The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-14 00:00:00

CHARGE OF STABBING.

On Monday Emma Maria Gregory, a middle-aged fe-
male, residing in Caroline-place, Hammersmith, was
brought up in the custody of the police, before Mr. T.
Paynter, the sitting magistrate, at Hammersmith, on a
charge of having stabbed her husband.
Thomas Gregory deposed that, on Saturday evening,
be went, accompanied by his wife (the prisoner) to the
house of Mr. Rogers, their next door neighbour, to
spend the evening. They were all very comfortable for
an hour or two, and enjoyed themselves much, when all
at once he was surprised to see his wife go and seat her-
self in the lap of a strange man who was present, but
whose name he did not even know. On seeing her do so
be immediately walked out of the room, followed by his ,
wife, whom he asked the reason of her doing so, but
she refused to give him any, and went to the bottom of
the place, and stood there some time. He then went
into his own house, but eventually went down to the
prisoner, and again questioned her as to her conduct ;
when she used very bad language, and pushed him away
from her. He then returned home, followed by the
prisoner ; and after a little while he again mentioned
the subject to her, when she instantly seized upon a pair
of scissors and stabbed him in the face, the scissors
passing right through the under lip. He bled pro-
fusely from the wound, and, taking the scissors from
her, 'went out and fetched the police, into whose custody
Ee gave her.
135, Mr. Paynter—Had been married eleven years, and
bad one child. The prisoner had been drinking. Had
generally been up to this occurrence a well-conducted
woman.

The prisoner, in answer to the charge, said she was at
the time rather excited by what she had drank, at the
pressing solicit of her husband. He had repeatedly
ill-treated her, and it was only a week ago that he had
given her a black eye,and beat her until she could not
lift her arm up. He
also struck her several times on
Saturday night, when, having the scissors in her hand,
she accidentally struck him with them, in warding off
his blows.
Mr. Paynter asked the husband ifG her wished to prefer
the charge against the prisoner ?—Gregory replied that
to know
he had no desire to do so. He onlyegwTheic,ib
whether his wife was to obey him or her neighbours
The prisoner said her husband had brougght9nlisll on
himself by beating her and setting her the example,
going with bad women. She would not, she declared,Peby
live with him again, and begged the magistrate to sepa_
rate them.
Mr. Paynter told the prisoner he had no power to do
so, Her conduct had been very bad, and it was most
fortunate for her that she did not stand at the bar on the
charge of murder. As the husband, however, did not
wish to press the charge, he should, under the circum-
stances, discharge her.—They left the Court together.

THE LATE FIRE REAR GRAVESEND.—CORONER'S
INQUEST.—Monday afternoon a jury was empannelled
at the Rose and Crown Upper Thorne, near Rochester,
in Kent, before John dale Dudlow, Esq., on the body
of James Miller, aged 67, who died from injuries re-
ceived at the late fire. After hearing the evidence the
coroner summed up. It was quite clear that the acci-
dent happened from some defect in the flue ; the fire
thus communicated with the thatch of the roo, which
falling in upon deceased he thus met his end. The
jury, Without Lesitation, returned a verdict of " Acci- I
dental death."

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Aug. 131

IN RE TROMARWitt.

UNCERTAINTY Or THE NEW INSOLVENT ACT.—
This day being the first upon which the New Insol-
vent Amendment Act came into operation, a question
of much interest to the profession generally con-
nected with the administration of the insolvent law
was brought before the Court by Mr. Cooke, the
question raised being, whether by the 58th section
of the New Act a person in prison was not entitled to
his discharge on his application to a Judge, provided
the amount of any separate debt of his several de-
taining creditors did not amount to 201., exclusive of
costs ?

Mr. CooKE agreed that in the present case the
debts of no one of the detaining creditors amounted
to 201., and, consequently, the insolvent did not re-
quire the assistance of this Court to get his discharge,
because, by the New Act, he could get it by an ap-
plication to a judge in chambers.
Mr. Commissioner HARRIS thought that there was
some doubt upon this point, and he should go on with
the case. In the clause of the Act referred to by the
Learned Gentleman, the words " shall " and " may"
were used in a manner which admitted of very exten-
sive interpretation; he had, therefore, much doubt
with respect to the meaning of the clause. The case
was postponed.
The cases in which there was no point of general
interest were then proceeded with.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Aug. 13.
(Before Mr. Commissioner GOULBURN.)
IN RE LEWIS JOHN JACKSON.

Mr. NicaoLLs said he appeared to oppose the bank-
rupt's interim order, on the part of a Mr. Riches, who
was a creditor to the amount of 1101. He opposed the
insolvent on two grounds; first, that this debt had been
contracted in a fraudulent manner; and, secondly, that
when an action had been entered in the Court of Qu,:,-en,s
Bench, the bankrupt by defending said actie:, had in-
curred expenses to the amount of 60/.., without any
reasonable expectation of being able, io pay
the same.
Mr. Commissioner GOULBU
I::rt—There was an action,
then. What were the de
~-wages given ?
Mr. NicaoLLs--rf,i.
The Learned Counsel then stated that his client Riches
was a coal c
lealer and collector of rents. He afterwards
took cra'c a license as a broker, and,employed the bank-
riVin as his man to take possession at a salary of 2s. 6d.
per day. Some time after this connexion, the bankrupt
proposed that the opposing creditor should advance some
money to buy furniture, on which a profit might be
realised on its subsequent sale. Riches acceded
to the proposition, and an agreement was en-
tered into that the bankrupt should have two-thirds of
the property for his trouble, and the creditor, Riches, the
remaining one-third for the use of the money. The con-
nection realised a profit, and continued for about twelve
months ; when one morning it was discovered that
the bankrupt was removing furniture, amounting
to 150 L, from Newport-street, where their place
of business then was, to Cambridge-road, where
the bankrupt now resided. He succeeded in re-
moving it, and Riches not being able to procure a settle-
ment, entered an action in the Queen's Bench, and found
damages in 501. Such were the simple circumstances,
and he contended that this fully established his grounds
of objection. Evidence was called to the facts.
_ _

M. Commissioner GOULBURN thought that the bank-
rupt in this case came clearly within the wording of the
Act, he•having contracted the debt to Mr. Riches in a
fraudulent manner, and was therefore not entitled to the
protection of that Court. The goods were delivered
upon trust, and there being no sale shown or established,
it implied clearly a breach of that trust. He (the Com-
missioner) was therefore obliged to reserve the conside-
ration of the bankrupt's final order, giving him the
protection of the Court.
There was no other case of the slightest interest heard
this morning.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
MANSION-HOUSE.

A young man who stated his name to be William
Charles Prince, was brought before Sir John Pirie,
charged with having robbed Mr. Kipling, hosier, of
Cheapside, of a diamond pin at Doncaster, nearly two
years ago. The prisoner was apprehended in King Wil-
liam-street, in the City, by Sergeant Langley, of the A
division of the Metropolitan police, who took him into
custody from the handbill description of him, having
seen him in company with several of the desperate
thieves designated " the swell mob," on the look out
for prey.
It appeared from the evidence, that as the prosecutor
was walking in the middle of the day in one of the most
public streets in Doncaster, in September, 1842, with his
nephew, a person made a snatch at his diamond pin,
which was fastened to his shirt with another pin. The
prosecutor seized him immediately, and held him
against the wall ; but by an active exertion he broke
away, and when pursued managed to strike the pro-
secutor a blow in the face and knock him down.
He was, however, collared and taken before
a Magistrate, by whom he was committed to Don-
caster gaol to take his trial at the Wakefield
sessions. On the third day after the committal he
escaped from the prison, and was never seen by those
who were anxious to come in contact with him, until a
day or two ago, when Sergeant Langley apprehended
the prisoner, and accused him of being the fugitive thief.
The governor of Doncaster gaol had offered a reward for
the apprehension of William Charles Prince, and caused
hand-bills to be circulated; but it was believed that the
runaway had taken an excursion to America.
Mr. Kipling, upon looking at the prisoner, said he
had no hesitation in stating that the prisoner was the
thief.

Mr. Thomas Kipliag, nephew to the prosecutor, also
recognised the prisoner.
In answer to questions from Mr. Humphreys, who ap-
peared for the prisoner, the witness said he had seen the
prisoner, not only at the time the robbery was com-
mitted, but for a considerable time after, the same even-
ing, before the Magistrate at Doncaster.
George Leadbetter (the Bow-street officer) stated that
he was at Doncaster at the time of the robbery, and saw
the prisoner charged several times in the gaol after the
robbery, and did not in the least doubt that the prisoner
was the man.

Sir JOHN PIRIE was quite satisfied with the evidence,
and directed that the prisoner should be delivered up to
the constable from Doncaster.
GUILDHALL.

ROBBERY FROM THE POST-OFFICE.—Ann lVest, a
very neatly-dressed girl was this day placed before
Alderman Farncornbe on suspicion of stealing forty-
seven sovereigns from Mrs. Larkins, a female residing
at 141, Bell-alley, Golden-lane.
The evidence of 132 City constable, went to show that
at half•past five last night, he had been called into a
public-house in Golden-lane, kept by Mr. Duffy, in con-
sequence of Larkins charging West with stealing forty-
seven sovereigns. Ile took them both into custody, and
then accompanied by Sergeant Merry and Mr. Duffy, he
went and searched the premises of Larkins. While
searching, Mr. Duffy pulled a glove from among the
ashes of the fire-place, containing fifty-four sovereigns.
After a long conversation between the sitting Alder-
man, Alderman Gibbs, and Mr. Duffy,
Mrs. Larkins was placed in the witness-box, but not
sworn. To questions from the Bench she said that she
had known the prisoner for about a week, but her sister
for five years. The prisoner was in service in 14, South-
street, Grosvenor-square. The fifty-four sovereigns
were Mrs. Larkins' own property, the fruits of
nine years' industry. Her husband had been
a policeman, but was latterly a letter-carrier in the
Post-office. She had not seen him since the day before
yesterday, but had received a letter saying that he had
gone to the country. lier husband knew nothing of the
sovereigns, as they were her own winning. She had no
wish to charge complainant. The policeman was called
in by Mr. Duffy.
Matthew Peake examined—Was a constable attached
to the Post-office, and took the husband Larkins into
custody yesterday, on suspicion of stealing a letter on
the 10th of July last, containing notes to the amount of
551 The notes had since that period been changed, and
he had no doubt that the present gold was part of
the plunder. The husband was remanded till Thurs-
day next, and he prayed that the present prisoner, and
Mrs. Larkins, might be also remanded for further
inquiry.
The prisoners were in accordance with his request re-
moved, to be brought up again when the evidence will
be completed.