The Sun. — 1846-04-07 (London, England)

INFANTICIDE.—Anne Coles, a rather interest  ing young woman, was arraigned for the wilful murder oi her male child, by inflicting a mortal bruise upon its head with some hard substance.  Mr. T. W. Saunders appeared for the prosecution. Mr. Prideaux defended the prisoner. The main facts of this case, which were of a somewhat extraordinary character, appeared from the evidence to be as follows :—The prisoner, who went out into service by day, and earned her bread as a general servant, lodged with an uncle and aunt of the name of Francis, who occupied two rooms, a front-parlour and a back parlour, in a house, No. 10, Wellington-place, Rath, the different apartments of which were let out to different lodgers. The back parlour was occupied by the prisoner, whilst Mr. and Mrs. Francis and a young child, their daughter, slept in the front parlour. On Saturday morning, the 2d of August, about four o'clock, a man of the name of Bowles, who also occupied apartments in this house, discovered in the privy a new-born baby alive, his attention being attracted to the child by a whining noise which it was making. He lost no time in alarming Mr. and Mrs. Francis and the other inmates of the house, and in rescuing the child from its perilous situation. A doctor was sent for, but the child shortly afterwards died. The prisoner, when interrogated, at first denied that it was her child; but she afterwards admitted it, and said, " I did not cry out here ; when I threw it down the privy I thought it was dead." The extraordinary part of the case was, that she could not have got to the privy without passing through the room in which Francis and his wife were, and unlocking the door of their room, which was kept locked, and which she must have locked again on her return, without disturbing Mr. or Mrs. Francis. With regard to the cause of death, Mr. }lefties; a highly intelligent surgeon, swore to his belief that it was Caused by extravasation of blood upon the brain, and that this was produced by a serious wound which had been inflicted upon the head. On his cross-examination he denied that such a wound could have been produced by the pressure of the head against the pelvis during labour, but admitted that it might have been produced by a fall, or some accidental violence unconsciously inflicted by the mother'daring her suffering. He also stated that a frequent result of extravasation of blood unon the brain was to produce a suspension of animal power, which might afterwards be followed by a temporary revival. The case for the prosecution having been concluded, Mr. PRIDEAUX, in a forcible address to the jury, commeitted upon the improbability of the girl having taken down the child herself without awakening either of the Francises; and further contended that even if they were satisfied that she bad done this, she ought to be acquitted, as the fair presumption was that the injury had been produced accidentally, and that the extravasation of blood had caused a temporary suspension of the animal power, which had led the poor girl to believe that the body was really dead. Mr. Baron ROLFE then summed up the case to the jury, and told them that they must not trifle with their consciences, but that if they thought all the circumstances of the case fairly 'consistent with innocence, they ought to acquit the prisoner of the murder. He was then proceeding to tell the jury that they might, nevertheless, if they thought-proper, convict her of concealing the birth of. the child, when •  • Mr. PRIDICAITX reminded the Learned Judge that the statute which authorised this applied only to the concealment of the dead body of an infant. Mr. Baron ROIXE then said,. that that was certainly so, and told the jury that as the body in this case was "found alive, they must convict her of the murder, or 'acquit her altogetli  The jury almost immediately returned a verdict of Not