The Sun.
London, England, 1854-04-17 00:00:00

tirE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING.. APRIL 17, 1564.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

GUILDHALL.—In consequence of a previous ar-
rangement, Mr. Meeking attended before Sir R.' W.
Carden, to give a full explanation relative to the deten-
tion of a lady at his shop on Holborn-hill, on the charge
of having'taken a sovereign belonging to another cus.
tomer from the counter. _ _ _

He stated he had given notice to Mrs. Finch, the lady
who complained, that her presence would be required ;
but she had referred him to her solicitor, in whose hands
she had pla.ced the matter. He had also given similar
notice to Mrs. Curzon, who lost the sovereign. He was
prepared to give the fullest explanation of the facts of
the case, if the alderman would hear the statements of
those of his assistants who were acquainttd with all the
circumstances.
Sir R. W. Carden said he should be happy to hear any
one who could throw any light upon the subject.
Mr. Tarsey said he attended for Mrs. Curzon, to con-
tradict any mis-statement Mr. Meeking might make, as
from a letter he had written to the newspapers it ap-
peared he denied the fact of any such transaction as the
one described taking place in his shop.
sir R. W. Carden said that was his impression on
reading the letter.
Mr. Meeking said he wrote that letter in a great hurry
to deny that any customer was detained in his shop
against her inclination.
Sir R. NV. Carden said in the letter he received Mr.
Meeking had endeavoured to throw the onus on Mrs.
Curzon of accusing and detaining Mrs. Finch.
Mr. Tarsey said that part of Mr. Meeking's letter
was entirely incorrect, as Mrs. Curzon accused no one,
but she certainly thought it very wrong that the loss
should be thrown upon her after she had paid the money
to Mr. Meeking's servant.

Mr. Meeking said that Mr. TarSey was wrongly in-
formed, and it was very desirTileree Mrs. Curzon should
be present to state what actually took place.
Mrs. Curzon was accordingly sent for, and on being
requested to narrate what she recollected of the circum-
stance, she stated that she purchased goods at Mr.
Meeking's shop to the amount of 51. 75., and paid for
them with a Si. note and a sovereign. Mrs. Finch
was sitting near her, and the shopman placed the note
and sovereign on his cheque-book, and, after endorsing
the note, he closed the book upon it and the sovereign
and then sent the cashier to take'the money. When
the cashier came to the book he could not find the sove-
reign, and on her asking him what was to be done, he
said he did not know, but she could do what she pleased.
The young man who placed the money in the book said,
to the best of his belief, he replaced the sovereign in
the note. She never accused any one.
Sir R. W. Carden asked what could have induced
Mrs. Finch to offer to be searched, and said there must
have been some insinuation thrown out to make her
believe she was suspected of taking the sovereign.
Mrs. Curzon said there was not the slightest thing
said or insinuated to induce her to make such an offer.
When the sovereign was missed she saw Mrs. Finch was
about to leave, and said to her, " Of course you will
not go until this is cleared up ;" and Mrs. Finch replied
she was not in a hurry, and was willing to be searched.
Sir R. W. Carden asked Mr. Meeting, who sent for
the policeman ?—Mr. Meeking said he was not sent for
by him.
Mrs. Curzon said the policeman was sent for by Mr.
Meeking, but no one was given into custody, for she
was willing to lose the money rather than have any
further unpleasantness about it. Mrs. Finch was
anxious to be searched, and voluntarily undressed her-
self for the purpose when taken into the private room.
On the following day she received an intimation from
Mr. Meeking that the sovereign had been found, and
she accordingly received it back ; but Mr. Meeking was
wrong in stating that she promised to inform Mrs.
Finch that the money was found.
Mrs. Curzon's brother said he was present on the
following day, and told Mr. Meeking that an apology
was due to Mrs. Finch, and that if he did n*t make it
he (the brother) would do so. He complained that Mr.
.Meeking had sought to shrink from the responsibility
he ought to have taken upon himself, and to throw the
onus upon Mrs. Curzson and Mrs. Finch.
Sir R. W. Carden inquired where the sovereign was
found ?

Mr. Meeking said the shopman found it in his cheque-
book, it having slipped through into the pocket.

Sir R. W.Caiden—So, then, the whole mistake
arose through the fault of the young man who received
the money and placed it in the book, and he was sur-
prised how it could have happened ; for it was perfectly
impossible that he could have forgotten having received
the money, as it never left his possession until it was
found the next day. He considered that, in justice to
all parties, Mr. Meeking should have written to every
one immediately the sovereign was found, acknowledging
the neglect of the young man, and apologising for the
unpleasant position they had been placed in through it.
Mr. Meekini, said, as soon as he got at the facts of
the case he subsequently wrote a full explanation, which
he regretted appeared only in one of the morning papers.
Sir R. W. Carden said neither the letter he had seen,
nor the one he received bore the slightest reference to
the finding of the sovereign (which he thought Mr.
Meeking was bound to mention), although it was the
most essential part of this investigation.
Mr. Meeking said he wrote these letters before he had
time to collect the details he had since given, and he did
not wish to accuse his young man of neglect until he
' had inquired if he were guilty of it or not.
Sir R. W. Carden said Mr. Meeking might have
stated the fact that the sovereign was found, without
imputing any offence to his young man, instead of
allowing suspicion to cling to Mrs. Finch after the
ordeal she had gone through.

Mr. Tarsey said Mr. Meeking, on being applied to,
had stated he had nothing to do with it, as none of his
young men, except the cashier, had authority to receive
money, which practice he thought was likely to lead to
many such unpleasant disputes.
Sir P. W. Carden said it was not necessary to say
anything more on the subject. It was very clear that
ail the unpleasantness arose from the negligence of Mr.
Meeking's servant, and it was equally clear that an
apology was due front Mr. Meeking's establishment to
Mrs. Finch.

Mr. Meeking said he hoped the alderman would ex-
press his opinion, after what he had heard, that he (Mr.
Meeking) had not caused the detention of a person in
his shop.
Sir R. W. Carden said be should give no opinion
upon that point.
Mr. Meeking said he trusted the alderman would hear
the young man who attended upon Mrs. Curzon.
The young man accordingly corroborated what Mrs.
Curzon stated, and added that when Mrs. Curzon asked
them what was to be done about the missing sovereign,
he said, " I don't know anything about it ; it rests
between you two ladies" (meaning Mrs. Curzon and
Mrs. Finch.)
Sir R. W. Carden said after that he thought a most
ample public apology was due from Mr. Meeking to
both the ladies, He had inflicted a most grievous in-
jury upon Mrs. Finch, and ought to have made a per-
sonal apology in the most ample terms to that lady
immediately he discovered the mistake that had been
made. He (the alderman) did not impute dishonesty
to the young man, but, to say the least of it, it was very
great negligence.—The parties then retired.

body? His answer was, that they did not know where
to find it."
The deceased, after leaving home, was traced to a
cartwright's shop in the neighbourhood. He entered at
about 10 minutes to 7 o'clock, and left it in 20 minutes
or half an hour. Dr. Smith had attended a person the
same evening, leaving about 7, and he was seen near the
place about the sate time. One witness, Johu Adam,
a labourer, in returning to the village from Peterhead,
stated that he had met McDonald and Dr. Smith about
18 or 20 minutes past 7 o'clock, walking together. "
passed quite near them," said this witness, " they were
speaking to each other. I nodded my head to William
McDonald, and he nodded to me in return. I saw Dr.
Smith quite plainly. I was quite certain he was the
other man. Dr. Smith had on dark clothes and a light
hat. They were walking at a good pace," The witness,
however, began to hesitate so much in his testimony as
to excite suspicion. He said, immediately before meet-
ing Smith and McDonald, he had asked a man to let him
know the hour, and was informed that it was 7 o'clock,
the man adding that his watch was fast by the Peter-
head time by about half an hour. He could not explain
the inconsistency of his evidence, and afterwards sail he
was wrong in saying it was 20 minutes past 7—that it
was a small bit of a mistake.
The witness continued, in some confusion, in this
strain, when
The Lord Justice-Clerk sentenced him to six months'
imprisonment for gross prevarication, and told him that
the only way of getting his sentence mitigated would be
by telling what induced him to say that he had seri the
two men at 18 or 20 minutes past seven. His lordship
animadverted, in severe terms, on the want of attention
and energy displayed in the precognition of the witness.
(This witness was not cited for the former trial.)
The other evidence was to no effect ; one man, a
farmer, had heard a shot fired at six minutes after half-
past seven o'clock ; but Dr. Siiiith had called at a house
on the Saturday evening at 10 minutes to eight o'clock,
and showed nothing remarkable in his manner. He
returned a second time to the same house, sat down, but
rose quickly, when the occupier said, "What's the
matter wi' you, doctor ; are you warm ? And he said,
" Yes," and began rocking the cradle. The next day
(Sunday) the mother of the deceased remarked his un-
usual paleness.
The Court adjourned till next day.

Further evidence in this case was heard on Thursday,
when witnesses were called to • prove that the prisoner
had purchased a pistol at Peterhead, in August last, like
the one found near the body ; that he had asked for
powder to shoot crows on Friday, the 18th, from a shop-
keeper in New St. Fergus, who, however, had not any ;
that he had purchased two ounces of gunpowder on the
Saturday afternoon, from a merchant in Old St. Fergus,
on pretence of preparing some ointment, and that he
had previously bought percussion caps. The packet of
powder was subsequently found, minus a quarter of an
ounce, and the string twisted and not tied. The weights
of the merchant were, however, proved to he defective,
and there was evidence of some powder being spilt.
There Was no evidence of any bullets being purchased by
the prisoner.

Evidence was also brought to show that the prisoner
had effected three insurances on M‘Donald's life—one
with the Northern Insurance Company for 499/. for five
years, commencing in December, 1852 ; one with the
Caledonian Insurance Company for 9991. 195., for one
year commencing on the 24th November, 1852, and
which was, therefore, with five days of expiring when
M'Donald died ; and one with the Scottish Union In-
surance Company for 5001., for five years, commencing
in January, 1852. The policies being on the life a third
party, were not nullified by suicide on his part.
The medical testimony was to the effect that the
pistol had been fired close to the head, and that death
must have been instantaneous. If the deceased had
committed suicide, he must have done so sitting in the
ditch ; if he were shot by another, it must have been by
some one who was alongside of him, and the body must
have been rolled into the ditch. The doctors could not
give a positive opinion as to whether the deceased had
met his death by murder or by suicide.
The proceedings on Friday opened with the reading of
the prisoner's declarations. lie accounted for himself. on
the evening in question by stating that he left the manse
some time after 7, that he went home and worked some
time in his garden, and went to call on Miss Anderson
at twenty-five minutes to 8.
Evidence was called in exculpation, to the effect that
the prisoner was in the manse up till seven o'clock ; that
he came home between seven and half-past, and after
being ten minutes in the house, went out to the garden
and took up some dahlia roots, and was some time en-
gaged there. Mr. Adam Grey, Peterhead, deposed to
selling a pistol to William M`Donald in September,
1848, and, on being shown the pistol found near the
body, said it was his firm belief, from a notch that was
on it, that that was the pistol.
The Solicitor-General addressed the jury for the prose-
cation, and the Dean of Faculty for the defence.
The Lord Justice-Clerk, in charging the jury, said they
had first to consider whether there had been a murder at
all, and whether the evidence absolutely precluded the
possibility of suicide or accident. After the evidence of
Mr. Gray, identifying the pistol as the one he had sold
to M'Donald in 1848, he thought they could no longer
hold that it belonged to tins prisoner, and this, the only
link that directly connected the panel with the crime,
being taken away, and Aden's evidence that they had
been seen together that evening being altogether un-
trustworthy, they had not a single act which connected
the prisoner with M'Donald at all in the matter of his
death. The whole case might be surrounded with sus-
picion and difficulties, but in the view he took of the
case, it came to be an unexplained murder, the evidence
having failed to connect the case with the prisoner at
the bar.

The jury, after a brief absence, brought in a verdict of
not proven, by a majority.
The Lord Justice Clerk asked if the minority meant
guilty or not guilty, to which the Chancellor replied,
that it was a majority for not proven as against guilty.
The verdict was received with hissing in the body of
the court, which was suppressed by the niacers, but
which broke out again as the prisoner left the duck.

--
UNIVERSITY INTELLIGEN(T.

OXFORD, APRIL 1 t.

The subjoined is a copy of the declaration against the
University Reform Bill, which being largely circulated,
with a view to obtain signatures, both among resi-
dents and non-residents :

"The difficulty of bringing together, for the purpose
of a formal vote, any large proportion of the non-resident
members of Convocation, makes it desirable to ascertain
by another method—as was done with reference to the
question of the admission •f dissenters in 1834—what
is their judgment upon the bill now before Parliament.
" It is proposed to make compulsory, by the said bill,
certain great changes in the constitution and government
of the University and its colleges. _ _

"It is further proposed to dear, by the same bill, with
the property of the several colleges, and to impose cer-
tain new provisions for its application.
"These two propositions, as carried out in numerous
clauses of the bill, appear—

" 1. To be subversive of the independence and legiti-
mate corporate action of the university, and also of the
discipline secured by the collegiate system ; and to be
regardless of the solemn obligations of the Visitors, the
Heads, and the Fellows of the colleges.
2, To be destructive of the original purposes of the
foundations, by discouraging the valuable class for whom
they were intended—poor, well-conditioned, and in-
genious students ; making intellectual attainments the
almost exclusive standard ; affecting unduly the con-
nection of colleges with great schools for the encourage-
ment of well-deserving youth in particular localities ;
restraining the period of the benefits proposed by the
founders ; diverting their bequests, in part, to purposes
altogether alien from their intentions ; and, finally,
making the fellowships intellectual prizes, rather than
endowments for men fitted to serve God in Church and
State.
"3. To be suggestive of a new principle of dealing,
not only with all trust property, but with all other pro-
perty in the kingdom, by act of Parliament."
The names of Residents at present appended to this
paper are those of the Vice-Chancellor, the Provost of
Queen's, the President of Magdalen, the President of
Trinity, the President of St. John's, the Warden of
Wariliam, the Principals of St. Mary Hall, Magdalen
Hall, and St. Edmund Hall, Drs. Pusey and Barnes,
Canons of Christ Church, the Public Orator, the Lau-
dian Professor of Arabic, the Bodleian Librarian, the
Junior Proctor, seven Tutors or Lecturer of Colleges,
10 Fellows, and three members of Convocation not on
foundations. The paper is also signed by nine or ten
non-Residents, among whom the most eminent is the
yen. George Anthony Denison, Archdeacon of Taunton.