Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

8 articles on this Page


Family Notices

^ N G AppQ I N T M E N T S.

i-fyt,8 ^ ° B D W B 8 T MAR…




THE MERTHYR AND DOWLAIS FENIAN PRISONERS. At the Glamorganshire Assizes on Thursday, Patrick Doran, 21; Patrick Carey, 23; John Mara, 23; Mark Farley, 23 Patrick Ryan, 34; Thomas Reardon, 22 William Holland, 21; Michael Flynn, 22 John Whelan 21; William Whelan, 20 all described in the calendar as labourers, were charged, in the terms of the indict- ment, with feloniously, and with divers other persons, devising and intending to deprive and depose our most gracious laiy the Queen from the style, honour, and royal name of the Imperial Crown of the United King- dom, by feloniously meeting, conspiring, and agreeing together to drill and practice military movements, at Merthyr Tydfil, between the 1st of September and the 26th of December, 1867." Mr Giffard, Q.C., with Mr H. Allen, conducted the prosecution, and Mr Bowen defended Ryan, Reardon, Carey, and Holland. Mr Michael appeared for the other prisoners. Mr Ensor, of Cardiff, instructed the counsel for the prosecution, and Messrs Smith and Lewis instructed the counsel for the defence. The jury, after about half an hour's deliberation, found all the prisoners not guilty, excepting Doran and Ryan, who were sentenced, the former to seven years' penal servitude, and the latter to the years' penal servitude. -♦ DEATH OF THE REV. MR. PLOW. About six o'clock on Thursday evening, after the most distressing sufferings, the Rev Mr Plow succumbed to the injuries he recently sustained at the hands of the young man Wetherill. The im- mediate cause of death was inflammation of the brain, resulting from reaction. Up to Wednesday evening there was no appearance of immediate danger but about ten o'clock at night serious symptoms began to manifest themselves, and thenceforward the unfortunate gentleman lay in extreme agony. We have also to record the death of the infant, born three weeks before the outrage. The child had been removed to Littleborough, and its removal from its mother is alleged to have tended to hasten its death. The death of Mr Plow, which was marked by the tolling of the church bell, cast a feeling of increased gloom over the parish. It is feared that the effect of these calamities on Mrs Plow cannot, in her present state, be other than disastrous. The town of Todmorden was on Sunday thronged by crowds of visitors who inspected the scene of the tragedy with an interest that seemed never to tire. Every particle connected with the fearful crime is eagerly sought for. The late vicar was the eldest son of the Rev Henry A. Plow, rector of Bradley, near Winchester. He was a graduate of Qneen's College, Cambridge, and held re- spectively the curacies of Staines, near London; Wickham, near Winchester Cosham, Dover, and Rochdale, whence be was appointed to Todmorden, in 1864; by the vicar of Rochdaie. While at Roch- dale he held the curacy of St. James's under the late incumbent, Mr Ffarrington, and his labours during that memorable cotton famine" will not be readily forgotten by the working classes of St. James's, Rochdale. The rev. gentleman has left two children, who are both of tender years. On Sunday evening there was a very large congrega- tion in Todmorden Church. The sermon was preached by the Rev H. A. Plow, father of the murdered clergyman. Before the sermon was delivered, the prayers of the congregation were earnestly requested on behalf of the culprit, Miles Weatberill now lying under sentence of death," and for Mrs Plow, now in great distress of mind and body." It was understood that during the day Mrs Plow's illness had taken a more serious turn. EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF POISONING IN FRANCE. NIORT, MARCH 10. On Friday next, at the Court of Assizes of this town, a criminal trial for poisoning will commence, which will rank amongst the causes celebres of France. Three persons are indicted for having caused the death of Pierre Teyier, a single man in possession of a fortune of ^12,000. The prisoners are ..the widow Teyier, nee Chariot, sister-in-law of the victim Frances Richard, his servant • and Francis Chariot, father of the widow Teyier. It is a singular circumstance that Francis Chariot was the partner of Martin Reauin land speculations. Rcaa was sentenced last year by the same Court of Assizes to the galleys for life for wilful murder by poison. M. Lachaud, of the Paris bar M Ricard, a barrister at Niort; and M. Thibaudiere of the Parthenay bar, are counsel for the pri- soners. The procurator General of the Court of Appeal of Poictiers will be the public prosecutor Hie crime was perpetrated at the Chateau de la Meilleraye, in the arrondissement or district of I arthenay, department of the Deux Sevres, the chief town of which is Niort. The poisoning seems to have been conceived and perpetrated with a slowness and a perseverance implymo- a well-combined plan but it appears, notwithstand- ing, that the authorities were on the alert even before the death of Pierre Teyier. Pierre Teyier had always enjoyed remarkable good health but in the middle of 1867 he complained of having an inexplicable weight on the chest, a burning thirst and nausea, and he vomited frequently. He emitted a fetid odour, and succumbed at the end of one month. A post mortem examination took place, which resulted in the discovery of arsenic, and death was declared to be the result of that mineral. Arsenic was found not osly in the viscera, but also on the boards of the fioW on which he had vomited Who were the poisoners 1 The only persons who had constantly attended upon Pierre Teyier durino- his illness were his servant Frances Richard and his sister-in-lsw, the widow Teyier. They alone prepared and gave to him his food and drink and if, by chance, another servant attended upon his master during the nfght,- he received the potions ready made which he was to give him. Thejrtdicial authorities had visited the patient's house*- several days before his death, and: were able to- take his depositions. Madam Teyier;, it appears, had had some differences with her broflier-in-lavf relative to her husband's succession, but the quarrel bad been smoothed over, and at long intervals she visited him. Her two daughters were the pre sumptive heirs of Pierre Teyier, their uncle but the inheritance was not to come to them «oon considering the health of the uncle M. Tevier had, it seems, a hatred of marriage, and had his sister in-law married again, he would' probably have left his property to his first cousin, with whom be was frIendly. The act of accusation im- plies that Mdrne. Teyier, who was only 35 years of age, had some idea of marrying again, were it only to get her future husband to take a share in the management of her farm. On the 2nd of July, 1867,. she paid a visit to her brother-in law, thtn suffering from an attack of gout, and spent the evening with him. Next day Dr Gapne, the same who played so important a part in the trial of Reau was sent for by Pierre Teyier, and he found him suffering from diarrhoea and stomach-ache. Madame Teyier returned to la Meilleraye on the 15th of July, and'installed herself there with her servants, her two daughters and their governess. From that time Teyier became worse. Dr Ganne always asked for the. vomit of the patient, in order that he might examine it, but he was always told 0 that it had been forgotten. The physician at last obtained some, and when in the act of pouring it into a glass bottle to take it away, the widow Teyier came in and asked, with much surprise, what he intended to do with it. She afterwards insisted upon the experiments being made at once in her own presence, but the physician declined to do so. The vomit, when analysed, revealed the presence of arsenic. The act of accusation even, asserts that Dr Ganne was kept in ignorance that the patient had vomitings till be detected the fact himself, and Teyier invariably vomited after having taken the broths prepared either by his servant Frances Richard or the widow Teyier. The act of accusation narrates the conversation which sup- ports the material evidence. On the 11th of August, while strangers' hands closed the victim's eyes, the widow Teyier said she bad no interest whatever in the death of' her brother-in-law, and that his succession would cause embarrassment to her instead of being advantageous. After all," continued she, "J don't know a single poison. I know well that there is one called arsenic, but I never saw it." At those words the servant girl Richard also said that she did not know any poison, and repeated that it was very surprising that people should suppose that her master had died from poison. As to Francis Chariot, Mdme. Teyier's father, the act of accusation says that if he did not pour the poison with his own hand he bad at least participated in the crime by the assistance he gave to the guilty parties, whose projects he knew and aided. He had a direct and personal interest in the prompt death of Pierre Teyier, because he was his debtor for a sum of 30,000f., to be paid Sept. 29, then close at hand. The act of accusation reproaches the widow Teyier and her father with having failed to unite their efforts with those of the magistrates to discover the poison, and apply the proper remedy. As to the prisoners' system of defence, the act of accusa- tion says that they began by asserting that if Teyier had been poisoned the crime was to belaid at the door of the physicians themselves. Sir," said the widow Teyier to Dr Ganne, it is you who put him in such a case. The drug you gave him last Thursday did not come from the chemist's you took it from your bag; you committed a mistake; since that moment my brother-in-law became worse and worse," But seeing that such a system could not be supported, Charlot and his daughter had recourse to another defence. Ttiey summoned to the house of Teyier several physicians, with the view of destroying, by means of the con- fusion and the opposed diagnoses hastily made, the authority of the conclusions of the doctors who bad attended the patient. Such is the act of accusation; its perusal will suffice to show that the La Meilleraye poisoning trial is one of the most grave and delicate cases which a jury had ever to decide upon.

[No title]