The Sun.
London, England, 1828-04-10 00:00:00

! meant by impartial, speedy, cheap, and effective
( justice ; for of the present race, with one or two
i exceptions, it may with truth be said, that
lit would be easier to give a savage of the
interior of Africa an idea of the interior
of a cotton-mill, than to give to them rational
ideas of jurisprudence. We have before us a
Bill which has just been delivered, for consoli-
dating and amending the Laws in Ireland relative
to malicious injuries to property," which we dare
to say will be found of advantage—as, however
defective the law on any subject may be, it is of
importance that the various provisions should be
brought together. But is it net melancholy to
see the Legislature of England, in the nine-
teenth century, losing itself in endless details,
without the possibility of possessing the least
assurance, that a number of particulars are not
omitted, with regard to all which the Jaw is a
dead letter. "Be it enacted, that if any person
shall unlawfully and maliciously set fire to any
church, chapel, or place for religious worship, or
shall unlawfully and maliciously set fire to any
house, stable, coach-house, out-house, warehouse,
1 office, ship, mill, malt-house, hop-oast, barn, hay-
yard, or granary, or to any building or erection
used in carrying on any trade or manufacture,
or any branch thereof, whether the same or
any of them respectively shall then be in pos-
session of the offender, or in the possession of
any other person, every such offender," &c. The
next clause contains a long specification of ar-
ticles, the breaking or destroying of which sub-
jects to transportation. Now these specifica-
tions are not and cannot be by possibility com-
plete, and we have no doubt that the exercise of
very little ingenuity is requisite to enable any
man to drive through the provisions with a
coach and horses, as the phrase is among lawyers.
How easy it woultl be to legislate by principle,
and not by detail in this childish and silly man-
ner ! One can easily pardon the Visigoths,
the Alemannians, or Repuarians, for having one
penalty for cutting off a hand, another for a foot,
another for a finger, so much for the great toe,
so much for any of the other toes ; but that an
Englishman, at this time of day, should be
obliged to have a separate provision for every
object in nature or art—one for breaking a pot,
another for injuring a tea-kettle, another for steal-
ing a turnip, another for stealing a potatoe, is
wonderful enough.—Morning Chronicle.

LENT ASSIZES.

OXFORD CIRCUIT—GLOUCESTER, Arnu. 8.

Lewis Jones was indicted for having, on the 11th
of February last, assaulted Judith Carpel Teed.
Judith Camel Teed, a very modest interesting
girl, said-1 am 14 years of age, and am in the ser-
vice of Mr. Barry, who resides at Westbury, near
Bristol. My father resides on the Stapleton-road.
By consent of my master and mistress, on the 11th
of February last, I went to see my father. The road
from Westbury, to where he resides, is througl
Bristol. I left my father's house to return at a

quarter before four o'clock, and purchased in Bristol
some things for my mistress, which I put in a hand-
basket. When I came to Rudland-green, I saw the
prisoner, with a shovel on his shoulder, and a little
black dog following him. I passed him on my way
to my master's house at Westbury. Shortly after
he came behind me, and asked if he should carry
my basket. I thanked him, and told him I could
carry it myself. I did not speak to him again till
he snatched the basket out of my hand, and ran up a
bank and over into the fields with it. I called out
" Stop thief," and followed him through four fields;
he then jumped over a stile, and put the basket down
on the ground. The place where I came up with him
was about three-quarters of a mile from the road. He
caught hold of me by the shoulders, and threw me
over the stile, and knocked my bonnet off with the
handle of his shovel. He then pulled me into a
ditch, and taking a pocket-handkerchief from his
hat, tied it over my mouth, and with his neckcloth
tied my hands behind me. I cried out and made
all the noise I could, and he swore he would murder
me. He struck me with the shovel several times,
because I made a noise, and once put the edge of
it across my throat, swearing he would murder me
if I did not stop making a noise.--(The witness
here went on to describe the conduct of the prisoner,
which left no doubt of his intentions.)—Just at
that moment the prisoner was alarmed, and ran up
the bank to see if any one was coming. I had torn
the corner of the handkerchief struggling, and the
prisoner then pulled it off my mouth, and got over
the stile and saw a man about forty yards off in the
next field. I took up my basket and ran as fast as
I could towards Westbury. When I got home, I
told my master and mistress of what had happened,
and the constable, and the prisoner was taken up.
The witness then underwent a long and severe
cross-examination by Mr. Sergeant LUDLOW, which
failed to elicit any thing tending to shake the credi-
bility of her testimony.
The Jury returned a verdict of " Guilty;" and
Mr. Baren VAUGHAN, after commenting on the enor-
mity of the offence of which the prisoner had been
convicted, sentenced him to be imprisoned and
kept to hard labour in the penitentiary of this place
for two years.
Isaac Powell was indicted for having feloniously
assaulted and ravished Mary Hewlings on the night
of the 29th of February last; Thomas Sinigar was
indicted for assaulting the said Mary Hewlings,
with intent to commit a rape : and Thomas Bendall
and David Ricketts, for assaulting the said Mary
Hewlings, and aiding and abetting the said Isaac
Powell and Thomas Sinigar.
The prisoners were none of them more than 18

years of age,
Mr. JUSTICE, with whom was Mr. CHICItESTER,
after stating the case to the Jury, concluded by
cautioning them in this Case to examine with the
greatest caution the evidence of the prosecutrix, as
she did not come before them untainted, and as her
intellects were not quite perfect.
Mary Hewlings said s,lte lived at Cam, in this
county. She does not know her- own age, nor the
distance of the fitctory in which she worked from
her mother's house, nor the day of the month or
week on which the offence of which she cots-
, plained was committed. She then proceeded to
detail her meeting with the prisoners, who she said
forced her into an orchard. She made all the noise
she could,, crying out for God's sake to come and
help her. She then stated that Powell effected his
purpose, and that Sinigar was only prevented by
her mother and a' woman named Mary Workman
coming to her assistance.
On cross-examination by Mr. CARRINGTON, she
said she was not married, but she had had a child
some yearrago.
Sarah Tallboys, the mother of the last witness,
described the state in which she found her daughter,
surrounded bytlie
daughterprisonerws,as who2l )ri,:anisawofayageo.nshheer
approach. Her
went to work the next day as usual, and was only
ill from the fright. Her apron was much torn.
Cress-examined by Mr. MACLEAN.--She does
not know Inty thing against her daughter's charac-
ter, except her connexion with the father of her
child and another man.
Ann Workman, who accompanied the last wit-
ness in search of her daughter on the night in queer
tion, stated, that in passing through the fields, she
saw the prosecutrix and prisoners standing together
in albunch. She did not make any complaint to her
of them, and her apron was not torn, but quite whole
and straight, as if just put on; there was no appear-
ance in her dress of her having been ill used.
borCe a veryneross-examination, she said the prosccutrix
light character for drawing young boys
The Jury found the prisoner " Not Guilty.
inn lirrnimerton was indicted for stealing a 10/.

Bank of England note, and divers articles of wearing
apparel, the property of Mary Davis.
The prisoner, a very genteel-looking young
woman, of -engaging appearance, and well-dressed,
surrendered to take her trial, and took her place at
the bar, apparently confident that the result would
be in her favour.

Mr. CURWOOD, for the prosecution, said the pri-
soner was a milliner residing in Cheltenham, and the
prosecutrix an old maiden lady, of small income,
who had gone to reside with her. They slept in the
same room and ate at the same table, and were on
such terms of intimacy, that it was impossible for
the prisoner to be ignorant of Miss Davies affairs.
Part of Miss Davis's property consisted of an an-
nuity of 201. per annum, allowed her by a nephew,
who resided at Merthyr Tidvill; and on the 15th of
October last, she received a letter containing a 101.
note, in payment of the half year's annuity. In
the evening of the next day, the 16th of October,
an alarm was given that the house had been robbed,
and on examination, a pillow was found in the gar-
den, as if it had been thrown out of the window;
another was found suspended from the window,
and the trunk of the prosecutrix, containing her 101.
note, and the various articles of lothing described in
the indictment, was gone from the room in which they
slept. Some of the prisoner's propertywas also missing.
So little did Miss Davis suspect the prisoner, that
at her instigation she was very near searching seve-
ral other houses for the property she had lost; but
by chalice she discovered a petticoat of her's, which
had been in the trunk she had lost, concealed be-
tween the bed and bed-sacking of a bed M the pri-
soner's house. She also found, on looking into the
prisoner's reticule, a steel purse which she knew to
be her's, and which had been in the lost trunk. In
consequence of this discovery, she left the prisoner's
house, and shortly after procured a search-warrant,
when several more small articles were discovered,
the prisoner was taken before the Magistrates, and
after some examination discharged. Some time
after this, Miss Davis received two notes written in
a disguised hand-writing, advising her to search cer-
tain places for her property : the notes were accom-
panied by some trifling articles she had lost, that
were thus returned to her; and soon after Miss
Davis was, at the instance of the prisoner, taken
up charged with the robbery, and the evidence in
support of that charge was a letter addressed to Miss
Davis, which the prisoner had opened, and thus, as
she alleged, arrived at a clue to the real offender.
On that charge Miss Davis was committed to prison,
and after being detained for three weeks, liberated.
At the time of the robbery Miss Davis wrote to her
nephew for the number of the note in order that it
might be stopped. He (the Learned Counsel) should
be able to prove that on receipt of his answer, the
prisoner undertook to go to the banks at Chelten-
ham to give the requisite notice ;—that she told the
prosecutrix that she had been, when in fact she
never had. He should prove that she virote a
letter to the nephew of Miss Davis to persuade him
to say her aunt was not right in her mind, and that
the seal affixed to that letter was stamped from a seal
which had been taken out of Miss Davis's trunk.
Mary Davis was then called, and detailed the
facts of the robbery as described by the learned
counsel. She also stated that the letter written by
prisoner to her nephew was stamped from a seal
lost out of her box. Some mirth was excited by
the impression, which was said to represent his Sa-
tanic Majesty shaving a hog.
William Pitt, Esq., banker at Cheltenham, said
the prisoner had never seen him, as she had stated,
respecting the note that had been lost.
_ _

William Shortall described the premises immedi-
ately after the robbery, and gave it as his opinion
that the robbers had not escaped by the garden.
Mr. WATSON,for the defence, called
_ _

Mr. and' Mrs. Tovey, of Cheltenham, to prove
that some of the witnesses were actuated by mali-
cious motives against the prisoner. Mrs. Tovey
stated she was the ",most brightest character of
woman."

The Jury returned a verdict of Guilty.
The Learmed JUDGE then sentenced the prisoner
to be transported for seven years.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.-WARWICK, APRIL. 8.

Stephen Bennett, aged 25, was indicted for hav-
ing' on the 16th of March last, at the hamlet of Lit-
tle Wolford, in the parish of Great Wolford, wil-
fully, maliciously, and unlawfully administered teSarah
Bennett, his wife, a certain deadly poison, consisting
of white arsenic, white lead, and sugar of lead, with
intent to murder her. In the second count, the pri-
soner was charged with having adMinistered the
poison with intent to cause and procure her mis-
carriage.

Sarah Bennett, the prisoner's wife, was the chief
witness against him—but as her evidence, though
positive, was in some parts vague and unsatisfactory,
The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
The trial lasted from nine o'clock until near six,
and with it terminated these assizes.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—TAUNTON, APRIL 8.
(From" the Taunton Journal.)

TRIAL or RICHARD GILHAM, THE MURDERER.
(Concluded from our Paper of yesterday.)

- -
Rev. Mr. Marshall examined.—Had been a chap-
lain and curate 25 years; resided at Bath. At the
request of the last witness, went to see the prisoner,
who wished Mr. M. to pray with him and read to
him, for he was not in a state to do so himself. On
Mr. M. expressing his sorrow at finding him in such
a situation, he said—" He knew he was a sinner,
and should soon die." Mr. M. asked him how he
knew this. Prisoner made answer—" He had been
told so at the hall, for taking the goods from his
mistress." Prisoner sat down, and began relating
that himself and wife were about to settle, and had
purloined a few things from their mistress. Mr. M.
conjectured, from the perturbed and distressed state
of the prisoner's mind, that there was something
still more heavy on his conscience. Prisoner said
he was " a sinner as other men, and was aware sus-
picion fell upon him as the murderer." Mr. Mar-
shall replied, if he was innocent, to maintain
his innocence, but if not, warned him not
to add sin to sin by dissembling before God.
During the conversation the prisoner was walking
hurriedly about the room, at one moment playing
with his finger, and at another picking up hits of
cinder from under the grate. Mr. M. read a por-
tion of the Commination Service, after which he
thought the prisoner had something to communicate,
and was asked if the gtoler should be sent for ; pri-
soner told Mr. Marshall he wished now he had never
sent for him; Mr. M. then took his leave with a re-
quest from prisoner that he would return. (A chair
was here ordered for the prisoner, who appeared
somewhat fatigued with standing.) At the second
interview, Mr. M. states, the prisoner did not at-
tend so well as at first, and told him that unless he
had confessed himself before God he could not,
pray with him, or afford him any consolation, which
it was his earnest wish to do. After a long conver-
sation relative to the confession of his sins, it was
evident some impression had been made on him.
Mr. Bourne, the gaoler was called, and gave evi-
dence of what had passed—after the Rev. Mr.
had had some interviews with the prisoner.
Witness said ' I have Seen your wife, and what
I said to you in the morning is correct. I find by
your wife that you did go down stairs a second
time after meeting Maria Bagnall, and that you re-
mained below a considerable while, and that when
you returned you were very cold and much alarmed.
On getting into bed you told your wife to lay farther
from you, for you were not very well. This, pri-
soner's wife told witness, was the first time he
omitted kissing her on getting into bed since they
were married.

Mr. Sergeant BOUPAS and Mr. MooDy now ad-
dressed the Court,and put it to his Lordship whether
it was an act of justice, that the confession of
the prisoner, extorted from him by religious
hopes and fears, and instilled into his mind by the
Rev. Mr. Marshall, could legally be brought as evi-
dence against him. Mr. Justice Gilbert, Judge Best,
and Lord Eldon, were cited as precedents in not