The Sun.
London, England, 1865-11-25 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT—Nov, 24:

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Byles.)
THE CHARGE AGAINST DR. HUNTER.
(Continued from The Sun of yesterday.)
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine rose to address the jury
for the defence. He said he hoped they would deal
with this matter as with the most important event in
their lives. It would be idle for him to say he did not
feel a deeper responsibility than in more ordinary
cases, for whatever might be the motive, whatever
might be the state of mind of the prosecutrix, it
was impossible for him to prove. He could not
forbear referring to the position of the prisoner,
a person only but a short time resident
in this country, and in his struggle for fame it
would be impossible for him to escape from the
envy of persons who looked upon his talents with
dislike. He was now placed in a position of un-
paralleled difficulty, because such a foul charge as
that alleged against him was easily made, but
it was difficult, if not almost impossible,
to rebut. The learned counsel then proceeded
to explain theories of Dr. Hunter, and showed that
they required a close examination of the external
portions of the body. In the course of his pro-
fessional duty he stated that he could not go on
without further fees, and the two persons
then mentioned and the brother of the pro-
secutrix committed the violent assault on him.
Dr. Hunter went to the police-court, and before the
matter came on for hearing this grave charge is
made against him. His conduct was not that of a
roan conscious of guilt ; indeed. his conduct
was calculated to provoke a quarrel which
must have been in the highest degree danger-
ous to him. He could not but think that
in the outset that his learned friend had failed
in a most important point ; he had not called any
medical man to say what was the name of the
drug which would produce such fearful results.
They were acquainted with chloroform and ether,
but neither of these powerful agents would produce
the stupifying effects described by the prosecutrix.
The peculiar drug used on this occasion was most
extraordinary—it caused a woman to fall into a state
of powerlessness, in which she would be perfectly
conscious of everything that was going on, but quite
unable to help herself in case of necessity. It was
a novelty to him, and he could not but say that
the whole story seemed to be culled from some high-
flown romance instead of savouring of truth and
reason. Did it seem at all probable that the pri-
soner would run the enormous risk of committing
such a crime as this within a very short distance
from the room in which other patients were ? Could
they imagine for one moment thattit prisoner could
have pre-arranged all this by providing himself with
the little bottle containing the peculiar drug
long before Mrs. Merrick came into the room. The
chance of discovery did not limit itself to the hear-
ing of the persons in the prisoner's house. Why,
the state of health of the prosecutrix was such that
the prisoner had no certainty that, suffering from
such a dreadful malady, the outrage would not
leave her a corpse in the chair in which she was
sitting when the transaction occurred. Why had
the prosecution refrained from calling Mrs. Shar-
land—was her evidence so unimportant ? He did
not think it was, but whatever might be the case
she left London yesterday, and according to the evi-
dence of her barmaid, she did not know where she
had gone to. The jury would put their own con-
struction upon that, but he did not care much
about it, because he did not see why the pro-
secutrix should have been knocking about the
streets at all after she had left Dr. Hunter's in pre-
ference to at once going home and telling her hus-
band of the gross outrage that she said had been
committed upon her. Then, with respect to the
letter she sent to Dr. Hunter, did it at all read
like the production of a person who had but one
single hour previously suffer the greatest wrong
a woman could receive from a man ? It began
" Dear sir," and terminated "yours obediently."
Was it such a letter that a daughter would write in
the presence of her mother after such an occur-
rence ? He thought not. It was said the mother
suggested the terms of the letter, but was it likely
that the services of the prisoner should be desired

when he (the learned counsel) was sure there was
not a single street in the great metropolis, from one
end of it to the other, in which a medical man would
not, upon being sent for, have rendered
all the assistance in his power. However, in
the face of all that it had occurred. Then it
was said was it likely that a woman, supposing her-
self to be at the point of death and taking the
sacrament, would pass to eternity with a falsehood
on her lips. Why, if he recollected the evidence
aright, it was to the effect that, when she partook
of the Holy Sacrament, she had not told her mother
the whole facts of the outrage of which she said she
.was the victim.

Justice Byles said the learned Sergeant might
reason that way if he pleased ; but he had to re-i

mind him that he had the notes of the evidence be

fore him, and according to them it appeared thatshe
had told her mother all before taking that solemn
obligation.
Sergeant Ballantine proceeded—He was under
the impression that such was not the case, but if it
was so he would not further allude to it. However,
he would now just lightly touch upon the position
of the husband of the prosecutrix. Was he a person
that was at all likely to be overburthened with
money ? Why, it had been proved he had been a
bankrupt, that he had not even paid his previous
doctor's bill of £lB. Then, with respect to the
evidence of the brother of the prosecutrix, who had
be en a policeman, a carpenter, and a pastrycook, he
did not see his testimony was such as to help them
to arrive at a clear conclusion in this case. Having
referred to the other minor points in the trial, the
learned Sergeant resumed his seat by saying he
would not appeal to their feelings, but he called
upon them, not for the protection of their sympathy,
but for the protection of their honest judgment.
Mr. Justice Byles then summed up the case. He
said he jdid not remember a trial in which more
fearful wickedness was imputed to one side •or
the other. On the one side it was said you
have been guilty of a breach of the most
sacred professional confidence, and on the other it
was said, you have been guilty of the most abomi-
nable perjury against an innocent man. The case
was, therefore, of the greatest importance ; because
previous to this nothing was alleged against the
character of either the prosecutrix or of the defen-
dant; both, therefore, were stainless as far as was
known to the Court. The learned judge then com-
menced reading and commenting upon the evidence,
beginning with that of the prosecutrix, and on com-
ing to the apparent contradiction as to the parties
who applied the embrocation, the learned Judg e
said it appeared to him that both the brother and
the mother were engaged in doing that, and
therefore there was nothing of very great impor-
tance in the slight discrepancy in the testimony. of
two of the witnesses. With respect to the evidence
of the husband going to Dr. Hunter and ask-
ing him to attend his wife it was clearly i
evidence that when he did it he was in entire igno-
rance of the assault, and when he became acquainted
with it the first thing he did was to go to Dr. Hun-
ter's house, and, in the presence of a witness,
horse-
whip him. The question of the guilt or inno-
cence of the prisoner was entirely a question for
them (the jury). They would- have to determine
upon the guilt or innocence of the accused, but if
they were so puzzled that they could not come to a
sound and satisfactory conclusion, then they would
act on that golden rule in criminal law, and not
convict a man of whose guilt they had the slightest
doubt.

The jury, at a quarter to 4, retired to consider
their verdict, and, after a n absence of a quarter of
an hour, returned into court with a verdict of
NOT GUILTY.

The announcement of the verdict was received
with loud applause by the persons who thronged
every corner of the court.
Dr. Hunter, during the calling over the names of
the jury on their return from the court-room after
they had arrived at their verdict, gave outward
signs of the greatest anxiety, although throughout
the proceedings he had borne himself with the
greatest firmness. Immediately the verdict was
pronounced his appearance altogether altered ; his
eyes brightened up, and the whole expression of his
countenance was that of a person who had ex-

perienced the greatest relief. -
Immediately he quitted the dock he was joined
by his friends, who were in waiting to receive lulu.

COURSE OF EXCHANGE-Last Evening.

Amsterdam Short. 11 18
Ditto 3 Months. 12 1f
Rotterdam -
Antwerp — 25 50
Brussels
Hamburg
Paris Short 25 12i
Ditto 3 Months. 25 40
Marseilles
Frankfort on the Maine 121
Vienne, — 11 71-
Tnesto — 11_10

11 19
12 2
12 2
25 57i
25 57i
13 9
25 22
25 47
25 47
121}
11 12i
11 15
34

Petersburgh
Berlin
Madrid
• Cadiz
Leghorn

- .••
- 47; -
- .
4 i f
- 25 47i
57 254865
- 25 57 25 65
- 25 57 25 65
- 25 60 25 65
- 25 62 25 67
- 25 62 25 67f
- 511 51
- 51} 511

Miran
Messina
Genoa
Naples
Palermo
Oporto
Lisbon . (4