The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-03 00:00:00

w a TOWN and COUNTRY CIRCULATION, at ONE CHARGE.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.

GLOBE.—Where constitutional rights are in-
volved, consideration of the persons will be merged
in the desire to vindicate their integrity. The ques-
tion is, not whether M'Douall be a noisy demagogue,
prepared to perpetrate injustice upon others, for the
purpose of obtaining an opportunity of declaiming
upon the People's Charter to those who would not
listen to him for a moment except upon compul-
sion—the point in issue is not what M'Douall is,
or what the principles he desires to promulgate are
—the real question is, whether a peaceable assem-
bly (we use the word in its legal acceptation) is
under the protection of law, or whether it is liable to
interruption and dispersion at the pleasure of a police
constable—whether the mental calibre of an ignorant
policeman is to be the circle within which the constitu-
tional right of Englishmen to meet for the purpose of
discussing public grievances is to be exercised—and
his notions of the proprieties of speech on such occa-
sions to be the rule by which the phraseology of the
speakers is to be constructed—these are the practical
bearings of the question. Let not the magnitude of the
controversy be lessened because a M'Douall is the in-
dividual in whose person the important question is
raised, or Chartist assemblies the meetings against
which the police are trying the extent to which they.
may push the powers they seem disposed to exercise.
The parties are mere circumstances. The constitu-
tional right of publicly assembling for any purpose
within the limits prescribed by law, is threatened
with invasion. The doctrines laid down by the Home
Secretary of State in his speech of last night, and in
that he delivered a few nights since on the Staf-
fordshire case, seem to justify the apprehension of
encroachments upon public liberty, similar to those
which characterised the Administration of Castle-
reagh, and were embodied in the infamous " Six
Acts." While Sir James Graham holds forth implied
encouragement to the impertinent and unconsti-
tutional interference of police constables with public
meetings, such as he embodied in the speeches we
have alluded to, there is no security from interruption
on any occasion on which a body of Englishmen may
assemble to petition Parliament, or for any other pur-
pose, however lawful.
STANDARD.—In the House of Lords, last night,
the Regulation of Mines Bill (Lord Ashley's Bill)
was read a third time, and passed. The Marquis of
Londonderry is entitled to the praise of having ren-
dered the measure complete by a boast, that, as
it stood, coalowners would not be under any ne-
cessity of admitting the Government inspectors
into their mines, or releasing them from these
subterraneous prisons when admitted. Lord Wharn-
cliffe supplied the omission promptly by pro-
posing, as an additional clause to that providing
for the appointment of inspectors—" And be it
enacted, that the owner and occupier furnish such
means as are necessary to enable such persons to visit
and inspect mines, collieries, buildings, and ma-
chinery." There can be no doubt that the
House of Commons will adopt this and the other
amendments of the House of Lords, so that the
beneficent measure may be now regarded as safe.
So far Lord Ashley has reason to congratulate
himself, and the human race have reason to be grate-
ful to his Lordship for the ground secured ; but the
factories remain, and the ground secured by the
Mining Bill is a great step towards the abolition
of the white slave-trade everywhere. " Nunc in
luctantes dracones:" now- for-- the • millowners,
Lord" Asfhles4 Nov for' thd 'complete fulfil-
ment of your- gro'riOn-s-i'conimiSsion r- The sup-
port •of • the 'l.colintry ba:s enabled you to
triumph'isver the 'tyranny and' :criielties of the Mine,
and you Will have the same•support irt- the warfare
with the tyranny and cruelties of the mill. But
Lord Ashley wants no prompting—he will do his duty;
and we can promise him that he will have the support
of the country. It is some satisfaction to see, by what
fell from Sir James Graham last night, that the Mi-
nisters are at length wavering upon the question of
a Short-time Bill. Doubtless the experience of the
present year has taught them, as it has taught the
country, that manufactures may sometimes go too '
fast, and that a trade fluctuating between unnatural
exertion at one time, and complete inaction at another,
is not the trade most conducive to the happiness of the
people, or ultimately to the wealth of the community,
though it is just the trade into which greedy
gamblers are most disposed to plunge. Now a
Short-time Bill would be one of the best imaginable
means to temper and equalise the operations of com-
merce, because it would render difficult, if not im-
possible, those paroxysms of exertion which are sure
to lay the foundation of such periods of lassitude as
that which now afflicts (or rather has lately afflicted,
for industry is again arousing itself) the manufac-
turing population.

falling upon the kerb-stone, a wound was inflicted causing con-
cussion of the brain, and terminating shortly after the exist-
ence of the unfortunate man. After striking his brother, the
prisoner expressed the greatest contrition for his hasty con-
duct, and was the first to call in a medical mar,, but the de-
ceased, after lingering for a week in a state of insensibility,
ex pi red.
Mr. YARDLEY addressed the Jury for the prisoner, and lug•
Bested that the untimely fate of the deceased might have
arisen from his having slipped backwards, and struck his head
against the ground, and that the inflammation was increased, if
not produced by the quantity of drink which the unfortunate
man had taken.

The Jury adopted the suggestion of the Leuned Counsel,
and acquitted the prisoner.

MIDLAND ClRCUlT—Leicester, July 30.

Mr. Baron Parke arrived in this town late on Thursday
evening, and immediately proceeded to the town and county
halls and opened the commissions. The business of the assizes
commenced on Friday with nine causes and upwards of thirty
prisoners, several of whom are charged with the perpetration of
crimes of a disgustingly revolting character.
MURDER—Charlotte Barnacle and Sarah Barnes were
charged on the Coroner's inquisition with the wilful murder of
an elderly woman of the name of Waring.
Mr. Hildyard and Mr. Miller conducted the prosecution,
and Mr. Mellor and Mr. Macauley the defence.
The prisoners were persons of rather prepossessing exterior,
but for some time before the commission of the crime laid to
their charge, they had been leading dissolute lives.
It appeared that the prisoner Barnes was living at the
time of the murder with her father and mother in Oxford-
street, Leicester, the deceased occupying the garret, and she
had been living there for about a month. On the Saturday
preceding the day of the murder, Barnacle came to lodge in
the house of Barnes, father of the other prisoner, Barnacle
sleeping with deceased. On Wednesday, the 6th of April,
Mrs. Waring had been out at work during the day, and on her
return home went straight to her room, where she partook of
some tea, having taken the water from Barnes's tea kettle.
Shortly aftershe had drank her tea, the old lady came out of
her room, stating that she had taken a cup or two of tea and
some bread and butter, at the same time complaining that she
felt so ill she did not know what to do. Deceased returned to
her room, continued to grow worse, and early on Thursday
morning died. Both Barnes and his wife, who had taken
water to make tea from the same kettle that Waring had
filled her pot from were taken seriously ill. It also came
out in evidence, that for a day or two previous to this me-
lancholy occurrence, Mary Barnes had been making vari-
ous inquiries as to " what sort of stuff" poison was. And
when asked her reason for making the inquiry, she replied,
" Because we have hero speaking about Catherine Smith (a
girl who had poisoned herself some short time before)."
The witness, detailing the conversation, said she thought it
was like flour, and as much as would lie on a shilling would
poison any one, &r. It also transpires, that shortly before the
time in question, Barnes, while talking to another person, said,
" I have got something, but durst not tell you what." Upon
being pressed to tell, she said, " I dare not hardly, it is jalap,
and Barnacle has put it into the tea-kettle." That Barnacle
came up and said to Barnes, " Come on !" to which Barnes
replied, " She durst not, as she knew they had tasted some-
thing." Barnacle said, " Oh, come on ; I know they hav'nt."
Barnes said, " I am sure I durst not go, as they will
taste it ;" when Barnacle replied, " ON, it, come on, or
stop here whilst I fetch some work." The same person who
gave this testimony further deposed that Barnes told her Bar-
nacle had bought some jalap and put it into the teakettle or tea-
pot. The two prisoners were indentified as the two young per-
sons who had gone into some chemists' shops on the Wednesday
to purchase arsenic, and were refused to be supplied. At last
they went to Mr. Lockyer, in the Market-place. Mr. Lockyer was
not present when the prisoners entered the shop. When he did
come in he heard Barnacle asking for a pennyworth of
arsenic. Whereupon he jokingly said, " Are you going to
poison yourselves ?" The answer was, " Not likely." He then
seriously asked them what it was wanted for ? To which Bar-
nacle replied, " For bugs and fleas." They were then supplied
with half an ounce, labelled " poison."
From the evidence of the surgeon who made a pest mortem
examination of the body of the poor woman, he found appear-
ances that denoted the presence of arsenic. The teapot of the
decease was analysed, and found to be impregnated with poison,
as was also the kettle of the Barneses.

The case occupied a large portion of the time of the Court,
but these were the principal facts.
The great difficulty "in the case was the absence of all ap-
parent motive for the deed, unless it was on account of the fact
that Barnacle, on the previous Sunday, had brought a man
into the room, for which she was scolded very much by de-
ceased.

• The Lerrned Ju'clge (Mt. Justice PA rrioarj having summed
up, the Jury returned a verdict of Gailty of administering the
arsenic, but not with intent to kill, whereupon the Judge told
them that was no verdict at all, they must either find them
guilty of murder, of manslaughter, or not guilty. After con-
sulting a short time further together, they returned s verdict
of Guilty of manslaughter, and they were sentenced to be
transported fer life.
William Vann was indicted for cutting and maiming his wife
with intent to kill. The prisoner, who has long been afflicted
with paralysis, had, for some time before the commission of
the offence with which he was charged, beets jealous of his wife.
It appeared that on the evening before the morning of the
day when the act was committed, the prosecutrix had gone out,
and did not return until long after her husband had gone to
bed. It further transpired that she had more money in her
possession than he thought could be fairly accounted for, and
high words arose between them, with some violence on his part,
whereupon his wife quitted the bed-room, and laid herself down
in what is termed the house-place. About four in the morning
she went up stairs to complete dressing herself, when her hus-
band offered to assist her in buttoning her gown, and while
pretending so to dn, he drew her down on the bed and cut her
throat with the razor, and afterwards severely wounded him-
self. The woman got away as well as she was able, and gave
an alarm ; he was taken into custody.
The prisoner was found guilty, and sentence of death re-
corded against him.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BOW-STREET.

Yesterday being appointed for the further examination
of John Perkins and Edmund who had been re-
manded from Friday, on the charge of stealing a dia-
mond pin from Mr. Henry Peckham, of the value of
15/., the Court was crowded to excess by friends of the
prisoners, and others, who were anxious to bear the dis-
closures which it was expected might be made relative
to the house in Jermyn-street.
Mr. Payne, the barrister, and Mr. Hobler attended for
the prisoners.
Mr. Henry Peckham, the complainant, who had been
bound over to prosecute, repeated the evidence which he
gave on a former occasion, the material points of which,
as relating to the case, were, that on the 29th of July.
about four o'clock in the morning, he was coming out of
a gambling-house in Jermyn-street, when he met
the two prisoners and another man not in cus-
tody. He went with them to a coffee-shop near
Charing-cross, and, having been drinking, he fell
asleep there. When he awoke he missed his
diamond pin, and accused the prisoners of having it.
They denied the accusation, and he left the shop in
search of a constable. When he returned the prisoners
were gone ; they were, however, subsequently found,
when M'Gill gave up the pin.
The following cross-examination of Mr. Peckham then
took place :
Mr. Payne—Who, and what are you ? Witness—l
am a gentleman, and live upon my means.
Mr. Payne—You had a watch and appendages with
you at the time of this transaction, had you not ? Wit-
ness—l had ; the watch was worth 401.
. Mr. Payne—What is the pin worth ? Witness—lts
intrinsic value is 15/..; it cost. a great deal more.
Mr. Payne—You had no money, had you ? Wit-
ness—l had, but I don't know how much.
Mr. Payne—Did you not borrow from M`Crill a sove-
reign ito pay a cab ? Witness—l did not.
Mr. Payne—Did you hire the cab ? Witness—l pre-
sume I did.
Mr. Payne—You presume ! no, shuffling. Do you
know whether you paid for the cab ?
Mr. Jardine here checked the Learned Counsel. He
did not think that he had any right to impute shuffling
to the witness, who appeared to be giving his evidence
very properly.
Witness—l don't know ; I was in that state of mind
that I don't know.
Mr. Payne—Now, you are a gentleman, as you say ;
what had you been about all night? Witness—l had been
as far as Hammersmith, and on my return I saw a gentle-
man, a Mr. Armstrong, whom I knew at Valparaiso and
Lima, go into a house in Jermyn-street, which I thought
was a club-house ; I followed him in; that was between
twelve and one o'clock in the morning.
Mr. Payne—What was the number of the house ?
Witness—l don't know the number.
Mr. Payne—Do you know whether it was " the cot-
tage "in Jermyn-street. Witness—l do not know what
it was.
Mr. Payne—Did you lose money there ? Witness--
I lost some money there.
Mr. Payne—Did you not lose 30/. and give a cheque
for it, upon your oath ? Witness—Upon my oath I lost
upwards of 301.
Mr. Payne—Did you give a cheque for it, I ask ?
Witness—l gave a cheque first for 5/. ; and afterwards
for 201., when I received the former cheque back.
Mr. Payne—Have you got the cheque ? Witness—
I have part of it.
Mr. Payne—How came it torn ? 'Witness—When I
paid tke cheque I tore it up.
Mr. Payne—Now, did you not, on your oath, first give
a cheque fur a small sum, and then under the pretence
of giving a cheque for a larger sum, keep the small
cheque, and refuse to give any other ? Witness
(with warmth)—l deny it altogether. I deny it alto-
gether. I was grossly robbed in that house, and if I
had acted rightly I should have given every one in the
place in charge.
Mr. Payne—Yes, after you had lost your money I
Did you pay the cheque ? Witness—l did, most de-
cidedly. I paid it in their own counters.
Mr. Payne—How came you to leave this country ?
Witness—l went to better my condition. I left in 1825,
and was then about twenty years of age..
Mr. Payne—How was it you
went into aaming-
house with a watch and pin, and no money? Witness—
I had money. I can give you the numbers of the notes
g
hich I lost, if that will suityou.
money
at the place where
Mr. Payne—Had y
my 73
elywent
mteo
sihl
raevre;
real
don't know how much.
bbuotu kafnayst ? Witness—l had some
Bridge-road? Witness—lt was,
Mr. payne_was your pin given to you at the draper's
shop ;in Westminstr_
With them then
Mr. Payne—D 1 .
and the e prisoners.sdondoiut
nmorast
shall!
jiae jh'ofinkeds.