The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-31 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 31, 1363.

true that the Austrian police has arrested in an
arbitrary and illegal manner numerous persons sus-
pected of having aided the insurrection, and it seizes
arms wherever they are to be found, and systemati
cslly imprisons insurgents taken with arms in their
viands. In short, Austria does more than Russia
h'as a right to expect from her, though, at the same
ime, far less than she might do were she disposed
to exercise all possible means for helping her former
a:lv. But that the Governor of Galicia connived
with Russia to let Wysocki's expedition go into
Volhynia to its destruction can be shown to be
false ; and that Colonel Kunsti, who commands
at Brody, informed General Kreuter, who corn•
mands at Radziwillow, when and where the expedi-
tion was to cross cannot be shown to be true. These
are the two great charges now made against the
Austrian Government or against its agents, and of
course neither Count Mensdoiff nor Col. Kunsti
can well come forward to disprove them. It has
been stated by the Cracow correspondent of a
Breslau paper that Count Mensdorff, after consult-
ing the Russian Government as to what he should
do with the two thousand insurgents destined
for Volhynia, was requested to let them enter,
and than thereupon he allowed them to form
in the woods, to remain there three weeks un-
molested, and only at the last moment mado
show of wishing to prevent their passage on to Rus-
sian territory. Fallirg into the lowest depths of
the :ridiculous, the Cracow cot espondent adds that
Count Mensdorff, Governor of a province, ex-Am-
bassador, a General in the Austrian service, went
himself to Brody, and " placing himself at the
head of a patrol," pursued the insurgents in the
woods, and captured from them a quantity of old
clothes. A French paper, after citing this non-
sense, remarks with much naivete, " Ceei n'a pas
beeoin de comtnentaire." It deed, the only part of
the statement worth commenting upon is that in
which it is asserted that the insurgents had time
given to them to form in the woods, whereas I can
testify that they had to take the greatest precaution
to get to the woods at all ; that they were obliged
to start for the frontier the moment they received
their arms, and that the Austrians did not tea
give them time to learn how to load their rifles,
It the Austrians are thought to have made great
efforts to prevent the departure of an expedition
they are accused of undue severity ; if they are sus-
pected (however unreasonably) of having favoured
its departure they are charged with having played
into the hands of Russia.
As for Colonel Kunsti's letter to the Russian
General at Radzis,villow the Gaeta Narodowa of
Lemberg, after declaring that this pretended letter
was in its possession, has abstained from publishing
it, though challenged to do so by the official journals
of Lemberg and Cracow, which affirm positively
that no such document exists, or has ever existed.
The Gaeta Narowdolva promised to send the epistle
in question for publication to a French newspaper,
and now the Opinion Nationale affirms gravely that
it has received it, and yet does not print one word
of it, though it can find space for a long letter from
the Russian Consul at Brody to General Kreuter,
in which nothing at all remarkable occurs. It is
not for Colonel Kunsti to show that he has not been
in correspondence with the Russians. It is for those
who hezard such an accusation against him to show
that they have not done so without any sort of
proof.

The Murder of a Girl at Islington.

William Henry Clarke, the young man who stands L'h'.ii.gM
with feloniously killing and slaying Elizabeth Hunter, at
Greenman's-lane, Islington, on the night of the 30th of

March in last year, vias again placed at the bar pf the

Clerkenwell Ponca Court, before kr, Barker, for re-exa-

mination.

Mr. Clarke, addressing the Court, said he had the honour
to be instructed by the solicitor to the Treasury. He had

to state that as the case now stood, and with reference to
the evidence of the little girl, sister of the deceased, it was

not the intention of the Crown to proceed further against
the prisoner upon the charge of murder. The evidence

at present given was not sufficient to entitle them to ask for
a committal. The police had no further evidence to justify
them in asking for a remand, nor did there appear to be any

prospect of obt,tining further evidence to substantiate the

charge. But, in withdrawing this charge he had to submit

,o them other charges showing that on three occasions the

prisoner had been guilty of indecent conduct towards chil-
dren of a youthful age. One of the,e cases was that of his
conduct towards a girl named Mary Ann Baster, towards
whom he behaved indecently in the greenhouse. No com-

plaint was made by the mother to bring the prisoner to jus-
tice, but upon Rc so, the prisoner's master, having a com-
munication with the prisoner, the latter made a confession,

and nothing further was done, That was one of the charges
he had been directed to bring under the magistrate's consi

proceed with it that day. It was that
residing at 9, Oxford-street, New
deration. Another charge tie had to press, but he sh,.iuld
ontota bgeirilnnaampoesdi t
Lioanmtboer
N:,rth-road. He mentioned this circumstance that it might
be known that this charge would also be included in the
indictment which would be preferred against the prisoner.
It was a charge similar to the previous one, with the excep-
tion that he asked this child to take a letter for him, and
took her to a nursery-ground in Marlborough-road (in-
stead of William-street) which was also in the occupa-
tion of Rowe, and the prisoner on that occasion endea-
voured to commit an indecent assault. He was taken into
custody, but the charge was not pressed, as the father of
the child had a reluctance to do so. The third charge was
,n.a of more recent date. He was instruc ed that in May of
the present year the prisoner took a child nam d Sophia
Quin to a shop, put her upon his knee, and was guilty of
some indecency towards her. She screamed and ran away.
This case would depend upon the girl identifying the pri-
soner. These were the charges which he brought under toe
notice of the magistrate, in order that the prisoner might be
committed for trial.

yea, s of age. I go to
Mary Ann Baxter said—l am 12
school on a ,unday. I reside at 3, Concord-buialings,
Lower-road, and have done so for some years. One night
at about a quarter to 10, I was going with a little girl to gei
some beer at the George IV. publichouse,when the prisoner
said to me, " Little girl, will you take a letter tu 19,William-
s,reet 2" I said I would. I uas then in George-street,
which is the first turning on the left from William-street.
He did not give me a letter. He took hold of my hand, and
walked by my side. He took me into the nursery gardens.
The nursery gardens open into William-street. When there
he took me into a room and locked the door. I think the
door was unlocked when he went there, He then made use
of a bad expression, and I screamed and halloaed, and he
said if 1 was not quiet he would cut my throat. I still
continued calling out, and he took me into another room,
which was all glass. He got a handkerchief with black
and white spots, but I do not know what he was going to
do with it He put it over my fac-, and I pushed it away.
I still continued caring out, and he said if I made less noise
he would let me out. At first he said would give me ld.
He offered it to me when he got into the first room, but I
would not take it. After that he offered me a 4d. bit, which
I threw on the floor. (The witness explained that he wanted
to take improper liberties with her, as he had done in the
first room.) It was then (she added) that he offered me the
4d. piece. I screamed, and hall,aed for him to let me out,
He unlocked the door, and I went out. I went up the gar-
den, and he came up the garden and let me into the street.
I went home and told my mother what had occurred.
Louisa, the other girl, went home when I went into the
garden.
Cross-examined by Mr. Dickie—He did not put his hand
above my knee. He did not Burt me. Ido not remember
the dress he had on. I next saw him about six weeks after-
wards. I remembered him because of his face. I then told

my sister of what had occurred.
Mrs. Caroline Ann Baxter said—l am a widow and a
charwoman. The previous witness lives with me. I recol-
lect she made a complaint to me sometime in October, 1861.
She told me where she had been, and said that a young man
had behaved indecently towards her.
Mr. Alexander (second clerk)--I cannot take that. It is
not evidence.
Mr. Clarke, as counsel for the Crown—l think it is.
Witness continued—ln consequence of that I went to the
house in William .street. Some days after I saw Mr. Rowe
in the nursery gardens. I made a complaint to him. I saw
the prisoner close against Mr. Rowe in the garden. He was
near enough to hear the complaint I made; I asked how it
was that that young man took the child down the garden,
and what he wanted to do with her. Mr. Rowe said, " I
don't tbink he is guilty." lie asked the prisoner some ques-
tions, and said to him,
t, Have you done such a thing P" and
the defendant said, No." I had asked Mr. Rowe in the
prisoner's presence how be dared to take the liberty of tak-
ing my daughter down the garden and using her in that
sharnetul manner. I did not charge the prisoner with any-
thing, as he had not hurt the child. The child was at my
elnow, Mr. Rowe wrote down what my daughter said, and
what he said, but Ido not recollect what it was. I went
away and left the prisoner with Mr. Rowe in the garden.
Cross-examined—lt was five or six days after my daugh-
ter complained to me that I saw the prisoner.
named Curzon proved that he went with the
last witness wi
tneaato nu thenam eery-ground.
Mr. George Rowe, of Sherborne street, Downham-
road, said—ln Octiber, 18a, I occupied a nursery ground
iu William-street. The defendant was then in my service.
I recollect Mrs. Baxter and Mr. Curzon corning to my
garden on the 9th of October The defendant was there
when they came, He was there when complaint was made
to me of his conduct towards the child. The following
statement I wrote in the presence of the prisoner:—" Wed-
nesday, 9th of October.—William took the child into the
seed shop and locked the door and opened the greenhouse
door, and took her in there, and put his handkerchief against
her month. She called out. Then he opened the door and
took her up to the street, door, let her out, and she rau
away. William saw her first at the corner of George 'street
and asked her to take a letter to 19, William-street, to the
nursery. Louisa Peterwood was with her, and saw him
and told her mother of it, who lives at 23, Rotherfield-street:
I went on after him, and he said Come along.' He did not
give me a letter. On reaching the garden he opened the
door, and I went away down after him." That was not the
first I heard of the transaction, for Mr. Curzon told me of it
the following day. I 'save repeatedly spoken to the prisoner
about it. I said to him that he had been charged with taking
a little girl into the g, eenhouee, but he most solemnly denied
it, and called God co witness that ho was innocent. On the
9 h. of Oct ber, after the mother of the little girl had been
there, I told him I should take him up to the mother of the
little girl memtioned in the paper, and it he was identified
I should hand him over to the police. I also told him the
mother of the child had said that if he confessed she would
not press the charge. After that he did confess.
Cross-examined—l have understood that all he did was
to put his handkerchief over her mouth.
Mr. Clarke said that was the case for the prosecution on
this charge.
Mr. Dickie said that a great deal of extraneous matter
had been imported into this case, through the inquiry at

the Coroner's Court. Ile felt certain that the jury would
acquit the prisoner of a criminal assault, and he asked the
magistrate t. grant a discharge.
Mr. Barker said it was a case he should not think of
withdrawing from a jury.
Sophia Allen, aged 8, said—A short time ago I was in
Bishopsgate-street. It was in last May, on a Saturday, just
when the lamps were lit at night. I was going home from
following the chimney sweepers, who were dressed up at
the time. In Bishopsgate-street a man spoke to me.

f3,,w the prisoner, and picked him out from among a number
of other men as the man that sp,ke to me. He askea me if
that was Bishops4ate-street, and I said, " Yes." He asked
me other questions, and then took me to a iced cream shop.
He hold my hand, and walked with me to the shop. He had
an ice, and gave me a spoonful of it. He put me on his
knee, and I was sitting there when he gave me the ice.
[The witness then described the indecent and improper
liberties taken by the prisoner ] She added—l kicked and
screamed, and ran away, leaving him in the shop. He did
not hurt me.

In cross-examination the witness said—There were no
other persons in the shop but ourselves and the men that
served. I complained to my mother when I went home.
I had never seen him before that night.
Police-sergeant Robert Adams, 63 City Police, said—l
know the ice shop spoken of. I heard of this affair on the
2d of May, a complaint being made by the father at the
station. On the 24th July the prisoner was placed among
several others at the Ishngton Police-station. The prisoner
was not pointed out to the witness. Inspector Wiseman
said, "Do you see anybody here that you know f" At that
time she had her eye on the prisoner, and she said ' No."
She afterwards said that the prisoner was the man, and
pointed him out.
Cross-examinee—Tho master of the shop did not recog-
nise the prisoner.
'I ho prisoner said he thought it was very hard that he
should be committed on this charge, as ho could prove that
on the day named he was at another place from 10 o'clock
in the morning until 10 o'clock at night.
Mr. Dickie said that under those circumstances he should
ask for an adjournment. He thought that every leniency
sh: uld be shown to the prisoner, who had been charged
with the commission of a most dreadful crime, and that
without the slightest tittle of evidence to support the alle-
gation.

Mr. Barker said that, whatever evidence might be ad-
duced, he should feel it his duty to send the case for the
consideration of a jury.
Mr. Dickie said that as the prosecution which was taken
up by the Government had failed, he hoped that the magis-
trate would take bail. No jury would convict, for it must
be evident to every one that, had not the prisoner been

charged with the serious crime of murder, he would not
had these cases btought against him. He cauld put in re-
flpectable securities for the prisoner's appearance at the
Mr. Barici. said he expected such an application would
made. he would. take bail, the prisoner himself in the
Do _ 4there were two charges, he should
-c £25 each.

sum of .ElOO ; aria,
require four sureties in the sum u.

" n.ht and the

Mr. Dickie said that the charges were
prisoner poor, and therefore he hoped that the magistrat.,
would reduce the amount of bail.
Mr. Barker declined to accede to the application.
The prisoner again protested his innocence, and was re-
moved.