The Sun.
London, England, 1861-12-20 00:00:00

THE 'SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 20, 1861.

the action for libel by Mr. White, and the alleged I
transaction was on the ground of the action for
seduction against him by Mr. Howarth.
Thomas Chadwick, estate agent at Wilmstow
and Manchester, said,—The plaintiff White is a
dentist practising in Lever-street, Manchester, and
has a private residence at Alderley, near my own,
and Howarth is a cotton-spinner at Middleton, six
miles from Manchester. Mr. Howarth called at my
office in the end of July or the beginning of August
last, and in the course of conversation with me
said, speaking as if in very great trouble, that his
daughter had been recently confined; that the father
of her child, he had learnt only that morning, was
Mr. White, the dentist, and that it had been begot-
ten when she was under chloroform; that the first
time she went to see Mr. White was professionally
with her mother; the next time she was alone, and
was put under chloroform, and that must have been
the time when the child was begotten ; and that
the third time she went he attempted to take
liberties with her, and she threatened thereupon to
scream " Murder ;" that he desisted then, and she
never saw him again. It was from that circum-
stance that she believed him to be the father, as she
had never bad connexion with any living man un-
less it were with him when she was under chloro-
form. Before this statement of Mr. Howarth I had
heard something to the same effect in the street, and
I told Mr. Howarth that I had. I communicated
the conversation to Mr. White on the 3d or 4th of
October, in the street opposite the Manchester In-
firmary, while I was in company with Mr. Green,
Mr. White's solicitor.
Cross-examined—l have not written down the
conversation, but I have it as literally as possible.
I understood that all the information Mr. Howarth
gave me was from his daughter, but I will pledge
my oath whether it was the belief of the father or
the belief of the daughter that events had happened
as they were stated. I certainly understood it was
the daughter's belief. Mr. White himself had told
me that he had administered chloroform to a young
woman, but he was not then speaking of Miss
Howarth, and, in reply to a question by Mr. Ho-
warth, I2told him I heard Mr. White say so, but
whether that question was put at the first in-
terview I cannot remember. Mr. White did not
say that he was in the habit of administering chlo-
roform, but in the course of a conversation at my
breakfast table, in presence of my wife and family,
he mentioned one instance in which he had had
considerable difficulty in recovering the patient
from the effects.

This closed the plaintiff's case in the action of
" White v. Howarth" for libel,

Mr. Overend then addressed the jury for Mr.
Howarth as defendant in that action, and opened
the case for the plaintiff in the action of " Howarth
v. White" for seduction of the daughter, producing
the following evidence.
• Mary Howarth—l am daughter of Mr. Edmund
Howarth, of Middleton, the eldest of seven children,
and 19 years of age. My father is a cotton-spinner,
and has a provision shop. Since I was at school I
have been assisting in the shop. I had occasion for
the assistance of a dentist, and therefore went with
my mother to Mr. White's, in Manchester, early in
September, 1860. I returned to him the week
following by his appointment, because he was then
engaged. My sister, and not my mother, was in
company with me on that occasion. He filled one
tooth, and prepared another, and I paid him for it
then. By appointment I went again the following
week alone, and had two teeth filled. I paid him
on that occasion, and went by appointment again
the following week alone. This was on Wednesday,
I think, in September, but I cannot tell the day of
the month. I was put into Mr. White's room and
he came in afterwards and shook hands with me,
asking how I was, He had not done so before. I
had two teeth filled, and while he was doing so he
addressed me as " love" and " dear," and by other
words to soothe. We had conversation about
Middleton and people there. I paid him that time
and made no appointment to go again, but he said
that if I wished to go again I must write and inform
him a week before the time. Middleton Agricultural
Show took place last year on the 4th of October, and
the week after the show I appointed to go to him
the following Thursday week, writing him on the
Wednesday. I went accordingly on Thursday, Octo-
ber 18, alone. Mr. White came into the room, shook
hands with me, asking how I was, and kissed me. I
sat down on his operating chair, and had one tooth
filled and another taken out. While he was operating
he addressed me as before, " love" and " dear."
" Don't be afraid ; it won't hurt you." Before he
gave me the chloroform ho said the tooth would not
be much good to fill, and that there would be violent
pain for three or four hours. I said I dared not
have it out. Ha wished me to have chloroform. I
refused three or four times. He said it would do
me no harm if my things were loose about me. He
then asked me -whether I wore stays, and whether
they were tight. I said I did wear stays, and he
said that I had better loosen them. He left the
room while I did so. He returned about five
minutes after, and administered the chloroform on
a white handkerchief. He got the chloroform from
a bottle with a yellow cork to it that stood on a
kind of sideboard. I was on the chair,ia large easy
chair with a back rather reclining, and a footstool
in front. I was leaning back, and my head in
something that fixed the head. He held the hand-
kerchief to my mouth and nostrils, and I felt going
to sleep very fast. I drew my breath very quickly,
and he said, "Do not breathe so fast ; it will be
better for you." When I came round I asked if
my tooth was out, and he said it was, and was on
the side table. At that time he was rubbing my
feet, about my ankles. Afterwards he put his hand
on my heart and said, "Your heart is beating all
right now." He then slided his hands from my
heart to my hands, which were on my chest, and
kept them there. (The wan( ss then described the
defendant's conduct before and while he had con-
nexion with her.) I denied him many a time ; I
did so because some one might scc it from the
window. I did not cry out, because my passion
was great ; but I said if he ever did so again I
would scream out. The defendant then left me
alone in the room for half an hour. After he re-
turned he remarked upon the break out on my face,
and wrote:out a prescription for me (put in evidence),
and bade me take it to Standering's, in Piccadilly, to
have it made up. He gave me also some brass metals
to put round my wrists and ankles (said to be gal-
vanic chains), I paid him half a guinea just before
I went out. He said he would not charge for ex-
tracting my tooth, 1 asked him if there was any
discount, and he said " No." My mother bade me
do so always, for having paid ready money. He
said he did not allow any discount, but he would
give me either ss. for the bazaar or three half-crown
boxes of tooth powder, and I preferred the ss. He
gave me the ss. and a half-crown box of tooth-
powder, and bade me get such a toothbrush as he
showed me at Standering's. He then shook hands
with me and kissed me, and I came away. I had
been there in the room with him from about half-
past 2 o'clock to a quarter to 5 o'clock. He told me
before leaving not to tell my mother that I had had
chloroform. He urged me very hard about that.
About a fortnight after this I found that I was not
as I ought, and sent a note to Mr. White, stating I
was distressed on account of it, and that I should
be obliged to tell my mother of the proceedings that
had occurred at his place the last time I was there.
I asked him to write me by the bearer, but to say
nothing in the letter except about my teeth. He
wrote me by post next day, requesting me to go to
him, and I went alone on the 9th Nov. When I saw

him in the waiting-room he asked me how I came
to write such a note as that by any person or a
friend either, but I said he knew what it was for,
and told him who brought it. He was angry with
me, and said I should have sent it by post. I said I
sent it by the girl because I wished to come on the
following day, the Thursday. The letter, he said,
looked as if it had been opened. In his room after
this he scaled my teeth, calling me endearing names
as he had before, and then began to take liberties
with me again, but I would not allow him, and said
I would scream out. He again worked at my teeth,
and then attempted liberties again, using very low
terms, and I cried "Oh," but I do not know whether
any one heard me. He tried to have connection
with me, but I would not allow him. He said, " We
must set you right." He would not take payment,
and I went away. I called on him again the day
the Empress of the French was in Manchester.
Miss Richardson was with me, but I was called
alone into his room. He said the pain of
my teeth and the cause of my not being right
arose from cold. I left him on the 9th November
without shaking hands, being rather angry, but
bade him good bye. I was delivered of a child
on the 16th July this year. Mr. White is the
father of it.

Cross-examined by Mr. James—l was seven
times altogether at Mr. White's, and I think on
four of these I paid him. The first call atter I
had been with my mother I paid him for the first
time 10s. 6d. ; the week following 21s. ; the week
following that 21s. The fourth time was on the
18th October, and that would be after an interval
of three weeks. I am sure of that. I am quite sure
I did not pay two guineas the first time, nor one
guinea and a half the second. I never saw him
or wrote him after that day the Empress of the
French was in Manchester.
Witness was then examined as to her previous con-
duct, and especially with certain men, who were
mentioned, one of them being a carter in her father's
service. Her answers were not such as to give a
high idea of her prudence or her morality.
Mr. Lunn, one of the surgeons of the Manchester
Infirmary, said—Chloroform is administered in an
immense number of cases weekly. I have seen it
administered to women. Before sleep comes on I
hgYe liCOll it produce MiteMOUt. If y9ll figLOther

the patient with chloroform there will be less ex-
citement. Afterwards, in coining out of the chloro-
form, persons ale differently affected. I have seen
in women in that case a manner more than hysteri-
cal, what might be called an indecent manner,
moving the arms as if to embrace and the lips as if
kissing, and using lewd dirty language—the lan-
guage rarely, but I have heard it. Chloroform if
given in a particular dose would have an effect on
the sexual passion ; an over-dose would have quite
an opposite effect and prostrate the patient's strength.
Vomiting shows that chloroform has been over-
administered. The effect of chloroform would in
time make a cork light yellow. A handkerchief
more than an inhaler would have a sexual effect. °
Anything about the neck of the patient should be
loose; it might be prudent to loose the stays, but I
have never had occasion to require that. I never
administer chloroform when alone with the patient.
Cross-examined—Chloroform prevents the sensa-
tion of pain. I know Mr. Simeon, of Edinburgh,
and his book on " Anaesthesia," and that he denies
the sexual effect on women, but that is in obstetric
practice, and there I agree with him. I speak of
hysteria in two cases, and of the indecency in only
one. That was the case in which chloroform was
given at a dentist's house by myself, to a lady who
was to have a tooth extracted ; that is the only case.
T. M. Lall, assistant to Standering, chemist, in
Piccadilly, Manchester, proved that the prescrip-
tion spoken of by Miss Howarth was made up on
the 18th of October. He did not know of its being
made up again till three weeks ago. There was
no date to the prescription as it appeared in the
book, but he had no doubt, from what preceded and
went after, that it was the 18th of October.
Mr. Manifold, of the Northern Hospital, Liver-
pool, spoke to the sexual effect of chloroform.
Cross-examined—He spoke of only two cases,
although his experience extended to 400 or 500
cases of chloroform being administered. He would
not say that sleep had an erotic tendency, although
the fancy might operate under sleep.
Mrs. Anna Howarth, the mother of the young
woman in question, said she thought it would be
the beginning of September when she and her
daughter went to Mr. White's. He could not see
them then, but appointed for them to return a week
after. Her daughter did go several times, and she
always paid, but she could not tell how much money
she had given her. She had spoken to her daugh-
ter about asking discount. She remembered her
getting a prescription; it was on the 18th of Octo-
ber, about a fortnight alter the show.
Eliza Howarth, the daughter of a publican at
Middleton, proved the delivery of a letter from Miss
Mary Howarth to Mr. White at Manchester on the
7th of November. She remembered the date, be-
cause Mrs. Whitehead was lying dead at the time.
She waited for an answer, and Mr. White came
down stairs and said he could not give her an an-
swer, but he would write.
Robert Fielding, a corn merchant at Middleton,
said he heard of Miss Howarth having a child in
July. He knew Mr. White. He-went to him to
his place of business in Lever-street before Christ-
mas, 1860, for the purpose of having something
done to his teeth. Mr. White knew him, and knew
where he came from.

Mr. 0 verend—Did he draw your teeth out, or
stop them, or clean them ?
Witness—That's my business. (Laughter.) He
did what was required. Mr. White asked him if he
knew Miss Howarth, and he said he did. He asked
him first if he came from Middleton, although he
knew. He answered in the affirmative, and then
Mr. White asked him if he knew Mr. Howarth.
He said he did; and, after asking him about seve-
ral other persons, asked him if he thought Middle-
ton was a place which would pay if he went over
and endeavoured to establish a practice there. He
replied that it would. Mr. White then said he had a
great many patients coming from there. He next
asked how Mr. Howarth stood—if he was a respec-
table man, and if he was a wealthy man. Witness
replied in the affirmative to both questions. He then
asked if Miss Howarth was engaged to any person.
Witness said two or three had paid their addresses
to her, and that was all he knew about her. Mr.
White also asked if she was respectable. To that
question he gave no answer. White went to Mid-
dleton about six weeks or two months ago, and was
making inquiries from witness about the eharacter
of Miss Howarth.

Frederick Andrew Taylor, assistant to his father,
Mr. Edmund Taylor, a surgeon at Middleton, said
he attended Miss Howarth during her confinement,
and he heard a statement made by her.
Susan Aldis, the keeper of a boarding school at
Harrogate, said Miss Howarth was a pupil of hers.
She kit school 12 mouths last Christmas. She re-
ceiN ed a letter from her last January.
Mr. James at first strongly objected to the admis-
sibility of this letter, but afterwards consented, al-
though it was not evidence, that it should go before
the jury.
Another letter in reply to this was read from the
witness, advising her former pupil to communicate
the whole of the facts to her parents immediately.
This was the evidence for the plaintiff in the action
of "Howarth V. White" for seduction.

Mr. James then put the defendant himself into
the witness-box.

John Haynes White said he had never any con-
nexion with Miss Howarth at all. He had been in
business 15 years. A man and his wife named Sher-
ratt resided at his place of business in Lever-street,
and took care of it. The wife or the man attended
to the door. The man was an assistant in the
mechanical part of the business. Witness himself
resided at Alderley. His operating room in Lever-
street was on the first floor, to the front. He had
as large a practice as any other dentist in Manches-
ter. eNas. Sherratt was in the habit of entering the
names of people as they called. Ho himself had a
book in which he entered the days for which he
made engagements. That book would enable him
to state on what days he had made engagements with
Miss Howarth. The first engagement entered in
the bJel.; for Miss Howarth was for the sth of
September. By reference to Mrs. Sherratt's book
it would be found that it was the 28th of August
when they called. On the sth of September he filled
some teeth for Miss Howarth, and received two
guineas from her, which was entered in his cash-
book, produced. The next engagement was made
for the 12th. In his cash-book there was an entry
of .f.:l lls. 6d. received from Miss Howarth on that
day. He filled two teeth on that day, and removed
some teeth. He used chloroform. He had used
chloroform for 12 years in extracting teeth, and had
always used it by himself without assistance. On
this occasion he used the same dose as on other
occasions. Ho did not take the slightest liberty
with her while she was under the influence of
chloroform. She recovered almost immediately.
That was the only instance in which he used
chloroform to her. He always asked females if they
laced at all tight. He asked her the same question,
and her reply was that she did not think she was
tight-laced. He told her she had better be cautious,
and he would leave the room for five minutes.
She was under his treatment altogether about
an hour or an hour and a half. He never kissed
her. He did not remember making use of en-
dearing expressions, such as "dear" and "love," to
her, but it was not at all unusual for him when
treating young persons and children to use the word
" dear." He was a married man and had three chil-
dren. Immediately after Miss Howarth left he went
to the station to go to his residence. The next en-
gagement was for Oct. 18. Referring to his cash-
book, he found that on Oct. 18th he received from
Miss Howarth one guinea. He might have given
ss. and a box of tooth-powder. He had given tooth-
powder on various occasions for bazaars. On Oct.
18th he filled two teeth for her. He did not extract
teeth more than once. He never charged her or re-
ceived anything from her afterwards. He only re-
ceived money three times. He certainly did not
take any liberties with her on that day nor on any
other day. Referring to Mrs. Sherratt's book, he
found she was there en Nov Ist. He removed some
filling on that day, and scaled some teeth for her.
He made no engagement on that day for the future.
He remembered receiving a note from Eliza
Howarth about Nov. 6th. He told her he could not
give an answer then, but he would write an answer.
He was very busy at the time, and that was the
reason he did not give an answer then. He believed
that letter was destroyed. He had looked for it and
could not find it. As far as he could recollect—and
he thought he could recollect it all—the letter com-
menced, " Mr. White, Sir,—ln accordance with your
wish I write to say that I am not as comfortable as
I could wish, and. I should be glad if you wouldsend
me something to use, and direct it to the Post-office,
Middleton." He thought that was about all. The
learned counsel having read the girl's statement as
to the contents of the letter, the witness said it was
quite untrue. The letter contained no allusion to
her being pregnant, or to anything improper having
occurred. He wrote a reply on the 7th, and addressed
it to her own house. He did not send it according
to her request, because he did not wish to lend him-
self to any underhand proceeding. He was stating
this with regard to the address to the best of his be-
lief. He wrote : " Mr. White's compliments to Miss
Howarth, and he does not quite comprehend the
meaning of her letter ; and if her teeth are at all
uneasy, she had better come to Manchester." Ac-
cordingly, on the 9th she came to Manchester.
Nothing of any moment took place. She said her
teeth were less painful, and he told her he thought
it was a slight cold, and in two or three weeks it
might all pass away. He did not got to her and
say, " Why did you send such a note by any per-
son ?" He denied the truth of the girl's evidence on
that point. He did not on that occasion take any
liberties with her or use any low terms to her. She
calle I again on the 30th of November. She did not
on that occasion pay anything about not Wing right.

She never charged him with having had connexion
with her. Mrs. Howarth called on the 18th Sept.
and requested him to make some reduction in his
charges. He said he would make no reduction, but
he would do the best he could for her mouth. The
prescription produced was in his handwriting. He
had some conversation with her about a scorbutic
affection before he gave her the prescription.
Cross-examined by Mr. Overend—He saw she
had some scurvy on her hands, and he suggested a
remedy. He did not say " This will do you good,
my dear." He charged sometimes half a guinea, and
sometimes five guineas, according to who the patient
was. The witness went on to say that he had no re-
collection of having administered chloroform to a
young woman in the absence of a third party. The
lady referred to having been brought into court, he
said he had no recollection of her. He sometimes
gave the ladies a kiss when they were young, but
not strangers—sometimes when their mothers were
not there. He had not kissed young women, stran-
gers, who had come to his place. He might have
kissed a young woman who was his patient if she
was not a stranger.
Rebecca Sherratt verified the entries made by
her in the register of visitors. She said she re-
membered Mr. White using chloroform to Miss
Howarth. She did not remember the date. Mr.
White went home soon after Miss Howarth went
away. It was before the 18th Sept., the day on
which Mrs. Howarth came. When Mrs. Howarth was
talking with Mr. White on that day, she thought
she was making a complaint about the chloroform
having been used.
Cross-examined—She did not know that there
was any charge against Mr. White until after the
child was born.
This concluded the evidence on both actions.
Mr. Overend this morning addressed the jury for
Mr. Howarth, and
Mr. James replied upon the whole for Mr. White.
Mr. Justice Crompton having summed up the
evidence,
The jury retired to consider their verdict, and
after being three hours and a-half in deliberation,
returned a verdict for the plaintiff White in the
action for slander, because they were satisfied that
the alleged seduction did not take place while the
young woman was under chloroform; they, there-
fore, gave one farthing damages. In the action for
seduction they found for the plaintiff Howarth—
Damages, 40s.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—EXETER, DEC. 18.
(Before Mr. Justice Williams.)
Sarah Sheppard was indicted for the wilful mur-
der of Mary Ann Ashton, at Stockland, on the 26th
of October.
Mr. Carter and Mr. Bere prosecuted; Mr. H. T.
Cole defended the prisoner.
This was a charge of wilful murder, but different
in its details from most other cases. '1 he murder
was said to have arisen from various acts of omis-
sion and commission. The prisoner was the wife of
a labouring man. They had bath been married be-
fore. By her first husband the prisoner had a daugh-
ter, whose death was the subject of the present in-
quiry. The deceased was about 18 years of age.
She occasionally went out to service, but was at
various times at home with her mother. After 11
Midsummer last several persons had conversations
with the prisoner, who was told that her daughter
Mary Ann was in the family-way ; when the pri-
soner said, if it should prove to be so, no one should
come near her until she was dead, that she would
not put a finger near her, and no one else should
so long as she was living. One person asked
her if sl- e thought her (the prisoner's) husband
was the father of the child. The prisoner replied
" No," but she was afraid something was wrong, as
she thought her husband had more feeling for her
daughter than for her. The young woman then
lived with Mrs. Turner, who suspecting something
charged her with being pregnant. The girl admitted
that she was so, and this fact Mrs. Turner after
wards communicated to the prisoner, who replied
that if she was in the familyway by her husband
she would run the pick into her and kill her. The
young woman left Mrs. Turner's and went to reside
with her mother. On the 26th of October the pri-
soner went into Mr Stack's, a chemist at Honiton,
about 4 o'clock in the afternoon, and asked for some
smelling salts, and then asked for something for her
daughter, who, she said, had just been confined.
The chemist asked the prisoner where she lived.
She said at Stockland, which was six miles from
Honiton. The chemist aeked if she had left any
one with her daughter. The prisoner replied that
she had left four women and a midwife with her
daughter, who had had a fainting fit. This was
untrue, as no one was left with her daughter. The
prisoner said the child was dead. The prisoner
called in a midwife about 1 o'clock the next morn-
ing, as she said, to assist in the confinement, but
upon going to the prisoner's house the midwife
found the girl dead, and she had been so for several
hours. It was therefore alleged that the prisoner
had purposely allowed her daughter to die of ne-
glect, and that this, coupled with the prisoner's
expressions, amounted to the crime of murder, be-
cause if see undertook a duty and by reason of
want of skill or care she caused the death of another
she would be guilty either of murder or manslaughter.
After all the evidence had been gone through,
the judge said he thought the prosecution ought to
call the only person who was in the prisoner's house
at the time.
A girl of fifteen, who was the daughter of the
prisoner's husband by his first wife, was then
called, and she stated that the prisoner went to
Honiton on the day in question about two o'clock,
and did not return till seven. No one else was
left in the house bat witness, Mary Ann Ashton,
and two little children. The deceased was assist-
ing to clean the house; she was not in bed when
the prisoner returned. They then had tea, and the
witness went out to look after the geese. She re-
turned about 9 o'clock, and went out again to look
for her father; the prisoner accompanied her. The
prisoner came home again, and the witness went
again to look for the geese. Witness came home
again about 11 o'clock, and then found the prisoner
helping deceased into bed. The prisoner went about
12 that night to fetch a woman (the midwife). The
deceased was then alive, but died in about ten
minutes after the prisoner went away. The pri-
sener returned about one o'clock.
Cross-examined—The prisoner gave the deceased
some brandy and water when she put her into bed,
and asked ber how she felt, and she said " Better."
The prisoner sent witness out to get assistance, but
the woman refused to come, and then the prisoner
went off after the other woman. The prisoner
seemed kind to the deceased. On the previous Tues-
day the prisoner asked her if she was in the family-
way, and she said she was, but she had a long time
yet.
Re-examined—Nothing was said as to who the
father was. The prisoner had often asked deceased
if she was in the family-way. Deceased said," Time
will make mention, and then you will see." The
deceased was at home from the beginning of hay
harvest until she died. The child was born when
witness went to fetch the first woman the prisoner
sent her for. The child was born while witness
was out, but it died as soon as she returned, at 11
o'clock. Deceased went into the bedroom several
times when the prisoner was at Honiton.
By the Judge—The baby was born before the
prisoner was trying to put deceased into bed ; she
was standing on the floor. The baby was lying on
a board on the floor, wrapped up in flannel. The
father went away to market that morning at seven
o'clock, and did not come back till after the baby
was born.
Mr. Gerard, the surgeon, stated that he made a
post-mortem examination of the body of the de-
ceased and the child on the following day. The
child bled to death. The umbilical cord was not pro-
perly tied. He then examined the body of the
woman, and she had bled to death. Had a proper
person attended in time, the life of the woman
might have been saved. From what he had heard
sworn to-day, the woman must have been dead
seven or eight hours before the midwife came. The
body was in a healthy condition.
The witness was cross-examined at great length
as to the progress of labour.
Mr. Cole submitted that there was no case to go
to the jury.
The Judge said, of course he had considered it,
and he should tell the jury that if they thought the
daughter was living with her mother and was taken
in labour, it was her duty to take all reasonable
care to procure assistance, and if she omitted to do
so it amounted to manslaughter; but if necessary he
should reserve the point.
Mr. Cole then urged that, as the deceased was
emancipated, the mother was not obliged to render
the assistance, but the husband's daughter had put
the case out of court.
The Judge said he should leave the whole case
to the jury, and would reserve anything that might
be requisite. He should put it to the jury how far
they could believe the girl, because she was called
by the prosecution under peculiar circumstances, as
he had told the counsel for the prosecution that he
ought to call her, as she was in the house at the
time.
Mr. Cole then addressed the jury for the prisoner.
Mr. Justice Williams having summed up,
The jury found the prisoner guilty of man-
slaughter.
The Judge told the prisoner that he had reserved
a point of law for the consideration of the Judges,
and it would be argued at the earliest convenient
opportunity, and he should therefore respite the
sentence.
Mr. Cole applied to the Court to allow the pri-
soner to be bailed.
The Judge said it was not a case for bail.
The prisoner WA then removed from the bar. I