The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-15 00:00:00

they have resolved to address one more letter to the
Minister of New Granada, asking for an explicit answer
as to the amount of remittances on account of the divi-
dends he has received from his Government. The Com-
mittee know the sum that was received up to May, 1848;
but of the amount received since they have no know-
ledge, official or otherwise, nor have they the slightest
notion in what manner any of the funds are invested.
To such a simple question as they intend to propose the
Committee have certainly a right to expect a satisfactory
answer, but after the specimens they have already re-
ceived, they will probably not be much surprised if the
reverse is the case.

The Committee of Spanish bondholders are, it seems,
about to bestir themselves, and to imitate the bond-
holders in Paris, who held a meeting last week. The
eulogies passed upon the Finance Minister, Senor Mon,
by Lord Aberdeen, and the jeopardy of the national
property, which they consider pledged for the satisfac-
tion of their claims, have given an impulse to their ex-
ertions, and now, if we are rightly informed, they will
exert themselves in good earnest. The means they will
adopt in urging their case upon the attention of the
Spanish or British Government are of course yet unde-
cided, but we may assume that the Committee will es-
pouse the cause of every class of creditor, and that while
the claims of the Active holders are brought forward,
the Passive will not be neglected. Monday next is fixed
fo: the day of the Committee's meeting.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Aug. 14.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Faxe.)
THE TALACRE BUBBLE.—IN RE CHAFPELOW.
Mr. Edwin James appeared to support the bank-
rupt, and Mr. Chambers attended for the assignee.
MT. JAMES said that this matter had been much
sander his Honour's consideration, and by him the
bankrupt's last examinatiou had been adjourned sine
die. Since that period two decisions had taken place,
to which he would wish to direct his Honour's atten-
tion, as they bore immediately upon the circumstances
of the bankrupt in this case. He need scarcely say
that the fiat had been issued upon a promissory note
for 8,3041., held by a person named Ridley, Mr.
Chappelow being the indorsee, it having been got
from another person named Howard, whose present
address was unknown. Neither Ridler nor another
important party to those transactions, one Leveson,
bad been examined in the course of the inquiry, and
therefore he (Mr. James) sought to impeach the note
on two grounds; first, that it was fraudulently con-
cocted; and., secondly, that Ridier was cognisant of'
the fraud, and he (Mr. James) would undertake to
prove it from an answer cf his (Ridler's) in a case in
Chancery arising out of these transactions. If he
could establish these grounds, he thought (taking the
decisions he had already referred to, and to which he
would afterwards allude, into consideration) he had
made out a case to warrant his Honour in expunging
that debt. The circumstances under which that note
was given would sufficiently mark the transac-
tion. Mr. Chappelow had been an industrious
respected tradesman in Long acre, for a very long
time before his connexion with the Talacre Com-
pany, and now he was a bankrupt. He (Mr. 'James)
would now point out to his Honour's attention the
two decisions which bore so strongly upon the point
at issue. Under the direction of the Chief Baron, in
both these cases, a jury had found that such notes
were fraudulent. He (Mr. James) contended, there-
fore, that this person, Ridler, had no claim upon the
estate. The one case was tried before a special jury
in Westminster—the other in the City of London.
The one was the case of Halifax and Verner, and the
action had been brought by Glyn and Company, with
the object of fixing Colonel Verner as a shareholder,
and the jury decided as he had already stated. Yet
Chappelow was fixed here because he put his hand
to a note. The action was to identify Colonel Ver-
ner with the company, and a jury of merchants de •
cided that that company was a fraud, and that it was
fraudulently concocted. lie would wish to draw his
Honour's attention to the summing up of the Lord
Chief Baron Pollock, as being most clear, and he
would add most convincing. His (Mr. James's
client) came into that Court under analagous circum-
stances, yet with a stigma attached to his name, as a
bankrupt whose examination had been adjourned
sine die. He came to that Court to ask his Honour
to review the case, and to do him merited, though
tardy, justice.
Mr. Commissioner FANE—I believe Col. Verner
was only a member of the company.
Mr. JAMES—A person might be deluded by
fraudulent representations into becoming a director
as well as a member. (The Learned Counsel then
proceeded to read an extract from the Chief Baron's
summing up, which said that because the scheme had
been a fraud altogether, the bank must suffer like
the persons with whom they personally dealt.) Mr.
Chappelow had nothing to do with the company. He
was a mere tool in the hands of designing men. Be-
yond all question his Honour must hold that the cir-
cumstances under which Mr. Chappelow had put his
hand to that paper, absolved him as much as the cir-
cumstances under which Colonel Verner had joined
the company had absolved him. The other case was
tried in the last week in June, and Alderman Thomas
Wood was examined on behalf of the plaintiff. Hor-
nage, the solicitor to Ridler, the holder of this note
of Chappelow's, was the solicitor to the plaintiff in
this action. What was the result P The jury scouted
the plaintiff's case, called it fraud, and found for the
defendant. These cases occurring since the bank-
rupt's last examination, he (Mr. James) brought them
before his Honour, because they had arisen out of
precisely similar circumstances, with this one excep-
tion, that the bankrupt had put his hand to a note,
and the other parties contrived to be brought in as
shareholders. Chappelow was induced to join this
company in 18391 To be rightly understood, it
would be necessary briefly to refer to the formation
of the Talacre Company. Some property had been
purchased from a Mr. Leveson, who could not now
be found, and a company was formed.
Mr. Commissioner FAME—Who formed the com-
pany ?
Mr. JAMES—Alderman Thomas Wood, a Mr.
Warwick Western, John Davies, Esq., of York-road
(he could not be found now), John Jenkins, of Red
Lion-square, Thomas Pottinger, and Thomas Coul-
ston, of Dublin. These gentlemen bought of Leveson
and Baker (the latter a bankrupt, who could not be
found) a certain property for 38,0001. He would
read the deed if the Court would allow him. The
Learned Counsel then, amid much laughter, read the
deed, willing the company all and every the mines,
seams, veins, lairs, and strata, &c., of coal, &c. The
quantity of ground to be bought was in all 780 acres,
in the township of Picton and parish of Llanessy.
The Learned Counsel went at considerable length
into the history of the Talacre Company, which has
already been so fully and so frequently before the
public. He also referred to the trial in the Court of
Queen's Bench, and made extracts from Lord Den-
man's judgment, referring very particularly to Alder-
man Wood's share in these transactions.
A gentleman from the Alderman's office objected
to the Learned Counsel's reading partial statements.
If the judgment were referred to at all, it ought to be
read consecutively, and not in a garbled manner.
The impression on his Honour's mind would then be
very different from what Mr. James would wish it
to be.
Mr. Commissioner FANS said he could stop no
statement made in open Court, but he hoped that the
Learned Counsel would refer only to what really bore
on the case.
After a long discussion between Mr. Chambers and
Mr. James respecting the propriety of bringing the
case before the Learned Commissioner, as the amount
in question was a judgment debt, the former gentle-
man contending that it could not be expunged, and
the latter that the mode in which it had been con-
tracted_gave the lion. Commissioner the power of
doing so.
Mr. Commissioner PANE said that he would ap-
point a dayof meeting to examine fully into the case,
If the bankrupt would undertake to pay the expenses
so incurred.
Mr. JAMES would guarantee that the expenses
should be so paid.
After a desultory conversation, and many technical
objections on the part of Mr. Chambers, the 30th of
August was fixed for hearing as to whether
Ridler's debt should be expunged, the Hon. Com-
missioner adding that he only fixed that day on con-
dition of Mr. Ashurst (the remaining creditor who
proved upon the estate, and who was friendly to the
bankrupt) undertaking to pay the expenses incurred
by that procedure.
Mr- JAMES craved the Court's protection for the
bankrupt, which was granted him for that day.
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Aug. 13.
IN Rll THOMAS HENRY HORATIO CAUTT.
This insolvent's case, it may be remembered, was
adjourned from the 16th of July for the delivery to
the Court, for the benefit of the creditors, of certain
models and rein ports relating to the insolvent's mining
speculations Wales, which were deposited in the
custody of Mr. Lewis, a solicitor in Grosvenor
but to-day that gentleman appeared and-square,
claimed a
lien upon this property for law expenses to the amount
of between 5001. and 6001., which he had incurred in
a Chancery suit in which the insolvent was engaged.
Mr. Lewis was directed to make an affidavit of the
circumstances under which the property came into
his possession, which was then done.
Mr. CRESWELL said that the insolvent since his
bearing had received two bills of 201. each, which
ought to be given up for the benefit of his creditors,
and was proceeding to examine him as to whether he
bad not met a Mr. Hookam and a Mr. Cooke in the
Bench, and whether he had not played with them at
hazard there, when
Mr. Cools, who appeared for the insolvent, inter-
posed, and requested him to state whether he ob-
tained the bills in any way connected with play.
The insolvent replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Commissioner HARRIS said, that then the in-
solvent could not be compelled to answer the inquiries
of the Learned Counsel. His impression was, if Mr.
Lewis's affidavit was satisfactory to Mr. Commissioner
Law, that the insolvent might be discharged.

SUMMER ASSI

'ZES

HOME ClRCUlT.—Guiedford, Aug. 2.
(From the Morning Advertiser.)
[l•Turaerous inquiries have been made why the fol-
lowing cases were not reported in our journal in due
time after their occurrence ? In answer to which we
can only say, at present, that the gentleman whose
duty it was to forward us accounts never furnished
us with any report thereof; into the cause of which
omission we shall inquire. The following are abridged
from yesterday's London Mercantile Journal]
(Before Mr. Baron PARKE.)
GRIFFIN V. SMITH.

Mr. Platt and Mr. Creasy appeared for the plain-
tiff; Mr. Montague Chambers and Mr. Edwin James
for the defendant.
This was an action brought by James Griffin, many
years reporter on the Morning _Herald newspaper,
against Thomas Smith, printer, of 42 and 43, Mincing-
lane, London, for false imprisonment.
Mr. PLATT opened the case by stating that James
Griffin was one of three partners connected with the
London Journal of Commerce, which paper was much
in debt, and the defendant had in the early part of the
business entered into an arrangement to purchase it.
That and several other offers went off, but on the Bth
August last, an agreement was entered into, by which
the three papers were to be blended, viz., the Austra-
lasian Record, the Mercantile Journal, and the London
Journal (If Commerce. This agreement was signed
by Robert Knox, on the part of himself and his part-
ners, Smyth and Griffin, and by Thomas Smith, on
the part of his son-in-law, William Hoperaft. A deed
was prepared, but not agreed to, and the types were
removed to the defendant's premises. Mr. Smith had
been in the habit of taking his books home to Bow,
and as Mr. Griffin had a right to inspect those books,
he went one day to Mr. Smith's office, in Mincing-
lane, and seeing them on the desks took them home
for inspection. Previous to this there had been many
disputes. (The particulars of what followed appear
in the evidence). The jury, said the counsel, must
not forget that Mr. Griffin had suffered the degrada-
tion of being taken through the streets of London as
a felon, given into custody, and kept in the station-
house against his will ; and it was necessary that he
should defend himself as a gentleman, and they, the
jury, would give such damages as would mark their
sense of the injustice done to his client.
William Rolls, a police-constable, stated that he
was on duty about five o'clock in the evening, on the
sth of June last; was called in by Mr. Smith, of
18, Mincing-lane, who desired him to take Mr.
James Griffin into custody fur taking certain books
from off the desks. He also gave his son, Roger
Kynaston Griffin, into charge for the like offence.
There were three or four persons present, and Mr.
Smith and the rest of them went down to the station-
house, which might be about five minutes' walk from
42, Mincing-lane. Mr. Smith, on the promise made
by Mr. Griffin that the books should be returned,
withdrew the charge.
Roger K. Griffin admitted that his father promised
to give up the books, but only such as did belong to
Mr. Smith. The streets were not crowded, but as it
was about the time merchants were leaving their
counting-houses, they were pretty full. At the sta-
tion-house Mr. Smith urged his father to give up the
books, and he replied that whilst he was in custody
he would not, to which Mr. Smith replied that, as he
believed Mr. Griffin would act as a gentleman and would
give up the books, he would withdraw the charge.
Cross-examined—He believed there was nobody
present but Mr. Berry when his father was given into
custody, but admitted there had been several persons
there before, including Mr. Knox. There were four com-
positors upstairs, and the reason we brought them away
was, because after taking the books, we did not think
Mr. Smith would bring out the journal. There were
five actions pending against Mr. Smith in this affair.
They took all the books they could find indiscrimi-
nately, and have not given any of them back again.
He believed there were seven, including a cash-book,
belonging to the trustees of the London New Price
Current. I have them all in my charge, at the office
of Messrs. Dean and Co., the attorneys. lam now
collecting the accounts of the London Journal of Com-
merce, paying over the money received to the solici-
tors. I saw them on Monday last. Witness said he
was a clerk to Messrs. Dean and Co., and that he took
the books first to the office of Mr. Hartley, of the
Dublin Steam-packet office, in Leandenhall-street,
and afterwards to the attorneys' office. He under-
stood Mr. Smith had a claim of 3001. on the Journal
of Commerce, and that on the Wednesday following
he went with his father, Mr. Smith, and about twelve
wharfingers, and two vans, at seven o'clock in the
morning, and took away about 25 cwt. or 26 cwt. of
type, which were taken to another printer's. He
stated they had a right to take the type, because he
believed Mr. Smith was entitled to keep it so long
as he continued to print and publish the London
Journal of Commerce. Believed that Mr. Smith
paid the money for stamps, paper, and other charges.
Admitted that a staple was drawn in Mr. Smith's
house, but did not see who broke open the door.
Mr. Knox said he was a reporter on the Morning
Herald, and was a partner with Smith and Griffin.
Mr. Smith had been introduced to them to purchase
the paper. Knew that the types were removed.
There were no advances made by Mr. Smith, because
he paid himself weekly out of the proceeds of the
paper. He had nothing to do with the other papers.
Accounts had been rendered by Mr. Smith, but
they related to the .London Journal of Commerce
alone.
Mr. Redpath (a clerk to Dean and Co.) stated that
on the sth of June, Mr. Smith had applied to Alder-
man Thomas Wood for a search warrant to get some
books supposed to be at Mr. Hartley's, the office of
the Dublin Steam Navigation Company, in Leaden-
hall-street, which the Alderman refused to grant.
The case for the plaintiff here closed.
Mr. MONTAGUE CHAMBERS addressed the jury for
the defence, and remarked that Smyth, Knox, and
Griffin were in great distress, and applied to Mr.
Smith as a printer—they entered into negotiations
with him. He was obliged to spend money upon the
concern, such as stamps, paper, duty, &c., he requiring
that, for his security, he should retain the types, col-
lect the accounts, &c. At the close of his address
Mr. Chambers stated, that although Alderman Thos.
Wood had refused to grant a search-warrant, yet Mr.
Smith was right, for Roger K. Griffin admitted the
books were taken to Mr. Hartley's at the Dublin
Steam Navigation Company's office.
The JUDGE, in summing up, told the jury, that as
a case of felony had not been made out, the plaintiff
was entitled to damages, but that his conduct had
been illegal and unjustifiable.
The jury, after a short consultation, gave a verdict
of—Damages, One Shilling.
The JUDGE refused to certify.
August 5.
(Before Mr. Baron GURNEY.)
ROGER KYNASTON GRIFFIN V. THOMAS SMITH.
Mr. Creasy appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. M.
Chambers and Mr. E. James for the defendant.
Mr. CREASY, in the absence of Mr. Platt, opened
the case, by stating that although they had been un-
successful in the other Court, he trusted the Judge
and jury now would do his client justice. The wrongs
he had. sustained were of a deep nature, and arose out
of a quarrel between his father and the defendant.
His client was given into custody; he admitted he
was not detained long—nevertheless the injury
had been severe. Mr. Smith had been singularly
advised in seeking shelter under the Metro-
politan Police Act, and the pleas on record
could not be proved. He did not ask for
heavy damages, but such as would convince
the world, long after this affair would be generally
forgotten, that his client, a respectable young
gentleman, who was just rising into life, should not
be stamped as a felon. It was a disgrace that the
criminal code should be abused in that manner. " I
am sure," remarked Mr. Creasy, " that in this case
the jury will not give slight and nominal damages—
not such as will give a tacit belief that my client is
guilty. As a junior counsel he threw himself on the
indulgence of the Court, and claimed attention while
he narrated the facts. His client had been taken into
custody, and he claimed the protection of the law for
so gross an outrage. His client, in obeying his
father's commands, had been imprisoned and insulted,
and he hoped the jury would give such damages as
the case demanded. The Counsel then called

William Rolls, poli3e-constable, whc, stated that he
was fetched from Fenchurch-street to Mincing-lane.
There were present in Mr. Smith's office three other
gentlemen when Mr. Griffin was given into custody ;
gave him in charge for taking books from the count-
ing-house ; took him to Tower-street station. The
charge was taken down, which occupied seven or
eight minutes, but on Mr. Griffin promising to give
up the books, the charge was withdrawn.
James Griffin, father of the plaintiff, in his exami-
nation, stated, I resided at that time at Bowling-
green-street, Kennington. I was connected with
Messrs. Knox and Smyth in bringing out a paper
called the London Journal of Commerce. I became
acquainted with Mr. Thomas Smith, and have had
frequent conversations with that gentleman on the
subject of newspapers; this ultimately led to the
drawing up and signing the agreement produced.
The three papers being pretty much of the same
character, the expense of composition would be com-
paratively trifling for each, the profit for all producing
7001.
or 8001. per annum. Mr. Smith agreed in the
estimate we had formed
v saying that the junction
would of the three papers ' ld ield 121 per week,
or thereabouts. On faith of that agreemeni
the
the type, amounting to 6001.
over to 11r. Smith. The or 7001., was handed
books were also sent to
Mr. Smith's office. We were
for the use of the office. Applicationsto pay 1/. per week
time to time by Mr. Knox and myself
rwere to made from
accounts of the three papers, but without
see the
t
u
This went on for seven or nine months. wseascer-
tained the books had been sent to Mr. Smith's house
at Bow. My son did not go with me on the sth of ,

_ .
•
June. He was there a few minutes previous. I took
ronession of all the books, telling my son to assist in
carrying them off. I believe there were eight or nine
in all, two of them belonging exclusively to Mr.
Smith, though I considered these might be necessary
for the purpose I had in view. Mr. Burton was in
Mr. Smith's counting-house (our counting-house, I
mean) when he took them away. Mr. Burton said
he must now go and inform Mr. Smith. When he
was given into custody, Mr. Berry was there, and
there were some compositors up stairs—as we appre-
hended Mr. Smith would not bring out the paper.
On cross-examination he said, " Now I will not give
up the books ; he would enter into no compromise
whilst in custody ;" but promised to attend before the
Lord Mayor, out of respect to him, but not as a felon.
He took every book he could find—cash-book, trust,
and other books, and took them all to Leadenhall-
street. He took them to Mr. Hartley's, and his son
Roger assisted him in taking away the books.
George Evans, sergeant of police, produced the
charge-book. The entry was as follows :—" James
and Roger K. Griffin, of Belvidere-cottage, Erith,
brought in by William Rolls, charged by Thomas
Smith, of 43, Mincing-lane, with taking from his
office and detaining certain books. Charge withdrawn
by complainant—thev defendant promising to give
them yp.

This was the case for the plaintiff.
Mr. MONTAGUE CHAMBERS addressed the jury for
:he defendant.

Mr. Baron GURNEY summed up, and said that it
was one of many cases where he had had occasion to
notice that actions often arose out of quarrels in re-
spect to partnership. The agreement showed that
the concern was to have been carried on by Mr.
Smith, the types and accounts to be kept by
him, and he was to receive the proceeds. The
father of the plaintiff alleges that he could not get
at the hooks to inspect them—he was to pay
part of the rent,' and therefore might have had an
opportunity of looking at them at the office—in-
stead of this he takes the violent resolution of going
•to Mr. Smith's, and, together with his son, carries off
all he could lay his hands upon. Mr. Smith comes
home, and finding what had been done (they refusing
to give up the books), gave both the father and son
in charge. The Learned Judge condemned the prac-
tice of placing on the record p!eadings that could not
be iustified; certainly it was a case of great aggra-
vation, although a felony had not been established, yet
the conduct of the plaintiffs was most violent. They
had carried off all the books, and he apprehended that
if the defendant brought his action against them he
would recover damages. In taking them into cus-
tody all he wanted was to get his books which plain-
tiffs had taken away. The Judge further remarked
that it was discreditable to the attorneys who brought
these actions to harbour books which had been un-
lawfully carried off, and some of which had never
been disputed to be the private property of Mr. Smith,
and they therefore could have no pretext for retain-
ing them.
The jury, under the direction of the Judge, gave a
verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, is.
No application was made on behalf of the plaintiff
to the Judge to certify for costs.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—wells, Aug. 12.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice PA.TrESON.)
MURDER.—JoIt Fisher was indicted for the wilful
murder of Mary Fisher, his wife.
Mr. Stone and Mr. Fitzgerald prosecuted ; Mr. Cock-
burn and Mr. Prideaux defended the prisoner.
The prisoner is a fine looking elderly man, who had
previously been in the Dragoons, and still maintains the
erect bearing of a soldier. At the time he committed
the offence for which he was now tried, he was living at
Weston-super-Mare.
Mr. Stone opened the case by a calm and temperate
statement of the facts of the case.
The first witness called was a servant girl by the name
of Evans. She stated that she had been a servant with
the prisoner and the deceased about a fortnight before
the deceased came by her death. The deceased lived at
Weston-super-Mare, and kept a public-house or beer-
shop there, known as the sign of the Devonshire Arms.
He and the deceased did not live on good terms ; but,
on the contrary, there were frequent disputes and bicker-
ings between them. There were two lodgers living in
the house, and two children of the prisoner's by a former
wife. Another of the prisoner's children lived in the
place with an uncle. On the sth .of June the pri-
soner had been out with a horse and cart that he kept,
and returned about five o'clock. Nothing particular oc-
curred for more than an hour after his return.
At that time prisoner and deceased commenced
a quarrel about a lodger who had given no-
tice to quit. It appeared that prisoner had informed
deceased of it, in a way to insinuate that she was the
cause of it ; and she replied, that she was not going to
put up with his temper, and that she wished all of them
would leave. They continued quarrelling in the bar
until nine o'clock, the deceased using the most aggravat-
ing terms of reproach to the prisoner. At nine o'clock
witness took in a candle, and put it in the bar, as she was
accustomed to do. Evidently for the purpose of annoy-
ance the deceased immediately blew out the candle. The
prisoner said a candle should be brought there, and
ordered witness to relight it, which she did. There was
a slate kept in this room on which was put the account
of the beer sold and not paid for during the day. When
witness took back the candle the deceased, in continuation
of her annoyance to the prisoner, took up the slate, and
said if a candle was put there, it would serve her the
purpose to rub out the accounts on the slate, and she
forthwith deliberately took the slate, and rubbed out all
the accounts. This of course but increased the angry
feeling between the parties, and they continue! to quarrel
until bed time, the deceased all this time saying every-
thing she could think of to exasperate and annoy the
prisoner. At about ten o'clock they went to bed, the
deceased going up before the prisoner. She went at
first into the prisoner's room where she always slept, but
came out of it before he came up, and went into witness's
room (where also the two children slept), saying, as she
did so, that she would never sleep with the old rascal
again ' • when she came into the witness's room, witness
locked the door. After a short time, the deceased be-
came very violent, and wanted to jump out of the win-
dow, which witness, with difficulty, prevented, and got
her to get into bed. Shortly after the prisoner came
up stairs, and, apparently not finding her in the room,
he came to search for her in the room of witness.
He found the door fast, and demanded admittance, which
was refused. He then went away, and again returned
and tried the door. Deceased wanted to get out at him,
but was prevented by witness. Prisoner then said at
the door that he wanted to get her to kill her; for that
he was determined to kill her, and he might as well kill
her that night as in the morning. After this they still
continued to quarrel, using all sorts of angry and pro-
voking language towards each other. This continued
till one o'clock, when their recriminations and abuse
closed. Witness and deceased continued awake until
three o'clock, when witness fell asleep. About five
o'clock in the morning, she was suddenly awakened, and
saw the prisoner standing with a large iron crow-bar at
the bottom of the bed. The deceased was just raising
herself in the bed, having one of her arms on the pillow.
Before she could do so, the prisoner struck her three
violent blows with the crow-bar on her head, which ren-
dered her completely insensible, and she fell back. The
prisoner stood over her for a moment, and then left the
room. After the interval of a minute or two he re-
turned, and then jumped on her chest, standing on her.
He then got off and left the room again, and in a minute
or two returned, holding a carving; knife in his hand.
He addressed the witness, and said-she need not be
afraid, as he did not want to hurt he He then again
jumped on the chest of the deceased, standing on her
with his feet, and, stooping down, liffed her head from
the pillow, and deliberately cut her throat with the carv-
ing-knife. After having done this, heOtood and looked
at her for a minute, and then left the room. Shortly
after he was gone, witness, Ward Upsall, upon whom
she had called before, came down stairs, and got out of
the house. She then dressed herself, and left the house
also, leaving the prisoner there. She afterwards returned
when the policeman came.
In cross-examination, this witness stated that she had
only lived for a fortnight with the prisoner. He was a
moody man, and upon one occasion she had seen and
heard him walking about the house muttering to himself.
After he had done the deed, and after Upsall went out
of the house, the witness, in her way to do the same,
met the prisoner. He said to her that he did not con-
sider he had done any wrong, but had removed a great
sinner out of the world. The deceased was a very
violent woman.
Corroborative evidence was given.
Mr. COCKBURN addressed the jury, and made two
points in favour of the prisoner. First, he contended
that they would be justified, upon the evidence, in find-
ing the prisoner guilty of manslaughter only. The
evidence showed what a violent woman the deceased
was. The first witness called stated that she had locked
the door, which continued so locked when she fell
asleep. When she awoke the prisoner was standing
by the bed. How had he got there? It was evident he
could not have broken open the door, because that would
have disturbed and awakened the witness. Was it not
manifest that the deceased had got up, had opened the door,
and, having no one to oppose her, had gone to attack the
prisoner, as she wished to do the night before. The
prisoner had met her, and in all probability a personal
rencontre had taken place, and blows had been struck.
The deceased had then retreated to her room, followed
by the prisoner, who, still smarting from her violence,
and under the irritation of her blows, had committed the
act, which he had, no doubt, done. The Learned Counsel
then went on to contend that the facts of the case showed
that the prisoner was insane--all his conduct went to

prove this fact.
'Two witnesses were then called to confirm the latter
view, but their evidence completely failed in this parti-
cular.

The Learned Jupoic having very carefully summed
up the case, the jury, after a short consultation, returned
a verdict of Guilty.
Upon the prisoner being asked by the officer of the
Court why judgment should not be pronounced against
him, that he should die, said he had killed her, and that
h 3 was justified in doing so, as she was such a bad and
provoking woman, and that he would rather be hanged
than to have lived with her.
His LORDSHIP then, putting on the black cap, pro-
ceeded to pass on the unhappy man the awful sentence
of death, which he heard unmoved, and was led from the
dock urging excuses for his crime.
At the sitting of the Court this morning, there were
about thirty prisoners for trial. Mr. Rogers lent his very
valuable aid in trying in the grand-jury room all the
day ; and Mr. Justice IVightman, after disposing of the
civil cases, some of which went off, proceeded to try pre I
-