Saturday 12 Apr 1845 (p. 2, col. 6-7) INQUESTS. ----- (Before Mr. LUMB, Coroner.) A MYSTERIOUS CASE. On Saturday last, at Maryport, on the body of a newly-born child, which was discovered under circumstances so singular as to create much surprise both to the coroner and to the jury, whilst the transaction is altogether enveloped in a veil of mystery which the utmost efforts used upon the inquest has not been able to remove. The following evidence brought forward at the inquest developes all that will probably ever be known of this strange and most mysterious affair:- John CLARK, the first witness called, on presenting himself refused to be sworn until his loss of time and expenses were paid. CORONER-I make no bargain with witnesses, and if you refuse to be sworn you stand committed to Carlisle gaol. Constable, you may take the witness into custody. On hearing this, the witness showed a great readiness to be sworn, much to the amusement of the spectators. CLARK then took his oath and thus proceeded-I live in Whitehaven and am a dealer in silks and paper. I was at Maryport on Thursday last, the third instant, seeking for orders and selling my articles if opportunity offered. On that night I was at a lodging house, kept by one Ann BROWN, in Senhouse-street, Maryport, where I intended to have slept. I got my tea at Mrs. BROWN's, and sat about an hour afterwards the by the fire. It was between four and five o'clock when I arrived at the house, and it was between five and six o'clock when I had my tea, which I got alone. When I had sat abbut [sic] an hour after tea I commenced putting my goods away for the night. I was going to put them in the bed room which I was to occupy. On opening the door for that purpose I found a very bad smell, and said to Mrs. BROWN, "Dear me, Mrs. BROWN, there is a very bad smell in the room." And she said, "No, no, there cannot be a bad smell in the room." I then remarked that there must be either a dead dog or a dead cat in the room. We got a light, and Mrs. BROWN then went into the room and I followed her. Mrs. BROWN knelt down and looked under the bed from beneath which the smell appeared to proceed. She said, there is a bundle, and that will be BURNS's bundle. She got up and went for the tongs and gave them to me. I took the tongs and touched the bundle with them, and pulled it out from under the bed, and in doing so the bundle left two wet marks on the floor of the room. The bundle appear to be a tartan plaid cloak, with two brass clasps on the neck or collar. On my pulling out the bundle, Mrs. BROWN said, "Dear me, it is that woman's cloak that was here a fortnight ago: she was very big in the family way, and I insulted her two or three times to induce her to leave, fearing that she might be brought to bed in my house." Mrs. BROWN then asked me to undo the cloak, and see what was in it. I said I would not touch it, but told her to go and get a policeman, who was the fittest person to apply to in such a case. The smell proceeded from the bundle. The cloak now shown to me by William BATEY, the policeman, is the cloak that I have deposed to, and the one which formed the bundle I have already mentioned. I did not look into the bundle at the time I pulled it from underneath the bed, and therefore I do not know what it contained. Mrs. BROWN went for the policeman, and I staid until she returned, when I got my goods together and left the house in consequence of what had taken place. I was afterwards informed that the bundle contained a dead child. I know nothing more than what I have already stated, and am therefore unable to give any further evidence. I have known Mrs. BROWN about two years, and have been at her house three times before. I know nothing against the character of Mrs. BROWN's house or herself. Ann BROWN sworn-I live in Senhouse street, Maryport, and am a widow. I keep a lodging house for packmen. I have two spare beds, and they are generally occupied about once in three weeks or a month. John CLARK came to my house on Thursday night last, and applied for a bed, which I told him he could have. When John CLARK went to put his parcels away for the night in his bed-room, I went with him, and we both found a bad smell. I was astonished at the smell and lighted a candle, and John CLARK pulled a bundle from under the bed. I looked into the bundle and found the body of a child; it was the same child as that now produced. The bundle in which the child was concealed was a tartan plaid cloak, the same as is now with the child, which was then quite dead. About three weeks ago, a woman came to my house and asked for lodgings. I took her in; but observed she was very large in the family way. She staid at my house about a week, or perhaps a day or two longer, she was large all the time, and her size appeared to be the same up to the day before she left when I had some conversation with her on ordinary matters. In the course of conversation she told me that she expected to be confined in about seven weeks. On the night before she left my house she went to bed about eight o'clock, and I did not see her again that evening. About five o'clock on the following morning she came into my room, and I asked what was the matter she had risen so soon. She said she wanted to be home, as their people would think she was lost. She lived, as she told me, at the Red Dial, near Wigton. She was not more than ten minutes in my room before she went away. I did not observe her person; she had a shawl on: it was a large one, and on account of it I could not see her person. She used to settle with me for her lodgings every night, and she paid me for them on the night before she left. She called herself "Jane," but I knew no other name. I never saw the woman before she came to my house about three weeks ago, and she was then a stranger to me. In the room where she slept there are two beds kept for travellers, she occupied that room; she slept in it. No one had slept in the room between this woman left and the time John CLARK came, and discovered the bundle with me. I made the bed in which the woman slept after she left, and upon my solemn oath I observed nothing to induce me to believe that a child had been born in the bed or room. I have seen the tartan plaid cloak in which the child was wrapped in the possession of the woman. After making the bed on the morning after the woman had left, I locked up the room, and never went into it again until I went with John CLARK. I have not many persons coming, and am often as long as four or five weeks without a comer or lodger to stay all night. I have never seen this woman since she went away, and know nothing more of the matter. She was an English woman and talked about being at Wigton market, which she frequented on market days. She spoke the Cumberland dialect, and was a nice, pretty-looking country woman: she said she was 28 years of age, but did not look to be more than twenty. She told me she was married, and that her husband was a farm servant in the neighbourhood of Wigton. I heard nothing whatever during the night before she left-no noise, nor moaning of any kind, I am not a sound sleeper, and was awake perhaps twice or so during that night. I never knew that the child was under the bed until we found it. The room in which I slept and that occupied by the woman are close together, and if there had been any noise I think I should have heard it. I gave the child to the policeman, William BATEY. By the CORONER-The woman did not wear a ring. I asked her why she did not, and she said it was not usual in her part of the country to do so. I observed that it was a curious custom. She did not appear to like to talk about her situation. She showed me plenty of money-eight sovereigns-had plenty of good clothing, and appeared to want for nothing. The woman was always hearty and in good spirits. William BATEY examined-I am a policeman, and reside at Maryport. I obtained this child now produced from Ann BROWN, the last witness. I gave it to Mr. FORBES, in order that he might make a post mortem examination, and he did so. Mr. FORBES sworn-I am a surgeon, and reside at and practice in Maryport. I have made a post mortem examination of the subject of this inquiry. I got the child from William BATEY, the policeman. The external appearance of the child indicated its having been born a fortnight ago,-it was much discoloured, and in a state of advanced putrefaction. The after-birth and the umbelical [sic] cord was attached to it. There were no marks of violence on the body of the child, which was full grown, and a very large one. I opened the head, and found the substance of the brain in a fluid state. I then opened the chest, and found the lungs fully inflated, the right lung particularly so, covering the pericaratium [sic]. I removed the lungs and heart, and placed them in water: they were very buoyant, and floated on the surface. I cut them into several pieces, and each piece floated. On cutting a portion air escaped, and on pressing it it became completely decomposed, and resembled jelly, but still floated when put into water. I cannot say whether the child was born alive or not: its decomposed state renders it impossible for me to give an opinion on that subject. The lungs might have floated in consequence of the advanced state of decomposition-that is, I mean from the gases arising therefrom, and might have floated in such a state even had the child been found dead, and therefore it is impossible for me, as a medical man, to say whether this child has been born with or without life. Had I seen this child within four or five days after its birth, I then could have formed a very decided opinion on this head, which, from decomposition and putrefaction, it is now impossible to do. The CORONER now commenced summing up the evidence. He said that there could be no doubt at all that this was a very bad and aggravated case of infanticide, but so far as that court was concerned, he regretted to say that the guilty and unnatural mother would escape detection. They had heard the evidence, upon which, with the exception of that given by Mr. FORBES, it was almost unnecessary for him to make any remarks. The testimony by the witness, Ann BROWN, appeared to him to be of a most extraordinary description, and could not, he thought, be looked upon without some suspicion; but as he knew nothing whatever of the character of that witness, or that of her house, he should be sorry to make any comments which probably might be uncalled for: her evidence, therefore, he would leave in their hands; and, as inhabitants of the place, they might possibly be some way acquainted with this person, and could consequently judge the truth or falsehood of the story she had told. It was, he thought, a very clear presumption that Mrs. BROWN did not know the child was under the bed, or else she would have removed it, and not have allowed a substance so offensive and disgusting to remain there for a fortnight; but that, in his opinion, did not quite reconcile her denial of hearing any noises proceed from the room during the last night that the woman was there, nor of observing any mark indicating the birth of a child when she made the bed, and it had been proved the child was then born. It also did not appear that the witness had at all concerned herself about the woman when she quitted the house. It seemed odd to him that she would take so little interest in a circumstance so strongly calculated to excite her suspicions as that of a woman in such a situation, leaving her house so suddenly, and apparently without any reason or cause assigned, so early as five o'clock in the morning, when it was in evidence that she did not usually rise before eight o'clock. That fact of itself should have excited Mrs. BROWN's suspicion. Had the evidence of the surgeon been satisfactory as to the existence of life at the time of the birth of the child, he should have adjourned the investigation which would now perhaps be prosecuted elsewhere; and he thought that if the authorities of the place were to use but very trifling exertions at all, the guilty party might yet be detected and punished; but after having heard the evidence of the surgeon and that given by the woman, BROWN, which did anything but assist them in ascertaining whether or not the child was born alive, it was perfectly useless for them to proceed any further, as they could only in accordance with the evidence of the medical gentleman, and the opinions suggested by other evidence, return an open verdict of "Found dead." The jury, in accordance with the recommendation of the coroner, immediately returned a verdict of "Found Dead." ----- On Thursday evening week, at the Ship inn, Duke-street, Whitehaven, on view of the body of a youth named Joseph BIRKETT, aged 16 years, who on the day preceding whilst leaving his vessel, the Mary, then lying in the North Harbour, accidentally fell, and alighting on the edge of a boat in his descent was so much injured, that he died in the course of the following day. Verdict-Accidental Death.-Another inquest was held before the same gentleman, at the Lowther Arms inn, Goat, near Cockermouth, on Friday last, on view of the body of John IRVING, aged six years, son of Mr. Thomas IRVING, flax-dresser, at that place, who, whilst amusing himself with some other children fell into the mill race and was drowned before his body could be recovered. Verdict-Accidental Death.