The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-30 00:00:00

NOTTINGHANI WRIT.

- SO

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE,
HOME ClRCUlT.—Guildford, July 29.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr, Justice COLTMAN.)

Martha Robinson, 22, a pretty looking young woman, was
indicted for the wilful murder of her male illegitimate child, by
-biking and casting it to the ground, and by strangling and suf-
focating it. In another count the prisoner was stated to have
caused the death of her offspring by divers ways and means un-
known to the jurors , and Thomas Robinson, 58, the father of
the prisoner, was indicated for being feloniously present aiding
and assisting the female prisoner to commit the alleged felony
and murder.
Both the prisoners were dreadfully affected when they were
placed at the bar, and when the prisoner Martha had pleaded,
she fell to the around almost immediately insensible, and
was in that gate removed from the dock.

Mr. Clarkson, who was instructed for the prosecution, had
a communication with the Court ; it was arranged that the
trials of the prisoners should be taken seperately, and that of
the male prisoner was first proceeded with. Mr. Charnock
defended the prisoner.
Mr. CLARKSON addressed the Jury, and said they would
have gathered from the indictment that had just been read, the
dreadful character of the charge imputed to the prisoner,
who, in effect, was accused of having assisted his
own daughter to murder her offspring. The Learned
Counsel went on to say, that the prisoner might
have reason to be thankful for the humanity of the
laws of his country, and also the humanity with which they
were adminstered ; and he observed that the Learned Judge
who presided having found, from the depositions, that the fe-
male prisoner bad made statements which would not be, le-
gaily, evidence against the man, but which, if the prisoners
were tried together, must be received as against 'herself, and
would thus prejudice her father, it had been thought that the
cases should be taken separately, and this would explain the
eourse that had been adopted. The Learned Counsel then pro-
ceeded to detail the facts of the case as they were afterwards
detailed in evidence, and of which the following is a narrative :
It appeared that the prisoner and his daughter lived to-
gether in a place called Ruffey's-buildings at Camberwell,
and for some time prior to the 4th July, a suspicion was
entertained that the woman was in the family way, but
both she and her father denied the fact, and the latter, it ap-
peared had been very angry with some of the neighbours
for making such an assertion. On that day, however, it
became apparent that the suspicion was a true one, for the
girl was delivered of a child, and the prisoner called
in some of the persons living near him, and a dead
child was found under the bed. The child appeared to
be full grown and healthy, and there were marks of severe
violence upon its person. The head was very much bruised.
The feet and legs were likewise bruised and scarified, the left
arm was cut, and there was a mark round the neck, as though
a ligature had been very tightly applied to it. Upon a post
modem examination, it was discovered that the brain was
suffused with blood, and the longitudinal sinus, or large blood
vessel that passes across the head, had been ruptured by some
severe blow, and the surgeons who were examined, expressed
a confident opinion that the child was born alive, and that
its death was occasioned by the violence that had been
offered to it. The way in which the crime was sought
to be made out against the prisoner was his contradic-
tory statements upon the subject, and also some expressions
alleged to have been made use of by his daughter, in his pre-
sence, to the effect that he had committed the violence upon
the child, and that she knew nothing of it. Two sons of the
prisoner were also examined in support of the prosecution,
and one of them stated that he slept with the prisoner in the
room it which his sister also slept, and on the night on which
it was supposed the child was born, he was awoke in the night,
and he saw his father carrying his sister up stairs, and he heard
her say—Do let me rest a little, and afterwards ask her father
not to tell anybody about it, and he replied that he wouid:not.
After this, it appeared the prisoner went down and get a pail
of water, and was seen to be washing up some stains of blood.
It was proved also by another son, that the prisoner wanted
him to ask his wife to lend Martha some baby linen to put into
her box, in order that it might appear she had made some pro-
s vision, in expectation of having a child. This witness also
t proved that his sister, in the prisoner's presence, told him that
she had been delivered of a child, but that it was dead,:and,'she
had placed it in a bard-box, and her father knew nothing about
it, and site wished to bear all the blame.
Mr. CLIA KNOCK addressed the Jury at some length on be-
half of the prisoner, and contended that however strong and
horrible the suspicion might be against him, yet that, in the
absence of direct proof, they would not be justified in return-
ing a Terri:et of guilty, the effect of which would inevitably be
to sacrifice the life of the prisoner. He theta proceeded to
comment upon the facts, end submitted to the Jury, that the
conduct imputed to the prisoner might be very fairly attributed
to the natural feelings of a father, who was desirous of shield-
ing his (laughter from the disgrace she had incurred.
Mr. Justice COLTMAN then went through the evidence with
great minuteness, and left the case in the hands of the jury,
who retired, and were absent from Court about an hour, when
they returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
r Henry Cramer surrendered in discharge of his recognizances
to answer a charge of misdemeanour, preferred against him at
the instance of the Croydon Railway Company.
, The case has been before the public during the last few days.
r The defendant, it will be recollected, by stupidly endeavouring
to get from one carriage to another, while the train was in mo-
tion, was the occasion of one of the servants of the Company

Mr. S. CRAWFOnn said that the reason he took upon
himself to move for a new writ for the borough of Notting-
ham was, that 1,700 electors and inhabitants of that place in-
trusted a petition to him on the subject, which he presented to
that House, and which prayed for the issuing of a writ.
He did not say whether the writ should be issued
or not ; he thought the time was come when the
House should come to some derision on the subject.
He was entitled to say on the part of those whom ha repre-
sented that they viewed the practices which were brought to
light by the late Committee with disfavour. It had been said
that the object of that Committee was not to punish individuals,
but if the writ was suspended the electors of Nottingham
would be isuniihed. It might be said that the writ ought to be
suspended till remedial measures were adopted, but there was
a Bill now before the House the 19th clause of which would
apply to the coming election. He should therefore move that
in pursuance of a petition from a large number of electors and
inhabitants o; the town of Nottingham, a new writ be
issued for that, borough.
Sir R. INGLIS seconded the motion.

killed. The Magistrates who heard the case, decided
upon making the defendant enter into sureties to appear at
these assizes, and 11r. Bodkin now attended on behalf of the
Company, to prefer a charge of misdemeanor.
The indictment against the defendant alleged that he, being
a passenger upon the Croydon Railway, unlawfully endangered
the lives of the other passengers.
The defendant expressed his regret for his conduct, and said
'that with the permission cf the Court, he would plead guilty
to the charge.
Mr. Justice CourstAN, having looked at the depositions and
at the indictment, expressed a doubt whether the charge
could have been supported, and as the defendant had pleaded
guilty, he thought that, under these circumstances, it was only
a case for a nominal penalty.
Mr. Bonet: said the indictment had been framed under
some section of the Croydon Railway Act, which made any
act, or any thing done likely to endanger the safety of the
passengers upon the line, a misdemeanour. Ile believed this
was the first charge of the kind that had been made under
the clause in question, and he was free to express that he felt
a doubt whether it was intended to apply to such an act as
that had been committed b`• the defendant. As, how-
ever, the Magistrate had thought fit to order him to find sure-
ties to answer the charge, the Company felt it was their duty
to the public to show that they were willing to adopt every pro-
ceeding that might be necessary to ensure their safety.
Mr. Justice COLTMAN said the Company had acted very
properly, but he was of opinion that the charge could not have
been legally supported. As, however, the defendant had
thought fit to plead guilty to the charge, the sentence upon him
was, that he should pay a fine of forty shillings.
The fine was immediatetly paid, and the defendant was dis-
charged from custody.

Mr. HUME said that he voted on a former occasion agains
the writ being issued, but from what had taken place last night
he did not intend to pursue the same course now. He thought
that as they were only acting a farce by the measures which
they had taken, it was better that the writs should be hailed
far all places with regard to which the writs were at present
suspended. He considered the House had stultified itself by
its late proceedings, and he did not know how the Right Hon.
Baronet could justify his inconsistency.
Mr. BERNAL said that if he had been in the House last
night he would not have been one of the minority. He was
one of those who did not look with so much horror upon these
compromises, which was the result of a vicious system, or upon
the system under which they were made, and which was accu-
mulating disgrace upon that House, and to destroy which they
had not advanced a single step.
Sir R. PEEL said that he had agreed to the suspension of
the writ when it was proposed to inquire into certain cor-
rupt practices, areged to have taken place in the borough of
Nottingham, but now that inquiry having taken place, and the Re-
port being made, which did not recommend any steps to be taken
to disfranchise the borough, he did not think it would be con-
stitutional to assent now to the suspension of the writ.--( Hear,
hear.) By the Bill which was uow before the House, he ap-
prehended that any person who was guilty of treating before
the testing of the writ, would be subject to the loss of his seat.
And he thought it would be advisable to introduce a clause
into that Bill, making treating, either before or after the test-
ing of the writ, an illegal act, when committed for the purpose
of corrupting voters' of which the Committee was to be
the judge.—( Hear, hear.) By destroying the distinction in
point of time, and making all treating an offence against the law,
he thought they did all in their power, as far as the law was
concerned, to put an end to the practice.—( Hear.) The Right
Hon. Baronet then read the provisions of the present law re-
specting treating, and the penalty annexed—the loss of the seat
to the Member—and said that if the distinction in point of time
were removed, and the additional punishment of rendering the
Member incapable of sitting in Parliament, that everything, as far
as was possible to have it done by law, was effected to put an
end to the system altogether.—(Hear, hear.) He did. not
know whether such a clause would pass the other Howie of
Parliament, but at all events he would be no party to its de-
feat.--( Hear, hear.) With regard to what had fallen from
the Hcn. Member for Montrose,
_ as to inconsistency
and stultification, he must say, that though it was hard
to be angry with him, whatever he said—(Laughter)
—the Honourable Gentleman was himself disposed to be
tsrannical.in many things, and was inclined to act
the part of a tyrant towards those who (lid not concur with him
in opation.—( Laughter.) He thought it would be better if
the Hon. Gentleman gave credit to those who differed from him
in opinion for being influenced by honourable motives, than to
act on a principle which was the foundation of all intolerance—
namely, that of assuming lam right and you are wrong."
Mr. El UM E denied being the intolerant person he was de-
scribed to be by the Right Hon. Baronet. But he did not
see how the Right Hon. Baronet could explain his conduct..
Sir R. PEEL said that the Hon. Gentleman had accused
him of being an encourager of all corruption and abomination
last night.
Mr. HUME said that if the Right Hon. Baronet alluded
to last night, he would adhere to what he said.—( Laughter. )
Mr. \'ARD said that he 'thought a person might vete
against the resolutions of last night without any inconsistency.
Alter what had taken place last night, he did not see how they
could refuse to assent to the motion of the Hon. Member.
But he assented to it on the unders'anding that the Bill now
before the House ss culd have the support of the Government in
another !ilace.
After a few words from Mr. R. YORKE,
Lord PALMERSTON said that as it seemed to be the wis'a
f the House that the writ should issue, he would net °Rose

MIDLAND CIRCUIT—Derby, July 2S.
CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Justice PATTESON. )

PEKFONATION AT AN ELECTION.-TIIE QUEEN V. JOHN

BUCKNALL.

Mr. Miller conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Clarke, with
whom was Mr. Kearsall, appeared for the defendant.
The indictment charged the defendant with perjury, and
giving false answers to the questions directed to be put by the
Reform Act, at the election for the southern ilivision of Derby-
shire, cis the 13th July, 1841.
Mr. CLARKE, on the part of the defendant„said his client
was a respectable butcher and farmer, living at Barrow-upon-
Trent ; the property for which he voted was his own. His
father, who possessed it before him, had been dead four years,
and he shculd prove that a claim was made to 'rave the de- •
fendant registered soon titer his father's death, but that Mr.
Cordcn, the Secret at y to the South Derby Conservative
Society, had given the name of Thomas instead of John to the
overseer when he made the claim. He should also show that
when a voting card was sent to the defendant, addressed to him
as " Thomas Bucknall," he went to Mr. Corden, and told him
1 that he could not vote, and did not wish to do so, as his name
was not Thomas. Mr. Corden, however, replied that he had
a right to vote, as he was the person meant on the register, and
C
it was his (Mr. Corden' s) fault that the wrong name had been
given. He should show that the defendant had been called
Thomas generally, and also Sampson, and George, as well as
John. —( Laughter. ) When he scent Sc' vote, he was asked
if his name was Thomas Bucknall, and he said, " No ; Samp-
son."—(Loud laughter.)
The Learned JUDGE here suggested that if Mr. Clarke
could prove such facts, it was useless to go on, as the defendant
was charged with " wilful and corrupt perjury," and if it were
shown that he had been advised byMr. Corden that he was
entitled to vote, the charge could not be made out. against him.
Mr. CLARKE then called Mr. Corden, who proved the
Learned Counsel's statements. On cross-examination, he said
that he had not made the claim at the request of the defendant.
It was usual for the Conservative Society to make claims for
persons on whose support they could calculate, without con-
sulting them, or having their authority.
Mr. MILLER thought it right to state that his clients were
entirely in the dark with reference to the facts which had
been proved.
The Learned JUDGE— It would have been more prudent and
better advice to have told him that he ought not to vote, rather
than to have endeavoured to make him believe that he was right
in doing so.—The defendant was then acquitted.

This trial terminated the business of the asiizes.
LEICESTER, JULY 29.
Mr. Baron Parke opened the commission here last evening.
There are 32 prisoners for trial. The business at nisi prius is
ver)' light, there being only nine cases entered, five of which
were disposed of in about an hour.
There are nine cases on the borough calendar ; amongst
which are one of murder, one of cutting with intentto murder,
and one of manslaughter. The remainder are larcenies.

_
.A'ORFOLK ClRCUl7'—lpszoich, Jul/
28.
The Commiasion of Maize for this the last county oil the

it. At the same time, he thought it. would be better if it Norfolk Citeuit, was opened to .day. Ti.e whole popu'ation of
I
was suspended for some time, till the Bill now before the House this beautitul town seemed to he assembled on 'the road from
was either passed or nearly so, as the public would have a Norwich to meet the Learned Judges, and the scene was gay
d;fferent opinion with regard to a Bill passed into a law and and animating in the extreme.
one that was not.—( Hear, hear.) The people of Ipswich appear duly to appreciate the advan-
The motion was then agreed to. tares which have accrued to it from the transfer of the Summer
CANADA LOAN REPORT. Assizes from Bury, and the change is unquestionably one of
On the motion-for bringing up this Report, very great benefit to the suitors and the public.
Mr. HUME objected toit on the ground of th,s expense. There are between thirty and forty prisoners for trial, but
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ,aid he their offences, with the exception of one of forgery, one of stab-
thought the resolution would be agreed to, because it was ab- bing, and two of burglary, are of the commonest description.
,olutely necessary for the welfare of the colony, and as a ful-
filment of the pledge which her Majesty had given.
Mr. HUME said that, wishing to record his opinion against
the grant, he would divide the House upon the resolution.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House divided,
when there appeared—
For the resolution B9
Against it
Majority for the resolution
'1 he Report was then brought up.
COPYRIGHT OF DESIGNS BILL.
On the motion for bringing up the Report of the Copyright
I Designs Bill,
Mr. WILLIAMS objected to the Howe proceeding with
the Bill at that late hour of the night (half.past twelve). The
Bill required great alteration.
Sir R. PEEL said if the general wish of the House was in
favour of such a course, he would have no objection to the post-
ponement of the Bill till Tuesday.
After a few observations from Mr. Morgan John O'Con-
nell, Mr. M. Philips, and Mr. Williams, the further considera-
tion of the Bill was postponed till Tuesday.
The Lunacy Bill was re-committed, and the Report was
ordered to be received this day.
The Dublin Boundary Bill went through Committee, and
was ordered to be reported this day.
The Bankruptcy Law Amendment Bill was read a second
time,
Sir J. GRAHAM observing that on Monday he would satte
what course the Government intended to pursue with respect
to the measure.
The Ordnance Services Bill was read a third time and
passed.
The East India Bishops Bill went through Committee.—Re-
port this day.
The Western Australia Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Lunatic Asylums (Ireland) Bill.went through Com-
mittee.
The Report on the Slave Trade Suppression Act was re-
ceived.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at One o'Clock.

NORTHERN ClRCUlT—Lancaster, July 28.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Lord DENMAN.)
Peter Whittle, a steady-looking man, of about the age of
thirty, was indicted for the wilful murder of his wife, Sarah
Whittle, at Preston, on the 7th day of May last, by cutting bee
throat with a razor.
Mr. HULTON, in stating the case to the Jury, said that the
prisoner was a married man, a spinner by trade, who bad lived
with his wife in the house of his father and mother at Preston.
He had two children ; and at the time of the offence charged in
the indictment his wife was in a state of pregnancy. About one
o'clock of that day the prisoner, the deceased, his mother and
sister, were in the house together, when the prisoner, without
any previous warning cr provocation, suddenly ent his wife's
throat, and then his own. She died almost immediately, but
he recovered, under surgical treatment, and was now here to
take his trial. _ .

Ann Whittle, the mother of the prisoner, a respectable look-
ing woman, cla:1 in deep mourning., deposed that she resided
with her husband at Preston. The prisoner, the deceased,
and their two children lived in part of the same house. Ou
the rtay of the fatal occurrence the prisoner and his family had
been tuning in their own parlour, and atter dinner the deceased
came into witne:s's room, and at down by her, sewing.
No di-puce had arisen, nor any unkind word passed, when sud-
denly she heard something fall like a broom on the ground.
On turning round she saw the deceased as if fainting. The
prisoner was then just going through the door into the
kitchen. She called after him, " What's to do with Sarah ?"
and at the same time saw the blood running down her neck.
The deceased staggered to the door and fell. At the same time
she heard her daughter shriek out, in the kitchen, "Oh, Peter,
don't do that," and, running to the kitchen, witness saw the
prisoner sitting in an arm chair, with his own throat cut. A
surgeon was immediately sent for, but the poor woman died in
a few minutes. The prisoner was taken to the hospital.
Some other witnesses were examined on the part of the pro-
secution.
Lord DENMAN in summing up the case, said it was one of
great difficulty to him ; but if the Jnry thought that the pri.
soner was not at the time in such a state of mind as to enable
him to know what he was about, and to see the consequences
of his own act, they would give their verdict upon that ground.
The Jury retired for a considerable time, and returned with
a verdict of Not Guilty, on the ground of insanity at the time.
The prisoner was ordered to be detained during her Majesty's
pleasure.

M‘Gill denied that any money was offered, except by the
prosecutor, who wished to reward the constable for hisvertions.
Mr. JARDINE said it was too serious a case to be disposed
of at once. lie should therefore remand the prisoners for a
few days. s•,/,
The prosecutor was also bound over in the sum of 501. to
appear and give evidence at the next examination.

Bail was offered for the fill ore appearance of the prisoners,
but Mr. Jardine refused to release teem.

GREENWICH POLICE.
Yesterday Mr. Ellis, undertaker, of the Lower-road, Dept-
ford, applied to Mr. Grove for his advice under the following
circumstances :
The applicant stated that he had been engaged to conduct a
funeral, and notice had been given to him that it seas the in-
tention of a person to whom the deceased was indebted fifteen
pounds, to arrest the body on its way to the churchyard.
The Chief Clerk said no arrest could take place under
twenty pounds, unless it was proved that the party was about to
leave the country•. He did not know whether that had refe-
rence to the case of a dead man. He recollected, however, a
case in which a body had been arrested in Deptford some yen-it
since.
Mr. GROVE considered that any interference with the tune-
ral would be illegal, although instances had occurred, as in the
case of the great Richard lirinsley Sheridan. If Mr. Ellis ap-
prehended any breach of the peace, he was entitled to the pro-
tection of the police.
Mr. Ellis thanked the Magistrate, and withdrew.

PO LICE INTELLIGENCE.
BO W.-STREET.
Yesterday two persons of very genteel appearance, one of

the name of John Perkins, described as a " -gentleman," re-
siding at 33, Queen-street, New-cut, and the other Ednzurcl
M. Gill, a tailor, of 14, St. James's-place, and 85, Edgeware-
road, were placed at the bar before Mr. Jardine, charged with
stealing from the person of Mr. Henry Peckham, of Cleeve's-
place, Stockwell, a diamond pin of the value of 151., under the
following circumstances :
The prosecutor, who appeared very unwilling to give evi-
dence, said that he lost his property at an early hour in the
morning, and it was subsequently fennel in the possession of one
of the prisoners ; but as it had been restored, he thought the
charge would hardly amount to felony, and he understoad the
prisoners were on their way to his residence to restore it, he
being at the time of the occurrence rather the worse for liqtier.
Mr. JARnINE said he certainly would not have his property
restored unless the Court was informed of all the circumstances.
He would, thezefore, hear what the constable had to say.
A police-constable stated that between five and six o'clock
that morning, whilst on duty near Charing-cross, the prosecu-
tor, who appeared perfectly sober, informed him that the pri-
soners, who had stolen his property, hid gone towards West-
minster-bridge; he immediately procured a cab, and having
overtaken the pi isoners near the Marsh-gate they were searched,
and the pin produced was found in the possession of Perkins,
who said that he had lent 101. upon it, but that fact was roan.
tively denied by the prosecutor, who said that he had merely
been at breakfast with the prisoners, and as they admired the
pin he showed it to them, when they immediately ran away
with it.
Mr. JA a DINE inquired of the prosecutor whether he intended
to state what he knew of the matter?—The prosecutor said he
knew nothing at all about it, except that he met the prisoners
in Jermyn-street, and they went together to Wright's Coffee.-
house, Charing-cross, to breakfast; but he could not say how
or under what circumstances the pin was taken. If the pi i-
soners had any demand upon him, he could have given a cheque
for the amount ; but they told him he had lost some money at
play, through his partner, of which circumstance he knew
nothing, having been asleep at the time.
Mr. JARDINE inquired whether the prisoners appeared to be
acting in concert at the time.
The prosecutor replied, that he was quite sure they were.
There was a third person with them, and the moment he
demanded his property in the presence of the officer, Perkins
gave it up, saying he was going to his ( witness's) house to leave
it there, as he had in the early part of the morning obtained his
address. He never saw either of the prisoners before.
The constable said, that when he took the prisoners into
custody, they offered him 10s. if he would not say anything
about it.