The Yazoo Democrat. [volume] (Yazoo City, Miss.) 1858-18??, 1858-12-04
MADELEINE SMITH.

ing synopsis OF the facts OF that celebrated case
which we extract from the October number of the
Edinburgh Review:
Madeleine Hamilton Smith was tried in rEdin-
burgh, in July, 1857, for the alleged murder Of
Pierre Emile LAngelier. This has become one
of the causes celeores of Great Britain. The rela
tions between the prisoner and the deceased-her
former passionate attachment for him--her age,
sex and social position--her unparalleled letters
the dark and impenetrable mystery in which
his death is still shrouded after an investigation
which exhausted every possible means of arriving
ut the truth-the remarkable ability displayed
both on the side of the prosecution and the side
of the detence-all these circumstances combine
to invest the case with extraordinary degree Of
interest; and it would be difficult to find in the
criminal annals of any country trial more likely
to stimulate, and yet battle, curiosity. We will
state very shortly the leading facts.
! L'Angeler was native of Jersey, and in the
year 1856 while in the employment of a mercan,
tile firm in Glasgow became acquainted with
Madeline Smith, the eldest daughter of Mr.. Smith,
an architect, who resided in Blythwood Square,
! in that city. An attachment sprung up between
them; and as the young ladys parents were op-
posed TO an engagement, they corresponded secret
| ly, and had several clandestine interviews. In
the month Of May, 1885, she surrendered herself
entirely to LAngelier, and her letters to him were
of the most compromising character. breathing
the warmest language of passionate attachment,
and addressing him constantly as her darling
husband. But in the course of the following
winter Mr.. Minnoch paid his addresses to her
and in January he made proposals of marriage,
which she accepted and it was afterwards ar
ranged that the wedding should take place in the
month of June following. She kept up, however,
most affect )nate correspondence with LAnge-
lier until the beginning of February, 1857, when,
becoming jealous of the attentions of her new
admirer, he returned one OF her notes. She then
wrote and proposed that the engagement between
them should BE- broken off, and became very
urgent to have all her letters returned L'Ange-
lier IL only did not comply with her request, but
seems to have threatened to show the letters tC
her father She wrote on the 18th Of February,
in the most agonizing terms Of entrea.y to him
begging him not to make her 90 public shame; ?
and then two or three days afterwards. resumed
her correspondence with him in her former strair
Of passionate love. Her bedroom was on tht
ground floor, facing the street; and through the
bars of the window she used to pass notes to
L'Angelier, md on one occasion undoubtedly sht
received him into the house at night.
+ On the Dist of February she purchased arsenic
at shop in Glasgow, and on the 9th of Marcel
the same poison at another shop on each occasion
signing her name in the druggists book, and OF
the last accompanied By u female friend. Sht
said at the time that she wanted the arsenic t
kill rats; but when judcially examined after
wards before her trial. she declared that she made
use of it as cosmetic. What really was dont
with it, there was no evidence to show,
AS the attentions of Mr.. Mnnoch became more
| ma al iAu0aliar,r ouepiciono RON
ed, and early in March he wrote to her demand
ing an explanation. To this she sent an evasivc
reply, and soon afterwards lift Glasgow with hei
family to 60 to the Bridge of Allan, near Sterling.
| From that place she wrote on the 18th to IAN
gelier, and on the l6th three days afterwards, to
Mr.. Minnoch, two letters which are, we hope.
without a parallel in the annals of amator5 cor
respondence for i'll each she pledged herself to
the person addressed, aud left each under the
impression that he the sole object of her love
She then returned to Glasgow, and on the 18th Of
March, accompanied by young lady, she made a
third purchase of arsenic at tue same shop where
she had bought the poison the 9th previously.
On the 10Th, L'Augelier left Glasgow for the
Bridge of Allan, and on the same day note came
to his lodgings from Madeleine Smith, appointing
an interview for the following night Thursday,
the 20th-which was forwarded to him at the
Bridge Of Allan. The next day she wrote to him
again thinking he was still at his lodgings in
Glasgow, saying that she had waitet for him, but
he did not come and adding, 81 will wait again
tomorrow night--same hour and arrangement" "
She then earnestly begged him to meet her at the
time appointed. This letter was received by
LAngelier at the Bridge of Allan on the morning
of Sunday, the 22d, and on the evening of that
day be arrived ut his lodgings in Glasgow He
| ouiffad fhovn about uipa ncl0ek and NOT
again seen by any one who could give evidence Of
the fact at the trill, until he returned to his
lodgings, about half-past two in the morning,
when he rang the bell violently, and said he was
very i'll. He rapidly became worse, and died in
q few hours, his body, on post mortem examlna-
ton, showing Enthusiastically that his death was
caused by his having taken large quantity Of
arsenic. The question was, by whom was the
arsenic administered? The jury, by majority,
found the charge against Madeleine Smith, who
was tried for the murder, not proven. at.
I On the trial. declarations made by the deceased
at two different periods in February, when he
was suffering from illness from whicThe recover
ed, to the effect that his illness was consequent
on his taking something which the prisoner had
given him to drink, were admitted in evidence
against her without any opposition on the part OF
her counsel. These statements, If understood In
the sense intended by the prosecutor were OF tre-
mendous significance and must have weighed
heavily against the prisoner. If they had been
excluded, it is hardly too much TO say that the
verdict must have been Not Guilty, for without
them the case against her would have resolved
itself into this She was proved tO have pur-
chased arsenic on three occasions, and on the
hypothesis Of the exclusion Of LAngelier's decla-
rations in February, there would have been no
evidence whatever to connect him in any way
with the use made Of the poison on either Of the
fret two Of these. Two days after the third pur-
chase, she made an appointment to meet the de-
ceased, which, ewing to an accident, he failed to
keep. The appointment was renewed for another
night, (Satarday, the 2lst Of March,) and this
again, owing to his absence from Glasgow, he
failed TO keep. On the following night he is
proved to have gone from home as II to obtain an
interview with the prisoner, bat there was an
utter absence Of proof that they did meet on that
occasion; and At two A. NJ. of that night he was
found at the door Of his lodgings suffering from
the effects Of arsenic, of which be died in the
course OF the day, without limiting in the remotest
manner that be lad sean the prisoner, or received
anything whatever from her. In this state Of
facts, the links which could connect the prisoner
with his death would have been too glaringy
wanting to justify even verdict Of Not Proven
The case, however, assumed . different aspect
when evidence was given, the object Of which wai
to show that on two previous occasions she hac
made attempts BY poison on her lovers life. i
the jury were satisfied Of that, their minds woult