THE CHARGE AGAINST BARON DE VIDIL.

Wellington Independent, Volume XVI, Issue 1676, 15 October 1861, Page 3

THE CHARGE AGAINST BARON DE VIDIL.

The Baron de Vidil is a French gentleman by birth, who, having married an English lady of fortune, has long been in the habit of visiting London where his position and friends gave him the entree to the most distinguished society iv the metropolis. He was an honorary member of several of the principal clubs, and, in fact, a gentleman whose position in what is termed "society" was admitted everywhere. Baron Vidil has become embarrassed, and, in fact, was pressed urgently for ready money. His son is a young gentleman, twenty-three years of age, who has been reared almost entirely in England, and who has graduated at Cambridge. By the death of this young man the Baron de Vidil would become entitled at onoe to £30,000.

The baron proposed to his son that they should ride out and pay their respects to the Due d'Aumale and the members ofthe ex-royal family of Claremont, Both gentlemen, accordingly, started. by the train from Waterloo for Twickenham, where they hired horses and rode to Claremont, Young Mr. Alfred De i Vidil bad a light riding whip, but the baron had none. At Claremont only the j Duo d'Orleans was at home, but. with him the father and son remained upwards of an* hour in conversation. On leaving, the journey, therefore, was continued at an ordinary pace towards Twickenham. On the outskirts of the village the baron turned his horse up a shady lane, saying he felt unwell, but almost immediately afterwards added that be should like to call upon the Duo d'Aumale, at Orleans-house. To this young Alfred de Vidil assented, and the baron began to lead the way down lanes and byways to the baok of Orleans-house stables, when the father turned aside down yet another lane. Both the father aud son at last arrived at a very secluded lane between Twickenham and Orleanshouse. A high wall shuts in the lane on one side, and a thick and rather tall hedge on the other. It must have seemed a fitting place, though in reality it was plainly overlooked, for a laborer saw what followed. It is stated tbat the baron looked round him aud then at once struck his son a dreadful blow on the forehead. It was at first thought, from the nature of the wound, thtit it must have been inflicted with a life preserver ; but the laborer who, from an adjoining field, saw all the blows struck, said the weapon appeared to be like (something glittering on the end of a stick. From this it would seem that the attempt was made with one of those massive metal banded hunting whips, with whiob, of course, as severe a blow as with a hammer could be given. Its full violence, however, was partly broken, for, though it laid open young Mr. Vidil's forehead, it did not bring him from his horse. The baron then struck two other blows, one on the side of the head, a very severe one, inflicting a serious wound ; the other we are informed was fortunately lighter. Almost stunned, bleeding, and quite overpowered by the suddenness of such an attack from such a quarter, young Mr. Vidil set spurs to his horse and galloped away as rapidly as his horse could go with his father in full pursuit of him. Both seemed to have pressed their horses to the utmost speed but the son found that his father was rapidly gaining on bim. He, therefore, as a last chance, reigned up his horse at a field where he saw some people at work, and, throwing himself off, broke through the hedge, and ran towards them crying for help. The father followed him up close, and first said, " Here, you have dropped your hat>" and then added to the country people " The young gentleman stood up in his saddle to look over a wall, and his horse shied apd threw him." Other people coming up, young Mr. Vidil was conveyed to a _ public-house, , and Dr,

Clarke, of Twickenham, was sent for. To tbis gentleman the young man appealed that his assistant might go up with him, and his manner was so marked and peculiar in making this request that Dr. Clarke at once consented, seeing that there was evidently something wrong. During all this time the father was present, and seemed anxious to be again alone with his son. But young Mr, I Vidil, now thoroughly oonvinced that his father had meant nothing less than to murder him, would not allow the assistant to quit him for a single minute. The three accordingly returned to. town, aud J I the Baron went to his son's chambers in j Jermyn-street, and remained till 12 atj I night, but still Mr. Vidil kept the assist- | ant with him always. Early on the fol- | lowing morning the young man wisely left tbe dangerous neighbourhood, and ! went to the proteotion of his uncle's j house. Here he told his tale, and before long warrants were out for the arrest of the Baron de Vidil, who at once fled to Paris. Instantly the detectives of that cfty were communicated with, and as of course a gentleman so well known, especially from his supposed connection with some of the Orleans family, cannot stay in Paris incog., his exact address was at ooce ascertained. When the Baron de Vidil was wanted, therefore, he was instantly arrested. Baron de Vidil was brought over to this country on the 15th. The Baron, says the Paris correspondent of the Times, was arrested on Wednesday morning at his house, in the Rue Saint Lazare, by Thornton, a London polioe officer, assisted by a Frencn agent. Thornton was provided with a warrant granted by the British Seoretary of State for the Home j Department, charging the Baron with assaulting his son with intent to murder bim. On an application being made to M. Thouvenel, French Minister forj Foreign Affairs, to permit Thornton to j convey Baron Vidil to England for trial, ■ M. Thouvenel refused to doso, saying I that the French law did not authorise him. This difficulty, however was sur- j mounted, and the Baron was finally handed over to the Metropolitan police.' He was brought up at the Bow-street j Police Court, when he appeared greatly \ agitated. After some proceedings of a formal nature in reference to the issue of an English warrant, Mr. Pollock, who] cond noted the prosecution for the Crown, ! proposed a remand to Wednesday. — Mr. | Sleigh, who appeared for the prisoner, said he would not obj ect. He would only say, on behalf of the Baron, that if the instructions which had been furnished him (the learned counsel) were correct, a very I different completion would be given to the case. The Baron was then removed j from the dock. j

The Nord says the Baron was a commercial traveller for a great firm dealing in buttons 23 years ago. [From the London Times.) Baron de Vidil was conveyed to Twickenham on the 16th, when Rivers, the labourer, who saw the attack made upon young de Vidil, and who is said to be dying from consumption, identified the prisoner, and in the presence of two magistrates, made a statement of what he witnessed. Earlier in the day, the Baron was brought up at the Bow-street Police Court, when the information sworn by his son was read. In his deposition, young de Vidil declares that if he were t<? die without lawful issue and without making a will, his farther would succeed to about £30,000, and he asserts his belief that the prisoner intended to murder him. The Baron was brought up for examiua- i tion on the 17th, but the case was adjourn- j ed until to-morrow, in consequence of the j refusal of his son to give evidence. The I young mau was ordered to be imprisoned I for seven days for his obstanacy: but eventually, on the application of the Counsel for the Crown, he was handed over to his friends, in the hope that he will alter his determination before the time ofthe next hearing on the 19th. The Morning Post says :— We believe that a royal personage who saw the Baron and his son immediately before the murder was attempted, was much impressed with the remarkable demeanour of the former, who complained in the course of his visit to the Royal Duke of severe pains in his head, and announced that he came to present his son, wbo, nevertheless, as he asserted was beooming a monomaniac.

The Parris correspondent of the Times says: — I am positively assured that tbe statement of the Baron de Vidil having been on terms of muoh intimacy with the members of the Orleans family at Claremont is without foundation. The members of that family are, I believe, accessible to most persons of fair standing and character, French or otherwise : but tjbis does not necessarily imply frequent and immediate intercourse. M. de Vidil since ! his return to Franoe after the death of i his wife in England, lived a good deal in j society, entertained much, and. as he was reputed rich, had, of course, a vast num- j ber of acquaintances who may have passed for friends, and who generally wish to pass for friends a3 long as one is prosperous. He certainly has his " friends," several of the warmest and most devoted friends ofthe Orleans government (while it ruled,) suoh as]the Moray's, tbe Walewski's, &C; but he was on equally good terms with Bonapartists, perhaps before, but uttdoubtly since, the Bouapartists have been at the top of the wheel. He was, if I remember well, among the seleot guests at Fontainebleau, last year, during the sojourn of the Emperor. The Baron de Vidil was brought up on remand before Mr. Corrie, at Bow-street, on Friday afternoon . Mr. Alfred de Vidil etiU refuses, to; give eyanoe. 3\dr. Pol-

lock said that he withdrew from tbe prosecution. Mr. Sleigh, for the prisoner, suggested that the ends of justice would be met by the Baron de Vidil entering inlo his own reoognisances to keep the peace towards his son. The proposal called forth some hisses in court. Mr. Corrie said that the cause of justioe was apparently frustrated by the principal witness refusing to give evidence. It had been intimated that the police would oarry on the prosecution. As this was certainly a case in which the executive ought to interfere, he would leave it to the Secretary for the Home Department to take tbe course he pleased. He (Mr. Corrie) could not be, both magistrate find prosecutor ; he should, therefore, remand the prisoner to Monday to ascertain what course the Home Secetary would take. M. de Vidil was bound over in his own recognisance of £1000 to attend on that day. The Baron was then removed from the dock.

This case was resumed at Bow-street police oourt on the 22nd, Three witnesses were examined — John Adams, an engineer, Julia Fitzgibbon, and Everett, a private watchman of the Duke d'Aumale. They merely proved previously known facts as to the young man's appearance, and the Baron's stating that his son's horse had thrown him against a wall. Dr. Clark stated tbat he attended the you*ng man, and whilst his father was present he said, in reply to his inquires, that he thought he was thrown against the wall ; but when the father left he took Dr. Clark's hand, and said— [Here Mr. Sleigh, on behalf of the prisoner, objected to tho conversation being related.] Dr. Clark believed the wounds were caused by the knob of a riding whip. Mr. Parker, who married a sister of the Baron's wife, said the young man had a considerable fortune in money. The prisoner wrote to him on the 29th June, stating that his son had been injured by bis horse rearing, and making inquires after him, as he had disappeared.

The Baron's son was then sworn, but refused to give evidence. / Inspector Thornton produced the hat worn by the young man, with a deep indentation in front.

Mr. Sleigh thought their was no evidence against the prisoner; but Mr. Corrie said there was, and deoided not to take bail.

The prisoner was then fully committed to Newgate for trial. He appeared much affected and astonished at the result.