The Express.
London, England, 1862-06-25 00:00:00

ANOTHER SHOCKING MURDER IN

HAMPSHIRE.

A murder, revolting in the extreme from the
cold-bloodedneei in which it was committed, and the brutal
treatment received at the hands of the murderer by his
' victim, was perpetrated at Fordingbridge, a small town in the
county of Haste, twelve miles from the cathedral city of
Salisbury, on Sunday morning last. The particulars are as
follows :—Mary Ann Sagan Hall, aged xi, was the only
daughter of a Mr. Hall, of Midgham Farm, distant about •
mile from Fordingbridge. The family are highly respect-
able, and rent a good-sized farm. It was Miss Hall's
custom to walk to the church at Fordingbridge every
Sunday morning, for the purpose of attending Divine ser-
vice ; and on Sunday morning last Filen Smith, the dairy-
woman, saw her leave her father's house about 10 o'clock
and strike into the footpath through the fields that led to
Fordingbridge. Nothing more was heard of her until four
o'clock in the evening, when a man named George Jacob
Gilbert, alias Philpott, informed the police-constable at the
town that, as he wee crossing • field called Harding's field, ha
picked up a lady's parasol, and on proceeding • little
farther he saw the body of • woman lying
on her back in a gully or ditch that separated Mr. Hall's
farm from Harding's field. The constable, a surgeon, and
several people at once went to the spot, accompanied by
Gilbert, which is situated shout half a mile from the town,
where they discovered the body of Miss Hall lying against
the side of the Etch, quite dead, the hands out-stretched
and clenched, the clothes fearfully torn and covered with
the mud and filth of the ditch, through which evidently she
had been dragged. On her breast was her church-
service, and in her hand her hymn-book. The body of
the unfortunate young lady was removed to her
father's house, the windows of which are visible from the
, place where the fearful deed was committed, the man
Gilbert assisting at the removal. From information received
by the policcconstable, he was induced to arrest this Gil-
' bert, on the charge of having committed the murder, sod
from whet transpired at the inquest held on Monday, and
from circumstances that have come to the knowledge

of the polies, but which, of course, were not made known at
the merely preliminary proceedings of Monday, there seems
every probability of their connecting him in some way with the
committal of the deed. Gilbert is • native of Fording-
bridge, but bears • very bad character, having been trans-
ported on one occasion for rape, betides being committed on
innumerable occasions for minor offences. He is now out on
• ticket-of• leave, and has resided in Fordingbridge for the
last twelvemonth*, working am a labourer, although recently
he hes been unemployed. He is unmarried, aged about 35,
and resides with his sister in a amall cottage about
500 yards from the spot where the body was
found. His statement is that be did not go out on
Sunday until three o'clock, the time at which be discovered
the body, but a shepherd named Garland asserts that be
saw him at a quarter-pest 11 o'clock on the Sunday morn-
ing, in a field about 500 or 600 yards on the Fordingbridge
side of the ditch, where the body lay, wiping his boots and
trousers with gram. Oa the :spot being examined by the
police there were traces found of such an 0033111111100 having
taken place. His clothes, also, on being examined were
found to have been recently waahed, and his *toothy were
hanging out to dry in the garden of his cottage. It would
seem that the murderer met his victim as she was walking
to church, at the stile that separated her father's from
Harding's field, and there attacked her, evidently with •
view of criminally assaulting her, as there seems to have
been no attempt et robbery. Here there are evident traces
ali a straggle having taken place, sad of the mastery being
I eared by **murderer, who, it would seem, dragged the
smfortaaste girl about fifteen yards up the gully or ditch
(which is completely covered in by the farce Wakes an
either side) that separates the two fields above mentioned,
and where they would be screened from the obeervatiou of
Any passers-by. Here it was that the second struggle took
place, the girl having been evidently placed against the side
of the ditch, with the lower pert of her body trailing in the
and and filth, whilst the brute attempted to terry out hie
object. This he would appear to have failed in, according
to the medical evidence. From this spot, then, be drugged
his victim by the legs for the distance of 140 yards,
Vireo& the water, filth, and weeds of the ditch, screened
ham all human observation by the overhanging bushes,
finally placing the now lifeless body in the place and posi-
tape in which it we, found. From the medical evidence at
the inquest, it appears that the deceased was alive when
her inhuman murderer immersed her in the poisonous
water of the ditch, for rooted it was found in her stomach.
Her inside clothes were torn to rap, and the weeds sad
mud had even penetrated ander her stays.

ESSAYS a REVIEWS—JUDGMENT.

(11103 DAY.)

ARCHES COURT.
Won Dr. Lusitiegtea.)

THE BISHOP OF SALISBURY o. DR. ROWLAND
WLLLIA3IB (CLERK).
This morning, It having been announced that Dr. Lash-
ington, the Dean of Arches, would deliver judgment in the

can of the prosecution, instituted against Dr. William■ sad
the Rev. H. Bristow Wilson, on account of certain opinions

published by them in the book entitled "Essays and lie.
views," the usually duU and thinly-attended Arches Court
was crowded to excess, and the scene was enlivened by the
presence of a number of ladies. The Bishop of Lichfield,
_ _ .

the Bishop d Worcester, and Lord Brougham were acoom-1
modated with elate as the bench, and the Her. H. Fonda,
.. ...

the Rev. Mr. Heath, the Hev.Dr. Williams, sad the Her.

Mr. Wilson, were in court during the delivery of the jek

Dr. Lushington observed that this was a case arising oat
of the volume entitled " &rye and Review'," which had
attracted a great amount of public attention ; and the pro-
occutica was instituted against Dr. Rowland William', cc
account of a review which was published in the book of
" Essays and Reviews," under the title of " Bunsen's
Biblical Researches." He had postponed giving his declaim
till the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council had pro-
, pounced their judgment upon the appeal in the case of
" Burder v. Heath." In that case the proceedings were
taken under the 13th of Elizabeth, c. 12, the Marge being a
violation of the statute in having propounded contrary to the
doctrines laid down in certain of the articles of relipoo. In
the present case a breach of that statute was not assigned,
but the charge was the having promulgated doctrines contrary
to the articled of religion, and in derogation of the Book of
amnion Prayer. The arguments against the admisdoe of
the artidee of accusation in this case were threefold ; 6.10,
it was said that divers opinions were imputed toDr.W Marna,
that he had not maintained ; secondly, that the opinions
imputed to him bad been submitted to a test that was not
warranted by ecclesiastical law, namely, by extracts from
the Bible ; and thirdly, that the *aka. at Dr.
Williams were not such as were forbidden to a clergy.
men to hold and publish. It made no difference that the
. .

preambles is the case of Mr. Heath was ander the statute
of Elisabeth, and that these proceediogs were taken nodes
the general eccianeatical law, for both were criminal pro-
ceedings instituted against • clergyman under the oulesinti.
Del law. In the case of Border sad Heath, it we. held that
the articles should specify the doctrines alleged to have
been published, the particular parts of the articles and
formularies of the church contravened, and set forth
the parts containing the doctrines which it was said were
contravened. There was a difficulty as to the position of this
case in coming to a decision whether opinions bad been in..
petted to Dr. Williams which he had not maintained, became
it was said that his was not an original work, but • review
by him of an original work by Baron Bunsen—there was s
difficulty in determining whet were the opinion which Dr.
Williams had promulgated, and what were mere statements
of the opinions promulgated by Baron Bunsen. That a
clergyman might review • book containing unorthodox
opinions if he differed with those mimesis or sought to
refute them, was a self-evident proposition. But the in-
quiry hi this case wee whether Dr. Williams had clearly
amused his puma approbation of the opinions
end doctrines contained is Bunsen's book, and had
generally adopted them es his own. Upon this quake e
great deal of difficulty had been shown to exist, but surely
it was not the duty of Dr.. William, a dogmas of the
established church, to leave in doubt whet his opiaoe was
with regard to the opinions he reviewed. The wet pm
time was whether extracts from the Scripturee had bag
improperly introduced against Dr. Williams. The qua
ties for the sours was not whether the doctrines of Dr.
Williams were contrary to the, Christian faith, but
whether they were at variance with the doctrines of
the church as contained is the articles and formuhuin
of the church, and in this respect they had the guidance of
the judgment of the Privy Council in the Gotham case.
The court could not pretend ignorance of the great excite.
meet that had been crated in the public mind by the putt.
canoe of this woks" sad it bad been said that the volume
had bees ommired by the whole of the episcopal
bine& He could not suede to the argument that
,the mind of the court should he influenced by
that eirecumanee As judge of the Arches Court he could
not take ns his guide eves the authority of the
mast learned sad orthodox divines of the church. The
court has to ascertain the true construction of the 'racks d
religion, and sot to form its opinion upon the authority d
anyone of the eminent divines whose authority had hen
quoted, sot attempt to grapple with the many citation
from learsed works which appeared to conflict with thee
authorities. With regard to the third objection, what the
law took cognisance of was not the opinions of • campus
held in private, but the opinions which he advisedly pm
mulgated and published ; and in putting the law in form
the court must not be influenced by discoveries upon wigs
ever authorities they were based, but mod emoute the lee
as it found it, even under extraordinary eirounistano.
There might be much in the book of "Essays sad Reviews'
that deserved ceosure, and yet that the law of the chord
might not reach. In approaching the various Tsar
which were raised in the articles of accusation, be dechnl
his opinion that the subscription was • seed mime
action, and though the court could not take allelmmi
of what reservation • clergyman might make the M
seriptioo, the court would bold him to hare mite
moundum anima= impopectis. In forming his judgeent
Is this case, the articles of religion most be
taken in their plain literal sense, and he NM
sot admit the Epistles and Gospels to gab
his decision without admitting the Lowom whki
would led to an interminable iovertiptioe, NM mil
rain theological questions upon which the court wee
ed
prepared to pronounce an opinion. With rape* therdne
to all the articles now preferred against Dr. Williarreol
the mired" from the Scriptures mast he erased.
Writ
regard to the limits within which • clergyman ass
liberty to entertain and publish opinions, he held that erf
clergyman who advisedly maintained either directly en
directly that the Holy Scriptures proceeded from the ten
mental powers that Ind produced other works, or vice tai
even with the qualification that the powers in the ma
and the other differed in degree, impugned the
drir
authority of the Holy Scriptures, end maintairse
in fact, that the Bible was not "God's Word written,"
was the work of men, oontreveciog thereby the 6th, it
and 20th articles of religion. It we. open to • degree
to maintain that any book of the Bible was not Mask
the person whose name it bore, provided he conformed*
the 6th article of religion, and admitted that the book
elf Myths, origin. He proceeded then to examioe
in
gables of accusation, and the pongee quoted from al
miaow of Dr. Williams, prefacing his remarks with th
Maralion that though he might entertain private)" .1
egibies lbst there was much in the writiop of the social
that was iseneurable, he must be influenced in his dais
solely by the law. Paring over the first four articles. 1114
were merely formal, he came to the fifth, which pleided
to
introduction of the " &says and Reviews," and he helieva
that that article was admissible because it (occluded mis
charge, sod made no attempt to charge Dr. Wallas
account of the opinions of others. For the ems recess al
sixth article most be admitted also. With regard
s b
sat article, he must hold that to characterise, sad
eiitae
qualificetims, the Bible as an expression of devout rune ss
• contravention of the doctrines of the sixth sell
of religion, that the Bible was al Divine 000,
Whether the Diets* writers were to be described .
" passionless machines," he need notinquire, but tapas..
to which he had referred, and the next pelage Illaslar
scribed the Word of God as the written voles of the ealle
pike, were plainly in contravention of the 6th and 20th
tides of religion, and this article must therefore beamed.
though in some somata it would have to be reformi
Ilegardieg the eighth article, Le could sot NO that the P!
gage cited there wee any denial that the propluess of ties'
Testament were the prediction of events to come al
the admission of the moral elemeot in pmpliecyooomM•
that denial, and it appeared that the whole Ps**,
wan a recital of whit others had written, as
was the Impression derived from their IMMO. 7,
could not think that to deny that the ROT
prophecies were directly Messianic was a cactraventionolm
teseltheg of the Ni.... creed that " the Holy tame eft
by the prophets," sad for these resem tbo
l;
Dr. Williams's opining militated against ooe of
the
Mporteat doctrines held by the most venerated dies.!
the March, he could sot come to the cooclusioo that
articles of religion or the liturgy had in this rens'.
wkilMaiL He must, therefore, reject this 1
the ninth r,
The
websegema. underti med tie lb.
of Detail. It might be true that Dr. W diem had is
denied that the Book of Pallid was written by Dellis *.
dia.vffi
De article
el iron yr ls"."
the
Dr. 1.

MENT.
OWLIND
Dr. Losh-
meat in the
rilliam■ sad
uo opioions
ys aad ite-
•ches Court
aed by the
f Lichfield,
rare sworn-
H. Fonda,
d the Rev.
of the pals.
s arising oat
which had
ad the pro.
Willful', on
the book of
•' Buosea's
his decision
SI bad pro-
the case of
edings were
large befog
[Amy to the
religioa. In
lot wiped,
Sou cootrery
the Book of
stlmissiee of
*fold lust,
Dr.Williarne,
the option'
hat was not
xtrects from
POI of Dr.
to a clergy.
Doe that the
it the statue