Star. — 1824-02-23 (London, England)

BANK-NOTE ROEUERY.—In the year. 1821, while the cashier of the banking-house of Messrs. Jones, Lloyd, and Co. in Lothbury, was counting some notes one even• ing, a man entered, and snatched a bundle of Bank of England notes to the amount of between 4,0001. and 5,0001. The cashier was .so completely stunned at the robbery, that he did not even call for assistance until the thief had rushed into the street, and made his escape through Tokenhouse-yard, where it was suspected a house was open for his reception. A few days after the robbery, a watchmaker in the City was applied to by a decent-looking man for a stout silver watch. A 101. note was given by the stranger to the watchmaker, who soon afterwards ascertained that it was one of those which had been stolen from the banking-house. About a year after. wards, the watchmaker received a visit from the same person, who produced the watch, and wished that it should be either exchanged or repaired. The watchmaker, instead of striving to get the fellow into his'' power with address, stared at him and darted round the counter to seize upon his person, but the thief was too' active, and easily escaped, notwithstanding the cry of Stop thief!" which pursued him for some time. The watch was, however, left in the watchmaker's hands. All inquiry after him was useless for a length of time, but the stolen notes began by slow degrees to return to the house, and it was conjectured that the thief was living cautiously upon the profits of his enterprise. At last a stolen 501. note was passed at Gravesend, and the person who had uttered it was apprehended. He behaved very impudently, and denied that he knew anything about the robbery. The watch-maker) however, the moment he saw him, said, " That is the very man who gave me the stolen 104 note for the watch." The clerk of Messrs. Jones, Lloyd, and Co. also identified him as the person who snatched the bundle of notes, and he will answer for the offence at the Old Bailey. Tuesday last, an Inquisition was taken at Luton, on view of the body of a female infant, which on the preceding afternoon had been turned up by a sow, which was groping about in an outhouse belonging to an old farm-house, which is now converted into several tenements, and occupied by poor people. It is probable the body would have been completely devoured by the voracious animal in a few minutes, had not some children, who were playing hear the spot discovered the circumstance. It could not have been buried more than two or three inches below the surface of the earth., and was merely strewed over with bricks and dirt. In consequence of the information given by the children, several persons repaired to the spot, and a bloody sheet and shawl, in which the child appeared to have been enveloped, were found. A great mass of evidence was taken, from which it appeared that the body of the infant had been concealed for about six weeks in the room occupied by its mother, and had not been interred till early on Sunday morning last. One witness spoke particularly to an intolerable stench, which she had several times perceived on going up and down the stairs which led to the room occupied by the mother of the child, and where it was doubtless concealed. John Fensom, with whom the mother, Elizabeth Hate, cohabited, and by whom she bad previously had a stillborn child, appears to have been deeply implicated in the horrid affair. From the state of the child's body, the surgeon was of opinion that it must have been dead six weeks. The investigation occupied about twelve hours, when, after a mature deliberation, the Jury returned an unanimous verdict of Wilful Murder against Elizabeth Hare, the mother, as principal in the fi:st degree, and against John Fensom in the second degree. John Fensom, who was in custody, was committed to the County Gaul, under the Coroner's warrant, and a warrant was issued by the Coroner for the apprehension of Elizabeth Hare,who had absconded, but who has been since taken and conveyed to gaol- - •