Star.
London, England, 1830-08-13 00:00:00

SWAN v. NEAUMONT AND CLAVVILING.

Mr. Carewsta. stated the case to the jury on the part of the
plaintiff, Who is a butcher at Sunderland, having also a shop at
Shields, where his business is managed by his daughter. A son of
the plaintiff is also a butcher at Shields, and olv,r/Zill,ittle money,
was sued in the county court, where the sheriff and an ex-
ecution upon judgment was taken out against his goods, and put
into the s to levy. The officer, however, made a mis-
take, and seised the plaintiff's goods instead of his son's. remaining
in possession during Friday and Saturday (the market day), and pre.
itepiing him from punting his trade, to his great injury, foe which
injury the present action was brought.
Mr. COLTNAII, foe the defendants, took an objection ageing the
sheriff being joined in this action with the acting bailiff, citing
numerous Instances on record, where the principle is esitablk
that where a party is judge in a court, he is responsible for any
ir-
regularities which might -be committed in the execution of the pro.l
etas of the court. The sheriff in this instance was judge in the
court whence execution was issued.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY admitted the objection. The theory, they
leained Judge stated, was said to be that suitors only jttdgw
iii county courts, but late decisions had ruled the sheriff to le
judge. also.
Evdence was then adduced in support of the action for u
some points in which turned upon the indistinctness withl=2
eh.; names of the father and son were painted on their shops, and
whiih had caused the bailiff's mistake. It was also shown that the
father and son did business together in their line, which might give
rise to some doubts as to their respective property.
• The jury, under the learned Judge's anointing up, returned a
verdict for the plaintiff. damages 21. 4s. allowing 11. for the inter.l
roption to the plaintiff's trade, and 11. 4s. for the value of emus
iik ins seised.
DENY V. LODGE.
Ti é plaintiff in this case is a tailor, residing at Cotherstone, near
Barnard Castle; the defeddant is a schoolmaster at the same place,
and the-cause of action was a bill for 231. 10e. Oven by Lodge in
MUM for garments for his scholars, and including also some items
fi)r horse, cow, and pig.doctoring, done by the plaintiff's son, young
Mit Dent, on behalf of the defendant. The defendant, it seems
hail made an assignment to his creditors, and young &it had signed
this on the part of his faeheer it proved, however, that he lad no
authority to do so, and in consequence, on Lodge's refusing se pay
the bill, the present action was brought, in order to see whether the
idaintiff was limpet by his son's act.
• The Court decided, that as no authority 'from the father to the
on coated in this easeobe plaintiff had a right to recover ea the
bill, the•eame its if no nmemt had been made, as Dent, the fa.
thee, was no party to, it.. , 231. 10s.
SHREWSBURY, Winsirtrsnar Ana. 11.
Cnbwst 1310 b.—(
oris Indicted forßeftire Mr. Judos
Miring
administered
Hiesnab Howley; aged 'll4
to, or caused es te•taben bit,. Saab builds and Thomas, • ,
gnindisy tit's*. eitbiatestiterotterder thous
Mr. Cottony? conducted the,. case for. the rioooqoo, Mr..c.
lipreired hi the prisoner. •
In Mme.'s fist; ea* reassess Ws is die device of Wei. 4alkh, a
former, at Weimer, is Sinerebir• Os Sander evening, die list dl

March, Mr. Smith had occasion to reprove her, for not getting sup-
per ready for two lads, of the namesolJamesThomasand Wm. Cox,
who were in his employment ; and told her, that if she did not in
future get it:ready before nine o'clock, he would "displace her." On
the following morning, In a conversation between her and Jas. Tho-
mas, the prisoner said she hated the sight of her muter, and If she
had poison she would give it to him ; adding,:that if she did give it
to him, and were to find him dead in bed next morning she should
he right glad. On the same morning after breakfast, she was
sent by her mistress to Bishop's Castle, about five miles distant, to
buy some garden seeds and other articles. On her return she ac-
counted for the money which she had received from her mistress,
and said she had laid out a penny of it foe herself. On Tuesday
morning, the x3d of March, the prisoner got up early to brew. She
had been told to call her master up to assist her in mashing ; and
she did call him up between 4 and 5 o'clock. After he had been
up about an hour, he told her to put some water into the kettle to
make her mistress some tea, and he then went to bed again. Mrs.
Smith got up about 7 o'clock, and went into the kitchen. The tea
kettle was on the fire, and the coffeepot at the side of the grate.
The prisoner was not in the room at the time, but came in In a few
minutes, and having told her mistress that she had made the coffee
for her, the latter poured it out and drank two cups of it, and gave
some to James Thomas the boy. In the course of a few minutes,
they were very sick, and a relation of Mrs. Smith, of the name
of Illedlicott, and afterwards a medical man named Lloyd, were
sent for.
Mrs. Smith, who was examined to-day, described what occurred
after she got up on the morning in question. The prisoner (she
said) was not in the parlour when I first went down stairs. When
she came in 1 told her to come and get her breakfast, as I thought
she needed it by that time. She said she would not have any;
it was for me. I said to her again, very sharply, " Did you
put it for me ?" and she said, Yes." I had toasted myself
a slice of roll, and was going to put some tea into the tea-
pot ; but when the girl told me the coffee was for me, I
put down the tea-pot and asked James Thomas if he would
have tea or coffee ? He said he would have coffee, and I then
poured out a cup of coffee for him and another for myself.
We drank It, and I poured out a second cup. I drank the whole
of the second cup. The boy had drank only half of his when he
leaned back in the chair, and said the coffee made him sick. The
witness then went on to state, that in the course of a few minutes
she also was taken ill, and both she and the boy vomited a great
deal. She had used the coffee-pot for breakfast on the preceding

morning.
William Smith, who was called up to his wife's amistance. de-
scribed the state In which he found her. His wife, he said, had had
a cold for some time before. The prisoner, when she came to call
him, said that her mistress was worse, and when he went down
stairs he found her vomiting. A female relation of the name of
Medlicott was sent for. The prisoner came out of the brewhouse,
and putting her arm on the kitchen table, said, " Master, I cannot
go on with my work any longer." Witness desired her to go on
with her work till the middle of the day ; and while she was getting
off the wort, she said, " Muter, I wish I had never touched the cof.
fee-pot with all my heart." Witness said, "It would have been as
well for you, mahap, if you never had." She remained in the house
ail dusk, and then went away, taking with her some of her clothes.
The next day she returned with her mother.
James Thomas, the boy, deposed to the fact of having been made
sick by the wine, and to the conversation with the prisoner on the
Monday morning.
Mary Hedlicott, a sister-in-law-of Mrs. Smith, described the state
in which she found her and the boy on going to the house between
seven and eight o'clock on the Tuesday morning
Mr. Lloyd, a surgeon, who was sent for, stated that he got to the
house between twelve and one o'clock on the Tuesday. He found
Mrs. Smith in a state of great exhaustion, and she continued to
vomit considerably for some time. Both she and the boy were
labouring under the same symptoms. In both there were many
symptoms of poison having been taken, but there were many sytn-
toms absent. Witness thought it probable, having tasted the
coffee, that arsenic had been administered. The witness, after being
examined at great length as to the symptoms, was recalled by Mr.
Phillips, and stated that after the charge had been made against the
prisoner, she, accompanied by her mother and another person, called
on him, and asked whether she had ever purchased any arsenic at
his shop, and he replied in the negative, as he never kept any.
The Hey. John ors, a magistrate of the county, before
whom the prisoner had been examined, deposed to the circum-
stance of having sent the coffee which was found in the coffee-
pot to Mr. Blunt, a chymist, at Shrewsbury ; and Mr. Blunt,
who was the next witness, stated that he had analysed the
coffee, and found in it a white powder, which he had no doubt was
arsenic. A pennyworth of arsenic would be more than sufficient to
kill two persons.
A boy named Everal stated that he saw the prisoner on the meta
log of Tuesday, the 23d of March, and heard her say, in answer
an inquiry, by a woman named &stop, after her mistress and Jame
Thomas, that she did not care how they were, and she wished, front
the bottom of her heart, that they were stone dead.
This was the ease for the prosecution.
Mr. C. PHILLIPS submitted that there was no evidence to sustain
die allegation in the indictment, that the prisoner had administered
do poison. To constitute an administering there must be an active
mealy, proceeding directly from the accused to the accuser. The
poison must be given to, as well as taken, by the accuser.,
Mr. COAST?? answered the objection, and
Mr. Justice PART said, he would leave it to the Jury to say whe.
Cher or not the evidence showed that the prisoner had caused the
poison to be taken."
The prisoner said nothing in her defence; but her father was ex-
amined as a witness on her behalf, and stated that he accompanied
her on the 24th of March to all the apothecaries and druggist's shops
in Bishop's.castie, and that no one recognised her as having been
there before though she showed herself in the same dress as that
which she had worn when she was last at Bishop's-castle.
Joseph Corfield. one of the jurymen, said he had known the pri.
sooer for several years, and she had always borne a good character
for humanity.
Mr. Justice Punt summed up the evidence, and made an argu-
mentative address to the Jury, bearing very strongly against the
prisoner.
The Jury, after deliberating for about Svc minutes, pronounced a
verdict of No Chilly.
The learned JUDGE:, addressing the prisoner, said he hoped her
conscience went along with the verdict: if it did not, she ought to
fall down on her knees and return thanks to Almighty God for her
wonderful deliverance.