The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-02 00:00:00

suited by Miss Martin as to what course sho should
pursue with regard to disposing of the two bills of
lading, and that it was by his advice that she went
to Cork to sell them.

Miss Martin, a ladi-like woman, apparently about
40 years old, was also examined, and she swore
positively that she had known Lambe since 1847,
that he introduced her to lb Bous, and that she
purchased the two cargoes ortly before she dis-
posed of the bills of lading to Mr. Hall) of that per-
son. She declared she knew nothing whatever of
the bankrupt Antonio Demetrio, and that the
money she paid for the bills of lading was her own,
and a variety of Totters and other documents were
put in, which showed that she was in possession of
considerable sums of money.
At this stage of the case the trial was adjourned.
On Saturday morning, at 9 o'clock, it was again
proceeded with.

- Miss Martin was cross-examined at very great
length by Mr. Bovill. She said that she knew no-
thing whatever of De Bous until she was introduced
to him in Hyde-park, and that she had never seen
either him or Mr. Lambe since the transaction re
lating to those cargoes. She first became acquainted
with Lambe in 1847, and she did not see him again
until 1857, when she met him in Kensington-gar-
dens. She did not know what his business was, or
where he lived. A letter was here shown to the
witness, and she said that she had received several
similar ones, without any signature, and she could
only guess from their contents who the writer was.
She said that she first became acquainted with
Nicholas Demetrio four years ago, and they were
on friendly terms until he left, and the action she
brought against him dick. not make any differ-
ence in their relations. She said she had
known Mrs. Westbrook since the year 1851.
She purchased the furniture that was in the house
at Kensington of Nicholas Demetrio, who had come
into possession of it by some arrangement with Mrs.
Westbrook. She paid altogether £6OO for the fur-
niture, but did not pay it all at once. The money
was sent to her from Holland. Thtre was a fire in
the house, and the insurance company resisted the
claim, which was £2OO, and ultimately they received
£l5O, but she was not aware that this sum included
costs. Witness's income was about £4OO a-year,
which was partly derived from the lodging house,
but sometimes she lost money by her lodgers. The
witness then admitted that in the years 1859 and
1858 she was in debt to a number of tradesmen, and
that judgments were obtained against her, and the
debts were not paid until she received this money
from Mr. Hall. Mrs. Westbrook used to go by dif-
ferent names, as Drinkwater and Turner, and wit-
ness received letters from her in these names. She
did not remember her going by the name of Smith.
Smith, she considered, was "no name." (A laugh.)
If any letter came to witness's lodgings in the name
of Smith she used to take it in and open it, and she
might herself have said to a cabman, who was in-
solent to her, or who demanded her name, that it
was Smith. (A laugh.) The reason she did not pay
the debts in 1859, she said, was that it was not con-
venient at that time to do so. Miss Martin then
stated that she had employed several solicitors on
various occasions, and she was fond of having fresh
ones. She was recommended to Mr. Walker by a
law stationer, but she did not know his name or his
address, but she could find it, although she could not
describe where it was. The witness then said that

she had heard that Mrs. Westbrook had on one oc-
casion accepted and drawn a bill for her husband
in her maiden name, and that she had done the same
for Nicholas Demetrio. The witness was then cross-
examined at great length upon the subject of the
circumstances under which she had received the
money from Canada, and she stated that he was
engaged in speculation, and never stopped six
months at any one place. He had no banker or agent
to assist him in his affairs. He came to Liverpool
from Canada, but she did not know the name of
the ship. She said that he had since gone to Aus-
tria, but she did not know where he was. The
whole sum of £2,700 was brought to her in gold
and notes, and there were about 300 sovereigns. She
said she had not got a single scrap of her husband's
writing, except the account he gave her at the time
he handed her the money. She put the money into
a bag, and took it up stairs and showed it to Mrs.
Westbrook. She knew nothing about the qualities
of grain, but she looked at the newspaper to see the
prices. These were the first cargoes of grain she
ever bought, but she should not object to buy more.
Re-examined—A gentleman named Ashcroft,
and Mrs. Westbrook's nephew, saw her cousin
when he came to bring her the money.
Mr. Ashcroft and Mr. Lewsey were then exa-
mined, and stated that they remembered being at
Miss Martin's in the month of July last, when a
gentleman, who was introduced as her cousin, was
there.

Mr. Terry, the manager of the Unity Joist-stock
Bank, proved that in June last two persons, who
represented themselves as Nicholas and Andrew De
Bous Brothers, opened an account with the bank,
and referred to Demetrio. They paid in £2OO, and
drew out the whole amount in August, and he heard
no more of them. He expressed an opinion that the
whole of the signatures to the different documents
that had been produced were similar to the signa-
tures in the bank book of De Bous Brothers.
In cross-examination the witness said he had
never seen either of the Demetrios, and he could
not say they were not the same persons.
Mrs. Westbrook, the lady alluded to, was then
examined, and she corroborated the evidence of Miss
Martin as to the circumstances under which the
proposition for the sale of the corn first took place
between her and Mr. Lambe and De Bous, and also
as to the fact of the cousin of Miss Martin coming
to her house and bringing her money in the month
of August. She was subjected to a very severe cross-
examination by Mr. Sergeant Ballantine, pretty
much to the same effect as that of Miss Martin, and
answered every question that was put to her very
readily. She declared that the reason she and her
husband separated was on account of his ill-treat-
ment, and she denied most positively that any im-
proper connexion had ever existed between herself
and Nicholas Demetrio.

Evidence was then given that Antonio Pemetrio
had offered the bills of lading in question for sale
to Messrs. Young, Begbie, and Co., corn merchants,
end an agreement had been come to; but in conse-
quence of the quantity being larger than those gen-
tlemen required, the bargain went off, and this was
the reason why the marks of cancellation appeared
upon the contracts.
Mr. Bovill having replied upon the whole case,
Lord Chief Justice Erle summed up, and the jury
retired at half-past six o'clock to consider their ver-
dict. At 10 o'clock they returned and found for
the plaintiffs.

: NORTHERN CIRCUIT—LIVERPOOL, March 29.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Hill.)
Mary Ann Sullivan was indicted for the murder
at Liverpool of Margaret Cross.
Mr. Simon and Mr. Littler prosecuted; and Mr.
C. Russell defended the prisoner.
It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner
and the deceased were both prostitutes, living in
the same brothel in Liverpool, that on Christmas-
day last the of the keeper of the brothel was
christened, and that the deceased stood sponsor on
the occasion. About 5 o'clock the deceased went out
to return a bonnet which she had borrowed for the
purpose of attending the christening, and did not
return until half-past 11 at night. In the mean-
time the prisoner and two other girls who lived
in the house sat drinking at home. The brothel-
keeper and his wife went to bed in a state of
intoxication, and the deceased when she returned
was also to some degree in liquor. As deceased
came up the court where the house was she
called twice to the prisoner, who went out and
pushed her into the house, and then on to a form.
Deceased thereupon called her a name, which she
retorted by calling her a cow, which so incensed her
that she took a candlestick and threw it with great
force at Sullivan. Sullivan ran at her, seized her
by the hair, bumped her head on the ground, and
then kicked her severely on the head. Deceased
then said in a feeble voice, " Oh, Mary Ann, another
like that will kill me." Whereupon the prisoner
said, " There it is, then," and kicked her again with
great force.

After the second witness had been called Mr.
Justice Hill said the charge of murder could scarcely
be maintained, and the jury should direct their at-
tention to the charge of manslaughter.
The facts and cause of death being fully proved,
Mr. Russell declined to address the jury, as he
could not resist a verdict of manslaughter.
The jury convicted the prisoner.
Mr. Justice Hill expressed his horror that such
depravity should be found in a so-called Christian
land, and that the prisoner, although only twenty
years of age, had been eight times in gaol, five of
which were for acts of violence. She had been
guilty of a most aggravated and malignant offence,
and the sentence of the Court was that she be kept
in penal servitude for the term of her natural life.
John Rooney was indicted for the manslaughter
of James Carlisle at Liverpool on the lath of July
last.

Mr. Preston prosecuted, and Mr. E. M. Fenwiek
defended the prisoner.
The statement of the case on the part of the pro-
secution disclosed a melancholy instance of depra-
vity arising from intemperance. It appeared that
the deceased man Carlisle, who was a dock labourer,
and lodged with his wife in a room in the prisoner's
house, had at the time given way to very drunken
habits, and when in that state his widow said he
was very hasty, and on coming home would "beat
her badly," so much so that she ran away from him
and left him on the 10th of July, five days befor
the affray between the deceased and the prisoner.