The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-10 00:00:00

CI SE OF 1 21; ILE 1 llls.

,[l:7 litatLd thet the eliar;;,
piaci red Ly the Rev. Mr. Hatch against a
child named Mary Eugenia Plummer stands post-
poned until thz May session of the Central Criminal
Court ; but, as the proceedings connected with it
have created a great deal of public interest, it may
be as well to state a few further particulars in re-
lation to this extraordinary case. It will be re-
membered that Mr. Hatch was convicted at the
November session of the Central Criminal Court
upon two indictments, charging him with indecent
assaults upon Mary Eugenia Plummer, a girl about
twelve years, and her sister, Stephanie Augusta, a
girl three or four years her junior, and that the
jury, after a long deliberation, returned a verdict
of guilty upon both charges, and the defendant was
thereupon sentenced to two years' imprisonment
and hard labour upon each indictment. Under or-
dinary circumstances the defendant would have
been at once sent to the Wandsworth House of
Correction, the offence having been committed in
the county of Surrey; but, as Mr. Hatch had been
for several years the chaplain of that prison,
and which office he only resigned upon these
charges being made against him, it appears that the
Home &cretary considered it would be a painful
and unnecessary aggravation of the sentence that
he should be sent back to this prison as a criminal,
and Mr. Hatch therefore remained in Newgate until
the Government had an opportunity of deciding in
what place of confinement the sentence should be
carried out. The defendant in the meantime, as
the public is aware, obtained the consent of Mr.
Baron Bramwell, who tried the case, that an indict-
ment should be preferred for perjury against the
elder child, Mary Eugenia Plummer, and this bill
was returned a true bill by the grand jury. The
allegations of perjury are five in number, and they
embrace the whole of the alleged acts of indecency.
The witnesses to disprove the evidence of the child
are all females except as to one portion of the in-
dictment, there being only one male witness to be
examined, with the exception of the defendant
himself. Mrs. Hatch is one of the witnesses ; a
little girl, an adopted child, who went by the name
of Lucy, and two female servants, appear to be the
additional witnesses whose evidence is to support
the charge of perjury. The object of Mr. Hatch
in instituting these proceedings ist of course, to
free himself from the consequences of his convic-
tion ; but as a good deal of interest has been
created upon the question whether a child of such
tender years is amenable to the criminal law, it may
be as well to state that, up to the age of seven years,
a child is not considered to be of competent mind so
as to be criminally liable for his conduct, but at that
age, if express iralice proved, a child may be
legally convicted and sufh,r the penalty of any
crime he may have committed ; and there is one sen-
t tence upon record where a boy, seven years old,
was convicted of the murder of another child, and
was left for execution, although the sentence was
not ultimately carried into effect. Just before the
adjournment of the Court the father of the little
girl entered into the required recognisance for the
appearance of hie dought st the May sessions:
By the form of the proceedings, the younger child
will be a competent witness to be examined on be-
half of her sister, and, it is said, that a mass of evi-
dence will be adduced in answer to the charge, and
the case will be placed first on the list for trial be.
fore the judges.