Star.
London, England, 1830-11-01 00:00:00

'indeed, he should recommend, before proceeding to judgment, that the
ens be termed to the judges. There was no analogy between the pre-
sses woo end that of Martin Van Butchell In the latter ease, the
hod ground for refusing to let the ease proceed. Be made
es betwixt the most eminent practitioner of the Royal Col.
Iffsldans or Surgeons, and any person who practised medicine
ors He should view a case in precisely the same light,
.g wilful negligence bad caused a fatal termination, whether the
posy was the Pmlaent of the Ito al College of Surgeons, or the cam.
i.e. Bone-setter of the villa. The case of a surgeon who cut off a
seer's leg when he was drunk, and of an aceoucheur who attended a
uasle, and by neglecting a very necessary precaution, caused her
death, was, I. his opinion, properly visited with the penalties of the
law. The same responsibility attached to a surgeon as to a driver of a
de coach, who, got drunk, and ran over any body, was properly in-
dictable for laughter. He repeated it, that proper caution was what
he insisted kaoth eases. Be could not for a moment divest
himself of id*, or consider that nothing reprehensible attaches
to a pencil who might have the lives of millions to experi-
meat upon, who dealt out medicines without judgment or care, and
merely took the chance of the benefit they might produce. It was not
the question with him of much or little skill, but it was the question of
proper precaution, and it proved that an operation was performed so
carelessly that the fatal result wax induced from that want of care, no
jury could say that such a man was not liable to the law. Under all
circumstances, he thought it better to have the opinion of the judges
upon this very important case.
Mr. Justice PARR then called on the prisoner foe his defence' who
handed in a written paper,which was read by the Clerk of the Arraigns.
The paper commenced by stating that the Aliases Cashio called upon
him in August, one of whom laboured under a pulmonary complaint.
He prescribed for her, and also her sister, whom he considered likely
speedily to suffer ucdcr the same disorder. He applied the same means
for her recovery which lie had used with perfect success for the last 4 years,
during which time he had restored to perfect health many of the nobility
and gentry. That the remedy failed in this instance was the dispensation
of PROVIDIKCE, over which no human agency could exercise control.
But he utterly denied that he had any other object in view than the
young lady's restoration. In fact his professional reputation and
his interest forbad any other conclusion. Before he ended, lie ged to
make one observation upon the statements which had appear in the
public print'. They had created an unfair prejudice towards him, and
he entreated them not to judge his case from thou statements. He hoped
they would dismiss from their minds all they had heard on this dia.
tressing subject, and in that expectation he left his ease in their hands.
It was for them to decide whether a medical practitioner should be an-
swerable to the laws for one fai!ure. He appealed cheerfully to the laws
of England and to their consciences for a just decision of his case.
A vast number of witnesses were called, all of them of the most re-
spectable class. Among them were examined, Mr. Samuel Houghton,
of Manchester, in examination by Mr. Gurney, stated, he had been
under Mr. Long's care for eight months ; was perfectly satisfied with
his skill and treatment.—Mr. Samuel Wildey, of Shropshire, had re-
sorted to Mr. Long for medical advice with great benefit ; had been for
11 months under his care.—Miss Page had been for three weeks under
his care, and was perfectly satisfied with his treatment.—The Mar.
chioness of Ormond had three of her daughters, the Ladies Butler, under
the care of Mr. Long from 6 to 6 months; was perfectly satisfied with
Mr. Long's care skill, and tenderness. Mr. Long had been at-
tending her first child two or three months before she placed the
second under his care.—Mrs. Aughtie had been under the prisoner's
care since June last, and was perfectly satisfied with his treatment and
skill.—Miss P. Smith, a very charming young lady, had a favourable
opinion of Mr. Long's skill and humanity, as she had been a patient
since last April.--Mrs. and Miss Webb had both the highest opinion of
Mr. Long's care and skill.—Lord Viscount Ingestrie had been under Mr.
Long's care for three weeks, and was entirely satisfied with his skill.- -
The Marquis of Sligo gave the same favourable testimony of Mr.
Long's skill. Colonel Campbell, Miss Melville, Mrs. Swill.
don, and General Sharpe, had all been under Mr. Long's care,
and had formed the highest opinion of his skill and treatment.—
General Ashworth had five of his family, and also himself, under
Mr. Long's care. They were all impressed with the highest opi.
Mon of his talent and care. Miss Catherine Webb and Miss Smith
bad both satisfactorily experienced Mr. Long's skill. Other witnesses,
to the number of twenty.nine, all spoke in the highest terms both as to
the skill, care, and tenderness of Mr. Long.
Mr. Justice PARKI then addressed the Jury, and proceeded to read
over the evidence, which he commented upon very minutely. He then
said, before he entered upon the evidence, he would enforce upon the
consideration of the Jury the necessity of dismissing from their minds
any bias which they might have received from raiding the pub-
lic prints. He had always been of opinion that the publication
of such matter was injurious and dangerous to any one who
was shortly to be tried by the laws of his country. There was
one observation he was bound to notice, which had fallen from the
learned Counsel (Mr. Alley) whom, at all times, he found to act in the
most impartial manner—that he had stated to the Jury that the Coroner
and the Grand Jury had both found Mr. Long guilty of manslaughter.
He was bound to inform them that this announced to nothing at all, and
did not, in the remotest degree, establish the guilt of the prisoner. His
learned brother, Garrow, had stated truly that it made no difference
whether a person was licensel or unlicensed to practice physic. If be
was unlicensed he only incurred the pecuniary penalty established by
the Charter of the Physicians, in certain acts of Parliament. The
opinion of Chief Justice Hale he begged to press on their notice.—
lie expressly says—" GOD forbid that because a medical man
has had a failure, he shovid be iheld guilty of manslaughter."
It was unfortunate that the learned Counsel for the defendant
had addressed the Court for the acquittal of the prisoner, as his
address seemed to infer that a difikrence en the question existed be-
tween his learned brother and himself. This was not the case, for in
fact they both drew the sane Way, though by different means. He
agreed that in proved cases of wilful neglect it was improper that a per-
son should escape, but he contended that a failure in skill carried
no penalty with it. To find the prisoner guilty, it wu necessary
clearly to establish that he had betrayed gross ignorance and criminal
indiitaeece. He would leave it to the judgment of the Jury,
after the high and unimpeachable testimony of so many
respectable witnesses, whether they could charge want of skill, or cri-
minal negligence on the defendant. He relied principally on Lord
Chief Justice Hale, who says, " If a potion is given, with the hope of
having a beneficial effect, and the man dies, this is not homicide, and I
hold other opinions erroneous, and that if this occurs to an unlicensed
person, this is not felony."—Tbe Learned Judge then proceeded to
read over the evidence, and from the comments on the witnesses, it ap.
peered to favour the opinion that the Learned Judge did not consider the
offence with which Mr. Long stood charged, borne out.
The Jury retired to deliberate at five o'clock. Having remained for
three hours, and some Intimation having been given to the Judges that
a difficulty had arisen, they were sent for into Court at eight o'clock,
when Mr. Justice PARKE, 00 proceeding to address them, was stopped
by the Foreman, who stated that his brother Jurors concurred in a ver-
dict of Guilty.
When this was announced, a slight symptom of approbation was ma.
nifested. The prisoner turned pale, and gave an electric start. This
verdict was evidently unexpected by the prt•oner and by the bench.
Mr. Sergeant Atenucws then prayed the Court to admit the prisoner
to bail till judgment was pronounced. The JuDoe said he could make
no distinction between this case and the care of a poor man, and was
obliged to refuse the application. It was then agreed by the Learned
Judges, that they should defer sentence until they had held solemn
consultation.

The prisoner was then removed from the bsr. evidently greatly affected.

SURREY SESIONS.

Saturday, Rkherd Tear de aged 30, and Matthew Gibson, aged
31. were indicted, the former for stalling 1161bs. weight of gum, value
221. 60 gallant of vandal', value 601. a large quantity of dry colours.
and a hammer and scoop, the property o: Ms employers, Blears.
Reynolds and Co. colour and varnish manufacturers, Snow-fields, Ber-
mondsey, and'the liner prisoner for feloniously receiving the same,
well knowing the article, to have been s:olen.
The jury found Teasdell guilty, and acquitted Gibte-.
The Chairman sentenced him to 14 yea's' transput