The Express.
London, England, 1852-06-25 00:00:00

able stress upon what he called a contradiction between Dr.
Achilli and Oaramoni's wife ; but it was absurd to ground
upon so slight a discrepancy a suspicion, much more a
charge, of intercourse which both parties had utterly de-
nied. If his learned friend's object was justice he would
hardly hays dwelt upon such n slight circumstance. Ile
(the Atturney-Ocneral) thought, howev‘r, that ho might
s.ifoly idly upon the judgment of the jury in tl.iu in-
stance. But now he come is the ease of the CgruboMs.
. _

If dere was any damage to 6-e character of Dr. ATlii
from having engaged them as his Serfallta, that would have
beer. the ease from the very first day they entered his em-
ploy. But it had been shown that lie was living in high
'vote at eirfu, and visiting even the Lord High Commis-
alarm The charge depended entirely upon the statements
of Mr. Reynolds. Now, he (the Attorney-General) could
not help being struck with the extraordinary chit-
ractrrof this statement. Was it conceivable that Dr.

Aclolli should have carried on sosheineies:lif the
indecent familiarities which were imputed to him st
a %%inflow where he could be so easily rbserved,
espreially atter he had been told of them? Besides,
the window from which the other witness stated that she

had witnessed the familiarities was below that of Dr.

ACHM ; and as jalousie blinds look upwards, it was scarcely
posdlole that she could have seen them. it was, however,
peeeible that she might have seen Carraboni himself with
his wife, and that her m..ater, who hail a deep feeling
against Dr. Achilli, might have made her believe that it
was that gentleman. Ihsirlea, Zante being a smaller place
then Corfu, any such familiarities must have been known
by everylsoly in the town, and if the circumstance were true
the? might have had the fact proved by other and less doubtful
If Dr. Achilles character were so scandalous, it
was imixosible that his reposition should not have followed
bin to Malta; and his appoinoment to his office at the college
we. a sufficient answer to the slanders of Mr. Reynolds.
Nothing could hardly be more atrocious than the justifica-
tion which bad been placi don the record with respect to
Dr. Achilles conduct in that situation. Leoriiiii and Zee-
charis were supposed to he guilty of certain irnmoraliti, s,
of which they were chit, ged by a priest named Cioxii. At
that time Dr. Achilli was In London, and therefore any idea
that he was implicated in those immoralities was
variably unfounded. Dr. Achilli placed no reliance ou
the statements of Ciossi, and recommended the London
committee not to interfere; but there was an inquiry, and
the charges were for the pi client dismissed. Afterwards the
matter was revived, and Dr. Achilli, who supposed that it
had hero settled, was dismissed, because he had sent away
Zaccharis on an important mission after having transmitt.3l
a notice to the committee some days before.
Lord Campbell observed that en looking more closely at
the pleas he found that he ought to have admitted the
questions which he had declined to allow Sir Alexander
Cockburn to put to the Earl of Shaftesbury His lordship
therefore directed the noble earl to be sent for.
The Attorney-General resuming, dwelt at sonic length on
the affair at Malta, and said that it would be unfair to infer
• charge of ecntplicity from the hasty statement of an angry
man. Ile (the learned gentleman) trusted that the jury
were now not unprepared to believe that charges might be
trumped up for the purpose of destroying Dr. Achilli; and
lie a pealed to them with confidence, to their deliberate
judgment, whether there was the slightest ground for Pay-
ing %oat V.e very serious imputation contained in the plead-
ings with respect to the college at Malta was established.
The Earl of Shaftesbury having now arrived, was exa-
mined by Sir Alexander Cockburn upon the point to which
reference has been made. Ilia lordship began more thou
once to repeat the entire narrative which formed the sub-
stance of his Former evidence ; but he was as often inter-
rupted by Lord Campbell. At length he was asked what
were the other reasons besides those which be had already
stated that had induced the committee to dismiss Dr. Achilli.
The Earl of Shaftesbury—The reasons that governed
our decision were the se :—We felt that if the matter
were to become public, so great • scandal would
be brought upon the college, and especiaLy upon
that branch of it which was occupied by the
missionary reformed priests, that, both with regard
to the character of the institution itself, and, moreover, to
the interestsof theprotestant religion, there was nothing left
us but to break up the whole establishment, therefore we cut
the Gordian knot by. dismissing Dr. Achilli. It did not
concern us to carry the investigation any further; for we
considered that whether he was implicated or not, it was
our duty to wipe our handset so foul a scandal. (Applause.)
We acted upon the rumour, not upon any charge actually
before us, and we determined to break up the whole thing.
The Attorney General really felt much obliged to his
lordship for having recalled the Earl of Shaftesbury, be-
cause, after this lust piece of evidence, so far from the seri-
ous charges contained in the justification having been cots-
, blished, they had entirely failed, and he trusted that the
matter was set at rest for ever. [A voice in the gallery—
. " Hurrah !") lie (the Attorney-Uentoral) now came to
the charges which had been made against Dr. Aebill's con-
, duet in England. Three servants in succession bad repre-
sented themselves—one to have had liberties taken with

her, and the othe r two to have been seduced by him. A
fourth case had also been thrown in. In all these instances
no complaint had been made either to Dr. or Mrs.
Achilli. The learned counsel had been obliged to deliver
up J nue Legge to the reprobation of the jury; and Ilarrictte
Harris had been dismissed for being dirty—acircumstance
which she would be likely to resent. His learned friend had
praised the candour of Sarah Wood, which be thought en-
titled her to some credit; but it was well known that she
had conic from the house of Mercy, and therefore her can-
dour did not go fur much more than that of the negro, who,
after he had been hired by a gentleman, said to his new
master, " Sir, I think it proertio tell you that I am a black
rs man." (Laughter.) M. Logan had complained that the
birth of her sister's child at er house had entailed great
expense upon her ; but had she made any application to
Dr. Achilli to be contributory towards that expense? Dr.
Achilli hod done nothing to stifle inquiry but had allowed
hie servants to go at large into the world, and had certainly
offered no " hush money." Ile had acted throughout as an
innocent man. Mrs. Logan had expressed great anger at
Mrs. Caustelani for having led to her being subpoenaed, but
it she thought that Dr. Achilli had had intercourse with
bee sister, why should she desire to shield him, or why
&mid she he unwilling to appear? It was said, too, that
Dr. Achilli had given Jane lasge a religious book. Now,
be was far from saying that it Dr. Achilli had done so, it
would have been any evidence of his guilt ; but if he had,
why did they not produce the book for it would have
bees a strong corroboration ? Then there was the
ease of Catherine Furman, in 1847; but if Dr.
Achilli had really token any liberties with her, why
did she not tell Miss Lambert, who as a respectable
woman would immediately have ordered him to quit her
house. One remark would apply to these alleged cases of
seduction—the very alteration which has taken place in the
law of bastardy showed how easy it was to trump up such
chimes, and hence the law had required corroborative evi-
dence in addition to the oath of the woman herself. They
had heard the manner in which the witnesses hat, given
their evidence. They had also had before them Mrs.
Aehilli ; and he bad no doubt that they would form • cor-
rect judgment as to the relative weight to be attached to
the testimony of each. This brought him, in the last place,
to that most extraordinary document which had emanated
from tbe Holy Inquisition. They would observe that
hie horsed friend had relied upon that document fur
limed of several of the charges of which there had been
eel proof, but of which the proof was to rest upoo the
seshosies to be found in that precious document. He
=Jena th
dspted ienparopriitettiwfulhodoccourseentw.hiy:tahtis
quam,lord-
booms there was an allegation that Dr. Achilli been
Rand 'silty by that tribunal, and had had a certain punials-
essat awarded to him. It was evidence that there had
been such a judgment, but as to the facts themselves, it was
so evidence at all. It was the first time in which a judg-
ment of the Holy Inquisition had been admitted m an
English court of justice, and he sincerely hoped
b would be the last. Probably it would be, after
the fate which awaited that under consideration.
It was in 1851 that Mr. Harting went to Rome and put
himself in communLation with certain of the authorities
there. There was nothing discreditable in getting a judg-
ment of a court; but somehow or other an individual whom
Mr. Harting was extremely desirous should be shrouded in
mystery undertook to obtain for him a copy of this docu-
meat. Mr. Harting desired to write this gentlaman's name
on a piece of paper and hand it to his lordship, but at last
it appeared that it was Monsigoore Talbot, the private
secretary of the Pope. lie (the Attorpereleneral sup-
reed that he theoght the interierenee of Monsignorer albot
was • swatter that would not bear the light, and that it was
desirable to eemosal it because there was something in it to
create prejudice. So secret were not only the proceedings
lost even the transeetions of the office that even an English
Roman catholic bishop was not allowed to enter,
but was kept at the door till the clerk or no-
tary or official tame and delivered to him the paper.
There was no examination with the original, nor indeed
say proof that such • document existed at all. Certainly it
was the most remarkable document that ever came before a
smart of justice. Amongst other things, it was stated that
W superior of the order of preachers had paid to • woman
on behalf of Dr. Achilli fifty crowns, as a compensation fur
her seduction. But where was that superior ? This docu-
ment was obtained in the month of September, 1851 ; the
pleas were placed on tho record on the 12th of February,
1852 ; that the pleas were founded upon the document,
and Vasa *ado( ument produced as proof of the pleas. The
jadganart stated in the document was one of perpetual sus-
Mirhi:ea the cure of souls and preaching the word of
wad aim that Dr. Achilli must repair to some house
et lb ardor a( Ow more strict observance. Now, in 1839,
babel sawart !, be a monk, and to hold office ; and how,
lissehus, snit this sentence be carried out ?
Laud Omphell-1 only admitted the document as proof
eat am was such a sentence ; but I cannot take it as
"dame of the precedent facts.
The Attorney-General acquiesced, and said that as re-
garded the confessions of indecent behaviour and immo-
eality mentioned in the document, it was a gross sod sow
&Ines fabrication. These allegations were militmit say
proof whotever, and he did with the meet perhat sawillowea
say that with regard to them Dr. Achilli bad asetpletaly
absolved and acquitted himself. Dr. Achilli new stood be
thee them ready to receive the decision of the Jury , and he
anticipated with the most entire confidence that-
that vets
diet would be one that would vindicate him be. the feel
slander which Dr. Newman had thought proper fa mai-
gate respecting him Ile had also the most entire eishielle•
that their verdict would be one of condemned= oasis*
Dr. Newman, and one upon which he would be answerable
to the law. lie (the Attorney-Oeneral) had sow gone
through the case with anxiety, with the deepest interest,
and with a constant sense of his inability to do japtice
to it. Upon those charges in detail he had addressed
to them those obeervatiuns which he committed to their
delibiTate judgment, and winch, he trusted, would he
found justified by their sentence. He appealed to them
whether he had in any way endeavoured to excite any
of those prejudices which his learned friend had anticipated ;
and whether he had nut endeavoured to avoid those religi-