The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-18 00:00:00

DREADFUL DEATH BY FIRE

---
Onyriday, Mr. Joseph Payne, Deputy Coroner for London,
held an inquest at St. Bartholomew's Hospital, on the body
.of Mary Carter, aged twenty-two. late servant to Mrs. Cress-
well, of 48, Southampton-street, Pentonville.
Mr. J. Lawson, clerk in an insurance office, said he lodged
at Mrs. Creswell's, and on Thursday morning, about two
o'clock, a strange sort of smell made him get out of bed and
open his bedroom door. Finding much smoke ascending
the stairs, he went down to the kitchen, which he found full
of condensed smoke. He saw a fire in .the grate and the
burning fragments of a female's dress on the floor and
flying about the kitchen. On looking closer he saw on the
floor, huddled up, a human body, and he said, " Why do you
not get up ?" Deceased replied, in a faint voice, " Oh, dear,
I cannot. Witness raised an alarm, and Mrs. Cresswell's
son came down stairs, and they opened the window, and
the smoke having escaped, they- saw deceased lying
On the floor desperately burned and deprived by the action
of tire of every vestige of clothing. Mr. Searle, a surgeon,
was called in, who pronounced the case of deceased hopeless,
and advised her immediate removal to that hospital; which
was done. Heard Mrs. Creswell tell deceased, between
eleven and twelve the night previous, to go to bed.
Ann Sheil, sister of Harley's ward, said when deceased was
admitted into it she was quite collected, though she was
aware she should not live. At the time of the accident she
said she was washing out the kitchen, and she supposed a
spark from the grate had ignited her dress. She said her
mistress was very cruel ,to her; that she had not been in bed
since the Sunday night previous, and that early on Monday
morning, whilst in bed, her mistress came down stairs (de-
ceased slept in the kitchen) and threw a pitcher of cold'
water over her, saying, "You shall not sleep in bed whilst
you are in my house." She said she was going to leave her
situation on the Thursday, and had a great deal of work to
do undone, and was afraid to go to bed, her mistress was so
violent. She frequently, up to the hour of her death, would
exclaim, " My mistress, oh, my cruel mistress !"
Mr. Jackson, house-surgeon, said deceased died on the fore-
noon of Thursday of extensive burns all over her body. She
was quite sensible up to the time of her death.
Jane Creswell, the mistress, denied the truth of deceased's
statement to the sister of the hospital. Deceased had been
with her four months, and was warned to leave on Thursday,
on account of her dirty and sleepy disposition. Witness and
her daughter heard of the accident, but did not go down to
see deceased. She supposed that deceased had gone to bed at
the usual time, but did not go to see her.
The Coroner and jury thought that females rather than
men ought to have attended to deceased as soon as the acci-
dent was known, -and that, though there was no legal crimi-
nality in the witness's.conduct, it was highly reprehensible,
and she would have to answer to her God for it.
Verdict, " Accidental death, and that the mistress was
Censurable for inhumanity."

HORRIBLE MURDER AT NEW

CASTLE.
NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE, THURSDAY.—The inhabitants of
this town were thrown into a state of great excitement this
pion-ling by a rumour that a tragedy similar in many of its
main features to the Savings' Bank murder, which created
so great a sensation throughout the country, had been per-
etrated. On inquiry it was ascertained that a woman had
fallen a victim to her husband, and that the life of the latter
was precarious, from his having taken poison after com-
mitting the barbarous act. The catastrophe was dis-
covered by a cousin of the murdered woman, named
Ann Grant, calling at her lodgings to see her.
She found the door locked, and knowing that the husband
had often threatened violence to his wife, she procured a du-
plicate key of the door, and on opening it saw the woman
and her husband stretched upon the floor. She instantly
alarmed the neighbours, and fortunately a surgeon, Mr. Carr,
was passing at the time, it being then about eleven o'clock,
and he rendered immediate assistance. The woman, it was
found, had been dead two hours at least, and the man was
totally insensible from intoxication. The usual remedies
were applied to the man, and persevered in for upwards of
three hours before he could be pronounced out of danger. On
examining the premises a still was discovered, and a consi-
derable quantity of material in various stages of preparation,
besides some whiskey, which had doubtless been manufac-
tured by the parties. On clearing out the fire, which
was lighted, two razor blades were found, and the
woman's throat had been cut from ear to ear. The
bed-clothes were tied up in a bundle, and the bedstead taken
down ; and it is conjectured that the man and woman
having qu-arrelled, the latter had made up her mind to leave,
and had made these preparations in pursuance of that inten-
tion. She seems to have made considerable resistance, her
hands being cut in two or three places, and there being two
'distinct wounds in her neck, one more oblique than the other.
'On the man recovering sensibility, he raised himself up and
looked in the direction towards the murdered woman, who
lay stretched upon the floor of their miserable apartment, and
it was evident he was conscious of having committed some
,great crime, although he affected to be ignorant of and in-
different to his situation. The man's name is Monk Sher-
wood, he was formerly in the Royal Artillery, and has been
married to his unfortunate wife nearly 13 years. An inquest
was held this afternoon at four o'clock on view of the body,
hut after identifying the parties, it was adjourned to Monday.
in the meantime the Magistrates have interfered to prevent
the ends of justice being defeated. The man is strictly
-watched, and will be removed this evening to the gaol under
the Magistrates' warrant.

BURGLARY AND ATTEMPT TO

MURDER.

On Saturday information was received at the dif-
ferent police-stations of a burglary and robbery being
'committed on the previous evening near Gravesend,
zunder The following circumstances :
It appeared that Mr. Peter Aspinall, a farmer, in
:an extensive business at West Tilbury, near Graves-
end, had a lot of sheep driven into that town where
he sold them to a butcher, and in addition to other
unonoy he received a 51. Bank of England note, with
the name " Newham" written in blue ink on the
back, which on his return home he deposited in a
store-room in his dwelling-house. In the course of
the evening he paid a visit to his father, who also re-
sides in the neighbourhood, and during his absence,
about eight o'clock, a knock being heard at the out-
ward door, the housekeeper asked who was there,
when she receivei for answer, that it was no person
who intended any harm, and it was only a poor man
asking for a drink of beer. She then opened the door
to peep out, which enabled the visitor to place his
foot on the threshold and prevent her closing it
again. A second man next made his appear-
ance, and fearing something wrong was intended the
housekeeper directed a workman, who happened to
be in the house, to go to the brewhouse, and bring
some beer, whioh he did, hut the moment he entered
the door he received a blow over the eye, which felled
him to the ground, where he .was left with the door
locked upon him. The first man then returned to
the dwelling-house, where he had left his companion,
and having armed
the
er mselves with a poker and tongs
seized hkeep by the throat, and compelled
her, under the most determined threats, to convey
them thiough every part of the house, and although
she assured them she could not tell where her master
usually deposited his money, they broke into every
apartment without obtaining any plunder, until they
entered the store-room, the door of which they forced
with the poker, and from a drawer they took 301.
and two 51. notes, one of which was that already
mentioned. One of them then demanded something
to eat, which the other objected to, as they had de-
layed long enough, and after using the most dreadful
threats towards the housekeeper, if she attempted to
give any alarm, they went away, having been in the
house upwards of half an hour.

On Thursday Mr. William. Forster, a cheesemonger
and grocer, &c., at Kensington Gravel-pits, appeared at the Ham-
mersmith Police-office, to answer a summons for assaulting a fe.
male, named Mary Tuckwell. On the evening of Saturday last,
between the hours of eight and nine o'clock, the complainant went
.to the defendant's shop, and ordered half a pound of butter, the
like quantity of lump sugar, an ounce of tea, and a quarter of a
hundredweight of coals, to her lodgings, as she had done before,
" laying down on the counter at the same time 25., the articles
amounting to is. 9d, Shortly after she had returned tome the
defendant's boy brought the things, and threepence change. Pre-
sently he returned again, saying his master had sent him for the 21.,
which had not been paid. The complainant sent word back that
she had paid it, and put on her bonnet to go to the shop, but was
met by the defendant, who forced her into the room, and demanded
the money or the goods, and on the complainant persisting that she
had paid, he forcibly took the articles from a cupboard in which
they had been placed, and the threepence from the table; and on
the complainant endeavouring to prevent him, he struck her, and
knocked her over &table, and quitted the house. The defendant
denied both the 4sYsalW/ t4b.effacS cAlte money having been paid,
and he calledie%sess crifhjprAMat the time, to prove that
the money as ThWitei T. The witness, however,
admitted t od ead when the complain.
ant put it '43crWte.taiel,kl,44l ver might be the truth
as to the ~ .1 11;5 the fact of the assault.
The dere .r, • costs ; but on its being
represent of*tiburiat circumstances, it was re.
ducld !) -
-,54,41-Ctk
Ar s

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF, BANKRUPTCY, March 16.
I

(Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD.)

IN THE MATTER OF JOHN ARDLEY WOOLMAN.

A solicitor, whose name we were unable to learn, in
the course of the day addressed the Learned Commis-
sioner, saying, that if his Honour was at leisure, he was
anxious to call his attention to, and to ask his opinion
on; a question which appeared to him to be one of the
last importance with reference to the meaning and intent
of the sth and 6th Victoria, as applicable to the filing
petitions by parties who, being in a state of insolvency,
fly for relief to the provisions of that statute. The in-
solvent in question had filed a petition, which had come
before Mr. Commissioner Evans, by whom it had been
dismissed. But—

---i6G:TOEart;;;iorter HOLROYD was of opinion, that, as
the matter had already been before Mr. Commissioner
Evans, any application on the subject had better be
made to that gentleman.
The solicitor observed, that Mr. Evans was not sitting
at the present time, and as he conceived the question he
meant to raise was one of general importance, and far-
thermore that it was a point which called for a decision
by the Commissioners as an authority and guide-for the
profession, as well as for the public, he was inclined to
pressior liberty to -open and submit the question upon
the present occasion, the more especially as, living at
some distance from the metropolis as he did (Colchester),
he might not be able to do so before the object he had
in view had been altogether frustrated.
Mr. Commissioner Eloutovn still thought that, as the
case had been before another Commissionec, any obser-
vation in reference to it ought to be submitted to that
gentleman. At all events, he himself should be careful
to avoid offering any opinion on the matter until he had
conferred with his brother Commissioner.

The solicitor said, that although the first petition of
the insolvent had undoubtedly been before Mr. Commis-
sioner Evans, it by no means followed that the threat-
ened second petition of the same insolvent would like-
wise come before him. The first petition had been brought
before Mr. Commissioner Evans, by whom it was dis-
missed. But now the insolvent had given notice by ad-
vertisement of his intention under the same Act of Par-
liament to seek relief from his liabilities by means of a
second petition. Then the question arose, and of very
great importance—
Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD could not entertain the
matter. There was quite enough business which, of ne-
cessity-, would come before him that day to occupy the
whole of his time, and he could not attend to any other
matter. It would be quite sufficient for him to enter upon
this question hen it should, if it. ever did, arise in the
regular proceedings of the Court.

The solicitor iiith firmness said, that the case in
point of fact was not before Mr. Commissioner Evans,
nor indeed before any Learned Commissioner; but the
question was, nevertheless, one of the utmost importance.
Here was an insolvent who had filed a petition for relief
under a particular Act of Parliament, which petition the
Commissioner• before whom it had been brought had
dismissed. Well, now the insolvent had given notice• of
another petition, and his Honour must well know that
upon the party coming up under that petition, he would
obtain his " protection." The question, therefore, arose
as to whether, for the same liabilities, an insolvent was
empowered (one petition for relief having been dis-
missed) to file a second petition, and so gain a
protection against his creditors? That was the point he
was anxious to offer to the notice of the Commissioner,
and he apprehended that it was one not simply of indi-
vidual interests, but one of the greatest public and ge-
neral importance, and of so imperative a character,
especially in the present instance, as to demand the con-
sideration and public judgment of the Commissioners of
that Court. In itself the simple question was, whether
an insolvent, who had had one petition dismissed, could,
under the Act of Parliament, present a second petition
for relief from the liabilities which had been set forth on
his first application?
Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD- here said, that if the ap-
plicant would put his question and observations into
writing, and forward them to the Court, the Commis-
sioners would take them into consideration.
The solicitor remarked, that as his Honour did not
feel competent, under the circumstances, to entertain the
case, it might probably be better that he should offer
his objections when his second petition should come
before the Court. After all, perhaps, he ought to op-
pose the second petition, on the ground to which he had
adverted.

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY MORNING, MARCH 18, 1844.

attended for the purpose of making the following appli-
cation :--

From their statements it appeared that a few days ago
a person named Henry Gould offered in pledge a silver
watch at the shop of Mr. Attenborough, and the article
answering the descriytion of a. watch stolen a short time
previously, information of which had been sent round to
the trade. Gould was accordingly questioned on the
subject, and not giving satisfactory answers, he was
given into custody and brought up to this Court. When,
however, before the magistrates, the accused gave such a
satisfactory account of the manner in which the watch
came into his possession that he was immediately dis-
charged. • The applicants said that since then Mr. Gould
had commenced an action for false imprisonment against
Mr. Attenborough,and that notice to that effect had been
served upon that gentleman.
Mr. COTTINGHAM said that he remembered the cir-
cumstance of Mr. Gould being brought before him and
discharged. That he (Mr. Cottinghwa) was of opinion,
under the 7th and Bth of. George IV., the pawnbroker
was justified in acting in the manner he had done, and
that Mr. Gould had no.erounds for an action. That it
was given in evidence before him, when Mr. Gould went
to pledge the watch he gave two different addresses, and
the article answeringexactly the description of the stolen
one, the shopman had therefore given him into custody.
The. Magistrate added, that in the event of the action
been proceeded with, he,had no objection to attend as- a
witness, and he advised the applicant to apply to the
judge for security from Mr. Gould for payment of the
costs, in the event of his persevering in bringing on the
action.

The applicant, having thanked the Magistrate, then
withdrew.

IMPUDENT ROBBERT.-Toro young fellows, named Ball and
Payne, belonging to a very daring gang of juvenile thieves, were
charged with entering the shop of a poor woman at Camberwell,
and robbing it of the till, containing a quantity of silver.
The comi.lainant said that while she was sitting in her parlour,
Seeing a lad enter, she went there and found another person, both
of whom rushed out, taking with them the till, containing a quan-
tify of silver, and also a coral necklace. The empty till was found
in a ditch near at hand ; and two .witnesses came forward, nho
identified the prisoners as having committed the robbery.
There was another charge against the prisoners of robbing a
gentleman's larder of an aitch-bone of beef and a leg of mutton.
The MAGISTRATE said thathe should commit the prisoners on the
first charge, but should have them brought up, again for the other
robbery.