The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1860-05-15 00:00:00

"Ltgal.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT, MAT 9.

OLD_ COURT.

The learned judges, Mr. Baron Channell and Mr.
Justice Keating, took their seats on the bench soon after
10 o'clock.
Mr. Baron Channel snggested to the Lord Mayor,
who accompanied their Lordships, that some gentleman
should be temporarily appointed to act as the officer of
the Court. to take charge cif the documents or other
papers that would be formally produced, in consequence
of the vacancy created by the death of Mr. Straight,
and until there should be a permanent appointment.
The Lord Mayor tbeii requested Mr. Kemp, the
Deputy Clerk of Arraigns, to act temporarily as the
responsible officer of the Court.

THE CANE or THE REV. MR. HATCH.

Mary Eugenie Plummer, a little girl 11 years old, was
called upon to surrender and take her trial upon an
indictment preferred against her by the Rev. Mr.
Hatch, charging her with the offence of wilful and cor-
rupt perjury.
fhe defendant was brought into court by her father.
Me was not placed in the dock, but wee allowed to be
seated at the attorneys table under her conned, during
the trial. The cam appeared to create a great deal of
interest, and the court was crowded during the day.
Upon the application of Mr. Serjeant Shee, all the wit-
nesses were directed to retire from the court, and they
were each examined separately.
Mr. Edwin James, Q.(' was specially retained, with
, Mr. Gordon Allen and Sir. tOiffard, to conduct the
prosecution. Serjeant !iliee was specially retained, with
Mr. Cooper, for the defence.
Mr. J ants, in his opening address to the jury, said he
ii old have to bespeak their most patient and careful
attention to the ease he should have Go lay before them,
which was, perhapa, one of the moat extraordinary that
had ever been investigated in • court of justice. The
prmecutor, the Rev. Mr. Hatch, was a clergyman ; he
we. °slanted in the year INS, by the Bishop of Lich-
field, and was appointed to a curacy, the duties 4 which
lie fulfilled for tome time, and in the month of Sep-
tember, WI, lie was appointed to the office of chaplain
to the Wandsworth House of Correction. Mr. Hatch

was a married man, and he advertised for scholars at
his private residence, and in consequence of this
advertisement lie was intl....Need to Mr. Plummer, the
father of the little girl, who was now before these; and
she and a younger sister, after None preliminary negoti.
ation, were received into the establishment of Mr.
Hatch, and it was while they were in this position that
the circumstances occurred which led to the present
inoceeding, and the conviction of Mr. Hatch for
indecently assaulting both the little girls, and Ids being
sentenced to two years' imprisonment and hard labour
upon each charge, a sentence which he was now under-
going in Her Majesty's gaol of Newgate. The jury were
aware that the law, as it at present stood, did not
peruiit of any appeal in criminal cases; and Mr. Hatch's
wife, a most virtuous and highly respectable lady, who,
if those little girls had spoken the truth, must really
have been in the position of an accomplice in the
dreadful offense alleged to have been committed, could
, not be called as a witness in his behalf ; and the only
_ . . _

opportunity Mr. Hatch bad of disproving the odious
accusation and showing that it had no foundation
was by preferring the present charge. The learned
council then proceeded to state the facts deposed
to by the defendant at the former trial, which '
are not, of course, of • nature to admit of
publication, and lie said that, apart from the extreme
unprobability of the story itself. he should produce
evidence which, it appeared to him, so far as human
testimony was capaole of doing so. would show that the
story told by this young girl was untrue, and an entire
fiction, the result of a prurient and depraved imagination.
I The learned counsel concluded by stating that it was
needless for him to remind the jury of the fearful issue
involved in the inquiry, and that the very existence
almost of the prosecutor depended upon the result of
the trial, and when they bad heard the evidence he
should lay before them, he was satisfied they would come
to a righteous conclusion.
Mr. 'Kemp, the Deputy Clerk of Arraigns, produced
the original indictment against the Rev. Mr. Hatch, and
the certificate of hi a conviction. . .

—....--
Hatker, one of the ushers of the Court, proved that
be administered the oath to the defendant in the usual
form.
By Serjeant Shee.—No witnesses were called for the
defendant, except to speak to his character.
By Mr. James. —He was not aware that witnesses were
in attendance to speak to facts.
Mr. Barnard, a shorthand writer attached to this court,
proved the despositions made by the defendant at the
former trial. The allegations ot perjury referred to fire I
distinct charges of indecent &malt. the first being repre-
scnteil to have taken place on the 11th of August, the '
first day the little girl was taken to Mr. Hatch's school,
the second on the following day, and the others very
shortly afterwards.
The Rev. Mr. Hatch, who was brought from the
gaol to give evidence, was then examined. He said : I
am the prosecutor in this case. I was convicted of an
indecent assault upon the defewlent, Mary Eugenie
Plummer. lam 42 years old. My father was vicar of
Walton-on-Thatnes. I was educated at Eton, and con-
tinued my studies at Cambridge. and was presented to
the curacy in Staffordshire by the Bialiop of Lichfield,
and afterwards to an incumbency in the same county.
I was married in 11445, but had no family. In 1851 I
was appointed chaplain to Wandsworth Gaol, and held
that office at the tone this charge was made against me.
(A plan if the witness's residence and grounds were
here handed to him, and he said it was enrrect.)
In abswer to questions put by Serjeant She. hi Mr.
Pereira. the gentleman who j.re-ared the plan of the
grounds, it appeared that the di t moo from the drawing
-
room window to the bottom of the garden was 250 feet,
mid there were aome thick shrubs in the garden.
The examination of Mr. Hatch was then proceeded
with, and was followed hy that of his wife, Mrs. Hessie
Hatch, who gave her evidence with very great calmness
and .elf possession, although she was deeply affected at
the unhappy position of herself and her loulead. At
the close of her examination the case was adjourned,
the father of the defendant renewing the recognizance
he had entered into in the mini of 1:5010 for her appear-
ance on the following morning.

MAY 10 I
The proceeding, in this extraordinary case were re-
earned yesterday morning before Mr. Baron Cbannell
air' Mr. Justice Keating.
As the charge is only of misdemeanour, the jury have
been allowed to go to their own homes, and they were
all in attendance at the time appointed for the opening
of the court.
The defendant, Mary Eugenie Plummer, was brought
into court by her father, and, as on the previous day,
took her seat near her counsel.
Further evidence having been heard, and the case for
the prosecution closed, the Court adjourned.
The defendant's father again entered into a recogni-
sance for her appearance on the following morning, and
she went away in his charge.
A great many applications were made to the Under-
Sheriffs during the day for admission ; but, when the
Court was filled to its extent of affording proper accom-
modation, those gentlemen very properly refused to
allow any more persons to be admitted, and thus a good
deal of confusion and inconvenience was avoided.