Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1896-11-12
THE TRIAL OF THE CASTLES
Conclusion of a Case of Inter-
national Interest.
WALTER M. CASTLE ACQUITTED
His Wife Committed to Jail for
Three Months.
Both Prisoners Weighted Down with sor-
row and the Woman BysterrcaI-No Evil
dence Against Mr.. castie--A Plea OF Guilty
Entered by BIS Wife.

London. Eng, Nov. 6.--The trial OF
Mr.. and Mrs. Walter M. Castle of San
Francisco, charged with shoplifting,
| LOOK place in the Sessions House, at
Clerkenwell, to-day, and resulted In
Mr.. Castle being acquitted and Mrs
| CASTLE being sentenced TO three mopths'.
Imprisonment without hard labor.
Much interest was taken in the CAGE
especially among the members of the
American colony.
The case was opened at 10. 30 O'Clock,
when the clork ordered the Castles to
surrender to their bail of $3.50, 0OO. Then
| counsel for the defence took the floor.
Charles Matthews, senior counsel for
the prisoners, was not present. The
quiet OF the court room was broken
by the sound OF bysterjcal sobbing by
Mrs. Castle, whose husband supported
her in the dock. Both prisoners were
attired in black and seemed to be
weighted down with sorrow. When
Mrs. Castle had become composed the
business of the day was resumed, Mr..
Castle stood calmly while the clerk, in
monotonous tones, read the indictment
and called upon the male prisoner to
plead. mot guilty." answered Mr..
Castle in strong voice, while a flush
passed across his face, only to loave
him paler than ever. Mrs Castle was
then called upon to plead, but Mr..
Clarke arose and said that his client.
Mrs. Castle, would plead guilty to all
the indictments, which were then read
separately, MIR. Castle at the same time
pleading not guilty to each separate
charge.
Horace E. Avory opened tho case for
the prosecution. He stated that after
careful consideration, unless His Lord
ship expressed view to the contrary,
there appeared to be no evidence
against the male defendant, adding \
=" shall proceed on that assumption
and shall not offer evidence against
him. AT the polite court we were
obliged TO proceed against both pris-
oners, but now the wife, pleading
guilty, permits withdrawal of the
evidence against her husband' The
Judge theroupon replied: 81 have read
the dispositions and can see nothing in
them inconsistent with the husbands
Innocence. Therefore, / am prepared to
accept the prosecuting counsel's view
OF the case" The Judge thereupon
directed the jury that they could not
convict man against whom no evil
dence was presented.
MEDICAL OPINION.
London, Eng, Nov. 6. DIR. William
Chapman Grigg, specialist in diseases
OF women and leading physician of
Queen Cbarlotte's lying-in- hospital,
testified that after repeated examina-
tions Of Mrs. Castle he had formed the
opinion that the disease from which
shewas suffering was one Of those which
are almost always accompanied by great
mental disturbance, causing different
manias, as kleptomania, religious
mania, &c, in different women. DR..
George Henry Savage, senior physician
at Bethlehem Hospital and lecturer
on Womep's diseases, endorsed every
word of DIR. Grigg's testimony, and DR..
Leonard Gabriel, member of the
Royal College Of Surgeons, gave similar
evidence. DIR. Scott, the medical
officer of Holloway Jail. gave evidence
of similar tenor, which, perhaps, was
the strongest of all, on account Of his
position. DIR. Scott said he believed
that any continuance of the imprison-
mont OF Mrs. Castle would be Injurious
to her mental and bodily health.
Sir Edward Clarke then drew the
attention of the court to the pitiable
condition Of the woman and suggested
that her friends, who were in court,
were deeply concerned and greatly
DESTROYS of removing her to some
asylum, whore her mental health could
be guarded. The Judge replied that
questions of this kind must be con-
sidered elsewhere. Continuing, Sir
Edward Clarke said that no one could
say at what moment disordered and
unhinged mind might give way utterly.
The Judge then passed sentenced of
three months Imprisonment, without
hard labor, upon Mrs. Castle. He
added that he did so with the knowledge
that the sen tence would be revised
elsewhere. and the general impression
which afterwards prevailed in court
was that this means that the Home
Office will shortly release Mrs. Castle on
her own recognizance.