The Sun.
London, England, 1863-12-23 00:00:00

THE HORRIBLE STORY,

On Monday, at the Magistrates' Office, Falmouth
(before Mr. J. K. Kiodman, Mr. T. Moor Horsiord,
and Mr. M. V. Bull), Samuel Porter, on remand
from the previous Monday, was brought up, charged
with the horrible cruelty to his brother at Flushing,
particulars of which have already appeared in Ike
Sun.

Mr. H. SJLaw, solicitor, London, appeared to pro-
secute on behalf of the Lunacy Comnfssioners ; Mr.
Moorman, of Falmouth, appeared for the defendant,
who did not exhibit the slightest concern at the
position in which he was placed.
The first witness examined was Edwin Elliott, a
merchant, of Flushing, who deposed to taking a
house from the defendant at Christmas last. The
defendant lived in the same house till the 25th of
March last, when he removed to a new house in
Flushing, where he now resides. During the time
between Christmas and March witness heard strange
noises at nights, more like the roaring of a bull than
sounds proceeding from any human creature. Wit-
ness proceeded :—I took the noise to come from a
lunatic. On the evening that the defendant was
going to remove to a new house he came to me and
said, "Neighbour, if you hear any noises in the
night, don't be alarmed or trouble yourself to get
up, because I think of taking Robert away to-
night." [Defendant sometimes called his
lunatic brother " Robert.") I offered my
assistance, but he said, "No, I can man-
age it myself." In the course of the night,
between 12 and 1 o'clock, I heard a wheelbarrow
being wheeled to the back-door, where it remained
about five minutes, when it was wheeled away
again. The next morning defendant came to me
and said, "Did you hear us in the night ?" I replied
that I heard the wheelbarrow. He said, "Me and
my wife removed Robert ourselves. We told him
we were going to take him to a new house. We put
him in the wheelborrow, and he was quiet till we
got there." About 5 o'clock on the morning after
the removal I went to the room where the lunatic
had been confined. When I opened the door I was
obliged to draw back, the stench was so horrible.
After a time I returned to the room and found it in
a most dreadful state; it was worse than any pigatye
I have ever seen in my life. Both the walls and the
floor were strewn with human dung, and there was
some rotten straw on the floor, but the straw was
so rotten as to be merely dung. Just inside the
door was a large blue flagstone, raised about four
inches from the floor. This stone was the lunatic's
bed, and it was covered with human dung to a depth
of four inches, and there was the mark of the man's
body in the centre, where it had sunk down to the
bare stone, just as if a vessel had been lying in the
mud. Later in the day, with the assistance of two
boys, I cleaned out as much of the dung as I could
remove with a shovel. There was half a cart load.
The walls were thickly covered with human excre-
ment. A great portion of the flooring was com-
pletely rotten. There was a small window which
was nailed up, and was so covered with green mould
that it admitted scarcely any light. There was no
communication between the house and the room.
Entrance was gained by going up a narrow alley
about 18 inches wide, and through the garden.
Cross-examined b.f Mr. Moorman—l mentioned
the case the day after I had examined the room to
Mr. Joseph Tong, but since then I never mentioned
the case to anybody but Dr. Byrne. I saw a room
in defendant's new house, where he said he was
going to put his brother. It was a new-built room,
but not quite finished then. That was about eight
months ago. I was perfectly friendly with the
defendant while in the house with him. I never
knew defendant apply any violence to his brother
Robert. The defendant took food to his brother
twice a day—breakfast and dinner time. The food
I saw was bread and treacle. It was not often I
had an opportunity to see the food because he woula
return into the kitchen the moment he saw me
about. When he took the food he did not remain
with his brother a moment. The defendant never
alluded to his brother during the three months I was
in the house till the eve of his removal. I did not
hear the lunatic cry out on that night, nor anything
to lead me to think the lunatic was being removed
against his will.
By the Bench—The bedroom was about 12ft long
and about 61t wide, and 18ft high. There was no
chimney in the room, and the door which formerly
communicated with the house had been blocked up.
Julia Tregiddgo, an old woman who had lived in
a house next door to that occupied by the defendant
for 25 years, said; defendant occupied the
house as its owner for ten years previous to March
last. I knew his brother Robert, who was a
fine young man about 25 years ago. I never saw
him from the time his mother died, in 1842, till
about three years ago. noise at the time
was so violent that it made me vary nervous and
timid, as the door of my living room went into the
yard. I therefore determined to find whether he
could get out or not. I went to the back door of the
room from which the noises had come. The door
was latched, but not locked. I saw a human being
there. He was a frightful object. He had not a
bit of clo;hing on. lie was stark naked, and doubled
up in a crouching posture. It was Robert Porter.
I was afraid to speak to him, and ran away. I
heard these horrible cries during the 10 years that
the defendant lived there. I frequently heard the
lunatic cry "Challa, Challa," alluding to his Char-
lotte, who is now America, ahe was
very fond. He was not a cripple when I knew him.
Cross-examined by Mr. Moorman—Robert Porter
lived with his mother till her death, 1842. I was
intimately acquainted with her. She never said
that she had any objection to Robert being sent to
a lunatic asylum. He lived some years after his
mother's death with his father and sister. His father
died about 14 years ago. It is about 11 years, I
think, since he went to live with the defendant. I
don't know what state he was in when he went to
live with defendant. I never complained of the
noises to any magistrate, policen2an, or other per-
son in authority. Before Dr. Byrne came to me I
never thought of complaining.
Re-examined by Mr. Law—l did not know that
the confinement of Robert Porter was illegal.
This concluded the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Moorman submitted that there was no charge
which could be substantiated against the defendant.
He had on the previous occasion shown that the Bth
and 9th of Victoria, cap. 56, did not apply to the
case; and. the 16th and 17th Victoria, cap. 96, sec.
9, only applied to persons having charge of a lunatic
by legal authority ; in which case there were cer-
tain duties to perform, for the neglect of which
there were certain penalties. But in the present
case there was no duty, and, therefore, there could
be no breach of duty. He then alluded to the deci-
sions in the case of " The Queen v. Rundle," of
Chief Baron Pollock, and Baron Parke. It was a
case where a husband had been accused of ill-
treating his lunatic wife, and keeping her in illegal
confinement. There were seven counts in the in-
dictment, six under the statute and one for common
assault. The jury found the prisoner guilty on all
the counts, but on a case being reserved to the supe-
rior courts, the learned Barons ruled that the Act
did not apply to cases of domestic relation. Neither
would an indictment lie in common law, for in order
to constitute a misdemeanour at common lawd
nott
anda
offence must be one against the public,
against any merely private individual ;
ssauu. there
n He,
was not the slightest evidence of an
a
he duty of the
therefore, submitted that it
w
magistrates to declare, without respect to the growl-
magistrates no Act under
ing from without, that
tthedefendant ; and the
whistle they could commit
still, if they thought
Lunacy Commissioners could
the assizes.
proper, file an indictment at. to the 16th and 17th
Mr. Law directed attention _
9 Wech, after alluding to
of Victoria, cap. 96, Bee'
and keepers of lunatic
the duties of public officers
nr f any person taking, or having
asylums, says, f i
or concerned or takingpart in
the care or cha
the custody, care, or treatment of any lunatic or
person alleged to be a lunatic, in any way abuse, ill-
treat, or wilfully neglect such lunatic, he shall be
guilty of a misdemeanour, and shall be subject to an
indictment for every such offence." It was unneces-
sary for him to do more than refer to the evidence
in the present case, which was one of the most
horrible he had ever had anything to do with, to
shove the magistrates that the misconduct and