Resurectionist?

The King v. Candick. - Mr. Nolan moved for the judgment of the court on the defendant, who was convicted of a misdemeanor at the last assizes for Surrey. As undertaker to that county, he was employed to bury the body of a malefactor, named Edward Lees; but instead of doing so, he sold it to Mr. Brookes, the surgeon, in whose dissecting-room it was found. He had received his fees for its interment. When the relatives of the deceased requested permission to see the body, he informed them that it was already buried; but suspicion having arisen, the coffin was dug up, and found to be full of rubbish.

Mr. Justice Bayley pronounced the sentence of the court. The law had, he said, made this distinction in the punishment of capital offences of different degrees of enormity - that, in the case of murder, the body of the offender should be dissected, but that lesser crimes should be followed only by the forfeiture of life. This distinction it was important to preserve; and the administrators of the law were bound to take care that its inflictions were never exceeded. Here the conduct of the defendant had been mercenary and cruel; he had denied to the distressed relatives of an unfortunate man, the melancholy satisfaction of knowing where his remains were to be deposited, and of following them to the grave.

The court adjudged that he should pay to the king a fine of 20l., and be imprisoned in the House of Correction, at Brixton, for six calendar months.