I requested him to send the medicine to the hotel at which I was staying. He said it would be much better to forward it to my permanent residence, upon which I gave him my address. The medicine was afterwards sent there, and I paid 117. 10s. for it. I took the medicine and sent for more six or seven times, sending up a check in payment for it each time. I paid 841. or 861. altogether, including 207. on one occasion. The checks produced are those I gave. They are all drawn in favor of A. F. Henery, except one, which was made payable to bearer, and I received a written acknowledgment of them signed with that name. I eventually consulted another medical man, and ceased to give further orders to Dr. Henery. That was about January or February. In July last the letter produced was put into my hand. [It was read as follows, by the Clerk of Arraigns]:

"MEDICAL INSTITUTION, 53, DORSET STREET, PORTMAN SQUARE, "LONDON; July 1864.

"No. 3, Private Room, Bugle Hotel, Newport.

SIR,-Experience has proved that in cases similar to what you are suffering from a personal interview invariably leads to the advantage of the patient, and therefore have requested the bearer, a gentleman of great experience and skill, to see you, as he happens to be in your neighborhood, on a professional visit. "Yours truly,

"A. F. HENERY, M. D. "W. ANDERSON.

"Captain CLARKE, Parkhurst."

I did not reply to that letter. About two months after that the prisoner Anderson called on me at the barracks and said he came from Dr. Henery. I told him I did not wish to have anything further to do with Dr. Henery. He said I would be aware that Dr. Henery had a very heavy claim against me. I replied that I was not. He said Dr. Henery had sent him down about a claim of 1507. he had against me. I remarked that it was impossible that he could have such a claim. He said he had come down in a great hurry in consequence of instructions given him by Dr. Henery on the previous evening, and of my not having answered any of the many letters the doctor had written to me. I replied I had not received any letters from him. After some further conversation he asked me to give him a check for 150l. I declined to do that, upon which he reduced his demand to 100 guineas, saying that I had better settle the matter. I declined that also, adding that I did not even know who he He said it did not matter who he was, and he declined to give me his Just before he left he said he had come down in a great hurry, and he asked me for a sovereign to pay his expenses. I said Dr. Henery had sent him down and he was the man to pay his expenses. He led me to believe that he could not get out of the island if I did not give him a sovereign. I said if I gave him a sovereign I should demand a receipt for it. He consented to that, and he wrote a receipt in my presence, which he signed “H. Wilson.” He then left. A few days afterwards-namely, on the 19th of September, I

was.

name.

wrote a letter to Dr. Henery, stating that a gentleman, describing himself as his agent, had made a claim on me for 1507.; that I was quite unaware of owing him such a sum, and that I should be obliged by his sending me the particulars, in order that I might send them to my legal adviser, addressing me to the care of Messrs. Cox. I received a letter from him in answer. [It was read as follows]:

"MEDICAL INSTITUTION, 53, DORSET STREET, PORTMAN SQUARE,

"LONDON; Sept. 26th.

"SIR,-I regret exceedingly to have to inform you that your letter did not reach me until Saturday night; otherwise it would have received my immediate attention. Nevertheless, I have to remind you that you promised the gentleman who waited upon you at Parkhurst that you would call at Dorset Street; therefore I do not understand your giving us so much trouble in the matter. I have to inform you that my claim for 1507. is for medical advice and medicine for spermatorrhoea brought on by self-pollution. If you will satisfy my claim without further trouble I will give you a receipt in full of all demands, or sign any paper that you may please to draw up, so that you shall not be troubled again by

"Your obedient servant,

"A. F. HENERY.

"P. S.-I called at Cox and Co.'s this morning, and found that you were there on Saturday, so therefore I hope this will reach you there."

I also handed that to my legal adviser. On the 5th of October I received another letter signed "H. Wilson,” and which, I think, is the handwriting of the prisoner Anderson;

"WARBURTON'S Hotel, Newport; Oct. 5th, 1864. "Private Sitting Room No. 4.

"SIR,--I am here expressly from London to see you with a view to effect a settlement, if possible, of Dr. Henery's claim; and anticipating your refusal to see me at your quarters is the reason I have penned this, and would recommend you to do so at once, for, rely upon it, I don't intend journeying here again for nothing. Your letter from your solicitor has been received, and I have that and some from yourself with me. Now, supposing I were to inform you application will be made at the War Office, with explanation of your case; and if we were to do so you know what the consequence would be; or supposing I were to inform you that I expect to be in your neighborhood in Scotland next week, and that I don't intend leaving here in the event of your still persisting in your refusal to pay without making it known in the neighborhood, for what purpose I am here. I am in no hurry, and will allow you time to reflect whether it will be better to pay Dr. Henery's legal and just claim or submit to exposure of your filthy case. I would inform you I have waited upon one of the head solicitors in Plymouth since I saw you, in reference to a claim we had upon his son, and on our explaining what we would do in the event of his not paying us, he soon saw the force of what we said and paid us at once. Now, the reason I did not tell you what we intended

doing in the event of your not paying when I was here before was because you promised to call in Dorset Street, and relying on your word as a gentleman was the only reason I did not do so.

"Yours obediently,

"H. WILSON.

"P. S.-It is useless for you to pretend you are not in quarters, for I know you to be there (and was there last night when I called) before I left London." In that letter there is an allusion to Scotland. My father resides there and some other of my friends. I had written from Scotland to Dr. Henery once while I was receiving medicine from him, so that he knew my address there. I placed that letter in the hands of my legal adviser.

By Mr. RIBTON, in cross-examination.--When I consulted him I was suffering from a malady, and I described my symptoms to him. The interview lasted about five minutes. The box he first sent me contained twelve bottles of medicine. I did not take it all. He gave me certain directions as to regimen, exercise, bathing, and the like, but only such as I had followed all my life. I acknowledged to Anderson owing Dr. Henery 107. 10s. for a box of medicine, which I was prepared to pay, but I would not pay him any more. I believed I was suffering then from the disease called spermatorrhœa. Re-examined by Mr. METCALFE.-I was in the Crimea, and was badly wounded in the head. I should think my constitution was injured there. ALEXANDER THOMPSON, Clerk in the London and Westminster Bank, deposed that the prisoner Wray kept an account at the bank, and that the endorsement on the checks of Captain Clarke was in the handwriting of Wray.

Sergeant WHITE, of the N. division, deposed that on the 22d of October the case against the defendant Anderson was heard at Marlborough Street Policecourt. Anderson appeared, but Henery did not. A warrant was issued for his apprehension, and witness went to his house in Dorset Street, Portman Square, and found him in bed. He said he was too ill to get up. Witness replied, "Nonsense; I saw you out yesterday, and you must go." He answered, "My name is not Henery; if the summons had been made out in the name of Wray I should have appeared." Witness pulled off the bedclothes, and found him partly dressed.

This was the case for the prosecution.

Mr. Baron BRAMWELL held that there was no evidence to sustain the first count for publishing a malicious libel, while the second fell to the ground on account of the venue, the alleged offence having been committed in the county of Hampshire.

The jury then, under the direction of the learned Judge, returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

The prisoners were then arraigned on a charge of conspiracy by diverse false pretences and subtle means and devices to obtain large sums of money from the prosecutor, and also of threatening to publish a libel concerning him with a view to extort money.

Mr. RIBTON, addressing the jury on behalf of the prisoner Wray, submitted that there was not a tittle of evidence to show that Wray was responsible for

anything that had been done by Anderson in the country. He admitted that the letter written by Anderson from Warburton's Hotel was a threatening letter, and that its purpose was to get money from Captain Clarke by menace, but he utterly denied that there was any evidence that Wray was cognizant of that letter being about to be written, or that he ever gave any instructions to Anderson to write it. They could not, either in principle or in law, hold the principal responsible for all the acts of his agents, but only for those acts which he had directed to be done. No doubt Captain Clarke at that time was laboring under some disease. If he were not, then indeed, there would be a false pretence, but he could not understand how a false pretence could be alleged when the origin of the demand was admitted by the prosecutor himself to be true. It was well known that certain members of the medical profession devoted themselves to a particular description of disease, and that they advertised in the papers, and he was not aware that there was any disgrace in their doing so. Captain Clarke, seeing Wray or Henery's advertisement, went to him and received medicine and advice. It was idle, therefore, to say that there was any false pretence. It had not been shown what were the ingredients of which the medicine was composed. In all probability it was a strong tonic, and intended to do Captain Clarke good, and charging for it more than he ought was not an offence on the part of Wray. Nay, it had been mentioned that within the last three years a member of his own profession had refused to come into that court unless they gave him 1000 guineas (a laugh), and he understood that the gentleman who did come on that occasion received a very large sum. Then in what way could Wray be affected by the letters which had been read? The letter of September 26th, 1864, had formed the ground of the charge for libel, but that had been abandoned; and now it was brought forward to prove a case of conspiracy; but all that that letter did was to say, "You owe 150l., and I request you to pay me." The jury could not shut their eyes to the fact that this was an attempt to convict these men merely by sheer force of prejudice. The jury were asked to say that Wray was a bad fellow, and was trading with inexperienced people, and inducing them to pay him large sums of money. With regard to the charge of threatening to publish a libel, the only letter which could be said to contain any such threat was that which formed the subject of the first indictment, and which had gone off upon the point of venue. Justice, however, would not be defeated by that decision, because the parties were still liable to be tried in Hampshire.

Mr. KEMP then addressed the jury on behalf of Anderson, and submitted that there were many circumstances to rebut the idea of a conspiracy. The only way in which he appeared in these proceedings was as a person who was sent down to Captain Clarke's quarters to obtain money, and if in writing a letter to that gentleman he couched it in terms that amounted to a threat to extort money, it must be held to be his own individual act, and could not, therefore, be made the ground of a charge of conspiracy.

Mr. Baron BRAMWELL summed up the evidence, and called the attention of the jury to the letter written by Anderson to Captain Clarke on the 5th of

October from Warburton's Hotel, Newport, and which he described to be clearly an attempt to extort money by threats of exposure. Now, the question was, in what way did the prosecution connect the other prisoner Wray or Henery with this threat made by Anderson, so as to constitute the offence of conspiracy? There was the letter of the 26th of September from Henery to Captain Clarke, in which he referred to Anderson having called upon the prosecutor and demanded 1507., as being due to him (Henery), and then in the same letter he informed the prosecutor that his claim on him was for 1507. Then came the letter of the 30th of September addressed to Henery by the Solicitor of Captain Clarke, and the receipt of which was acknowledged -not by Henery, but by Anderson, in his letter of the 5th of October, thus showing that there must have been some communication between the two on the subject of the demand made upon Captain Clarke. If the jury were satisfied that there was an intent to extort money, by means of threats, and that that intent existed, not only in the mind of one of the prisoners, but in the minds of both, and that they were engaged and leagued together in that common intent, that would amount to a conspiracy, and the prosecutor had made out his case. If they were not so satisfied they would acquit them; but it would certainly be a very singular thing if two people could be found acting in the way in which the prisoners had been acting without some common purpose.

The jury, after a few minutes deliberation, returned a verdict of Guilty as against both prisoners.

Mr. Baron BRAMWELL, in passing sentence, said the offence of which they had been convicted was one of the most abominable that could be conceived, because in a case of this description it was not one robbery that was practised upon the individual who was the subject of it, but that was followed up by a succession of demands until his life was made positively hateful to him. The offence of which they had been found guilty being one of misdemeanor he could not sentence them to more than two years' imprisonment, and he sentenced each of them to be imprisoned for that term, accordingly, with hard labor.