The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-07 00:00:00

'it cost them from 20s. to 50s. per annum for the
cleansing of their cesspools.
The Court was then adjourned, after a sitting of
several hours.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.-IVariviek, April 6.
THE QUEEN V. GUTTERIDGE.
(Before Chief Justice WILDE and a Special Jury.)
At the conclusion of Mr. Gutteridge's address last
night he proceeded to call witnesses to establish his alle •
gations with regard to Mr. Hodgson's want of skill in
the tying of the subclavian artery, the wounding of
which, by causing a flow of blood, caused the death of
a patient. The following witnesses were called :
Mr. Wood, sen., surgeon of the Birmingham Hospital.
—I remember an operation upon the subclavian artery
in 1843. Mr. Hodgson and Mr. Vaux were present. I
performed the first part of the operation and Mr. Hodg-
son the latter I should consider that the most irnpor•
tint part of the operation is in securing the subclavian
artery. Some haemorrhage took place after the vessel
aas tied. The patient expired on the following Thurs-
day. By dissection I discovered (in my opinion) death
was caased by a wound in the subelas Lie vein. I know
the present Bishop of Manchester, and recollect
calling upon him by request of the late W.
Balker. The subject of conversation was relative
to the operation. I told the Rev. Mr. Lee of the ope
ration, and the cause of death was from a wound in the
subclavian artery, accompanied by ltemorrhage. W.
Balker was present. lam not sure that I told Mr. Lee
who
made the wound, but it was caused during the latter
part of the operation. I understood that Mr. Barker
was engaged to prepare the proceedings of the meeting
or the General Hospital for publication, and Mr. Lee.
My opinion has always been the same as to the wound,
and I believe that I stated it to Mr. Lee. I was pre-
sent at the annual meeting in Sept. ber, 1844, and I
recollect the operation being
ttohoeksubject '9f discussion.
The Bishop of Manchester took romiceot part in
that discussion. I have seen the reportP where letters
of Mr. Clarkson and Mr.
the meeting by Mr. Lee. EThreaprpeeaorr,t as produced at
in.] The first three or four lines.P of pwaagse 38 are
not correct. It was a large artery. lt. was not merely
s
twig, but a trunk; page 39. " During the dressing.'
e. tsee book]. I think that is coorrect, as I
fthinki
it was considerably more than":w
sponged the blood up, which was not a ounces, or
gradual oozing,
but it immediately filled up. I remember an psa
being used at the meeting—" two teaspoonsful,' expression
otihoen
best of my recollection. I have seen the paper now
handed me, and saw the drawing at the time of 'the dis-
section (see page 29). I cannot say what I heard from
Mr. Lee, but he did not speak of the information he had
received from me (page 40). I believe you contradicted
him in that part, and I believe you used the words now
read, " I will not allow," i. e., I believe the statement of
Mr. Ledsam to have been correct [handed in].
Cross• examined—To the best of my belief I never
heard Mr. Hodgson's opinion upon the matter till yes-
terday. It was a largo nerve—the part of the inedicus
nerve. I should think six. teaspoonsful of blood would
be an ounce. ,F The slip was about three-quarters of an
inch long. Mr. Gutteridge was not at the operation.
When the second rush of blood came I said to Mr.
Hodgson, " Where does this blood come from ?" He
replied, " I suppose from some vein."
Mr. Gutteridge handed in Swan's plates. of the
nerves, and the subclavian artery was pointed out by
Mr. Wood, and the artery which was included in the
ligature.
Mr. Thomas Green—l am a surgeon in Birmingham,
and have been in practice for twenty years. I remember
the operation at the General Hospital, when the sub
clavian vein was tied. Mr. Hodgson performed the latter
part of the operation.
William James Foster—l am a schoolmaster, and live
at Bewdley. I know the Blue Coat School at Birming-
ham, and was master there for seven years up to Sep-
tember, 1847. I lett in consequence of the opening
being good. I remember a particular Tuesday evening
in January, 1844; and I recollect it in consequence of
waiting upon Mr. Lee to attend a boy named Bayliss,
who was sensible to all about him. The regular clergy-
man of St. Phillips (Mr. Downes) was away, and the
other returned home, a distance of four miles from Bir-
mingham. It was past six when I went to Mr. Lee,
and I went direct to the Free School. I saw Mr. Lee in
the hall at his house. No one was present. I was
struck by Mr. Lee's manner. The unsteadiness of his
walk, and the impertinent manner in which he
spoke to me. My impression at the time was that he
was intoxicated. I delivered to him the message. The
boy being in a dying state, I thought it incumbent on
me to request the attendance of a clergyman at the boy's
bedside. I apologised, stating that the other clergymen
were not in the town. He said he would come; and he
asked me what time my address to the children would
take place. I told him at eight, and he said he would
come and hear me. I then returned to the school, and
Mr. Lee came about seven. I next saw him in the sick
ward, a room unconnected with the house, large, and
capable of containing three beds. When I first went into
the room Mr. Lee and the child only were there; Mr.
Lee was speaking and asking the child questions upon
religious subjects. As I entered he spoke to me, and my
impression still was that be was intoxicated; there was
a strangeness in his appearance to what I had ever seen
upon any preceding occasion, and I had been in the habit
of seeing him frequently. Mr. Lee requested the child
to repeat the confession after him, which he did, but
sometimes he could not hear the whole, and Mr. Lee was
compelled to repeat it. His voice was not distinct, and
had I not have known the words I could not have fol-
lowed. It was much unlike his usual voice, which gene-
rally was very distinct. In my opinion he was intoxi-
cated. He did not read any portion of the Visitation of
the Sick service. Mr. Lee offered up an extempore
prayer, kneeling; part I heard, part was inaudible. The
mother was in the room at the time Mr. Lee entered. I
did not see the mother in the room; the mother was
standing on the stairs. I left, accompanied by Mr. Leo.
There had not been a chapter of the Bible read by him.
I was in advance with a candle, and still I was of opinion
he was not sober. He was slipping or stumbling going
down the stairs, and I was fearful ho might tall. I
raised my arm, but it was not necessary more than in
one instance. Ho did not stumble a second time. I
raised my arm, fearing ho might fall, being impressed
that ho was intoxicated. We went into the matron's
room, and he then went into the dining-room.
My opinion was still unaltered. Mrs. Lee and
the matron were in the room. The supper was
delayed, because I did not wish Mr. Lee to be seen by
the children in the state in which I supposed him to be
in. tie himself asked to go into the room more than
once; and I hoped he would be wearied with waiting,
and not go. He went in, accompanied by Mrs. Lee,
myself, and the matron. There were nearly two hun-
dred children in the room, and four assistants, two
females and two men. Supper not having been cleared
away, he remained till it was; two of the ushers were
near the door entrance—Smart was one. Mr. Lee was
at the top, or what is termed the carving-table, and I
was about to deliver my address, which I had previously
prepared. Mr. Lee stepped up and said, " Mr. Foster
will deliver the address." I had the written discourse
in my hand, and he must have seen it; he then ad-
dressed the children on " our Saviour's first miracle,"
the subject of the day, the changing of water into
wine. I perceived the smell of his breath, and sup•
posed he had been drinking wine. When he addressed
the children, it was not in his usual manner, and
such as to strike me as objectionable. Ile spoke,
probably, twenty minutes, and he then knelt down
while I read the usual prayers. I and the matron ac-
companied Mr. and Mrs. Lee to the door, which was soon
after eight. I know Mr. Griffiths, a solicitor, who was at
that time chairman of the committee. I saw him the next
day, having endeavoured to do so in the morning, but
could not. I went to his office in Waterloo-street, upon
school business, which I had done frequently. I related
the circumstance to that gentleman, as nearly as I now
have done. I told him as chairman of the committee,
and not in his private capacity. I considered by telling
him I had removed all responsibility from my shoulders,
respecting irregularities in the institution. I also reported
it to the Rev. Mr. Downes, who ought to have performed
the duty, had he been in town. I mentioned it to him
the first time he visited the institution, some few days
after. I had conversed with Mr. Griffiths's niece that
time upon the subject. I told Mr. John Brierley Payn,
who was one of the committee.
The witness, in his cross-examination, was fixed in his
opinion that Mr.i Lee was in a state of intoxication upon
the evening alluded to.
This morning the examination of witnesses for the de-
fence was resumed.

Mary Ann Foster, the wile of the gentleman examined
yesterday evening, deposed as follows:—Previous to her
marriage she was matron of the Bluecoat School for ten
years. She recollected a Sunday in June, 1844, when a
boy named Bayliss was ill. He was in an unhappy state
of mind, and required religious consolation. They
knew that the usual clergy connected with the
school were from hone, and they applied to
Mr. Leo to attend. This was about six in the even-
ing, and Mr. Lee, in company with Mrs. Lee, came in
about three-quarters of an hour afterwards. When
witness met Mr. Lee in the hall she observed that his
manner was very different from what it usually was.
She accompanied Mr. Lee from her own parlour
to the sick ward. Mr. Lee, in an imperative manner,
requested witness and
.others immediately to leave the
room. Her impression was that Mr. Lee was intoxi-
cated. She returned to her room, and requested Mr.
Foster to go to Mr. Lee, as, in consequence of the boy's
illness and Mr. Lee's state, she was much alarmed. On
Mr. Lee's return down stairs, he and Mrs. Lee remained
in her parlour until the children had nearly done sup-
per. While he was in the parlour witness observed the
Bishop's manner, land she thought the same of him as
she did when she was up-stain. Their usual supper
hour was between half past seven and eight o'clock, but
on that occasion they delayed it later, in the hope that
Mr. Lee would leave. They were anxious that he should
leave, as they did not wish the children to observe Mr.
Lee's excited and intoxicated appearance. After supper,
although Mr. Foster was prepared to deliver his cus-
tomary address to the children, Mr. Lee undertook the
duty. Witness was within two yards of him. She
observed in him great indistinctness and hesitation,
different to his usual manner. Mrs. Lee looked anxious
and uncomfortable. The manner of Mr. Leo was spoken
of by herself and husband the same evening.
Cross-examined by Mr. WHITEHURST Witness
thought Mr. Lee's intoxication must be observable to
any person of common sense. His discourse wee a good
one; but coming from Mr. Lee it was not an excellent
one. From an ignorant person it would have been ex-
cellent. His language was not so clear and beautiful as
usual.
Charlotte Bayliss resided in Birmingham. Remem-
bered her son being ill. Was with him. [The witness
then corroborated the account of the last witness.] Mr.
Lee ordered them all to leave the room as soon as he
came in. Stood a short time at the top of the stairs—a
very short time. Web at the bottom of the stairs when