A PHRENOLOGICAL ROW.

West Coast Times, Issue 347, 2 November 1866, Page 1 (Supplement)

A PHRENOLOGICAL ROW.

TheMaungatapu murderers still provide excitement for the good citizens of Nelson, though we should have thought that they were as sick of the subject by this time as we doubt not all other parts of the colony are. Having not only tried, but hanged, the murderers, they are now squabbling over their bones, and going to law about the right of certain parties to certain casts of the villains' heads. We are informed by the {k Nelson Examiner " that on- the 25th ult, Mr A. S. Hamilton, the well-known phrenologist, was brought before the Resident Magistrate, J. Poyntcr, Esq., charged, on the information of Messrs Tatton and Knight, with " unlawfully, maliciously, and feloniously stealing and taking away " three casts of the heads of the murderers, Burgess, Kelly, and Levy, valued by the prosecutors at L3O, from the office of Mr Rout, in Hardy street. Mr Hamilton had been apprehended on this charge on the previous day, but had entered into his own recognizance to appear and answer to the charge. The case had excited much interest in the city, and a number of persons were present in the Court to hear the proceedings. Mr A. Pitt appeared for the prosecution : Mr Kingdon for the defence. The evidence given in support of the charge went to prove that the Phrenological ! Society, through Mr Rout, had first obtained permission from, the Sheriff to take casts of the heads, but had waived its privilege in favor of Messrs Tatton and Knight, on the understanding that Mr Hamilton was to superintend the operation ' • phrenologically ;" that they agreed to this arrangement ; that on Mr Hamilton giving a lecture on behalf of the Monument Fund, the three first casts had been supplied by them for the purposes of illustration at the lecture. It further appeared that on Tuesday last Mr Rout, as Secretary of the Phrenological Society, had received a set of these casts from Messrs Tatton and Knight, as they alleged, for the temporary use of the society, who had previously stipulated for the purchase of three setd. The prosecutors denied that tho set in question formed an instalment of the order given by the society, and produced an agreement to the effect that no one should be permitted to make use of the casts, save members of the society. Mr Tatton, though he solemnly asserted that these casts were the property of himself and Mr Knight, stated that he considered Mr Rout was responsible for them. It appeared that

Messrs Rout and Burns had informed Mr Hamilton that the members of the society were much annoyed by the terms of this agreement, and that, in consequence, they determined to give back the casts to Messrs Tatton and Knight, or else to rid themselves of the obligation not to lend the casts, as Mr Hamilton wanted them to lecture upon. On hearing this, Mr Hamilton begged them to desist, as he would not take as a compliment what he demanded as a right from the prosecutors. A letter, left by Mr Hamilton when he took away the casts, was 'produced by Mr Rout, addressed by Mr Hamilton to himself, Mr Burns, and the members of the Phrenological Society, reminding them'that, as they were aware, that he

(Mr Hamilton) was to have the first

three casts ; and that Mr Tatton had € repeatedly acknowledged that, according to agreement, Mr Hamilton had a moral (right to the first three, he had taken possession of them, and expressing his belief that had the Society known that they were Disking a mistake in taking the first three casts delivered by the prosecutors, they would not have done so. The letter went on to say that the society was aware that Mr Hamilton had only given his lecture on that condition; that they had waived their prior claim to the easts in his favor ; and that, having obtained possession of the casts, he left the society and the prosecutors to fight it out between them Mr Kingdon was proceeding to address the Court for the defendant, when the Resident Magistrate said he would not trouble him to do so, characterising the case as a series of criminations and recriminations, and as one, which could not be sustained. MiHamilton, he said, evidently had an idea that he was entitled to ' a set of casts, but had acted wrongly in taking away the casts as he had done. The case was therefore dismissed.