The Sun.
London, England, 1853-11-09 00:00:00

THE BURNHAM MURDER.

VERDICT OF THE JURY.
Yesterday the inquiry was again resumed before Mr.
Chearsley. The removal of the prisoner Moses Hatto
occasioned considerable excitement in Eton and the

neighbourhood. He was conveyed handcuffed in a light
chaise-cart, between the superintendents of the Eton
and Slough police. The route through the village of
Burnham and past the Abbey Farm was purposely
avoided, owing to the excited state of the inhabitants of
the district, who, it is said, are so satisfied of Hatto's
guilt, that, if set down among them, he could not pos-
sibly escape "lynching." Hatto is a man of small sta-
ture, but of well-knit frame, with a countenance rather
pleasing than otherwise. On reaching the Mile-house,
he got out of the police cart with a light step, and held
his manacled hands aloft with an expression of bravado.
Mr. Goodwin, the occupier of the house, stated, in
answer to the coroner, that he had lost two white-
handled razors, one gold ring, two pencil cases, one
ivory-handled knife with several blades and instruments
n it, an ivory pocket tablet, two small keys, and a but-
ton-hook. He missed these articles from his bedroom

on Thursday morning.
The coroner asked Dr. Robarts whether he was aware
that Hatto had an extensive bruise on the right side of
his forehead ?
Dr. Robarts was aware of the fact, but Hatto had
accounted for this by stating that it was caused by a
stick springing up and striking him on the forehead
while he was at work. He had examined certain marks
upon the prisoner's hat, commonly called a " wide-
awake." On the edge, where it turned up, he observed
two spots of about an eighth of an inch each, which
upon close inspection he had no doubt were blood. He
had also examined the outside of the hat, on the crown
oft which he found six. very minute spots, apparently of
blood.

Mr. Goodwin said that on his return home on the
night of the murder he found that Hatto's supper things
had not been put back into the larder. He saw the
meat on the dresser after the fire was extinguished.
That was a very unusual thing, as the deceased always

put them away.
John Bunce, the farm bailiff, was recalled. He said
that when he went round the farm with Hatto on the
night of the murder he told him to go to that part of the
yard next the granary, where there was a ladder. He
old Hatto to stop outside the gate while he (Bunce)
went round the yard. Instead of• doing what he had
been requested, Hatto came and guzzled into the water
somehow or another; it was water which came
directly from the duugheap, two or three yards
from the spot where he had been placed, and
where he had been directed to remain. To get
at the water he had to go through a gate. He
said, " What a mess I have got into, Bunce,"
but witness did not at the time take much notice of him,
but said to him, "I don't like you any the better for
not stopping where I placed you." That was before
the return home of Mr. Goodwin. There was no fall on

the ground there, and he could not have tumbled into

the water accidentally. It was of no depth—not half-way
up his shoes. He was "messing" his hands in the
water. It would have been impossible for him to have

seen whether Hatto fell in the water or not, on account
of the distance between them ; nor did he notice whether
his trousers were very wet or not, as he was a little
" rumpy " with him. As nearly as he could say, 'his

his trousers were wetted nearly up to the knee. Or

the morning after the murder he assisted to move the
body of the deceased from her bed-room into the cow-
house. Hatto was there at the dine. The body was
moved on an old sack, and witness was not aware that
he got any spots of blood on his clothes while assisting
in the removal. Hatto held the leg end, and witness
took the head end, which was the heaviest part, coming
down stairs first. The lower part of the body was
quite charred, and in pieces. Some portions of the
legs were left behind, and they were aftewards fetched
down on another sack. He saw no blood effused from
the body, nor did he think there was any blood on the
sacks. The sacks were left in the cow-house, and had
not since been locked up. •
Mr. Ward, the magistrate, said it would be very im-
portant to ascertain whether Hatto wore the same trou-
sers on the Wednesday as he had worn on the night of
the murder. If lie had not, and the trousers which he
wore on Tuesday night had blood upon them, it would
be very strong evidence, as it could not be said that it
bad come there in conquence of his assisting in the re-
moval of the deceased.
. Mr. Goodwin said he did not wear the trousers on
Wednesday which he wore on Tuesday. Those be wore
on Tuesday were put before the fire to dry.
The Coroner thought it might be important to ascer-
tain what portion of time it would take to consume the
body as found.
Dr. Robarts said it was so disputed a point that he
could not give any positive answer. He believed that
it would take from two and a half to three hours to con-
sume a body to the extent that of the deceased had
been when the jury visited it. But in other cases it
had been different. The body of Mr. Pass was burnt
by his murderer, Cooke, at Leicester, in a large fire,
and it took several hours to consume it.

Mrs. Bunce, the wife of the farm bailiff, was re-called
She stated, in addition to her former evidence, that Hatto
was of a very passionate disposition. She had some words
with him a short time since about a piece of wood, when
he shook his hand in her face. and said, "I wish you was a

man instead of a woman--wouldn't I." Deceased had told

her she had mentioned to Hatto that either he or she must
leav9 the place, for she could not live with him. These
wereher very words. Witness said to Hatto next day,
It is very strange that there was no robbery in the
house, to which he replied, " Oh, but there was." That
was
oi me to on Thursday, about the middle of the day, when he
her house with some greens. When he came
in he said, "I suppose you will have to go up to Mile-
house where
the inquest is held." Witness replied, "If
I have to go I will speak the truth as far as I know."
William Eggleston, a carteru in, the employ of Mr.
Eo
Goodwin, and lodging at
obeer b
s, was here recalled,
whet
and was asked by a juror e saw Hatto when
fire was
he was removing the body after the
put out,
turn the body over, and take some keysfromthe pocket
of the decease ? Witness said he did, and a handker-
chief, which Hatto pulled out at the s
lon' 7litttilme,he
threw on the floor. There were keys
He searched about the bed for the purpose of ascertain.
ing ring.
ing whether there was any more fire. He (witness)
did not know what vitas done with the keys. A little
before ten o'clock on the Thursday night after the mur-
der, Hatto said he wanted to go to the Maidenhead
station, as he expected a parcel there for him, and he
said he would go at the same time to the Mile-house to
get some beer. He went out on his master's horse, and
was absent about an hour. Witness did not observe
whether he had a bundle under his arm or not when
he left the house, but he was in the stable a long time
before he started. He occupied a great deal of time in
going so short a distance. When he returned he said
he had not succeeded in getting any beer, as the people
at the Mile-house had gone to bed.
Mr. Gough, the landlord of the Mile-house, said the
prisoner called at his house on the night in question
about 11 o'clock, but the house having been closed, and
recognising Hatto's voice he would not re-open it.
Inspector Langley said that from inquiries he had
made he had ascertained that the prisoner took his
master's horse from the stable, unknown to him, on
Thursday night, and went to the Maidenhead station to
inquire for a parcel. He had every reason to believe
that there was a shirt belonging to the prisoner missing,
and there might be some other articles not yet found.
Thshirt might have been enclosed in a parcel and
thrown away. Every portion of Mr. Goodwin's pre-
mises been searched ; but having been so long ab-
senta6
he thought Hatto must have gone further than he
and
stated,thus disposed of the things. He (the in-
spector) saw the prisoner for the first time that morn-
ing. He took his
clothes off in order to ascertain whe-
ther there were
any discolourations of the arms, as there
must have been
a fearful struggle, the deceased being a
very strong woman. On
stripping him in the presence
of Mr. Saxton, constableof
Maidenhead, he distinctly
saw eight spots of blood on his hat, two on the brim
He
and six on the crown.had no material evidence to
offer. If the shirt could be found, it could be identified
by the washerwoman.
In reply to a juror,
Mr. Goodwin stated that he had not Paid the deceased
any wages since she came into his service, eight or ten
weeks ago. She had, he belived, money hi the bank at
Maidenhead.
Mr. Symington, superintendent of the Burnham die.
trict police, said he took possession of Hatto's trousers
on Friday morning, and now produced them. On the
Wednesday morning previous, prisoner admitted theme
to be his, and added that they were the trousers he wore
on Tuesday evening—the night of the murder. Witness
asked him how it was they became so wet, and he re-
plied that he been carrying water up into the room were
the fire was found. He did not say he had wetted them
in the yard. By direction of the coroner, he took the
trousers to Dr. Taylor, in London, in order that he
might examine the spots on them, and state whether or
not they were blood. In his presence on Saturday, the
sth of November, Dr. Taylor looked through a magni-
fying glass. The spots were so minute that he could

not tell what they were, and he said he should require ►
three or four days to make his investigation. He had
seen Dr. Taylor again that morning, and he pronounced
that the spots were blood, but thought they were of
some standing—that was, that they had not come there
within a day or two. He said he could not pronounce
whether it was human blood or not. He added that, if
there had been blood upon the trousers, and manure
water had been applied, it would change the colour so
materially that it would be very difficult indeed to tell
the date of the spots, as it would make them look much
older than
.they would otherwise appear. Dr. Taylor
added that the trousers had been dirtied since the spots
of blood had been upon them. Witness proceeded to
say that he had ascertained that Hatto did not eat his
supper on the night of the murder, having given it to
Eggleston, whereas Hatto had told him that he had
eaten it, and afterwards went to bed.
The Coroner here desired that the prisoner should be
introduced. On being brought into the room in custody
of an Eton constable, he looked anxiously round,
and appeared somewhat disturbed by the pressure of the
crowd round the door. The bustle and confusion caused
by his entry having subsided,
The Coioner addressed him as follows :—Moses Hatto
since our last meeting further evidence has been adduced
against you. That which was before taken was read over
to you on the last occasion ; you shall now hear what
ms been produced to-day.
Prisoner---Yes, sir.
(A rush at the door at this moment caused some in-
terruption, and appeared to disconcert the prisoner, who
listened with great apparent anxiety to the observations
addressed to him.)
The clerk here read through the depositions, the pri-
soner watching attentively the various points as he
proceeded. The testimony of the several witnesses hav-
ing been gone through,
The Coroner said—lt is my duty to caution you now,
as I have already previously done, and to tell you that
you are not bound to say anything. Whatever you do
say will be taken down in writing, and will be given in
evidence against you at your trial. You have heard
the depositions taken before, and also those taken to-
day, and I ask you now whether you have anything to
say?
Prisoner—l did not tell that carter that I was com-
ing here for a parcel on Thursday night. (This was in
allusion to a mistake in Eggleston's evidence, rectified
by Inspector Langley's deposition.)
Coroner— We are not going into the matter now.
What do you say about the murder ?
Prisoner—Well, I can say that I am innocent
from" it.

Coroner—Have you anything more to say ?
Prisoner—No, sir ; I don't know that I have any-
thing more to say ?
Coroner—Don't know. Do you mean that: you have
nothing more to say ?
Prisoner—No, sir ; I have not anything more to say.
The prisoner here signed his declaration with a firm
hand, and withdrew in custody.
The Coroner then proceeded to sum up. He said—l
shall not go again into the disgusting details of the
fearful crime, but shall content myself with making such
remarks as the evidence suggests, so far as it implicates •
the prisoner in custody, at the same time reminding you '
that no part of it appears to criminate any one else.
You find, gentlemen, that Mr. Goodwin, the respect-
able occupier of the house wherein the murder was com-
mitted, had left his home between six and seven on
Tuesday evening, for the purpose of visiting his rela-
tions at Langley, and there it has been proved he re-
mained from half-past six till a quarter to 11—the dis-
tance seems to be about half an hour's ride—and he
reached home about half-past 11. He entered by the
north door of the house by a latch key that was left
on the latch ; the opposite or south door was also found
on the latch ; which was usually bolted at bed-time.
You have heard that it was Mr. Goodwin who first
gave the alarm on his reti?rn home, having found that
there was a fire in deceased's bed-room, which was ex-
tinguished by Hatto and the farm labourers. The
instrument of death seems to have been a poker, which
was broken just above the wider part, and was found
in the room of the deceased with human hair upon it,
and identified as the one she had in her hand the
day before, taken from Mr. Goodwin's room.
Now, gentlemen, let me call your particular atten-
tion to the passage-door by which you enter the
kitchen—there is found the deceased's tooth, a hair-
pin, much blood, and a blow on the door post as if
made by a blunt instrument like a poker. If the
nstrument by which the blow was given was the
poker, the assassin must have gone into the deceased's
bed-room to get the poker, and if the fatal blow took
place in the passage, then the body must have been car-
ed up stairs (blood being traced from the passage-door
to the bed-room), or it might have been that a struggle
first took place in the bed-room, and she might have
run down stairs to give the alarm, and there received a
blow which disabled her from opening the passage-door,
and then, returning to the bed-room, and being fol-
lowed, the fatal blow must have been given there. But,
either way, there must have been blows and loud
screaming at the passage-door, which must have been
heard in the kitchen where Hatto was waiting for Mr.
Goodwin or up stairs in her bed-room. No doubt the
body was set fire to by the perpetrator of the horrid
deed, and it might have been the person's intention to
burn the house too, to avoid detection. The doctor's
evidence points out to you a large smearing of blood, as
if the body had been dragged from the entrance of the
room to the spot where it was found. Then, gentlemen,
look again. As the deceased left Bunce's cottage near
or about nine, and as the inmates of that cottage were
all in bed soon after, that fact must have been known
to any person about the premises. Soon after, or about
that time, it is [probable the tragedy commenced,
for the body could not have been so much consumed
and charred in a much less time than two or three
hours. I observed a sprinkling of blood on the facing
of the door-post on the side of the door next to the
kitchen. Hatto told Mr. Goodwin he thought some one
had been about the place. Hatto also said he heard a
rumbling noise against the door, about a quarter before
11, whilst in his bed-room, that he then laid down for a
quarter of an hour, and afterwards hearing the dog bark
he got up. He told Bunce that he heard a noise in the
house, and was not satisfied ; but if there were any
noise in the house it must have been. before 11, and
must, I submit to you, have been heard by Hatto. It
is remarkable that he gave no alarm till the dogs had
barked, when the body was partly consumed. It is
also a remarkable circumstance that when Bunce told
Hatto to go to a gate on the other side of the yard,
while he watched at the entrance gate, that Hatto had
left his post, and got his trousers wet and dirty. I
think now it becomes important to refer to Mrs. Bunce's
evidence. You know, gentlemen, that her cottage is
only a few yards from Mr. Goodwin's residence.
Between eight and nine the deceased was in Bunce's
house. She remained there about a quarter of an
hour, and then left to get (as she said) Hatto's
supper, and told Mrs. Bunce that as soon as she
had done she should go to bed or sit in her own
ae are
room, as Hatto's conversation was so " indiffer-
ent" that she could not, and would not, sit with
allurniigttueodrontheeat
whathe htandosewwoorrddss
were.with
bheimr,.butHtto
, we
Hatto says "he came out of the house • with the woman
who was murdered, when she went to Bunce's cottage
;
open,
it as the back door leading into the house was
it might have been then entered." You don't hear that
any one else was about the premises. Now, what are
the suspicious circumstances against Hatto ? First,
after getting into the water in the farmyard, he washes
his trousers, assigning as a reason that he had got into
the water ; upon those trousers, which were worn by
him on the night of the murder, are found spots of blood.
secondly, when he was up stairs, after the fire was ex-
tinguished, he was seen to tilt water on the floor, near
to the deceased's bedroom door, on some blood, and rub
it with his hand. Again, what was his conduct after
Mr. Goodwin came home, and before the murder was
discovered ? After he had taken Mr. Goodwin's horse
to the stable, Hatto returned to the kitchen, where he
was sitting when Mr. Goodwin came home ; and on that
gentleman's second examination, he told you that, when
lie had opened the passage door to get a light, Hatto,
before he had groomed the horse, came back into the
kitchen making a humming noise. Hatto then asked
Mr. Goodwin if he had seen anything wrong or words to
hat effect. Then Mr. Goodwin had not been up stairs.
You recollect that it is in evidence that Coker, the
farmer's boy, slept with Hatto on the Wednesday, when
Hatto said he hoped he should have a better night than
he had had the night before, and for the first two hours
of that night he was so restless that the lad could not
get to sleep. The next night Mr. Goodwin ordered two
other men to sleep with him. Mr. Goodwin has lost
trweoz hisaz?rs and a ring, and several other small articles
bed-room. I don't think much importance
attaches to this, as he did not miss them till
and a great many
optersons had been in the house to visit
the melancholy s
sexier has given all . It does not appear that the pri-
which may lead toythexeplda.nation, or disclosed any thing
this horrd deed. The 'seoverY
of the perpetrator of
fact for your last,consideration .but not the least important
found cecure when Mr. Goodwin that. the premises were
only exception that. the south door came home, with the
and not bolted as usual, so that theon, the. latch only, •
murderer might

have gone out that way and pulled the door to. The
deed would, therefore, seem tolave been done by some
one conversant with the premises. Now, gentlemen,
these are the points of suspicion that bear upon the pri-
soner Hatto, and I should remark to you that, though
there may not be direct evidence against a person sus-
pected (and you must know from experience how difficult
that is to be got at), that many a person has been con-
victed on circumstantial evidence only, and that this
kind of evidence is sometimes most to be relied on ; as
it is possible that the testimony of only one person to
the fact sometimes is faulty, whilst circumstantial
evidence is like a chain, linked together and difficult to
be broken. You must, therefore, now lay your heads
together, and say whether the circumstances I liave]par-
ticularly adverted to, and the whole of the evidence
given, will warrant you in thinking there is sufficient to
put the prisoner to his trial, bearing in mind that this
is only a preliminary inquiry, and that, if you pronounce
a verdict of guilty, it does not follow that conviction
may ultimately take place. If, on the contrary, you
are of opinion that there is not sufficient evidence to put
the man on his trial elsewhere, then your verdict will be
one of wilful murder against some person or persons un-
known. I beg that you will discard from your minds
all that you have read and heard elsewhere with refer-
ence to this matter. It has been stated in the news-
papers that I said there was no legal evidence. I said
no such thing. I said there was no direct evidence, and
I say now that everything you have heard, taken to-
gether, is evidence in this case. I now leave the matter
in your hands.
The room was then cleared, and after a lapse of about
ten minutes, on the court being re-opened,
The foreman announced that the jury were unanimous
finding a verdict of " Wilful murder against Moses
Hatto."

The verdict appeared to have been anticipated by the
majority of those present, and it was stated that the
prisoner manifested no surprise on the fact being com-
municated to him.

The usual warrant of committal having been prepared
by Mr. Chearsley, Hatto was conveyed last night, in
custody of Superintendents Symington and Thomas, to
Aylesbury Gaol, there to await .his trial at the ensuing
assizes.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—Nov. 8.

SCHULTZ V. LEIDEMAN.-THE COAL TRADE OF NEWCASTLE,

The plaintiff in this case is the captain of a vessel
called the Triton, which was chartered by the defendant
to carry a cargo of coals from Newcastle. It happened,
however, that some delay took place, and the ship was
detained in the Tyne. Upon this state of facts the
plaintiff commenced an action to recover damages for
the detention ; and in the County Court of Newcastle he
recovered 501. The defendant, however, was not satis-
fied with this result, and he appealed to this court upon
the ground that the judge below had been guilty of mis:
direction. The point, involved in the appeal was said to
be of very great importance to persons engaged in the
coal trade of Newcastle.

Mr. Bovill appeared for the appellant, and Mr. Udall
for the respondent.
Mr. Bovill said he should only call the attention of the
court to two of the questions raised upon the case which
had been sent up, viz., whether the judge of the county
court was right in rejecting certain evidence ; and
whether his construction of the terms of a charter party
was correct. The learned counsel stated that in the
Tyne there had been for some time great contests as to
the loading of vessels, and it ultimately became neces-
sary to pass an act of Parliament to regulate the turns
of vessels loading in the Tyne ; that act being the 8 and
9 Vict., cap. 73. Although, however, there was a sta-
tutory regulation as to the loading of coals, this does not
affect coke, the loading of which article is regulated by
the custom of the port. By the 11th section of this act,
the "fitters" are to keep four lists—one, containing ves-
sels for foreign parts ; two, home vessels ; three, those
to be loaded by spouts ; and four, those to be loaded
from barges ; and the 12th section forbids vessels to he
entered until they are within two miles of Tynemouth,
and provides that each-master shall take cargo from the
place, and in the manner, and the same kind of coals for
which he has entered. The charter party now in ques-
tion was dated the 11th January, 1853, and by it the
defendant chartered the Triton, which was stated to be
then in Landon, and ready to cave for the Tyne, and on
her arrival there she was ready forthwith "in regular
turns of loading, to take on board a quantity of coals
and coke. The body of this document was in print, but
it was important to notice that the printed word " turn"
had been altered by the pen to " turns." The kind of
coals and coke to be shipped was to be left to the discretion
of the charterer, but it was provided that he should not
load higher up than at a place called Bowden. The
judge of the county court held that the term " turns of
loading " meant that coals should be put on board first,
and coke afterwards ; and he was of opinion that there
was no ambiguity about the meaning of the term, and he
refused to receive any evidence to explain the custom of
the trade as to " turns." It frequently happened that
vessels were kept in the Tyne for a month, and if the
decision in the county court were correct, the conse-
quence would be that the charterers would be liable to
pay enormous amounts for detention. The Triton left
London on the 19th, of January, arrived:at Newcastle on
the 25th, and was entered on the 26th. The coals had
been waiting for her from the 20th of January, but it
was not until the 3rd February that she was ready to
take them on board. Three or four days after the date
of the charter party, she was entered on the coke.list of
a particular colliery, and when she arrived there were
only two vessels on that coke list, so that but for the
delay in her getting ready she might have taken in both
coals and coke at once. But having delayed to take the
coals until the 3rd February, it was found when she
went for her coke that a vessel, named Fourteen, was
in course of loading. Before her loading was finished,
the frost and snow prevented the coke being brought
from the colliery, and so she did not receive the whole
of her cargo until the 3d of March ; and the Triton was
obliged to wait until after that time. The plaintiff pro-
tested against this, and after some negociation the pre-
sent action was brought to recover damages for the
delay. The plaintiff contended at the trial that the
Coals Act did not apply to coke, and that as to the last
named article the custom was, that it should be put on
board in a reasonable time. The lefendant then offered
to prove that the custom in the Tyne was to wait the
turn, as the Triton had waited, but this evidence the
judge rejected, and then directed the jury that the cargo
should have been put on board in a reasonable time,
and that it was not sufficient that she bad taken her
turn. This ruling the learned judge adhered to, not-
withstanding he was referred to the case of Robertson v.
Jackson, 2 Q. 8., 412. which it was submitted was pre-
cisely in point. In that case the charter party was that
a person should take coals from Algiers, for the French
marine service, and there deliver them "in turn," and
the court admitted evidence that the phrase "in turn "
had acquired a special meaning. The- learned counsel
contended upon the basis of this decision, that there
was nothing to warrant the ruling in the court below,
which was clearly wrong in law.
Mr. Udall, for the respondent, addressed the court
shortly, in support of the decision in the court below.
The Chief Justice said that this appeal was in the na-
ture of an application for a new trial for misdirection,
and not to enter a verdict or a non-suit. He was of
opinion that the appeal should be allowed, and the action
tried again ; and for that purpose it was only necessary
to advert to what was really the only question in the
cause, without reference to what might ultimately be the
liabilities of the parties. The simple point was, whether
the judge was right or wrong in rejecting the parole evi-
dence, and in constituing the charter party. He thought
that he was wrong. The judge below had read the char-
ter party as meaning that the coal was to be first put on
board, and the coke afterwards ; and if that was the
meaning, he was of opinion that the vessel was to be
loaded in a reasonable time. When there was an act of
Parliament regulating the loading of coals, and wl}en it
was known that the Tyne was full of vessels hurrying to
get cargoes, there was enough probability of ambiguity
to let in evidence to show the meaning of the words "in
turns," and that evidence ought to have been admitted.
The case was very similar, in his opinion, to that of
" Robertson v. Jackson," and he thought the judge of
the County Court was mistaken, and there should be a
new trial.

Appeal allowed with costs.
Sittings at Nisi Prius in Middlesex.
(Before Mr. Justice Cresswell and a Common Jury,

BARTON V. TRUSCOTT.

This was an action to recover 761. 135., the balance of
an account for advertising the Ardennes Mining Com-
pany.
It appeared from the statement of counsel, that the
plaintiffs carry on business under the firm of Abbot, Bar-
ton, and Co., as advertising agents in Wellington-street
North, and that the defendant is a mining agent in Three
Kings'-court, Lombard-street.
After some communication with Mr. Horniman, the
plaintiff's agent, they received in the handwriting of the
defendant, early in the present year an order to advertise
the mining
company in certain newspapers, and subse-
quently they received, on account a cheque signed by
the defendant. After this, Mr. Watt, the secretary,
wrote to the plaintiffs another order for advertisements,
and directed them to chayge the amount to the de-
fendant.
Witnesses were called on behalf of the plaintiffs, but
they failed to make out the case, and the consequence
was that a nonsuit was entered.

iltieffoorrea
dDivr.orLeue,shbiyngtreoaano)nv.olB.
cruelty
and
CONSISTORY COURT, No
Ciocci V. moor.
This was a a
adultery, brought by Mrs. Jemima Mary
rt(
Bacon Ciocci
against Raphael Ciocci. The parties were married at
Brighton on the 15th January, and they separated on
the following 14th of March. The defendant -was a
teacher of languages at Brighton, where it was asserted
he had an engagement to teach at 20 ladies' schools.
He had also been employed to translate "Jewell's
Apology" into Italian by the Society for the Promotion
of Christian Knowledge, and had since 1848 been an
active member, from his own statement, of the Female
Aid Society, established in Red Lion-square. • At the
time of his marriage he was about 27 years of age, while
his wife, then Miss Frank, was considerably older, and
was possessed of a fortune amounting to 40,0001. The
charge of cruelty was almost entirely grounded upon the
fact set forth in the libel, that Mr. Cioeci, knowing
himself to be affected with syphilitic &tome, didt, in

spite of warning, contract the marriage, and impart to
Mrs. Ciocci the disease in question, whereby she was
reduced to a state of great debility. It was also alleged
that ever since the marriage the defendant had been in the
habit of consorting with prostitutes both in Brighton and
London, and had been constantly seen in their society. That
on or about July 29, 1851, Mr. Ciocci, then living at

_ .
No. 8, Clarence-square, Brighton, frequented brothels,
where he had adulterous intercourse with an abandoned

person named Polly Miller, and divers other prostitutes.
He was further alleged to have habitually committed
adultery with his cook, named Emma Brown, and that
afterwards in London on the 2nd Nov., 1852, he pur-
sued a similar course of conduct with a person named
Fanny or Ellen Alexander. In answer to the libel
given in on behalf of the wife, Mr. Ciocci had given in
an allegation setting forth that so far from treating his
wife with neglect, she had experienced at his hands the
most uniform tenderness, and he had done everything in
his power to promote her comfort and happiness. His
wife had, two months after marriage, gone to Cuckfield,
in Sussex, as she informed him, for the benefit of her
health, but instead of returning to her husband, she sig-
nified her intention of never living with him again.
From that time she had carefully concealed her resi-
dence, • and Mr. Ciocci •had never heard from her for
a year and a half, when he was served with a cita-
tion to appear in the Consistory Court. It further alleged
that he (Mr. Ciocci) was a member of the Society
for the Protention of Females, in Red Lion-square,
that he had indeed spoken to Fanny. Alexander,
but that in so accosting her he had merely en-
deavoured to persaade her to alter her course of life,
and that it was altogether untrue that he on that
occasion, or at any other time, took indecent liberties
with her. The defendant alleged, that in August, 1852,
he saw a countryman of his named Guateleta (who at
the time was a candidate for the office of minister of the
Italian Protestant Church, in Newman-street,) convers-
ing with the female in question, and, as he suspected fOr
an improper purpose. He, therefore, though with much
reluctance, represented this to the Rev. J. D. Glennie
and Mr. Burgess, who were concerned in the appoint.
ment in question. He alleged, that on the 3d of Novem-
ber, 1852, he procured an interview with the girl Alex-
ander, and, after putting, questions to her, took her in a
cab to the police station, in Rochester-row for the pur-
pose of having her sworn to the truth of the answers
which she had given relative to the illicit intercourse
between her and Guateleta; that this object was frus-
trated by the magistrate refusing to interfere in any way
in the matter ; and that he then took the girl in the
cab as fanas it went her way, whilst he returned to his
own lodgings alone.
Dr. R. Phillimore, on behalf of Mrs. Ciocci, con-
tended that the two charges before the Court were in-sub-
stance proved, and that, in particular, adultery of a
most gross and sensual kind was clearly established by
unimpeachable evidence. The learned advocate sub-
mitted it was fully proved that Mr. Ciocci had married

his wife when he was in a state of disease, and that
shortly after such marriage the victim of his cruelty had
suffered in body in the manner described in the evidence.
The defendant was an Italian, who after leaving his
country and renouncing his faith had become a Pro-
testant. His friendship with Dr. Achilli appeared to
have been struck out in the plea, but it came out again
in the interrogatories put to the witnesses, and it seemed
that Achilli, Guateleta and Ciocci resided together.
Some of the interrogatories went to show that Ciocci
pretended he was subjected to persecution, owing to his
having renounced the Roman Catholic faith. One of the
witnesses was a Miss Anna Chinnery, who deposed in
answer to various questions, that she had no knowledge
whatever of any Roman Catholic cardinal, or bishop, or
priest having been in communication with 'Mrs. Ciocci.
It was evident from this, that the suggestion on the
part of the husband was, that the suit could be nothing
less than a Popish plot against him, only, unfortunately
for his case, there was no imputation that the medical
witnesses were under the command of any priest or car-
dinal. The first witness to prove adultery was a ser-
vant of No. 3, Shaftesbury-crescent, Pimlico, named
Jane Legg, who stated that Ciocci called at the house
one Sunday, when her master and mistress were out,
and on learning that fact, seized hold of her, and tried
to force her into the parlour, but desisted upon being
told that a person named Augusteni was in the house.
She further deposed, that after this he used to joke her
and ask her to meet hinr by appointment. It appeared
that she had had an illegitimate child, and had said she
was unable to say who was the father of it, having had
connexion, as she asserted, with both Achilli and the
person named Augustini. The nature of the defence set
up by Ciocci was, that he was the most persecuted man
in the universe ; that he was a holy man and a saint
whose vocation it was to redeem prostitutes. He pro-
fessed the purest and loftiest motives, and it was urged,
nothing could be more hard than that this exemplary
Christian, who ought almost to have a halo round his
head wherever he went, should be charged with the very
act which his whole life was spent in endeavouring to
prevent. By what miracle Mr: Ciocci had contracted
the disease in question, did not yet appear, and the court
would see how this would be reconciled with his extreme
piety, and the learned advocate on the other side. The
evidence of Charlotte Thomas went to prove, that she
had never heard of the Female Aid Society, although
she knew Ciocci, and was not aware he was an agent
of that society, but she refused to answer the question
as to whether he had sexual intercourse with her. The
learned Advocate then referred to the evidence of seve-
ral other witnesses, the result of whose testimony, he
submitted, fully proved the charge of adultery. In con-
clusion he called upon the court to pronounce for the
divorce.
Dr. Deane followed on the same side.
Dr. Addams appeared for Mr. Ciocci. He said the
case was of such a nature that he should ask the Court
to dismiss the case, with a sentence condemning the
wife in the costs. It was assumed by the other side
that Mr. Ciocci had been a Roman Catholic, and had
become a Protestant. There was no evidence in the
case to show this ; but even if there were, was that to
subject a man to proceedings in an ecclesiastical court,
and to subject him to be loaded with discredit and con-
tumely. It was also alleged he was associated with Dr.
Achill'. Why, Dr. Achilli stood justified by a jury of
his own country as a person not open to the imputation
which had been made upon him, and the use of Dr.
Achilli's name, therefore, was merely a handle to make
a reflection upon the character of Ciocci. He contended
that Mrs. Ciocci had entered into the marriage, in
common parlance, with her eyes open, and that
her husband had acted most generously in the
matter, by abstaining from endeavouring to find
her out after she had left him in the manner described.
It was true that she was possessed of independent pro-
perty settled upon herself, but Ciocci, had he felt dis-
posed to seek her out would certainly have been entitled
to share her income, so far as living in the same house
and other general expenses went. In proof of the
manner in which he had behaved towards his wife, the
learned counsel read the following letter :--
"April 22, 1851.
Dear Wife,—The publicity which you have
been pleased to give to our affair, necessarily obliges me
to put forth my defence, that I may not also lose, besides
the domestic happiness I expected, my honour, which is
dearer to me than anything, much more than my in-
terests which have been injured by your conduct, and are
in danger of becoming more injured. But can my de-
fence be pleasant and honourable to you, especially after
I have been obliged to seek among the articles you left
behind for the cause of your withdrawal ? I have disco-
vered but too clearly what these causes have been. If you
assert that you are unhappy, with, how much greater
reason may I not say that you have made me very un-
happy. You have taken a foolish step without foresee-
ing its consequences. If I did not desire your return—
(but after a satisfactory explanation, and a fresh agree-
ment, which should prevent the renewal of similar
rashness), but with the agreement of finding in you a
gentle and reasonable companion, without intercourse
with dangerous friends (who are only friends in name,
and who have been the principal cause of our present
unhappiness)—l would not write to you. The present
state of things cannot last—it mtist have an end. Take.
counsel with your former declarations and promises,'
with your reason, and with your heart, and if they
tell you (as I think they will) that duty calls you home
again, come, and I will do all I can for your happiness,
both of us remembering, however, that perfect happiness
is not for earth ; that those who are called happy-
have often need of the virtue of resignation. If you per-
sist in a resolution which is not yours, but with which
you have been maliciously inspired, the public shall hear
my voice also, and so much the louder, because I have
warned you of it. You know that the law would assist
me, and you also know that when I have entered upon
a course I am accustomed to persevere in it. I send this
letter through your lawyer, and this act almost of
humiliation best shows to you the state of my mind.
I do not know your direction. *ls this right ? Is it
proper and kind ? Perhaps you think I should avail
-myself of the right granted me by law to come and take
you by force oat of your concealment. Your will joined
you to me, and I am neither so foolish nor so brutal, as
to wish for a violent reunion. I shall wait your definite
resolution till next Saturday. I hope your health is
perfectly restored, and believe me now as ever, your
affectionate husband. "R. Ciocci."
He contended, the statement that the wife had contracted
a disease, was totally unfounded, the only medical man
called to give testimony as to her health having been of
opinion that her illness arose from general weakness of
the system. That part of the case, then, was an utter
failure. As to the charge that Ciocci. himself had con-
tracted the disease, he (Dr. Adams) designated the evi-
dence of the medical men on this point as most uncandid.
It might be that Ciocci himself had been suffering from
the disease in question at some early period of his life,
and that some slight signs of it were still apparent ; but
there was no testimony to prove that it had been con-
tracted lately, and he (the learned Advocate) must con-
fess that his ideas of morality did not carry him to such
a point, that he would be ready to affix enduring stigma
on the character of a man because he had been led into
an act of imprudence in his youth, and in an unguarded
moment.
The further hearing of the case was then adjourned'
until to day.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY—Nov. 8.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Fane.)

IN RE BARTON.-THE ' " ROSEMARY BRANCH" GARDENS,

This was the certificate meeting in the case of W. Bar-
ton, described as a licensed victualler, of Islington. The
bankrupt had kept the Rosemary Branch Gardens, a.
place appropriated to al fresco amusements. The ac•
counts, prepared by Mr. Thomas, extended over a twelve-
month prior to the 12th August last, commencing with
a deficiency of 2.4291. • • The sum owing to creditors was
'7,169/. ; assets put down at 7001. in property. The pro-
fits were stated at 8501; ; trade expences, 1,1221. ; per-
sonal ditto, 175/. ; losses, 3,593 t; The last item was
'thus explained by the bankrupt :--4" Lost by fire at the
Rosemary Branch Tavern, Islington, when the circus
and stabling receali erected by me-at an estimated cost

of 1,0001. was entirely consumed, together with two
horses, and all the harness, stable utensils, and proper-
ties of the circus, which cost at least 500/.-1,5001.
Estimated depreciation in the value of fixtures, fittings, 1
&c., at the Rosemary Branch Tavern, estimated to have
cost me 3,0591., but which are not estimated to realise 1
under the bankruptcy more than 1,0001."
Mr. Bagley, for the assignees, who were large credi-
tors, stated that they had been very favourable to the
bankrupt all along, but from some circumstances which
had come to their knowledge within the last 48 hours
they were induced to ask that the consideration of the
certificate might be adjourned until inquiry should be
made into the new features of the case. It was repre-
sented to the assignees that property had been concealed,
and that a marriage settlement existed, of which the
bankrupt had given no account.
Mr. La wrance, for the bankrupt, said he should not
oppose the application for adjournment.
After a short examination of the bankrupt, the fur-
ther hearing of the case was adjourned for six weeks.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd.)
IN RE ROBERT BRENNAND.

The bankrupt, of Addle-street, warehouseman, applied
for his certificate, owing to creditors 5,0311., besides
8471. of liabilities. The assets were returned at 461. in
good debts ; .property, 4051. The profits had been 6481.;
law charges, 3461. ; trade expenses, 4681. ; losses, 2261.;
house and personal expenses, 295/. ; by deficiency, 3,439/.
Mr. Linklater opposed, for the assignees, on the
ground that the bankrupt had concealed the true state
of his affairs, by neglecting to enter into the books cer-
tain consignments which he had received from Messrs.
Maunder. The debts were large, upwards of 5,0001.,
while the assets had realised little more than 5001.
The bankrupt had consigned some goods to Corfu, on
which he stated there would be a large profit. The
case had been adjourned three months in consequence ;
and it now appeared that, instead of a profit, there would
be a loss. _ _ _

Mr. Lawrance, for the bankrupt, contended that the
discrepancies complained of had been explained at the
examination meeting. Messrs. Maunder had been in
the habit of consigning to him to the amount of 4,0001.
a year. He had made a composition in March, 1852 ;
but, as occurred in nine cases out of ten, he was un-
able to carry it out, and was obliged to come to this
court. The law charges, which were apparently large,
had arisen out of the attempt at arrangement.
His Honour thought the omissions attributable ra-
ther to carelessness than to fraud. Considering that
nine months. had elapsed since the bankruptcy, the jus-
tice of the case would be met by a short suspension—
four months from that date ; the certificate, when
granted, to be of the second class, with protection in the
meantime.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURTI---Nov. 8.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Murphy.)
IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD BAYLEY-BREACH OF

TRUST.

This insolvent, a ship and insurance agent in•Tower-
street, appeared for judgment. Mr. Cooke opposed for
Messrs. Bailey, iron merchants of Liverpool.
The complaint in this case, which was originally beard
in September, was that the insolvent had contracted a
debt with Messrs. Bailey by means of a breach of trust.
Messrs. Bailey were in the habit of consigning goods to
him, and. with. them he received bills of lading. It ap-
peared that he wanted to raise money on a bill of ex-
change, and deposited a bill of lading of Messrs. Bai-
ley's goods as collateral security, and the point was
whether it was a pledging under the 5 and 6 Viet., cap.
39, by which it became a transportable offence. It was
denied that" it was a pledging as contemplated by the act,
Mr. Commissioner Murphy was clearly of opinion that
the insolvent had committed a breach of trust in the
manner in which he had depoited the bill of lading, and
that the case came within the act of Parliament cited
to him. It was a question which affected the trading
community, Messrs. Bailey had to pay the debt for
which the bill of lading was deposited, and were now
creditors for 1341. There would be a serious judgment.
The case stood over, and the learned Commissioner
now pronounced judgment for twelve calendar months,
at the suit of Messrs. Bailey, for a breach of trust,
whereby the debt had been fraudulently incurred.