The Sun. — 1862-07-25 (London, England)

CROWN COURT. THE CEMETERY OUTRAPES AT SHEFFIELD.--TFIE TRIAL OF THE CLERGYMAN. John Livesey (on bail), was charged with making a false entry of burial on the 3d of April last, and giving a false certificate of the same burial on the sth of June last, at Sheffield. Mr. Price, Q.C., and Mr. Hannay prosecuted ; Mr_ Bliss, Q.C., and Mr. Blanchard defended the prisoner. The case seemed to excite an nnusuai degree of interest, and the court was crowded at a ve:y early  hour. Mr. Price stated the case. The prisoner at i.he bar,--the Rev. John Livesey, has been, and is now, the incumbent of St. Philip's Church, Sheffield, and has had the office some 30 years, and so far as he (the learned counsel) knew had conducted himself as any one in that position of life could be expected to do. Mr. Livesey was indicted under the 24th Victoria, chap. 98, sec. 36, which enacts to the effect, among other things, that whosoever should knowingly or unlawfully insert, cause, or permit to be inserted in any register of births, marm2,ges, deaths, or burials, or any certificated coi:117 thereof, any false entry relating to any such births, deaths, marriages or burials, should be guilty of felony. The entry out of which the present case arises is one concerning a body brought from the Medical Hall, of one John Gretores. It purported that it was buried on April 3d, which was utterly false, as it was then lying in a coach-house in the cemetery. Next came the most important entry, "By whom performed ?" Answer, "John Livesey," which was equally false as the other, and more than all, must have been made with the full knowledge of the prisoner in whose handwriting the entry was. In consequence of certain disclosures concerning the exposure and mutilation of dead bodies in the cemetery the sexton became the object of much excitement and public opprobrium, and in consequence Mr. Livesey took upon himself to write a letter of explanation to the Sheffield newspapers, in which he tried to exculpate himself, and cast all the blame upon the sexton. He spoke of what was found in the coach-house as " a mass of foetid matter, black and shapeless," and of the existence of which he surely ought to have known ; and he also referred to what was found in the cemetery catacomb, or large pit, as " relics of humanity, over which the burial service could not legally be read." Now, there were only three cases in which clergymen can refuse to perform the burial service. The first was in the case of one who might be excommunicated by the Church; the second where a person had not been baptised ; and thirdly, in the instance of one respecting whom a coroner's inqui sition had returned a verdict offelo de se. Now, although the prisoner knew this, yet he represented to the authorities that he had read the burial service; besides which, if he had refused to do so, the authorities would probably have decided the question, and thus have satisfied the prisoner's mind. Since the time that the question had been before the grand jury Mr. Livesey had had the register, to which he had appended a long note, explaining that on June 23 last he had discovered that the body of Joseph Gretorex was not buried, as he had supposed, on the 3d April last, but that after its removal it had been decently buried. The above facts were then proved by the witnesses for the prosecution. Mr. Bliss addressed the jury for the defence. He contended that the present was rather a question for the bishop of the diocese than a criminal court. He submitted also thnt the burial service was addressed to the living, and not to the dead, and when the interment was a square box, with a dissected body in it, and without any kind and mourning friends to witness the ceremony, the service might, without impropriety, be left out. After an absence of nearly half an hour the jury returned a verdict of Guilty. Sentence deferred. The case of Isaac Howard, the sexton, was then proceeded with, but was not concluded when our parcel was dispatched,