CHAPTER XV. THE STORY OF THE TRIAL. THE PRELIMINARIES.
LET me confess another weakness, on my part, before I begin the Storyof the Trial. I cannot prevail upon myself to copy, for the second time,the horrible title-page which holds up to public ignominy my husband'sname. I have copied it once in my tenth chapter. Let once be enough.
Turning to the second page of the Trial, I found a Note, assuring thereader of the absolute correctness of the Report of the Proceedings. Thecompiler described himself as having enjoyed certain special privileges.Thus, the presiding Judge had himself revised his charge to the jury.And, again, the chief lawyers for the prosecution and the defense,following the Judge's example, had revised their speeches for andagainst the prisoner. Lastly, particular care had been taken to secure aliterally correct report of the evidence given by the various witnesses.It was some relief to me to discover this Note, and to be satisfied atthe outset that the Story of the Trial was, in every particular, fullyand truly given.
The next page interested me more nearly still. It enumerated the actorsin the Judicial Drama--the men who held in their hands my husband'shonor and my husband's life. Here is the List:
THE LORD JUSTICE CLERK,} LORD DRUMFENNICK, }Judges on the Bench. LORD NOBLEKIRK, }
THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mintlaw), } DONALD DREW, Esquire (Advocate-Depute).} Counsel for the Crown.
MR. JAMES ARLISS, W. S., Agent for the Crown.
THE DEAN OF FACULTY (Farmichael), } Counsel for the Panel ALEXANDER CROCKET, Esquire (Advocate),} (otherwise the Prisoner)
MR. THORNIEBANK, W. S.,} MR. PLAYMORE, W. S., } Agents for the Panel.
The Indictment against the prisoner then followed. I shall not copy theuncouth language, full of needless repetitions (and, if I know anythingof the subject, not guiltless of bad grammar as well), in which myinnocent husband was solemnly and falsely accused of poisoning his firstwife. The less there is of that false and hateful Indictment on thispage, the better and truer the page will look, to _my_ eyes.
To be brief, then, Eustace Macallan was "indicted and accused, at theinstance of David Mintlaw, Esquire, Her Majesty's Advocate, for HerMajesty's interest," of the Murder of his Wife by poison, at hisresidence called Gleninch, in the county of Mid-Lothian. The poison wasalleged to have been wickedly and feloniously given by the prisoner tohis wife Sara, on two occasions, in the form of arsenic, administeredin tea, medicine, "or other article or articles of food or drink, to theprosecutor unknown." It was further declared that the prisoner's wifehad died of the poison thus administered b y her husband, on one orother, or both, of the stated occasions; and that she was thus murderedby her husband. The next paragraph asserted that the saidEustace Macallan, taken before John Daviot, Esquire, advocate,Sheriff-Substitute of Mid-Lothian, did in his presence at Edinburgh(on a given date, viz., the 29th of October), subscribe a Declarationstating his innocence of the alleged crime: this Declaration beingreserved in the Indictment--together with certain documents, papers andarticles, enumerated in an Inventory--to be used in evidence against theprisoner. The Indictment concluded by declaring that, in the eventof the offense charged against the prisoner being found proven by theVerdict, he, the said Eustace Macallan, "ought to be punished with thepains of the law, to deter others from committing like crimes in alltime coming."
So much for the Indictment! I have done with it--and I am rejoiced to bedone with it.
An Inventory of papers, documents, and articles followed at great lengthon the next three pages. This, in its turn, was succeeded by the listof the witnesses, and by the names of the jurors (fifteen in number)balloted for to try the case. And then, at last, the Report of the Trialbegan. It resolved itself, to my mind, into three great Questions. As itappeared to me at the time, so let me present it here.
The Law and the Lady Page 15
