The Sun. — 1855-10-24 (London, England)

THE CASE OF MESSRS. STRATUM, PAUL, AND BATES. —Mr. Bodkin applied to the court to fix the trial of this case for Friday morning. He said the Attorney-General was instructed to conduct the prosecution, and counsel were specially retained on behalf of the defendant, and it would suit the convenience of all parties that the case should come on this day.  Mr. Ballantine, who appeared for the defence, said he bad no objection to the trial being fixed for Friday. Baron Alderson said that as it appeared to be conve• nient to all parties the trial should coma on on Friday. The defendants were not in court.  MußDEß.—leabella Mary Jolley, 43, single woman, was indicted for the wilful murder of her mother, Isabella Jolley.  Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Clark conducted the prosecution. The prisoner was defended by Mr. Ballantine. The facts of this case were of a very extraordinary nature. The evidence was very voluminous, and the trial occupied the' greater part of the day. It appeared that the deceased was a very aged woman, and that she and the prisoner lived together at a house in Hill-street, Knightsbridge, no other person being in the house but a servant. It appeared that they were in reduced circumstances, and that a scheme they had in view of obtaining subsistence by means of letting lodgings had entirely failed, and the prisoner had, in consequence, exhibited a good deal of despondency, and had frequently expressed an intention to destroy herself, in order, as she said, to escape being compelled to go into the union workhouse. The occurrences in question, it appeared, took place on the night of the 15th August, and it appeared that, on the previous evening, the deceased was put to bed by the servant about two o'clock, and on the following morning when she took up the breakfast to the bed-room of the deceased she found the door locked, and very soon afterwards the prison er said that her mother was dead. The neighbours were called in, and the prisoner then repeated the statement that her mother was dead, and she said that she had cut her own throat. Upon being asked why she had not called in a medical man, she said that she owed her doctor a little bill, and she was afraid he would not have come if she had sent for him, and she said that she did not like to tell the servant, because she was a Roman Catholic. A coroner's inquest, it appeared, was held, and the jury returned an open verdict ; but in consequence of some facts that subsequently transpired the prisoner was taken into custody, and was eventually committed by the magistrate upon the present charge. The principal facts that were relied upon to support the charge were, that a few days before the fatal occurrence the prisoner had taken the razor with which the deceased was undoubtedly destroyed to a cutler in the neighbourhood, and told him that it belonged to a gentleman who was lodging with her, and she wished him to set it, and lie did so ; and she took it away and afterwards brought him the same razor, and said that the gentleman complained that the razor did not cut sufficiently and wished him to give it a sharper edge. She left the razor with him for a few days and then took it away. It was also proved that the prisoner had complained of being in very great distress, and upon one occasion she said that if she had had a sharp razor in the house that morning she should have cut her own throat, and when she was told that this could not do any good, and that if she destroyed herself she would leave her mother behind, she replied that she should not do that. The prisoner, it appeared, had always behaved with very great kindness to her mother, and it was urged that it was not probable she should have commit. ted such a dreadful act under the circumstances, and that the more probable conclusion to be arrived at was that the deceased old lady had destroyed herself. After the examination of several witnesses, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.