The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-01 00:00:00

Mr. M. Chambers, in opening the case, said it was one
of the most important that had ever been brought into a
court of justice, because it involved the happiness of a
gentleman who had been beloved and respected, and also
deeply affected the interest cf another gentleman of great
eminence at the bar. Tho case, it was to be regretted,
would, in the course of its progress, bring before them
the secret communications fiat existed between client and
attorney; and as such communications had hitherto been
held sacred, it was to be regretted that Mr. Hatch had no
other course open to hire to regain his position in society
except by laying the whole 01 the circumstances before the
jury. In dealing with the case he should confine himself
entirely to facts ; and he thought, after having carefully
gone through the case, they would be of opinion that Mr.
Hatch had such a case as would carry conviction to the
mind of every person that he was entirely innocent of the
charge brought against him. He implored any person
who had the slightest doubt on the subject to have that
doubt thoroughly cleared up, as the most searching investi-
gation was courted by his client. It would not be necessary
for him to go at any great length into the facts, because the
proceedings at the trial at the Old Bailey would still
be fresh in the recollection of every person.
Mr. Hatch, at the time of the circumstance, occupied
the position of chaplain of the Wadsworth House of Cor-
rection, and, being desirous of increasing his income, he
undertook to educate two young children. On the 11th of
August Mrs. Plummer arrived at Wandsworth, with her
daughter Eugenie, a child about 11 years of age, and,
having arranged the preliminaries, she left her in Mr.
Hatch's care. The charge made agtinst Mr. Hatch was
that, very shortly after Mrs. Plummer had quitted Wands.
worth, he took the child Eugenic and his own adopted
daughter into the garden, and there dared her hand on the
lower part of his person, through a hole in his trowsers
pocket; and this incredible proceeding, it was stated, took
place in the broad daylight, in front cf Mr. Hatch's house.
The next charge was of an equally atrocious nature, namely,
that his client had gone into Eugenie's bedroom and
there made her use her hand in a manner that ho
would not shock the jury by further alluding to it. This
dreadful charge was not said to have occurred once or twice,
but was carried on for upwards of a fortnight. Sometime
after the younger child, Stephanie Flummer, aged eight,
was brought to Mr. Hatch's residence; and immediately
after she was left there by her parents Mr. Hatch commenced
the same disgusting practices towards her. The parents,
on being informed by the children that Mr. Hatch had
acted in a disgusting manner, immediately wrote to the
Bishop of Winchester, who transmitted a letter requiring
an explanation to Mr. Hatch, which also contained a copy
of the communication Mr. Plumm.3r had made to the
bishop. In a short time after a magisterial inquiry was
ordered, and on Saturday, Nov. 11, his client surrendered
himself into custody. Mrs. Hatch, onthe Sunday following,
engaged Messrs, Lewis to defend her husband, giving to them
the papers of Mr. Hatch, together with the bishop's
letter to her husband. The result of the first inquiry on
the Monday was that Mr. Hatch was committed for trial,
but was admitted to bail, himself in £5OO, and two sureties
in £250 each. His client was unable to procure such heavy
bail, and was consequently detained in custody. He main-
tained that the duty of a careful attorney was not to have
quietly allowed his client to be committed for trial on an
occasion like that, but to have represented that on such a,
charge made against a clergyman, ho wished to have au
opportunity of looking over his instructions, as he had re-
ceived them but a few hours before, and he fully believed
he should be in a position to produce overwhelming evidence)
to refute so grave a charge. He should also have con-
tended that his client ought to have been allowed to go
at large on his own recognisances ; at all events, until the
charge had been substantiated. The very fact of a committal
having gone forth was, he considered, fatal to Mr. Hatch.
Mrs. Hatch was cosapretely prostrated by such a deeision,
and immediately went to Mr. Lewis beseeching him to
allow her to see Mrs. Plummer or the gentleman conduct-
ing the prosecution ; but Mr. Lewis said she could but
prejudice the case of her husband by adopting the course
she proposed, and also told her that such a step was quite
irregular. Things went on until the evening before the
trial, when a meeting was held at Mr. Lewis's, and then
Mrs. hatch was informed that it was not their intention to
call witnesses for the defence. She strongly remonstrated
against such a course, but she was overruled, and t'old that
all things had been settled, and it had been fivally decided
not to call witnesses to rebut the evidence given for the
prosecution. The morning of the trial came. Miss
Howe, the servants of Mr. Hatch, and a number of
other persons were in attendance in the lobby of the Old
Court of the Old Bailey, who could speak positively in
favour of Mr. Hatch, and Mr. Lewis well knew that they
were. there. Mrs. Hatch could not help, in her great
anxiety of mind, again begging of Mr. Lewis to instrr,at
Mr. Hatch's counsel (Mr. Sergeant Ballantine) to call
the witnesses, but he said, " Oh, no. It's all arranged—
we shall only call witnesses to character," She, poor
woman, then, in the agony of her minds said, " Mr. Lewis !
Mr. Lewis are the Plummer:3 to have it all their own
way ?" He replied, " Oh, it's all right--everything is
arranged ; leave it all to me." The trial concluded, and Mr.
Hatch was convicted. But how ? He would not say the jury
were wrong. Far be it from him to utter such a thought.
The judge was one of the most upright on the bench,
and he could not but think that the fatal verdict was to be
attributed to the fact of, not calling the witnesses to contra-
dict the statement:a of those for the prosecution. Witnesses,
it was true, were called as to character, and :the character
Mr. Hatc,l,l received was such as any man might be proud
of) klit now came the sentence. Mr. Hatch was then con-
. a
uemned to the utmost extent of the law. But fortunately
there were those who, in spite of everything to the con-
trary, fully believed in the innocence of Mr. Hatch, and
steps wore taken to indict Eugenie Plummer for perjury.
He could not deduce a stronger circumstance in favour of
his client than what occurred some time after the trial, when
eleven of the jury who had convicted him signed a petition
for his pardon to the Secretary of State. The petition was
ineffectual at that moment, and the trial for perjury
proceeded. Mr. Hatch convicted Eugenie Plummer,
and this result was arrived at by the examination of the
six witnesses who were in attendance at the first trial.
He did not think a stronger proof of the innocence of
his client could be adduced, and it • was to mark the
dissatisfaction and injury which Mr. Hatch had suffered
that he now took the present step against Mr. Lewis. At
the second trial Mr. Hatch offered himself for cross-exa-
mination, in which he was most minutely examined. Mrs.
Hatch, Lucy Hatch, and others were examined and be-
lieved, and his client was now in this painful
position—he was not a guilty man, but he was
a most unfortunate one ; and although he had received
her Majesty's most gracious pardon, yet the injury he had
sustained was irreparable—he was, in fact, a ruined man
--his hopes had been annihilated by the conviction against
him, and for years the stigma of conviction would preclude
him obtaining a livelihood. His client said he had a cause
of complaint, the law said so too, and it was to obtain
reparation for the injury he had suffered that he now came
into a court of justice.

The learned gentleman then called his first witness, Mrs.
Hatch. On that lady taking her position in the Witness-
box,

Tho Lord Chief Baron said it appeared to him that the
ease would certainly not finish that day, and that it would
be a very protracted one. When he tame to the court that
morning, for the first time since his illness, he had no
idea that such a heavy case was set down for hearing, and
as he thought it would be impossible for him to occupy his
seat that day through so important a trial, he had sent for
the services of one of his learned brothers (Baron Martin)
who would try the case.

Mr. M. Chambers, with the greatest respect to the
learned judge, said he thought it was absolutely essential
that the judge trying the case should have heard the open-
ing speech of counsel.

The Lord Chief Baron said he did not think Mr. Cham-
bers would suffer in the least by that, as he would take care
to inform Baron Martin of every thing of importance.
Mr. Chambers preferred, as his lordship had heard his
opening remarks, that he should hear the cause.

The Lord Chief Baron said it was utterly impossible he
could undergo the fatigue of even taking the necessary
notes of so long a trial.

Mr. Sergeant Shea• also would prefer that his lordship
should hear the case. He much regretted the cause that
had compelled his lordship to make the announcement he
had done. There was not a learned judge on the bench
who had, for so many years, without the slightest interrup-
tion, occupied his seat with so much constancy and regu-
larity, and he could not but say he sincerely regretted his
lordship's indisposition. The better course he thought
would be to adjourn the case until a future day.
Mx. Edwin James thought a week's adjournment would
meet the convenience of all parties.
Mr. Chambers would much rather it were possible to
proceed that day.

The Lord ClAief Baron—you can do so. Another judge