The Sun.
London, England, 1852-08-09 00:00:00

had been misinstructed with regard to meat being al
lowed once a week, it being proved that they had it
oftener ; but the jury must look at the whole ques-
tion, and what description of food these children had
given to them. For breakfast they had soup made
of rice and grease, and although one of the witnesses
(Miss Leith) appeared indignant at this description
being given of it, and stated that it was made of
dripping, he could not help thinking that it came to
the same thing, and he asked the jury whether such a
greasy mess was a proper thing for the breakfast of a
delicate child ? It appeared to him that it was only
calculated to produce the result that followed, namely,
sickness and an unwillingness to take proper food after
it. He would confine himself to what occurred after
the defendant, Madame de l'Espinusse, came to the
establishment in this respect, and he should contend
that the diet was most important. The children
might have had a small quantity of meat for their
dinner, but all their meals appeared to have had one
principal ingredient, " confitnre," or sweetmeats, and
between the dinner at twelve o'clock and the supper
of vegetables and tea at half•past seven, the poor
children had nothing but the " gouter," which was a
piece of dry bread with a little jam cf some kind
scraped, no doubt, very lightly over it. The tale
told by the witness for the defendants, with regard to
the liberal diet at the establishment was evidently an
exaggeration, and reminded him of Dickens's story
in "Do-the-Boys Hall," where the boys certainly
had more than they could eat, for they were fed as
the pigs were, and the pigs certainly got the fattest.—
(A. laugh.) A great parade had been made about the
3501b5. weight of meat that was consumed in the
establishment; but they ought not to forget the num-
ber of persons there were to consume it ; and he said,
notwithstanding that, this poor child had not been
properly fed, and be asked them to say the same. It
was probable that the food had been to some extent
changed after the doctor was called in; and as to her
throwing away the victuals and the beer, he urged
that it was ridiculous to suppose that she should have
done so ; and if she did throw the beer away, it ap-
peared to him that it confirmed her story that it was
only water coloured with beer, and was consequently
so nasty that she could not drink it. If this poor
child had really thrown her meat away because the
condition of her stomach would not allow her to eat
it, ought this not to have excited commiseration in the
breasts of those about her, and ought they not to have
seen at once that something more ought to be done ?
Instead of that, however, they called her a naughty
girl, and actually punished her. The next allegation
was, that the plaintiff had been overworked, and com-
pelled to do work beyond her strength; and he sub•
milted that this was sufficiently proved by the fact
that she had been kept in the kitchen from half-past
four in the morning till nine at night. The nent
charge was, that the plaintiff was improperly punished
and compelled to do tasks injurious to her health ;
and the principal evidence to support this was whet was
proved to have been the course of proceeding in the
trial class room. It appeared to him that this was a
most severe punishment. For the first offence the poor
children were subjected to be confined to the trial
class for seven days, for the second 14, and for the
third 20 days; and the jury would not forget that if
any pour child turned her head from the white wall,
in front of which she was placed, if it was only one
day before the expiration of her sentence, it all began
over again. He could not help thinking that this was
a most cruel punishment. Toey all knew how the
eyes were affected by looking at any white object,
even tor a short period ; but here were the poor chil-
dren, with the exception of the periods for their meals,
placed opposite a whitewashed wall from half-past
four in the morning until nine at night, and if they
only turned their heads—the object of punishment
being to keep their eyes upon the wall—the punish-
ment recommenced. It was true that an attempt
had been made to prove that since the present de-
fendant had been made superior of the convent the
system had been changed, and that the children did
not now sit with their faces to the wall; but he
asked the jury to doubt whether this was the fact, and
if they should do so he contended that it was a
most improper and injurious description of punish-
ment. Another of the punishments which be
relied upon to support the plaintiff's case was that of
prostration. It had been denied, certainly, that any
such punishment was ever inflicted ; but in what
manner was the contradiction given ? At first it
was said that there was no such punishment :known
in the convent, and iN hen the lady superior was ques-
tioned upon the subject, she professed entire igno-
rance of it. When she was pressed, however, she
said she did not know anything of prostration " in
that sense," meaning as a punishment. It appeared
to him that this looked very much like saying one
thing and meaning another ; and he felt compelled to
make this remark—and he asked the jury, from
their own observations, to confirm him as to the truth
of it—that the ladies who had been examined, al-
though evidently most acute and intelligent persons,
had not given their evidence with that candour and
openness which ought to be exercised, and that the mode
in which they did give it led him to fear that they had
been studying a book of which everybody had pro-
bably heard, and which professed to make persons
skilled in the art of saying black was white, and
white was black, in such a manner as to avoid stating
a direct falsehood, and evading the truth by giving an
answer with a mental reservation, and in another
sense to that which was conveyed by the answer. He
admitted that the mysteries of every religion were,
and ought to be, sacred matters, and that they ought
not to be inquired into, and he stopped immediately
in his inquiries upon an intimation from the Court
upon this point; but he submitted that quite enough
had appeared to show that such a punishment as pros-
tration was known to those who professed this form
of religion, and although it was denied that the plain-
tiff had ever been required to perform it, it appeared
to him that something had been done very much like
it. The girl Beiser admitted that she had been
punished for refusing to kneel in the middle of tee
floor—it was admitted that one of the punishments
made use of was to order the children to stoop down
and kiss the floor, and he asked the jury whether it
was at all unlikely, under these circumstances, that
the plaintiff should have been ordered to prostrate
herself in the presence of one of the nuns. With
regard to the motives that might have existed for
this ill treatment of the plaintiff, he was afraid
it might be traced, to a certain extent, to her un-
happy condition of body. It was represented that
she smelt offensively, and Miss Leith herself ad-
mitted she did not like her, although she gave no
reason for it, but merely that the plaintiff was a girl
who never inspired her with any confidence; and he
was fearful that her miserable condition gave offence
to those about her, and that the result was that she
was neglected and no care taken of her. Upon the
subject of going to confession, and the statement that
the plaintiff had refused to go because the. priest wrote
down what she said, it was true that it bed been
stated that it was false, but he was afraid that this
expression was also made use of in another sense as
it was termed, and that the refusal of the plaintiff to
go to confession had given offence, and that she was
punished in consequence. If they really believed, as
they stated, that going to confession was a good
thing, did the jury doubt that they omitted any means
to melee the children perform the duty, and that al-
though they did not actually order them to go to it,
yet that they took other means to effect the same ob-
ject equally efficacious ? The next subject for consi-
deration was the confinement of the plaintiff in the
dark room. He knew it had been said that this was
done by the doctor's orders, and for the plaintiff's
benefit; but he asked the jury, if this were really
the case, whether they would have confined this
poor child in such a place for a period of four
months without letting her aunt, the only relative
she had in the world, know of the circumstances,
and affording her an opportunity of going to visit
her, and whether a room eight feet long by four
wide, in which she was confined a portion of the
time, was a proper place, particularly when the doctor
was proved to have given directions that she should
be placed in a well-ventilated room ? He now would
refer to a matter which he thought had been intro-
duced solely for the purpose of creating a prejudice;
he alluded to the observations that had been made
with regard to the name of Dr. Achilli being placed
in the same subpoena with that of Cardinal Wiseman.
The fact was, that the defendants bad put every sort
of plea upon the record, and it became absolutely ne-
cessary for them to prOcure all the evidence they
could to meet those pleas ; and as Dr. Achilli, from
his position, was supposed to be possessed of a great
deal of information in connection with those establish-
ments, it was thought that he might be enabled to
give important evidence upon the present inquiry, and
his name was therefore put into the subpoena. With
regard to the absence of the aunt, it was not felt that
her evidence was very material, and it was supposed
that she would have come forward to give evidence
voluntarily in behalf of her niece ; but as she bad not
done so it was not their fault. He said he felt bound
to give this explanation; and, is conclusion, he asked
the jury not to allow any religious prejudices to inter-
fere with their judement, but at the same time he
said he must ask of them not to 3110 a themselves to
be deterred from doing their duty by any fear that
the remit they arrived at should be ascribed to pre-
judices of the description to which he had alluded,
The CHIEF JUSTICE then summed up. He said
that although the case hail occupied a very consider-
able time, and the question the jury would bays event
tinily to decide was of a very painful character, he
and every one else could not but be salitiied at the
manner in which the case had been conducted on
both sides, and that those persons who had crowded
the court during the trial, in
.the el:et:cagier-1 of hav-
ing a vulgar curithaty gratified by the exhibition cf
any bigotry or religious feeling, had been altogether
disappointed, as he was happy to say that the case,
case would be, without any
which in itself was of an orcunary character, had been I
conducted ite an ordinary
improper or irrelevant matter being introduced en
either aide. Such a proceeding was most satisfactory