we hoped to die. This man (the defendant) had fallen ;
but, in the name of charity, would they not say, even
upon this statement, that he was labouring under an
aberration of intellect? Could it be believed that a man
tette this would use the most sacred symbols that ever were
sent upon earth to commit such a crime? And it was
a fact that some persons had notions of religion so at va-
riance with truth and with reason, that every one must pro-
nounce them insane. There wa., a few years ago, a gentle-
niau named Muloch, who had such immense influence over
many other persons, that they actually sold their property,
turned away their wives, and abandoned their children,
merely because he told them to do so; but, if any person
did not come into his notions, he published the most dread.
ful libels of him ; and it happened, at the sessions at Saf-
ford, that a person was brought up for disseminating some
of those libels. That person, on his trial, said that a gen-
tieman present knew him, and he named Mr. Whateley,
and upon his (the learned counsel) turning his head, he
saw that this person was one whom he well recollected as
having been a respectable chymist at Oxford at the time lie
(the learned gentleman) was a tnember of that University.
However, upon this person no persuasion bad the least
effect, as he said he was told by his pastor, Mr. Moloch,
to disseminate those libels, and lie would do so. What
was the sequel—Mr. Mulocia was convicted of a libel, and
treated by the medical men as an insane person, and hap-
pily, by the blessing of heaven, he recovered his reason,
and no one was more sorry for what had occurred ; could
any case be more applicable to the present than the one he
had related ?
Mh. Justice PARK said that this case was attended with
most unusual circumstances, He happened to know that