The Sun. — 1860-04-10 (London, England)

CASE OF THE REV. MR. HATCH.  It has already been stated that the charge of perjury preferred by the Rev. Mr. Hatch against a child named Mary Eugenia Plummer stands postponed until the May session of the Central Criminal Court ; but, as the proceedings connected with it have created a great deal of public interest, it may be as well to state a few further particulars in relation to this extraordinary case. It will be remembered that Mr. Hatch was convicted at the November session of the Central Criminal Court upon two indictments, charging him with indecent assaults upon Mary Eugenia Plummer, a girl about twelve years, and her sister, Stephanie Augusta, a girl three or four years her junior, and that the jury, after a long deliberation, returned a verdict of guilty upon both charges, and the defendant was thereupon sentenced to two years' imprisonment and hard labour upon each indictment. Under ordinary circumstances the defendant would have been at once sent to the Wandsworth House of Correction, the offence having been committed in the county of Surrey; but, as Mr. Hatch had been for several years the chaplain of that prison, and which office he only resigned upon these charges being made against him, it appears that the Home Secretary considered it would be a painful and unnecessary aggravation of the sentence that he should be sent back to this prison as a criminal, and Mr. Hatch therefore remained in Newgate until the Government had an opportunity of deciding in what place of confinement the sentence should be carried out. The defendant in the meantime, as the public is aware, obtained the consent of Mr. Baron Bramwell, who tried the case, that an indictment should be preferred for perjury against the elder child, Mary Eugenia Plummer, and this bill was returned a true bill by the grand jury. The allegations of perjury are five in number, and they embrace the whole of the alleged acts of indecency. The witnesses to disprove the evidence of the child are all females except as to one portion of the indictment, there being only one male witness to be examined, with the exception of the defendant himself. Mrs. Hatch is one of the witnesses ; a little girl, an adopted child, who went by the name of Lucy, and two female servants, appear to be the additional witnesses whose evidence is to support the charge of perjury. The object of Mr. Hatch in instituting these proceedings is, of course, to free himself from the consequences of his conviction ; but as a good deal of interest has been created upon the question whether a child of such tender years is amenable to the criminal law, it may be as well to state that, up to the age of seven years, a child is not considered to be of competent mind so as to be criminally liable for his conduct, but at that age, if express malice he proved, a child may be legally convicted and sutler the penalty of any crime he may have committed ; and there is one sentence upon record where a boy, seven years old, was convicted of the murder of another child, and was left for execution, although the sentence was not ultimately carried into effect. Just before the adjournment of the Court the father of the little girl entered into the required recognisance for the appearance of his daughter at the May sessions_ By the form of the proceedings, the younger child will be a competent witness to be examined on behalf of her sister, and, it is said, that a mass of evidence will be adduced in answer to the charge, and the case will be placed first ou the list for trial be• fore the judges.