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

AUGUST 1, HA

The evidence adduced at the inquest, held on
Friday evening last, on the body of Alfred
Delaruelle, a young gentleman of an amiable dis-
position and of bright prospects, the only son of
a gentleman of high respectability and indepen-
dence, aftlards a fearful and affecting lesson to young
men of his age and inexperience, and the necessity
of their guarding against the many temptations
they may be exposed to, and-how easily they may
be plundered by a set of scoundrels who are ever on
the alert to allure them into ruin.
Dr. Samuel Kinns, Shaftesbury-house, Islington,
on being sworn, said the deceased was a Frenchman,
and came from Paris six weeks or two months ago.
Ile was brought to my college by his father, a re-
tired solicitor. His age is about 22. He was a most
temperate, attentive, and amiable young man, not in
any way excitable. He has never shown any disposi-
tion to sullenness more than excitability. He was an
amiable, kind young man, of a remarkably even
frame of mind. On Wednesday morning about 9
o'clock, he breakfasted at the college. He left us
as though he were going for a walk. Expecting
him back to diiiner, and not arriving, I thought he
had met a friend. As he did not come corns to tea,
I thought he had accompanied some friends he had
in Regent-street to the opera. Being a rule in the
establishment that no gentleman, whatever his age,
should remain out all night without a previous un-
derstanding, I became alarmed at his non-ai A•ival at
night ; still I thought it possible he might have re-
mained late at the opera, and that be might have
gone home to sleep with his friends. J had not the
slightest idea of his going to Windsor until I re-
ceived a letter from the superintendent of police. I
may state that deceased's prospects were most
bright. His father is a gentleman of large pro-
perty ; he is the only son. Since his art ival in Eng-
land he had expressed the utmost satisfaction at his
condition. His fattier allowed him every mgt.'
made. He had ample funds at his disposal. I had
recently seen several sovereigns in his purse. On
the Wednesday he had written two letters ; one i,
English to his mother, and the other in French to
his cousin, expressive of his entire happiness at the
college, and his very grateful feelings toward wit-
ness and Miss Kinns for their kindness towards
him.
In answer to the Coroner, the witness stated that
deceased seemed to be in his usual spirits when at
breakfast. Had he appeared dejected, witness
would have observed it, as he sat near him. Unless
the letters threw some light on the subject he (wit-
ness) would not be able to account for his self-de-
struction. Witness added that he put the question
about the watch to the man who found the body,
became deceased had a watch suspended by a silken
guard when he left the house in the morning. In
answer to a further question, witness stated that he
knew of no love affair in which the deceased was
concerned. He was anxious that the four sealed
letters found in the deceased's pocket should be
opened and read.
The coroner remarked that that should be done,
after they had taken the whole of the oral evi-
dence.
After the depositions of several other witnesses
had been taken, the four sealed letters were then
opened, they were all dated July 27. One wits
addressed to Dr. -Kinns, another to a married sister,
and the others to his father and mother. The two
latter, althoUgh dated on the same day, contained
no reference to his death, and had apparently beer.
written in the morning before he had con-
templated self-destruction. That to Dr. Kinns was
written in French, and was to the following
effect
"MY DEAR DOCTOR,—when you receive this I shall
cease to exist. Adieu! Many thanks for kindness shown
to me by you and Miss Kir-is.—Yours sincerely,
A.Lvar.o DELAnur.t.r.E."
The letter to the sister was translated by the
French gentleman who accompanied Dr. Kinns. It
was to the following effect :--
"MY DEla SISTER,—Do not weep too much when you
receive my letter. •At the same time preserve in your re-
membrance a brother who loves you so well. , Prepare my
poor parents for the blow in as gradual and gentle a manner
Os you possibly can. I had foretold that the voyage to
London would be fatal to me. I have this day lost all any
money in a house to wh;ch I was led by one unknown (or
who shall be unknoNca). ilaving lost my watch and my
jewels, rather than return home empty landed, I prefer to
put an end to the ennui (so rendered) which will beset me
on all sides. My last hour has arrived, and when you re-
ceive this, two days will have passed after I have ceased to
exist."
It is unnecessary to give the letters to the father
and mother, as nothing contained therein bore upon
the inquiry.
Dr. Kinns remarked upon the strange character
of the event. The deceased mast have been influ-
enced by some sudden and extraordinary impulse
to commit suicide, owing to having lost his money
in a gambling-house, to which he hal been allured,
as the amount lost could have been ofn no import-
ance to him.
Verdict, " Temporary insanil ."

RIFLED ORDNANCE.—Experiments As ill shortly
be carried out at -Woolwich with a view to test the efficiency
of an oNlinary siege gun after being subjected to the process
of rifling. Should the system prove successful a large
number, of. guns will be nitered in the same manner.
[ADVERTIi3EMENT.I-1-lolloway's Ointment and 'Pills.—
Palpitation, Shortness of Breath, Dropsy.--This last=
named disease is commonly preceded by itTegular action of
the heart and difficult respiration, which symptoms are
always severe, and ever go from had to worse unless the
proper means of cure are resorted to. In Holloway's un-
rivalled Ointment and Pills the dropsical patient will ever
quick,oin
find succcpur ; the
,present relief derived from the use- of
f this noble
tlinednt, invariably perseverance' in
re-
sults in a lasting and satisfactory cure. They act with
such energy in the circulation and absorbent system, that
thheesseteraedinyeadpieps.li
isca marvellously
the dropsical fluid vanishe4, and the sufferer finds all the
oppressive symptoms daily decline till natural health re-
turns.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.—SHREWSBURY, July 28.
(Before Mr. Justice Willes)
Francis Hopwood, 21, engine driver, was charged
with cutting and wounding his wife, Mary Hop-
wood, with intent to murder her ; also with intent
to do her grievous bodily harm, on the 10th of
April, 1859, at Ludlow.
Mr. Bailey appeared for the prosecution ; Mr.
Cook Evans defended the prisoner.
It appeared that the . prisoner was an engine
driver, who for some weeks had been living at
Worcester. His wife, the prosecutrix, who was
married to -him in October; 1857, was living at
Ludlow, and on Wednesday, the 6th of April last,
the prisoner went there to see her, and wanted her
to go with him to Worcester to live with him. The
prosecutrix refus,d, end she and the prisoner ap-
peared to have quarrelled together on Saturday
night, and in the course of the quarrel the prisoner
seized her by the throat and held her till she
fainted. In consequence of this treatment the pro-
secutrix - the same night left the house and went
to the house where her sister was living at Lud-
low, and stayed there till the morning. The
next morning, Sunday, the 10th, the prisoner came
for hex, and wanted her to go with him to Wor-
cester, end as they were going along he put
his back against the wall and said, that before
he went any further he wanted to know what she
meant to do. The prosecutrix said, she did not
mean to live with him any more, and that she
would swear the peace against him ; upon which
the prisoner immediately struck her several times
in the face with a knife. He then got her down
and kn.:P.:- upon her, and tried to cut her throa4but
she pre an '-sd his doing this by holding her shawl
to her neck. Her cries of " murder" brought a man
named Lewis. to her assistance, and the prisoner ran
away. The prosecutrix was subjected to a long
cross-examination, from which it appeared that she
and her husband when living toge:nier were always
quarrelling, and that the only cause of difference
which led to this assault was the desire of the pri-
soner that she should go and live with him, and her
refusal. to consent. "= al other witnesses were
examined, from whose i7dt..nony it appeared the
on the Saturday. night the prisoner had been ve
much excited on ~ccount of his wife's refusal to live
with him, and had said that he should kill his wice
and be hung for it, and that her body would be seen
comina• down the river.. It appeared that there
were five slight wounds inflicted on the face of the
prosecutrix ; and im cediately the prisoner had left
her he had cut his o I throat and inflicted a wound
nearly three inches a length, but not sufficient to
separate the or to do himself mortal in-
jury, He thee' ran 6 vn to the river and attempted
to dross n him - elf; -and --as •taken out of the water
in a state of ioserisibilhyd In a few hours he re-
covered, and his first 7-query, on cordng to his
senses, wr s, " How is my d-ar Mary ?" tie then
appeared very sorry for what he' ad done, and was
in a very desponding state, and shed tears. The
surgeon said.the wounds inflicted on the prosecut-
rix just severed the skin, while that inflicted by the
prisoner oa himself was a much more serious wound.
It appeared that when taken into custcly the pri-
soner had a-small scratch on the side of his face,
and it was • suggested on his part that the affair
arose out 4f. a quarrel, which the prosecutrix might
have aggravated by scratching the prisoner in the
face, as it. was proved she had done on the Satur-
day-previous.
Mr. Cook Evans addressed. the jury .for the pri-
soner, and admitting that a verdict of unlawful
wounding could not be resisted, urged that there
was nothing to show that the* prisoner - was guilty
of the,capital charge of wounding with intent to
murder, or of. the felony of wounding with intent
to do grievous bodily harm.
Mr. Justice- Willes summed up the evidence to
the jury, and they fmind the prisoner guilty of
unlawfully wounding.
Mr. Justice Willes said, the jury had taken a
very-lenient view of the prisoners case, and that if
he had been found guilty of the felony he (Mr. Jua-
tice Willes) would have transported him for life.
The prisoner had been twice before convicted of
violent assaults-upon women. and he (Mr. Justice
Willes) should'therefore give him the utmost pun-
ishment which the law allowed, viz., two years'
imprisonment, with hard labour.
(Before Mr. Justice Byles and a Common Juryd)
PANKIIURST V. T4(TON.
Mr. Whateley, Q.C., and Mr. Moteram appeared
for the plaintiff; and Mr. Gray, for the defendant.
This was an action brought to recover damages
for a breach of promise of marriage. The plaintiff,
Mary Pank.hurgt, was a young woman of about 23
years of age, who had worked for six years in Mr.
G. F. 17owdee's china manufactory as a gold grin-
der, and lodged at the house of a Mra. Walsh, at
Hanle:-, North Staffordshire. From the evidence
of her mastr, who kindly came forward to speak
in her behalf, it appeared that she had always
conducted herself with great propriety, and to
ihis entire satisfaction. The defendant was a young
• man of abLA the same age, who had been in
business rs a butcher, but now lived with his
mother, who kept a bin palace, at Burslem, and
assisted her in the conduct, of the business. T.'n,
defendant" had become acquainted with the plains 'ff
at Hanley, and visited her at Mrs. Walsh's. T'
went on till t le month of Sept., 1858, when i
defendant took her to the house of a Mrs. Wrench,
at Burslem, and it was then arranged that she
should reside there until they were married, a cere-
mony which was to come off as soon as possible.
The defendant gave Mrs. Wrench half-a-crown to
put up the bans, a• they were " called out," i.e.
published. for the •ad and last time, in October,
but by thattime it seemed the defendant's ardour
had cooled, and he had altered his mind, though
w't.iout communicald gto thepaa or most concerned
the change of his sent -neat% The plaintiff Un-
happily had yielded to ,'•e defendant's seductions
befae aSie canie to Bur. em, and was in the family-
way; and, thus, hoping and believing that the de-
fendant would be as true and faithfut as he seemed
in his amorous moods, she went to the church on
the day appoin'ed for the wedding, and there
waited the arrival of her lover. But the defendant
never came, and when Mrs. Wrench went to look
for him she found him coolly walking about the
town, and trcatang the whole affair as of no im-
portance. Mrs. Wrench urged him to go to the
church, but the decendant.made excuses, and said
there was not time, though Mrs. Wrench assured
him there was plenty of time, as the clergyman was
willing to wait ti.l 12 o'clock. But all she could
say prcduccd no effect. She then tried to compro-
mise the matter by asking " Would he go in the
morning ?" To this the defendant assented, as it
gave him respite from Mrs. Wrench's importunities,
girl whom he had seduced. In January
bsoutlihtehcelid not keep his promise, and he then for-
the plaintiff was delivered" of a child,, and the plain-
tiff's friends obtained.an order on the defendant to
par half-a-crown a-week for its maintenance, and
the present action was then brought to recover da-
mages for tl•e breach of promise of marriage. It
apneareal the defendant's father had left some real
property, which was proved to be worth about
£2,000, and, by his Will, the widow, who is 60
years of ago, was to onjoy the property during her
life, •and, upon her death, it would go to the chil-
dren, and the defendant's interest would be worth
about £5OO.
Mr. Gray addressed the jury in mitigation of
damages, and said there was no proof that the de-
fendant had seduced the plaintiff by a promise of
marriage. In such cases there were faults on both
sides, and he contended the plaintiff was better off
with. one bastard child than she would have been
if the defendant had marriel-her. In the- latter
case she would prohably have had a large family,
and, as the defendant had no means of keeping a
family, -marriage would only have added to hoc
misery.
Mr. Justice Byles summed up the evidence, and
cautioned the jury against sweeping away the whole
of the defendant's expected fortune, but advised
them to give reasonable and moderate damages.
The jury laid their heads together for some time,
and then found for the PlairitiffDamages, Z5O.
• a (Before Mr. Justice Willes.)
- Themes Burden surrendered to take his trial,
upon a charge of stahbing and wounding William
Meredith, with intern ; to do him some grievone
bodily. harm, on the 17th of June, 1850, at Lla .-
voirwaterdine.
Mr. G. Browne
..app-.:red for the trosecution ;
Mr. R. Kettle defended the prisoner.
.The prosecutor in this case was a farmer, end
the prisoner was ~ shepherd. The parties lived
near one at-tether, nd it appeared that on the I.7th
of June last a quarrel took place between them, m
which the prisoner stabbed the prosecutor in the
back with a pair at ehears.• The prosecutor
_nLs,
50" "I"ing aWill" to his own house, pursued
the prisentr, and a ‘N itness came up as the aeose)..
enter 6.911 k On the fl(a• of his llone from loss (st
blood. The prO,ceht,.r wi.l subjected to severe.ero%.
examinalion, as to whether be had not
on former
occasions threatened him. In the course of t

tri,,l •
The learned jadge int:tnated.that he thought thc
char mge of lel y could not be supported, and that
there could be no answer to the charge of unlaw-
fully wounding.
The counsel on both sides acquiesced in this view
of the case, and the jury found the prisoner guilty
of unlAwfully wounding only.
Joseph Dickin surrendered to take his trial on a
charge of manslaughter, in causing the death. of
Richard Hughes. .
Mr. Boughev appeared for the prosecution ; Mr.
Scotland and Mr. Kettle defended the prisoner.
The prisoner, who was a very respectable looking
man, was a cattle doctor, living at libberton. His

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 ana broke his leg. The fracture was a
compound comminuted fracture, and both bones
were broken a little above the ancle. The unfor-

,unate mar: was carried home, and wished thepri-

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 ou 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 bane-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 examined, 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 Will2s 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 comp tent
degree of skillin the perfortriance Of the duty which
he had undertaken. There wls 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 byat large number of the pri-
soner's friends who hair 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. Ovcrend, 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
Au rust 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,. au'd said to liim, " 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 coul.d not tell particularly where it tame from.
But, said-the inspector, it could not be wondered
at, as the lane was sometimes in such a filthy state
that it was almost impossible to walk down it with-
out treading on fith, 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 pri•7y ?
The witness—Oh, dear, yes. There are a good
many such streets.
On a suggestion from his Lordship,
Mr. Temple, afier this evidence, withdrew all
imputation on the plaintiffs on the part of his
client, and 'Consented to a verdict for 40s.
Verdict fur 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. Bristowe conducted the case for the prosecu-
tion ; Mr. O'Brien appeared for the defence.
The prisoner had been for some years acquaintd
with the prosecutor, Mr. J. Foottit, an attorney
in
this town, who had done business for him at diffe-
-rerittinies, and- for which there was owing to him
in January, 1857, a sum of £ll4 153.8 d., being the
-balance of his account. According to the evidence
of Foottit, the prisoner came to his officetelli ng Derby
on the 6th of January, 1857, and after him
that he proposed going to York Castle to take the
benefit of the Insolvent -Act, and was desirous of
doing something for him
su (mFootta) befotT he went,
lie r, posed to payof £5 b
a of £7
send down in cash, to
givep an lOU for £7, and to a sum y
the post next day from
Sheffield tomake up the
sum of £l9, if Foottit would accept it in full dis-
charge of his debt. To these terms Foottit assented.
The -S7 was paid down, and the I 0 U given, and
an accitint was drawn up, in which Foottit gave
his receipt for £l9 cas.h received in full discharge
of his account. Foottit afterwards petitioned the
Insolvent Court. and. an order was made for vesting
all -his estate and yf ects in the official assignee, Mr.
B. Frear, the registrar of the Derby County Court.
Ili, schedule contained an entry of the I O U for
ET given on the Gth 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,
on the Gth o January, 1857. he paid to Foottit £7
in cash, and gave the I 0 •U in question early on
th!rt day, and that after several hours discussion
with
inFuettit lie paid £l2 more in cash, making
£l9, full settlement of the account, and that Mr.
Foottit agreed to return him the I 0 U, but
after receiving the £l2 he had lost or mislaid it,
and. that tic) application for the £7 had been made
by the prosecutor or
to him afterwards, eithey
his wife. The judge, however made an order
for payment of the amount forthwith. On the dap
after the trial.in the County Court Foottit' on look-
ing over his pap rs, found some letters that ha d
li
passed between an3elf and the prisoner in the
months of January and April, 1857. From these
letters it appeared that the prisoner on his return
to Sheffield d.tl not send the £5 as promised
alleging that hecould
not,
the
6th of January, 1 upon
which Foot tit wrote to him stating his urgent need
of the money, saying that he was going to petition