The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-25 00:00:00

CRICKET.

SURREY V. CAMERDGESITIRB.—Both these counties
ing,
Kennington-oval, was
g
before the commencement
nbfe
throngedtintehrgeesfta game,ma
nwediclt with erslispecteel icrSetda spectators. roytr nemy.
rltalent,this match excited great
Around,io
The following is the result of the
day's play :—Surrey, 277 ; Cambridgeshire, 14. The game
will be resumed this morning.

MARYLEBONB CLUB AND GROUND v. SOUTH WALES
CLUB.—At Lord's Ground, yesterday, this match was com-
menced, and the gentlemen of South Wales displayed some
very good batting, finishing their first innings for 110.
s'out with 15. The match was Mr. E. M. Grace being not out
continued to-day.
The M.C.C. only scores 70-40 in a minority. Upon the
close of the day's play, South Wales left off with 109 rims
Bishop
withfcrthe6o,l loss
so
ftwo
Mr. ish ick
ortr
not

GRAVESEND V. FARNINGRAM.--Match played at Graves-
end, in favour of Gravesend on the first innings by 25 runs.
Score :—Gravesend—D. Shearman 12 (not out) 0, M. A.
Troughton 11 (not out) 5, R. M. Sundford 7 1, E. Pryce,
0 3, H. Whatson 11, H. Turner 14 13, W. E. I. Riggi 4
0, W. Page (not out) 38 1, F. Hughes 1, J. Cleveland 15,
J. Carroll 1; byes, &c., 34 5 ; totals 146 28. Farningham
—J. Edmeades 2, C. Eashleigh 7, a Benstead, 44, W.
Rashleigh 2, F. Hay 34, J. C. Hayward 0, G. Gandy 6, G.
Crowhurst 2, C. Williamson 3, L. Crowhurst 4, L. W.
Applegarth (not out) 0 ; byes. &c., 16 ; total 129.

THE SERIOUS CASE OF WHOLESALE
POISONING.

Yesterdayy
Wilson, alias Catherine
on remand and again placed
Taylor,
at the bar of the Lambeth Police court, before the
Hon. G. C. Norton, for further examination, touch-
la r was b
rConstanceaugh brought
up
touch-
ing the death by poison of Mrs. Emma Soames, in
October, 1856.

The court, as on former. occasions, was densely
crowded. Mr. Chipperfieid, as before, conducted
dtheefenccaes.e for the prosecution, and Mr. Neale the

Mr. Chipperfield said he proposed to-day to exa-
mine the surgeon
who had been called to attend the
deceased lady during bet last illness, and one or two
other witnesses, and then to ask for a further re-
mand.

Mr. George Francis Whidborne was then sworn
and examined. He deposed that he was a surgeon,
and resided at 61, Guildford-street, Russell-
square. He had known the deceased Mrs.
Soames very well indeed for two or three years
previous to her death in 1856. He had frequently
professionally attended her husband and daughter,
but he never knew her to require medical atten-
dance. She was a person of good constitution,
and always enjoyed excellent health. On Friday,
the 17th October, 1856, he was called to attend
her between eleven and twelve in the morning,
and he found her suffering from very severe
cramps, pains in the bowels, violent retching,
and great restlessness; in fact, she complained of
very serious illness, and that she could not keep her-
selt still. It surprised him very much that a person
of such excellent hetilth should be seized at once
with such symptoms, and he asked her if she could
amount for it, and what she had eaten. She could
not do so, but said that she had partaken of some
pork pie that had been given to her the night before
by Mrs. Wilson, the prisoner. The prisoner was in
the room at the time, and said the pie was very
good, and she would show him some of it. From
what he could judge, the pie which the prisoner
produced was very
good. It appeared to him at
first that the Symptoms which he observed were
those of an attack of cholera, and he sent her the
usual remedies that were found to give ease in dis-
orders of that kind. He saw the deceased, Mrs.
Soames, on the same Friday, between six and seven
in the evening, and she was then not at all better.
He saw the prisoner the second time and every
other time he went there. She was the only one
he saw attending on the deceased. The daughters
were there, but the attendance on the invalid ap-
peared to him to be conducted under the directions
of the prisoner.

Mr. Norton—She was acting as her nurse ?
Witness—Yes; as her nurse and friend, in the
double capacity, and it appeared to him that she
was anxious to render all the assistance she could.
It appeared to him that the prisoner was more than
usually anxious about getting her well again. When
he saw her on the Friday evening the symptoms
were not at all altered. She was in the same state
as in the morning, and she appeared to suffer as
much as any person could suffer. He ordered a
repetition of the remedies and thought the deceased
was in danger. He was convinced that he told the
prisoner so, and he Was also confident that he told
the eldest daughter so, as he met her on going
downstairs to leave the house. He did not mention
that she was in danger on the occasion of his first
visit, because knowing her constitution to be so
good he supposed the disease would give way to
his course of treatment. He was called in the
middle of the night by one of deceased's daughters,
and found the deceased sinking, and she died be-
tween three and four o'clock on the Saturday
morning.
Mr. Chipperfield—ln the course of your attend-
ance on the deceased did you give any instruc-
tions to the prisoner to administer the medicine
herself and to keep it in her own room ?
Witness—Not to my recollection. I do not
believe I did.

Mr. Norton—Was the nature of the medicine
such as would require particular attention ?
Witness—No ; I always send
directions with
my medicine, written on a label,
and I expect
those directions to be carried out_ The medicines
were not of a poisonous character, and did not re-
quire any particular attention in their administra-
tion.
Mr. Chipperfield—lf it has been stated that you
told the prisoner to give the medicine to the de-
ceased herself, and that nobody but herself was to
give it, is that statement true or net p
Witness—To the best of my belief I gave no
such directions, because the deceased's daughter,
who was then 20 years of age, Was
quite compe-
tent- to administer the medicine.
Mr. Chipperfield—lf it has been stated here that
the prisoner had said that you directed her to ad-
minister the medicine and nobody else, is that true
or not ?
Witness—I do not believe I gave any such order,
but I could not swear to it at this distance of
time.
Mr. Norton—Was there any necessity for such
caution in consequence of the nature of the
medicine ?
Witness—Not the slightest. The medicine I
gave was an aromatic mixture, commonly called
" chalk mixture." From its nature it was not
necessary to give any one a caution as to its ad-
ministration, and that leads me to the couclusion
that I did not give any such instructions, for which
there was not the slightest necessity.
Examination continued—Two bottles of medicine
oLly were sent, one after the other. The bottles
were six-ounce bottles, about six inches in length.
He was not present at the death of the deceased ;
but when he saw her sinking there was nobody
present but the prisoner, who appeared to him
to be very much distressed. He expressed
to her his surprise that such symptoms could be so
quickly produced, and that the usual remediPs bad
failed in effect. He followed that surprise by re-
fusing to give a certificate of death without a post-
mortem examination. He was asked to give a cer-