The Sun.
London, England, 1861-08-08 00:00:00

ASSIZE IA TELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.—CROYDON, AUG. 7.
CROWN SIDE.
(Before Mr. Justice Blackburn.)
THE KINGSWOOD MURDER.

The trial of Johann Charles Franz, 24, the Ger-
man who was charged with the wilful murder of
Martha Halliday, was resumed at 9 o'clock yester-
day morning.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine, specially retained, with
Mr. Robinson, again appeared for the prosecution ;
the Hon. G. Denman, Q.C., with Mr. W. Best, was
counsel for the prisoner.
Mr. Denman proceeded to address the jury for
the defence in a most powerful and eloquent speech,
which occupied. rather more than four hours in.the
delivery. He said that it had been truly stated
by his learned friend Sergeant Ballantine that the
case against the prisoner rested entirely upon what
was called circumstantial evidence ; but, while
he should not attempt to deny that in many cases
evidence of this character was the most satisfac-
tory that could be laid before a jury, still he could
not subscribe to theobservation of his learned friend
that it was sufficient to show that all the facts
which were brought forward were consistent with
the guilt of the prisoner, but thought that it was
necessary also to show that they were inconsistent
with his innocence—and he believed he should be
able to satisfy them that this was not the case in
reference to the present charge. He then observed
that it appeared the prisoner had endeavoured to
gain a livelihood by his labour, that he was not a
man of bad character, and he did not therefore ap-
pear to be the sort of a man who was likely to com-
mit a crime of this dreadful description, and the
principal evidence against him appeared to be that
he was seen in the neighbourhood of the place
where the crime was committed in company with
another man ; but there was nothing whatever to
show that he was ever in the house or near it, ex-
cept from the pocketbook and the papers that were
contained in it, and he submitted that there was
nothing in the case to show that the statement of
the prisoner that he had been robbed of this pocket-
book was not true, and it appeared to him that
there were many facts in the case which tended to
show that it was so. The learned counsel then pro-
ceeded with great feeling and earnestness to call the
attention of the jury to the destitute and helpless
condition of the prisoner, who, he said, was not only
deeply steeped in poverty, but entirely ignorant of
our language, and consequently unable to give any
of the necessary instructions for his defence, and
who, but for the humanity of the Saxon Embassy,
would have been altogether without legal assistance
to answer the dreadful charge made against him.
He then went on to comment upon the evidence
which had been adduced in support of the prosecu-
tion, and concluded by stating that although sus.
picion might be created by that evidence, still it
was not sufficiently cogent to justify the jury in
saying upon their oaths that the prisoner was guilty
of a crime for which his life must undoubtedly be
forfeited.

Mr Justice Blackburn then 'proceeded to sum
up the case to the jury, and went very carefully
through the whole of the evidence. He observed
that it certainly was a very material question for
them whether it had been satisfactorily established
that the prisoner was one of the men who was seen
near the scene of the murder shortly before it was
committed ; and, if they believed that this had been
made out, they would then have to take into con-
sideration the other circumstances of the case, and
say by their verdict whether the evidence satisfied
them that the prisoner was one of the parties con-
cerned in the murder. His lordship then read
through the evidence, and concluded by leaving the
case in the hands of the jury.
The juryretired at 5 o'clock to consider their ver-
dict, and were absent about an hour, and upon their
return into court they found the prisoner Not
Guilty.
It was said that when the jury retired ten of
them had made up their minds to return a verdict
of guilty.

The prisoner was immediately discharged from
custody, and it was stated that means were afforded
him by the Saxon Embassy to return at once to his
native couz.t ry.

(Before \lr. justice Williams and Special Juries.)
SMITH v. THE LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN

. RAILWAY COMPANY.
This was an action to recover damages sustained
by the plaintiff, who was a guard in the service of
the Post.ofliee, for injuries sustained by him through
the negligence of the servants of the defendants.
Mr. M. Chambers, Q.O ' Mr. Prentice, and Mr.
Undardown were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr.
Bovill, Q.C., and Mr. Pollock were for the de-
fendants.

After one or two witnesses bad been examined,

the learned counsel on both sides held a cons ulta-
1
tion, and the defendants consented to a verdict, with
£l5O damages.

CLEMENTS V. THE LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN
RAILWAY.

This was an action of the same description.
Mr. Hawkins, Q.C., Mr. Craufurd, and. Mr. Lum-
ley Smith were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr.
Bovill, Q.C., and Me. C. Pollock represented the
company.
This action arose out of the same accident that
was the subject of the first inquiry. It will be re-
membered that on the 16th of November last the
mail up train, travelling at the rate of 40 miles an
hour, ran into the cattle train at Atherstone, and
the consequence was that nine of the drovers in
charge of the cattle were killed, and a number of
the Post-office servants who were travelling in the
Post-office van were seriously injured. The plaintiff,
who was engaged as a letter-sorter, and who received
£75 a year salary, which, with other perquisites,
amounted to nearly £l5O, had, it appeared, received
an injury by a similar accident that occurred at
Rugby in March, 1859, and upon that occasion the
company gave him £l2O as compensation. At the
second accident it appeared that he was thrown a
distance of 22 feet, and that several of his com-
panions who were with him in the Post-office vau
were thrown upon him, and it was alleged that he
had received an injury to his spine, and that his
eyes were affected by the shock that he had received.
In order to make out these facts, Mr. W. Lewis,
the physician to the Post-office, Dr. Pearson, Dr.
Webb, Dr. Gay, Dr. Poland, and Dr. Farre, all of
whom are eminent in their profession, were exa-
mined, and they expressed their opinion that the
plaintiff had sustained very severe injury from the
shock that he had received. In the course of the
trial an offer was made on the part of the defen-
dants to consent to a verdict, with £250 damages,
but this offer the plaintiff refused to accept, and the
case proceeded. At the close of the plaintiff's case
on Tuesday evening a suggestion was made that
the plaintiff should consent to allow his eyes to be
examined by Dr. H. Walton, the surgeon attached
to the Ophthalmic Hospital, by an instrument
called an ophthalmoscope, but although the learned
judge expressed a strong opinion that he ought to
allow this to be done, he refused, and the trial was
then adjourned.
Mr. Bovill, at the sitting of the Court yesterday
morning, addressed the jury for the defendants, and
said that the answer to the action was, that the
plaintiff had greatly exaggerated the injuries ho
had received, and he called as witnesses• Dr. Haynes
Walton, Dr. Arnott, Dr. Partridge, Dr. Barnard
Holt, and Dr. Skelding, all of whom stated that
they had made a careful examination of the plain-
tiff, and could not discover the slightest indication
of his having sustained any injury to the spine, and
with regard to the condition of his eyes, they stated
that he was suffering from a malady called asthen-
opia, to which all persons who were engaged in ex-
amining minute objects by strong artificial light
were subject, and that it was not at all of a perma-
nent character or in any way to be ascribed to the
accident. Several of these gentlemen stated, in an-
swer to questions put by Mr. Hawkins, that they
were paid five guineas for making a report upon
the case to the railway company, and 25 guineas
per day for attending to give evidence, but they
stated also that they expected the same fee from
their private patients, and that it was their usual
charge.
Dr. Skelding, one of the medical witnesses for the
company, in cross-examination by Mr. Hawkins,
said that when an accident happened upon the line
it was usual to send for' him to see the patients upon
their arrival at Euston-square, and he had been so
called upon probably a hundred times in the course
of the year, and he took a note-book with him and
made notes of the different cases, and reported upon
them to the company. He also said that when a
patient broached the subject of compensation he
entertained the question, and reported to the com-
pany his opinion as to the amount of compensation
that should be given, and sometimes paid them with
his own check. The plaintiff, in the first instance,
required £550 damages, and he advised that an offer
of £250 should be made him.

In answer to a question put by Mr. Bovill, in
re-examination, :Dr. Skelding said lie should not
have advised this offer to be made if he had been
aware that the plaintiff would refuse to allow Dr.
Walton to examine his eyes, and that there were
grounds for believing that the defect existed in them
long before this accident, and that, in point of fact,
the accident had nothing whatever to do with it.
Mr_ Bovill, in summing up the defendants' case,
complained a good deal of the course that had been
taken by Mr. -Hawkins in bringing out the fact
that an offer of £250 had been made to the plaintiff
on the previous evening, and he said that the offer
was made in ignorance of what was afterwards
ascertained, that there was reason to believe that
the injury to the plaintiff's eyes solely arose from
the nature of his occupation, and had nothing to do
with the accident. This opinion was strengthened
by the fact that the plaintiff had refused to permit
his eyes to be examined, although the learned judge
had so strongly intimated that he ought to do so.
When the offer was made the company believed
that the plaintiff had really sustained an injury to
his eyes that might require rest to restore them,
and they made him an offer of liberal compensation;
but from what subsequently came to their know-
ledge, they felt themselves justified in withdraw-
ing that offer, and he expressed his opinion that
Mr. Hawkins ought not to have brought the offer
before the jury, and that it was solely in the extre-
mity of the case that he had felt compelled to do so.
The learned counsel concluded by expressing his
opinion that the evidence had clearly established
that the injury sustained had been grossly exagge-
rated, and called upon the jury not to give the plain-
tiff any more than a reasonable amount of damages
for the expense and loss of salary that he had sus-
tained.

Mr. Hawkins commented in severe terms upon
the conduct of Dr. Skelding in the transaction, and
described him as a sort of lawyer's clerk, doctor,
and compensation maker, whose only duty, he said
appeared to be to go to the bedside of any unfortu-
nate persons who had received injury through the
negligence of the company, not for the purpose of
endeavouring to assuage their pain, or to render
them any assistance, but, note-book in hand, to en•
deavour to extract from them something that was
calculated to benefit the company; and he urged,
notwithstanding what had been said by his learned
friend, as to his having acted unprofessionally in
extracting from him that he had recommended an
offer of £250 to be made to the plaintiff, that he
was perfectly justified in the course he had to take,
when he had to deal with a witness of this descrip-
tion. He then said that, without entering into
the precise nature of the injuries sustained by
the plaintiff, he would put it to the jury, as
men of common sense, whether it was possible,
having regard to the nature of the acci-
dent, and to the fact that nine unfortunate per-
sons lost their lives, and that the plaintiff was yip.
lently thrown a distance of 22 feet and four or five
other men thrown violently upon him, that the
plaintiff could have escaped without sustaining
some severe injury from such a shock, and for that
injury he called upon them to give him reasonable
and proper damages.

tustice Williams, in summing up the case to
the jury, said that in itself it was very simple, but
from the peculiar course of the evidence it had,: in
his opinion, become one of very considerable public
importance. It was no doubt very necessary that any,
one who received injury in consequence of the negli-
gence of a railway company should receive compen-
sation for that injury ; but, on the other hand, it
was not to be tolerated that the occasion of a rail-
way accident should render the company liable to
pay large amounts of money for false and exagge-
rated claims, in order to put money into the pockets
of persons who were not entitled to it and those
professional advisers who attempted to enforce
claims of such a description. If such a course of
proceeding were to be sanctioned it would not only
be extremely unfair and unjust to railway com-
panies, but eventually the public must suffer by it,
for the heavy costs and damages consequent upon
it would compel railway companies to raise their
fares in order to cover these additional expenses, and
the public would thus suffer very materially. His
lordship then called the attention of the jury to the
facts that had been brought forward, and expressed
his opinion that the plaintiff acted wrongly, after
what took place, in refusing to allow his eyes to be
examined, and he also said he thought it was
wrong for Mr. Hawkins to introduce the fact of the
off,:r of the £250 having been made on the previous
evening, but he was satisfied that he had done so
under a misapprehension of the circumstances
under which the offer was made.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages £275, and they at the same time stated
that they were not at all influenced in coming to
this decision, by the offer of the £250.

CHESTER CIRCUIT.—CirEsTER, Aug. 7.
NISI PRIUS COURT.
(Before Mr. Baron Bramwell and a Common Jury.)

BLAKE V. DONE.
Mr. weisby and Mr. M. Lloyd were counsel for
the plaintiff; Mr. Grove, Q.C., and Mr. Pulling
for the defendant.
This was an action of ejectment by a mortgagee.
John Done made his will, and left his property to
the illegitimate son of his sister. The main ques-
tion to be tried was whether John Done, the tes-
tator, was capable of making a will.
Witnesses were called on behalf of the plaintiff
in support of the will, who, however, had to admit
that the testator was of dull mind. One old school-
master under whom he had been at school said he
managed during the three years he was with him

•••••eapp•••••,..a.,.. • ••••14,
to teach him to read and write, but he could never
get him to understand the simplest arithmetic, and
that he could not originate or start any idea of his
own. The man who prepared the will, and who
was over 80, was examined before a master, and_
stated that he thought the testator was capable of
making a will.
At the conclusion of the plaintiff's case Mr. Grove
objected that the action was brought by the wrong
person, and that it ought to have been in the names
of the executors and trustees under the will.
The learned Judge said if that were so he should
give the plaintiff leave to amend by adding the
names of those persons to the suit ; and they, being
present, were called, and stated they were willing
that their names should be added.
Witnesses were called for the defence, •
who said
the testator was of " dark mind," had no intellec-
tual power, could not count a shilling in halfpence.
One witness said he had done his best to teach 'lira
shoemaking, but he was too dull to learn •, that he
could not remember from day to day, and that he
could do uothing with him. He was what all the
Dones were—none of them were so sharp as they
should be. Mrs. Done, the testator's mother, was
not so sharp as the female race generally, an obser-
vation which caused much laughter, given, as it
was, as if the witness spoke feelingly on the
subject.
Mr. Welsby replied with great force on the whole
case, and
His Lordship summed up, leaving the question
of capacity generally to the jury, who returned a
verdict for the plaintiff.

A SWELL-1110BSMAN PERSONIFYING

THE REV. MR. SPURGEON.

LIMERICK, Tuesday.—A. circumstance of bare-
faced swindling, which occurred in this city ,yes-
terday, has given rise to much gossip among a"
classes, owing to its novelty of occurrence. It aP-•
pears that a young gentleman, clerically attired as
a minister of the Established Church, put up a fell
days since at a hotel in Roche's-street, of which
Mr. John Molony is proprietor, entering himself as,
the " Rev. Mr. Spurgeon, en route to Killarney,'
and stated to the hotel keeper, in the way of con-
. versation, " that he was specially engaged to preach
before the Queen during the Royal visit to the
romantic lakes of that part of her Majesty's domi-
nions, but that it was to be kept a perfect secret
until the Queen actually arrived." As a matter of
course, every possible attention was paid to the
supposed celebrated rev, gentleman, not only by
the proprietor, but waiters, chambermaids, &c., to
whom strict injunctions were issued not to breathe
his name, and strict secrecy was accordingly ob-
served by all. His chops at breakfast were made
savoury and done brown ; his lunch was punctually
placed upon the table precisely at one ; he dined at
six, and subsequently enjoyed each evening half a
bottle of wine and two glasses of brandy punch-
So far all went right, and in the day time he
strolled about the city, viewing its curiosities if
curiosities were to be seen ; and deeming it advis-
able to add a new suit to his wardrobe, he yester-
day entered the establishment of Mr.', O'Connor,
master tailor and military outfitter, William-street,
where he fitted himself and ordered the clothes
home to the hotel, first directing some slight alte-
rations to be made. The carpet-bag of the would-
be rev, gentleman was of small size, but this passed
unnoticed, being accounted for by the fact " that
great men never travel alone with lumber." The
master tailor sent the suit of clothes to the hotel by
his messenger, to be delivered to the Rev. N.
Spurgeon, with bill for amount. They were again
fitted on and pronounced " all right," the wearer
asking the messenger if he had balance of change
between the tailor's bill and a £lO note, to which
he replied in the negative, whereupon " the relr•
gentleman" exclaimed, " Oh, never mind ; 1 have
business at the bank, where I am just going, and
on my return I will discharge this bill. In the
meantime you can remain here and await my re-
appearance." The rev. gentleman then proceeded
to the bank—that is to the bank of the Shannon,
where he took steamer down river, and has not since
made his appearance, leaving his carpet-bag, which
was filled with hay behind him, for the tailor and
the hotel-keeper to nibble at. The police are on the
qui vivo, and as it is said that this rev. gentleman is
known, there can be no doubt of his speedy capture.

COUNTRY MARKETS.