The Sun.
London, England, 1834-07-16 00:00:00

PREROGATIVE COURT, JULY 15.

(Before Sir JOHN NICHOLL.)
SCOTT v. SCOTT.
This was a question of considerable interest. It relates
to the validity of a paper propounded as the last testamen-
tary act of the deceased in the cause, Mr. Christopher Scott,
a bachelor, and who died in July last, aged 75 years. The
will was opposed by the brother, and next of kin of the
deceased, on the ground that he was insane at the period
the will was executed on the 20th July. The facts stated
in the cause were as follow : —The deceased, in 1811,
settled in New Brunswick, and amassed great riches as a
merchant and shipowner. He returned to this country in
1828, and intended to wind up his affairs and retire to
Scotland, Greenock being his native place. He purchased
a large freehold property there, which he called Blackhorse,
and made a will, giving his whole property to his two bro-
thers and his nephews and nieces. He made also a pro-
vision for his natural son, William Scott, one of the parties
in the cause. He, however, returned to St. Andrew's,
commenced fresh extensive speculations, and drew large bills
on his agents in this country. Some of these bills were
dishonoured, and he returned to England, found his ships
arrested, and was ultimately arrested and thrown into
Bristol gaol, and was released when the rioters burnt thai
place. A commission of bankruptcy was taken out against
him, but superseded, the estate paying twenty shillings in
the pound with interest ; from which period, as is alleged,
the deceased became insane. Under the feelings of being
ill-used by his relatives, it was contended, on the other
hand, he executed the paper now before the Court, giving
his whole property to his natural son.

The KING'S ADVOCATE spoke in favour of the paper
propounded as the last testamentary act of the deceased,
who died, aged 75 years, on the 29th of July last, having
executed the will, bequeathing the whole of his property to
his natural son, Mr. William Scott, on the 20th of the
same month. The Learned Advocate appeared on the
behalf of Mr. William Scott, the natural son of the de-
ceased, and, notwithstanding the case made on the other
side, he should contend that the deceased was a capable
testator at the time of making the will.
Dr. LUSHINGTON appeared for Mr. J. Scott, the de-
ceased's brother ; and who would, in case the deceased died
intestate, with the nieces and nephews, be entitled to ae
property in dispute. He (Dr. Lushington) said there was
no question that a will would be valid if it was adopted by
a deceased party, even though he gave no instructions for
it, if the testator was sane, and was aware of its contents.
Here, however, a will was brought, cut and dried, to the
deceased, who had executed it without the slightest change
in the exercise of capacity. Here the deceased was on his
death-bed at the time of the execution of the will, when his
frame, by previous illness and habit of drinking to excess,
was reduced to the greatest infirmity. If the will was pro-
nounced for, a most dangerous precedent would be estab-
lished.

Dr. ADDAMS followed on the same side, after which

Sir JOHN NICHOLL said that he woul'd hear the reply
on a future day.
The Court then adjourned at five o'clock.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

WESTERN CIRCUIT, WINCHESTER, JULY 14.
( CROWN COURT.—Before Mr. Justice PArrEsori.)

John Young and Daniel Higgins were indicted for having
burglariously broken open the house of William Crockford,
a farmer at Basingstoke, on the 17th of April 1832, and
stolen therein '205 sovereigns, 301. in bank notes, a promis-
sory note for 200/., some gold rings, and other articles, his
property. There were four persons concerned in this rob-
bery. One of them was convicted and transported for life
in 1832, and another became an approver.
Charles Silver, an accomplice, who had been for some
time in the service of Crockford, assisted the prisoners in
the robbery. He had been a fellow-labourer of Young's,
and gave him information about Crockford's property.
When they came to the house, about twelve o'clock at
night, Crockford put his head out of the window, and desired
his boy to go down. I shut the gate as the cows had got
in. When the boy opened the door they went in, and pro-
ceeded up stairs. A shot was fired at the top of the stairs,
and Young knocked down with an iron bar the person who
fired it. He then struck Crockford with the iron bar, and
swore he would murder him. Crockford had previously
knocked down Higgins. They asked him for his money,
and said if he gave it they would not hurt him. Young
broke open the box with the iron bar, and carried away the
little box. When he got a distance off, Young divided the
money. Gave fifty-three sovereigns to each of them, but
asked witness to return him all but two again, which he
did. The others did not. About a month afterwards wit-
ness gave information. Blag, one of the robbers, was tried
there in 1832.
Higgins was apprehended in 1832, but made his escape,
and was not recaptured until June last. When Young was
apprehended in May last he asked if it was for the Epsom
murder, and appeared to be comforted when told in the
negative.
After the evidence had been concluded,
Young said he was guilty, but that Higgins was not at
the robbery at all. " The top of my finger," said he, " was
blown off by the pistol shot. I knocked the man down with
an iron bar, and then struck Crockford on the head, and
said I would murder him."
Verdict—Guilty against both.
Young, in a rage, bawled out, " I am sorry I did not
murder the old —, and he could not give evidence here
to-day."
Mr. Justice PATTESON would not be provoked to pass
sentence on the prisoners without mature consideration.
As the prisoners were being removed Young again said
he was sorry he did not murder the old —, and added
something about Epsom, which we could not hear. Sen-
tence postponed.
John Mundy and George Barrett were indicted for set-
ting fire to three barns, two stables, with other out-houses,
three hundred sacks of wheat, and three hundred quarters
of barley, with some implements of husbandry, the property
of Lady Frances Wilson, of Chelsea Park, and her tenant,
William Saunders. The value of the property consumed
was stated in the calendar to be 3,000/.
Charles Parsons, sixteen years of age (an approver), re-
sided on the premises with the prisoners. On the evening
in question Mundy said to him that they were going to set
the farm on fire. Witness said he should have nothing to
do with it. Mundy said he would thrash him if he did
not assist. Both the prisoners took him by the hands and
dragged him to a cartload of straw, when Mundy took out
a lucifer-box, and set fire to the straw. They all went to
their bed-rooms. The prisoners slept over the witness, who
after a few minutes saw the two barns on fire, and ran out
to drive the horses out of the stable. The prisoners went
after him, and assisted in driving the cattle out, and in
saving the property. They were all taken into custody
that night by Mr. Saunders, and sent to prison next
morning.
On behalf of the prisoners, Kelly and Brinden were
called, and deposed that they were privates in the army,
who were imprisoned for a few weeks for having gone a few
miles beyond their parole ; that Parsons was in the same
ward with them, and had often used the following expres-
sions, which Kelly took down in writing at the time :
" What we burnt at the farm was unfit for the pigs to eat.
If I knew any person at Sutton who had nothing to do
with the fire I'd swear it was he to get free myself. I'd
swear that black was white, and that it was my father who
did it, even if he was innocent, to get free. You'll see I'll
nail up two persons at the next Assizes.
Verdict Guilty. Sentence postponed.

TUESDAY MORNING.
The prisoners Young and Higgins were put to the bar
this morning to receive their sentences.

Mr. Justice PATTESON, in addressing them, said that
the conduct of Higgins was not marked with the same de-
gree of cruelty as that of Young. He would therefore make
a distinction in the punishment, and direct sentence of
death to be recorded against Higgins ; but he felt it his
duty to pronounce the extreme penalty of the law on
Young, for it was evident that it was he who struck the old
man with the iron bar, and broke off his finger. He should
therefore hold out no hopes of a remission of the sentence
to him. He had but a short time to live, only ten days.—
(Young here exclaimed, " Thank you, my Lord ; I did not
know I had so long to live.")—His Lordship exhorted him
to make the best use of his time ; but Young, instead of
attending to him, laughed, grinned, and cast his eyes
about ; and his Lordship, seeing he could make no impres-
sion upon him, pronounced the extreme penalty of the law
on him, holding out no hopes of mitigation.
When Young was about to be removed he leaped and
tramped down the stairs. He is of a middle size, and
there is certainly nothing in his countenance which would
excite a presumption of the savageness which he has displayed.
The conduct of the other prisoner was highly becoming,
yet his appearance was less favourable.

THE CASE OF ARSON.
The prisoners having been brought up to receive sen-
tence this morning, _ _

Mr. Justice PATTESON addressed them, observing that
the evidence did not strike him with the same sense of their
guilt as it did their Jury. During the trial he entertained
strong doubts of their guilt. The conduct of the boy was
such as at least to cast a suspicion on his evi-
dence. It was quite clear from the evidence of Kelly
and the other witness, that all the evidence which the
boy gave in the box was not true ; but it was for the Jury,
and not for his Lordship, to decide on the effects of the evi-
dence. After mature consideration they found them
guilty, and it was his Lordship's duty to pronounce the sen-
tence of the law. Since the trial the Jury intimated to
his Lordship a wish to recommend them to mercy. He
had considered the case with much anxiety. It was very
rarely indeed that a mitigation of sentence took place in

convictions for arson. He had not completely made
his mind on the subject ; he would still consider it, afl
without holding out any hopes to them, he would mere'
say that if he could satisfy his own mind that consistentll
with his duty he could recommend them to the mercy aft
Crown, he would do it ; but as he had not made uP bps
mind finally he would pronounce upon them the seatenee
which the law directed.
The Learned Judge then passed sentence of death uP°ll
the prisoners. •

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—Yoax, Jua 14.
Late on Saturday evening the Commission was °Pepe
here by Mr. Baron GURNEY.
This morning the Grand Jury were sworn.
The Learned BARON congratulated them upon the WY
usual lightness of the calendar, there being only tweet
nine prisoners for trial in the county, and two in the citl;
one of whom is charged with manslaughter, in administer-
ing " Morrison's celebrated pills" in the smallpox. _Tile
other was tried to-day ; it was for horse-stealing ; he
convicted, and sentenced to transportation for life.
county calendar does not exhibit any case of great atrocitY4
the majority of them are for horse and sheep stealing ; tel°
or three for burglary ; one for rape, and one for infanticide.
The Learned Judge, in addressing the Jury, observed that
though he congratulated them on the lightness of the cr
lendar in this county, which was no doubt attributable
either to the Petty Sessions or to the activity of the A,
gistrates, yet he regretted to say that the increase of creme
exceeded the increase of the population. But he trusted
as soon as the recent improvements in the law had a.,_falta
trial, their benefits would be felt by the community,
particularly the commutation of the punishment of death
for that of transportation. The administration of that, pc;
nishment since the commutation was essentially calculate'
to check the increase of crime.
There
On the Civil Side Lord LYNDHURST presided. it_
was only one case tried, and that was a case of assault,
in which there was not the slightest interest. The Plaii?
tiff supported his claim for damages for an assault coW
mitted on his wife by the testimony of two of his ohildn
while the defendant repudiated it by the evidence of two
his servants. There was the usual contradictory evidence'

The Jury found a verdict for the defendant.
At the rising of the Court there was an undefended case'
Saville v. the Earl of Scarborough. It was merely as t,l
the finding of some points of law which Ivere to be argue"
above at the Courts of Westminster.
. On special application in the case of the indictment f.°r
the administration of Morrison's pills in the sniall-P°11'11(
copy of the indictment was granted, it being the opinion
Lord Lyndhurst that it was a very peculiar case- No dsl
has yet been fixed for the trial.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT—LINCOLN JULY 14.
The commission for this county was opened on Satura*
and the business of the Assize commenced this morningbt"
fore Mr. Justice PARK on the Civil Side, Mr. Justice
TAUNTON presiding in the Criminal Court.
There are sixteen cases in the former Court, and eight
prisoners only in the calendar. The following was the 0101
case of any interest that occurred during the day :

BROWN, GENBONE, &C. V. HUBBARD.
This was an action to recover the amount of an attor°
ney's bill.
The plaintiff was employed in his professional capacitla
at the Summer Assizes of 1833 for this county,' to defer'
an action brought by the Marquis of Bristol against abe
Cooper, an inhabitant of Sleaford, to try the right I'o
the Noble Marquis claimed to take stallage dues at Si? JP'
ford market, when shortly after the case had beei CBl',
on it was agreed that the plaintiff should take a verdict'
with nominal damages, each side paying their own costs;
and the present action was now brought to recover fri
the defendant the balance due to the plaintiff on accosot°
his conducting such defence.
The Learned JUDGE thought the action not sustainable'
and directed a nonsuit.