The Express.
London, England, 1852-06-22 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 22, 1852.

the proceedings of the Bishop's Court and the archives of
the polite court mere burnt at the last revolution.
Cress-examined by the Solicitor-ftenetel—Achilli left
Vitt rho in 1834. Mr. Flanagan, an Irish priest applied to
me in December last to come here. I was at Ilkadm ay, in
Worcestenbire, as a catholic priest at that time. 1 have
since been abroad to get information for this trial. 1 have
seen Rosa di Allessasidris at num and Viterbo. I did
not give her any money, or soy one else, with relation to
this trial. I have seen a great many persona in Viterbo
shout the trial—i might say the entire city of Viterbo.
I have not induced nay person to come hero as witnesses.
I have seen many persons who were coming here, but pp
have not come. I did not seek them—they came sponta-
neously. I went alone, and put myself in communication
with the vicar•general, Casa Nm.vo. I had a companion,
a Dominican priest, Zoppini. I saw the first witness in Rome.
1 did not interrogate her. 1 applied to the vicarlineral
when I got to Viterbo ; and I had every day many coming
to me when they heard what I was there for. That was
after I had seen the vica:. general and Zoppini. Dr. New-
man sent me to Viterbo. rho vicar-general and Zoppini
wen expecting me. 1 was fifteen days in Viterbo collect-
ing evidence. Iwu seven or eight days in Rome. 1 did
not communicate with any tech siastical authorities at
Rome. I saw three persons in Rome, Mr. 'larding and
Mr. Gordon, and another person ; they are here.
Re-examined by Mr. Bramwell—The chi f of the police
came to me at Viterbo. I did not apply to the police for
information. I endeavoured to persuade item di Allts•
sandria to come to Englund, but she rernscd—sho was
enceinte. The director of polic: hod a private memo-
Tandem of all the proceedings against Achilli. This is a
copy of it; it has the seal of the city.
Lord Campbell said it could not be evidence if it had
twenty teals of the city.
Sophia Maria Minna, examined by Mr. Baddcley—l
live at Naples. lam a married woman. I have been mar-
ried eight years. Principe was my maiden name. I am
about 28 years of age. I lived at Naples before I married.
I knew Dr. Achilli there then. I became acquainted with
Dr. Achilli when I was about 13 or It years of age. I was
in the habit of frequenting the church of St. Peter the
Martyr at Naples. I became acquainted with Dr. Achilli
in the sacristy ;of that church—he was sully-prior of the
church. I went there of my own accord—he wan alone. I
went several times to pay a amen sum to the saint, and he
did not say anything. One day I went there when he was
alone, and be embraced me closely. I wished to leave, but
he prevented me and dishonoured me. He used some vita•
lent-, and threw me on a kind erica. I tried to get away,
and 'draggled much. I was then a virgin. I became preg-
nant and bore a child. Before 1 was confined my father
and mother went to Dr. Achilli. I was not with them. I

—....,...—.. „.... _
remonstrated with Dr. Achilli at the time, and said ho was
doing me a great harm. He said there was no harm in it—
it was rather a good than on evil. He pre me a bit of
sweetmeat from time to time. My father died three years
afterwards, from illness occasioned by this affair.
Cross-esamined by the Attorney-Ciencral-1 left Naples
on the 16th of January. My outlier went to Civita Vecchia
with me. While there a Dominican monk came to me and
desired me to go. Before 1 thought of coming to Eng-
land
there had been a trial in Naples, about 13 or 14 years
ago. Money has not been necessary to me. I have had
everything provided for me. I came alone a great part of
the journey. A father of the order of St. Philip spoke to
me at Naples, and he has paid the expenses, but I don't
know what he has paid. I have been some time in Paris.
I have been living with Buis:lei in Paris. I met her first
there. We are together now. We have talked together
about this business. I had known Dr. Achilli sit months
before he seduced me in the sacristy. Ho was the prior,
not the sub-prior. I never saw any other Dominican monk
in the church at Naples but Dr Aehilli. The dour of the
saerivy was open at the time. Many persons went to the
sacrirty to put their names down as I did, and they went
whenever it was convenient to them. I used to go at all
hours when I knew he would be engaged in putting down
the names. It was in the morning, about 9 or 10 o'clock,
when I went there on the occasion in question. It was in
November or Dee., I went through the church to get to the
sacristy. There were many people in the church at the time. I
He locked the door. I was rather afraid, and said I wanted
to go out. He said, "Be quiet, or shame will come on us."
I said " You are a priest—let me go." He said it was no
sin. I did not cry out; but I struggled. I stayed there a
quarter of an hour afterwards, because I was red in the
lace ; and he said, " Why should you go through the
church ?" I went out through the common way of en-
trance of the monks. There were two doors to the room ;

one leading to the two other rooms between the room in
which I was and the church, and the other leading to the
common entrance of the monks. I did not tell anybody of
it, until I could not conceal my appearance, and Dieu 1 told
my mother. Dr. Achilli knew that I was in the family
way. The only answer he mails was that he knew nothing
of it.
The court then adjourned.
THIS DAY
_ „ _. .

At the sitting of the court this morning the examination
was proceeded with at great length, and had not concluded
when a went to press.

SPORTING.
TATTERSALL'S—MoNDAT.

7 to 4 apt Mr. Mallelemie &GM
6to 1 lir. Hermes Celikmdoie
6 to 1 Mr. Wllldoemee Nonikma
7 to 1 lord Glasgow's Oarimme (t)
GoODWOOD STAILIS.
15 to 1 apt Mr. Gredllea Corlim
13 to 1 Lord Clildea's TormaCiats
15 to 1 Mks of alokommoro
WO tog Mr. Moises Meat (t sal $14111)
50 to 1 Mr. Doultho's Don Patio
GOODWOOD CUP.
S to 1 apt Mr. Metkl•m's Milton
SOO to 50 Sults. 'ruining the Northman:load Plato and
tloadm rid Cup (t)
1500 to I) Cordaro animists the Goodwood Pokes and Frantic
the Goodwood Cup (t)
0000 to 23 Champion for the Goodwood Ptak" Milton for the
Goodwood Cup,ond Sooistrem for Me M. Legoo(t)
DERBY.
10 to I apt Mr. ?owner's Mess (t and aft of )
25 to I Mr. Wilkinson's Dm worth (t)
The above quotations are in most instances made from
offixs. Business was very nat.
CRICKET.

THE NORTH V. THEiouii7.--Ihis match wu OMR-
mimed yesterday at Lords, and the following is the wore :
North Ist innings, 00; 2nd do., 5 wickets down, 18; Routh
lst innings, 91.

NAVAL.

MOVEMENTS Or 11ERMAJEST T'S Snips.—At Ja-
maim, her Majesty's ship Imsum, 70; Alban, steam
ship, 4 ; Calypso, Admiral Seymour, at Halifax by last
accounts in the Cumberland; Alarm, at St. Lucia; In-
flexible, gone to Lisboa ; Express, to Rio de Janeiro;
Bermuda, at Bermuda; Devastation, at Bermuda; Rosa•
mood, at Nassau and Turk's Island with the Bishop of
Jamaica; Persian, at Greytown.

Sahli Intelligence.

ROUSE OF LORDS.—YEstv.RnAy.
APPEAL rang Tn. Hum Counr Of CMANCIUtT.-11•P011t LOMA Talmo,
1.0. n nnotonat. Loan Caknwoar4 mob Two On= soma Lou"
.4,-..T110 DT Tat Junto, or TOR Cacao OS WEEPS'S liff CB AND
0.01110,1 Plait AND flAllON• or Mcoeuran.

BalOilT O. HUTTON. -PIOVISIONAL COMMITTERMEN.-

TUB WINDINO•UP ACM.
The question involved in the present appeal arose in pro-
ceedings in winding up the " Dared Birmingham, Oxford,
Reading, and Brighton Railway Company.' The appol-
lent was placed on the list of contributories as one of the
provisional committee who had accepted shares in respect
of a certain portion of the expenses incurred in the manage-
ment. The respondent is the official manager. There was
un appeal to the VieoChancellor Lord Cranworth, which
11 was not allowed. The only question raised by the present
appeal to the House of Lords was this : thet previously to
the passing of the Joint Stock Companies Winding-up Acts
the appellant uas not liable at law or in equity to pay any
part of the expenses incurred on behalf of the company, and
that these acts hail not the effect of making any contribu-
tory of thu company liable for any part of the expenses in-'
mitred fur which he was not previously liable. The pies-
Om au argued before the house in the course of the last
session. Some difference of opinion having arisen it was
ordered to be re-argued by one learned counsel on each side.
Mr. (4. Pinion Cooper (with him Mr. Morris) appeared
for the appellant.
Mr. llethell (Mr. Roxburgh with him) for the re-
spondent.
Lord Truro, addressing the learned counsel, said there
were two questions to which the house desired that atten-
tion should be directed ; fleet, whether this association
came within the meaning ot the Winding-up Acts of 1848
and 1819 ; and next, if it came within these acts, whether
the appellant was liable as a contributory, and to what ex-
tent he was liable ?

Mr. Purton Cooper said that would be a much larger
argument than the one ranted by the appellant.
Lord Brougham—Yon don't contend that this company
was not within the Winding-up Acts ?
Mr. Parton Cooper—No, my lord.
Lord Droughorn—You deny that he is liable to the extent
alleged. Don't you gain your point if we should ho of opi-
nion that this is not within the acts ?
Mr. Purton Cooper said, having only confined his atten-
tion to the question actually raised, he was not prepared at
once to go into the other argument.
Lord Brougham said learned counsel might now proceed
with the qutation rl prior liability, and the house could
hear the argument on the other question to-morrow.
Mr. Bethell suggested that the course proposed of deviat-
ing from the question which came within the scope of the
appeal was somewhat inconsistent, as in a similar case
before this house, when he attempted to do so, it was ob-
jected to.
Lord Brougham said, when the house had the very great
benefit or the attendance of the learned judges, questions
were often put on points not strictly raised by the apm al.
It was important that they should have the benefit of this
assistance with respect to this question.
After some further conversation, it was arranged that the
re hearing of the appeal should be postponed tilt to-morrow
morning, to afford the learned counsel an opportunity of
preparing to argue whether the association is within the
winding•up acts.
The judgment in the writ of error in " Gosling v. Vcley,"
the Braintree church-rate case, will not, wo understand, be
given before Thursday or Friday.

WURT OF COMMON PLEAS.-TESTEIIDAY.
fiIIITUKIA AT NISI !MR'S Ia MlADLinalt.7 Minns CAILI IV,TICZ

Jc-a7r:

NIAS O. SCOTT.--754LA-X-1;15-R.-L-ell-A-1;-;.OF COWARDICS

AtiAINbT A NAVAL CAPTAIN.
Both the plaintiff and defendant in this action are cap-
tains in the Royal Navy, and the action was brought to re
cover damages for slander in charging the plaintiff with
cowardice in that he had not obeyed a signal for going
into action. The defendant pleaded not guilty, and in pat:
justified the words imputed to him.
Several witnesses, including the plaintiff, having been
examined,
Sir Alexander Cockburn addressed the jury for the de.
fendant, and detailed what that gentleman would prove
when called iuto the witness box.

The Chief Justice suggested thtt the case might, in his
opinion, with great propriety, stop where it was. It
seemed to him that the statements of Captain Scott and of
Captain Nies were in substance the same.
Sir Alexander Cockburn said, he was in this difficulty,
there was a plea of justification simply co-extensive with
the words used by Captain Scott.
The Chief Justice—But Captain Scott was mistaken in
his facts. It was true, upon the evidence now, and ac-
cording to Sir Alexander's speech, Captain Scott would, in
effect, say that Captain Nies did not come into the position
in which he expected him; but that did not prove the plea,
for the plea was that be WAS not in the action at all. The
justification could not be proved. Captain Scott could not,
of coarse, persist in saying that there was anything like a
charge of cowardice against Captain Sias. It was most
honourable for all parties to yield in a gentlemanly way,
and it was a great satisfaction to everybody to know that
two officer, gentlemen of high honour, had not shrunk
from coming into court in a case of this kind, and appealing
to the laws of their country.
Sir Alexander Cockburn offered to leave the matter in
the hands of his lordship.
Hr. Chambers said unless a distinct denial of any impu-
tation of cowardice or conduct unworthy of a naval officer
were given, he must go on; and there must abo be an apo-
logy fur having used the words.
A good deal of discussion then ensued between the coun-
sel as to the terms of settlement, and ultimately it was
arranged that Captain Scott, having heard the explanation
of Captain Niaa and of his commanding officer, Sir Thomas
Herbert, believed that there wee nothing which could pro-
perly cast my reflection on Captain Nias, and Captain Scott
perfectly withdrew any imputation affecting the character
of Captain Nies. And he expressed his regret for having
used the words in question.
His lordship and the jury expressed themselves satisfied
with this offer, and a verdict was then entered for the
plaintiff, by consent, damages 40s.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-YESTERDAY.
&nixes *ma Tamar Taut ut MIDULAINIX. AT Nati Pam.—
_ lit.roas rum LOAD Cllll4l UAW •li fitItCIAL JVIIEA

MITN;IINTAI7I; ii(IFI;;77IIIraMEZT-117017TIVEIllTRAIL-
RAT COMPANT.--ACTION TO ZECOVZR COMPENSATION

!ULL AN ACCIDENT.

This was ;iictiOnbrought to recover damages for an
accident which plaintiff alleged to have been caused through
the negligence of the defendants' servants.
This action arose from the same uccident which gave rise
to the case of " Bousilon v. the Great Northern Railway
Company," tried in this court, and reported in the Daily
Netes at yesterday.
In appeared that the plaintiff was the keeper of la small
shop at Ilitchin, in Herta, of which her husband was the
freeholder. On the Bth of September, 1851, the plaintiff
was a passenger iu an Exhibition excursion train coming to
London from Leeds. On emerging from the Bornsey
Wood tunnel, the train came in contact with another train
before it, and by the collision two of the plaintiff's ribs were
broken, and she sustained injuries in her kg which have
left her with a " club foot." She was taken to the
Free Hospital in Gray's-inn-lane, where she remained for
seven we, he,. and continued as an out patient for a fort-
night longer. She had been suffering from illness through
the winter, and an invalid for a considerable time ; and
finally, on the 11th of the present month, took the advice
of two eminent medical men, who gave it as their opinion
that the plaintiff could only recover the permanent use of
her leg by undergoing a delicate operation, which would
involve an expense of from 1001. to 3001., and incapacitate
her from using her leg for six or twelve months.
Mr. Bovill, on the part of the defendants, submitted that
the company had dune all that could riasonably be ex-
pected from them, They had offered the plaintiff the sum
of 2001., which the learned counsel submitted was sufficient
compensation for a woman of 50 years of age, in a very
humble condition of life, and who had not been shown to
have lost anything in point of money by the accident. lie
contended also that the subsequent ill effects of the accident
were the result of the plaintiff's own negligence in not
attending to the advice of the medical men at the Hospital,
who had not been called in evidence by Mr. James, because
they would have given opinions unfavourable to the plain-
tiff's claim.
The Lord Chief Baron having summed up,
The jury retired for a abort time, and returned a verdict
for the plaintiff; damages 1201.