The Cambrian

GLAMORGANSHIRE MIDSUMMER ASSIZES, j Jhese Assizes commenced at Cardiff, on Tuesday last, nefore Sir R. M. Rolfe, one of her Majesty's Barons of the Y«rt of Exchequer. His Lordship arrived in that town a"°nt half.past nine 011 the preceding evening, and proceeded t0 Church on the following morning, when a sermon was e'ivered, from Romans 13. iv., by the Rev. E. W. Richards, lie Chaplain on the occasion to the High Sheriff, John ttorafray Esq. From Church his Lordship proceeded, in f!«e Sheriff's carriage, to the Townhall, when the following 4ia?isirates answered to their names: — L«rd James Stnart, M.P. H. Thomas Lee, Esq. S'r J. J. Giiesl, Bart., MP. Henry Lewis. Esq. C. M. R. Morgan, Esq., M.P. J. Bruce Pryce, Lsq. ■J. W. Bennett, Esq. Robt. Savours, Esq. T. W. Booker, Esq. J H. Vivian, Esq., M,P. Walter Coffin, Esq. N. V. E. Vaughan Esq. Hugh Enlwistle, Esq. W. E. Williams, Lsq. Rowland FotherpriII, Esq. Rev. Mr. Coles. R. P. Jenner. Esq. Rev. Robt. Knicht. R"bl. Oliver Jones, Esq. Rev. E. W. Ricnaids. Eow. H. Lec, Esq. CORo:eR-R. L. Berc. Esq. MAYOR—Mayor of Cardiff. following Gentlemen were su orn on the Grand j ury Lord JAMES STUAHT. Foreman. Sir .1. J. Guest. Bart., M.P. M. P. Trahtnie, Esq. J. H. Vivian, Esq., M.P. J- W; Bonel, Ksq. C. M. R. Morgan, Esq., M P. VV hillock Nicholt, E«q. J. Bruce P.yce, Esq. Rowland Folherg.ll, Leq. R. F Jenner Esq. Robert Savours, Esq. Sir Geo. Tyler, Bhrt. Edward Lee, Esq. R. O. Jones, Esq. Henry Lee, T. W. Booker, Esq. J ames Lew is Esq. Jervis Tu.betvill, Esq. William Needham, Esq. N. V. E. Vanuhan, Esq. VV alter Collin, Esq. Hugh Entwistle, Esq. W. E. Williams, Esq. The Learned Judge then addiessed the Grand Jury the following effect:— Gentlemen of tlie Grand Jury,—I am happy to be able to say, that jour labours, on the present occasion, are not likely to be of ^0!lg duration, neither does it appear to me tliat any difficulties in 'I'eir discharge will present themselves to your notice. I have ^°"ked over the depositions, anrl most of he cases are ot a trifling na|ure, and will not require any particular observations from me. ''ere is, however, one charge of a very serious nature, against 'Wo persons, who are indicted for having administered poison, by l'neans of which two individuals met their death. The facts of the case will come before you, and the only observation I have to rcake, is, that it will be necessary for you to enquire, not only Wlif) are the guilty parties, hut, first of all, if there has been any ^rime committed, and what that crime is. It appears that the 1") deceased individuals were master and servant, and you must first satisfy yourselves that the parties did not die from natural pluses, but that they have come to their death by poison and, in the second place, you must ascertain how far the case is made °ut as to who has administered the poison—whether it was done both prisoners, or either of them. It is alleged, that the object ?I the prisoners was to put to death one of the deceased persons, ,1,tI([ that the death of the other was not in the contemplation of tile persons who administered the poison. I must make the ob- Sfirvation, that, to all intents and purposes, under those circum- stances, it is RS much murder as if that person had met his death fr'r whom the poison was intended. The view is aliKe consonant :Ylth reason and common sense, that if any person commits felony Oy mistake, it being his original intention to commit felony, the Party is equally guilty as if the person against whom the felonious In.tention was originally directed, had suffered. Being a question 0.1 considerable importance, I thought it right to call your atten- lion to it. In this case, much will depend upon the evidence of ti.,e medical gentlemen, who, I presume, will give you their va- rious opinions in a very clear manner; yet I would caution you keep your minds or. guard, for in questions of tins nature Konerally involving great intricacy and much difficulty the mind 's frequently predisposed to receive what does not really appear evidence. Gentlemen, there is other case before me de- Servin<r of anv particular observations; but I should hardly be Performing my duties, were I not to notice the extensive breaches of the peace which have been committed in some of the adjoining Cities, and which have caused much fear in past times, aad excited great apprehensions for the future. I am glad to under- stand (hat this):, rge and important county has hitherto been en- (1leh free from those disturbances. It is my duty to tell you, "'al to prevent the extension of this great evil, any persons who ai'i>ear to be implicated, ought to be visited with immediate com- mitment for such persons must be taught that there is no excuse which can justify such a course, but that they will be visited with the utmost severify of the law. Having said so much, I will observe, that in some instances mistakes have been committed in delllallding tolls; but if in any case you should find that lolls have been ilIE-gallv demanded, you should exert yourselves to redress the grievance, for persons in my station, in your position, 4"d all other individuals, ought to conspire together to suppress sud> proceedings. With these observations I conclude, not, "'inking it necessary to add anything to what I have already said, for I am confident that gentlemen of your experience will "ot fail to discharge your duties in a manner satisfactory to the county at laro-e. There is another case, the depositions of which have been this moment put into my hand. It is a case in which a Mother with whom was her child, is charged with commuting a larceny' The law savs, that a woman cannot commit larceny in ,lle Presence of her husband bat this does not appear to apply to a woman with her child. -That observation is worthy of yonr consideration." T Before the Grand Jury had returned any true bills, his Lordship took the following cause:— ? Doe on the demise of Talbot v. Gibson, Frazer and Pord.-In this case Mr. C. R. M. Talbot, M.P., the plaintiff, had sought to recover from the defendants the possession of a colhery, called the Bryndu Colliery, in the parish of Margam, and Bryndu Iron Works, in the parish of Kenfig. The property had been leased ,n 1838. In the lease there was a proviso to the effect, that if the J*°rks should be suffered to get out of repair, possession should given up. It appeared that the defendants had lately become bankrupts, and that the iron works and colliery were allowtd to fell into decay. Witnesses were called to prove the above facts, and a verdict was taken for the plaintiff by consent.—Counsel for Plaintiff, Mr. Vaughan Williams and Mr. Benson; attorney, Air. Llewellyn.—Counsel for defendant, Mr James. Mary Wdliurnsw&s then placed at the bar, on a charge of having a pair of shoes, the property of*- John Jones, shoemaker, ^lerthyr-Tydlil. Mr. Richards, who appeared for the prosecu- tion, briefly slated the case, and called Richard Keys, who said that he was a shoemaker, residing at Mertliyr-Tydfil, and had a "'all for the sale of shoes in the market-place of that town, on Saturday, the 8th of July last. The stall kept by the prosecutor, John Jones, adjoined the witness s stall. About half-past nine o clock on the ever i»g of the day in question, when John Jones and his assistant, David Williams, were busily engaged, witness observed the prisoner take a paii of shoes which hung on a nail in j"e prosecutor's standing, and she put them under the cloak of ler daughter, a little girl about eleven years of age, who then J^ent away. Witnifets ran after the little girl and caught her "efore she had proceeded far, when her mother interfered and attetnpted to rescue her. Botb were then given to the charge of policeman. The prosecutor corroborated this witness s evi- "eiCe, and identified the shoes to be his property. I he police- lnan proved the prisoner's apprehension under the circumstances by the witnesses. The prisoner denied tlie truth of the ev'dence adduced, and called as evidence her little girl, who s,«ted that the shoes were not taken by her mother but by her- ¡elf.. The witness Keys was recalled, and positively swore that ,e distinctly saw the prisoner take the shoes and give them the hlId. The jury returned a verdict of Guilty—His Lordship severely censured the prisoner, for endeavouring to defeat the ends of justice by causing her child to perjure herself. Had it llot been for that act of her. the Court would have deemed three rnoDlhs' imprisonment a sufficient punishment, but in consequence of her conduct the sentence would be—Imprisonment aud hard Itibour for one year. John Thomas, 48, was charged with having stolen an umbrella. the properly of Isaac Harris, of Eg) wysilan. Isaac rUrris proved t'lat he had lent an umbrella on the 3d of July to Evan Evans, blacksmith, of Caerphilly and afterwards saw the umbrella (which J.'e identified) in the possession of T. Llo< d, po.iceinan.—Evan Evans stated that after having borrowed the umbrella, he left it by the stable-door while be went to saddle his mare, and when he returned the umbrella was missing. At a distance of about a quarter of a mile he overtook the prisoner, who threw the um- b'ella to the road. Witness picked it up and delivered it to a Policeman —Stephen Jones, who accompanied the last witness III Pursuit of the prisoner and the policeman, were examined, and corroborated the evidence. Verdict, Guilty.—Sentence, twenty. One days' solitary confinement in Cardiff Gaol. Catherine Pedall and Mary Mahout) were charged with stealing _)c a quantity of coal, the property of Mr. Powell, of Merthyr.— Ihoinas Davies a policeman, proved that, about hall-past three °>lock on the morning of the 5th of July, lie was on duty oppo- Mr. Powell's wharf, when he saw the two prisoners carrying 'wo sacks of coal. Suspecting that the coal had been taken from Powell's yard, witness took the prisoners to that gentleman's foreman—John Jones, who was foreman to Mr. Powell, proved ,at a quantity of coal of the same quality as that taken from the Prisoners had been missed from his master s yard on the night ia question Verdict, Guilty.—The Court sentenced each of Uie Prisoners to fourteen days' solilary confinement in Cardifl Gaol. -The Queen v. John.hmcs.~U c«.se an information w,s .fr'ed against the defendant in the Court of Queen stench, for having usurped the office and i'legally exercised llie tunctions of Portreeve of the boronch of Aberavon, m this county. I lie sub- *'atice of the defendant's plea was, that H. J. Grant, lisq., was •Lord of the said Borough, and that it had been a custom from 'e immemorial for the burgesses to hold a Court, at which y'e Lord of the Manor was present, and at that Coui I the grand ,1'iry arid jury of homage returned three fi' persons, out ol whom of the Cnslle was to appoint a Portreeve, and that defendant was regularly appointed, and took 'he oashs. It was alleged in the replication, that the custom was not denied, hut t.iat delsndant was not elected in accordance with it, and that '•e did not take the oaths.— Sir. V NVillams addressed the jury for the defendant, and slated that Aberavon, which together with Swansea, Neath, Kenfig, and Loughor, returned a member to Parliament, was a borough from time immemorial, with one Alderman and two Councillors. In the last year ilie grand jury {lr>d jury of homage assembled, and instead of returning three, returned five persons, from whom Mr. Osborne, as Constable of Castle, was to select one. The five nrinn s, of which the de- rendant was the first, were not placed under the heading written '°r the purpose, as they oi'g'it to have been done, but were en- dorsed on the back Mr. Osborne told them, that the afted le;r;lll,, (, to haterettiriied three names, ovly. Upon ''('s saying so, the Court became a scene of confusion, much to ille injurn, of its after much noise and ^"Oiult, the majority of the jury left the Court, and the lew tliat Remained, reduced the list to three names. Irom which Mr. "borne elected tliedefeiu'anl. Some parties became oll'ended at "'e election, and went to the Court of Queen's Bench. The fact WaS. observed the Learned Counsel, that Mr. Grant had thought proper to change his administration—(laughter) .ilr. Coke, who w#8 prime mimsier" went out of office, which is a polite way °* saying turned out"—(laughter) and Mr. Osborne became I'ntiie minister, and as ex-prime ministers generally endeavour annoy the government, so IMr. Coke had instituted the present ■V,rfJ°eedings (or a similar purpose. Mr- Osboine, .solicitor, _J|"istol, was then called, and gate e» idence to the eliect, that the Y°Urt was held, as related hv Mr. V. Williams, but that part of 1 j"ry only had returned the three names Irom whom the de- end<mt was elected, the others having lell the room amidst tl,,It Cililloil, Q.(! on I)eli;ilfoi' ilie 'at the election was invalid, inasmuch as it was made by a n""orii v of the jury, the rest having retired for the purpose of rp'Orning another list, but that before their return, mi. Osboine illegally elected the defendant out of the list fust given in. 'a Lordship directed the jury lo find lor the Crown on the first lssue (which was the material one), and lor the defendant on ihe A\ -er t'lree*—Counsel for the Crown, Mr. Chilton. Q.C. and Mr. ^jlson; attorney, Mr. CoUe. ('ounsel lor defendant, Mr. V. v illi ims and Mr. James.. Rirhnrdsv. Williams.— In this case, Mr. Chilton, Q. C., « ith Vr vyas Mr. Nicholl, appeared for the plaintifl, and Mi. V. 'lliams and Mr. James lor the defendant. Th« action was fought by Mr. Richard Richaids, merchant, of Merthyr, to .ecover the sum of 50/ the amount of a promissory note, with ''rest, jointly made by the defendant and anotlier person. I he ^>riUcipal plea of the defendant was, that be lent his name for the .|Cc°""nodation of plaintifl', and had received no consideration or Chi!lon called Mr. Davies., a clerk in the Souih > a'es Bank, to prove the defendant's signature.— Mr. V. Wil- anig n,en addressed the jury, and stated that a peison of the auie of Watkin Williams, who had b«sines» transactions with P aintifl) had given biro a bill for 44/. in ,\Jay. 1841. The note \y-. b660 several times returned, and plaintiff .vent to Walkiu "Marns s house and requested him to procure some security n addition to his own- Watkiu Williams named iwo j>«rsnnii, whose name. were declined bj plaintiff. The defehdant Wilbatn Williams coming in at the time. the plaintiff persuaded him to join Watkia Williams in the note, at the same time saying that he ran no risk," and requested he would do it to enable him (plaintiff) to get the money to renew the bill. Defendant gave his name under those circumstances.—Mr. V. Williams con- tended that the defendant having lent his name as an act of kind- ness towards the plaintiff, without receiving any consideration, could not be liable for it.—Watkiu Williams, the original maker of the note, was called, and having sworn that he was released from all responsibility, from the payment of the note, was admitted ill evidence, and stated that the defendant endorsed the note to enable plaintiff to procure money under the circumstances already detailed.—Mr. Chilton then called Mr. Clarke, Manager of the Bank at which the bill was discounted, who gave evidence to the effect that the bill was discounted for Richards, and not on account of the defendant's signature.—Mr. Richards, solicitor, Merthyr, was also called to prove that defendant had acknowledged his liability to pay, and had even offered to pay in instalments of five pounds per month.—Mr. ,\1. Williams again addressed the jurv, and Mr. Chilton replied, contending that the banker's evi- deuce entirely falsified that of Watkiu Williams s, inasmuch as it showed that the defendant's signature did not enable the plain- tiff to raise money, which was given him by the Bank on his own responsibility, and that it was evident defendant had joined in the bill as security for Watkin Williams, who had since become an insolvent, and could not himself pay the amount.— His Lord- ship, in summing np the evidence, observed that the only ques- tion for the consideration of the jurv was, whether defendant had heconle a joint maker of the note for the accommodation of the plaintifl', or as security for defendant. If the former, be was en- titled lo a verdict if the latter were the case, however hard it may appear, a verdict must be returned for the plaintiff. Though Watkiu Williams had stated that the first supposition was the correct one, the evidence of Mr. Clarke and other circumstances was in favour of the tast.-The jury retired to consider their verdict, and the Conrt adjourned.-On the following morning a verdict for the plaintiff was returned. THE POISON CASE. The above case was the first tried on Wednesday morning, and the greatest interest and excitement were manifested by the crowded audieuce. Indeed, the excitement was as great, if not greater, than when the first investigation took place, and the Court was extremely crowded. Nearly all the Counsel were present, including those who were not engaged in the case, and there were a number of respectable females in Court. Mary Thomas, aged 50, and her husband, Edward Thomas, aged 30, were placed at the bar. The prisoners, who were respectably dressed, appeared thoughtful, but not particularly concerned, or in any way atl'ected by their awful situation. The Clerk of Assize read over the two indictments, which contained several counts, one charging the prisoner, Mary Thomas, with administering the poison (by mixing it in beer) to Wm. Howell, and also another count charging her with inciting and procuring Edward Thomas, to do so. Euyvard Thomas was also charged with having admi- nistered the poison. The indictment charging the prisoners with having murdered Jane Harry, was similar, with the exception that they were not charged with a felonious intention, but that they killed Jaue Harry in feloniously attempting to kill William Howell. Each of the prisoners, in a firm voice, pleaded Not Guilty.—Mr. Evans, Q.C., and Mr. Nicholl Came, were the Counsel, and Mr. Wm. Lewis, of Bridgend, the solicitor for the prosecution.—Mr. Chilton, Q.C. (by special license), wiih whom was Mr. Vau»han Williams, defended the prisoners. The solicitor for the defence, was Mr. Rhys Jenkins, of Cowbridge. The following respectable persons composed the jury Mr. Wm. Anthoney, '• Thomas Davies, Frederick Blew' Thomas Evans, W. Powell, Rees J" Rees Bowen, Jeffrey Evan Price, f'aniel Cook', Morgan Rowland, Geo. Davies,' Harry Ry<1e. Mr. hvans, Q.C., stated the case to ttie jury, and addressed them to the following effect" Gentlemen of the Jury, 1 have the honour to appear before you as Counsel for the prosecution in this case. I am sure you are fully aware of the responsible aud serious nature of your duties. The prisoners at the bar are charged with the serious crime of having feloniously caused the death of Mr. William Howell, by administering to him a quan- tity of arsenic, which bad been mixed in beer. I entreat you to pay attention to the evidence which I shall call before you, and to the evidence only, and discard all reports which you "might have leard out of doors, if you have heard any. I shall make no fur- ther comments upon the subject, but proceed immediately to state the circumstances of the case. The prisoner, Marv Thomas, and her husband, as you have already heard, are charged with the inurcler of Mr. William Howell, a respectable farmer and free- holder, residing at Pantrosl", near Laleston. It will be neces- sary to tell you whom the deceased person's family consisted of. e 'ived in the house, where he kept a female servant only, and the prisoner is his only sister, he having no other brother or sister, or any other near relative. Previous to the 14th of April, Mr. *v m- Howell enjoved his usual good health. About five o clock on the afternoon of that day, he was taken extremely ill, and about seven o'clock on the following morning he died. I will here make a few observations relative to the babits of the deceased s family, who. as I have stated, consisted of Mr. Howell, the female servant, and a boy. They were in the habit of occasionally taking beer, for which they sent to a house in the village of Laleston, where they obtained it from a Mrs. Lewis, a brewer. Oil lhurs- day previous to the 14lh, the servant, Ann Thomas, obtained a supply, which was all consumed before the Friday in question. Mr. Howell, on that day, desired the female servant to go to Laleston, and procure an additional supply, The female sarvant told him that she was unable to go. as she was busily en- gaged in churning and other duties Mr, Howell then went to the house of a neighbour, who was a cottager on his property, and asked his son, a little boy of the name of Morgan, to fetch the beer, which the boy brought to him nbout five o'clock that evening. The boy partook of a small quantity of the beer on the road, and was taken extremely ill. [Mr. Chilton here stated, that though the witnesses had been or- dered out of Court, they ffad not all of them gone. A pause en- sued while the witnesses were out-i Mr. Evans proceeded :-Gentlemen, I was going to tell you that Mr, Howell was in the habit, from time to time, of sending for his beer to Laleston, in a stone jar, which contained about one gallon, and which he obtained from Mrs. Lewis, who is not a publican, but a maltster and brewer. On returning, the bov took a small quantity, and became very sick. He then brought the beer home, and gave the jar to Mr. Howell, who in a short time afterwards took a smalt portion of it, and became extremely ill, and was seized with violent vomitings, spitting of blood, and cramp. He continued in that state until about seven o'clock on the folloyving morning, when he expired. Mr. Pritchard, a sur- geon, had been sent for soon after his illness, and from the symp- toms manifested, he treated the case as one of cholera, and or- dered fomentations, and jars of warm water to be applied to his feet, and also ordered the servant to send to his bouse for medi- cine. At this time, information of the circumstance was given to Mrs. Thomas, the prisoner, who came down from Laleston, where she resided, 10 her brother's house. The beer had been taken from the jar (which was required to contain water, to apply to Mr. Howell:, feet), and put in four black hottles-Ihree were filled, and the other was half filled; they were then placed 011 the dairy floor. After Ilr. Howell's death, a woman, named Jane Harry, was sent for to assist in cleaning the house, and to lav out tne corpse. After having been so engaged, she became thirsty, and asked if there was beer in the house. A woman, named Gwenlljan Davies, told her that there was beer iu the four bot- ties in the dairy. Jane Harry drank about a pint of the beer, and soon afterwards was seized with violent fits, retchings, and blood-vouiiting, and was otherwise violently affected. She died j about secen fT'oluck on that evening. The famify servant, Anne Ihouias, yvho had been poorlv, took about an egg-cup full of the beer; she immediately became much worse, was seized with a similar illness, and retired to her bed. from which she did not get up onfil Sunday evening Thus, evidence will be adduced, that all the persons who par ook of the beer became allected two died, and as to the other two, one became ill, and the other be- came much worse than before. Thtr medical gentleman, Mr. Pritchard, who lodged at Mrs Lewis's, from whose house the beer was obtained, having no reason to connect the deceased s death with the beer, cautioned Gwenllian David, and told her to | inind what she said about the beer," when the latier said that the beer made Jane Harry ill. However, he sealed up Hie bottle from yvhich Jane Harry had drank, and desired the pnsoner, Mrs. Thomas, to send it after him to his bouse, by the person who was set;! for the medicine. An inquest took place upon the bodies, but the surgeons did not suspect them to be cases of poison, and the bodies were buried; but a week afterwards they disintered, and the stomachs and part of the intestines, both of Mr. Howell and Jane Harry, were found to be much inflamed, but the membrane of the stomach was not destroyed. Ihe stomach and liver of Jane Harry, and the intestines of Mr. i Howell, were sent to Mr. Herapatb, chemist, of Bristol, to be analyzed. He discovered (bv a process which he will explain to you) that arsenic bad been in both stomachs, and he succeeded in reducing it to a metallic state. All the mmptorns, also, cor- respond with tliofe usually produced bv that poison. Having i satisfied vourstltes that the parlies died frlllll the effects of arsenic, you must then ascertain, before bringing the crime home to the prisoners, whether the prisoners had any arsenic in their possession, and that this was the case will be proved in evidence. You must a.so enquire into the motives which could have induced them to commit the crime. Yon remember, Mr. Howell was a bachelor, about tiftv years of age. The female prisoner was his only si,ier. who would succeed lo his property, if he died un- married or intestate. He was under '¡n engagement to he married •o .Mrs. Lewis; and it will be proved, that, in the month of the female prisoner told a person tlaat she wOllld ralher see her brother buried llr:n be married to the widow. The male prisoner, her husband, would of coir.se derive a benefit, if his wife succeeded to all estate. I must now call your attention to some circumstances connected with the boy's journey to Laleston. Mr. Howell, for some reason, requested the boy to returll by a pathcijiprromi There were two roads lealling- to Laleston, one through the turnpike-road, which passed by the prisoner's resi- dence, and the other through a particular lane, called Heoly- slocksa, Air. Howell bad desired the bov to return through the latter. The boy, not having been desired to go that way, went On the turnpike-road, and as he knew the prisoners, and used to eaf his dinners at their house, whilst at school, he called there h<ore proceeding to Mrs. Leyvis's." He saw Edward Tho.ias tiie.e hi> wi!e was at the lime engaged in sewing. She asked liiin how he was—how yvas bis master, and ofieied him »»ine i bread and butter. She whispered something to her husband, and gave him a small wltie paper packet, which he put into his (render's pocket. In going awav, Mrs. Thomas desired the bov to ask her brother lo send her some eoal, but not to tell him that s hj called at her bouse, but that he met her husband on the road, and that he requested him to deliver the message. Theboythen went fo Mrs. Lewis's, and a little girl, Mrs. Lewis's daughter, gave iiiui the beer from a cask which was in the cellar. Ihe beer was then in a pure stale, which can be proved, in ihe first place, by the lact, that all ihe inmates of the boose usually drank from it and, secondl y, because, when the beer was drawn. Isaac. Downe>, Mis. I'rilehaid's servant, held a cup, and caught some of Ihe beer, as it was running, which he drank. The little gnl put a cork inlo the jar, and the boy left. In returning, he passed 'hrough Sandpit field, and then went to Saiket-lield, Irom which there was a stile leading to Heolystoc.ksa-lane. He passed °vei the stile, mid as he was going along, he met fhe piisoner, Ldwaid Thomas, in a field near Heol> sfocksa. He approached, a"1' de- sired the bov to go after the colts to an adjoining field, called t Seven Acres. In going to that field, it was necessary to go I the s< nt to being about 478 yards. Tliev were Sir. Ho«ell s colts, whirl. E. Thomas looked alter. The jar was left on the ri-ht side of ihe hme, by the stile leading to the field. The prisoner haung been so left alone with the jar, a person of the name ol V illiam Howell, who will be called before vou, happened In be in a field adjoining Ihe lane, and the field being considerably higher than the lane, he could see what was going on in the lane. His alien- tion was directed to a man stooping over a jar, into which he put a cork, and afterwards shook it violently i" his hand, as a peison would do who wished to mix a thing well, and having done so, j he pel the jar back, and rose up. The witness ( IImnl ) the,, perceived it'wa^ Edward Thomas. The witness ihen proceeded j to cross the stile, and left the prisoner with the jar. hen the little bo» returned, he found both the prisoner alld the jar nearly where he lelt them and iu a short time afterwards the prisoner asked the bo» permission to see how much be r there was in the j ir. hat his object was, I will let >ou determine. The boy 'hen lell the prisoner, and'fell in with another bo\, who watch, "d a corn-field lor i be pti rpose of keeping od t lie ciows. With that bov he remained for a short time, playing and throwing stones al e; ch other. Just at that lime, a voting woman n uned Gwenllian I homas, was passing through the field, alter the boy. She saw the prisoner, Edward Thomas, following her, so lie must have gone back again, for he followed her in the direction be was ori- ginally going. He I'oilnwed her over the -«*iI* until became mr em-ugli to set- the boy. The little boy then w :lked on with the young woman, and left (lie hoy who WHS watching the crows. I JtMwMd Tbontaa then Came up to the JaUet, and asked him if one of them had tasted the beer, to which the boy said no; upon which Thomas left. It will be for you to sav what possible object he could have in making those enquiries—what possible object be could have in sending the boy to look after the colts— what possible object he could have in reluming across the fields. It is very material, in cases of this kind, to prove that poison has been traced to the possession of the accused parlies, and it is frequently proved that thev have purchased poison. That pur- chase is not proved in this case but it can be proved that poison was in the prisoners' possession, for when the constables searched Ihe house, they found a paper, with its contents taken out, but there remained a sufficient quantity for the chemist to analyze, and discover that it contained arsenic, which he was enabled to reduce to a metallic state. We have no way of accounting for 'e"'nI,0^sfss,on of tlle arsenic, unless it was obtained from a Mr. Griffiths, a surgeon, now deceased, who yvas an uncle of the prisoner. Mary Thomas, and to whose household furniture and eliects the prisoner succeeded. In searching the house, several piII-boxes and measures, such as are used hy chemists, were lound there, and we have no other way of nccounlin" for the possession of poison, unless got with Mr. Grifliths's"effects • however the fact of arsenic having been in their possession, wilj be clearly proved. There was a/so a bottle found in the house, containing a small portion of the same poison, in a liquid state! Now it wouid have been very desirable, if a portion of the beer Now it wouid have been very desirable, if a portion of the beer had been anaiyzed but a fact very Imich asainst the prisoners is, that they have placed that beyond reach; for though Mr. 1 ritcli.ird, the surgeon, had told the female prisoner to send the bottle fo him, it was destroyed, having been broken into small pieces. 1 he statements of the Iwo prisoners, relating lo that cir- cumstance, are very conflicting. The male prisoner said that he.. broite them ol Ins own accord, and that his wife was very much'1 vexed and annoyed that he did so. She says that she Was or- dered by her husband to break them. It wjJI also be proved, that before she could have known of Mr. Howell's illness, the female prisoner went to Ihe bouse of a man named Harrv, a butcher, and upon being asked by his wife where she was going to, said that she was going lo Laleston, for she had heard (hat her brother was tipsy. She afterwards met the woman, Harrv and tobl her that her (pnsoner s) broiher was very ill and that what she had previously said respecting his beinT tipsy was not lrue; and added, that she was going to send her cousin. Mary Wiliiains, to Laleston. Now, Mary Williams, who will he called before you as a witness, will say, that she had not been near La- leston on that day. Afterwards, when Mrs. Thomas was at her brothers, daring his illness, she required something to drink but did not venture to drink the beer in the bouse, though know- ing it was in the dairy, but she sent the servant to the house of a Mrs. Lloyd, fo procure a quantity of beer and gin. These, gen- tlemen, n're fhe principal facts which will be hroughi before you. I have stated them as shortly as I could, and have avoided making any particular comments upon them. I hive left the case for vonr consideration it will he for you, under his Lord- ship's direction, to judge of the different circumstances, and decide upon the matter. nard and sorrowful as the dul" may be, if the charge will lie proved to your satisfaction, in justice to the public, and for the sake of awarding justice to the prisoners themselves, you are bound, by the sacred oath which you have taken, to return a verdict accordingly. The first witness called, was Anne Thomas, who was exar:1ined by Mr. Nicholl Carne — Witness was servant with the Mr. Wm. Howell, of Pantrosla, at the time of his death, and had jeen so for two years before. Pantrostais near Laleston. Mr. Howell was a farmer residing on bis own estate, was about 54 years of age and single-had one sister onlJ-the prisoner at the bar. Witness was Ihe only female servant at Panfrosla. She ke?t bis house. There were also two servant-bovs, who slept in the house, viz" Edward Lewis, and William David, The famil" generally drank beer on Sundays, and sometimes on other days. They sometimes brewed at home, but when they were out of heer, used to send to Mrs. Lewis's, of Laleston, for it. Mrs. Leyvis was a ma'fster and brewer, but not a jmblirnn. Mr. Howell was in tie habit of drinking a small quantity of beer every day. Witness often heard her master say, that he was going to be married to Mrs. Lewis The beer was generally sent for in a stone jar, containing about a gallon. The jar was not used for any other purpose. Witness had often taken it to Mrs. Lewis's for beer, and the last time was on Saturday, the 8th of April, when it was brought back full of beer—which lasted until the following Thursday. They were out of beer about dinner time on that dav. They dined between one and two o'clock on Good Fridav. Witness's master and servants dined in the same rOOll1, hUI not al the same table. They all had salt beef, salt pork, and brocoii for dinner. Mr. Howell ate his dinner as usual—if anything, rather more hearty than othenvise. He asked wifness, about'half-past two or three o'clock, to go for beer to Mrs. Lewis's. She told him she was too busy. Mr. Howell then went out in a great hurry to look for a little boy named Morgan, the son of a cottager, who came in after him. Her master delivered the jar to the boy, telling him to return immediately. The boy returned about live o clock. She then went out to milk. In a short time she re- turned, and partook of an egg-cup full of the beer. She was ill before, and during the boy's absence had comp!ained of illness to her master; when he said she could lake part of the beer, and that would make her better. As soon as she had partaken of it she was seized with violent illness.—[W itness here describee her sensations, which have been repeatedly before the public during the progress of the investigation before the Magistrates.' Her master was taken with a violent illness on the same evening; but witness being unable 10 render him any assistance, owing 11 hei own illness, went to bed, from which she did not rise until the following Sunday evening. Her master died about seven 0 clock on the following morning. She did not see the jar after- wards, but saw the handle amongst some broken pieces of bolt lei, in a field which Sergeant Loosmore and others were examining. The witness was cross-examined at great length by Mr. Chilfoi. The Learned Gentleman examined her very eloselv as lo whether Mr. Howell had not always talked abou* his marriage, as much as when she came first into his service as just before his deall. Witness said he had often talked upon the subject since she w?s in his service, but he said it was Mrs. Lewis's fault thev were not married. Witness also said, that she denied having taken the beer when the question was first asked, because she was afra d of the consequences of making any insinuations against the beer not suspecting that any poison had been put in it. She never Iud seen arsenic or any other poison in her master's house. If there had been any she would have known. William Davies was next examined, and proved that he was in the service of Mr. Howell at the lime of his death. He corrobo- rated the preceding witness relative to the violent illness with which Mr. Howell was seized after having taken a small portion of the beer. Mr. Howell had told him that he had taken some of (he beer. Mr. Chilton here objected 10 Ihe admission of conversations with the deceased in evidence, and quoted a case iu Koscoe. His Lordship overruled the objection. Witness then repeated the evidence similar to what was given before the Magistrates, that he went to the prisoners' bouse in going for Mr. Pritchard, fhe surgeon, they were not at home, neither was Mr. Pritchard, who lodged at Mrs. Lewis's, but it was promised he should be sent to Pantrosla as soon as be had arrived. The female prisoner subsequently returned with witness 10 Panlrosla. She became very attentive to her brother, emptied the beer from the jar to four black bottles, which were placed on the dairy floor. Witness assisted her in doing that. II was done for the sake of filling the jar with warm wafer to apply to the deceased's feet. He saw the prisoner mixing some- thing similar 10 treacle, which she offered the deceased, but which he declined taking. About two o clock on the following morning (Friday), lie was sent by Mrs. rhomas to a Mrs. Lloyd's for a shilling's worth of gin and some beer. In going, he called at the prisoner's house, when he saw the male prisoner, who asked him how his master was. He replied, that he felt somewhat easier. He then returned, placed the gin and beer on the table, when Mrs. Thomas took care of it. Witness was cross-exumined by Mr. Chilton, but nothing was elicited. Gwenllian David was examined by Mr. Nicholl Carne, and proved that she was at Pantrosla at the time of Mr. Howell's illness, and after detailing many circumstances relating 10 the severity 0f Mr. Howell's illness/ said that the servants, witness, and Jane Harry, dined together ol ',a"1 a"d potatoes. Mrs Thomas partook of some beer, and offered some to witness, which she declined taking. Did nol see where that beer was taken from. After some other unimportant occurrences, Jane Harry coiu- plained of being thirsty, and partook of some of the beer from .oneoftbefourbott)es. She then became extremely ill. Wit. "?ss l'ere minutely described ihe nature of the illness of Jane arry until she was laken home in a carl. She expired in a short tune. When Mr. Pritchard came, witness said that the beer had made Harry ill, but he cautioned her, and told her" to lake care wnat she said aboullhe beer, as be daily drank some M ^r" Pritchard, however, sealed up the bottle, and desired Mrs-Thomas to forward it to his house by the messenger who came for the medicine. She knew it was the bottle out of which Jane had drank, as there was flour about the neck of il. Jaue the*be" 'USt COme fr°'n llandlin £ fl°°r &l lhe time She drilnk The yviiness was cross-examined hv Mr. Vaughan Williams, but nothing more was elicited than has frequently been before the public. Mr. Pritchard, surgeon, examined :-This gentleman repeated the statements made before the Coroner and Magistrates, and which appeared in our paper at the lime the investigation took place. When he attended Mr. Howell, he found that he was allected with violent vomitings, diarrhoea, and cramps, and thougut his case to be one of cholera, and Ireated hlln accordingly. A mixture of the solution of arsenic would have caused similar symptoms. He directed hot jars, and to be applied as already stated. The seven packets of powder sent b, him for Vlr. Howell, he founelwere not administered bv Mrs. Thomas, who said that her broth, rwoutd not take any. He cautioned the woman re- specling what she said of the beer, because bedaity partook of it —not susp. Oiog a case of poison. He requested Mrs. Thomas to forward the bottle which was sealed up, but she did nol for- yvard it. When asked why she did not, she replied" That she ordered tlip. bollles all to be broken?" The witness also de- scribed the symptoms attending Jane Harry's disease up to the time of bet death, the repetition of which would he really super- Huous. He then described the appearances of the liver, stomach, and intestines generally of Jane Harrv and Mr. Howell, in the post mortem examination, and proved having sealed them in boxes anel delivered Ihem to Loosetnore. This witness nnderwenl 1\ long cross examination, bot nothing new was etiniied. The servant, Anne Thomas, was subject to a fehrile compiailit, but there was nothing in the symptoms mani- fested at Ille time of her illness to induce witness to suspect that she had taken any deleterious substance. Police-sprge,nl Looseoiore was examined at length. His evidence went to prove that he delivered the boxes containing the stomach and intestines of Mr. Howell, and those of Jane Harry, to Mr. Herapatb, at Bristol, in the same entire state as he .j received them from Mr Pritchard, and gave the liver (It ridgend. He also proved that the bottles were broken to pieces, and the reason Edw. Thomas gave for doing so was, because people had been burled bv the beer W itness tnld him that it iooKed very bad." He picked up some of the broken pieces, but as the rain had washed them during several days, there was no substance found attached to llieni whicbcoujdbesnhmittedto examination. The witness also proved apprehending the pri- soners, and detailed the particulars relating to the search of the louse, and finding the piece of paper containing arsenic and the bo lIe. as corroborated by Capt. Napier's evidence, which follows. He was cross-examined, but his evidence was not shaken. Capt, Charles Frederick Napier examined I am Chief Con- stable for this county. I went on 'he 8th of May. to the house of the prisoner, with Loosemore and Kees Jenkins, to search the premises. Capt. Napier corroborated the ev idence or Loosemore respecting the discovery of the piece of paper. I saw something glittering on the paper. I put it 10 my tongue, which became "wollen. The substance created saliva. It left a disagreeable taste during the whole of the day. I folded up the paper, and delivered it to Mr. Herapatb, the chemist. There were in the house a number of pill boxes and one large circular bottle wiih "Senna" written upon it. One box contained quiacuni, and the other aloes. Thomas Thomas. police-consfable at Pyle. proved that soon afler Mr. Howell died, he was at Pantrosla, and went from there 10 the prisoners' house to Laleston, and accompanied bv Edward Thomas, the lIIole prisoner, and in searching he found a phial corked, containing some liquid in it, and on the 2Slh of April delivered it to Mr. Herapatb. Mr. W. Herapatb examined:—! am a philosophical chemist residing at Bristol, and a magistrate for the city of Bristol. I received from Loosemore, Oil the 21st of May last, two boxes, one labelled the "contents of stomach and intestines of W. Howell." The seals were perfect, and I cut them. I examined William Howell's stomach. The appearance was highly inflamed, such as it would he after the administration of acrid poison. In examining the stomach, I could not discover the presence of poison. The other box was labelled, contents of the intestines," which I analvzed, and discovered the presence of mineral acid. I examined the contents of the box labelled stomach and inles tiires or Jane Harry," and discovered no mineral poison. 1 after* j wards received at Bridgend, from Loosemore, the liver of Jane Harry, which I submitted to chemical tests. I discovered poison in the liver. I received trom Capt. Napier a small piece of paper (paper handed in). On one spot there was a small qoan- tity of white powder. I took enough off to operate upon. It was white arsenic. I also received from Thomas Thomas a phial. The residuum in the phial had all the characters of a solu ion of yvhite arsenic, but there was not enough left to reduce it to a metalic state. The most satisfactory test is a reduction to a metallic state. I did reduce that found in the liver of Jane Harry. I produced ihe metal in every case in which I found arsenic, excepting that contained in the phial. There are two processes of testing—one I call mv own. [Mr. Herapatb here explained his mode of reducing it, which would not be interesting to the great majority of readers."| There are five tests, which can be used in each experiment. I generally use two tests —one as a corroboration of the other. Mr. H. here handed to the Court and Counsel the arsenic as reduced. No other known substance would produce those characters. Cross-examined by Mr. Chilton — In ail those cases, when I could not obtain the metal from mv own process, f tried Marshe's. In all cases they were tried in yain Oil the stomach of Howell and stomach and intestines of Jane Harrv No experiments will a fiord the full quantify given to deceased, but will certainly prove the presence of arsenic. I did not detect arsenic III ttie lirst experiment, as I did not complete it-I lost the substance. j There was nothing remaining to apply Marshes test. [Showing a paper.J These spots on the paper I call the arsenic. Arsenic is used in dying blue indigo, I cannot say if the arsenic in the liver was produced from ve'low or white arsenic. 1 do not think that poison is used in bleaching. I should have known it if it wde. That arsenic has a taste is a question much doubted. I have frequently tried it, hut I think it has no true taste. It causes a burning sensation on the parts to which it i. applied, which is mistaken for taste. If arsenic sufficient to produce death in,seven hours were put to beer, I could not always find it in the beer, as it is a heavy substance, and sinks to the bottom. Ifit were administered in- g-rnel. treade. or anv other thick sub- stance, F should discover more than in a thin substance. A pint would hold in solution 17 grains. Eight grains and a half would be sufficient to cause death. The smallest quantity I have known to kill, is four and a half grains. A considerable time was occupied in exhibiting the arsenic, reduced to a metallic state, to the jury. Joint iviorgan :—f am going for 11 vearsofage. I lived near the house ot Mr. Wm. Howell. Pat tier has bis cottage under Mr. Howell. I remember the Friday before Mr. Howell died. He told me to letch beer from Mrs. Lewis's of Laleston. I went to Mr. Howell's home for ihe jar, at;d he delivered it to me. I here are two roads Irom Pantrosla to Laleton. Mr. Hoyvel! told me to return through the Heolvslocksa road. I went through he t nrn pike-road, T hn :w wli,-re the prisoners lived—the road passed by rheir cottage. In going to Mrs. Lew is s I went in to Mrs. Thomas's house, and saw Edward Thomas by the fire. His wife was sewing in the little rOPnJ. She -t^ked me to have a little bread and butter. I said yes. "*he asked me how master was. and where I was- poms. I said to fetch beer from Mrs. Lewis's. She asked it I returned that way. I said, no-I must go through Heolysloeksa. There was no cork in the jar—it was by me on the settle. I sat down the whole of the time I v*as there. Mary Thomas whispered to Edward Thomas, and then vent into a little room, and f no- I' ticed something like white paper tied up with a string, which she gave Edward. I then went away. She told nie not to tell Mr. Howell that I liar) been in the bouse. She told me to a-k him to send a cart-load of coal on Saturday, and also told me so say, that I received the message from Edward, whom [ met in the field. I then went to Mrs". Lewis's, and gave the jar to Margaret Lewis. She returned it full Tn returning, f saw Edward Thomas go over the Sandpit field leading to the lane, I met Edward Thomas in the lane, and he told me to go and look after ti>e colts—that thev wire in the road —in the cross- road called Heol Traherne. t went to look after the colts, and left the jar with Edward Thomas. It was left oil the side furthest from the Sandpit field. I turned romid, and went up to see if the colts were on the rond, or in the field. When I came back, I found E. Thomas with the jar. It was not Of sight when I turned round the corner. The distance was a field. When I returned, Edward Thomas, who stood about six yards from the jar, was coming to meet me. He then a^ked permission to see how much beer was in tlie jar, aud afterwards looked at it. He told me not to tell Mr. Howell that the colts were on the road. lIe then wont into Edward Wilde's field. I then went to Pantrosla. In going home I met Wm. David, who was keeping the crows from the oat field. I played with him, and put down the jar. T then sayv Gvvenn^ 1 homas. After I saw her I took up the jar and went on. She had a pail for milking the cows—she took it to u field. I then drank some of the beer. I took "a little little drop," not a mouthful. I be- came very sick, and had mv stomach up on the bridge. I bad it m my times that night. When I went to Pantrosla I gave Mr. Howell the jar. Jfy gave, nie hread and butter, which I could not eat, as I was sick. I am quite sure my master told me to come through Heolys'ocksa. and that Nlrs *Tli,)tiiai told me Mr. Thomas desired me to snv I had not been at her house. Mr. W il.iam Howell;—Was formerly a farmer, but lives now with Ills nephew. at a place callul St rOlan, ahollt two miles from Laleston. iVIv nephew holds land adjoining Heolysloeksa. He used to keep colts there. I went two or three times a week to see the colts. On the List Good Friday I was at B'idgeud, and returned iibout foiif o'clock in 'hf evening, I went to look after the colts at Heolysloeksa. I then went to the field of Edward Wilde, which joins Heolvslocksa from one end to the other. I crossed the ifeld, and drew near the hedge, which is higher than the road. The hedge is low, and I went close to it, and looked over. J saw a man on lhe opposite side of the lane. He was pressing i„ the ccrk to the neck of a stone jar. which might contain a gallon or a gallon and a h;ilf< He then rose ihe jar and shook it, and then came to the side I was. He the rose up bis bead, and walked the side I was, but did not stand straight. I knew him from the time be wa s a boy. [The remainder of this witness's evidence was a description 01 the position of the defendant's f]ftd<].—I then crossed the fields to Laleston. On leavings I turned back, and saw h in in the same place. Cross-examined by Mr. Chilton I never said that they could not bang Thomas and his wife without mv evidence. Wilet, I attached my brother's name to a note it was by his authority. I never attached Lewi, Edwards's name to a bill. I heard something about 11 note. I was in jail five ,vear--for debt one month, and was employed as a turnkey for the re- mainder of the time. Hannah Lloyd corroborated the last witness's evidence re- specting his coming for tobacco. She also proved that the pri- soners sent to her bouse lor gin and beer for Mr. Howell. The Court was ihen adjourned, and the jury ordered to be kept together until next morning, and refreshments provided for them. THURSDAY.— His Lordship took his seat on the bench soon after nine o clock, at which time the Court was as much crowded as on the preceding day. The prisoners appeared more con- cerned than on Wednesday. William David, a bov nine years old, was the first witness examined. He said he was the son of Edward David, labourer, ol Laleston. He watched a field of oats adjoining Heolvslocksa lane, on Good Friday last, to keep off the crows; and John Morgan came to him about four o'clock in the evening of that day, and they played together for some time, GwennyThomas passed at the time. and soon afterwards he saw Edw. Thomas. John Morgan took up the jar. and went on before Gwenny. Edward Thomas came to the field, and asked him if John Mor- gan had drank any of the beer, to which witness replied in the negative. Tne prisoner then left. Gwenllian Thorny, who said that she was a first cousin to Edward ) homas, the prisoner, stated that she saw John Morgan playing with the other boy, and saw Edward Thomas coming after her. but that was not on Good Fridav, but either Wed- nesday or I bursday before. She corroborated the evidence of the two hoys except in that particular.-In her cross-examina- tion, she said she said she did not see Wm Howell, of Storman, in the field at the time. Jannet Williams, who lived next door to the boy John Mor- gan's parents' house, proved that she remembered the deceased Mr. Howell giving the boy directions to fetch the beer, and that she atterwards saw him vomiting. He said he had taken some of the beer. Mary Morgan, the bov's mother, who lived in a small cottage near Pantroshij said that she remembered Mr. Howell coming to her house to ask it the bov should go to Laleston, aud that the boy returned about five o'clock, and had became very ill, repeatedly vomiting. She went that evening to Pantrosla, and found Mr. Howell leaning, with his hand under bis head. She asked him what was the matter. He said—[Mr. Chilton ob- jected to admitting as evidence any conversauon with the de- ceased. Mr, Evans argued in support ot the admission. It was, however, eventually agreed not to press for the admission of that evidence].—The witness remained with Mr. Bowen. who continued extremely ill until he died. After his death witness saw Mary Thomas take two half-crowns from his trousers' pocket, at the same time exclaiming, Oh, God this is the last money of my brother Bill's." She remembered the surgeon inquiring of the female prisoner what she had done with the beer when she replied that the bottles were broken. Witness could not rememb r what ensued. The description of the cir- cumstances attending the illness and death of Jant* Harry was similar to that given by other witnesses.— In her cro^s-examina- tion bv Mr. Chilton, witness said that the pnsoner kissed her brother whenshecamein: and, on returning in the morning, she found her kneeling by his bedside, and wiping his face with her handkerchief. John Jones examined :—He said he was a publican, and resi. ded about two miles from Pantrosla called at Mr. Howell's on the dav be died, and saw Gwenllian David and Jane Harry there. Mr.s. Thomas offered him something to eat, and said there was no heer in the house, bill that she had sent to Laleston for harf a harre! —Cross-examined by Mr. V. Williams :—I know that Mr. Howell kept poison in his house. Many witnesses can say so. Bv the Court:—Did vou see any ? Witness: No. I said I would not take it. He offered some to another person, but I saw none. Margaret Lewis sworn,—said'she was the daughter of Mrs* Lewis, of Lale-ton, and frequently used to see Mr. W. Howell at her mother's house. Remembered the boy Morgan coming for beer on Good Friday, and witness fuve him some in the jar usually sent for beer. Bv her mother's directions she lilted the jar. which was without a cork, from the cask out of which Mr. Pritchard usually had his heer. She put a cork, and some paper about it, into the mouth of the jar. Isaac Downdes held a glass under the cask, as the beer was runt ing, and drank some. In her ion, the witness, wbo was a very inter- esting little girl, said she obtained the paper which she wrapped about the cork from a hamper where the corks were kept. Isaac Downdes corroborated the last witness's evidence rela- tive to his having drank the beer obtained from lhe cask when the jar was under it, and that he felt no inconvenience Irom drinking it. Mary Harrv remembered seeing Mrs. Thomas on Good Friday. She said she "wanled a bit < t meal" against Easter Sunday. As she was leaving, witness asked her yvhere she was going to so late, she replied that she was going to Lales'on, as she bad beard that her broiher was tipsv. From half-past eight to nine o'clock on the same evening, she saw piisoner talking to Mrs. Lewis. She told her not lo proceed far as she wished to speak to her. She then told witness that it was all a mistake about her brother being tipsy."nndthtt she was going lo send her cousin to Llangewydd. Her cousin's name is Mary W illiams. MnryWiHi-.ms was examined, allil said she was not from home) on the day in question. Since the prisoners had been laken up, witness's husband had taken care of Mr. Howell s cattle until thev were sold. They were old on the prisoners'account. Cross-examined bv Mr. Chilton — Vlr. Howell s property was much encumbered at the lime of his death. Whe" his father died there was mortgage of l:?OOI. upon tie properly, and when he (Howell) died. it was 9i)o/. more. Before his death, lie was sued fnr Gal, which he lold witness be was unable to pay. His property consisted of Pen'iau, which was worlli 3- a-year; Pantrosla, 20/. a-year; Mr Neal occupies a farm 01 his for-15/. E. Wrde, 221. a field in his own occupation is worth Hi cot- tages at Aberkenfig, 30/ ditto at Laleston, 51. He allowed his sister 101. a-v ear. Mr. C. Popkin, surveyor, was examined, to prove that the distances, &c., in the plan of the fields and lanes were correct. Edward Lewis, a servant of the deceased Mr. Howeil, yvas ex- amined relative to a variety of circumstances connected with Mr. Howell's death, which were particularized by other witnesses, He was sent for the medicine to Mr. Pritchard, who gave him various directions, which witness comtnuniGated to Mrs. Thomas. The remainder of the evidence was quite uninteresting, as it bad been gone over by other wilnesses. Mr*. Lewis was examined, and stated that lhe late Mr. W illiam Howell was engaged to be married to her, though the day of the wedding WHS not fixed. She corroborated Mr. Pritcliard s evi- de||ee( as welt as that of several other persons relative to tbe ptority of the ale. Cross-examined by Mr. Chilton :—Witness has five daughters. Two are married, and have families. Mr. Howell was engaged to her for five years. Jenkin Lewis was examined, and stated that he once met the prisoner, who asked him if he bad heard of the marriage at La/eston. Witness said, No, what marriage ? To which prisoner said, the marriage of the little 'Squire to the widow. She then said she would rather see him burried, than be married to the widow. Mary Morgan was recalled bv Mr. Ch i If on :—My little boy is rather sicklv. I have sometimes seen him vomit before. He was frequently Iwahle to go to school owing to illness. Mrs. Lewis was recalled by Mr. Chilton :—I am not aware that Mr. Pritchard kept ativ drug's it, the cupboard. Mr. Pritchard recalled by Mr. Chttton :—I kept a few common medicines in the cupboard. Mr. Chilton ihen ailtlresst-d the jury on behnlt of the prisoners. Un- learned counsel appeared to be inoch atfecterl, and curing fit- aifdre^s frequently shed tears He commenced by assuring the jury 1hat he rose tl) address iliem nnder a greater responsibility than he eVer Kit during the whole rom>e of his professional cartf. If "ich was his state of Ceelintr, what must be that of the jury, for thf grea't.-l responsibility rested with ihem. He w;ssa mere feeble instrument, who would endra vonr 10 suggest to them ihf many doubts in which the case was enve- loped so much so. as to make it impossible tur them it, lelnrn a ver- diet which would consign to ano'her worlri two fellow creatines. He hoped that if, in the ironhled and ex-i ited slate of bis mind, he should make use of anv nnfortuna'e expressions which would betray a spiui of complaint—there was nothing further from his mind lb*11 1(1 coin plain of the manner in which die case was conducted. He did not in tend complaining of the comt having been adjourned, lor it w-as c loosing the least of two tvib — etiher the jury wert 10 reliie with tlie ettict or all tbe evidence yesterday brought against the prisoners remaining upon their minds nncontiarticled, or they would be compelled lo listen to nun, burdened wiih weariness more llian man could b-ar. He would not intuit tbe jury bv reminding ihem of their duty of discharging from their minds all repor's heard out of conrt, but he would tell them to discharge from their millds much they had heard in court, for h,s learned friend, in his opening speeih, had asserted manv things in sup- pnrt of whirh he did not adduce a tittle of evidence. He was sllre they would dismiss from their minds every thing that was not proved. for that was a case involving much c"nf"-j,,n and contradiction. It been trumpeted in every town, village, and hut; and he in comt many individuals who had come 'rum a distance, in consequence ot the deeply bruited interest, the case had excited. If he would make use of any bad arguments, he entreated the jury not to visit them upon Ins unfortunate clients—they did not speak, but entrusted to him what was mosi near 10 man—me, and tie trembled to ihink tnai mey u"5'"> chance, put their reliance upon a broken reed. He had passed a sleep- less night, and the numerous facts Vhi,.I, mind miidit have embaara«sod him lo such a degree as to disable him from doing his duty • Ifectnally. In proportion as tbe facts weie ini- j probable, the evincm e was confusing. Cutild they expect, that I., a case having so m?ny tacts more than donbitn the evidence should not be contradictory? When he asked his Learned Friend to produce Ihe \trid1lS depositions, he said, nO-r.(i fqr a very good reason; they woe one mfiss of contradictions and. discrepancies. Could it bfi Ihat any person sho,,101 manifest sueh reckleso t1aring» AS to concoct a plan to perpetrate a crime which wOllld defeat itself-that any person should plan a design, the consequence of which wonid not be the de.'Uh of one individual, but would likely to jesilt in the death ol four—for the piisoiiers well knew lhe habit? of the inmates of Pantrosla, 'hat aU partook of the b^er. Would they hetirve thaf a ph't bad been laifi tomrrder four persons, while their object miiiM hare been de- j foated bv the boy taking; a draft in going home—such a thing quite j incredible. But attempts have been made to prove a motive f, the pint. He wonM content!, that e,,eii tl)ii;e cii-eiiiii,tan, es which at the first appear J110sl suspicious, prove the prisonpis entliely innocent i f the charge preferred against them. The humane law of England said- \Vhere IIny óonhts e..ist, give Ihe bentflt til the prisoner," Did ti"t th^t charitable construction extend to all doubts upon any particular points? If Mrs. Thomas had anv guilty conscience—as •'conscience make cowards of us all." would she have exhibiteo1 a paper, cout;iinii< arsenic, to the boy Morgan, wheu the might have called her hnnband into the room, and delivered it to him, while the hoy was eating his bread and butter ? The circurnstance of her having sent for boti ed b while she had snme in the honv, cn-ild form no ground for suspicion. It WHS evident that her principal ohj. ct Was to send for spirits, having previously spoken to it,, landlady about it. Did thai not shew that her conscience was clear 7 No Immaii being has ever been found to dege- Derate at once to the worse stages of crime, It had pot been attempted to disprove that the prisoners have borne a most unblemished character. Such affectionate conduct as hers towards her brother, could be witnessed. In his hours of "Iry, over his cups, he talked abollt Ihe widow, and of his marriage with her, and that a course of five lon^ years: but, when affiiclioll and sickness 11ssailed hint, and in the hour of death, did he mention her name? No, not a won! was spoken about her. He immediately sent for his shw and was it p05siblt that she could have kissed him, and wiped with her handkerchief frotn his face the clammy sweat of death, if she herself ha caused it; and when j she found tint anothei innocent woman, from whose death she would not even obtain as much as the wreck of her brother's fortune, would suffer, could it be believed thai she would tell her that she wa* sorry she .,( she wilill(i It-11 [, sort), could do nothing, and wi bed to assist her, and offered her tea! The body of was examined bv two surgeons, assisted by Mr. Verity, and they ca'ne to the conclusion" that the deceased ctiell from cholera. They had been virtually acquitted by the coroner's j"ry, who declared that death resulted from cholera. He wonlrl wi,h to otler a few re- marks upon Mr. Herapalh's evidence, wilhont which, it was allowed, the prosecution conlll not have been conducted. Philosophers were, of all men, the most likely to be letl asti-ay. There were ihouc itvJft of men of Mr. Herapaih's profession, who weie the grea'esl eiiii;ti?iasts— who were as confident they had discovered the philosopher's Stone, as Mr. Herapath was that he had discovered arsenic. Captain Napier said, that the substance which he applied to hi? tongue had a taste, bnt did not burn; while Mr. Herapath said, that arsenic had no taste, but pro- duced a burning sensation. When a practical man's evidence was in opposition to that of a scientific man, be onehi to have his evidence corroborated. Were the jury to decide upon snch an important case on vi6 ,nert> dreams and uncertainties of science ? Alter ail the analyzation, Mr. H. had been unable to discover the arsenic in the stomach of one. or intestines of the other. How were the jury to know lint that all the processes Mr. Herapath went through, did not plodnce arsenic? The Learned Counsel commented npon the evidence of all the other witnesses, and concluded by entreatina the iorv not to decide such all important question without the strongest, evidence. Mr. Chilton then called several higlily-respcclable individuals, who gave the prisoners a jrood character for humanity and general respectability. His Lordship then Dimmed lip the evidence, observing, that the jury had Iteaid, both Irom the Learllpd COlIlIMd for the prosecution, and irom the Learned Advocate for the piisoiiers, that the case wns one of the most important that could come under their notice. His Lordship then charged the jury to dismiss from their rainds any preconceived opinions, either for 01 against the prisonert. He also observed, that though, as they were told bv the Coun-el for thc prisoners, that the law of England would railier acquit many guilty persons than convict one innocent, still that was to be taken, within certain limits, as to the degree of doubt raised, for human evidt-nce could never arrive at infallible certainty. They were first of all to consider, whether the deceased came to their death by poison and before ascertaining that they would have to say whether Jane Harry met her death from the same cause as Mr. Howell. For his own part, looking at the symptoms before, after, and in the act of death, there was very little doubt of that. The next ihing they would have to ascertain, wonid be, whether poison was tlie cause of death (or if that were not the case, it would be unnecessary to puisne the subject further. It would also be necessary for iheni lo take the motive into their consideration. The alleged motive was for the sake of obtaining tlie decea-ed's property. It had been said that this property was scarcely worth obtaining; but, for his part, he thought there was some motive, though it was very small. The property, taken at a rough valuation, might be worth about two thousand pounds, afler deduciing his mort- gages. The facts 011 the part of the prosecution are-thtt both persolls have died, and that they died from (he same effect, and from the same mineral poison. His Lordship then slated, that he take the evi- dence chionologically, and not in the order the witnesses were called forth. The little boy, John Morgan, was the first «iine>s on whose evidence he would offer his remarks. But there was one observation he would make regarding the evidence of children, and that was. that they were liable lo mistake wlut they had been talking about. He did not think it was the case in this instance, bnt he thought it right to mention it One thing that appealed strange was, that the wife should have given the husband the paper of poison in the boy's presence. In ie- ferring to the prisoner kissing her brother on his deathbed, and doing other kind offices for him, observed that those facts were not favourable to the prisoners, if the other facts were established. Such conduct might be coosistent wiih the most genuine kindness and sympathy, or w' lJ,e most hypocritical appearances. Tbe Learned Jndfre recapitulated the whole of the evidence, remarking on and yveighinjr every point for and against the prisoners; and concluded by telling the jurv, that if a suffi- cient number of ciicumstances were not made out to justify them to convict, they should return a verdict of not guilty but, should they think them guilty, they would be committing a gross bieach of faith to society 1101 to return a verdict accordingly. The jurv after an absence of an hour and a half returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY. There is imotber indictment against the prisoners for the mur- der of Jaue Harry. [Want of space compels us to defer the remainder of the Assize Report until our next.]