The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-28 00:00:00

bankers, Strand, half-yearly, quarterly, or annually, as the
said Fanny Maria Brunton shall will it, and after her death
(which I cannot contemplate without feelings of the deepest
regret) to her son, now born, Thomas Chase, but illegitimate
(since the horrid previous marriage has been proved)
Given under my band and seal this 18th day of November
in the year of our Lord, 1840.

(L.S) " COVENTRY.
" Witnesses—THOMAS MARCHANT.
RICHARD CHAMBERS, M.D."
The codicil was, enclosed in an envelope, end.rsed, " To
Miss Fanny Maria Brunton—Coventry."
The QuaEx's ADVOCATE and Dr. PHILLIMORE, jun., op-
posed the paper as not being a codicil to the will of the 'late
Earl, but merely as a security that the testator would regu-
larly execute a paper in her favour.
Dr. ADDAMS submitted that the paper had been propounded
as a codicil, and it was rather too late now to raise the objec-
tion made on the other side. The paper was regularly exe-
cuted and delivered to the lady, who placed it in her bosom.
There could be no doubt but that the deceased was of sound
mind at the period it was executed, though there was no
question he subsequently became deranged, and continued so
till his death. As to the execution of the paper by the late
Earl, that was most fully established. The cases cited on
the other side did not bear on the points now raised as
against the validity of the paper under discussion. The re-
quirements of the new Will Act had been complied with, and
the Court must pronounce for it as a provisional codicil, in-
tended by the testator to operate in the absence of any more
formal instrument, as it would be hard indeed to deprive the
lady of her annuity.
The COURT said it must consider if this paper was a codicil
or not. It was an important question. The other papers
were entitled to probate, the costs as to them to be paid out
of the estate.

JAMES V. COVEN,

This case respects the validity of certain testamentary
papers of the late Mr. L. Cohen, who died on the sth of
March, 1842, leaving property of the value of about 7,0001.
Among the relatives he left behind him were two nieces, one
of whom is the wife of the Bishop of Jerusalem. By the
papers before the Court, the distribution of the property was
varied. The deceased destroyed his last will, and the ques-
tion was, if this revived a will dated in 1832, and two cbdi-
cils, made in 1833 and iu 1836, which had for a long time
been out of his possession. The case does not possess the
least public interest.

The Court, after hearing civilians on both sides, held that
there was no proof of the intention of the deceased to revive
the will of 1832, or the codicils of 1833 and 1836, and there-
fore an intestacy must be pronounced for.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
GUILDHALL.
On Monday Mrs. Earnshaw, of Park-street, Camden-to*n,
and Miss Emma Wells, who resided with her as companion,
were re-examined, charged with purloining various articles
from jewellers' shops.
Mr. Clarkson, who attended for the prisoners, observed
that the officers were, at the last hearing, especially directed
to ascertain if there were grounds for believing that either
of the eight 5/. notes found in the possession of the prisoners
could be presumed to be the produce of ether goods stolen
and sold or pawned by the prisoners. He wished to know
if they had made those inquiries. He knew the fact was
that Mrs. Earnshaw had received them in payment of her
allowance under her marriage settlement, and he trusted the
magistrate would restore them to the lady. The officers had
brought away some savings' bank books, containing deposits
to the amount of 801. As he could not as clearly show that
the moneys paid in were not the produce of stolea goods, he
was afraid he could not then make the same claim for their
restoration.

Mr. Alderman HUGHES asked the officer if he had made
inquiry about the notes ?;—Wardle, the policeman, replied he
had, and that he could not trace that a 5/. note had been paid
to the prisoners in any case. He had traced only one pawn-
ing, that of a locket, stolen from Mr. Lamb, a jeweller in
Cheapside, and pawned at Mr. Fleming's, in Farringdon-
street.

Mr. Alderman HUGHES examined the notes, and finding
they were new, and seven of them of consecutive numbers, he
said he believed Mr. Clarkson's statement, and should order
30/. to be given up. Lest anything should turn upon the
notes, he must direct the officer to keep two of the notes, and
take the numbers of those he gave up.
To complete the case entered into at the first hearing of
the stealing of a fruit knife from the shop of Mrs. Rose, of
Farringdon-street,
George Chambers, a station-house clerk, was examined,
and proved that he found the knife in an unsewed portion of
Miss Wells's boa. He also found there a gold watch key,
which had not been owned.
Mr. Alderman CHALLIS asked if a secret pocket had been
purposely formed in the boa. The officer said no. It was
merely unripped. There was no sewing to form a pocket.
Mr. Shepherd, a watchmaker in the Strand, identified a
gold watch of the value of 301. The prisoners came into
his shop three weeks ago, and Wells wished to see a tray of
watches in the window. He placed two trays before them :
they objected to the price, and wished to see some at six
guineas. Their appearance obtained his confidence so much
that he did not remove the trays before he turned away to
reach the cheaper watches, and this was taken advantage of
to steal the watch, which he did not miss till the officer in-
quired whether he had been robbed.
Mr. Alderman HUGHES asked if it was possible that he
could have sold the watch ?

Mr. Shepherd said it was not. The number of every
watch was entered in a stock-book, and the sale was also
entered.
Mr. Alderman HUGHES asked the officer where he found
the watch ?

Thomas Hollingsworth, a City policeman, stated that while
he was conveying the to the Compter, Wells handed
the watch to Mr. Hughes, her landlord, of Park-street, for
care, and witness immediately took possession of it.
A third charge was preferred by Mr. Hannaford, of Re-
gent-street, a dressing-case maker. He had a recollection of
seeing the elder prisoner about five years ago, but neither
he nor his partner had any recollection of seeing the prison-
ers in his shop recently. The two gold pencil-cases pro-
duced, value 81. and 31., were his property. They were two
out of three which were purchased from the maker on the
31st of January ; the larger one was missed ten days after ;
the smaller one had not been missed.

The officer said these were found, each in a separate case,
at the prisoners'lodging.
Mr. Alderman HUGHES said it would be more satisfactory
if his partner would attend the next examination, that he
might be certain that neither could identify the prisoners.
A fourth charge was preferred by Mr. Clapham, a jeweller
in the Strand. He said the prisoners had been three times
to his shop within two months, and each time looked at his
ringlL They did not purchase anything. He did not miss
anything, but he suspected them so much that at their
second and third visits he used such precautions that ren-
dered stealing undetected impossible, and he sent his boy
to watch them. They went into the jewellers at the corner
of Villiers-street. He identified three finger-rings set with
atones.

Mr. Alderman CHALLIS asked how he knew they were not
sold /—Mr. Clapham said they were very old stock, and he
could not have sold them without remarking the fact.
A fifth charge was preferred by Mr. West, of Ludgate-
street, jeweller. He did not remember the prisoners, but he
identified a gold brooch, value 2/. 10s., which had been stolen
from his stock, and was found at the prisoners' lodging. He•
missed it on the Ist of February.
A sixth charge was preferred by Messrs. Hitchcock and
Rogers, St. Paul's Church-yard, of stealing a piece of ribbon,
value 55., on the afternoon the prisoners were apprehended.
They first looked at some boxes of dark ribbon, and then
wished to see some light ribbons ; and while the assistant
was fetching the box, they took the opportunity to help
themselves. They bought a small quantity.
A seventh charge was preferred by Mr. Lamb, a jeweller,
in Cheapside. He identified a gold locket, but lad no recol-
lection of seeing the prisoners at his shop.
Mr. Alderman HUGHES said, as several articles were yet
unclaimed, it was desirable that the prisoners should be
further remanded.

Mr. Clarkson said he could not oppose this. There ought
to be the fullest inquiry, and he was willing that the pri-
soners should at once stand remanded for a fortnight.
Mr. Alderman HuGnus replied that this was a longer term
of remand than he should hale proposed, but if it would be
more convenient than an intermediate examination, he would,
with their own consent, remand them for a fortnight.
The prisoners were removed.
HAMMERSMITH.

THE LATE SERIOUS CHARGE AGADTST A RESPECTABLE
TRADESMAN.-Mr. Samuel MO, a master-baker, residing at
Notting-hill, who was charged on the 14th instant with a
criminal assault upon a young woman named Mary Horn,
eighteen years of age, and who has been several times re-
manded, appeared before Mr. S. Paynter, the sitting magis-
trate, in discharge of his bail, in the sum of 1,4001., for the
purpose of undergoing a final examination.
The facts have already appeared in the daily papers, and
it has also been stated that since the night previous to the
second examination the complainant has absented herself
from her father's dwelling, and has not since been heard of.
M. Duncombe, solicitor of Gray's Inn, again attended to
defend Mr. Nash.

Mr. PAYN. TER inquired if anything had yet been heard of
Mary Horn, who had brought the charge against the prisoner.
Inspector Morgan said he had written immediately after
the second examination to Mr. Solomon, the chief constable
of Brighton, whither the complainant was supposed to have
gone, having lived there for some years, but he had received
an answer that she had not been there.

Mr. I'AvNTETt (seeing Mary Horn's father, in attendance),
inquired if he had heard anything of his daughter.
The father replied that he had not. He had himself been
to Brighton to see after her, but could learn nothing respect-
in her.
Inspector Morgan observed, that if the father had come to
him immediately on discovering that his daughter was gone,
he doubted not he should have soon been able to have found
her, and prevented him the trouble of going to Brighton.
Mr. PAYNTER remarked, it was doubtful to him if the
father of the complainant went to Brighton at all to look
after her. There were many suspicious circumstances in the
case on all sides. He should not, at present, enter further
into the case, but content himself with binding Mr. Nash
over to appear at the ne?Et sessions of the Central Criminal
Court, to answer any charge which may be preferred against
him.

Mr. Nash then entered into his own recognizance of 400/.
and two sureties in 2001. each to appear.

BANK OF MANCHESTER.—The Committee ap-
pointed at the annual meeting in October last to investigate
the affairs of the Bank have presented their report to the
proprietors. Having exercised the' utmost discretion in the
estimates placed on the value of assets, whether in
form of real securities or personal obligations, they had
arrived at so near an approximation to the statements
contained in the report as to justify them in
pronouncing the balance-sheet exhibited to the share-
holders on the 29th of October, 1843, to have been (as far
as could be ascertained) a true and accurate statement
of the position of the bank on the 30th of June in that year.
The Committee had also examined the balance-sheet for the
half-year ending the 31st of December, 1843, and had the sa-
tisfaction ofreporting that this balance-sheet showed a con-
siderable realisation of assets, and consequent
_reduction of

liabilities, from 440,9361. to 314,7781., during the halt-year,
and justified the hope that no further loss would result to the
shareholders of this unfortunate concern than what would be
provided for by the payment of the second cal.—Low/Paper.
DEATH OF A GRAVEDIGGER FR?M LOCK-JAW.
—One of the gravediggers of St. Peter's, in the 'Waterloo-
road, has recently died under very extraordinary circum-
stances. It appears, from information' obtained from An-
derson, the beadle, that the deceased, whose name was
John Larkin, while occupied, about two months since, in
digging a grave in the church-yard, by some means got a
splinter run into his hand from the remains of an old coffin.
He took no notice at the time of what he considered a trivial
occurrence, and proceeded in his daily avocation. At last,
the hand became very much inflamed, and he was obliged
to have medical aid.. The symptoms became very serious,
and eventually 'ock-Jaw ensued, which caused his death.
The body was to have been buried yesterday, but it was
thought necessary to make some inquiries as to the real
nature of the death, and the surgeon baying stated that the
splinter had caused the lock-jaw, the Coroner had been ap-
plied to, as to whether an inquest should not be held. The
friends of the deceased are very much opposed to it, because
the injury occurred so long ago.