The Sun.
London, England, 1860-10-05 00:00:00

a period Of some months, and thus cast a certain

stigma upon the character of one who has previously
borne an unblemished reputation, and whose con-
duct, as far as it has come before us in this matter,

with the exception of one or two facts to which
need not allude at length, is without reproach.
Considering how much curiosity has been exhibited
relative to th is dreadful affair—the anxiety naturally
evinced by everybody connected with the family,
the officious inquiries of those who are merely curi-
ous, and the official investigations of the authorities
—it is remarkable that we should see no appear-
ance, even if we could suppose her to be guilty,
either of a sullen reserve on the one hand, or of an
affected frankness on the other. When so many
persons have expressed opinions as to the modem
which this murder was done and the motives which
suggested it, I am not surprised that the young per-
son at the bar should have followed the general ex-
ample and framed a hypothesis of her own. Ido
not say that there is no material evidence before us
which may hereafter, perhaps with additions, be in
some way or other acted upon. Therefore, the
decision of the magistrates is that, although they
will not commit her for trial, they will bind her
to appear if she should be wanted again.
Sureties to a moderate amount will be required.
Some observations have been made by Mr. Rib-
ton, perhaps not unnaturally, reflecting strongly
upon the mode in which Mr. Slack has conducted

his inquiries. We think it our duty to say that,
judging from what has come before us, we do not
think anything like misconduct can be attributed
to that gentleman.

The decision of the magistrates was received
with some cheering from the part occupied by the
public._..

Mr. Ribton—As far as Mr. Slack personally is
concerned, I did not mean to say anything offen-
sive to him, because I have no doubt he discharged
the painfukluty intrusted to him with ability and
discretion. My remarks applied to the inquiry
itself.

Mr. Dunn denied having put questions to any of
the persons examined by Mr. Slack. He had sim-
ply suggested, on one or two occasions, that such
and such a piece of information could be got from a
particular witness.

The Chairman said that, when he considered the
refusal to allow a plan of the house to be taken
and the locking up of thelpolicemen in the kitchen,
he found it impossible to say that Mr. Kent had
been well advised.
Mr. Edlin remarked that he was instructed by
Mr. Dunn, on the part of Mr. Kent, to afford every
facility to the magistrates and the police in the
prosecution of their inquiries. The police, indeed,
had had the run of the house for weeks. When the
plan was spoken of, Mr. Kent had no information
as to the parties against whom it was- intended to
proceed, and for anything he knew the unjust pro-
secution of his daughter, which had been con-
demned by high legal authority, might have been
followed by some other proceeding equally ground-
less.

The prisonei was then discharged, a verbal bond
being taken from a relative to produce her, if re-
quired, under .a penalty of £lOO.

THE WAKEFIELD POISONING CASE.

WAKEFIELD, OCT. 3.

This morning Emma Stringer, a young woman
about 26 years of age, and her two sisters, Matilda,
about 22, and Abigail Stringer, 16 years of age,
were brought before the magistrates at the Wake-
field Court-house, the elder prisoner charged with
murder of Miss Adamson, by the administration, in
small doses, of arsenic, and the two younger pri-
soners as being accessories.
The magistrates present were Mr. E. Tew (chair-
man), Mr. W. Tew, Mr. Foljambe, and Mr. Barff.
The court was crowded during the proceedings, the
greatest interest being manifested.
Mr. Shaw, barrister, of Wakefield, instructed by
Mr. Fernandez, appeared to prosecute, and Mr.
Wheelhouse, barrister, of Leeds, instructed by Mr.
Stringer, for the defence.
On the prisoners being called up Mr. Shaw said
that, after reading the whole of the evidence which
had been taken, the prosebution had come to the
conclusion that there was no case against the two
younger sisters, and they were discharged on un-
dertaking to appear if called on. Emma Stringer
was then placed at the bar, and formally charged
with the murder.

Mr. Shaw, in opening the case, called the attention
of the Court to the fact that Mr. Waddington, the
surgeon who attended Miss Adamson for some
years before the prisoner went to live with Miss
Adamson, was not called in during the repeated ill-
nesses of the deceased, and which illness the evi-
dence of the witnesses would prove exhibited all
the symptoms of poisoning, such as vomiting and
purging, and that Mr. Hirst, the medical attendant
of Emma Stringer, was only called in a short time
before the death of the deceased. The medical tes-
timony of the analyzation of the contents of the
stomach and viscera showed distinctly that the de-
ceased had been poisoned a short time before she
died, and not only that, but the appearance of the
intestines and other parts of the body was conclu-
sive as to the fact that small doses of poison had
been administered at intervals during two or three
years. Having proved that the old lady was
poisoned, he should connect the prisoner with the
poisoning by proving that she alone prepared the
food of the deceased, and a variety of other circum-
stances indicative of the motives which actuated
the prisoner. He would also mention the fact that
the deceased kept a medicine chest, but no arsenic
had been fcund in it ; so that it was extremely im-
probable that the- old lady had poisoned herself,
and there was the additional fact that a packet of
powder alleged to be arsenic was found in the
kitchen.

Dr. E. Waddington, of Wakefield, deposed that
he was formerly the medical attendant of Miss
Adamson, and after her death he made a post mor-
tem examination of the body. He saw. Dr. Nun-
neley take away a portion of the contents of the
body for analyzation.

Cross•examined by Mr. Wheelhouse—l have my
degree of M.D. from the Royal College of Physi-
cians in Edinburgh, not from the University. Some
time before portions of the brain, the heart, the
liver and_the diaphragm were taken away by Dr.
Nunneley, I had myself analyzed a portion of the
contents of the viscera for the discovery of
arsenic, and I then discovered none. lam a
member of the College of Surgeon's, in Lincoln's-
inn•fields, London. It is not more than the duty
of a surgeon to make analytical examinations than
that of a physician, but it is more his duty to make a
post mortem, to do the work of the knife. If arsenic
had been given in small doses for some time, I should
not have expected to find a residium of arsenic in
that portion of the stomach which I examined, or
in any portion of the stomach, but I should have
expected to find traces. I employed Reinkhe's tests
and the liquid tests. I found by Reinkhe's test a
suspicious appearance on the copper, but I would
not undertake to swear it was arsenic. I did not use
Marsh's test, because I could not rely upon my
zinc being pure, and it might contain arsenic itself
in an insoluble form. I did not boil the copper in
muriatic acid before using it to test the presence of
poison, but rubbed it bright and made it perfectly
clean. I met Dr. Nunneley at my own house some
time in September; the day the body was exhumed.
This was on the 20th of September, and it was the
second time the body had been taken up. The coffin
was taken into the chapel of the cemetery, and the
lid taken off. The body had been sewn up with a
steel needle after the post mortem examination.
Mr. Nunneley took away, from the body what he
wanted for an analysis. I did not see him make the
analysis, and I had no orders for interfering with
any analysis that he might make. I did not reserve
any portion of the viscera when Mr. Nunneley took
away a portion of the region of the stomach. I had
reserved a jar of a portion of the stomach which I
had analysed; that jar was analysed by Mr. Nunne-
ley, and I myself examined it. I saw no arsenic.
We found traces on the metal.

By the Chairman—We found suspicious appear-
ances on the metal. I staid till nearly 10 o'clock on
Satarday night, and I resumed it on Sunday. We
found suspicious traces on the copper.
Mr. T. Nunneley said—On the 19th September
last I was present at the exhumation of the body of
the late Miss Frances Adamson. I assisted in open-
ing the coffin. The body had apparently lain in the
grave some time and was partially decomposed.
The body had been previously opened as far as the
abdomen was concerned. The greater portion of
the stomach had been removed with a portion of
the liver and the right kidney. There was no effu-
sion or adfiesion of any of the parts together.
There was no sign of disease in the parts I saw.
The intestines were empty, with the exception of
about half an ounce of solid matter. The state of
the peritonmal surface was quite healthful ; the
bladder was quite contracted. The intestines were
very little changed. I took away some portions of
the body. I removed nearly the whole of the vis-
cera, with the chest and the brain. I subsequently
made an analysis of the whole of the'parts. I found
the lining surface of the gullet and a portion of the
membrane thickened and covered with mucus. On
one portion was a white thick patch.
Mr. Nunneley was proceeding with his evidence
when our parcel was despatched.

OCTOBER 4.

The prisoner Emma Stringer, charged with hav-
ing caused the death of her mistress, at Aggbrigg,
by the administration of arsenic in small doses, was
again brought before the county magistrates of the
West Riding this morning.
The prisoner looked pale and dejected, and a
marked change seemed to km taken Flue m he