R v Cochrane, 1840

Catherine Cochrane, a very interesting looking young girl, was placed at the bar, charged with burglariously breaking into the apartments of an Officer of the 31st Regiment, and with stealing therefrom certain promissory notes - to wit - four notes, each of the value of £5, and four of the value of £1. There was also a separate count for the larceny. This case seemed to create considerable interest, and the Court was exceeding crowded.

The prisoner, it seemed, at some former period, had been in the habit of visiting the apartments of the prosecutor, and on the evening of the day mentioned in the indictment, having become a little intoxicated, she determined, after an absence of some weeks, to pay a visit to the old quarters; on her arrival at the Barracks, she found a window of the officer’s room unfastened, which she opened, and gaining access to the apartment, found it untenanted, but observed a pocket-book lying on a writing desk; on examining it, she found that it contained the notices in question, which she abstracted, and, in the language of the law “feloniously took, and carried away, contrary to the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, her crown and dignity.” The greater part of the money was spent in purchasing articles of wearing apparel, and in treating two other women to drink, &c. The charge was brought home to the prisoner, and the learned Judge, after explaining to the Jury the precise nature of a burglary, as distinguished from a larceny, left the verdict entirely in their hands. The Jury, without retiring, found the prisoner Guilty of the larceny, but acquitted her of the burglary. She was remanded for sentence, as His Honor wished to make certain enquiries as to her character, &c.

Catharine Cochrane was now brought up for sentence, when His Honor addressed the prisoner in a most feeling manner; he observed, that he had made enquiry into her character, and had found that there was no offence recorded against her; had there been he could not have passed the lenient sentence which he now proposed to pass. It was a fortunate circumstance that the sash of the window was not fastened, - for if it had been, His Honor would have been obliged to pass the extreme sentence of transportation for life. He would, however, observe, and he did so, not with any intention to wound the feelings of the prisoner, that she must now consider herself a Felon - a convicted Felon - a sentenced Felon; and this would be recorded upon the books, against her, to her prejudice, should she sin again. In considering every circumstance connected with her case, His Honor would pass upon her the lenient sentence of six months imprisonment in the female house of correction.

This decision seemed to afford great satisfaction to a crowded Court. - Colonial Times.

[1] See also Hobart Town Courier, 11 September 1840; Hobart Town Advertiser, 11 September 1840 (the latter stating that the defendant was “an exceedingly pretty and genteely dressed female, apparently not more than seventeen years’ of age” and that “Mr. Justice Montagu animadverted in strong terms on the conduct of the watchhouse-keeper, who attempted to induced the prisoners to make disclosures while in durance, – a course of conduct his Honor said, was extremely reprehensible”).