The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-21 00:00:00

CHLOROFORM.

THE ALLEGED MURDER AT CLAPHAM.
Dr. Snow placed on the table, at the last meeting of
the Westminster Medical Society, the apparatus which
he used for detecting the presence of chloroform in the
dead body. He said that the process was a modification
of one described in the Journal de Chimie Medical
for March, 1849. The blood or portion of the body to
be examined was put into a flask, from which there
proceeded a tube which was made red• hot in part of
its course. Another glass tube, attached to the ex-
tremity of the latter, was moistened inside with a so-
lution of nitrate of silver, and terminated in a Wolfe's
bottle, the interior of which was also moistened with
the same solution. Heat being applied to the flask by
means of the chloride of calcium bath, the vapour
given off bad to pass through the red-hot tube, and
any chloroform which might be present was de-
composed, and the chlorine and hydrochloric acid gas
being set free, were arrested in the next tube, where
they formed a white precipitate of chloride of silver,
which became rapidly darkened in colour by the
action of light. The nature of the precipitate could
be further proved by cutting the tube with a file,
and introducing a drop or two of nitric acid
into one portion, and of solution of ammonia
into the other. He had distinctly detected the
presence of chloroform by this process in two
kittens, killed by inhaling the vapour, on six
successive days after the death of the animals,
although no precautions were taken to protect the
bodies from the air; and the quantity inhaled by each
kitten must have been less than one minim. The parts
of the animals examined were the viscera of the chest
and abdomen, the brains, and the muscles of the body
and extremities. From all these parts clear evidences
of the presence of chloroform were obtained. He had
also obtained a precipitate of chloride of silver by
operating on some portions of the muscles taken from
the leg of a child amputated under the influence of
chloroform at St. George's Hospital. The process,
indeed, was one of such delicacy, that he had been able
to clearly detect the presence of the hundredth part
of a grain of chloroform when dissolved in a thousand
grains of water. The only substances which could
yield chloride of silver by this method were, Dutch
liquid, chloride of ethile, and some other bodies similar
in composition and effects to chloroform, and which,
however, were not in common use, or even kept oo
sale. There were chlorides in the human body, but
these could not be decomposed below a red heat, and
certainly not till the part became dry ' • whilst -in the
process he employed, the heat to which the part under
examination was exposed was only that of boiling
water, or a very little more, and it could not be-
come dry in the most protracted examination, as
the greater part of the moisture given off became
condensed in the tube, which inclined upwards, and
flowed back into the flask. The method therefore,
was liable to no fallacy or objection. He had re-
ceived from Mr. John Parrott some portions of the
viscera of a woman, lately found dead, under very
mysterious circumstances, in the Wandsworth-road.
The parts had been closed up air -tight from the time
they were taken from the body. They included a por
tion of the brain and of the liver, and though they were
kept boiling for two or three hours in their own se-
rosity, not the least trace of chloride of silver was
obtained, whilst in the instances were chloroform had
caused death, the precipitate began to appear when
the heat to which the part was exposed reached to
about the boiling point. In the muscle taken from
the child's leg, the chloroform was only a few minutes
longer in being detected, although the quantity pre-
sent must necessarily have been much less than in a
case wbere death had been caused by it. He there
fore concluded that the death in the Wandsworth
road could not have been occasioned by chloroform
Lancet.

Total
The capital account showed that on the 7th of No-
vember, 1845, the bankrupt had to his credit in the
books of Messrs. Combe and Co., 100,0001. It also
showed that he was entitled to the reversion of a moiety
of 12,0001. under the will of his late father, valued at
3,037/. 10s.
To singers-1848, 33,349/. ss. 6d. ; 1849.
25,6441. 3s.
Billet accounts-1848, 8,1051. 18s. Bd. ; 1849,
2,5261. 6s. 6d.
Orchestra accounts-1848, 10,0481. 13s. 6d. ;
1849, 3,398/. 17s. 9d.
Rent.-1848, 4,042/. ss. ; 1849, 774/. 19s. lid.
To house disbursements-1848, 14,526/. 15s. 11d.;
[849, 8,500/. 2a. 10d.
To salary to people employed in the house-1848,
3,8851. 158. 3d.; 1849, 2,6661. 133.5 d.
To fitting the royal box-1849, 219/. I6s. 6d.
Law expenses-1848, 1,5001. ; 1849,,846257/1.. ;
8751.8:9.,
TO sundry other expenses-1848, 1
7071. 10s. 11d.
To receipts-1848, 44,0081. 15. 11d., 1849,
29,407/. 10s. 10d.
To losses-1848, 34,756/. Bs. 10d.;1849, 25,4551.55.
Mr. LAWRANCS said that he had the honour to ap-
pear before the Court on the part of the assignees, to
draw attention to certain facts of the case, and crave
a judgment against the bankrupt, and to offer a par-
ticular complaint on the part of Mr. Everafield, who
was one of the assignees. He thought, from the pre-
vious proceedings, that the Court would have been
spared the time, and he would say the not affected
pain, in going into the case of this young gentle-
man, but all that there was to be urged
upon the point of youth would come with
much more weight froul his Learned Friend
Mr. Cooke. He had to bring a strong case before
the Court, which, if proved, and he fully believed it
would, would disentitle the bankrupt to a cer-
tificate altogether, or at all events, cause a long sus-
pension, and that being only terminated by a condi-
tion being annexed to such certificate, which the
Court had the power of annexing under the 198th
section of the new Act. It was in consequence of the
latter part of that section that Mr. Lewis
had made a proposition on the part of the
bankrupt to pay 10s. in the pound, which was agreed
to by the assignees, not for the purpose of making
any bargain to defeat the justice of the case, but for
II (benefit of the creditors. He had withdrawn that
roposition, and he (Mr. Lawrence) had to call the
attention of the Court to the facts of the case, the
same as in other cases disclosed by the balance-sheet,
and which showed as lamentable an extent of profli-
gacy that he had ever witnessed. The bankrupt was
a young man just emerging from his minority, and
coming to a capital of 92,0001., was introduced to
one of the most repectable firms in London, and an
engagement was entered into by sdlich be was to re-
ceive his share of the profits, and the interest he re-
ceived on his capital amounting to 14,164/. One year
they were not quite so large, but then it was prover-
bial thin in 1847, owing to the high price of barley,
brewers were not making large profits.
His Hoxona—l see there was a small loss one
year.
Mr. LAWRANCE-1004 If the bankrupt had acted
with anything like approximation to prudence, he
would have made a large fortune, and as to the mode
in which he should squander his money and to spend
it in the loose reckless manner he had done, instead
of making better use of it, was a question between
Mr. Delafield and his conscience. He emerged from
the brewery gate with this large sum of money, and
he would have been justified in entering into ordinary
pursuits, or have made some return to those to whom
Providence bad not acted so bountifully. That wa;
nothing, however, to do with the case to-day. Here
the case commenced, and after that the bankrupt was
found with a large amount of debts and very little
assets. The sum total on the balance-sheet was
145,0001, and it was quite clear that the bankrupt
had been possessed of 106,000/, but he had thrown it
away, and it was to the difference between these sums
where the creditors' complaints rested. The ques-
tion which the Court had to deal with was one which
involved the proposition whether it was any apology
for a man who had wasted this large amount of money
to say that it was his own. It was by the position
that wealth gave him that he induced people to trust
him without having a shilling to pay them, and with-.
out making any proposition so to do. Delafield came
to this Court as an ordinary debtor, owing 33,000/.
without having a shilling of assets. It was true that
the losses were 81,000/., showing how a large pro-
portion of his fortune bad been engulphed in the
Royal Italian Opera House, at Covent-garden.
His Horoua.—l thought the other house was the
Royal Italian Opera ?
Mr. LAWRANCS said that was her Majesty',
Theatre. In addition to the large sum of 81,000/,
the expenses in the "former year were very heavy,
and he took credit for the sum of 2,0001.,
as the amount of loss sustained by the per.
formances of the Brussels operatic company, and
an advance to Mr. Mathews to carry on the Ly-
ceum Theatre, during the season of 1849, oa their ;

Mr. COOKE—That was in the middle of 1848.
Mr. LAWRANCE—And after this, when he was re-
ceived, it was not shown that he had even given up
his horses, or in any way broken up his establishment.
His HONOUR—I see it was in 1848 when he exe-
cuted the assignment of the reversionary interest in
favour of Beale.
Mr. LAWRANCE—And it was quite evident that
Delafield must have known the state of his affairs, for
the books of the theatre were kept with singular
accuracy. He (Mr. Lawrance) considered that from
the season of 1848 the bankrupt was not justified in
spending one shilling, and what he was spending was
at the expense of the creditors, and it was shown that
he had expended 22,0001. in two years. It was again
complained that the bankrupt bad pursued a reckless
course after he knew he was ruined and irretrievably
insolvent. Ile had also executed an assignment in
July, 1848, in respect of a debt for which he was not
liable, and he might have saved the creditors ex-
pense by calling them together. The season of
1849 was disastrous, the losses being 25,0001., and
the whole of the assets had gone into this ruinous'
engagement. It might be said that engagements had
been made for a series of seasons, and that he could
not get rid of them, but he ought then to have
become bankrupt, and not at a time when he had
not got a shilling. In March, 1849, he also exe
cuted an assignment in favour of his own attor-
ney, to secure a debt of 1,7501. Webster was
engaged in that as well as Delafield, and it was
proposed that the household furniture and plate should
be assigned to him (Appleby). If this was 'Webster's
property, why should Delafield interfere ? By a deed
signed on a Sunday morning, at Mivart's Hotel, De-
lafield disposed of all interest in the Willow Bank
property, and there was no opportunity of the cre-
ditors questioning it.
His HoNouß—That was to Beale ? Mr. LAW-
RANCE—Yes. On the 21st April, 1849, he assigned
every shilling to Mr. Beale.
His Hosioult—And then disappeared.
Mr. LAWRANCE—This was an assignment to secure
not only the 1,0001., but any future advances. It was
said by Beale, that he had advanced on account of the
theatre 7,0001. That made it all the worse, for what-
ever was advanced after 1849 was at the expense of
the creditors. The bankrupt had also quartered
WebAer on the theatre for a maintenance, for he was
to receive 751. a month as long as the theatre kept
open. That was also at the expense of the creditors,
who were most reasonably complaining. He would
now come to the grievance complained of by Mr.
Eversfield. He was at the University of Oxford with
Delafield, who had certainly brought away a portion
of its follies, not to say vices—he borrowed in March,
1846, 5,0001. Mr. Eversfield was now a creditor for
4,600/. A memorandum was drawn up, and interest
at 5 per cent. was to be paid, and the principal to be
paid that day twelve mouths, but, as Mr. Lawrance
was instructed, his client was not aware of the
limitation.
Mr. COOKE—That is an assumption. The docu-
ment is signed by himself.
Mr. LAWRANCE—In February, 1848, Eversfield
instructed his attorney to take proceedings against
Delafield for 5,000/., and the latter pleaded to the
action that he did not promise in manner and form
except as to 450/., the amount of interest. Eversfield
being defeated in that action, he gave the twelve
months' notice for payment, and the result was a
second action, in which " a Pike," as stated in a letter,
appeared as the bankrupt's solicitor. Delafield took no
step to pay him a single shilling, and on the 12th of
April, 1849, a few clays before the assignment to
Beale, be pleaded the general issue, but on the 17th
of April the bankrupt gave a judge's order for the
amount. The judge's order was for payment on the
24th of April, and on the 23,1 Delafield left the coun-
try. He (Mr. Lawrance) complained that a gross
fraud had been committed ou Mr. Lversfield, who