The Sun.
London, England, 1859-11-30 00:00:00

TIM D EDITIO.

TRIAL OF DR. SMETHURST.

Mr. Joseph Smith—l reside at Rifle-terrace, Bayswater.
I keep a boarding-house there. The prisoner resided with
me with Mrs. Smethurst in 1858. They lived as husbsnd
and wife. Miss Isabella Bankes also resided there in 1858.
She quitted my house on the 29th November, 1858. The
prisoner left on the 12th December, 1858. The prisoner's
wife continued to live in my house afttr ho had left. She
remained until the June following. I don't know where
she went to when she left my house. I suppose she lived
somewhere in the suburbs
Cross-examined—I have never seen Miss Louisa Bankes
in conversation with her late sister and Mrs. Smethurst.
The deceased lady used to call the wife of.the prisoner Mrs.
Smethurst, and so did everybody in the house.
Mr. Jam es Spice—l am clerk of the parish church of
Battersea. I produce the register of the marriages cele•
brated in the church in 1858. I find therein a register of
a marriage by license between Thomas Smethurst and
Isabella Bankes, on the 9th of December, 1858. I was one
of the witnesses to Vac ceremony, and Lucy Ambrose was
the other. The prisoner is the person married in the name
of Thomas Smethurst.
Miss Louisa Bankes was next called.
Mr. Clark—Will you look at the signature of "Isdoella
Bankes," and tell if you know in whose handwriting it is.
Miss Bankes—lt is in the handwriting of my murdered
sister. (Great sensation.)
Cross-examined by Mr. Sleigh—l never was introduced
to Mrs. Smethurst at Rifle-terrace.
Mr. C. Lafont recalled, and, in answer to the learned
judge, said—While my father was living with my mother
under the name of Johnson, their relatives did not visit
them. They went out together to parties, Dr. Smethurst
called my mother by the name of Johnson. I introduced
him to her as a friend of my own. He afterwards Waited
in a friendly manner.
Mr. Sleigh, for the prisoner, submitted that the prof ecu-
don had altogether failed, as they had omitted to show that
Mary Durham was a persoU capable of forming a valid
marriage in 1828.
Mr. Clark contended that it was no part of the pros ecu-
tion to prove the first as a valid marriage, as it rested with
the defence to show the contrary.
Baran Bramwell said he was of opinion that there was a
case to go to the jury, but as Justice Byles was in an ad-
joining room, he would consult him. He had, however, no
doubt whatever upon the point.
The learned judge then retired for a few minutes ; ort his
return

His lordship said Mr. Justice Byles was strongly of
opinion that there was a case to go to the jury.
Mr. Sleigh then rose to address the jury, and after
briefly touching upon the points given in evidence, ' pro-
ceeded to argue that the pardon the prisoner had received
was to be taken as a certificate of his innocence of the
crime of murder with which he had been charged.
Baron Bramwell—l don't think, Mr. Sleigh, a pardan is
any more a certificate of innocence than a verdict of not
guilty.

Loud demonstrations of applause followed this ols3er-
vation, in the midst of which the learned jimige
exclaimed, in a loud voice, " Mr. Usher find
me a person 'who is making that noise. Indeed, Twill
prevent a repetition of it. It is most unseemly that t ;ach
demonstrations should take place in a court of justice. If
such things were tolerated their proceedings would soo ta be
lowered to th'at of a bear-garden."
Silence having been restored, Mr. Sleigh proceeded •rrith
his address, and apologised if he hadsmade any observaaion
out of his position as the advocate of the prisoner at the
bar. He thought that the marriage which took place in
1828 was invalid, because the Crown had altogether billed
to show that one of the parties at least was in a position to
contract marriage. •
The learned judge briefly summed up the evidence, : and,
after a short deliberation, the jury returned a verdi,:t of
Guilty.

Previous to passing sentence, Mr. Baron Bramwell s aid,
as there was a peculiarity in the cause, he would con4sult
with Mr. Justice Byles, and his lordship left the
court for this purpose. In about two minutes he
returned into court, and, addressing the priso tier,
said he had been found guilty of bigamy, and for that of-
fence, and that only, was he about to sentence him.
He wished to express no opinion on the charge of murder,
as he did not think he ought to take that into consideration
as an augmentation or diminution of punishment. But
with respect to the last marriage, it was beyond a doeibt
the prisoner took a false oath, because when he was as ked
if he knew any impediment to the marriage, he replied
he did not, well knowing he had a wife then living. Under
all the circumstances he thought it his duty to sente ace
the prisoner to one year's imprisonment with hard laborer.

IIEaLTH OP LONDON DURING THE
WEEK.

(From the Report of the Registrar-General.)

The deaths in London ,continued to increase in
the week that ended last Saturday. The numbers
registered in the two previous weeks were sum; s-
sively 1,051, and 1,233; last week the number was
1,307. In the ten years 1849-58 the average num-
ber of deaths was 1,210 ; but as the deaths co n-
tained in the present return occurred in a popula-
tion which has increased, they should be compared
with the average raised in proportion to the increase
—namely, with 1,331. The comparison shows that
the deaths in last week were below the calculated
number, but that the difference is not of important
amount.

The births of last week exceeded the deaths in
the same period by 478.
The diseases which predominate as the year draws
to a close continue to increase. The deaths referred
to affections of the organs of respiration rose in the
last three weeks as follows :-179, 233, 314. Those
caused by phthisis or consumption are not included
in these numbers ; they were 132, 157, and 16.5.
Bronchitis was fatal in the same period in the fol-
lowing numbers of cases, 102, 138, and 198 ; pneu-
monia 60, 64, and 73 ; whooping-cough 14, 20, 30.
Of the 198 deaths front bronchitis last week 21 oc-
curred to infants; 19 occurred at one year of age
and under ten ; 10 in the period of life 20-40 years,
46 in the period 40-60 years, 85 at the age 60-80,
and 17 at 80 years and upwards.
Small-pox was fatal last week in 30 cases, six of
which occurred in the Small-pox Hospital. • Al-
though that institution is situated in the north dis-
tricts, the east, in which 10 deaths from this disease
were registered, returned more them any group of
districts. 86 deaths were ascribed to scarlatina, 13
to diphtheria. The former oppears to prevail much
in the north parts of London ; it was fatal in five
cases in Kentish-town, in five in Islington east.
Six deaths are also referred to in Bethnal-green,
and four in Mile-end Old Town.
Nine infants died by suffocation, two by murder
or-manslaughter. A child suffering from inflamma-
tion of the lungs was treated with a narcotie poison
by an unqualified practitioner; a man died from
destitution • another from exposure to cold.
Of bricklayers 2 died in the week, of bricklayers'
wives 1, of bricklayers' children 4 ; of carpenters
13 died in the week, of carpenters' wives 5, of car-
penters' children 18 ; of masons one died, of masons'
children 4 ; of painters 8 died, of painters' wives 2,
of painters' children 12 ; of plasterers' 2 died, of
plasterers' wives 1, of plasterers' children 2.

SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock.

Thomas Smethurst was indicted for unlawfully and felo-
niously intermarrying with one Isabella Bankes, his wife
Mary being then alive.
Mr. Clark appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Sleigh
a:ad Mr. Salter defended the prisoner.
On tho indictment being read over, the prisoner pleaded
" Not guilty."
Mr. A. M'Crostie—l am clerk in the London and West-
minster Bank. The handwriting in the register is that of
the prisoner, Thomas Smethurst, whom I have known for
20 years.
The Clerk of the Court then read the entry from the
parish register, which was to the effect that Thomas Sme-
thurst was married at St. Mark's district church, Kenning-
ton, on the 10th of March, 1828, to Mary Durham, by the
Rev. W. Otter, now deceased.
Mr. Mark said he appeared there, by direction of the
Secretary of State for the Home Department, to prosecute
the prisoner for bigamy. It would be unnecessary for
him furzher to allude to the case than to say that
in August last the prisoner was tried and sentenced
to death for murder, which sentence, however,
had not. been carried out. It was during that trial that
the present offence was discovered, for it appeared then that
the prisoner married a lady named Isabella Bankes, foreaus-
ing the death of whom he was indicted, during the lifetime
of his first wif€, Mary. He should merely prove, what he
had stated br witnesses, and then ask for the committal of
the prisoner on a charge of bigamy.
The learned gentleman then called
Mr. William Easter, who said—l am the clerk at St.
Mark's Church, Kennington. I produce the registry-
book of yr.arriages celebrated in that parish during the year
1828.

Mr. C.. 1. Lafont—l am acquainted with the handwriting
of Mary Durham. The signature in the book is in her
hanth.vriting.
Cr oss-examined by Mr. Sleigh—Mary Durham is my
mo',,her. My age is 52. The prisoner is not my father. On
the 10th March, 1858, ray father was alive.
Re-examined—Mary Durham went by the name of
Johnson when she married the prisoner, and I also
went by that name. My father, Mr. Lafont, went by
the name of Johnson. I did not know his name was La •
font until after the marriage. After that event my father
introduced are to his family.
Charles Lafont, jun., son of last witness—l have several
times seen Mrs. Smethurst (Mary Durham) at Rifle Ter-
race, Bayswater. The last time was about a fortnight after
the prisonsx was taken into custody on the charge of mur-
der.