The Sun.
London, England, 1850-12-14 00:00:00

p DST-OFFICE LONDON DIRECTORY
FOR 1851.

Just published, in 2,000 pages, royal Svo., price 365.
Principal divisions of the work - Official Directory ; Street Di-
rectory ; Comm9reial Directory ; Trades' .Directory ; Law Direc-
tory ; Court Di; ectory ; Parliamentary Directory ; Postal Direc-
tory ; City Directory ; Conveyance Directory ; Banking Directory ;
Assurance Directory —with a very great amount of general informa-
tion. For reviews of the work, which is now the only London Direc-
tory published, see the Times, 14th ult. ; Morning Herald, 13th ult. ;
Mornin,4 Chroni,le, 13th ul-. ; Daily News. 14th ult.; Morning
Post, 16th ult. ; Morning Advertiser, 16th ult. ; Standard, 2d inst. ;
Sun, 13th ult. ; Mining Journal, 16th ult. ; Weekly Dispatch; 17th
,ult. ; Examiner, 16th ult. ; Literary Gazette, 16IA alt. ; Spectator,
16th ult. ; John Bull, 16th ult. ; Atlas, 16th ult. ; Britannia, 16th
ult. ; llerapath's Railway Journal, 16th ult. ; Shipping and Mercan-
tile Gazette, 6th inst.

Kelly and Co., 19 and 22, Old Boswell-come, Temple-bar ; and
all Booksellers.

. • ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NORTHA RN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, Dec. 13.
NISI PRIUS COURT.—(BeforellrehistieeTALFOUßD.)
THE QUEEN V. WCAULEY AND SIRRELL.
George Stafford, the witness who was under examin-
ation when our report left, further stated that the
weight of the silver in the parcel taken at Sirreli's cor-
responded very nearly with the weight named in
M'Caulcy's letter. The price of old silver was from
4s. 63. to ss. per oz.
Mr. BLAIR then proposed to give in evidence another
receiving by Sirrell of property stolen about the same
time in the same neighbourhood.
Mr. Sergeant WILKINS objected to its reception, and
His LORDSHIP, after retiring to consult with Mr.
Baron Alderson, decided thet it was inadmissible.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Sergeant WILKINS submitted that there was no
case against Sirrell.
The Learned JUDGE thought the evidence very
slight indeed ; but eventually it was decided to leave
the case to the jury.
Mr. POLLOCK then proceeded to address the jury for
M'Cauley, contending that the evidence was insufficient
to convict his client; but his only fear was, that there
was so much prejndice thrown, around the case against
the prisoners through the rurrours in circulation by
means of the press, that the jury might in consequence
be led to a conclusion unfavourable to the prisoner for
whom he appeared.
Mr. Sergeant WILKINS then addressed the jury on
behalf of Sirrell, observing that they saw before them
one of the most respected tradesmen in the city of Lon-
don in the position of a criminal at the bar, and he
knew that his only child, not for a moment mistrusting
her father's innocence, was now waiting with breathless
anxiety to know the result of their decision. He had
been anxious to call upon the jury, without the necessity
of hi; addressing them at all, to remove the prisoner at
once from the painful position in which he stood, to let
him go forth with the consciousness that no imputation
rested on his character, to convey peace to his home,
end to the comfort and prop of his age. He conceived
that the whole evidence in the case showed Sirrell to be
en honest man, far more methodical, punctual, and par-
ticular in his dealings than ninety-nine cut of a hundred
tradescuea. After reviewing the evidence, and strongly
reprobating the conduct of Kehoe, the officer, he called
upon the jury to acquit his client, and send him forth
without the slightest stain upon his character.
The jury, without retiring from the box, returned a
verdict of Guilty of receiving against M'Cauley, and of
Not Guilty against Sirrell.
This morning M'Caulay was brought up for sentence,
and his LORDSHIP said, that every consideration in-
creased his assurance that the jury had come to a cor-
rect conclusion. He had been proved to have been in
possession, on the day sifter the articles were stolen, of,
among other things, some instruments of the Roman
Catholic worship, about which grave suspicions might
have been ascertained that they had not been rightly
comp by, from whomsoever he had received them. It
was doubtless only a part of a (tense of habit adopted by
the prisoner, and the poor nsen who were led into the
commission of crime by squalid misery were, in his mind,
far inferior to him in guilt. He was then sentenced to
ten years' transportation.
TUE QUEEN V. SMITH AND CASSON.

These prisoners, who were convicted yesterday, of the
frau'l on the Royal Insurance Company, were this
morning sentenced—Smith, whose case, in his Lordship's
opinion, deserved a greater punishment than that of
Casson, who had acted by his master's instigation, to
two years' imprisonment, and Casson to one year's im-
prisonment. _ _

Henry Blackhurst, 68, was indicted for the forgery
of a codicil to the will of his late wife, Catherine
Binekhurst.

Mr. Pollock and Mr. Catterall appeared for the pro-
secution, and Mr. Sergeant Wilkins (who in this case,
as well as in the other cases during the present assizas
in which the Learned Sergeant has been engaged, was
specially retained) and Mr. Segar defended the pri-
soner.

Mr. Por.r.oex, in stating the case for the prosecution,
said that the prisoner, who had been an attorney at
Preston for many years, was charged with forging or
altering a codicil of his late wife, and the authorities of
the city of Glasgow, in whose favour as trustees the will
was made, bad deemed it necessary to prefer the indict-
ment which was now before the jury. It appeared that
the wills and codicils of Mrs. Blackhurst, who seemed
to have made a great number at various times, were
made under the powers of a marriage settlement, dated
14th of June, 1825. Previous to her marriage with the
pi isoner Mrs. Blackhurst's name was Maxwell, her first
husband being a gentleman connected with the city of
Glasgow. It was, as it appeared, in remembrance of
her first husband, from whom she bad derived her pro-
perty, that in a will dated on the 25th of September, 1847,
she left her property to various trustees for the purpose
of founding an orphan school for the poor of Glasgow, to
be called the " Maxwell School." A few legacies wore
left to other persons, but nothing to the prisoner, and a
desire was also expressed that she should bo buried with
her former husband. The first codicil to this will was
executed on the 15th of April, 1848; the second on the
27th of Msy, 1850, in which she left certain property to
her husband for his life, and altered some other legacies
us to their amount. Then came the codicil the prisoner
was charged with forging or altering. The date of this
d icumcnt was the 3d of June, 1850, and wholly in the
handwriting of the prisoner, by which she left to him ab-
solutely all her property. It appeared that previous to
their moving to Liihon-hall, where this codicil was ex-
ecuted, Mrs. Blackhurst had consented, on the prisoner's
agreeing to go there, to give in evidence declarations of
the deceased relating to her intentions in regard to the
disposal of her property.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins rose to prevent his Learned
Friend making any statement of that kind, as he should
object to the evidence; and
Alter a short discussion between his Lordship and
the counsel, it was agreed to abstain from any statement
of the kind, leaving the object'i
the evidence vres offered, on to be considered when
Mr. 13, Lexcn. then proceeded to remark on the codicil
of the 3d of June, which, though drawn by an attorney,
as the prisoner was, while proteseing to be a codicil was,
in fact, a will. The jury would inspect the document,
and they would have
their attention attracted to the pe-
culiar way in which the words giving the property to
the prisoner were inserted, and, though interlined, they
had not been initialled, as was usually done in such
cases. It was true that the gentlemen who witnessed
the codicil could not positively swear that the words in
question were not in the codicil when they so signed
their names to it, but they had no recollection of seeing
them there, and believed they would have noticed them
had they been. It would be for the jury to consider the
whole circumstances of the case after the evidence was
before them.

The various documents mentioned in the opening of
the Learned Counsel having been produced end proved
and such parts of
them as were considered necessary
having been read, the prosecution called
Mr. George Noble, solicitor,
Reston, who proved that
he received instructions for a codicil from Mrs. Black-
hurst on the 26th of May last. It was drawn up,
signed, and witnessed accordingly on the following at
Lisbon-hall, where she resided. The prisoner was not
in the room when it was witnessed, but came in im-
mediately after. Mr. Lawrence Spencer was present
when he took the instructions. The date of her will
was furnished to him, but he did not see the will itself.
He read over the codicil, word by word, to Mrs. Black-
hurst. He was at her fnneral on the 3d of August
last, and after it was over, Mr. Pedder, who attended it,
whichother
produced a copy of the will of September, 1847, the
wills wasand two
Septemberwill" 17,
codicil of the 27th of May, 1850, and the codicil of the
3d of June, 1850, and some other documents, one of
B"Mrs.iachßurlsatc,khur datedst's
1840, and July 6, 1846. The codicil of the 3d of June
was produced, in a cover, addressed to Mr. Pedder, in
eonfdomrsresd.
the prisoner's handwriting.
Mr. Robert Ascroft, solicitor, Preston, had known Mr.
and Mrs. Blackhurst for many years, and remembered
going to Lisbon-hall on the 3d of last June on business.
Mr. Thomas Ambler was with the witness at the time,
and as they were leaving Mr. Blackhurst came to them
and said that he was about finishing his wife's will, and
requested them to stay and witness it. They waited ac-
cordingly for some little time in the garden, and then, at
the prisoner's request, went with him into the house,
where they found Mrs. Blackhurst. On entering the
room the prisoner said to his wife, " I have got these
gentlemen to stay and witness the codicil to thy will."
Mrs. Blackhurst was seated with her back to the door.
Witness t9ok a seat to her left. Mr. Ambler seat( d him-

self near the door, and the prisoner was on the right
his wife. There was a parr on the table a little to the
right of Bari. Blackhurst. (The witness was here
shown a document, which he identified as being
the same that lay on the table.) Tho paper
was then opened out, and placed before Mrs.
Blackhurst, who wore spectacles, and had a shade over
her eyes, and a mark was made by the prisoner in pencil
where she was to sign. She accordingly tignf,d, and,
after adding a few words to the attestation, the witness
and Mr. Ambler signed it also. After remaining open
for a few moments, during which he had an opportunity
of seeing it, the document was folded up; L.soking at
the document now he did not think it was in the same
state then. He did not think there was any crowd-
ing or interlining in a part which witness pointed out,
and he believed lie should have noticed it had it boen

there at tho time.
cross•examica'ion the witness said he could not
swear that the interliceation was
,not there. Mrs.
Blackhurat was an acute, intelligent woman. lie did not