Stockton Herald, South Durham and Cleveland Advertiser. — 1886-04-24 (Stockton-on-Tees, Cleveland, England)

THE PIMLICO POISONING CASE.  VERDICT OF NOT GUILTY.  The Pimlico case was concluded last Saturday. At the opeaing of the proceedings Mr Clarke, repairing an omission in his speech of the previous day, pointed out that no motive had been shown why the prisoner should commit the crime. The Attorney-General, addressing the jury, admitted that no one saw the prisoner administer the draught, but poisoning was always done in the dark. He ridiculed the suggestion that the deceased committed suicide. It was physically impossible to have done so. He asked the jury to believe that her husband had become distasteful to the prisoner, and that she desired Dyson. The learned Judge, in summing up, said the prisoner and deceased were happy until the Rev. George Dyson took advantage of the husband's maudlin nonsense. He directed the jury not to accept Dyson'e evidence, unless corroborated. The attachment between the prisoner and Dyson was a possible motive for the crime; but it was a strong point in prisoner's favour that she kept the chloroform bottle for twenty-six days after death, and insisted on a post-mortem examination. His lord! ship concluded his address at five minutes to three o'clock with an earnest appeal to the jury ! to give the prisoner the benefit of any doubt that they might have. I At five minutes past five the jury returned late Court, and, in answer to the usual pies. tion, the foreman said they had agreed upon , their verdict.  Mr /ivory: Do you find the prisoner guilty or not guilty of the wilful murder of Ler husband, Edwin Bartlett?  Ti3o Foreman: We have very carefully considered the evidence. We are of opinion that there are circumstances of grave suspicion against Mrs Bartlett, but there is not sufficient evidence to justify us in giving a verdict of guilty. The Judge: That is a 'Verdict of not guilty. Loud shouts of "Hurrah " arose from almost every voice in the °mut, and were taken up with increased vigour by a very large multitude assembled outeide.  The Judge, in very stern language, said that such conduct was an outrage on a Court of justice, which was not a theatre, and he hoped it would never be repeated. He hoped he should never again receive inch an iusult. His lordship then intimated to the jury that they would be exempt from service for five years. The Court then rose.  The scene, both inside and outside the Court, pending the verdict, and whilst it was being given, was of a most exciting character. Every inch of standing room inside was occupied, and a very large crowd assembled and patiently waited outside to learn the result. It was a remarkable fact that the decision of the jury was apparently known outside before it was actually announced in the Court, for whilst the foreman was making hie statement, and before he had given the affirmative reply to the clerk, great shouting from outside was heard, and this was kept up for some minutes. The prisoner, who throughout the whole proceedings before the Coroner, the Magistrate, and the Judge had been remarkably quiet and composed, except when overcome the previous clay by the address of her counsel, upon the verdict being given fainted, and was taken out of the dock by the two female warders.  The Rev. George Dyson, who figured so prominently in the above trial*, has sent in his resignation to the Wesleyan body. He intends going abroad for a few months, and will in all probability stady for the law after taking his LL.D. degree at Dublin.  RElJ4sx ov