Mr. O'Connor, he answered it was unpleasant to allude to such matters, but as it was conceived to be useful to Mr. O'Connor's defence, he would mention, that embarrassments, which he need not particularize, had rendered different small advances to Mr. O'Connor necessary, and of which he, Sir Francis, had never made any memorandum. A circumstance having, at one time, occurred, which he would not then explain, he had written to Mr. O'Connor to place 400l. to his credit at his banker's. Mr. O'Connor in answer wrote to him, saying he had not a demand for 4001. but 1000l., and enclosed him his bond for that amount. On witness's next meeting him, he told Mr. O'C. he had entirely misunderstood his intentions, and returning the bond, desired him to pay the money at his convenience. Witness said he was once before in Ireland for a short time, and that his present visit was for the purpose of serving Mr. O'C. as far as he was able. He was then asked from what he had known of Mr. O'Connor, and calling him as he did his friend, what were his feelings on hearing of the charge of felony which had been preferred against him. Sir Francis replied with great emphasis, "I thought I should have sunk into the earth." Counsel observed that it was well known the witness was a gentleman of large fortune, and asked him whether or not he would have advanced him money if he had applied to him, at the period of the imputed offence? Sir Francis replied, "I know not the sum of money that I would not have

placed at his disposal if he had applied to me."

The learned judge (Daly) addressed a few words to the jury. He said there was certainly legal evidence to go to the jury; but, in the course of his experience, he never knew a charge so strongly rebutted as that which it was produced to sustain. If the jury felt any reasonable doubts, he would recapitulate the evidence; but if they thought with him, it was unnecessary for him to do so.

The foreman of the jury replied, that himself and his brethren were all of his lordship's opinion.

The verdict of acquittal was immediately pronounced; it excited the extremest joy-the manifestations of it in the court were of an unusual kind, the waving of hats, handkerchiefs, and sticks. The effect without was instantaneous. The town caught the enthusiasm of the auditory within, and shouts of joy interrupted, for a considerable time, the closing of this very interesting scene.

OLD BAILEY, JULY 7.

Child Stealing.-Harriet Molineux Hamilton was indicted for feloniously and maliciously taking, stealing, and carrying away a certain male child of the age of six months, the son of Henry Porter, with intent to deprive the said Henry Porter of the custody of the said child. In other counts the prisoner was charged with stealing certain wearing apparel of the said child, the property of the said Henry Porter.

The prisoner was brought into court at about 10 o'clock, extremely well dressed. At her de

sire the witnesses were ordered out of court. The following were the witnesses examined :

Louisa Wood, a child of 14 years of age, lived with the prosecutor, a butcher, residing in Quebec Street, Portman Square, as servant girl. On Friday, the 6th of June last, she had the care of a little boy of six months old, and at about half-past five in the evening of that day went out to take a walk with it. While opposite Lady Montague's house in Portman Square, in company with two other girls, who also had children under their care, the prisoner came up, and said to witness, "What a pretty child you have there." The prisoner gave the two girls in company with witness a penny each, telling them at the same time to go and take a walk. They did go, and as soon as they were gone the prisoner said to witness, "I want to speak to you," and added, "will you go an errand for me?" Witness asked how far she wanted her to go, and she replied, "I want you to go to No. 21, Lower Berkeley Street, and I will hold the child for you in the mean time." Witness said "No, no, I will take the child with me;" but, however, was afterwards induced to give the child to the prisoner. As directed, witness then went to Lower Berkeley Street, but finding only 19 houses in the street, she immediately returned. vious to going to Berkeley Street, the prisoner gave her sixpence, and had given her sixpence before that. She told witness to go to a young woman in Berkeley Street, to tell her to come directly. On returning to Portman Square, she

Pre

found the prisoner and the child were gone.

John Armrod, a waterman at the stand of hackney coaches in Paddington Street, deposed, that a little before seven o'clock the prisoner came to the stand with a child in her arms, and took a chariot, driven by a person of the name of Woolhead.

Thomas Woolhead was the owner and driver of a chariot ; and on the 6th of June last was on the Paddington-street stand. About seven o'clock the prisoner came with a child in her arms, and got into his coach. After having told him to drive to Piccadilly, she ordered him to go to Charingcross, and to drive fast. Witness heard the child cry while on the way to Charing-cross, and upon looking back into the coach saw distinctly the prisoner changing the child's clothes; she put a clean frock and cap upon it. When he got to Charing-cross, and having opened the coach-door, the prisoner said, Coachman, I won't stop here; go on over Westminster-bridge." Witness followed her directions, and when he arrived at Vauxhall, where the roads part, said, "Madam, which way am I to go:" she told him to drive to the Elephant and Castle, and at the same time told him to drive gently, as she said the shaking of the coach frightened the child. Witness went past the Elephant and Castle, expecting further orders. Presently the prisoner looked out of the window, and asked, "Where is this Elephant and Castle, coachman ? "' Witness said, that he had come past it; and, upon the prisoner

:

asking what place she was at then, he said it was the Bricklayers' Arms. The prisoner immediately cried out, "O! that is right, I believe, for it is from this place the Brighton Coaches go." Witness said, that it was not, and that the Brighton coaches went from the Elephant and Castle. At this time the child was very "wranglesome." The prisoner asked for something to drink, and witness brought it to her. While she was drinking, seeing her in trouble, he said, "Dear me, why do you flurry yourself so much the child is only a little wranglesome and cross." Witness then went back as desired to the Elephant and Castle; and when he arrived, by her request, asked whether there was any stage, or return chaise, going to Brighton. There, however, was no conveyance of any kind going that road. After having got a little milk for the child, and some more drink for the prisoner, she asked him what he would charge to take her to Croydon ? Witness replied that he would take her for 25s. She said it was too much, but finding she could get no other conveyance, she said, "I find you are very civil, and I wish you would go with me." The agreement was made, and witness was to stop at a house or two on the road, to give something to the child. He then proceeded on the road, and when he arrived at Streatham, the child again began to be "wranglesome." He stopped at the Horse and Groom, where the child was nursed and fed for about 20 minutes. He arrived at Croydon at about half-past 10 o'clock at night, and the prisoner, after paying for

the coach, took a return chaise, and told the post-boy to drive to Brighton, At about half-past two in the morning witness got back to London, and upon going into his room as usual, his wife said to him, "Why, Woolhead, there has been a hue and cry after you; there is a child stolen." In consequence of the information of his wife, the witness went to Mr. Porter's house, and after some conversation, put a pair of horses to his coach, and set off with the prosecutor and his father in search of the prisoner. He first went to Croydon, then to Reigate, to Crawley, Brighton, and from thence to Chichester, where he arrived about two o'clock in the evening of the next day, and there saw the prisoner and the child at the Golden Fleece inn.

Henry Porter was a butcher by trade, and resided at No. 3, Quebec-street, Portman-square. He was married on the 14th of April, 1816. In the month of June last Louisa Wood was employed in his service, to attend particularly to his child. About half-past five in the evening of the 6th of June she went out with the child to take a walk, and about a quarter before seven o'clock a person informed him that his child was stolen. Witness and his wife immediately went in search of the child, one going one way and the other another. At a little before three in the morning Woolhead came to his house; and witness, in company with his father, proceeded in a coach to Chichester. He found the prisoner at the Golden Fleece at Chichester. She was then leaning over the child, which was lying crying on the bed. Witness

said to his child, "Ah! Henry, what have I found you; and the child immediately began to smile. The prisoner appeared much confused. He immediately went for a constable, and had her taken into custody, carried up to London, and placed in Marylebone watchhouse.

After some further evidence, the prisoner handed in a paper of four or five folio sheets, in her defence, in which she stated that in taking the child she had no malicious intention, or of depriving the parents of their child for any length of time. It then proceeded at much length to enter into a statement of the facts of the case; and concluded with beseeching that the jury would duly weigh all the evidence, and not to suffer their minds to be influenced by public reports.

The jury found a verdict Guilty.

HUNTINGDON ASSIZES, JULY.

of

This was an indictment against Jane, the widow of John Scarborough, a respectable innkeeper at Bugden, on the North-road. The prisoner, a respectable looking woman, about 40 years of age, stood at the bar, accompanied by her daughter, a beautiful young woman about 19. The indictment changed the prisoner with feloniously stealing a letter, containing a remittance of a 201. Bank of England note, from Richard Preston, Esq. of Lincoln's-inn, barrister at law, M.P. which was addressed to his son, W. S. Preston, Esq. a pupil of the Rev. Dr. Maltby, at Bugden. In the first count the note was charged to be the

property of R. Preston, Esq. sen. and in the second count as the property of W. S. Preston, Esq.

Jun.

John Sharp, clerk to Mr. Preston, sen. proved the sending of the letter on the 16th of October, 1815, and Mathew Cromartie proved the delivery of it to the bellman, who put it in his bag.

James Fisher Park, letter-carrier for Charlotte-street, Blackfriars-road, had no recollection of receiving the letter on the 16th of October, 1815; but if he did receive it, is positive he forwarded it the same evening to the General Post-office. The letters being once put into the bag could not be taken out till the bag was received at the Post-office, where the key was kept.

Philip Franks, clerk in the General Post-office, stated, that if the letter was put into the bag in Charlotte-street, he had no doubt whatever that the letter must have been forwarded.

Wm. Joseph Wall, teller in the General Post-office, made up the bags for the York mail. If such letter came to his hands, he had no doubt it was regularly forwarded by the mail-coach to Huntingdon.

John Hatfield, post-master at Huntingdon, received and forwarded the letters for Bugden as received on the 17th of October.

Wm. Cox, an elderly man, stated that he is post-master at Bugden. On the morning of the 17th of October, 1815, remembers that he received by the bag from Huntingdon a letter, which he delivered to Mrs. Scarborough, the prisoner at the bar. He took it to

her

her because he could not make out the direction, which was much blotted, and not legible. Mrs. Scarborough received it from witness at the bar of the George inn at Bugden, saying, "I know the gentleman for whom it is directed, and will deliver it to him; you had better leave it." Witness saw Mrs. Scarborough some days after, who informed him the letter had been safely delivered to the person to whom it was directed. On cross-examination, witness admitted that he was frequently in the habit of delivering letters to the prisoner for persons whom he did not know, and particularly for travellers upon the North-road, who put up at her inn. He is positive that letter was never returned to him. When Dr. Maltby came to the witness, some days after this letter should have been received, witness told Dr. M. he had no recollection of having received any such letter. It was not till several months after, when witness received a letter on the subject from the Postmaster-general, that he recollected that on the day in question he delivered a letter to the prisoner, the direction upon which he could not distinctly read. The circumstance inquired into by Dr. Maltby did not bring it to the recollection of wit ness then; but near twelve months after, the letter he received from the Postmaster-general brought these circumstances and conversation with the prisoner to his entire and perfect recollection.

Mr. Wm. Scott Preston, stated that he was a pupil of Dr. Maltby, from May 15, until the following September; his letters, of which he received many from his father

and other persons, generally franked by his father, were all severally received, except the one in question; and it was not until some days after its miscarriage, that, having been disappointed of a remittance, he ascertained the fact of such letter never having been received.

Cross-examined. Does not recollect whether or not he received a letter on the 17th of October; but is certain that he never received the letter in question.

Wm. Jervis, clerk to an attorney at Peterborough, had an interview with Mr. Bond, an attorney at Leicester, together with Mrs. Scarborough, at the Bell inn, Stilton, kept by Mr. Green, who is son of the prisoner. Mr. Bond had a claim against Mr. Green of 481. which Mrs. Scarborough paid for her son, to Mr. Bond. The payment consisted of one note for 201. one for 10l. three for 51. and three 17. notes. These Mr. Bond put in his pocket, and took away with him.

Mr. Robt. Bond stated, that he is an attorney at Leicester. He had a debt against Mr. Green, son of the prisoner, and came to the inn at Stilton for the purpose of obtaining payment. He did not see Mr. Green, but saw the prisoner, who paid him the notes in question. He put them into his pocket with other notes, but he had no other Bank of England notes in his pocket than those he received from the prisoner. On Thursday following he paid the 201 to Mr. Price of Leicester. about the 20th of September last.

This was

Mr. Price lives at Leicester. He received that note from last witness on the 23d of September,