The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-22 00:00:00

FOREIGN FUNDS.

Austrian, 5 per Cent ....... .. ;Portuguese, 5 per Cent —
Belgian, 5 per Cent — 'Ditto New Ditto ,
Brazilian Bonds — :Prussian, 5 per Cent —
Buenos Ayres, 6 per Cent... Russian, 5 per Cent —
Chllian, 6 per Cent ............ Ditto, Metallic .......
Colombian, 6 per Cent
Ditto, 1824 ............ ......
Cuba Bonds, 6 per Cent — Ditto, Deferred... ...... .........
Danish, 3 per Cent — French, 5 per Cent.......119t. s').
Greek, 1825, 5 per Cent — 'Exchange .. .......... .... —l. —c.
Mexican, 5 per Cent
Ditto, 6 per Cent., i&i7 Dutch, 2% per Cent...... 61 4
Peruvian, Icr2s, 6 per Cent — Ditto, 5 per Cent ........100%
SH A RES.
Birmingham and Gloucester (100 paid lOl
Bristol and Exeter (70 paid)
Chester and Holyhead ( f) paid)
Eastern Counties (23 paid) i. ll%
Ditto Registered (8/ 6s 8d paid)
Edinburgh and Glasgms, 50 paid
Great North of England, 100 paid
Great Western (75 paid)
Ditto Half Shares, 50 paid Bl
Lancaster and Carlisle, 5 paid 6 I,‘
London and Birmingham (Stock) 223
Ditto, New Thirds, 2 p iid
Ditto, Quarter Shares ( 2 paid)
London and Greenwich (12t. I,'.s. 4d. paid) B%
London and Croydon (Trunk) lO %
Manchester and Leeds (70 paid)
Ditto, Half Shares, 30 paid
South Devon, 5 paid
South Eastern and Dover (33 2s 4d paid)
Ditto New Shares, 4 old
York and North Midland (50 paid) —
Ditto Half Shares (25 paid)
Paris and Rouen. 20 paid
Paris and Orleans (20 paid)

TRIAL OF BELANEY.

THE STEPNEY POISONING CASE.

CRIMINAL COURT.-(TIIIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.

Mr. BODKIN (in continuation from our Afternoon
Edition) said—Would he not, as a medical man, having
been told by his wife that she had taken prussic acid,
have given an alarm, and called fer those remedies with
which, as a medical man, he must have been acquainted,
and which were at once at hand—cold water, a smelling-
bott!e, and brandy ; for, as one of the witnesses had
said, as long as there was life there was hope. Why
had he not adopted these means? Why, because he
would either have restored to life a person he did not
wish to live; or by the use of the remedies betray his
knowledge of the fact that she had tsken poison. L
was said he was alarmed, but would alarm lead him to
coin upon the moment a fa'sehood, and to go through a
mock ceremony in applying remedies which he
knew to be perfectly useless. The deceased was
represented to have been in bed and awake ; there
were no curtains to the bed. Why his wife must have
observed him attempting to open the bottle, and must
have seen what he did ; and yet he represented that his
wife got out of bed, poured water upon the prussic acid,
and drank it. The odour of prussic acid, when spilled,
remained in the atmosphere of the room some time. No
odour was observed in the room. The room was swept.
No broken glass was discovered ; but outside the street
door, on the steps, some broken glass was afterwards found.
They would not fail to observe that on his arriving in
the front room he represented that suddenly a thought
came into his mind of writing to his friends in the
north; but this was more deliberate, for he desired the girl
to leave the room, and not to bring up the breakfast
until he called her. They would have to say whether
having thus removed a parson, a ho might have inter-
rupted, he availed himself of that opportunity of re-
turning to the bed-room, and administering, first the
salts and then the prussic acid. If he had at once
given his account of the transaction it would have been
open to the gravest suspicion, even if it had been taken
alone, but when taken in conjunction with the letters
which he had written to the north, he feared it was a
case pregnant with much more than suspicion.—[The
Learned Gentleman here read the letter dated from the
Euston Hotel, and sent to Mr. Bell, and which was given
yesterday, in the Solicitor-General's opening.] Had
that letter stood alone, it would have been nothing, but
it was the commencement of a series. On the 29th May the
will was executed, on the Ist June they set out for Lon-
don, and on the 3d of June this letter is written, in
which allusion is made to the delicate state c f her health.
On the 6th June he wrote another letter, intended, as it
appeared to him, to prepare the way for the news of her
death, and stating that two medical gentlemen were in
attendance on her. Now, that letter was written on the
Thursday, the very day on which the prisoner bad ob-
tained the poison from Donaghue. Undoubtedly the pri-
soner had been in the habit of using prussic acid up to
the year 1841. but there was no evidence that he ha..l
been in the habit of using it since that period. It was
also true that he obtained it where he was known. The
prisoner was entitled to the benefit of that circumstance, '
although it should be remembered that he might have
found difficulty in obtaining it where he was not known.
He now came to the letter written to Mr. Bell on the
Bth June. This was written on the Saturday, the day of
the death. [The Learned Counsel here read the letter,
which was given in the Solicitor-General's opening
address yesterday.] That letter was posted after
half-past five on the evening of that Saturday on
which the death took place. That letter, describing her
dangerous state, and saying that she was attended by
two medical men, who pronounced her to be labouring
under a diseased heart, was written hours after he had
seen her expire, and after he had applied at the cemetery
on the subject of the funeral. That letter had been
written before the necessity of a coroner's inquest and a
post mortem examination had become manifest. The post
mortem examination took place on the Monday, and the
prisoner had expressed a desire to be present. He was not
permitted to be present, but Captain Clarke was there,
and described to the prisoner that the contents of the
stomach had been analysed by the medical men, and
had been placed in a glass and removed. This was
ample notice to a medical man. He went to Mr. Gar-
ratt, and received, what was evidently intended to be an
evasive answer to his inquiries, and then, and not till
then, he expressed a desire to get Captain Clarke into a
private place, and made to him that communication
which Captain Clarke bad stated to them. It would be their
painful duty to consider the evidence, and to pronounce
a verdict on which the life of the prisoner would depend.
They should remember his statement to the Registrar,
that his wife had died of diseased heart, which was an
hereditary disease, as her mother had died of the same
disease in Northumberland some months before ; while
at the same time there was existing in the register in
Northumberland a statement, under his own hand, that
she had died of bilious fever. If they could entertain
any doubt as to the prisoner's guilt, it would be their
bounden duty to give the prisoner the benefit of that
doubt ; but if they could entertain no such doubt, it
would be their duty—and however panful that duty might
he, he was convinced they would nut shrink from its per-
formance—then he repeated, it would be their painful
duty to pronounce him guilty.
Mr. Baron GURNEY then summed up the evidence.
The crime charged against the prisoner was that of the
most odious nature--the crime of murder ; and the per-
son whom he was charged with murdering was one whom
he was bound to protect and to cherish, for she was his wife
—she was young, and beautiful, and fascinating. The
case differed from most other cases that had come under
his observation, for the doubt in other cases generally
arose as to the person who committed, and the means
by which, the crime was committed. Here there was no
doubt of that kind, for it was perfectly clear that the
prisoner was the person who purchased the poison, and
that that poison was the means of the death of his
wife. If the jury were of opinion that he had admi-
nistered the poison himself, or had left it in her way know-
ing she would take it, they would find the prisoner guilty;
but if he had not administered it himself, or had not left
it in her way with a guilty, intent the prisoner was not
guilty of any crime whatever, however blameable his
want of caution might be. The secrets of the heart
were known to the God of all, and to him alone. It ap-
peared that the prisoner and the deceased lived, ap-
parently, in a happy state, so that the state in which
they lived together afforded no probale motive for
committing such a crime. Neither did the way
in which the property was so circumstanced, afford any
probable motive for his committing the crime with
which he was charged. But though neither of those
circumstances afforded any probable motive, yet it
sometimes happened that great crimes were commit-
ted, for which no reasonable motive could be assigned.
He was aware that, in the present state of the press of
this country, it was impossible for twelve gentlemen to
come into the box without knowing' the circumstances iu
which great crimes were committed before they came to
decide on them in a Court of Justice. If any of them
had..e received the least impression of prejudice from what
the 3' might have read of the present case, he begged of
him to dismiss it from his mind and to weigh the case
and :decide upon the evidence' which they had heard.
and by that alone. Some stress had been laid on the
prisoner taking a lodging in Stepney, but he did not
think, under the circumstances,
rea-
sonable gsound of that there was any
general observations which hethat.Those were the
he thought it necessary to
address to them. The Learned Jud,ethenproceeded too
read those portions of the evidence t4.which bore upon the
nce
case, commenting on them as he went along. 11111
his Lordship had gone through the oral evidence
he referred to the letters written by the prisoner.e
which were of great importance in this case. It ap
peared from the first letter which he wrote to Mr. Bell
and Mr. Downing, that he had been practising a deeep-
tion upon them, in telling them that his wife was ill,
and that he had two physicians attending her. With
regard to the letter of the Bth, in which he reiterated
his statement that his wife was ill, it was evident that
it was posted after his wife was dead, but whe-
ther it had been written before that event
they had no means of knowing. If the letter
was written before the death, he thought it
furnished a strong argument against the prisoner, for it
would seem to be a portion of that deception which it
was evident he had been practising on his friends. If it
was written after the death, this view might be taken of
it—that wishing to conceal that his want of caution, if
his story was true, was the cause of his wife's death, he '
wanted to prepare them for that event. The question
which they had to try was, whether the prisoner
bad administered, or caused to be administered, this
poison, for the purpose of destroying his wife's life. If
they were ot', that opinion, they would find the prisoner
PiltY ; but if on the other hand, they believed that
ne was only guilty of an indiscretion, and had
in
been guilty of falshoodorderhere towecroenceal it,
they would acquit him.
very peculiar circumstances in this case. s'o rmhee

prisoner had been guilty before hand of a falsehood
in stating that two medical men were attending his wife
—that falsehood was subsequently repeated. He stated
that his mother-in-law died of a disease of the heart,
whereas he had given it under his own hand, that she
died of a bilious fever. All this was for their consider-
ation. If they thought under all these circumstance s
thrt the prisoner was guilty, they would, hogs ever,
painful to themselves, perform their duty to society, but
if they had any reasonable doubt of his guilt, they wou'd
give the benefit of it to the prisoner, knowing that it was
better ten guilty men should escape than that one inno-
cent life should be destroyed.

The jury then retired Co consider their verdict.
After an absence of about an hour, they returned with
a verdict of—Not Guilty.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.

FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.

GLOBE.—If the French Ministerial journals are
to be believed, the affair of Otaheite is to be
arranged between the two Governments by the sacri-
fice of Mr. Pritchard. This gentleman is to he
treated as the scapegoat, on whose head the violent
proceedings of the French authorities is to be con-
fessed as unjustifiable in extent ; but as provoked
by alleged indiscretions on his part, by which he
had excited the jealousy of the watchful French " Pro-
tectorate,' and induced the treatment of which the
English Government, whose minister he was, has very
properly complained, and required explanation. The
Paris Globc states, as an established fact, that which
is not merely unsupported by a tittle of evidence, but
has been expressly contradicted by distinct testi-
mony :—" Have the French authorities been guilty
of any wrong? If so, England has a right to
demand reparation, and France should not
hesitate to grant it ; for it is only by
avowing our wrongs that we can maintain
our rights. Now, it is evident and proved that the
French authorities had a right to arrest Mr. Pritchard,
and deport him, because of his exciting disturbances,
and mither the English nor any Government can
deny the legality of such an act. There was, how-
ever, on the part of a French officer, an abuse
of force and an inexcusable pi-weeding—a fact
which may and ought to be acksawledged. No-
body can find fault with the English Govern-
ment for demanding that that proceeding and
gratuitous violence be censured, and no man of
sense can condemn the French Government for ac-
quiescing in that demand." The Presse (also a Mi-
nisterial journal) follows in the same track ; and,
upon the faith of a letter in an English journal, for-
mally accuses Mr. Pritchard of having been "the in-
stigator and exciter of all the disturbances which
broke out in the island (of Otaheite)." Such a mod,
of settling the differences between the two Govern.
ments might be, doubtless, very convenient to the
apathetic Minister who dreams over the Foreign de
partment in Downing-street. Lord Aberdeen, it i:
supposed, will say :—" If you, M. Guizot, will re
move M. D'Aubigny from Otaheite, and pass a sligh;
censure upon him for his indiscreet zeal in imprison-
ing Mr. Pritchard, our Consul, we (the British
Government) will admit—without questioning thr
grounds of the imputation—that Mr. Pritchard di(
not act quite prudently in the very delicate circum-
stances in ‘s hich he was placed. M. D'Aubigny is of corn.
paratively trifling importance to you, when compared
with the embarrassments which are thickening aroutn
your heads, as a Ministry. As for us, we are a peace-
loving Cabinet—l am, emphatically, pacific. W(
would deliver over a thousand Pritchards to con-
tumely, censure, disgrace, and ruin, could we do s.
with safety to our position as a Government, an(
diminish the difficulties which surrounded our policy
by pitching them out of our way. All things wii
now proceed smoothly. The dignity of the grew
nation, of which you are the Minister, will b(
maintained; and the English people, less romantic
in their notions, will he easily reconciled t(
the means, so that we can but prevent the threatener
visitation of war." Now, this may appear to Lor(
Aberdeen a Ary easy, if not a very dignified
mode of getting out of the difficulties created bi
the proceedings of the French subordinate autho-
triies at Otaheite. But, however his Lord-
ship may view the matter, we do not anticipat(
the acquiescence of the British people in such a com
promise ; nor do we think that the House of Com-
mons is so perfectly subjugated as to permit sue!
an arrangement to pass unquestioned, and its has,
truckling to French prejudices and passions to pas.
unexposed. If there be proof that Mr. Pritchard ha:
acted improperly or indiscreetly, let it be adduced
and let the French authorities at Otaheite derive even
fair fair advantage, in the way of extenuating their insul
to his office, and their violence to his person, which suet
proved impropriety of conduct can supply. But these
assumed errors, or faults, in Mr. Pritchard's conduct
must be specified and established by proof. The mere
after-thoughts of his ruffian-like assailants must no
be received against him as ascertained facts. Nor mus•
Ministerial convenience be regarded in comparism
with the claims of personal rights and national honour
The Duke of Wellington and the Earl of Aberdeen, it
the House of Lords, awl Sir Robert Peel in the Hons.
of Commons, speaking on this very subject, have born
testimony to Mr. Pritchard's personal virtues an:
public merits. These testimonials were not deliverer
in a corner, but in the face of the British Parliameni
and nation. They are on record ; and cannot be de-
stroyed or removed by French slanders, even thong]
they be grounded on anonymous or obscure libeller:
of his reputation in this country. The desire whirl
prevails in France to exhibit .Mr. Pritchard as un-
worthy of public regard, and thus to induce Englisl
acquiescence in the treatment he has received, is ma-
nifested by the statements which were industriously
put forth by the French press, and circulated 13.3
means of some journals in this country, that a Mr
Pritchard, who had been guilty of some improprieties
at Caen, in Normandy, is the same Mr. Pritchar(
whose treatment at Otaheite has provoked public
resentment in this country, and induced the Englisl
Government to require explanation and reparatioi
from that of France. .

STANDARD.—We have been favoured by
Messrs. Gabriel Kennard, Thomas Cull, and Edmon(
Post, with copies of a series of letters which have
passed between these gentlemen and the Archbishol
of Canterbury upon the subject of the unhappy dis-
putes that have lately distracted the parish of Ease
Farleigh. The gentlemen who have sent us thi:
correspondence wish us to make it public :
hut this is a step upon which we crav(
time for deliberation. 'There certainly is nothii-g
in the letters of Messrs. Kennard, Cull, am
Post, of which we do not entirely approve, and
which does not, in our judgment, reflect high
honour upon the writers. Nevertheless, they and
all reasonable men will agree with us, that parties in
their position may say things, and if they are sincere
will say them strongly and bitterly, in a remonstrant(
to their diocesan, which it might be inconvenient an('
mischievous to publish in a newspaper; there is in
our opinion something answering this description in
the third letter of the correspondence, which thougl
very proper for the attention of the metropolitan, would
hardly bear the press. Meanwhile, it is impossible
not to admire the whole conduct pursued by the dis-
satisfied—in our opinion most justly dissatisficd—
parishioners of East Farleigh. They have with
drawn from the ministrations of the clergyman who.
by his innovations, his religious millinery, and reli-
gious dramaticism, and by his Tractarian doctrines,
showed a disposition to convert a Protestant pa-
rochial temple into a Romanist mass-house ; they
have turned their backs upon his candlestick and
his chanting, and his distillations from Doctor
Pusey's defence of transubstantiation ; but they
have not turned their backs upon the Church,
faithfully attending the services of an adjoining
parish church, where the doctrines of the Church of
England are decently and faithfully inculcated.
It would appear from the correspondence before
us, that the candlesticks have been removed (as it
is supposed, upon a suggestion of the Archbishop) but
that the chanting is continued, and that the Trac-
tarian doctrines are still promulgated from the
pulpit, with this extraordinary sanction from the
Archdeacon, that the laity not being qualified to
understand the doctrines of the Minister, have no-
thing to do with these doctrines but to accept them
implicitly. Now, of the three innovations complained
of, the only one removed (the candlesticks) would ap-
pear to most reasonable Fersons incomparably the
least offensive. For chanting in a parish church
there is no excuse whatever ; the practice, which
in our time, it is not easy to reconcile any.
where with the decent and unaffected gravity of
religious worship, had its origin in the necessity
of sustaining the human voice by an artificial disci-
pline and distribution of its power, so as to fill large
buildings which the ordinary speaking voice could
not fill. There was to choose between shouting and
semi-singing; and in those simple times, when
mobbing was more frequent, and the opera
not quite familiar, the semi singing was thought
to have less tendency to desecrate the solemn
prayers of the Church than mere shouting. We are
not quite sure that the reverse is not the case at
present. In parish churches, however, chanting was
never necessary, because parish churches are rarely,
if ever, too large for the articulately delivered hu-
man voice, and as chanting in parish churches is
unnecessary, so is it improper. Every one is ex-
, petted to attend, and ought to attend his parish
dhurch ; but every one is not affected in the
same way by music, or by the unnatural tones
employed in chanting. We know that, of all people
on the face of the earth, musical people are the
most incredulous of the existence of any unlike
themselves, the most intolerant of any impeachment
of the universality of the influence of that which
influences them. Nevertheless, it is very certaon
that a great many reasonable (and, the question
here), responsible creatures are as little affected
by musical notes as blind men are by-colours, and
upon such the unnatural tones of the chant and the
something like grimace by which it is accompanied,
have an influence the very reverse of edifying; at the