The Sun.
London, England, 1865-11-24 00:00:00

rim SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, No:WEMBER 24, ISEt%

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

DIVORCE COURT.
(Before Sir J. P. Wilde and a Special Jury.)

BRAIDWOOD V. BRAIDWOOD AND DUKE OF ST. ALBANS

Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C., Dr. Spinks, and another
learned gentleman, were counsel for the petitioner,
and the defendants were represented by the Queen's
Advocate, Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., and other learned
gentlemen.
This was the petition of Mr. Charles Hamilton
Broadwood for a dissolution of marriage on the
ground of his wife's adultery with the co-respondent,
the Duke of St. Albans. Both defendants appeared
and denied the adultery, recriminated the charge,
and further pleaded cruelty.
From the opening statement of the learned coun-
sel it appeared that the petitioner was the son of a
gentleman of fortune, some time deceased, and that
he married the respondent, whose maiden name
was Shaw, at St. Luke's Church, Chelsea, in
February, 1854. They lived happily together
until May, 1863, at St. John's-wood, and then they
went abroad. In the year last mentioned the re-
spondent suggested that the petitioner should dis-
pose of his furniture and go into furnished lodgings.
Accordingly he disposed of his furniture for £7OO.
Shortly afterwards his father died, and he became
possessed of property to the amount of between
£3,000 and £4,000. They then went to Cavendish-
row, Grosvenor-square, to live, and afterwards
removed to different hotels, living in a sort of con-
tinental style. In the April of 1863 they were
living at the Grosvenor Hotel, and then the respon-
dent expressed a desire that they should separate
for some time, which the petitioner, who was in-
fatuated with his wife, assented to. Ultimately
the petitioner went abroad by the request of his
wife, and during his absence the alleged criminal
intercourse between the respondent and the Duke
of St. Albans took place.
The further facts are developed in the follow-
ing evidence :
The marriage of the petitioner with the respon-
dent having been proved formally,
Mary Jarvis said her name was Adams. She
had been housemaid and lady's maid at 24, Caven-
dish-row, St. John's-wood, in August, 1862.
They were then living together. In October, 1862,
they went to Brighton, to the Royal Hotel. They
resided at different places up to August, 1863.
Then they were at the Grosvenor Hotel, Pimlico.
While there Mr. Broadwood went to Mrs. Broad-
wood and said, " Lou, I thought you would
go with me to Brighton," and she re-
plied, " Yes, but I am too tired. I
thought you would sign this agreement." He
aked what it was for, and she said it was an agree-
ment for a house. He asked her where it was, and
she said it did not matter. He refused to sign it,
and then she said it was in London. He said he
would not live in London. She said if he would
not Mr. Taylor would let her have it on her own
account. He then asked her how long it was for, and
she said three months. He then:ilew in a passion,
and signed the agreement without looking at it.
At the rising of the Court, the case was not con-
cluded.

POLICE INTEL LIGENCE.—This Day.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
ROBBERY WITII VIOLENCE.—Thomas Giddings, a rough-
looking lad, describing himself as a whitesmith, was
charged before Mr. Yardley with stealing, at No. 28,
George-street, Grosvenor-square, a till containing money,
belonging to Mr. Thomas Jinscott, baker; and he was
further charged with violently assaulting Mrs. Matilda
Hexamer, who manages the business for Mr. Jinscott, who
has another shop in Oxfo rd-street.

Mrs. Hoxamer said that on the previous evening, about
six o'clock, having just served a customer, she was return-
ing to the parlour, when, thinking she heard a noise, she
returned to the shop, and saw the prisoner behind the
counter at the till. The prisoner jumped over the counter,
when she followed him and held him, and he then struck
her several times. She continued to hold the prisoner,
and called for assistance. The prisoner then gave her a
violent blow, which knocked her down and nearly stunned
her. A gentleman then came up and secured the prisoner.
In answer to Mr. Yardley, the witness stated that there
were about 12s. in the till at the time.

Mr. Benjamin Hatchman, of No. 9, George-street,
Grosvenor-square, said that, hearing cries of "Murder," he
ran out of his shop, and found the witness Hexamer lying
in the road and the prisoner making his escape. He went
after the prisoner, who threw some money on the ground,
and brought him back, and he was given into custody.
William James, 71 C, proved taking the prisoner into
custody, and that a boy picked up some of the money.
The prisoner gave an address in Barrett's-court, but it was
not a correct one. On the way to the station he said he
had taken 55., but had thrown it away.
Inspector Harrison said the prisoner was ono of a gang
of young thieves who infested the neighbourhood, and a
lady was present who saw the prisoner in company of
another boy who had attempted a similar robbery a few
nights previously in the same neighbourhood.
The prisoner said ho was guilty, and wished the case
settled by the magistrate.

Mr. Yardley committed the prisoner for six months,
Nrith hard labour.

MARKETS—This Day.

MARK-LANE.

Fresh up to our market to-day the arrivals of hothe-
grown wheat were very moderate, and the condition of
the bulk of the produce was very middling. Dry samples
sold steadily at the prices of Monday. Otherwise, the
trade was dull, at that day's currency.
There was a fair supply of foreign wheat on the stands.
For all descriptions the trade was in a sluggish state, at
about previous rates.

Floating cargoes of grain were in slow request, at late

prices.

The supply of barley on sale was moderate. Good and
fine malting produce sold at full prices, but inferior barley
was a dull inquiry, on former terms.
Malt was in slow request, at late rates.
Oats were in fair supply. For most descriptions there
was a fair demand, and prices ruled firm.
Beans and peas were in fair request, at full currencies.
Most descriptions of flour sold slowly, at late rates.
SHIP ARRIVALS THIS WEER.
Wheat. Barley. Malt. Oats. Flour.
English and Scotch. 660 590 776 510 790
_ .

Foreign B4BO 1090

110 --
- 11,270 500 slag.
382 brls.

NEWUATE AND LEADENHALL.

The supplies of meat on sale are somewhat extensive
The trade is dull, at lower prices:--

-
Per 81b by the carcase.
s d s d 11 d a d
Inferior beef 2 10 3 4 Inferior mutton.... 2 10 3 4
Middling do. 3 6 4 0 Middling mutton..) 6 4 6
Prime large do 4 2 4 4 Prime do 4 8 6 2
4
Prime small d 0.... 6 4 8 Veal 3 8 4 8
Large p0rk........ 4 0 5 0 Small pork. 5 2 5 8
Lamb, Os Od to Os Od.

THIRD EDITION.

SUN OFFICE, 7 o'CLocK.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

WARWICK RACES-THIS DAY.
BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAM
HUNT CUP. •

Glasgow
Spright
Pallas Lass
Eight ran.
HANDICAP HURDLE,

Acolyte
Cutler
Jacob:

Gulnara
Sabrina

Five ran.
SELLING RACE.

Six ran.
NURSERY HANDICAP,

Ulphus
Rosalind colt
Venturesome
Thirteen ran.
LEAMINGTON HANDICAP.

Elland
Sidewind
Jacqueline colt
Seven ran
WELTER RACE.

Beadle • • __ _ __. _.

Albert
Mongrel
Five ran.
HANDICAP PLATE.

Gulnara
Pegasus 2
Puritan
Six ran.
INNKEEPER'S PLATE.

Skirmish
Confederate
Catalogue
Eight ran.
HANDICAP STEEPLECHASE.

Cutler
Polly Hopkins
Oscar

Six ran.

THE FENIAN CONSPIRACY.

... 2

ESCAPE OF STEPHENS, THE HEAD
CENTRE.
(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)
DUBLIN, Friday Morning
_ _ _

Stephens, the head of the conspiracy in Ireland,
and for whose apprehension a reward was offerel
by the Government, and who was last week taken
into custody, has escaped from Richmond Prison.
It is supposed that some of the prison officials are
implicated in his escape.
His cell door was found open this morning, and
no trace of him has since been found.

consequent on the death, on the 16th inst., of Vice-Admi-
ral Sir Horatio Thos. Austin, K.C.8., have this day taken
place : Rear-Admiral Sir Sydney Colpoys Dacres,
K.C.8., to be Vice-Admiral ; Captain Cospatrick Baillie
Hamilton to be Rear-Admiral on the Reserved List; Cap-
tain Thomas Fisher to be Rear-Admiral ; Retired Captain
William Louis Sheringham to be Retired Rear• Admiral,
under the provisions of the Orders in Council of let
August, 1860, and 9th July, 1864.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COUR r—This Day.

r~__~

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Byles.)
THE CHARGE AGAINST DR. HUNTER.

Robert Hunter, described as a doctor of medi-
cine, was placed in the dock charged with feloni-
ously assaulting Anne Merrick against her will, and
carnally knowing her, on the 14th of October, at
his residence in Upper Seymour-street, Marylebone.
The prisoner, who is a fine, tall, handsome per-
son,_pleaded not guilty.
_ _ _

M. Sergeant Robinson and Mr. Butler Rigby
prosecuted. The prisoner was defended by Mr.
Sergeant Ballantine, Mr. Sleigh, and Mr. Montagu
Williams.
Mr. Sergeant Robinson, in his opening, said the
case rested mainly on the evidence of Mrs. Merrick
herself. Dr. Hunter was not regularly qualified
according to the English law, and was not regis-
tered, but he had obtained a qualification in New
York. He had been in the habit of advertising
miraculous cures of consumption, and it was this
circumstance that induced Mrs. Merrick to consult
him. Mrs. Merrick was in the last stage of con-
sumption and on the point of death, and therefore
she could have no object in:injuring such a person

as Dr. Hunter.
Mrs. Merrick—l am the wife of Mr. Samuel
Merrick, of 52, Upper Baker-street. My husband
is a tobacconist, carrying on business there. Pre-
vious to September I had been suffering from con-
sumption, and in that month I consulted Dr. Hun-
ter. I saw him from time to time until the 14th of
October at his house. When I first saw him he
examined me, and I asked him if he could cure me,
and he replied he could. He told me his fee was
five guineas a month, and I told him I would see if
I could afford to pay him such a high fee. On the
following morning my husband took the five guineas,
and after that I used to go to his residence, and con-
tinued to do so until the 14th October. On that
day I went to his house, about 11 o'clock. lam
quite positive that was _ the date, and I can swear
it was. I went into the waiting-room, in which
there were other patients. I waited there more than
an hour, and then I saw the prisoner in his room on
the first floor. He was quite alone. He asked me
how I was. I told him the pain in my side was
worse. He told me to sit down and inhale some-
thing from an instrument on the table. I did this
for about five minutes, when he took a small bottle
off the table and poured something into the instru-
ment, and in a few minutes after I had inhaled from
the instrument again I became conscious of a pecu-
liar sensation.

Justice Byles—At the time it was poured in was
you inhaling from it ?
Witness—Yes.

Examination continued—l felt a stupifying feeling
coming over me. It seemed to render me powerless
in feeling, but I retained my consciousness. Prisoner
then said he would examine my side, and he put
his right hand underneath my garments to do so.
He told me I was much better, and continued talk-
ing. While so doing I did not notice what he was
doing. All at once he pulled me back in the chair,
and in that position I was quite helpless, and then
the offence was committed. I afterwards struggled
as much as I could to get from him. He put his
head over my face and then began passionately to
kiss me, so that my mouth was completely stopped
up. When I got up the chair then flew back. He
then went up to another part of the room and
washed his hands. He afterwards came to
me and asked me not to say anything of
what had passed, but I demanded the door
to be opened. The prisoner then unfastened the
door and I went direct down stairs and left the
house. I stood outside for a short time to see if I
could get a cab, but, not succeeding, I went to a
friend of mine to rest, in fact to tell her what had
occurred. It was Mrs. Sharland's. Her residence
was about a minute and a half's walk from Dr.
Hunter's. I stopped there about ten'minutes, and
then seeing a cab in the distance I hailed it, but
previous to entering it I ran to Dr. Hunter's in
order to get an embrocation he had ordered. I
then entered the cab and was driven home. I saw
my mother on my return and I made a com-
plaint to her. I remained at home after that
and took to my bed, in which I remained for
a fortnight. I was unable to make any com-
plaint to my husband. While I was ill in
bed my mother and a nurse attended on me. My
mother slept with me at night. I never had any
connection with the prisoner after that, but my
mother went to Dr. Hunter's for a doctor to be
sent, and Dr. Willis came to me on the Monday.
The assault took place the previous Saturday. Dr.
Willis attended me three times, and after that Dr.
Melville, one of the doctors from the prisoner's, at-
tended me. On the Monday fortnight after the
assault happened I made a complaint to my husband
of what had taken place ; but on the 7th of Novem-
ber I made a full statement of the circumstances to
my husband. It was on a Thursday morning.
Cross-examined by Sergeant Ballantine—l had
inhaled from the instrument on several former oc-
casions. The process adopted rendered it necessary
that I should inhale at home. Dr. Hunter gave me
an instrument to use, but it was quite different
from that I used at his residence.
By Sergeant Ballantine--I have sent for the in-
strument, and it will be in court in a short time.
Mr. Justice Byles—lt is desirable that it should
be produced.
Sergeant Ballantine—l will proceed with another
part of the case, and refer to this when the instru-
ment arrives.

Cross-examination continued--I was in the
drawing-room when the occurrence took place. The
prisoner moved some of the articles of furniture in
the room to enable him to examine my side. I did
not notice what he was doing when he was talking
to me. He did not kiss me until after the assault.
There was nothing done that could induce me to
imagine that he was about to commit an assault on
me. I struggled as much as I could.
Sergeant Ballantine—Were you incapable of
screaming ?
Witness—l didn't think of it. I was too stupe-
fied.

Sergeant Ballantine—Could you have done it?
Witness—lf I had tried I have no doubt I could,
but I did not think of it ; my only object was to
get away.
Cross-examination continued—The house I called
at after I left Dr. Hunter's was at the corner of
Quebec-street.

_
The deposition of the witness was here put in and
read. On that occasion the witness said—" I did
not scream because I did not wish to make a scene
in the house."

Cross-examined--I never said I ran out of the
house. Mrs. Sharland's is a publichouse. She
keeps it. I did not tell her what occurred. Mrs.
Sharland is not here. I saw the barmaid before I
saw Mrs. Sharland. She is in attendance. The
reason I did not mention the name of Mrs. Sharland
was because I did not wish to involve other persons
in the disgraceful outrage. I did not take anything
in Mrs. Sharland's house. The reason I went back
Dr. Hunter's was for the embrocation to make a
blister, as it was the first time he had ordered such
a thing. I wrote to Dr. Hunter after the occur-
rence, and after I had told my mother.
The letter was here put in and read. It com-
menced " Dear Sir." It complained that the em-
brocation had not had the effect of raising a blister,
and that she was in such dreadful pain or she would
not have troubled him again. It concluded "Yours
obediently."
Cross-axamined—l told my mother immediately
1 got home about the assault, and, as the embroca-
tion did not act as described, I wrote informing the
doctor about it.
Serjeant Ballantine—Who applied the embroca-
tion to your side ?
Witness—My brother.
Serjeant Ballantine—Your brother !
Witness—Yes. He is engaged in an infirmary
as superintendent.
Serjeant Ballantine—Did you write that letter in
bed ? _ . . _

--Witness—Yes ; I wrote it in bed at my brother's
mother advised me not to mention
suggestion. My
anything that had happened, because then it would
have to be made known to my husband. My mo-
ther thought that if I referred to the matter, the
doctor might send me something that might injure
me, and that as 1 had paid for medical advice for
the month I might as well have it.

Sergeant Baliantine—Your husband kept a little
tobacconist's shop in Baker-street ?
Witness—Yes.
Sergeant Ballantine--And you served in the
shop?
Witness--Yes.

Evidence continued--My husband has been a
bankrupt within the last 12 months. I have rela-
tions in the country of the name of Goddard. My
brother goes by the name of Goddard. I never
knew that he went by the name of Dr. Goddard
Jones. For nine months he had been in the police
force as a constable. My brother has resided at
Brentford. I have visited him there. I know a Dr.
Pryor. The letter now placed in my hands is writ-
ten by my brother. I did not know of its existence.
Re-examined by Sergeant Robinson— I am 26
years of age. I lived in Conduit-street, in the upper
part of Mr. Sandiland's home. I paid £l9O a-year

for the apartments. I used it as a boarding-house.
She lived there three years. It was on account of
my husband's bankruptcy that I left. Persons of
rank and title lodged with me.
Mr. Justice Byles—l do not think this is relevant
to the case, but you can proceed.
Sergeant Robinson—l only wish to show that
persons of undoubted respectability and position
resided in the witness's house. However, I will go
to another part of the case.

Re-examination continued—The only reason I
had far not mentioning Mrs. Sharland's name is
that which I have stated. I firmly believe the state
of stupor produced on me was caused by something
that was administered to me. I never inhaled a
vapour, but I had never had anything like it before.
The chair and the inhaling instrument were here
brought into court. The chair was of the usual
pattern made for drawing room suite, called ladies'
reclining chairs.

Mrs. James—l am the mother of Mrs. Merrick.
I keep a boarding-house, No. 51, New Bond-street.
When my daughter returned from Dr. Hunter's she
was crying, and appeared excited. She made a
communication to me, and afterwards she went up
stairs, and in about an hour she took to her bed.
On Sunday she was very much worse, and I went
to Dr. Hunter's. I saw the servant maid. I went
again on Monday, and on that day I saw the hall
porter. I waited for an hour and a half before I
saw him. I asked him that a visiting doctor might
attend my daughter. Dr. Wills came up and Dr.
Hunter told him to attend Mrs. Merrick. He went,
and after that he saw my daughter two or three
times. My daughter got worse, and for a few days
she was unconscious, off and on. The Sacrament
was taken by my daughter on the Monday week
following the assault, as she thought she was dying.
Sergeant Ballantine objected to this evidence.
Justice Byles—l think it important, and it must
be received.

Sergeant Ballantine (to witness)—Were you pre
sent when the Sacrament was administered.
Witness—Yes.

Cross-examined—l assisted in getting my daugh-
ter to bed. I advised her to write to the doctor.

Sergeant Ballantine—Your daughter brought
some embrocation home with her, did she not ?

Witness—Yes.
Sergeant Ballantine—Who put it on ?
Witness—l did, but my son assisted me.
Sergeant Ballantine—You did ?
Witness—Yes.
Sergeant Ballantine—Your son was in the room,
was he not ?
Witness—Yes.
Sergeant Ballantine—You advised your daughter
not to mention the matter in her letter to the doctor.
Why did you do this ?

Witness—Because I thought he might give her
something that would injure her.
Sergeant Ballantine—Poison her, you mean.
Witness—No, not that.
Sergeant Ballantine—What then ?
Witness—That he might give her something that
would hurt her, but not that.

Sergeant Baliantine—Did you tell your husband
about the matter.
Witness—No.
Sergeant Ballantine—Nor your son?
Witness—No.
Sergeant Ballantine—What did Mr. Merrick say
when he heard of the matter ?

Witness—He wanted to go and shoot Dr. Hunter
instead of having law.
Eliza Wood—l am barmaid to Mrs. Sharland,
who keeps the Quebec Arms, Oxford-street. I recol-
lect Mrs. Merrick coming there on the 14th of
October. She was very excited. Mrs. Merrick
went into the bar parlour, but Mrs. Sharland was
upstairs dressing.
Cross-examined by Sergeant Ballantine—Mrs.
Sharland lives at the Quebec Arms. She is not in
town. She left London yesterday. I don't know
where she's gone. I have never been examined be-
fore. Mrs. Merrick was with Mrs. Sharland about
three or four minutes. Mrs. Merrick said she was
going to Dr. Hunter's to get something she had
forgotten. I have not seen her since. I was first
spoken to about coming here last Sunday evening
by Mr. Butler. I did not know Mrs. Sharland was
going out of town till yesterday morning.
Re-examined—Mrs. Sharland has lived in the
house in Quebec-street for many years.
Sergeant Ballantine—What name is over the
door ?
Witness—Sharland.

Frederick Goddard Jones—l am the brother of
Mrs. Merrick. I was at the house in Baker-street
on the 14th of October. I recollect my sister com-
ing home. She was crying when she came in, and
she went and laid down on the sofa. She begged
of her mother to take her upstairs. No communi-
cation was made to me about the occurrence. I
did not know it until the morning I went to whip
Dr. Hunter.

Sergeant Robinson—Do you recollect applying
an embrocation to your sister's side on the 14th ?
Witness—Yes.
Sergeant Robinson—Your mother was with you
when you did it ?

Witness—Yes.
Sergeant Ballantine—Did you ever pass as Dr.
Goddard ?

Witness--I might have been called Dr. Goddard
as a nickname when I was a boy.
Sergeant Ballantine—You have applied for a
licence for a house for the cure of epileptic patients ?
Witness—Yes.
Sergeant Ballantine—Didn't you make that ap-
plication in the name of Goddard.

Witness—No ; I never used any other name in
business but that of Frederick Goddard Jones.

The husband of the prosecutrix was called by
Sergeant Robinson, but he was merely placed in the
box for cross-examination by the counsel for the
defendant. In answer to Sergeant Ballantine he
said Dr. Hunter never said I owed him nine guineas,
and that he would not go on until I paid it. I had
already paid him five guineas. I arranged to pay
it, but my wife would not have his attendance. I
did not tell my wife he would not attend without
previous payment. I had been a bankrupt. I have
not paid my previous doctor's bill. I have not paid
the debts I left in Conduit-street.

By Sergeant Robinson—When I went to Dr.
Hunter's the first time I did not know of the as-
sault. The reason I did not send the money to
Dr. Hunter was because my wife objected to have
anything more to do with him. I first heard some-
thing of the assault on Monday, the 30th of Octo-
ber, after I returned from Dr. Hunter's ; my wife
said she would have nothing further to do with
him as he had insulted her. It was not until the
2d of November that I became fully acquainted
with the whole state of the matter, and the same
day I went in company with my brother-in-law to
horsewhip Dr. Hunter.

This was the case for the prosecution.
Sergeant Robinson then summed up the evidence
he had adduced to support his case. He contended
that the evidence he had placed before the jury
clearly brought home the charge to the prisoner, de-
spite the desperate attempt that had been made to
prejudice the case and to throw discredit upon the
witnesses examined for the prosecution.
On the conclusion of the learned sergeant's ob-
servations the court adjourned for refreshment.
On the return of Justice Byles to the bench,
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
man 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 awoman to fall into a state
of powerlessness, in which she would be perfectly
conscious of everything that was going on, butquite
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 thattkt 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 o f 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 suffered 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-
mind him that he had the notes of the evidence be-
fore him, and according to them it appeared that she
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
been 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 ho
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. lle
said he 'did 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 ttlp greatest importance ; because
previous to this nothing was alleged against the
character of either tVe'prosecutrix or of the defen-
dant; both, therefoi Were stainless as far as was
known to the Court. 'The learned judge then com-
menced reading and dthimenting upon the evidence,
beginning with that of the prosecutrix, and on com-
ing to the apparent cdntradiction as to the parties
who applied the embtocation, the learned Judge
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:in
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 theipresence 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 bad the slightest
doubt. to:

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 him.