Star.
London, England, 1827-07-16 00:00:00

ter, was left to Os )ff Tlto was eftpulated 1441 exec* •
trio. has alsa; abomtett day: before his death
the dec was attacked by an inflammation of the
bowels, brought on by getting wet at his farm. After
he bad been dead and in his grave If weeks, his body
was disinterred, upon a suggestion that he had- been
poisoned by his wife, and an inquisition was held there-
on. There appeared, in the sequel, no sort of. ground
for such a charge. The deceased was attended by an
apothecary of Wantage, named Williams, and the
following account was given in evidence of the tes-
tamentary act. Soon after nine o'clock in tl-e evening
or the 11th of June, Mr. Williams was called in, and
found Mrs. Brittain crying, who told him she was
afraid her husband would soon die; that he wished
to make his will, and she had sent for Mr. Davis,
a person who had acted as a conveyancer, and was
intimate with the deceased. Mr. Davis soon joined
.Mr. Williams, and both entered the deceased's bed-
room together. They were left alone with him. This
was neatly ten o'clock. Davis asked the deceased tow
he did? He shook his head, and said of his own accord,
" I want yon to make my wilt" Pen, ink, and paper
were brought, and the deceased directed that Mary
(his daughter) should have 2001. and mistress (his
wife) all the rest, and be executrix. Davis wrote out
the will without ti previous draught ; he then read it
over to the deceased, and inquired if it was what
he wished? The deceased said, I, Yes." Davis de-
sited that another witness might be called, and
voting Bartholomew, grandson of the wife, was
'brought into the room. The deceased was lifted up
iii bed by the apothecary, and strove to 'raise him-
self; a pea was held to hilts; he took it, and upon
Davis telling him he might only mark the paper if he
was unable to write his name, he put his mark accord-
ingly, without aid. He afterwards repeated the words
of publication, again lay down, and in an hour he was
dead. If the attesting witnesses were to be believed, the
will was fully proved, and there was an end of the cause.
If otherwise there must have been a foul conspiracy in
fabricating the will, and gross perjury in supporting it.
Then, how was it fabricated ? Two witnesses, Bowles
and his wife, swore that the proceedings did not begin
till eleven, and that at 9.5 minutes past eleveis the de-
ceased was dying or dead, his eyes were fixed, and his
jaw was fallen ; and that five -minutes After, the parties
were setting the jaw. Which witnesses were to be believed?
What possible inducement could actu,ate the medical
man and the other person to undertake this conspiracy ?
Where was any proof of previous plan or arrangement?
There was even no evidence of -importunity or anxiety
on the part of the wile for the making of a will. As to.
the disposition of the property, the deceased had never
declared that he would not provide for his wife. Their
occasional quarrels arose from no imputed misconduct
f hers, and in his illness she was kind and affectionate
towards him. With respect to the power of the de-
ceased to give instruction's So near his end, he (Sir John
Nichol') had the authority 'of a medical friend foe
saying, that in an obstruction of the bowels ands
mortification. the pain during the inflammation wait
greit;lbut when mortification took place it ceased, use
the mind became more clear, the capacity returned, and
death took place without a sigh or struggle. As to the
'time. he (Sir John Nichol') could not venture to rely
upon the testimony of Bowles, in opposition to the wit-
nesses on the other side: the statement of the former
respecting the removal of the deceased from the bed
must have arisen from mistake or a Worse motive.—
Upon the whole, the Learned Judge was inclined mho.'
lieve that the evidence established' tht will ; he there.'
fore pronounced. for its force and validity. As to costs,'
if the Court could belieye that they would reach some
of the parties, it might give them, but it could not
against the young woman. .

OLD BAILEY. JULY L 4.

OLD COURT.

Elesesor Banker. an elderly decrepit woman, bent
Dearly double, stood indicted for cutting and wounding
LUMPS Robertson.
Thomas Robertson (a smart yepng fellow), sworn =deem/abed.
Mow the prisoner. We lodged Id the same hone together. On
Os day stated la the lodieunest. having been est. I found her, on
nterd,atdinnee with Mrs. Poole and atietber female neighbour.
She aged me to dine with them? I refused. and said, " Rat your
own dinner. and when you have dined I shall dine." She rose from
the table.and went down to bir own room. wbere she commenced
staging. She sang two wogs to heeself. Mrs. Poole came to me and
seid,tbe prisoner begged I weel4 as her ; I refused. but after having
been asked more than a hundred times, I went down stairs to her at
the entreaty of Mrs. Poole. When I went into her room. I saw the
prisoner put her band ha* her began, and take out a penknife, which
site opened. She appeared Ina gnat rage; when !observed her pas-
sion, and the penknife open. I put over my band, took it from
bet. and shut it. On taking the penknife away, Mn. Poole
said, " See bow the blood runs I" I made answer, " I don't
!maw where it comes (rem." The prisoner had bad the knife
in low hand, and I cannot say which of us three she intended
it for. • I found my right haled was wounded. I did not observe
the idea-aka I had taken the knife. I did not feel the wound
lat all. I was wounded while taking the knife. I cannot say who
she intended to have wounded When I came down stairs she
seemed in a great lege, but said nothing. I could not ten what
it was about. When I was going down stairs, after having been
wounded. the prisoner said she was very sorry for it (the wound-
ing) ; she bad intended it for herself.
Mr. Jacky Liregmaas--Was she jealous of yea?

Witness—She wan.
Mr. Justice Bessollitila••Yell were good Melds previously?
Witness—Yes, my lased, sometimes. I cannot swear that she
intended to cut me.
Mr. Justice LITTLIDALI—This being all the evidence
against the prisoner I think, Gentlemen of the Jury,
you will be best discharging your duty towards the,
public and the prisoner by acquitting her.—Verdict—
Not Guilty.
The prisoner then hobbled out of Court, mu:tering
complaints against the prosecutor: From her manner
and appearance, it might be inferred that the poor
creature was not of sound mind.
(Before the RacoaDsa.)
Henry Solomons, aged 69, the father of Ikey Solo-
mons, stood capitally indicted for stealing, on the 25th
of Mir, twenty-seven watches, value 114. and a pun.
tity of other valuable trinkets, amounting in the whole,
to upwards of 200/.
Mr. Gegrge Grant, watchmaker, of Chancery-lase, MOTU.—
Doe', not reside In the house, which be generally leaves between
eight and nine o'clock at night. On the night of the day mentioned in
the indictment he left his shop futenod, and the next morning ascer-
tained that considerable violence had been used to effect an entrance
by the beck of his premises, and the articles taken away. Two days
afterwards he again saw the property la possession of Mr. Cope, the
htarshalman, at the klansion.bouw.
Henry Cope,' a Marshalman, went to the prisoner's house in
Gravel lane, on the afternoon of the 25th of May, the day that
they Solomons escaped. He there found on the ground-floor a
box, containing a large quantity of jewellery, which he took to the
Manslou.bnuse.
By Mr. Putunts—The box was not heavy—achlld of nine years
et age might carry it without difficulty. The distance frum
Chancery-lane to Gravel-lane might be rather more than a mile
ded a half. Believed the see escaped bacon live o'clock on the
Skit of May.
Wontner, keeper of Newgate, knew they Solomon& lie was
fa custody thi.whole night of the 24th-uf May, and escaped in the