The Sun.
London, England, 1862-12-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, tiONDON, TUESIAY EyEMNG, DECEMBER 9, ISO%

time-expired men from the various corps serving in
the Mediterranean arrived at Chatham, from Gib-
raltar, having disembarked at the London Docks
from the steamer Eva, Capt. Smith. The troops,
who numbered 40 men of all ranks, with five women,
belonged to the Royal Engineers, 2d battalion of the
2d Queen's 2d battalion of the 3d Buffs, 2d
battalion ofitoyathe7lsth, Royal Fusiliers, 2d battalion of
the Bth King's Regiment, and the 100th (Prince of
Wales's Royal Canadian) Regiment, the whole un-
der the command of Lieut. Smith, Royal Artillery,
and in medical charge of Assist.-Surg. Jay, Bth
Regiment. In addition to the above, a party of
the Royal Artillery also disembarked from the
same vessel, and were forwarded to the general
hospital at Woolwich, The Eva left Gibraltar on
Nov. 23, but was obliged to put back, owing to
some accident occurring to her machinery. She
finally left Gibraltar on the 27th ult.

A general court-martial assembled at the Royal
Marine Barracks, Chatham, by order of the Lords
of the Admiralty, on Friday, and was occupied dur-
ing the whole of that and the succeeding day in
the trial of First-Lieut. J. M. Sadleir, of the Chat-
ham division of Royal Marines Light Infantry, on
the following charges :—First, for conduct unbe-
coming the character of an officer and a gentleman,
and to the prejudice of good order and military
discipline, in having, when stationed at Deptford,
on or about July 15, 1861, borrowed the sum of ss.
of Colour-Serg. R. Caddy, of the same division, and
omitting to pay the same on the following day, as
promised; also in having borrowed of Celour-Serg.
Caddy between Jaly 15 and 27, 1861, on two sepa-
rate occasions, the sum of 10s., making a total of
53., which he promised on several occasions, both
in writing and verbally, to pay, but which promises
he failed to perform. Secondly, for con duct unbecom-
ing the character of an officer and a gentleman in hav-
ing failed to redeem his promise made to Col.-Com-
mandant Lemon, C. 8., to the effect that the sum
due to Colour-Serg. Caddy(then amounting to 118.),
should be forwarded by the next day's post ; also
for having failed to remit to Colour-Serg. Caddy
on the Ist of November last the sum of 110., having
distinctly given Capt. Thompson, commanding her
Majesty's ship Cumberland, 70, to understand that
he was going on shore for that purpose, and also
for having on the 4th of November sent to Colour-
Serg. Caddy a post-office order for 9s. in payment
of the sum due, knowing at the same time that the
amount owing was lls. Thirdly, for conduct un-
becoming the character of an officer and a gentle-
man in failing to redeem his premises repeatedly
given between Sept., 1861, and May, 1862, to Mr.
W. Smith, canteen sutler at the Chatham division
of Royal Marines, to repay the sum of £3, being
the amount of an order drawn by the prisoner on
his agent, Mr. Tear, of Hatton-garden, cashed by
Mr. W. Smith, and returned to him dishonoured;
also in failing to liquidate a debt of £1 16s. ld.,
contracted between the 6th of December, 1858, and
the 15th of July, 1861, and due to Corporal H.
Hart, master shoemaker at the Chatham division of
Royal Marines, which debt he (the prisoner) had
repeatedly promised should be paid within a short
time. The Court was presided over by Col. W.
H. March, Second-Commandant, and Capt. J. A.
Stewart officiated as Deputy-Judge Advocate,
Lieut.-Col. S.• N. Lowder prosecuted. The pri-
soner pleaded "Not Guilty" to the whole of the
charges. The whole of Friday and Saturday were
devoted to the examination of the numerous wit-
nesses in support of the prosecution, and at the
rising of the Court on Saturday afternoon the case
for the prosecution had not closed. The trial was
resumed at 11 a.m. yesterday, under the presidency
of Col. W. H. March, when the remainder of the
witnesses in support of the prosecution were exa-
mined, after which the Court was adjourned until
Wednesday, to enable the prisoner to prepare his
defence, when it is understood that witnesses will
be called to rebut certain portions of the evidence
for the prosecution.

The very large block of buildings erected by
Messrs. Naylar and Son, Chatham, the Government
contractors, from the plans of Mr. Lacy, C.E., for
the accommodation of the married non-commissioned
officers and men of the first division of the depot
brigade, Royal Artillery, at a cost of upwards of
£lO,OOO, having been completed and taken posses-
sion of by the War Department, an official inspec-
tion of them has been made by Major-Gen. H. Eyre,
commanding the troops in the Chatham district, ac-
companied by Colonel S. Freeth, the commanding
Royal Engineer. The new building is exceedingly
commodious, and is believed to be one of the best of
its kind yet erected. Ample provision is made for
80 separate families, each room measuring 17ft. by
14ft., with a height of 14ft. There are also wash-
rooms, drying and ironing-rooms, and bath-rooms
for both sexes, all heated by steam, and fitted up
after the most approved system. The upper stories
of the building contain a spacious verandah, over-
looking the Nore, which can be used as a promenade
by the occupants.

THE RAILWAY .RIO 7.

WORCESTER, MONDAY EVENING.

This city has been in a state of great popular ex-.
citement for a week, which has been brought to a
crisis to-day by an examination before the magis-
trates. The immediate charge which the Bench had
to inquire into was one of a wilful and malicious as-
sault with intent to do grievous bodily harm against
one Edward Garrett, in the employ of the West Mid-
land Railway Company, the person assaulted being
Mr. Walton, the lessee of the refreshment rooms at
the Worcester station of that railway. The hall
and the street near were crowded with thousands
of excited persons throughout the day, and the
proceedings were occasionally interrupted by
the disgraceful uproar cheering and hooting
—of those in the hall. The railway officers and
Mr. Walton wore also oheered and hissed on arriv-
ing at and leaving the Guildhall.
Mr. Wright, of Birmingham, appeared to conduct
the prosecution ; and Mr, Motteram, barrister, of
the Oxford Circuit, for the railway company, who
justified the proceedings of the defendant.
The examination lasted four hours, and arose out
of a dispute between the railway company and Mr.
Walton, as to the latter refusing to give up pos-
session of the refreshment room at Worcester. The
company had given Mr. Walton several notices to
quit, which he had disregarded as illegal, and dur-
ing Saturday night week the company, in the ab-
sence of Mr. Walton and his assistants, locked up
and barricaded the rooms, and refused to give him
possession of them again. On Sunday morning Mr.
Walton went up with a party of six or seven per-
sons, and a blacksmith, armed with a crowbar and
axe, with the view of forcing an entrance. Mr.
Walton had broken a pane of glass, and was unfas-
tening a window, when Garrett, who was one of a
party of railway labourers, who had been armed
with sticks and placed in the station to prevent
any one gaining admittance to the refreshment
rooms, struck Mr. Walton on the head, knocking
him down and rendering him insensible.
Mr. Walton, in his evidence, stated the facts in
detail, and that on an attempt being made to regain
possession of the rooms, the prisoner said he would
strike the first man down that attempted to go in,
and that while he was trying to open the window a
cry was raised, " They are coming," when some one
pulled him from behind, and at the same moment
Garrett struck the blow. He was carried home,
and remained insensible until three o'clock in the
evening. The wound was new healed, but Mr.
Walton's head was bandaged, and he appeared to
be weak. A letter had been delivered at his house
on the Sunday morning (which he did not see
until the evening) from the secretary to the com-
pany, informing him that they had taken posses-
sion of the rooms, and that he might have his
goods on the following day. Mr. Walton's hat was
produced. There were marks of blood on the inside,
and the hat was broken.

Mr. Motteram, for the defence, stated that the
proceedings were authorised by the directors of the
West Midland Company, and that Mr. Walton hold-
ing adverse possession of the rooms after notice to
quit, they had taken possession of them quietly on
Saturday night, and he maintained that, having so
obtained possession, they were entitled to hold it
by force against Mr. Walton, who he alleged had
held possession unlawfully. The prisoner, however,
did not aim the blow at Mr. Walton's head, but at
his hands.

The Magistrates dissented from Mr. Motteram's
law of possession, and decided on committing the
prisoner for trial at the next spring assizes.
The decision was received with a round of cheers
in the hall.

SHIP WRECK AND LOSS OF 7 WENTY-

FOUR LIVES.

Two men, survivors of a most disastrous ship-
wrcck, have been landed at Queenstown, and re-
ceived into the Cork Sailors' Home. On Sunday
last the Eliza, a barque of 760 tons, Captain Smith,
left Liverpool for Monte Video, laden with ma-
chinery and coals. Her crew, inclusive of the offi-
cers, consisted of 26 men. After passing Holyhead
the breeze freshened, and it began to blow strong
from the south-east. About two o'clock next morn-
ing the wind grew so strong that sail was shortened,
and at nine o'clock in the forenoon the three top-
gallant masts were carried away. With the loss of
these spars one man was carried overboard, another
had his leg broken, and the third, one of the
two landed at Queenstown, a man named Mont-
gomery, had his arm dislocated at the shoulder. In
an hour after the ship sprang a leak, and before
long she had seven feet of water in the hold. The
ship was then about midchannel. All hands were
employed at the pumps, but the leak continued
to gain at the rate of an inch-and-a-half every two
hours. The mate, an American named Burns,
urged the captain to bear up for Queenstown, but
the captain refused. For 24 hours they continued
in this position, when the captain at last consented,
and the vessel's course was changed for this port.
The wind, however, continued in full force, and the
ship laboured heavily. All at once her three top-
masts went by the board, and shortly after the sea
began to make breach over her. One sea swept
aft,and no less than twelve men, not carrying
away with resistless
fhoerreef fore o
and
boats,
one of whom was ever seen again. At three
o'clock she was completely awash and sinking. The
two seamen who have been saved, William Lyons,
a native of Liverpool, and John Montgomery, a
native of Scotland, got into the lifeboat and
cut away the tackle. The boat was driven
clear off the ship, and she had scarcely
parted with it when the vessel went down bodily,
with every soul on board, these two men alone
escaping. A small schooner, named the Aspia,
whose captain was also an American named
Smith, and like the lost vessel was bound from
Liverpool to Monte Video, hove in sight to wind-
ward, and picked up the two men. They were re-
ceived on board and treated with the greatest hu-
manity. The schooner getting leaky, she had to
bear up for Queenstown to get pumps repaired. At
the Cork Sailors' Home they have been received •
with that kindness the institution is intended to
show those in their unfortunate position, and every
attention has been paid to them by the hon. secre-
tary, Capt. Stuart, R.N., to whom, we may add, it
is owing that there exists such an establishment.
The seafaring inmates of the Home generously en-
tered into a subscription for the shipwrecked men,
and provided them with a sum of money and
clothes. The survivors were the only two British
subjects in the entire crew. All the rest were Ame- ,
rican, and all strangers to each other, as they had
only been shipped four days before leaving Liver-
pool.—Cork Examiner.

THE CIIES7ERFIELD MURDEIF.

CHESTERFIELD, MONDAY.

This morning the two prisoners, Thos. Flannery
and John Ball, were brought up before the mayor
and a full bench of magistrates charged with wil-
fully murdering George Cooper on Monday night
last. Contrary to expectation the young woman
teas again unable to attend, having been seized with
epileptic fits in conjunction with hysteria, and the
surgeon stated that it was utterly impossible for
her to give evidence, as she is speechless. This
being so the magistrates again remanded the pri-
soners, notwithstanding the objections urged by Mr.
A. Knowles, the solicitor for the defence. It is
stated that threats have been used against the young
woman Holt, and bribery also attempted to prevent
her giving evidence against the prisoners. Funds
for the defence of both men have been provided by
the Hibernian Society which has been established
in the town. Both prisoners pleaded their innocence.
The defence urged by them is an alibi. The case
will come on again on Friday next, or sooner if the
girl be sufficiently restored to give evidence. A
great body of Irish sarrounded the Municipal Hall
during the examination of the prisoners.
Another serious riot took place on Satarday night
last between the Irish and the Protestants at about
twelve o'clock. After a hard fight the Irish were
compelled to retreat and take refuge in their houses,
and were closely followed by the indignant Eng-
lishmen, who smashed their windows in all direc-
tions. The English were principally colliers from
Staveley, where the deceased Cooper worked. The
row was repeated last night; the Irish were soon
satisfied and left their opponents masters of the field.
The efforts of the police to restore order were quite
unavailing, as will be shown in the fact that one
Irishman took refuge in the passage of the police
office, and was closely followed by a party of
Englishmen and soundly thrashed in the very
precincts of the temple of justice.

LAW INTELLIGENCE, Dec. 8.

VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT.

(Before Vice-Chancellor Sir R. T. Kindersley.)
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. ETHERIDGE.-THE
RAMSGATE BAPTIST CASE.

This morning the Vice-Chancellor gave judg-
ment in this case, which has been for some weeks
before the Court, and has excited much interest
amongst the Baptist body throughout the country.
The relators and plaintiffs were Miss Mary Spencer,
Messrs. Thomas Hodgman, George Tyson, and
others, the defendants being Mr. B. C. Etheridge,
the minister of the chapel, Mr. Flint, and others,
the trustees. The question in dispute was the
right of the defendants to admit to holy COMM-
nion and church membership persons who have
not been baptised when adults by immersion. It
appeared that in 1834 the Particular or Strict Bap-
tists, who hold that it is not lawful to admit to the
Lord's Supper any person who has not when an
adult been baptised by immersion, founded a chapel
in Ramsgate, which was called Beulah Chapel, and
in 1837 the Rev. Mortlock Daniel was appointed as
the minister. The congregation increasing, it was
determined in 1839 to sell Beulah Chapel and to
build a new one. This was done at a cost of some
£4,800, and it is alleged that a greater portion of
the money was contributed by the strict commu-
nionists, Miss Spencer alone giving £3,200.
The trust deed of the new chapel, which is
called Cavendish Chapel, and Which was
erected in May, 1841, takes no cognisance of the
former chapel, and the trusts were, that the trustees
for the time being should, from time to time, and at
all times thereafter, permit the said chapel to be
used, occupied, and engaged as a place of public
religioui worship and service of God, by the So-
ciety of Protestant Dissenters at Ramsgate, of the
denomination called Particular or Caivinistic Bap-
tists, and by such other persons as should thereafter
be united to the said society and admitted members
thereof, and should attend the worship of God in
the said chapel; and should permit such person, of
the deno nination of Particular or Calvanistic Bap-
tists, as two-thirds of the members of the said so•
ciety present at a meeting should from tim3 to time
elect and choose to be their minister or pastor, to
preach and expound the Holy Scriptures, and other-
wise officiate in the said chapel according to the
usual order and customs of societies of Protestant
Dissenters of the denomination aforesaid. About

1810 Mr. Daniel, who had up to that time been a
strict Baptist, changed his opinion on that eubject,
and he proposed to admit to the Lord's Supper un-
baptised believers; but the great majority of the
church disapproving of that proposition it was aban-
doned, and the subscriptions for the new chapel, as
alleged by the plaintiffs, went on on the understand-
ing that the chapel was to belong to the Strict
Baptists. In 1844 Mr. Daniel again mooted the
subject of open communion, and proposed to the
church to admit "unbaptised" persons to the Lord's
Table. The effect of that proposition was at once
to induce Miss Spencer the relator, and some other
individuals, to request their dismission from the
church, and they were accordingly transferred to a
strict cotamunion church at Broadstairs. This state
of things continued till 1846, when, in the month
of December, a resolution was unanimously passed
at a church meeting to the effect that the Lord's
Table be restricted to baptised believers. Mr.
Daniel resigned immediately after this, and the
church worshippers at Cavendish Chapel re-
mained without a pastor until December, 1847,
when Mr. Wills was elected to that office, and
continued to hold it till September, 1853. During
the whole of his pastorate the communion was
strict, and on the sth of May, 1848, a declaration
of faith was agreed to at a church meeting in which
they re-affirmed the principle of strict communion .
After the resignation of Mr. Wills, Mr. Etheridge
was elected the minister, and the practice of strict
communion was continued to December, 1859, when
Mr. Etheridge proposed a resolution at the church
meeting to open the communion to unbaptised be-
lievers. A vote by ballot was taken on this reso-
lution, and it was carried by a large majority, and
at a subsequent church meeting the resolution was
confirmed. After some endeavours on the part of
the strict communionists to induce Mr. Etheridge
to revert to the practice of strict communion, this
suit was instituted, and the plaintiffs by their bill
asked the Court to restrain the defendants by in-
junction from permitting the chapel to be used by
any other persons than Particular Baptists ; and
for a declaration that on the true construction of the
trust deed none but Particular Baptists were en-
titled to the benefit of the trusts or participation in
the Lord's Supper. The Vice-Chancellor went at
great length into a consideration of the confessions
published by sections of the Particular Baptists at
delegate meetings, from which he came to the con-
clusion that they had held strict communion to be
an essential or fundamental article of doctrine.
Reviewing the trust deeds of Cavendish Chapel, he
found that it was never the intention to restrict
the communion in the way desired by the plain-
tiffs, and he therefore dismissed the bill.

_ -
had had many interviews, and opportunities of con-
versing with him, and he had come to the conclu-
sion that in conscquenca of his violerit conduct to-
wards his wife he would turn out to ba a mono-
maniacal homicide. Such was his opinion, and
such it remained.
Mr. Chambers—Then it is your opinion that he is
still insane ?
Witness—lt is, towards his wife. On other
points he was capable of conducting his affairs.
Dr. F. Webb, M.R.C. of Physicians, of Woburn-
place, said he had visited the plaintiff,at the request
of Mrs. Hall, in Sept. last. He found him in a
very excited state, with a very rapid pulse. The
wife told him of his having, on his return home
from the asylum, thrown the frying-pan, contain-
ing the dinner, across the room. He asked him his
reason for such conduct, and he said his wife was
constantly out, and was in the habit of pawning
and making away with the shop things, and get-
ting drunk, and he added he believed she was drunk
then. Witness said that was not so, as he exa-
mined Mrs. Hall at the time. Plaintiff then
said his wife was constantly out, and in
the company of other men. Witness then asked him,
" Do you mean to charge your wife with infidelity ?"
Mr. Hall replied in a jeering manner, " Oh dear no.
Do you think Mrs. Windham was unfaithful to her
husband ?" (Loud laughter.) After this the daugh-
ter came into the room. Dr. Semple and Mrs. Hall
came into the room also, and Mrs. Hall asked
Dr. Semple, as her husband kept her without
necessaries, if she was not justified in pawning
things to obtain food. Dr. Semple said if that
were so she was. At the request of Mr. Hall he
examined the house, and found it in a very dirty
state, and observed a great absence of furniture.
Mrs. Hall said it was caused by her husband not
allowing her to have any assistance or to employ a
servant. If the plaintiff was under delusions that
his wife was unfaithful and was addicted to drink-
ing, when it was not true, he should consider it
evidence of insanity.
Some controversy took place between counsel as
to the evidence.
The learned judge said a great deal of evidence
had got into the case which ought not, to have been
given. By-and-bye he should tell the jury the
question would be for them to say whether Dr.
Semple had been guilty of negligence, and had not
made proper inquiries before granting the certificate.
Cross-examined by Mr. Huddleston—Was of
opining that the plaintiff was under a dominant
idea against his wife. He had seen Dr. Semple
before he visited the plaintiff, but did not know
him at the time of the action. He would not say
that the plaintiff was insane at the present time, and
would not sign a certificate without further inquiry.
It was no delusion that the house was in a dirty
state. He did not recollect when he asked Mr.
Hall, on his visit in September, relative to his
throwing the gridiron across the room. He said he
had provided some dinner, and his wife had taken
it off to cook her own.
Re-examined—He told Mr. Hall that he must be
insane to use such language as he had done to his
wife. He called her a fool, and applied other
epithets to him ; but doctors were not usually
called " fools." (Laughter.) He concurred it
was desirable to see Mr. Griffiths, the plaintiff's
regular medical attendant. He had not been
witness to any assault committed by the plain-
tiff on his wife; but if he.(plaintiff) had killed her,
he should have said he was a monomaniacal homi-
cide. The plaintiff's daughter, Mrs. Harding,
had not said to him that it was ridiculous in him
to say that her father was mad ; but she had mid
to him her mother was not the bad woman her
father represented her to be. He (Di. Webb) had
bought china at the plaintiff's shop, but his son paid
for what he purchased.
Mr. Chambers here put some questions to the
witness, indicating that the reason why the son had
paid for the articles was that he (witness) was not
solvent.
Witness, in explanation, said—l am very seldom
solvent, (Laughter.) But I owe very little, per-
haps £lO, besides my rent. (Laughter.) I never
flattened my nose against the window of the plain-
tiff, as he states. (Laughter.)
Mr. Sergeant Pigott here put some questions to
the witness, to which Mr. Chambers objected, and
Mr. Justice Crompton said—Let us get on ; we
are in for to-morrow, that's clear; but I am afraid
of Wednesday. (Laughter.)
Cross-examined by Mr.. Huddleston—l do not
say that Mr. Hall is insane now. Dr. Semple applied
to me three or four days ago to be a witness; but
neither he nor Mrs. Hall asked me to give a certi-
cate of Mr. Hall's state of mind.
Harriet Sarson, 15, Robert-street, Hampstead-
road, shopkeeper to her father, stated that she had
known Mr. and Mrs. Hall twenty-seven years, and
during that period she had witnessed numerous
acts of the most painful violence on the part of Mr.
Hall towards his wife. He was always quarrelling
on the most trivial occasions ; and she had known
her to be kept without money and necessaries for
the family, and had visited and assisted Mrs. Hall
out of pity. The language of Mr. Hall was most
shocking, and terrified her (witness). On one
occasion she recollected, before the daughter's mar-
riage with Mr. Wright, Mr. Hall pulling down the
curtains and tearing the room paper, and on that
occasion he threw the slops in the room over Mrs.
Hall. She never saw any indication of her being
in the habit of drinking, nor did she notice any
familiarity with other men.
The witness was cross-examined by Mr. Cham-
bers, but her answers only related to money matters.
She was godmother to two of the children, and
she felt it her duty to take care of them out of
pity. She would not say Mr. Hall was mad, but
his manners were very violent and strange, and his
language very bad. On the occasion when Mr.
Hall tore down the paper and the curtains witness
was with his daughter Jane, now Mrs. Wright,
and they were engaged in repapering the bedroom,
when Mr. Hall took a candle and rubbed it over
the paper, and said he would not have such expen-
sive paper, and ordered witness to leave the room.
Mr. Montagu Chambers—Had you any other re-
lationship with Mrs. Hall than that of godmother
to two of her children ?
Miss Sarson—Yes, I was her bridesmaid.
(Laughter.)
Mr. Justice Crompton—Well, now, Mr. Cham-
bers, mind that. (Laughter.)
Miss Sarson—But it is the truth, my lord.
(Renewed laughter.) When Mrs. Hall was con-
fined of Mrs. Wright, that is—(laughter)—I was at
the house, and I saw that the room was stripped.
That was at the time of the Coronation.
Mr. M. Chambers—That is going a long way
back.

Miss Sarson—l recollect it well. Mrs. Hall was
penniless, and I lent her the money to pay for the
christening. The eldest child had not been chris-
tened, and when I went to the church, I said to
Mrs. Hall, " What a shocking thing it would be if
that dear child was to die without being christened,"
and—

Mr. Justice Crompton—And you lent her the
money to pay for the christening.
Miss Sarson—Yes, my lord, I did.
Mr. Justice Crompton--And I hope you saved
the child. (Laughter.)
Examination continued—As to acts of violence, I
have witnessed them by Mr. Hall towards his wife,
not actually in his striking but in ill-using her in
other ways.

Re-eXamined—When Mr. Hall tore down the
curtains and smeared the paper with a candle, I
was teaching the girls to paper the room.
Mr. Chambers—Pray, Miss Sarson, are you a
paper •hanger ? (Laughter.)
Miss Sarson—No ; but 1 am a godmother ; and
as such, I thought it my duty to teach the chil-
dren everything. (Laughter.)
Dr. Griffith was recalled and examined as to his
attending Mrs. Hall in her confinement in 1851.
He gave her medicine to relieve pain from violence,
but he could not remember whether she said it was
caused by a fall or a blow.
Amelia Homeston examined—Deposed that she
had been in the habit of charing at Mr. Hall's
house, and she recollected that she on one occasion
saw him seize Mrs. Hall by the throat, and heard
him say he would have her life. Mrs. Hall, on
that occasion, told her to go and fetch a policeman.
Mr. Burge, of Tottenham Court-road, deposed
that Dr. Semple had called upon him respecting Mr.
Hall, and told him he was, in his opinion, labouring
under some delusive idea about his wife's chastity
and conduct in business. His answer was that he
had never known her guilty of unchastity, nor did
he know her to be addicted to drinking and intem-
perance ; but he heard her complain of her husband's
conduct to her.

Mr. Sergeant Pigott then summed up the evi-
dence, and said the question for thk jury to consider
was whether Dr. Semple had been guilty of negli-
gence in signing the certificate of lunacy in the
defendant's case. The defendant justified his act
by reference to, and conformity with, the Act of
Parliament, which required that no person should be
committed to a lunatic asylum, unless on the certi-
ficate of two medical men, who should not examine
the alleged lunatic together, and who should not be
relations of the family, or in any way unduly in-
fluenced by them. He contended that all Dr. Semple
had done was duly and regularly done in the
practice of his profession, and in conformity with
the provisions of the Act of Parliaments Looking
at the reports of the present trial which a eared
in the newspapers, he (Mr. sergeant Pigottmust
say he could not approve of the comments made in
)pp
the report in the limes on the
evidence of some of
whether a witness e witnesses while the case was aub judiee ; but
was shaken or unshaken in his
testimony, according
to the opinion of the party, would not, in his (Mr, Sergeant Pigott'e) opinion,