The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-01 00:00:00

father had been what is called a " bone-setter," and
the prisoner, having followed the same occupation,
had acquired a considerable reputation for skill in
that art. He was, however, now put on his trial
for causing the death of a butcher of Tibberton
named Hughes, by his want of skill in the treat-
ment of a broken leg. It appeared that on the 30th
of December last the deceased was riding in his
car to Newport market, when the horse kicked
violently and broke his leg. The fracture was a
compound comminuted fracture, and both bones
were broken a little above the ancle. The unfor-
tunate man was carried home, and. wished the pri-
soner to be sent for, a wish which had already been
anticipated by his family, who procured his early
attendance. The prisoner set the leg in the usual
way, binding it up with splints and bandages. The
bandages were undone on the 11th day, when it was
found that there was some discharge from the wound,
but it seemed to be going on well. The leg was done
up again in the same manner, and was not undone
again for several weeks, when it was found the dis-
charge had increased. A piece of the broken bone
came from the wound, but, though the deceased
was not going on so well as could be wished,
the prisoner encouraged him to believe that his
broken led would be cured, and would finally be
stronger than the other. These hopes, however,
were not realised, and the prisoner expressed a wish
that the deceased should be seen by a " regular
practitioner," as he required medicine, and the
formation of matter in the leg required the use of
the lancet. A regular practitioner from Wellington
was then called in, and he continued the treat-
ment which had been adopted by the prisoner to
support the strength of the deceased, and had him
removed to Wellington, where he could have him
close under his eye. According to the evidence of
the regular practitioner, " general muscular ab-
sorption " took place, or, as he explained the
phrase, the deceased got very thin, and instead of
gathering strength, he declined, and in the month
of April died of exhaustion. As is not uncommon
in such cases, the whole of the blame was thrown
upon the unlucky " irregular practitioner," who
was had up and charged with felony, in causing
the deceased man's death by his gross and crimi-
nal want of skill. The sons of the deceased man
were examined, and spoke very highly, not only
of the prisoner's attention, but also of his skill and
reputation as a bone-setter, which they said could
be testified to by from 20 to 30 witnesses, upon
whom he had successfully operated, and who had
come to Shrewsbury to speak for the operator,
who had set their broken bones. The surgeons
who had attended to the case, and also a gentle-
man from the infirmary, were examinpd, and
stated that there was no fault to be found with
the treatment in the first instance, or for the first
two or three weeks, as they thought an attempt
was properly made to save the leg, but they
thought that if the leg did not heal within that
time it ought to have been amputated. They ad-
mitted, however, that the propriety of amputation
must depend on the strength of the patient and
other circumstances, of which they were unable to
judge ; but they seemed to agree that it was not
good surgical practice to bind up the leg for so
many weeks, and so to confine the matter which
was forming in the wound.
Mr. Scotland contended the prisoner had not
shown that gross ignorance and want of
skill which ought to make him criminally
liable, and that at the utmost if there
had been any unskilful treatment it
arose from an error in judgment merely,
and not from gross ignorance of his art.
If necessary, and the evidence were admissible, he
was in a position to call 20 to 30 witnesses to prove
the prisoner's skill and success in bone setting.
Mr. Justice Willes summed up the evidence to
the jury, and said a want of attention was not at-
tributed to the prisoner ; but the question was,
whether he had shown a reasonable and competent
degree of skillin the performance of the duty which
he had undertaken. There was no difficulty as to
the rule of law on the subject. The difficulty was in
applying the law to the fact, and the jury, who were
acquainted with the wants and habits of the coun-
try, must decide whether or not the prisoner had
shown gross ignorance of the art, and so had caused
the death of the deceased.
The jury, without hesitation, fonnd the prisoner
not guilty, a result which was received with the
liveliest satisfaction by a large number of the pri-
soner's friends who had rallied round him.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.--• NEwcAsTLE, JULY 30
(Before Mr. Justice Hill.)
TROTTER V. PLEWS.
This was an action for slander of the plaintiffs
in their trade.
Mr. Overend, Q.C., and the Hon. A Liddell ap-
peared for the plaintiffs; and Mr. Temple, Q.C.,
and Mr. Heath for the defendant.
It appeared that the plaintiffs, Messrs. Trotter
and Son, are large provision merchants at Shields,
and the defendant is in the same line of business,
and his warehouse not far from the plaintiffs'. In
August last the defendant met the Inspector of
Nuisances, named Mitchell, at Shields, and said
to him, " Trotter and Son have a quantity of dis-
eased meat. It is so bad that the people smell it
in the lane." On the following Monday the de
fendant again met Mitchell, the nuisance in-
spector, and said to him, " Why have you not
been to see that meat ? There are 31 casks (naming
the brands). It came from Holstein. I know they
only gave £1 a cask for it. It is not fit for human
food. Part of it went on board a foreign ship, and
it was so bad it had to be sent back." In conse-
quence Mr. Mitchell went to the warehouse of
Messrs. Trotter and Son, and found 29 casks of the
brand described. He opened one of those casks,
and cut off some of the meat and smelt at all the
other casks. The meat was perfectly sound and
sweet, and he took part of it to the authorities. He
had traced out the other two casks on board a
foreign ship, and the meat was perfectly good. A
part of the casks were beef and a part pork ; and it
was proved by Mr. Trotter that for the beef he had
paid upwards of 70s. a cask, and for the pork up-
wards of 80s., to an old established firm at Hol-
stein.
On cross-examination of the witness Mitchell, it
was elicited that there were many bad smells in
the lane where the plaintiffs' warehouse was, and
that the people sometimes complained of it, and
they could not tell particularly where it came from.
But, said the inspector, it could not be wondered
at, as the lane was sometimes in sur.th a filthy state
that it was almost impossible to walk down it with-
out treading on fi.th, as none of the houses in the
lane had privies.
His Lordship—Do you mean to tell us that there
is a street in Shields where not one of the houses
has a privy ?
The witness—Oh, dear, yes. There are a good
many such streets.
On a suggestion from his Lordship,
Mr. Temple, after this evidence, withdrew all
imputation on the plaintiffs on the part of his
client, and consented to a verdict for 40s.
Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, 40s.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—DERBY, July 29.
CROWN COURT.
Peter Ward, a chemist at Sheffield, was indicted
for perjury committed before the judge of the county
court held at Derby on the 19th of April, 1859.
Mr. Bristo we conducted the case for the prosecu-
tion ; Mr. O'Brien rppeared for the defence.
The prisoner had been for some years acquainted
with the prosecutor, Mr. J. Foottit, an attorney in
this town, who had done business for him at diffe-
rent times, and for which there was owing to him
in January, 1857, a sum of £ll4 15s. Bd., being the
balance of his account. According to the evidence
of Foottit, the prisoner came to his office in Derby
on the 6th of January, 1857, and after telling him
that he proposed going to York Castle to take the
benefit of the Insolvent Act, and was desirous of
doing something for him (Foottit) before he went,
he prc posed to pay a sum of L 7 down in cash, to
give an I O U for £7, and to send a sum of £5 by
the post next day from Sheffield to make up the
sum of £l9, if Foottit would accept it in full dis-
charge of his de.bt. To these terms Foottit assented
The £7 was paid down, and the I 0 U given and.
an account was drawn up, in which Foottit 'gave
his receipt for £l9 cash received in full discharge
of his account. Foottit afterwards petitioned the
Insolvent Court, and an order was made for vesting
all his estate and effects in the official assignee, Mr.
B. Frear, the registrar of the Derby County Court.
Hi▪ s schedule contained. an entry of the I 0 U for
£7 given on the 6th of January. On the 19th
of April, 1859, an action upon this I 0 U was com-
menced in the Derby County Court at the suit of
Mr. Frear, as official assignee, against the prisoner,
who, at the conclusion of the
plaintiff's case, was
sworn as..a witness on his own behalf, and stated,
o n the Gth of January, 1857, he paid to Foottit
in cash, and gave the I 0 U in question early on
that day, and that after sever9.l hours discussion
wi▪ th Foottit he paid £l2 more in cash,t t
Mr.
making
£l9 in full settlement of the account, and h
Foottit agreed to return him the I 0 U,a but
after receiving the £l2 he had lost or mislaid it,
and that no application for the £7 had been made
to him afterwards, either by themla(l.e.osecutor or
his wife. The judge, however an order
for payment of the amount forthwith.
tOn. the day
.after the trial in the County Court
letters
tit, on look-
ing over his palms, found some
~. that. bad
passed between himself and the prisoner in the
months of January and April, From. these
letters it appeared that di,
on. his return
to Sheffield did not send the' £sl.io,Lier
as promised Oil the
6th of. January, alleging that he could not, upon
which Foottit wrote to him stating his. urgent need
of the money, saying that he was going to petition