beauty of the accused, her refinement of manner and appearance, and the imperturbable resolution

(At Glasgow,

JUNE 30, JULY 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8,

and 9, 1857.)

A TRIAL of singular interest and uncertainty has occupied the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh for nine days. From the first announcement of the arrest of the accused, this cause célèbre excited the deepest interest in Scotlandan interest which was raised to the highest point of excitement during the trial, and which, though little heard of during the preliminary proceedings, was read with the utmost greediness throughout the United Kingdom during its concluding stages.

The person accused was a young lady named Madeleine Hamilton Smith, 21 years of age, the daughter of an architect of respectability residing in Blythswood Square, Glasgow, and having a country residence at the Bridge of Allan. The crime laid to her charge was that of having poisoned her lover, a young Frenchman, named L'Angelier, under circumstances of singular deliberation and duplicity, and with an ulterior object. The interest caused by the romantic circumstances of the case much heightened by the alleged

was

dangers in which she was placed.

On the day appointed for her trial, Miss Madeleine Smith took her seat in the dock with the most perfect self-possession. She is described as of middle height and fair complexion; her features and her carriage indicated extraordinary nerve. The simple elegance of her dress and appointments, and her undisturbed manner, appear to have attracted much admiration.

The Court was composed of the Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Ivory, and Lord Handyside. The indictment, drawn of course in the forms of Scotch law, and therefore differing greatly from a similar document in England, in substance charged the accused with three crimes, or, in English law terms, contained three counts. The first count charged the accused with having, on the 19th or 20th day of February, 1857, administered to or caused to be taken by Pierre Emile L'Angelier, arsenic or other poison in cocoa, coffee, or other articles of food or drink with intent to murder the said L'Angelier; and that the said L'Angelier, in consequence thereof, and immediately or soon after taking the same or some part thereof, suffered severe illness. The second charged

the prisoner with a similar offence on Sunday the 22nd or Monday the 23rd of February, 1857. The third with the same offence on Sunday or Monday the 22nd or 23rd day of March, 1857, and that the said L'Angelier did, on the said 23rd day of March, in consequence, suffer illness and die, and was thus murdered by the said Madeleine Hamilton Smith. In addition to the indictment the law officers of the Crown put in an inventory of a vast quantity of letters written by the accused and the deceased, cards, bottles of drugs, jars containing portions of the deceased's body, and other articles; all of which formed part of the case for the Crown.

The prosecution was conducted by the Lord Advocate, the Solicitor-General, and Mr. Donald Mackenzie, Advocate-Deputy. The prisoner was defended by the Dean of Faculty, Mr. George Young, and Mr. A. Moncreiff.

The prisoner being called upon to plead to the indictment, pleaded "Not Guilty" in a distinct and unshaken tone of voice.

It will readily be understood that a trial which occupied nine entire days, and turned upon the minutest points of circumstantial evidence, applicable to three distinct occasions, each occcasion extending over two days, is not capable of being reduced into any comprehensive abridgment. The difficulty is greatly increased by a difference in the Scotch mode of procedure from the English; for whereas in Eugland the counsel for the prosecution prefers his accusation by a distinct narrative of his case, and then calls the witnesses by which his facts are to be supported; and the counsel for the defence pursues a similar course on behalf of his

client,-in the Scotch courts the evidence, incriminatory and exculpatory, is first produced, and the counsel for the Crown and for the accused then make their addresses, founded on particular points of the evidence. The consequence, so far as abridgment is concerned, is important; for the Court being in possession of the evidence in full, many of the points of the pleadings of the counsel are allu sive, as to matters already known to Judge and jury. The course which has been adopted is to give such an abridgment of the addresses of the Counsel and the Judge as may seem to convey a clear notion of the case of the respective parties, and such occasional extracts of evidence as may appear to be of remarkable interest or importance.

From the extent of the evidence, and the numerous documents read, it was not until the seventh day of the trial that the Lord Advocate rose to offer his charge to the Court. The material points of his address were as follow:

I am

The Lord Advocate:-Gentlemen of the jury, after an investigation which, for its length, has proved unexampled, I believe, in the criminal annals of this country, I have now to discharge perhaps the most painful public duty that ever fell to my lot. quite sure, gentlemen, that in the discharge of that duty I shall meet with that attention which the deep importance of this case requires, and which you have paid to its details from the commencement. Gentlemen, it is impossible, whatever impression may have been produced in your minds-it is impossible that, during this long and protracted trial, in which we