The Sun.
London, England, 1861-09-25 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENTINy, StiTTEVIBER 25. 1361.

tusiness done

6 61

- 1
} ipr
i i

9} 10i

4 3h
1 i ,
24 25

8i 8f

8 gi
19i 206
BE4 39

8 D
4O 414
56 57

3i 2jt

6; 8;
8* q
lel It
26 27

7 74
91 104
214 224

i i
1 £

355 360
75 80
25i 264
35 31
11 13
31 41

44 5
11 2
34 36

21 31
/ 1
43 45
54 6
34 4
8 84
41 54
9 10
41 43

295 105
3 3}
I
1128 1174
31 33
14 11
52 6i
it
15 17
44 46
325 115
81 88
75 85
1t 2
6 7
13 14
14 16

1011

1011
141 1
19f1

MINE .

1 If
pr ip
39. 406
1 16
di®.
35 37
h
6 8
I
23 24
iP
1 16 p
61 71
iP

2 4
1*
id p
54 6

131 I

3i I

ARTIST.

CRIMINAL COURT.—(This Day.)

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Ryles.)
ALLEGED MURDER.

John Speller, aged 19, described as a sailor, was indicted
for the wilful murder of William Dixon, on board the
American ship Bosphorus, on the 6th of September.
Mr. Orridge having briefly addressed the jury on the
part of the prosecution, called his evidence.
Thomas Porter, a seaman on board the Bosphorus, said
that vessel arrived off the Commercial Docks on Friday,
Sept. 6. The mate ordered all hands on deck, and witness
went down to the forecastle to tell the men who were there.
The prisoner war. one of them. Prisoner said he would not
go until witness went, upon which witness caught him by
the collar and tried to pull him out. They both fell, the
prisoner being underneath. The prisoner ran away, and
witness jumped on a chest. The man Dixon was coming
in at the time, and attempted to take from the prisoner a
knife which he had in his hand. Dixon was stabbed, but
witness did not see the blow, although he saw the knife in
the prisoner's hand. The prisoner had his right arm up
when Dixon caught hold of him.
Police-constable 264 M produced a large clasp-knife with
which the assault was said to have been committed.
Examination continued—Dixon died within three minutes
after he was stabbed. There had been quarrels between
witness and the prisoner during the voyage, bat not on the
day the assault on Dixon took place.
Cross-examined by Mr. Thomson—Dixon and witness
had been on shore in the morning, and had been drinking.
Witness had two glasses of gin. All the sailors in the ship.
carried knives in their belts.

Re-examined by Mr. Orridge—Witness was not altoge-
ther sober when he had the struggle with the prisoner, nor
altogether drunk.

James Galbraith, a seaman on board the Bosphorus,
gave a similar version of the quarrel. He saw the pri-
soner strike Dixon a back-handed blow with the knife.
lhe prisoner then threw the knife away. He had heard
the prisoner and Dixon quarrel in the morning about money.
The prisoner said, "I will have my money, or I'll see for
why."

A police-constable said that when he took the prisoner
into custody he said be was very sorry that Dixon was
dead. He meant it for the other' Man (Porter), who had
very cruelly used hi'm on the voyage..

Medical evidence was given that the wound received was
sufficient to account for death.

Mr. Sleigh (who, with Mr. Thompson, appeared for the
defence) made a very able speech to the jury on behalf of
the prisoner, suggesting that there was no motive for the
committal of murder, and that the offence was nothing more
than manslaughter at the most. He thought that the jury
would be still safer in acquitting the prisoner on the ground
of the blow by which Dixon met his death being unpre-
meditated and accidental.

The judge left it to the jury to say whether it was mur-
der, manslaughter, or accident.

The jury found the prisoner guilty of manslaughter,
adding that he had received provocation which mitigated
the offence.

Mr. Justice Byles said he would take time to consider
the sentence.

THE CASE OF DR. GRIFFITH JONES.

Dr. Griffith Jones, surgeon, was indicted for wilful and
corrupt perjury in propounding a will before Sir C. Cress-
well. 1 here was also an indictment against the prisoner
for having forged the will—the will of Sophia Bellis.
The indictment charging the prisoner with wilful and
corrupt perjury was read by the clerk,
The prisoner pleaded guilty.

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine said that under the circumstances
he should withdraw from the prosecution on the second in-
dictment. He had come to the conclusion that it would
be a vain inquiry. He might mention that the perjury
was that the prisoner had represented on oath before Sir
C. Cresswell' that he was a Dotter of Medicine, having
taken that degree at Aberdeen. It appeared from the pri-
soner's own admission on cross-examination that he had
taken no such degree, and that he was represented at Aber-
deen by another.

Mr. Sergeant Parry, on the part of the prisoner, said that
the perjury was of the most trumpery character. The pri-
soner said he was a doctor of medicine of the University of
Aberdeen. Such was not the case, but he was a member
of the Royal College of Surgeons.
Mr. Justice Byles said that such statements must- be
made on affidavits, and he would consider them before pass-
ing sentence.
A verdict of not guilty was then taken on the indictment
for forgery, and sentence on that of perjury was deferred
till to-morrow morning.

NEW COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Keating.)
THE CHARGE AGAINST VINCENT COLLUCCI, THE ITALIAN

In this case the prisoner, Vincent Collucci, is indicted
for larceny, in stealing from Miss Frederica Johnson, 19
£lOO Bank of England notes, and also with obtaining the
same notes under fraudulent pretences.
On Monday, Mr. Sleigh, with whom was Mr. Giffard, on
the part of the prisoner, made an application to the Re-
corder for leave to inspect and take copies of certain letters
written by the prosecutrix in the Italian language to the
prisoner, and which were taken possession of by Sergeant
Tanner of the detective force on taking the prisoner into
custody, they being material and necessary for the purpose
of properly conducting the defence, and also that the trial
should be postponed until next session.
Mr. Sergeant Parry opposed the application on the part
of the prosecution until he had seen his learned brother,Mr.
Montague Chambers.

At the sitting of the Court this morning, Mr. Montague
Chambers, Q.C., with whom was Mr. Sergeant Parry and
Mr. F. IL Lewis, on the part of the prosecution, said that
with reference to the application made by Mr. Sleigh to the
Recorder, he had now to state to his lordship for his infor-
mation, that in the case of Vincent Collucci, there were two
bills returned by the grand jury, the ono for larceny, in
stealing a large sum of money, £1,900, from the prosecutrix,
and the other for fraudulently obtaining the same large sum
of money by false pretences. The application was to in-
spect and make translation and copies of a number of
letters, 63 in number, which were written in the Itali an
language, and which were in the hands of the police. On
the part of the prosecution he must oppose the application,
on the ground that the letters in question were wholly and
absolutely irrelevant to the nature of the charge, and could
in no way be material to the defence of the prisoner. He
(the learned counsel) had read the translations of the
letters, and he could not help thinking that the only object
the prisoner had was to create intimidation or to gratify
some morbid, idle, and improper curiosity, in addition to
which the affidavit upon which the application was
made was defective, and another difficulty to his
mind was that the prisoner himself ought to have
pointed out what part of the letters would assist his
defence. The second indictment charged the prisoner with
falsely pretending that the package or parcel contained cer-
tain letters, whereas the parcel only contained old news-
papers, and one single letter so folded as to deceive the pro-
secutrix. At the examination of the prisoner, Mr. D. Keane,
who appeared for him, had been shown some of these
translations, and Mr. Collett, who had acted as the attor-
ney, had since retired from the case, and a Mr. Sidney
was the attorney who made the affidavit. That affidavit
had been fully answered by Mr. Lewis, the attorney for
the prosecution, and he (the learned counsel) could assure
his lordship that the letters could in no way affect the pri-
soner's defence ; and he repeated the only object was to ob-
tain copies for the purpose of intimidation, and to gratify a
morbid and idle curiosity, and if his learned friends had
copies they might get into other persons' hands.
Mr. Sleigh, in support of his application, said surely the
counsel who conducted this defence were the best judges
what would be material, and the letters might be of great
importance, and might utterly refute the charge, and
ho felt he could not properly conduct the defence without
an inspection of the letters.

Mr. Justice Keating desired that the translations should
be handed to him. He would look through them, and in-
form Mr. Sleigh to-morrow morning what he would do. If
any of the letters contained any matter at all relevant there
might be ground to allow inspection, but he should cer-
tainly not feel justified in allowing copies to be taken.

,
The prisoner, who is an extremely good-looking gentle-
manly man, was in the dock during the application, but not
placed at the bar.

THE NEWTON-STREET, HOLBORN, AND WESTMINSTER

MURDERS.

The trials of William Cogan, for the murder of his wife,
and also that of William Maloney, for a similar offence,
were, upon the application of the counsel for the respective
prisoners, Mr. Ribtou and Mr. Sleigh, postponed until to-
morrow.