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

THE ACHILLI TRIAL

COURT OF WREN'S BENCH.—ThreaDAT.

*MAAS AT Kr PIIIIII At WI

.-iiIVUILK 4,au CAIItIIAU.

AND • r•PICIAL JvaT.
VERDICT AGAINST NEWMAN.

Teti (411111(4 r. INVOILIIATION.
After the report given iu yesterday's Express was des-
patched,
Lord Campbell said the defence had been conducted with
great propriety and ability, but, la fore the Attorney•Uene-
tal commenced his reply, it would be better to come to ea
understanding as to the questions to be .eft to the jury.
The plea consisted of 23 clierges. Sir A. Cumenurn had
addressed tumult to the main restates .4 the case, but,
technically, it was out plea. Ile thought the several mitt-
trrs should be telt ...parade to the jury, and he would
...ggest that the nary should. hove a copy of the different
allegations in the plea, and, bat Mg heard the discussions on
hotii sides, and the summing up of tlw judge, that they
should say whether they believed, on the evidence, that •
alio!e of the charges were mule out, or any part of
them, and if so whet had been 1114110 Out.
The jury then retired for a alert Cme. On their return
into court,
The Attorney-11count rose to address the jury
in reply, upon the whole case. Ile said : Ilia
. karma friend had, just delivered one of the mast elo-
quo ut addresses he had ever beard, and hail urged every
topic calculated to excite their einoti a. lie had adverted
to the great advantage of Dr. Achilles position, but he must
remind them that this was the fast time in the trial that

his counsel had been haunt upon the matters of actuation
alienist him, whilst his learued friend had ta ieu had the
opportuudy of addressing them. The whele caw was
03•1 before them. All that the bitterest hatred,
the nu st unwearied industry, the inset unbounded
resources, and the must unlimited intluence, could combine
for the purpose of accomplishing the destruction of one
man—no doubt a most formidable ads:nary—had been
accumulated together on that occasion; and it would bo
for them to say wile:her the mass and body of the evidence
which haul be, it produced was of such weight as to crush
the prosecutor to the earth, or whethe r it would crumble to
dust at the touch of calm and impartial investigation. Be
supposed the re never bad been sin lust ince, in an English
court of justice, in which a trial had takeu place under such
circumstances. Dr. Aehilli, it hail been truly said, had
become the accused, but he had nut even been allowed to re-
main in court to confront thew dingoes against him, and give i
instructions for their cross-examination as the case pro-
ceeded. Awl he could not help thinking that his
learned friends who had been studying the proceed.
ings of the Holy Inquisition hail become so ena-
moured of its practice that they were determined
that everything which took place in the way of judicial in-
quit y against Dr. Achilli should be consisteut, and although
they were in a British court of Justice, t:.e Reiman forms
should be regarded un the present occasion. There never
was an instance of • man undergoing so fearful and fur-1
mirlable an ordeal as that to which Dr. Achilli had been
exposed in his esamination for nearly eight hours, and lie
appealed to their recollection of his conduct and demeanour
during the whole of that anxious period, and asked them
with the most perfect confidence whether anything but a
thorough conviction of his own innocence could have ilia-
bled him to stand such a searching inquiry with calmness
and pr greet self-poesession. Ilia learned friends hail endea-
voured to make them suppose that thee RIO • question of '
religious controversy. Ile stated that the two eliampious of
the contending religious faith were before them, and waned
them against prejudice. Ile had supposed th-d he (the
Attorni y-G!neral) should appeal to their religious feelings.
He should be ashamed, however, if he were to endeavour to
excite in their minds soy such feeling. This was me a
.
question of religious controversy, for Dr. Achilli add,
Dr. Newman has assailed me with poisoned arrows—if he
could prove his charges, the law would protect him,
lif not he must ho convicted as a slanderer. Ibis learned
*Mod had said that Dr. Newman was not actuate!: by per-
usal animosity. Ile had exhibited, however, all the Neil
of • proselyte. Dr. Achilli was a man of great learning
andeminence, and Dr. Newman's hatred against him might
be as sarong as if they had come into personal collision
But his learned friend said these were matters published
bag ago-15 months, it was said—they were all contained
in the Dublin &view; and in page 76 of Dr. Achill e* book
he attributed the charges to Dr. Wiseman, Archbishop t.l
Westminster by the Pope's creation. (t.aughter.l If he
would have thrown off his mask, Dr. Achilli would have
met him; but when he saw those charges re-asserted by a
man who was once respected, and who was • tangible being,
and could be got at, he lost no time in calling upon him to
peeve his statements. Ile tint commenced proceedings
the publishers of the pamphlet, but allowed Dr.
•.man's name to be substituted. Was ever a man placed
In such • situatiou as Dr. Achilli ? It was said he was
on his trial. If he had been, some specific offence would
have been selected ; he could not have been questioned
himself; and he would have been in a much better
position, because he was now called on to answer
for 26 years of his life, and had no less than 23 charges
brought against him. But notwithstanding all these disad-
vantages, and that their minds had been twice impressed
by the powerful addresses of his learned 'friend, he had no
doubt that they would he actuated by a desire to do justice,
and that he should satisfy them that there was no ground
for supposing that Dr. Newman's charges were proved.
Ile should look with confidence to their verdict. lie would
first draw attention to the charges on the record, of which
there was not the slightest proof. In the first place, it was
alleged in the 7th charge that Dr. Aehilli, on I.'eb. 1, 1831,
debauched and carnally knew Rosa di Allessandris, and in
Sept. 1833, he was found guilty of it by the Bishop of Vi-
terbo. In the 12th charge it was said that the offence took
place in the sacristy of the church of 6radi, and in the 20th
charge he is represented to have given 50 scudi to the fa-
ther of Rosa di Allessandris as hush money. This charge
altogether failed to be proved, and he did not except the
evidence of the document produced from the Inquisition.
Lord Campbell—Places are mentioned in it but not names.
The Attorney-General was obliged to his lordship. They
had heard whet Dr. Achilli had said about lima Alles-
sansiria—that she was iiider than himself and • nun. It was
said that the polite records at Viterbo had been destroyed
—but this would have taken place in the Bishop's Court.
The eighth charge was that he debauched a certain other
woman at Viterbo, whose name was unknown, being chaste
and nansarried. It was siggulaz that as the woman was un-
known they should be aware of the fact that she was chute
and unmarried. (Laughter.) The difficulty his client had
had in struggling with the ease had been to obtain dates,
names, and places. In the present case the charge was laid
in July, 1834. Now, it was in evidence that Dr. Achilli was
then on • tour of visitation with his principal—that lie left
Viterbi in 1833, and did not return until November, 1834,
and, therefore, with regard to that charge it was not made
out. The ninth charge was that he had debunked and
carnally known, in 1835, at Viterbo, one Vintiond Cams,
and another woman unknown, but chaste and anenarried,
and that he had afterwards been found guilty by the Holy
Inquisition. Now, in the year 183,1 he was never in the
neighbourhood where the offence was said to have been
committed, but preached the Lent sermons at Capua, and
had • patent to confess in the diocese of Capua. He exer-
cised that office in 1835, and was
that year. The documents had been produced which
vouched the truth of this statement made by Dr.
Achilli. And they would see what faith was to
be attached to the pretended judgment and sen-
tence of the inquisition, which had been produced.
That document said he confessed to have been guilty of
those particular offences, when, in fact, he was not wild&
some hundreds of miles of the place. The 13th agoga
alleged that Dr. Aehilli being a Romish priest at Bamis,
Capua, Naples, and Malta, spoke and talked against des
doctrines of the Roman catholic faith, to wit, the doctrines
of the eucharist, confession, and absolution, and against the
moral obligation of chastity and continence, and by the
means of his thus teaching and preaching he corrupted
%curd persons, and amongst others Louisa di Cent:Bekaa
di Alessandris, the women Vallenti, Principe, and mime,
all of whom he was alleged to have debauched and snandly
known. Rosa di Allessandris and Eleanor Valleall be mos
alleged to have debauched in 1831, and to bays 411.111.11
by his preaching in 1841, many years after be bet left tee
locality in which they resided. So that he mos cold to have
debauched them first, and corrupted them albsrwards.
The 21st charge stated that there were is in the
archives of the Neapolitan polies chewing that Dr.
Achilli had been reported for habitual lempatiessey.
He knew what his friends would say if they had ffigkeippens
thrifty. They would remind the jury that dry bed at-
tempted to give in evidence a document from Es Milos
of Ecclesiastical Affairs, and which was re is be
a report from the Neapolitan police. C de iis4
dame they had had latterly of the anthority of des lies
pulitan police reports, he thought they should have gene Is
the fountain head at least; but the Roman getbdie midis
who went to Italy to get up the evidence Mast Alia dm
document from that quarter, to which, in feet, be sew up
plied, and the learned judge ruled that the paper labia be
did get from an individual could not be received. nose
were all matter+ upon which no evidence had ken offend,
and upon which Dr. Newman must be found guilty. Bet
he did not shrink from the other charges, and he believed be
should sa:isfy the jury that there was no ground for any
them. First, Dr. Newman charged in the libel, and me
pealed, that Dr. Achilli was an infidel. It was alleged that
Dr. Achil6 preached against the sucharist, auricular con-
fession, and absolution. If it were meant that Dr. Aehilli
was an infidel because he disbelieved in transubstantia•ion,
and the efficacy of human at solution and confession, he
hoped the number of such infidels would daily increase
(Applause.) It was then said that he was a Roma
priest and • hypocrite; and his learned friend had
tried to substantiate that charge by referring to Dr.
Achilli's book. The primp to which ha referred
was a description of a strong mind struggling with de
doubts. It was difficult for a man to tear himself from lie
ancient faith all at once. They all knew that Luther, with
his strong mind, struggled from year to year with his eon.
victions ; and would any ono pretend to say that became
be remained in the church in which he wee born until the
fall light of truth dawned upon his mind, that Luther
could properly be characterised as a hypocrite ? (Mass
sours of applause.) Bat who was the person from whom
those charges proceeded? Was Dr. Newman 'nodally
converted Did conviction flash at once upon his soul
Did he lie down at night disbelieving in transubstantiation,
&protestant, and rise up in the morning a catholic ? (Ap-
plause.) He would proceed to the nest charge—the charee
in which it was alleged that in 1826 Dr. Achilli was de-
prived of his faculty to lecture in consequence of an offence
his superiors did their best to conceal. Why, he had no
appointment to lecture until the following year Kr:), and
he continued in possession of that lectureship down to the
year 1833' It was untrue that he was ever deprived of
his lectureship at all, and it was imposaible that he could
have been deprived in 1826. This was his indictment—
these wae the charges he was tailed on to answer. Ihe