1786-02-04 (static/transcriptions/1786/02/029.jpg)

to suggest, the motive which induced this girl to commit so malicious an offence is beyond the efforts of surmise! no cause for it whatsoever appeared upon the evidence; her confession expressly declared her heart to be free from all envy, hatred, or malice toward her master, mistress, or any part of the family; her intellectual faculties seemed no ways deranged; and her conduct appears emphatically to warrant the allegation in the indictment of “being moved and seduced by the instigations of the devil.”
The following prisoners were acquitted.
Mary Walker for privately stealing in the shop of Richard Hinksman, in High Holborn; Mary Polton for stealing a pewter pot the property of John Uinde; William Kimpton, William Marsh, and Richard Rushin for stealing thirteen Welch sheep the property of the Hon. Charles Fitzroy, commonly called Lord Southampton. – It was agitated that this was a misnomer, or improper description of his Lordship’s name and dignity, he being, not by curtesy, but actually and by creation, Baron Southamptopn. That it is a misnomer cannot well be doubted. Yet it was doubted by One [ILL] not been long in the practice of criminal jurisprudence.

Tuesday.
The King against Sophia Pringle.
This unfortunate girl was found guilty last sessions of forging a letter of attorney, in the name of William Winterborne, for the purpose of obtaining a dividend on stock in the Bank. She received sentence, and is included in the warrant for execution on Thursday net. On an intimation that she was with child, she was ordered to be put to the bar, and Mr. Justice Gould as the senior judge on the rota, asked what she had to say to the Court. The agitations of her mind prevented an answer, upon which the Judge asked her if she referred what she had to say to her Council. Mr. Knowlys accordingly moved, that her sentence might be respited upon a suggestion of pregnance. The Sheriff then returned a jury of matrons, who were sworn to enquire, &c. whether she was quick with child. They retired into an adjoining room provided for their purpose, and gave their verdict, that she was not with quick child. This verdict was recorded; and the unhappy object of their enquiry remanded to her dismal cell to wait her approaching fate on the day of execution, unless her benevolent and gracious Sovereign should, by a respite, extend his mercy to her.
Upon this case some question prevailed, whether the plea of pregnancy could be received judgment. it was determined that it may be received at any time before execution, and that, if it be found for the prisoner, the Court have authority, upon such a verdict, to respite the execution, notwithstanding the King has, by his warrant, commanded it to be done.
N. B. A number of ladies of distinction attended the Court, in curiousity on this occasion.