THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Ex Libris ISAAC FOOT I Notable British Trials ; "; , TRIAL OF THURTELL AND HUNT edited by Eric T. Watson Edinburgh and London, W. Hodge & company, ltd. KD PREFACE. THE trial of Thurtell and Hunt is one of the best known in our criminal annals. It presented little enough of either mystery or romance. Yet it is important as a land-mark in our legal history for several reasons. It was almost the last famous trial to take place under the old Tudor procedure, rightly described by the presiding judge as "inquisitorial." It was the first trial "by newspaper," and the first in which there was any very serious collision between the Bench and the Press as to the duties of the latter in relation to the detection of crime and its investigation. Again, as I am reminded by the very experienced criminal lawyer to whom I have the honour to dedicate this book, it stands out with hardly a parallel as a murder undertaken with no other object but lucre, by several persons, unconnected by domestic ties. Aram and Miss Blandy, it is true, did not under- take their crimes single-handed, and in their cases too the incentive to the crime was mainly of a pecuniary character, and in a much more recent Scottish case, where the verdict was " not proven," the murderer, if murder was done, was not alone. Yet to the criminologist any case of such a nature presents itself as a rarity in the psychology of murder. Such enormity of guilt as is implied in a cold-blooded, mercenary murder almost forbids the association of several for its accomplishment the mutual confidence essential to criminal conspiracies would be lacking in men so utterly depraved. I have to thank Messrs. Sweet f " labourers," and that no indictment against Probert is extant; inasmuch as he stood charged as accessory before the fact upon the coroner's inquisition, it was needless to prepare a bill against him for the mere purpose of his formal acquittal. The grand jury found a true bill against Hunt and Thurtell, and on the following day, 5th December, all three prisoners were put to the bar, when Hunt and Thurtell pleaded not guilty to their indictment, and, together with Probert, pleaded not guilty to the inquisition. 56 33 Grant. 54 History of Criminal Law, i., 227. 5th Dec., 1823. Vl The original indictment and inquisition are in Aas. 35/263 in Rec. Office. 31 John Thurtell. The pleas taken, Mr. Andrews, leading counsel for Thurtell, applied to the Court that certain affidavits might be sworn. They related to the campaign of calumny carried on in the Press, and especially in the Times itself, against the prisoners. After some discussion and certain formalities, the clerk of the Court proceeded to read an affidavit by Thurtell' s attornies setting forth particulars of the libels in the papers and in the various publications in book form which had already appeared, as well as of the infamous performance at the Surrey Theatre. The reading concluded, Messrs. Andrews, Platt (afterwards Mr. Baron Platt), and Chitty moved for an adjournment, to which motion Mr. Gurney (afterwards Mr. Baron Gurney) offered no serious opposition. His reply is notable only for having drawn from the judge a repetition of the opinion he had so forcibly expressed in his charge that it was most improper to acquaint a prisoner with the evidence against him. After some further observations from Mr. Andrews, Mr. Justicei Park adjourned the Court to eight o'clock in the morning of 6th January, 1824, urging all persons " within the sound of his voice " to " disclaim and withhold such publications " as had been set out in the affidavits on the prisoners' behalf. This salutary warning, though it produced a little foolish abuse of the judge in the Press next day, completely put a stop to the scandals complained of. Mr. Herbert, author of the very spirited account of the trial in the London Magazine, has left an amusing description of the awe felt by certain humble fellow- passengers on the London coach, who were in guilty possession of authentic portraits and memoirs of the accused, from the sale of which they had hoped for a profitable trade. 57 " Some very good likenesses of the pond," which had decorated the window of " The Six Compasses," were forthwith withdrawn, under the notion that they were " actionable." On 4th December Thurtell had received two visitors at the gaol ; one was the officer formerly commanding in Leith Roads, Sir Edmund Nagle, who had been served with a subpoena by Messrs. Jay and Fenton, and had journeyed down from London to see if he could pick out the prisoner as one who had served under him, so as to speak as to his conduct. Nagle was, how- ever, entirely unable to recollect the lieutenant of marines, 67 When it is stated that the " Times " itself published, on 10th Nov., a detailed description of the attempt alleged to have been made on 7th Oct. , by J. Thurtell, to murder Mr. Woods, some idea will be obtained of the spirit of journalism at this time. The fact that such publications were not dealt with as contempts of court, had, no doubt, much to do with their recklessness. 32 Introduction. but was satisfied by Thurtell recalling the names of shipmates and the circumstances of some entertainments on board the " Adamant " that he had at one time been under his command. The prisoner apologised to the Admiral for the unnecessary trouble to which he had been put, and the Admiral returned to town. 58 The second visitor was the well-known sportsman Pierce Egan, who had known John for some five years. The demeanour of the prisoner, as described by Egan, who repeated his visit next day, was typical of the murderer boastful, egoistic, impenitent, untruthful. His " sullen, low love of fame " made his present notoriety not altogether displeasing. " But what a piece of work this affair has made, ain't it? . Do I appear dejected? " he remarked with evident glee. He showed, however, as he did at the end, a sense of the disgrace he had brought upon his parents. EGAN You have not been to see your father or mother for these two or three years past, I suppose? THTTBTELL Oh ! yes I have (giving a deep sigh). It is not seven weeks ago since I dined with them at Norwich, in company with Mr. Jay, my solicitor, at my father's house. (It was more than seven weeks since the murder.) EGAN Since you have been at Hertford, your father has not been to see you, nor any of your relations, have they? THURTELL No, no. I could not see my father. My feelings would not permit me. ... I saw my brother Tom yesterday ; that was quite enough for my feelings to undergo. To the many persons who sought interviews out of mere curiosity Thurtell showed a pardonable coldness. It would be idle to recall such trifles but for the light they shed on social life less than a century ago. As the adjourned date of trial drew near, public excitement waxed once more. Many persons came even from Ireland as well as from the most distant parts of Great Britain in the vain hope of finding room in the Town Hall. 59 The Press, which had for some weeks maintained a decent silence, " then burst forth with redoubled activity. Every paper had four to six ' Horse Expresses ' ; it was calculated that there were not less than one hundred horses placed on the road for this purpose." 60 M The " Times," 9 Dec., 1823 (wrongly indexed in Palmer as 9 Nov.). The anecdote in this paper of ThurteH's misconduct on board the Aboukir, related by one Young, must, if true, relate to Midshipman Charles Thur- tell, aged at the time (1811) fifteen. He came from Suffolk. 89 The "Observer," 11 Jan., 1824. 33 John Thurtell. Ever since the arrest of Probert his wretched cottage had been an object of pilgrimage to thousands. The landlord, to whom the rent had long been owing, conceived the happy notion of charging a toll for admission. So great were his receipts that an unseemly squabble occurred between him and the Sheriff as to whether the gate-money belonged to the landlord by way of distress or to the Sheriff in lieu of execution, it being a case of nulla bona. According to Sir Walter Scott, John Bull " became so maudlin as ... to treasure up the leaves and twigs of the hedge and shrubs in the fatal garden as valuable relics." 61 In the town of Hertford itself hundreds were unable to secure sleeping accommodation. " Throughout the night (of Monday, 5th January) Hertford was as sleepless as before. The window at the Plough was as luminous as usual ; the Half -Moon swarmed with post-chaises and drab coats; and the Seven Stars, the Six Compasses, and the Three Tuns abounded with tippling witnesses, all dressed in their Sunday clothes. . . . The Court was crowded to excess, and even at this early hour (7.30) the window panes, from the great heat, were streaming with wet." 62 The influx on the morning after the trial of a large number of fighting men, fresh from the great battle at Worcester between Spring and Langan, added to the turbulence of the town. The proceedings during the two days of the trial were constantly interrupted by disorderly outbreaks, which greatly tried the temper of the Court. " At eight o'clock the trumpets of the javelin men brayed the arrival of Mr. Justice Park, who shortly afterwards entered the Court and took his seat. As usual, the Court was colloquial respecting the heat and the crowd and the sitting down of tall men to the loss of much of that imposing dignity with which the ermine and the trumpets invariably surround a judge." 63 A long delay occurred; it was explained that the prisoners were having their irons removed. " In this interval, Mr. Jay and Mr. Fenton, attornies for the prisoner Thurtell, were struggling to find their way through the crowd for the purpose of obtaining places near the prisoner's counsel, and, having reached the point intended, and there being great noise 61 Lockhart's " Life of Scott," viii., 351. 82 " London Magazine," Feb., 1824. 68 Mr. Herbert in the " London Magazine." We read elsewhere that " Several gentlemen of the bar, who do not usually attend the Home Circuit, having been attracted by curiosity, were accommodated with Beats." 34 Introduction. and confusion in the effort, Mr. Justice Park inquired who were the persons thus increasing the disturbance. Mr. Fenton and Mr. Jay respectfully intimated that they were the attornies in the case. Mr. Justice Park replied, with considerable warmth, ' Nonsense, it is only to make a fuss; you ought to be here at seven in the morning.' * After further ebullitions from the bench, the prisoners at length made their appearance. Mr. Herbert thus describes the scene ' ' Hunt was dressed in black with a white cravat and a white handkerchief carefully disposed so as to give the appearance of a white under waistcoat. There was a foppery in the adjust- ment of this part of his dress which was well seconded by the affected carriage of his head and shoulders and by the carefully disposed disorder of his hair. It was combed forward over his ears from the back part of his head and divided nicely on his forehead so as to allow one lock to lie half -curled upon it. His forehead itself was white, feminine, and unmeaning; indeed his complexion was extremely delicate, and looked more so from the raven blackness of his hair. Nothing could be weaker than his features, which were small and regular, but destitute of the least manly expression. . . . Beside him stood the murderer, complete in frame, face, eye, and daring! The contrast was singular fatal, indeed, to the opinion which it created of Thurtell. He was dressed in a plum-coloured frock coat with a drab waistcoat and gilt buttons and white corded breeches. His neck had a black stock on, which fitted as usual stiffly to the bottom of the cheek and end of the chin, and which therefore pushed forward the flesh on this part of the face so as to give an additionally sullen weight to the counten- ance. The lower part of the face was unusually large, muscular, and heavy, and appeared to hang like a load to the head and to make it drop like the mastiff's jowl. The upper lip was long and large, and the mouth had a dogged appearance. His nose was rather small for such a face, but it was not badly shaped. His eyes were too small, and buried deep under his protruding forehead, so indeed as to defy you to detect their colour. The forehead was extremely strong, bony, and knotted and the eyebrows were forcibly marked though irregular that over the right eye being nearly straight, and that over the left turn- ing up to a point, so as to give a very painful expression to the whole face. . . . His frame was exceedingly well knit and athletic. . . I have observed that Thurtell seldom 35 John Thurtell. looked at the person with whom he conversed . . . but looked straight forward." Probert was subsequently brought in and placed in the dock, but not close to the bar, gaolers interposing between him and the other two. Mr. Thesiger, distinguished in later life as Lord Chelmsford, who had been called just over five years (18th November, 1823, Gray's Inn), now rose to move the adjourn- ment of Hunt's trial. Lengthy affidavits had been prepared on both sides, and, after argument, Mr. Justice Park overruled the application, and ordered the trial to proceed. There at once occurred one of those comical scenes recurring throughout the proceedings in which human nature, having " supped full of horrors," found relief in laughter. Several burly jurymen, after having taken up comfortable seats in the box, were challenged by the defence, and reluct- antly compelled to withdraw. After twelve had been eworn, the Clerk of Assize charged them both on the indictment and the inquisition, and then the craven Probert was formerly acquitted. Fear and worry had largely blanched his raven black hair since his first apprehension, and the pencil of Mul- ready, 64 busily employed throughout the trial, seems to have caught the alteration of his appearance. After a formal opening of the indictment, now disused, Mr. Gurney addressed the jury. His speech was "slow, distinct, and concise. ... In several of the most appalling parts of his statement there was cold drawing in of the breath and "an involuntary murmur throughout the whole Court." 65 It is needless to summarise the evidence of the fifty-four witnesses examined in support of the indictment. The shamelessness of Probert, the hysteria of his wife, the genuine grief of Richard Weare and of Thomas Thurtell, the ungrammatical officers and constables, the Bonifaces, mellow with their own liquors, the ostlers also somewhat overtaken, except Dick Bingham, who was " quite undisguised, and seemed to be confident and clear in proportion to the cordials and compounds," the Court's periodical outbreaks of temper, and the unending struggles of reporters and of the " fancy," to force their way into coigns of vantage, have been admirably described by 64 The sketches made by Mulready of Probert appear to have been made on various occasions. In most the hair is blanched ; in one or two it is black. When tried for horse-stealing in June, 1825, Probert, according to the "Times," had quite white hair. " The Fatal Effects " tells us "that. his hair was turning grey " at the date of Thurtell's trial, (p. 89). 88 1 again quote from Herbert in the " London Magazine." E.R. W. 36 Introduction. eye-witnesses. The two most alert people in Court were the judge and John Thurtell, the latter, as ever, acting a part. " I should not have omitted to mention," wrote Herbert, " an admirable piece of presence of mind and by-play which Thurtell showed towards Clarke, the publican who had been an old acquaintance; on Clarke's turning to bow to him when he entered the witness-box, in which he was about to speak to the prisoner's identity, Thurtell received the bow with a look of ignorant wonder, and elevated his eyebrows as though to say, ' How bow to me! I know you not.' This could not have been but instantaneous, but the indention of the prisoner was evident, and the trick was inimitably well performed." In contrast to the theatrical demeanour of Thurtell was the impudently collected manner of the chief witness against him, Probert. " When Probert was called," says Mr. Herbert, " he was ushered through the dock into the body of the Court. The most intense interest at his entering the witness-box was evi- dently felt by all persons, in which even the prisoners joined. Hunt stood up and looked much agitated; Thurtell eyed the witness sternly and composedly. Probert was very well dressed, and had a new pair of gloves on. He did not seem the least ashamed of his situation. . . . The face of Probert is marked with deceit in every lineament; the eyes are those of a vicious horse, and the lips are thick and sensual. His forehead recedes villainously in amongst a bush of grizzly black hair, and hie ears project out of the like cover. . . . He stood up against Mr. Gurney's exposure with a face of brass. Indeed, he seems to fear nothing but death or bodily pain. His grammar was very nearly as bad as his heart." The counsel for the defence, able men as they were, could do little to assist their clients. Mr. Ward, the surgeon, gave the clearest evidence as to the cause of death, and defied all the efforts of Mr. Platt (whose peculiarities have been so entertain- ingly described by his pupil, Ballantine) 66 to entangle him. The evidence of the ostlers and publicans was far stronger than Thurtell had anticipated, and when at a very late hour the Court eventually adjourned he had made up his mind for the worst. It says not a little for his stoutness that next morning 66 Platt was the son of Ellenborough's clerk ; he was a man of comical appearance, who invariably put on " A wife and twelve children look " ; not even Bux.fuz could have surpassed this flight, "And, gentlemen, thia serpent in human shape stole the virgin heart of my unfortunate client whilst she was returning from Confirmation." 37 John Thurtell. " he looked as though he had passed a good night; and yet he must have been busy in the brain through all the dark hours." As Probert's face of brass had been the feature of the first day's proceedings, the oration of Thurtell stood out as that of the second. It would be idle, indeed, and very unfair to the orator, to compare it with the masterpieces of professional advocates. The barrister's life is not at stake. He is performing a duty in which his personal interests are far less closely bound up than are those of a " prisoner in person " ; he has all the advan- tage of experience and familiarity; he has, nowadays at least, the fullest possible instructions for dealing with the evidence on the other side; he could, until recently, take refuge from the unexplainable facts against the prisoner in the glib pretence that his client's lips were sealed. A man rising to address a jury under such circumstances as Thurtell' s was so heavily handicapped that he was not infrequently advised by his counsel to attempt no defence at all. 67 The more rhetorical parts of the speech Thurtell had care- fully committed to memory ; the eloquence was not his own, being a patchwork from the speeches of Charles Phillips and others ; its very theatrical manner was wholly in harmony with the character of its author. Its effect is best described in the words of Mr. Herbert. " Thurtell now seemed to retire within himself for half a minute and then slowly, the crowd being breathlessly silent and anxious drawing in his breath jand gathering up his frame, and looking very steadfastly at the jury, he commenced his defence. He spoke in a deep, measured, and unshaken tone, accompanying it with a rather studied and theatrical action. . . ." When he had finished his carefully learnt exordium, and proceeded to deal with the evidence, reading from the notes he had so diligently made, the favour- able impression gave way, and before he had finished quoting his long list of alleged wrongful convictions the patience of the audience had been entirely exhausted, and there was so much noise in Court that his powerful tones were well-nigh inaudible. It is a curious psychological fact that an advocate preaching on the fallibility of circumstantial evidence from the acknow- ledged blunders of the past nearly always prejudices his own cause. He bores the jury, and leads his hearers to the somewhat 67 In the cases of S. v. Mplherhill (rape) and . v. Thornton (murder and rape) the prisoners remained mute when called on for their defence, and were acquitted. 38 Introduction. illogical conclusion that he must have a very poor case, since he prefers to talk about others. There is no more certain way of irritating a judge or jury than to parade the shade of the late Adolf Beck. Mr. Herbert tells us that " this paper was either so ill-written or Thurtell was so indifferent a reader that the effect was quite fatal to the previous flowery appeal to the jury. He stammered, blundered, and seemed confused through- out. . . . When he had finished his books and laid aside the paper he seemed to return with joy and strength to his memory, and to muster up all his might for the peroration." The scene at the close of the speech has never been surpassed for dramatic interest in a Court of justice. " The solid, slow, and appalling tones in which he wrung out these last words can never be imagined by those who were not auditors of it ; he had worked himself up into a great actor, and his eye for the first time during the trial became alive and eloquent. The final word ' God ! ' was thrown up with almost gigantic energy, and he stood after its utterance with his arms extended and his face protruded and his chest dilated, as though he dared not move lest he should disturb the still echoing appeal. Such a performance, for a studied performance it surely was, has seldom been seen on the stage, and certainly never off. Thus to act in the very teeth of death demands a nerve which not one man in a thousand ever possessed." When Hunt was called upon for his defence his feeble voice and shrinking manner were doubly apparent from the over- wrought energy of his companion. He was entirely unable to read the paper prepared for him, and it was accordingly read by an officer of the Court. When the reading was concluded " Hunt read a few words of his own on a part of Probert's evidence in a poor, dejected voice, and then leant his head upon his hand. He was evidently wasting away minute by minute. His neckcloth had quite got loose, and his neck looked gaunt and wretched." Before Mr. Justice Park began to sum up, Thurtell spoke with great firmness to those about him. He said he was sure the judge would take about four hours, but for himself his mind was made up for the worst. 68 Park exhibited his favourable qualities as well as his foibles in the painstaking effort in which he laid the case before the jury. He had displayed throughout the trial that minute attention to the matter in hand, which was noticed as a characteristic by "The "Observer," 11 Jan., 1824. 39 John Thurtell. Grant. 69 Thus we find him recalling Ruthven to prove that Conduit Street was in the parish of St. George's, Hanover Square, in the county of Middlesex, and putting the coroner into the box to prove that both Gill's Hill Lane and the pond where the body was found were in Hertfordshire. The object of these questions was to establish the charge precisely as laid in the indictment. Otherwise a counsel of Theeiger's ability might have moved in arrest of judgment that there was no proof of the fact alleged against Hunt that " With force and arms at the parish of St. George's, Hanover Square, rk near the spot. I could not search then, and returned to the house. That morning they went away in the gig, and took the things with them. On Sunday they came down again. John Thurtell and Hunt were in one gig ; Thomas Thurtell and Noyes in another. They arrived at about twelve o'clock. Hunt brought a bundle of clothes, a newspaper, and a new spade. He said the spade was to bury the deceased. Thomas Thurtell arrived first, and went up the lane to meet John Thurtell in the other gig. Hunt was very dirty when he got down. He asked for a room to change himself. He went upstairs. When he came down he was dressed very well; he had almost new clothes. I learned from Hunt that they belonged to the deceased. Hunt told me he had brought down a spade and thrown it over the hedge into my garden. I went to look, and saw it there. He said it wae to bury the body. After John Thurtell arrived I walked with him in the garden, and he asked me if the body rose? I said no, and he said that it would lie there a month. In the afternoon Mr. Heward called. I went with him to Mr. Nicholls'. After I returned, I told Thurtell and Hunt that Nicholls had informed me some one had fired a gun off in Gill's Hill Lane on Friday night, and that there were cries of " murder," as though some one had been killed. I had asked what time it was, and Nicholls said about eight o'clock; and I said, "I suppose some of your friends wanted to frighten you, sir." Thurtell said, " Then I'm baked." I said, " I am afraid it's a bad job, for Mr. Nicholls seems to know all about it. I am very sorry it ever happened here. I'm afraid it will be my ruin." Thurtell said, " Never mind, Probert, they can do nothing with you." I said, " The body must be immediately taken up from my pond, John." He said, " I'll tell you what I'll do when they are all gone to bed Joe and I'll take and bury him." I told him that would be as bad, if they buried him in the garden. John Thurtell then said, " I'll bury him where you nor no one else 79 Thurtell and Hunt. W. Probert can find him." As Thurtell was going out of the parlour Hunt said, " Probert, they can do nothing -with you, or me either, because neither of us was at the murder," Hunt and Thurtell sat up all night. I, Noyes, and Thomas Thurtell went to bed. Thomas Thurtell slept with his children. In the morning John Thurtell and Hunt said they went to dig a grave for the body, but the dogs had been barking all night and they thought that some one was passing. Thurtell said, " Joe and I will come down to-night and take him away; that will be the better for you altogether." Thomas Thurtell and Hunt went away first. My boy, Addis, went with them in one chaise; John Thurtell, Thomas Noyes, and Miss Noyes in the other. I had no use for that boy in London. He was sent that he might not be in the way to answer any questions. John Thurtell and Hunt came down that evening in a gig. We took supper; I think at about nine o'clock. After supper John Thurtell and I went to the stable, leaving Hunt talking with Mrs. Probert. John Thurtell said, " Now you and I'll go and get the body up ; leave him talking with Mrs. Probert, then she'll not suspect anything." We went to the pond, got the body, took it out of the sack, and cut the clothes off. We left the body naked on the green sward, then returned to the parlour, and told Hunt that the horse and gig were ready ; it was not so. We came out and went to the stable; John Thurtell went to his gig, took out a new sack, and some cord. We all three returned to the pond, put the body into the sack head foremost, and carried it up to the garden gate. We left Hunt waiting with the body. John Thurtell and I went round to the pond. I carried the bundle of clothes and threw them into the gig. John Thurtell said, " Better leave the clothes here, Probert; there won't be room for them." We took the horse and chaise lower down towards the garden gate, and put the body into the gig. Then I left them. They wanted me to settle the body more in the gig. I would not; I returned to Mrs. Probert. I went out afterwards to destroy the clothes. I cut them into pieces ; some I burnt, some pieces I threw about the hedges. I did not put anything into the dung heap. I was taken into custody the day after they left my house. Cross-examined by Mr. ANDREWS I do not know who appre- hended me. When I was taken I did not express any desire to become a witness. I cannot say when I first expressed a desire to become a witness. It was after Hunt had made a con- fession. I can't say whether I was asked to become a witness before or after Hunt's confession. I heard that Hunt had made 80 Evidence for Prosecution. a confession, but I don't recollect from whom. The first I W. Probert heard of my becoming a witness was when I was taken before the grand jury by Mr. Williams, to the best of my recollection. feefore that I expected that we were all to be tried. I did not know what was to become of us ; I did not know what was to be done to me. I took no pains to become a witness before being taken before a. grand jury. I have never seen Mrs. Probert since I left my own house when I was arrested. I don't know of my own knowledge that Mrs. Probert is now here, but I was told so by Mr. Williams, my solicitor. I have had no other solicitor in this transaction. Has not a Mr. Noel been your solicitor 1 I am sorry to say that he has. How long did he act in that capacity ? For a few months in the year 1819. Has he not acted as your solicitor since that period? Not that I recollect. Had you no communication with him in 1823? Not that I recollect but I cannot swear that I had not. You say you heard that some injury was intended to certain persons, and yet you gave no alarm? I did hear that at my cottage, but I did not believe it. You must have believed it when you heard of the murder; and, when you saw the dead body brought to your house, did you not give an alarm then? I did not. You received the parties into your house after the trans- action? I did. You supped with them and breakfasted with them in com- pany with your wife on the following morning? I did. Were you sober then ? I was. And yet you did not spurn them, and kick them from your house? I did not. Did you tell Mrs. Probert what had happened? I did not. Did Mrs. Probert not appear disturbed at what was going on? She did. Did she not ask you any questions as to what was passing? She did. Did you not tell her? I am not certain. By the virtue of your oath, sir, did you not tell her what occurred on Friday night? I can't swear positively, but I might have told her something. Did not Mrs. Probert express uneasiness on the Saturday? She did. o 81 Thurtell and Hunt. W. Probert Did she not inquire who Hunt was? No; she had heard of him often, though she had not seen him. At what time did you come down on Saturday morning? Between eight and nine. Will you swear, upon your oath, that you did not come down at six o'clock on that morning? Certainly, I ca.n swear that I did not. Will you swear it was after eight o'clock when you came down? I will not; but to the best of my recollection it was between eight and nine. What did you do when you came down? I went to the stable, or perhaps into the garden. Did you go down the lane? I did not. What sort of hat did you wear on that occasion? I think a black hat, such as I generally wear. Did you not wear a white hat? I cannot say. I think not. Did you see your wife receive a gold chain from John Thurtell? I did. Did she wear it on the Saturday? I did not see her wear it on the Saturday. Did ehe, when she received it, put it on herself, or did Thurtell put it on ? I cannot state that, but I think she put it on herself. I saw Thurtell rise when he presented it to her. Did Mrs. Probert express any uneasiness on the Sunday ? I think she did. When Thurtell produced the sack and cord on Friday night where was the boy? I think he was in the kitchen. Where was the sack before Thurtell produced it? I don't know; I never saw it before. Will you ewear you had not seen it before John Thurtell said, "I'll go and fetch the sack and cord? " I will. Did not the boy tell you where it was? No. Who was in the stable when the horse was taken out to fetch the body? I don't recollect. Where was the boy then ? I think in bed ; he slept in the room over mine. Were you ever in difficulties before this? I have been. Were you ever in such a scrape as this before? Never. Had you never a charge of felony preferred against you before this? I had. Where was that? In the King's Bench prison. What was the nature of that charge? I was accused of taking some silver from the till of the man who kept the coffee- house, and who owed me 100 at the time. 82 Evidence for Prosecution. What was the consequence of that charge 1 I was sent for W. Probe* six months to the House of Correction. Was that the only charge of felony ever made against you? Yes, the only one. Were you never in Hereford? Yes, I was born there. Were you never charged with sheep stealing there? Never. Well, perhaps it wae lamb stealing? No, I was never charged with either. Come, you know what I mean by charged; were you never accused of such a crime there? Never. Then the accusation is quite new to you? It is. Then what was the charge against you? I had bought some skins, which were afterwards owned. Oh, then, you were accused as a receiver of stolen goods? I was not. Were you not taken before a magistrate? No. Were the goods not taken away ? They were not. I understand you have passed much of your time in prison ? I have been in the King's Bench prison, and in the Rules, between two and three years. By Mr. JUSTICE PARK Were you imprisoned in the King's Bench on civil suits? Yes. By Mr. ANDREWS Well, you have been in the House of Correction and in the King's Bench prison ; are these all ? Yes. Do you know Mr. Framstone? I do. Now, sir, having given you that name, I ask you, on your oath, were you not committed by that gentleman for refusing to answer certain questions before the Commissioners of Bank- ruptcy? Yes; I was committed to the King's Bench prison. I have been a bankrupt. No dividend has been paid out of my estate. I was frequently remanded by the Commissioners. I have lived only six months at the cottage. I lived witH my brother-in-law in the Strand. We were not partners, but did business together. It was a large grey horse that was employed the night of the murder. It was in my stable at night. Mr. Hunt had a white hat and black handkerchief on the Friday night. I had heard of the transaction of the insurance office; and yet subsequently I introduced Thurtell to my wife. Thurtell was making love to Mrs. Probert's sister also, a love, however, that would come to nothing. I thought John Thurtell's saying it was mere idle bravado. I do not know Mr. Beaumont, to my knowledge. I never mentioned it to any person. No one was present save Hunt and Thurtell when the money taken from the body was distributed. I did not see any cards played a,t my 83 Thurtell and Hunt. W. Probert house, either on the Friday, Saturday, or Sunday nights. I do not believe my wife played cards on Sunday. I never, to my knowledge, saw my wife play at cards. I never heard any person say it was a bad example to children. I have lived in London eleven years ; I transacted business in Herefordshire also. Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER I had known Hunt twelve months; I have been in his. company several times. I was the person who introduced Hunt to Thurtell, about six or seven months ago at the Cock. I do not recollect inviting Hunt to Gill's Hill Cottage. I believe Thurtell asked me to drive Hunt down to Gill's Hill Cottage. I did not say there was no spare bed at my house. I expressed no surprise at Hunt's going down uninvited to Gill's Hill Cottage, he not having been personally introduced to Mrs. Probert. Hunt paid for the pork in Oxford Street; I have never paid him for it since; it was only eighteen pence. I had three or four pounds in my pocket when I borrowed the five pounds from Tetsall. I am not certain what I might have said when Hunt said at the gate, " Take no notice, and drive on." Hunt had never been at Gill's Hill Cottage before. Phillimore Lodge is on the high road, a mile and a half beyond Elstree, towards St. Albans. Hunt paid for the four or five glasses of brandy and water, and I paid for the one I had at Edgware. There were two or three handkerchiefs, and I burnt the mark out of one of them. Up to the day I went before the grand jury, I said to Mr. Franklin, the chaplain, that myself and Hunt were innocent of the murder. The exact words were, very likely, that neither of us knew anything about the murder till after it was done. I was con- victed of a felony before I was sent to Brixton. By Mr. GURNET On the Sunday evening that I went to Mr. Nicholls' I remained out two hours and a half. Hunt and I were prisoners when I had the conversation with Mr. Franklin. By Mr. JUSTICE PARK When I spoke to my wife about netting, it was to satisfy her, as she was in a passion, and asked, "What have you been doing, you three? You have been counting money, burning papers, and dragging something heavy across the ground." I did not observe whether the windows of Mrs. Probert' s room were open or not. MM. E. Probert Mrs. PROBERT, examined by Mr. GURNET I remember the night of 24th October when John Thurtell, Hunt, and Probert came to Gill's Hill Cottage. I remember also, very well, hearing the sound of a gig passing the cottage that night. I think 84 Ti -X o < CO O Q LU a; Evidence for Prosecution. this was about eight o'clock or near it, as well as I can recollect. Mr*. E. Probert It was nearly an hour after that I heard a ringing at the bell, but I cannot exactly remember. No one entered my house immediately after this ringing, but at about half -past nine, or near ten, my husband came in. I had been upstairs some time; when I came down I found Mr. Probert, John Thurtell, and a stranger in the parlour. My husband introduced that stranger to me as Mr. Hunt. I saw John Thurtell produce on that night a gold watch with a great deal of work about it, and also a chain. It was such a chain as the one now shown me. Mr. Thurtell offered to make it a present to me. At first I refused it, but at length he put it round my neck. I afterwards, having been taken into custody, gave it up with the little box [pointing to a box on the table] to the constable, in the presence of the magistrates. John Thurtell and Hunt and my husband sat up that night. When Miss Noyes and I went upstairs we left in the room John Thurtell, Hunt, and Mr. Probert. I did not go to bed directly. I went from my room to the stairs to listen. I leaned over the balusters and listened to what was going on in the room. I overheard them talking, but the conversation was all in a whisper. What I heard first was, I thought, about trying on clothes. I heard one say, " I think that would fit you very well, " but this was all in a whisper. I heard a noise like papers on the table, a rustling like; and then something like papers being thrown in the fire. I afterwards returned to my chamber, when I saw some- thing take place out of doors. I saw two gentlemen go from the parlour to the stable ; they took a light with them, and led a horse out of the stable, and opened the yard gates to let the horse out. I heard afterwards something apparently very heavy dragged from the stable to the garden. The stable is near the back gate. I could hear the substance dragging, I think in the dark walk. I had a view of it as it was dragged out of the walk. The walk is just opposite the window; it seemed to me very large and very heavy. It was in a sack. The rustling I have mentioned was after this, after I had seen the sack. In the walk I saw them dragging the sack; there were two persons; I could see half-way down the walk; it is quite away from the pond. I then heard a hollow noise; I can't describe it ; it was like a heap of stones thrown into a pit. When I heard the whispering, the first thing, I think, was Hunt's voice, who said, "Let us take a 5 note each." I did not hear Thurtell say anything then, but afterwards heard 85 Thurtell and Hunt. Mw. E. Pr brt a voice which said, " We must say there was a hare thrown up on the cushion of the gig, of which some one made us a present coming along; we must tell the boy so in the morning." I next heard a voice, I can't say whose, say in a whisper, " We had better be off to town by four or five o'clock in the morning." John Thurtell said, " He had better not go before eight or nine o'clock"; but the parlour door was now shut. I heard, I think, John Thurtell's voice say, " Holding shall be the next." Then Hunt, I think, asked, " Has he got any money?" John Thurtell said "It is not money I want; it is revenge. It is Holding that has ruined my friend." By this I understood he meant Mr. Probert. I do not know whether Holding had been concerned in my husband's bankruptcy. Thurtell said, " He has ruined my friend, and destroyed his peace of mind for ever." I went up to bed at nearly two o'clock, I think. After my husband came up some conversation passed between us. [A short conversation then took place between the counsel for the prisoners and the learned judge and Mr. Gurney as to whether it was proper to ask Mrs. Probert concerning any con- versation that passed between her and her husband.] Mr. JUSTICE PARK (to Mr. Gurney) All that you can ask ia whether a conversation took place, in which witness com- municated to her husband what she had seen and heard. You cannot ask what her husband said. Examination continued When your husband came to bed, did you mention to him what you had seen and heard, accord- ing to the evidence you have given? Must I answer? Mr. JUSTICE PARK Pray, compose yourself, good woman; you .need not be alarmed. Mr. GURNET I do not want you to tell us what was said. Mrs. PROBERT Must I answer questions concerning my husband? Mr. GURNET No evidence you now give can prejudice your husband. He has been this day put before a jury of his countrymen and acquitted of this murder. The WITNESS Oh, has he! has- he! I'll answer anything I but has he been acquitted? Mr. JUSTICE PARK Pray, compose yourself; pray, good woman. Don't be alarmed; we are not wanting you to say anything against your husband. Nothing will be drawn from you against your husband. Pray, compose yourself; pray, do not be alarmed. Examination continued I did mention to my husband what I had seen and heard. The next morning Hunt and Thurtell came and dined with us, and on the Sunday Thomas Noyes 86 Evidence for Prosecution. and Thomaa Thurtell also came. On the Monday night John M. E. Probcrt Thurtell and Hunt came again ; it was past nine, I think, when they came. They stayed to supper, and went away soon after. Cross-examined by Mr. PLATT You affected surprise to hear that your husband was acquitted. Now, did you not know that he was to be acquitted previously to his giving evidence? No. Did you not hear that he was to be acquitted of the charge provided he gave his testimony here truly? I don't recollect that I was told eo. Can you say on your oath that you were not told so? I don't know that I was. . In passing up the lane from Radlett to my cottage there are two garden gates leading from the lane. When you pass from the lane, one gate leads to the stable and the other leads into the garden. There is a very high fence, in which the latter gate stands, and of which it forms part. My bedroom window was on that side of the house that looked towards this fence. I do not mean to say that it is possible to discern anything in the stable looking from my window. It is not possible to see the doorway. I could not discern it. I could not exactly see the door, but I could see the horse as soon as it came out. I think in the daytime the door might be seen. The night of the 24th was a very fine moonlight night. There was but one sitting- room in our house. The persons I saw in the garden were, I rather think, Thurtell and Hunt. The short ma.n was Hunt. He was dragging the weight across the garden. I could not say as to the other. I was on the landing-place when I heard the conversation. It was for the most part in a whisper. There was a great deal of whispering which I did not distinctly hear. I could not hear it all. I thought I knew the voices, but could not be positive. I thought I heard my husband whisper, but he whispered so low that I could not hear what he said. I cannot say positively. My husband gave me no money before he left me. He did not give me 23. He did not tell me what to say here. I do not know that John Thurtell knew Holding. My husband knew him. I never saw Holding and John Thurtell together. I do not know that Holding held my husband's property when he was in difficulties. It was after twelve when Miss Noyes and I went upstairs. I cannot say what time it was when I saw the horse coming from the stable. It was a few minutes after I went upstairs. I heard the parlour door open. It was a glass door. Soon after I saw them go to the stable, and the horse was brought out. They had a light. The short man had the light. I 87 Thurtell and Hunt. MM. E. Probert heard no noise in the stable after. I rather think the light remained after the horse was brought out. I did not hear any one go out before this. I think I heard some one go to the kitchen before any one went out with the light. I kept a store for potatoes' on the premises. There was a hole made for them, and they were covered over. I went out on the Saturday. I did not observe the pond particularly. I did not go near it. I cannot say whether it was so shallow that I could see the bottom. I seldom went to look at the fishes there. I did not go out to see it on Sunday or Monday. One of the walks in the garden is a dark walk. It is immediately on the right as you enter the garden. There are many shrubs there on both sides, but they are very short. It was in the dark walk I first heard the noise, and afterwards I saw something heavy moving along, or dragged along, in that direction. This was opposite the window. That path led to the pond. I did not see my husband in the garden when I looked out of the window. Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER I did not expect my husband on that night. It wais uncertain what time he should arrive. My husband went from home on the Monday before that, I had not seen Hunt before that day. I was then intro- duced to him for the first time. My husband did not say he (Hunt) was the good singer of whom I had often heard. There was singing on the Friday night. Hunt sang two songs on that night. It was not by my husband's desire that Hunt sung. John Thurtell asked him once, and I asked him the second time. I pressed him to sing the second time. There was no card playing that night. It was after supper Thurtell gave me the chain. It was before the singing. I did not attempt to return the chain on the Sunday. There were cards played on the Sunday. I did not introduce them. The cards were played in my husband's absence. He did not come back before the playing was over. I did not play. I think my husband was not present when the cards were played. I rather think not. It is possible he might have come in before they were over. I am certain my husband did not play. I cannot remember who played. I did not hear John Thurtell remonstrate against the cards as a bad example to the children. Mr. Noyesi came on Sunday. I did not tell him about what I saw or about the gold chain. T Thuneii THOMAS THURTELL, examined by Mr. GURNET I was at TetsalPs, in Conduit Street, on Friday, 24th October. Hunt and my brother John dined there. I remember that some time after dinner Hunt was away for a time. I rather think he 88 Evidence for Prosecution. brought a sack with him, and I think a gig to the door. He T - Thurtell did not say anything to my knowledge. [The witness was desired to recollect himself, but he persisted in the same answer.] The horse in the gig was a grey horse. My brother went away in the gig. Upon your oath did you not hear Hunt make some observa- tions to Probert before dinner? There were some made, but I can't now recollect what they were. I saw some pistols, two large pistols, in the room. I think I heard Hunt say to Probert, " Bill, will you be in it? " or something to that effect. On the next day I saw Hunt. He asked me if I wanted money? I think he named 20, or something thereabouts. He did not say how he came by such money. I saw some considerable sum with him, and I was surprised to see it with him. He said they had been drawing game, or netting game. Did he say what he meant ? Did he explain ? (The witness hesitated to answer.) Mr. JUSTICE PARK I now feel it my duty, sir, to caution you as to your answers. I have before me the statements you made in your examination before the magistrates, and I caution you to answer strictly to the questions proposed. The Court considers your situation, but justice must be done. After this, I trust I shall not have occasion to say more or to exercise the power with which I am invested. Examination continued The word " Turpin " was used by Hunt. I think he said, " We Turpin lads, or boys, can do it," or something to that effect. Hunt afterwards said he had been killing game and Probert holding the bag. The word ' ' murder " was used in joke. Hunt said he committed murder, or some- thing to that effect. The words were, " We have been commit- ting murder, to be sure," but this was iu joke. This was in answer to a question from me as to what they had been doing. I went down to Probert's on Sunday. I walked to Maida Hill. Hunt and my brother took me up there in a gig. There was a spade in the gig. It was a new spade. It was thrown over the garden wall by Hunt. I said he had better take it further, and he said, " No, I know what I am about." He said he did not wish Probert's wife to know it, or something of that kind. Cross-examined by Mr. THBSIQBK The conversation about Turpin, &c., was after dinner. We had not drunk much. Hunt said that Probert said he did not wish his wife to know that he had been expensive. I was at Probert's on the Sunday night. Cards were introduced. I can't be certain, but I think all the parties were present when they were introduced. 89 Thurtell and Hunt. Thomas Nore* THOMAS NOTES, examined by Mr. BOLLAND I am a wine merchant. I know Mr. Tetsall, Thomas Thurtell, and the prisoners. On Friday, 24th October, I dined with them at Tetsall's. Probert borrowing some money of Mr. Tetsall, for the purpose of paying it over to John Thurtell. John Thurtell went away in a gig. It was an iron-grey horse. He was alone. Hunt and Mr. Probert also went away in Probert's gig. I saw some of them again on the Saturday morning at Tetsall's; I saw John Thurtell, Hunt, and Thomas Thurtell. I went down to my brother-in-law's cottage on Sunday. I walked, and the two Thurtells and Hunt overtook me in a gig. John Thurtell alighted and walked with me. Thomas Thurtell went on with Hunt. I was afterwards met by Thomas Thurtell in a gig at Brockley Hill. He came to meet us in a gig. On the Sunday evening in question, at Gill's Hill, cards were introduced. John Thurtell, Thomas Thurtell, Hunt, and myself played at whist. Probert went out. We did not play the game out. Probert was absent a quarter of an hour. On that night Thurtell and Hunt sat up. I left the cottage on Monday, after two. My sister and John Thurtell were of the party. The others went away in the morning. Cross-examined by Mr. CHITTT When they played cards on the Sunday, John Thurtell threw the cards up and said he could not play such cards, they ran cross. There was nothing said about the children. Anne Noyes ANNE NojES, examined by Mr. BRODERICK I was at Pro- bert's cottage on Friday, 24th October. About eight o'clock I heard a gig passing. I heard a ring at the bell about half- past nine. During the evening John Thurtell, Hunt, and Probert came into the room. Thurtell had a black coat on. I knew that Probert had a white hat, which was kept in the hall. None of the three had a white hat that evening. They had a little brandy, and I rather think that John Thurtell proposed to go to Mr. Nicholls' to ask for a day's shooting. They all went, and returned about eleven. When they came back, they mentioned that Mr. Nicholls was not at home. They had supper; I did not sup with them. I saw a gold watch that Thurtell had. He took it out of his pocket. It had a chain. It was a hunting watch. Thurtell took the chain off, and gave it to Mrs. Probert. He proposed that Probert should give it to her first, but on Probert declining, he put it round her neck himself. The chain produced I believe to be the same. There was some singing that night; Hunt sang. Soon after I went to bed. I did not come down the next morning till after breakfast. 90 Evidence for Prosecution. I saw Hunt and Thurtell go out at half -past nine. On the Anne Sunday morning John Thurtell, Thomas Thurtell, and Hunt came down. I believe Hunt's dress was changed after he came to our house. When the drees was changed he had on a black coat and waistcoat, and I rather think, a white handkerchief. John Thurtell said, " How smart Hunt is dressed to-day." Hunt had rather dark whiskers. During the day the word " Turpin " was used. John Thurtell said that Probert would not do for a Turpin. There were cards played that evening. I saw Mr. Heward on Sunday. Probert went out on the Sunday evening. I went up with Thurtell the next day. I saw a knife in John Thurtell's possession, very like the knife produced. Cross-examined by Mr. ANDREWS I slept in a room very near where Probert slept. I did not hear him get up that morning. I have seen Mr. Probert in a white hat and a black hat. The hall was the passage leading into the parlour from the kitchen. I did not see Probert go out on the Saturday. John Thurtell had been often at the cottage before; he slept there several times, and did not always sleep on the sofa. I can swear he once slept nearly a week at the cottage. He slept alone. Cross-examined by Mr. THBSIGBR I was present when Hunt was introduced to Mrs. Probert. Probert did not say he was the singer he had often talked about, but he did say that Hunt was a good singer. This was before he sung after supper. Mrs. Probert said he was not so good a one as, from the report! she had heard, she expected to find him. CHARLES TBTSALL, examined by Mr. BOLLAKD I keep the Coach and Horses, in Conduit Street. Since 21st October, Probert, Hunt, and the Thurtells have frequented my house. I recollect that on 24th October the two Thurtells, Hunt, and Probert dined at my house. Probert then asked me to lend him 5, which I did. I don't know what he did with it. I did not see them go away, and I don't know when they did go. Cross-examined by Mr. THBSIQEH The two Thurtells were introduced to me by Probert, who told me that they were anxious to keep out of the way for a short time. Re-examined by Mr. BOLLAND Hunt's whiskers about the 21st were very large. I observed that on the Monday after the 24th they were shaved off. On the Sunday after the Friday of the murder I observed Hunt and Thurtell at my house. John Thurtell was dressed in leather breeches, long gaiters, and drab waistcoat. He went, with his shirt neck open, across the street 91 Thurtell and Hunt. Charles Tettail to get shaved. I never saw him in those clothes before. At that time Hunt was with him; he was dressed in black, and very indifferently. They went away about half-past ten. I put into the gig in which they went a piece of beef. I saw a shovel in the gig. By Mr. THESIGER If Probert swore that he did not introduce the Thurtells to me, he swore falsely, for he repeatedly applied to me to become a bondsman for them. Mr. JUSTICE PARK observed that Probert had not sworn, as the learned counsel seemed, from his cross-examination, to suppose. w. Rexworthy WILLIAM REXWORTHY, examined by Mr. BOLLAND I knew Weare for about sixteen years. I always considered him a man of property. I have seen him repeatedly put his hand to his flannel shirt and take out large sums of money. I believe that he usually kept his money next to his skin. I have seen Thurtell, Hunt, and Weare together. I saw them together about ten days before the murder. The last time I saw them together was on the Thursday before the Friday of the murder, about nine o'clock in the evening, in my own house. I did not hear anything pass between them, as I left the room on their entering into conversation. On the morning of the Friday Mr. Weare called on me between one and two o'clock; I saw him. After some conversation he left me. I did not see him any more that day. Cross-examined by Mr. ANDREWS I keep two billiard rooms, which are much frequented between eleven and six o'clock in the day. I saw the body of Mr. Weare when it was taken from the pond, when it was in the sack and when it was in the coffin. I saw it before it was reburied. By Mr. BOLLAND I know this knife that is now shown to me. I saw it in Weare' s hands on the day he was supposed to be murdered. By Mr. ANDREWS I had this knife in my possession for a month in consequence of Weare' s leaving it in my room. I know it from a mark on the handle. I swear to it from that mark and by the wear. It is a remarkable knife. Re-examined by Mr. BOLLAND I have seen Mr. Weare play at billiards about twenty times during the time that I have known him. By Mr. JUSTICE PARK I saw the legs when the body was taken out of the water ; they were naked. I saw the body laid out naked at the Artichoke. 92 Evidence for Prosecution. MART MALONEY, examined by Mr. BRODHRICK I was M*ry laundress to the late Mr. Weare; he lived at No. 2 Lyon's Inn. I was in his rooms on Friday, 24th October. I saw his clothes and linen on the drawers; Mr. Weare put them in his carpet- bag. [A bag was shown to witness.] That was Mr. Weare' s carpet-bag'. There were five linen shirts, six pairs of socks, a shooting- jacket and leggings, a pair of breeches, a pair of laced- up boots, a pair of Wellington boots, and a backgammon board and things in it, put into the bag. [A backgammon board was shown to witness.] That is the board, and these are the things that were in it. I saw Mr. Weare put it in himself. He dined at his chambers ; he had two chops between two and three o'clock. I did not expect him home that night; he said he was going out of town. He was expected back on the Tuesday following. About three o'clock I got a hackney coach for him from the Strand, at the Spotted Dog, in the Strand; it came up Holywell Street, with the horses' heads towards Charing Cross, by his orders. He went away about three o'clock, or a quarter after. A carpet-bag, a double-barrelled gun in a case, and a box coat were put into the coach. Mr. Weare had a buff waistcoat and a new olive-coloured coat on. He pulled his watch out before he went; I knew it, I had seen it before; it was a gold watch with a gold chain. [A chain was shown to witness.] It was exactly like this. [A knife was shown to witness.] This is Mr. Weare' s knife. The watch had a double case, and was worked. He also wore a steel chain round the neck to secure it. The coach drove off towards Charing Cross. [The shooting-jacket, waistcoat, shirts, respecting what happened in the lane. John Pidcock JOHN PrococK, examined by Mr. BOLLAND I am a surgeon. I was at the Artichoke, at Elstree, when the body of Mr. Weare 104 Evidence for Prosecution. . was there. I took the shawl from off the neck ; saw a sack John over the shawl. I saw the body firet at the Artichoke. When the sack was taken from the body I found a handkerchief, which I delivered to Simmons, the officer. The body was quite naked. JOHN FLEET, examined by Mr. BRODBRICK I am assistant to John Fleet Mr. Johnson, the messenger. On 24th October I was at the Cock public -house, in the Haymarket, acting officially under a commission. Hunt came in a gig there, about half -past four in the afternoon. He delivered a note to me,' which I have destroyed. John Thurtell lived at the Cock; I have seen him living there. I knew the room he occupied; it was No. 10. The contents of the note were ' ' Have the goodness to give Mr. Hunt my greatcoat and red shawl, which you will find in a closet at No. 10." I went to the room, took the things out, and brought them down, and gave them to Hunt. The shawl produced is something like the shawl I gave to Hunt. I do not know the handwriting of the note. CAROLINE WILLIAMS, examined by Mr. BOLLAND I was c. WiiiUm* servant at the Cock, which was kept by Thomas Thurtell. His brother, John Thurtell, lodged there. He had a shawl like the one produced. LUCT SLATER, examined by Mr. BOLLAND I was a servant Lucy Slater at the Cock. John Thurtell lodged there. I have seen him use a shawl similar to the shawl produced. JOHN MARSHALL, examined by Mr. BOLLAND I am a gun- John ivurhaii smith in London. I know the gun produced. I saw it last a twelvemonth ago; I saw it at Mr. Weare's chambers in Lyon's Inn. Cross-examined by Mr. ANDREWS It is at least a twelve- month ago since I saw it. By Mr. JUSTICE PARK I have no doubt it belonged to Mr. Weare. W. BLAKBSLEY, examined by Mr. BOLLAND In October I w - lodged at No. 9 King Street, Golden Square, the residence of the prisoner Hunt and his wife. I remember Hunt coming home on 27th October in a single horse chaise. I saw him take out a carpet-bag filled with things, a gun with a. dark case similar to that produced, and a dressing-case similar to that on the table. They were carried into his apartments. There were also some coats. 105 Thurtell and Hunt. John Upson JOHN UpsoN, recalled, further examined by Mr. BRODERICK I am an officer. I took the prisoners from London to Watford ; we came in two gigs. At Watford, the next morning, a con- versation took place between me and Thurtell about Hunt's confession. I made use of no previous promise or threat. In the course of the conversation about Hunt's confession I asked Thurtell what he did with the watch, and he told me that he threw it away in a place among some trees where there were some palings. This is the account he gave me. Cross-examined by Mr. THESIGER When we were at Watford, Hunt gave me an order for the things to be given up, and told me where they were to be found. J. Foster j FOSTER, examined by Mr. BOLLAHD I am a constable at Rickmansworth. On 30th October I had Thurtell in my custody at the Plough. He made a communication to me. I made use of no previous promise or threat. He said that Hunt wasi a rascal for " nosing " him so; that he (Thurtell) would not do so to him (Hunt), particularly after he (Thurtell) had offered the watch for sale in Hunt's name, and as his property. He said he was offered no more than 25 for it, though it was worth 60. [The jury here signified their willingness to accede to the prisoners' request to adjourn till the following morning.] Mr. JUSTICE PARK Gentlemen of the jury, you have relieved me from a great difficulty. I should not have acceded to the wish of the prisoners, had you not also expressed your concur- rence in that course, one advantage arising from which will be that we shall have given the case the fullest and most patient attention. I shall now adjourn the Court until to-morrow morning. Let two of the most steady constables be sworn according to the form which I shall direct. Two constables were then sworn " To keep the jurors in some safe and convenient place until the sitting of the Court to-morrow; to furnish them with every proper and convenient accommodation, and not to speak to them themselves, or to allow others to speak to them, touching the matter at issue, without the leave of the Court." The Court was then adjourned to nine o'clock on the follow- ing morning. 106 Second Day Wednesday, 7th January, 1824. The Court met at nine o'clock. Evidence for the Prosecution continued. GEORGE RUTHVEN, recalled, examined by Mr. JUSTICE PARK I Geo - know Conduit Street, Hanover Square. I think Tetsall's house is on that side of Conduit Street that is in the parish of St. George, Hanover Square. Whitcomb Street is also in the county of Middlesex.* Cross-examined by Mr. ANDREWS I had Probert in custody at Mr. Nicholson's at Gill's Hill on the Tuesday. He was not in my care while the coroner's inquest was sitting. He had not at that time expressed a wish that I should convey any message to the coroner or magistrates. I subsequently told him that if he had any such wish I should convey it, as he said that he wished to explain something. I said that was no answer, and wished him to say directly what message I should convey. He then said that he wished to have communication with the magis- trates. This took place two days after Hunt had made an acknowledgment. Before that Probert denied all knowledge of the transaction. THOMAS THURTELL, recalled, examined by Mr. JUSTICE PARK T. Thorteii I observed that Hunt had on a suit of black clothes on the Friday. He wore the same on the next day. I do not know whose they were. I knew that he did wear some clothes of my brother's. Hunt was very badly off in the world, and had borrowed clothes from my brother and money from me. I saw Hunt on the Sunday morning, when he had the same clothes on also, but after dinner on the Sunday he was better dressed. Mr. HOLLAND That is the case on behalf of the Crown. Evidence for the Prosecution closed. Mr. JUSTICE PARK John Thurtell, this is the time that it becomes your duty to make your defence. Mr. JAY My lord, my client wishes to call his witncpm first. Mr. JUSTICE PARK I cannot in my capacity attend to wishes ; I must abide strictly by the rules of the Court. This, therefore, is the proper time for the prisoner making his defence. * This was required to supply the formal proof that Hunt abetted in the parish and county laid in the Indictment. E. R. W. 107 Thurtell and Hunt. Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. John Thurtell JOHN THURTELL My lord, and you, gentlemen of the jury, under the pressure of greater difficulties than perhaps it has ever before fallen to the lot of man to sustain, I now appear before you to vindicate my character and preserve my life. But, appalling as are these difficulties, I have been supported under tiie impression that the hour would arrive when I should be enabled to defend myself in a land of liberty and fairness before that tribunal which the free institutions of my country have awarded to the accused, namely, a.n enlightened Court, and a jury of twelve fellow-subjects uninfluenced by prejudice and unawed by power. I have been represented by the public Press, which carries on rapid wings to the extremity of the land either benefits or curses, as a man the most depraved, the most habitually pro- fligate, the most gratuitously cruel, that has appeared in modern times. I have been represented as a murderer, who had per- petrated his crime with greater atrocity and under circum- stances of more premeditated malice than any that has hitherto been heard of in the sad catalogue of criminals. I have been stigmatised as a callous, cruel, heartless, remorseless, prayer- less villain, who had seduced his friend into a sequestered path in order the more securely to despatch him. I have been described as a viper, who had nestled in the bosom of my victim with the preconcerted intention of striking a surer blow as a monster who, having committed a deed of horror, at which our common nature recoils, and humanity stands aghast, en- deavoured to extinguish the upbraidings of conscience in the tumults of debauchery. These have been the descriptions given of me, not alone daily, but I may say hourly, by the public journals, and communicated from one extremity of the kingdom to the other. You, gentlemen, have no doubt read them; I will not say that you have been influenced by them; but it would exact too much from the common virtue of human nature to suppose that men could entirely divest themselves of impression so suc- cessively repeated, or that they could dispossess themselves of those feelings those creditable feelings, I will say which such statements, if justified, were calculated to excite. But I feel satisfied, gentlemen, that, as far ae it is possible, you come to this investigation with minds unbiassed and judgments 108 John Thurtell. At.frr a pi-ncil sketch by \nilinin SI already, R.A. Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. unaffected by the atrocious slanders which have been published J against me. I feel assured that you will decide ae becomes the character of that sacred office with which you are invested. Guilt of such a complexion as that imputed to me is not the custom of this land; it must ha.ve sprung from an innate principle, which must have advanced to maturity by a con- tinued practice in crime. It must have " grown with my growth, and strengthened with my strength"; but you shall hear from men of the most unblemished reputation, of the most unimpeachable veracity, that at least there was a. period of my life when the bosom of him who now stands before you as an accused murderer throbbed with the most gentle and kindly feelings of affection and sympathy, and that my faults were those of an improvident generosity and an unsuspecting con- fidence. Beware then, gentlemen, of preconceived opinions; oh, beware of an anticipated verdict ! Believe not that the years of a no very lengthened existence have perverted those natural feelings of benevolence; and, indeed, Nature must have taken a refluent course in my heart, if these qualities of early life were succeeded by vices which only demons could feel; rather do me the justice to believe that they are the slanderous imputa- tions disseminated by that Press which was wont to be the shield of innocence, but which, in my case, and in the want of other intelligence, has pandered to the worst feelings of our nature. Gentlemen, my entrance into life was under circumstances the most auspicious. I was reared by a kind, affectionate, and religious mother, who taught my lips to utter their first accents in praise of that Being who guides the conduct of your hearts and of the learned judge upon the bench. My youthful steps were directed by a father conspicuous for the possession of every good quality, but, above all, for his unaffected piety. On leaving my parental home I entered the service of our late revered monarch, who was emphatically styled the father of his people. For years I had the honour of holding his commis- sion, and served under his colours, and I may justly take the credit to assert that I never disgraced the one nor tarnished the other. I have done my country some service. I have fought and bled for her, and in her cause have never feared to draw the steel against an open foe, against my country's enemy. But to raise the assassin's arm, and that, too, against an unsuspecting friend! believe it not; it is horrid, monstrous, and incompatible with every feeling of my heart and every habit of my life. 109 Thurtell and Hunt. John Thurtell Amongst the numerous other vices attributed to me it has been said that I have been what is termed a sporting man, a gambler. To that accusation, with a true penitence of heart, I plead guilty. I was a gambler some time past, but three years have now elapsed since I entered a gaming-house, or was present at a horse race, or other sporting exhibition; but even had the charge been true, had I continued the practice, I am yet to learn why such a vice is unpardonable in me; why I am to be thrust out of the pale of society for the practice, when half the nobilty set the example, and the most enlightened statesmen have been my apologists. True, too true, I have been a gambler, but an unfortunate one ! My afflicted family have been the only sufferers, and myself the only victim. I feel that I labour under great disabilities, but you know from that authority that never errs, that the human heart is deceitful above all things. Beware, then, I repeat, in the discharge of your saored duty, of preconceived impressions, beware of an anticipated verdict! It has been the remark of one of the sages of antiquity that no man starts decidedly wicked ; and though I fear it will be too long a trespass on your attention, yet I am compelled, by the circumstances in which I am placed, to lay before you the details of my past life, calling upon you to extend to my conduct the benefit of such a truth. I fear it may be tiresome, but calumni- ated and charged as I am, what bosom can refuse a sigh? What eye can deny a tear? Though my pencil were dipped in the hues of heaven, it were still impossible to portray the feelings that at this moment actuate me. When you, who are to decide on my fate, carry in your mind the great hazard in which I stand; when you reflect upon the state of feeling which must accompany a mind for a long time ill at ease; when it is recollected that I have been grossly injured by those from whom I had a right to expect kindness, you will, I am sure, feel disposed to pity the sufferer and forgive his ramblings. The close of the last war, which shed a brighter lustre than ever before beamed on the glories of our common parent land, cast a shadow on my fortunes. Having ceased to be actively employed in military service, I unhappily was induced to enter into the commercial world ; I entered it under the influence of all those romantic feelings which the habits of a soldier's life had strengthened, but which were as hostile to my commercial pursuits as they were congenial with my military attachments. I considered my commercial connection in the same light as I was wont to view a military mess, and my fellow-dealers as 110 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. brother officers. I laid myself bare to the claims of the John Thurtell avaricious and the unfortunate; I relieved the distresses of the one, and was injured by the designs of the other. No fortune was competent to sustain this double drain to which I was sub- jected. I became a bankrupt ! My solicitor, who had been my earliest friend, the friend of my bosom, became a traitor, and I found him, in the hour of my embarrassment, in the ranks of my bitterest enemies. From the examination of my affairs I had reasons to form the most confident grounds of re-establishment. I had hoped to re-assume my station to be again restored to the respect of my connections to be again in possession of that self-esteem which I value above all; but a baleful influence intervened. Too frequently, alas, does the over-reaching avarice of one, running counter to the feelings and interest of the other creditors, destroy for ever the prospects of the unhappy debtor. Such was my misfortune. Thomas Osborne Springfield was my assignee. I had procured the signature of some creditors, and the promises of almost the whole, to obtain a supersedeas of the Commission of Bankruptcy ; but when I thought the winter of my fortune had passed away, and that the blossoms of hope were ripening, a chilling frost came to blight them. My prin- cipal creditor demanded a bonus of 300 for his signature; in this demand he was backed by my own solicitor, who was also his. I spurned the dishonourable offer, and in so doing was cut off from the prospect of retrieving my fortune, and cast upon the world, the dupe of many, and despised by all. My brother, Thomas Thurtell, shortly after arrived in London, and, availing himself of my assistance, embarked in the silk trade. His warehouse was accidentally destroyed by fire accidentally, I repeat, as has been proved by the decision of a jury, at a trial at which the learned judge who sits on the bench presided; and yet this calamity was made the occasion of an attempt to fix on me the crime of removing fraudulently the goods those goods which the verdict of a jury had decided to have been destroyed by an accidental fire, and of the truth and justice of which decision the most unexceptionable evidence and most unequivocal corroboration will be given in the approaching trial on the alleged conspiracy. But where, gentlemen, does the real conspiracy exist? where, but in the acts and expedients of the prosecutor? Yes, gentlemen, the conspiracy will be found in the suborning of evidence, in the purchasing of witnesses, in the acts of Mr. Barber Beaumont himself, the pretended corrector of abuses, the specious assertor 111 Thurtell and Hunt. John Thurtell of liberty, who has dared to hoist the standard of rebellion in the front of the palace of his Sovereign. He is of that descrip- tion, who have just head enough to contrive a crime, but possess not a heart to feel for its consequences to others. I have, my lord, perhaps given too free an expression to my feelings, but borne down as I have been by calumny and falsehood, the victim of accumulated slanders; it is impossible to confine myself to very measured language The flesh will quiver where the pincers tear, The blood will follow where the knife is driven. You have been told, gentlemen, amongst its other unfounded calumnies, by the public Press, that a Mr. Woods has asserted that he was inveigled into a house in Manchester Buildings, where he supposed it was intended to murder him, and that he saw me standing in the passage. Happily, I am enabled, if such a charge were at issue, to prove, from the unquestion- able testimony of some most respectable individuals, that I was at the time I am thus described to be in Manchester Buildings in the city of Norwich. Of Woods I shall say no more at present; I abstain from doing so from feelings of delicacy towards a most worthy female. In proof of my respect for her, I grant to Woods the mercy of my silence.* When I ask, gentlemen, did it ever before happen to a British subject to be called to answer for his life under such an accumulation of unfounded . calumnies such a mass of com- mented obloquy? When has it ever before occurred that the very actions of a man's life, which, if truly known, would have redounded to his credit, have been, by a strange perversion, construed into proofs of guilt? and by that Press, too, which ought to be the shield of innocence, the avenger of oppression, the detector of falsehood, and, above all, the strongest support of that best security of English liberty, trial by jury ! By that Press, I say, all these slanders have been neaped upon me before trial; nay, it has whetted the public appetite for slanders still more atrocious. That engine which, in other cases, would have operated to refute the imputed falsehood, has been em- ployed to give a deeper dye to my supposed guilt. One would have thought that the claims of an honourable service spent in the army of my country would have protected me, at least till the day of trial, from such a persecution, if they did not go to * Thurtell and Woods were said to have been rival suitors for the hand of Miss Caroline Noyes. 112 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. dissipate the numerous calumnies so studiously circulated to my disadvantage. Towards me the very order of Nature ha* been reversed. The few days of my late misfortunes have thrown a livid shadow over the glories of days long past. The actions of my life have been misrepresented every kind of connection and engagement which I might have formed has been ransacked to supply the magazine of slander. You have been told that even in the days of glory, when the battle's rage had ceased, and the peril of the conflict was over, the vanquishing, unoffending, yielding, nay, supplicating foe* has fallen in cold blood beneath my cowardly steel; that, not satisfied with the blood of my victim, I coolly set to plunder his person. Nay, more, that, with a folly only to be equalled by the atrocity of such an act, I subse- quently boasted of the ruffianly barbarity as the exploit of a soldier ! Is there an English officer, is there an English soldier, or an Englishman, whose heart would not revolt at such a dastardly deed of cold-blooded cruelty? Better, far better had it been, ere I had seen this day, that I had fallen in honour- able conflict, surrounded by my brave companions , after having assisted with my arm To turn the tide of battle than thus to be borne down, the object of unrelenting malignity. I should have been covered with honourable dust. My family might then, while mourning for my loss, have blessed my memory, and the glory of such a death would have rolled its fires into the fountain of their sorrows ! Before, my lord, I proceed to read the remarks on the evidence which has been offered in support of the conspiracy against me, I take the liberty to return my sincere thanks to the High Sheriff and the magistrates of this county for their kindness arid attention towards me. I cannot allow the present opportunity to pass without expressing my regret that any misunderstanding should have arisen between the Rev. Mr. Lloyd and one of my solicitors. I hope and trust that all angry feelings between them have now subsided, and that the bonds of amity are ratified. To the Rev. Mr. Franklin, the chaplain of the prison, I owe my acknowledgments for his un- remitting attentions, and his virtuous exertions to inspire me * Here the prisoner was deeply affected and shed tears. Mr. Justice Park said, " Sit down, sit down." Thurtell for a moment gave way to hia feelings, but soon resumed his wonted firmness. i 113 Thurtell and Hunt, John Thurtell with the awful truths of religion. His exertions to awaken me to such considerations have trebly armed me to meet with firm- ness the trial of this day. Though last, not least, allow me to mention Mr. Wilson, the governor of the prison, whose fatherly conduct I can never forget. Memory must be indeed extinct, and my heart cold for ever, when it ceases to beat for the pros- perity of himself and family. I will now, gentlemen, call your attention to the evidence in this case, which, you will remark, instead of being clear, consistent, irresistible, is so far unlike the evidence usually adduced in support of so awful a charge that it is contradictory, inconsistent, and derived from the mouths of persons who have been willing to save their own lives by any sort of falsehood or injustice towards others. The first witness is Beeson; he has told you that there are several roads to Probert's cottage, so that the inference drawn from the circumstance of the gig being seen with the head from Batler's Green is now done away with. He also mentions that he went out to search for the body, and that those who sought were utterly at a loss for it till they were told where it was by Hunt. Hunt could inform them where the body was, and why could he do so but because he had deposited it himself ? Beeson also told you that one person could not have thrown the body into the pond where it was found. Now, what proof, I shall ask you, is there that the body ever was, as has been alleged, in Probert's pond? None but the evidence of Probert. I shall lay before you at the proper time what appears to me to be a view of the probabilities of this part of the case. There was also, Beeson tells you, a large pond near the small one in which the body was found. Who could have chosen the smaller pond but a person acquainted with the country 1 Who could possibly have known that the larger pond was sometimes dry and the small one not? Who but Probert himself? It appeared, in an answer to a judicious question of the learned judge, that both the sack in which the body was enveloped and the cord with which it was tied were bought by Hunt. I pass over the evidence of Field and Upson as immaterial. The next evidence is that of Rexworthy. Rexworthy, you must recollect, is, from his own account, a gambler and a supporter of gamblers ; but his evidence, if worthy of any consideration at all, contains no fact that is material against me. The next witness who bears upon the case is Ruthven, who produces some of the articles found in the room at TetsalPs when I was apprehended ; but there is no proof that these articles 114 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. are mine. I never wear white neckcloths; I have not worn a John Thurtell white neckcloth for two years till this day. You have been told there was another person in the same room with me. Now, let me ask you whether it was prudent on my part, if I had done the act with which I am charged, to suffer another person to be in my room, and have thus allowed him an opportunity of discovering my guilt? Mr. Simmons produced a red shawl handkerchief, which was proved to have been worn by Hunt, and which proved nothing against me. I now come to the only evidence which at all connects me with the crime committed the evidence of the only man wLose testimony points at me. And who is he? What is he? He is himself the murderer. Is it credible that he would have intro- duced me, just hot from slaughtering, to his wife? Where was the murder committed ? A quarter of a mile from his own house. Where was the body found? In his own pond. Who took it there? Himself. Who took me to Tetsall's? Probert. He gives here the true account respecting the 10, but he gave a different one before the coroner and the magistrates. Is such a man to be believed? Before you doom a fellow-creature to an ignominious death, I conjure you to weigh well the state- ments of Hunt and Probert. Gentlemen, are you to consign me to an ignominious death upon such evidence as this? Can you reconcile the difference between the statements of Hunt and Probert? And yet these men have been running a race to be admitted as approvers these men have put up their evidence to auction, hoping to find a bribe in proportion to the length of their consciences. The evidence of Probert throughout clearly tends to show that the proposal of murdering Mr. Weare was familiar to him. He tells you I informed him that I was going "to do" for Mr. Weare, " for he had robbed me of several hundreds." Can you believe that I was so egregious a fool as to make such a declaration to a person who was a previous stranger to such a transaction ? Probert says, I told Hunt to stop at certain places on the road; he was a stranger to that part of the country, and Mr. and Mrs. Probert both say he never was at their cottage before. Mr. Weare was to be put down at an appointed place. Why? Because Hunt and Probert thought it was the most proper place to commit the murder. Look at Hunt's confession before the magistrates and Probert's evidence yesterday, and see whether they do not both say that this was the particular spot intended for the sanguinary deed. Is it credible that Probert would have 115 Thurtell and Hunt, John Thurteii induced a stranger to visit him at a house where he had no accommodation for company, unless he had some unfair design towards him? It is in evidence that Probert advanced 20s. to enable Hunt to go down by himself. He clearly did not take him in his gig, and in going down Hunt was allowed to purchase a, loin of pork, and pay for it with Probert's money. Is not this the conduct of men who were going on a joint business? He said that I passed him 4 miles on the road, and he describes Hunt as having used some ambiguous remarks ; and therefore I believe that Hunt and Probert enticed Mr. Weare near the fatal spot, and that I too was intended as their victim. I think it is clear that they had prepared themselves for this bloody business by the quantity of brandy and water which they got on the road. Probert tells you that Hunt and I were to sleep at his house. According to Mrs. Probert's account, there was not sufficient accommodation for us. Why did he then invite me down? The motive is plain why, in order to cast upon me the odium and the consequences of the guilty deed which he and Hunt had meditated. It must not be forgotten that there was no spare bed without depriving Miss Noyes of hers. Would you have done otherwise than he did? Is it not manifest that the object of bringing me there was to throw all suspicion from himself upon me? The conversation which Probert attributes to me on the night in question is utterly inconsistent with his own innocence. Is it possible that I should have introduced matters of such great and awful danger to a man like Probert if he himself had no previous intimation on the subject? Probert, in his evidence, has not failed to press into his service the most gratuitous odium upon my character, and has invented things which could never have been said by me. He says I told him that I would murder Mr. Barber Beaumont and Mr. Woods, the latter being on the eve of marrying Mrs. Probert's sister, and then keeping company with her. If such had been my intention, is it credible that I should have men- tioned such a subject to Probert, above all other persons? Observe next the difference between the evidence of Probert and that of his wife. He says that I and Hunt went for the body and took it over Mr. Wardle's field near to the gate, and that we then dragged it to the bank of the pond. Mrs. Probert says we took it into the stable and dragged it down the walk from the stable to the pond. Probert said that we had no lantern ; but Mrs. Probert winds up this part of the story by saying that it was a. fine moonlight night. These are manifest 116 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. contradictions, but they are still more obvious when you come John Thurtii to consider the local situation of the garden in which they lay this scene. The garden, as- described by Probert, had a house on one side and a stable on the other, which last was in such a situation that it was impossible for him to have seen what he describes. Probert says that after this he went to bed im- mediately; and I beg you will bear it in mind that he also states that he did not get up next morning till nine o'clock, a fact which is flatly contradicted by the evidence of his servant boy. Probert states that he told me on Sunday that Mr. Nicholls knew all about this business, and that I then said, " I am baked " ; and yet after this warning I returned to town, to the place where I usually lived, and where I was well known, and could easily have been found at any time, and where, in fact, I was found. Mrs. Probert says that Hunt came down in dirty clothes, and that those very clothes were seen on him on the Friday night, although, previously to his leaving London, I had lent him some of my brother's clothes, which he did not return to me till Tuesday, the day before my apprehension. Probert has told you, in order to add weight to his testimony, that on the Monday I took his servant out of the way, that he might not answer questions ; but the truth is that the very next day Probert was to quit his cottage, having received a regular notice to quit from his landlord. Gentlemen, I will not disgust you by many more remarks upon this cold-blooded act. I cannot help persuading myself that the discrepancies I have already pointed out are quite sufficient to discredit such witnesses in your judgment; and I am sure at least you will receive with great caution the testi- mony of such a man as Probert. Between him and Hunt you will bear in mind that there has been a struggle who should obtain the mercy of the Crown. He has been admitted as an approver, and therefore every word of his testimony must be regarded with the strongest suspicion. You will observe that after much prevarication, and after swearing in his examina- tion-in-chief that he did not come downstairs on the Saturday morning till after nine o'clock, he refuses to swear that it was so late $s eight, although his servant boy swears it was but seven. You will not fail to have remarked on the character of this witness. It was wrung from him by Mr. Andrews, that he had six or seven times been committed by the Commissioners under his bankruptcy for perjury; you will not forget that he introduced Hunt to me with an intention which is now too manifest. 117 Thurtell and Hunt, John Thurtell The disgusting affectation with which Mrs. Probert gave her evidence is quite sufficient to lay her credit under the strongest suspicion. What faith can you put in the testimony of a female who confesses that she put round her neck the gold chain which had been plundered from the murdered man, and that after the sanguinary tragedy had been perpetrated she called upon the blood-stained Hunt to sing her a song? You will recollect that this is the conduct of a woman who well knew that a murder had just been committed, and that the hand of the assassin, whom she called upon to sing, was still reeking with his victim's blood. The bare statement of this i'act is sufficient to overwhelm her as a witness, and render her utterly unworthy of her sex. I must, however, call your attention to some of the facts which she has stated. She says she saw two men bring a horse to take the body out of the back gate ; that some digging took place on the spot ; and that she saw the body carried out. She- also details a long conversation in whispers between myself and her husband, which, she says, took place at the distance of a flight of stairs from one door to another. In answer to a question put by the learned judge, she says that this long conversation was after she had seen the digging, and yet her husband says that immediately after leaving the body, he went to bed. Is it not clear, gentlemen, that this whispering, pretended to have been overheard, was a scheme settled between Probert and his wife? I know not, but I believe most firmly, that the body never was in Probert's pond. From Mrs. Probert's description of what is called the garden and yard gate you will see that my statement is confirmed, as well also by the difference between her and her husband's statement as to the bringing in of the body. I may here explain the circumstance of the supposed grave by telling you that it was a potato field, and that the potatoes were taken away previously to Probert's leaving the cottage. Probert said that the body was stripped by the side of the pond, but I could not learn from the evidence on which side it was. In the print in the Observer of 9th November it is repre- sented to have been on the opposite side to where Mrs. Probert says she saw it dragging. From the evidence of Probert and others it is clearly proved that Hunt hired the horse and gig, and got everything ready on the occasion ; and from the evidence of Fleet it is found that Hunt took the shovel, which has been produced. Probert supplied the sovereign to pay Hunt's expenses. 118 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. I beg to call jour serious consideration to the evidence of John Thurtell Mr. Clarke, the landlord of the White Lion, at Edgware. You will remember he states that as he was returning home he met a gig on the wrong side of the road, and that at the same time a coach was passing, by the lamps of which he was enabled to distinguish my person. Does not your own experience prove this to be false? And I now hereby declare most solemnly that it is utterly false. Is it possible that on a wide road, in a dark night, a man passing at a quick rate, being 30 yards off, could be able to distinguish the countenance of another in an opposed gig, by the lamps of a coach? Would not the lamps in such a case hinder rather than assist the view? Does not every night's experience prove this? But the circumstance of my being on the off side, and having, as he says, a gentleman with me, is, I submit to you, the strongest proof that he could not catch a glimpse of my countenance. We all know, according to general principles, that when a witness tries to prove too much he fails in every particular. The testimony of Mr. Clarke is therefore not to be depended upon, and I shall be able to prove that he is a man on whom no reliance can be placed. I beg also to draw your attention to the evidence of the hackney coachman who set Mr. Weare down at a quarter-past four o'clock. You will please to recollect that he said positively it was half -past four when the deceased left his coach, that I met him, and assisted in carrying away his bag. Now, all the other witnesses say that I did not leave Mr. Tetsall's till five. These facts prove that I could not be the man who met him, and establish the fact that some other person must have met the deceased. It is obvious, therefore, that this coachman is also introduced to assist in the conspiracy against me; and I have no doubt that if he had been allowed to see me in prison, and I had been pointed out, he, too, like the other witnesses, would have identified me. The witness Freeman says he met a gig in Gill's Hill Lane. Before the magistrates he said it was a yellow gig, but now he says he never did so, although to my perfect recollection he did. The evidence of Mr. Clarke's ostler proves that the night was so dark that it was impossible to distinguish anything. Probert, who I am sure you will think is unworthy of credit, says, if my recollection be correct Mr. JUSTICE PARK Prisoner, I don't wish to interrupt you, but I wish you not to deceive yourself by stating as a fact that which is not well founded. In the depositions taken before the magistrates, which I have before me, it does not appear 119 Thurtell and Hunt. John Thurtell that the -witness Freeman asserted that it was a yellow gig ; you have asserted that he did so, but I cannot allow that to be said. Go on with your observations, I only interrupt you for your own sake. JOHN THURTELL That is the strong impression upon my mind, I assure your lordship. The evidence of Probert is that he left the Artichoke public-house eleven minutes before nine, but Mr. Field says that he left at a quarter- past seven.* Taking this statement to be true, it is clear that Probert and Hunt had time enough to go to the top of Gill's Hill Lane and return to the Artichoke after they had perpetrated the murder, so as to enable them to throw the guilt upon the shoulders of any other person than their own. Can you believe, or can anybody believe, that Probert, without some inquiry, would have left his companion Hunt on a dark night, at nine o'clock, half a mile from his own cottage? Is that possible, or can you be so much imposed upon as to believe it ? No ; I am satisfied you will not. I am- satisfied you will consider this circumstance as sufficient to overrule Probert's statement; and without that there is no evidence to support the charge against me. I must now advert to the testimony of Mr. Clarke's ostler. He stated that two gentlemen arrived at his master's house at a quarter-past seven; that it was dark, and that he could not distinguish the countenance of either; and yet he takes upon himself to distinguish the countenance of one of the gentlemen, whom the laundry-maid comes forward to say she believes was Mr. Weare. But, gentlemen, there is no other person to prove this fact; there is no other person to prove that the gig did stop at his master's house. And, let me ask you, when this unhappy business was agitated, why did not the ostler come forward to offer his evidence at the coroner's inquest, or before the magistrates? He certainly did not; and he now comes forward for the first time. I now declare that, looking at Mr. Clarke's evidence and the ostler's, it was utterly impossible for me to have been seen by them. As to the evidence of the man who sold the pistols, I am sure you must be satisfied it does not at all identify me with this transaction. With respect to the evidence given by Upson and Foster, as to the conversation they have mentioned, certainly * The prisoner has misstated the evidence. It was Field who spoke to the hour as 11 minutes before 9. Probert said it was "about 10 minutes before 8 " when he arrived, and that he stopped three-quarters of an hour, making it past 8.30 when he left. Field said he stopped 30 or 35 minutes. Cf. ante, pp. 75, 97. E. R. W. 120 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. something of the kind did occur, but they have entirely mis- John Thorteii taken the purport and nature of it. I am quite certain that the real meaning of anything I might say was no more than to express my disapprobation of the persons suspected, and to designate them by the word " scoundrel." If I had been in this horrible affair I certainly would never have betrayed my companions. Enough has been said to you about the watch; it has been most minutely and circumstantially described, and yet it is not forthcoming. Have you not a right, and have I not a still greater right to ask, " Where is it? What has become of it? Why do they not produce it? '* My lord and gentlemen of the jury, I ought to rejoice that the circumstances alone on which the prosecutors rely in support of their case afford the strongest evidence of my innocence. The case for the prosecution is founded entirely on circum- stantial evidence. I have demonstrated to you that the circum- stances proved do not point at me as being concerned in the perpetration of this murder. But, gentlemen, circumstantial evidence is- at best but a fearful guide to human judgment. If human judgment is to be guided by circumstantial evidence alone, the greatest errors may be committed. Nothing can be more frail, more liable to deception and false conclusions, than mere circumstances, which are at all times equivocal. In the annals of foreign and domestic jurisprudence some of the most melancholy and dreadful instances are to be found of a too fatal adherence to the supposed infallibility of circumstantial evidence. Among the former we find a father condemned to death, upon mere circumstances, for the supposed murder of a child, and a poor servant girl convicted of a theft of which she was wholly guiltless. The names of Galas and of the maid of Palaiseau* present an awful lesson to judges and to jurors, who have to decide upon the lives of their fellow-creatures. In our own happy country instances have been less frequent, but, still, they have occurred often enough to inspire jurors with the utmost caution. My Lord Hale, in his Pleas of the Crown, vol. 2, p. 200, says, " I could never convict any person of murder or man- slaughter unless evidence of the most satisfactory nature respect- ing the body of the deceased, and the nature of the wounds * This case is in the Recutd dts Cause* Ctldbres, and in English is La Pie Voleuse, or " The Magpie and the Maid " (1815), a story of a servant condemned for thefts of silver spoons stolen by a magpie. It had a great success as a cheap melodrama, after the execution of Eliza Penning had stirred the popular imagination. E. R. W. 121 Thurtell and Hunt, John Thurtell which had caused his death, should be produced in aid of the circumstances by which the accusation was to be supported." The same learned judge quotes a case showing the necessity of such a resolution, which he states to have happened in Stafford- shire within his own recollection. A was missing, and there being a strong presumption that he had been despatched by B, who was suspected of having consumed his body to ashes in his own oven ; B was indicted for the murder, convicted, and executed. About a year afterwards A returned home from beyond the seas, whither he had been sent by B against his will; so that, although perhaps B really deserved death, he was clearly innocent of that crime for which he suffered. Another case, from the same high authority, was that of a nobleman who had the care of bringing up his niece, to whom he was the next in succession to certain property. The child, it seems, had committed some offence, for which her uncle had found it necessary to correct her, and she had been overheard saying, " Good uncle, don't kill me." The child was after- wards not to be found. The uncle was committed for the murder, and the judge before whom he was tried admonished him to find the child against the next assizes. When that period arrived the uncle could not find the child, but produced another, like his niece in years and in figure. On examination, it was discovered that this child was not the one which had disappeared, and the uncle was found guilty and executed. It appeared afterwards that the child had been terrified, had run away, and had been received by a stranger, who maintained her; and when she became of age she claimed her land, and was put in possession of it, having satisfactorily proved herself to be the true child. [Thurtell then proceeded to read from the Percy Anecdotes, a work which, he observed, was dedicated to the Lord Chan- cellor, the following interesting cases of conviction on circum- stantial evidence: CASE OF THE FARMER IN THE REIGN OP QTTEEN ELIZABETH. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, a person was arraigned before Sir James Dyer, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas,* from whose own notes the account is said to have been taken, upon an indict- ment for the murder of a man who dwelt in the same parish with the prisoner. The first witness against him deposed, that on a certain day, * What makes this anecdote doubtful is that at this date the Judges of the Common Pleas did not, so Lord Campbell states, try pleas of the Crown. It is quite certain that they did later, however. E.R.W. 122 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. mentioned by the witness, in the morning, as he was going through a John Thurtell close, which he particularly described, at some distance from the path, he saw a person lying dead, and that two wounds appeared in his breast, and his shirt and clothes were much stained with blood ; that the wounds appeared to the witness to have been made by the Juncture of a pitchfork or some such instrument, and looking about e discovered a fork lying near the corpse, which he took up, and observed it to be marked with the initials of the prisoner's name. Here the witness produced the fork in Court, which the prisoner owned to be his. The prisoner waived asking the witness any questions. A second witness deposed, that on the morning of the day on which the deceased was killed, the witness had risen very early with an intention of going to a neighbouring market town, which he men- tioned ; that as he was standing in the entry of his own dwelling- house, the street door being open, he saw the prisoner come by dressed in a suit of clothes, the colour and fashion of which he described; that he (the witness) was prevented from going to market, and that afterwards the first witness brought notice to the town of the death and wounds of the deceased, and of the prisoner's fork being found near the corpse ; that upon this report the prisoner was apprehended, and carried before a justice of peace ; that he, this witness, followed the prisoner to the justice's house, and attended his examination, during which he observed the exchange of clothes the prisoner had made since the time he had seen him in the morning ; that on the witness charging him with having changed his clothes, he gave several shuffling answers, and would have denied it ; that upon witness mentioning this circumstance of change of dress, the justice granted a warrant to search the prisoner's house for the clothes described by the witness as having been put off since the morning ; that this witness attended and assisted at the search ; that after a nice search of two hours and upwards, the very clothes the witness had described, were discovered concealed in a straw bed. He then produced the bloody clothes in Court, which the prisoner owned to be his clothes, and to have been thrust in the straw bed with the in- tention to conceal them on the account of their being bloody. The prisoner also waived asking this second witness any questions. A third witness deposed to his having heard the prisoner deliver certain menaces against the deceased, whence the prosecutor intended to infer a proof of malice prepense. In answer to this the prisoner proposed certain questions to the Court, leading to a discovery of the occasion of the menacing expressions deposed to ; and from the wit- ness's answers to those questions, it appeared that the deceased had first menaced the prisoner. The prisoner being called upon for his defence, addressed the following narration to the Court, as containing all he knew concern- ing the manner and circumstances of the death of the deceased. " He rented a close in the eame parish with the deceased, and the deceased rented another close adjoining it. The only way to his own close was through that of the deceased ; and on the day the murder in the indictment was said to be committed, he rose early in the morning, in order to go to work in his close with his fork in his hand ; and passing through the deceased's ground, he observed a man at some distance from the path, lying down as if dead or drunk ; he thought himself bound to see what condition the person was in ; and on getting up to him he found him in the last extremity, with two wounds in his breast, from which much blood had issued. In order to relieve him he raised him up, and with great difficulty sat him on his lap ; he 123 Thurtell and Hunt, John Thurtell told the deceased he was greatly concerned at his unhappy fate, and the more so as there appeared reason to think he had been murdered. He entreated the deceased to discover, if possible, who it was, assuring him he would do his best endeavours to bring him to justice. The deceased seemed to be sensible of what he said, and in the midst of his agonies, attempted to speak to him, but was seized with a rattling in his throat, gave a hard struggle, then a dreadful groan, and vomit- ing a deal of blood, some of which fell on his (the prisoner's) clothes, he expired in his arms. The shock he felt on account of this accident was not to be expressed, and the rather as it was well known that there had been a difference between the deceased and himself, on which account he might possibly be suspected of the murder. He therefore thought it advisable to leave the deceased in the condition he was, and take no further notice of the matter. In the confusion he was in when he left the place, he took the deceased's fork away instead of his own, which was by the side of the corpse. Being obliged to go to his work, he thought it best to shift his clothes, and that they might not be seen, he confessed that he had hid them in the place where they were found. It was true he had denied before the justice that he had changed his clothes, being conscious this was an ugly circumstance that might be urged against him, being unwilling to be brought into trouble if he could help it. He concluded his story with a most solemn declaration that he had related nothing but the exact truth, without adding or diminishing one tittle, as he would answer for it to God Almighty. Being then called upon to produce his witnesses, the prisoner answered with a steady, composed countenance, and resolution of voice, "he had no witnesses but God and his own conscience." The judge then proceeded to deliver his charge, in which he par- ticularly enlarged on the heinousness of the crime, and laid great stress on the force of the evidence, although circumstantial only, he declared he thought to be irresistible, and little inferior to the most positive proof. The prisoner had indeed cooked up a very plausible story ; but, if such or the like allegations were to be admitted in a case of this kind, no murderer would ever be brought to justice, such deeds being generally perpetrated in the dark, and with the greatest secrecy. The present case was exempted, in his opinion, from all possibility of doubt, and they ought not to hesitate one moment about finding the prisoner guilty. The foreman begged of his lordship, as this was a case of life and death, that the jury might withdraw ; and upon this motion an officer was sworn to keep the jury locked up. This trial came on the first in the morning ; and the judge having sat till nine at night expecting the return of the jury, at last sent an officer to inquire if they were agreed on their verdict. Some of them returned for answer, that eleven of their body had been of the same mind from the first, but that it was their misfortune to have a foreman who, having taken up a different opinion from them, was unalterably fixed in it. The messenger had no sooner gone than the complaining members, alarmed at the thought of being under confine- ment all night, and despairing of bringing their dissenting brother over to their own way of thinking, agreed to accede to his opinion, and having acquainted him with their resolution, they sent an officer to detain his lordship a few minutes, and then went into Court, and by their foreman brought in the prisoner not guilty. His lordship could not help expressing the greatest surprise and indignation at this unexpected verdict; and, after giving the jury a severe admonition, he refused to record the verdict, and sent them 124 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. back again with directions that they should be locked up all night John Thurtell without fire or candle. The whole blame was publicly laid on the foreman by the rest of the members, and they spent the night in loading him with reflections, and bewailing their unhappy fate in being so associated with so hardened a wretch. But he remained in- flexible, constantly declaring he would suffer death rather than change his opinion. As soon as his lordship came into Court next morning he sent again to the jury, on which the eleven members joined in requesting their foreman to go into Court, assuring him they would abide by their former verdict whatever was the consequence ; and, on being reproached with their former inconstancy, they promised never to desert or recriminate upon their foreman any more. Upon these assurances they proceeded again into Court, and again brought in the prisoner not guilty. The judge, unable to conceal his rage at a verdict which appeared to him in the most iniquitous light, reproached them severely, and dismissed them with the cutting reflection, " That the blood of the deceased lay at their doors." The prisoner on his part fell down on his knees, and, with up- lifted eyes and hands to God, thanked Him most devoutly for his deliverance; and, addressing himself to the judge, cried out, "You see, my lord, that God and a good conscience are the best witnesses."* The circumstance made a deep impression on the mind of the judge ; and, as soon as he had retired from Court, he entered into con- versation with the high sheriff upon what had passed, and particu- larly examined him as to his knowledge of the foreman of the jury. The high sheriff answered his lordship that he had been acquainted with him many years ; that he had a freehold estate of his own of above 50 a year ; and that he rented a very considerable farm besides ; that he never knew him charged with an ill action, and that he was universally beloved and esteemed in his neighbourhood. For further information his lordship sent for the minister of the parish, who gave the same favourable account of his parishioner, with this addition that he was a constant churchman and a devout communi- cant. These accounts increased his lordship's perplexity, from which he could think of no expedient to deliver himself but by having a conference in private with the only person who could give him satis- faction; this he requested the sheriff to procure, who readily offered his service, and without delay brought about the desired interview. Upon the foreman of the jury being introduced to the judge, his lordship retired with him into a closet, where his lordship opened his reasons for desiring that visit, making no scruple of acknowledging the uneasiness he was under on account of the verdict, and conjuring his visitor frankly to discover his reasons for acquitting the prisoner. The juryman returned for answer that he had sufficient reasons to justify his conduct, and that he was neither ashamed nor afraid to reveal them ; but as he had hitherto locked them up in his own breast, and was under no compulsion to disclose them, he expected his lordship would engage upon his honour to keep what he was about to unfold to him a secret, as he himself had done. His lordship having done so, the juryman proceeded to give his lordship the fol- lowing account : " The deceased being the tithe-man where he (the juryman) lived, he had the morning of his decease, been in his (the juryman's) ground, amongst his corn, and had done him great in- justice by. taking more than his due, and acting otherwise in a most * When Thurtell arrived at this passage, his voice faltered, and he shed a few tears ; bnt almost instantly recovering himself, he put his hand to hi* eyes, and then with a firm voice proceeded. 125 Thurtell and Hunt. John Thurtell arbitrary manner. When he complained of this treatment he had not only been abused with scurrilous language, but the deceased had struck at him several times with his fork, and had actually wounded him in two places, the scars of which wounds he then showed his lordship. The deceased seemed bent on mischief, and the farmer having no weapon to defend himself, had no other way to preserve his own life but by closing in with the deceased and wrenching the fork out of his hands, which having effected, the deceased attempted to recover the fork, and in the scuffle received the two wounds which had occasioned his death. The farmer was inexpressibly concerned at the accident which occasioned the man's death, and especially when the prisoner was taken up on suspicion of the murder. But the assizes being just over, he was unwilling to surrender himself and to confess the matter, because his farm and affairs would have been ruined by lying so long in gaol. He was sure to have been acquitted on his trial, for he had consulted the ablest lawyers upon the case, who all agreed that as the deceased had been aggressor, he could only have been guilty of manslaughter at most. It was true he had suffered greatly in his own mind on the prisoner's account ; but being well assured that imprisonment would be of less consequence to the prisoner than to himself, he had suffered the law to take ite course. In order, however, to render the prisoner's confinement as easy to him as possible, he had given him every kind of assistance, and had wholly supported his family ever since. And, to get him clear of the charge laid against him, he had procured himself to be summoned on the jury, and sat at the head of them ; having all along determined in his own breast rather to die himself than to suffer any harm to be done to the prisoner." His lordship expressed great satisfaction at this account ; and after thanking the farmer for it, a' d making this farther stipulation, that in case his lordship should survive him, he might then be at liberty to relate this fact, that it might be delivered down to posterity, the conference broke up. The juryman lived fifteen years afterwards ; the judge inquired after him every year, and happening to survive him, felt himself at liberty to make a disclosure of this extraordinary occurrence. CASK OF A MAN UNJUSTLY EXECUTED FOB THE SUPPOSED MURDER OF His FATHER. A man was tried for, and convicted of, the murder of his own father. The evidence against him was merely circumstantial, and the principal witness was his sister. She proved that her father possessed a, small income which, with his industry, enabled him to live with comfort ; that her brother, who was his heir-at-law, had often expressed a great desire to come into possession of his father's effects ; and that he had long behaved in a very undutiful manner to him, wishing, as the witness believed, to put a period to his existence by uneasiness and vexation ; that on the evening the murder was com- mitted, the deceased went a small distance from the house to milk a cow he had for some time kept, and that the witness also went out to spend the evening and to sleep, leaving only her brother in the house; that returning home early in the morning, and finding that her father and brother were both absent, she was much alarmed, and sent for some of the neighoura to consult with them, and to receive advice what should be done ; that in company with these neighbours 126 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. she went to the hovel in which her father was accustomed to milk John Thurtell the cow, where they found him murdered in a most inhuman manner; that a suspicion immediately falling on her brother, and there being then some snow upon the ground, in which the footsteps of a human being to and from the hovel were observed, it was agreed to take one of her brother's shoes and to measure therewith the im- pressions in the snow. This was done, and there did not remain a doubt that the impressions were made with his ehoes Thus con- firmed in their suspicions, they then immediately went to the prisoner's room, and after a diligent search they found a hammer in the corner of a private drawer with several spots of blood upon it. The circumstance of finding the deceased, and the hammer, and the identity of the footsteps, as described by the former witness, were fully proved by the neighbours whom she had called ; and upon this evidence the prisoner was convicted and suffered death, but denied the act to the last. About four years after, the sister, who had been chief witness, was extremely ill ; and understanding that there were no hopes of her recovery, she confessed that her father and brother having offended her, she was determined they should both die ; and accord- ingly, when the former went to milk the cow, she followed him with her brother's hammer, and in his shoes; that she felled her father with the hammer, and laid it where it was afterwards found ; that she then went from home, to give a better colour to the horrid transaction ; that her brother was perfectly innocent of the crime for which he had suffered. She was immediately taken into custody, but died before she could be brought to trial. CASE OF WILLIAM SHAW, EXECUTED ON CIECTTMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, FOE THE SUPPOSED MUBDEB OF HlS DAUGHTEB. An upholsterer of the name of William Shaw,* who was residing at Edinburgh in the year 1721, had a daughter Catherine, who lived with him, and who encouraged the addresses of John Lawson, a jeweller, contrary to the wishes of her father, who had insuperable objections against him, and urged his daughter to receive the addresses of a son of Alexander Robertson, a friend and neighbour. The girl refused most peremptorily. The father grew enraged. Passionate expressions arose on both sides, and the words " barbarity, cruelty, and death " were frequently pronounced by the daughter. At length her father left her, locking the door after him. The apartment of Shaw was only divided by a slight partition from that of one Morrison, a watchcase maker, who had indistinctly heard the conversation and quarrel between Catherine Shaw and her father ; and was particularly struck with the words she pronounced so emphatically. For some time after the father had gone out all was sUent; but presently Morrison heard several groans from the daughter. He called in some of the neighbours; and these listening attentively, not only heard the groans, but also her faintly exclaim, " Cruel father, thou art the cause of my death ! " Struck with the expression, they got a constable, and forced the door of Shaw's apart- ment, where they found the daughter weltering in her blood, and a knife by her side. She was alive and speechless, but on question- * This case is related in La Pie Voleuse (1815), as an illustration of the danger of convicting on circumstantial evidence. 127 Thurtell and Hunt, John Thurtell ing her as to owning her death to her father, she was just able to make a motion with her head, apparently in the affirmative, and then expired. At this moment Shaw enters the room. All eyes are upon him. He sees his neighbours and a constable in his apartment, and seems much disordered; but at the eight of his daughter he turns pale, trembles, and is ready to sink. The first surprise and the succeed- ing horror leave little doubt of his guilt in the breasts of the be- holders ; and even that little is done away on the constable discover- ing that the shirt of William Shaw is bloody. He was instantly hurried before a magistrate, and upon the de- position of the parties, committed for trial. In vain did he protest his innocence, and declare that the blood on his shirt was occasioned by his having blooded himself some days before, and the bandage having become untied. The circumstances appeared so strong against him that he was found guilty, was executed, and hung in chains at Leith. His last words were, "I am innocent of my daughter's murder." There was scarcely a person in Edinburgh who thought the father innocent ; but in the following year a man who had become the occu- pant of Shaw's apartment, accidentally discovered a paper which had fallen into a cavity on one side of the chimney. It was folded as a letter, and on opening it was found to contain as follows: "Bar- barous father ! your cruelty in having put it out of my power ever to join my fate to that of the only man I could love, and tyrannically insisting upon my marrying one whom I always hated, has made me form a resolution to put an end to an existence which is become a burden to me." This letter was signed " Catherine Shaw " ; and on being shown to her relations and friends it was recognised as her writing. The magistracy of Edinburgh examined it, and on being satisfied of its authenticity, they ordered the body of William Shaw to be taken from the gibbet and given to his family for interment ; and as the only reparation to his memory, and the honour of his surviving rela- tions, they caused a pair of colours to be waved over his grave in token of his innocence. CASE OF JONATHAN BRADFORD, EXECUTED FOR THE SUPPOSED MURDER OF MR. HAYES. In the year 1736, Mr. Hayes, a gentleman of fortune, in travelling, stopped at an inn in Oxfordshire, kept by one Jonathan Bradford. He there met with two gentlemen, with whom he supped, and in conversation unguardedly mentioned that he had then with him a considerable sum of money. Having retired to rest, the two gentle- men, who slept in a double-bedded room, were awakened by deep groans in the adjoining chamber. They instantly arose, and pro- ceeded silently to the room where the groans were heard. The door was half open, and on entering they perceived a person weltering in his blood, in the bed, and a man standing over him with a dark lantern in one hand and a knife in the other. They soon discovered that the gentleman murdered was the one with whom they had supped, and that the man who was standing over him was their host. They instantly seized him, disarmed him of the knife, and charged him with being the murderer. He positively denied the crime, and asserted that he came there with the same intentions as themselves ; 128 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. for, that hearing a noise, which was succeeded by groans, he got up, John Thurtell struck a light, and armed himself with a knife in his defence, and was but that minute entered the room before them. These assertions were of no avail ; he was kept in close custody until morning, when he was taken before a neighbouring justice of the peace, to whom the evidence appeared so decisive, that on writing out his mittimus he hesitated not to say, " Mr. Bradford, either you or myself committed this murder." At the ensuing assizes at Oxford, Bradford was tried, convicted, and shortly after executed, still, however, declaring that he was not guilty of the murder. This afterwards proved to be true ; the murder was actually committed by Mr. Hayes's footman, who, imme- diately on stabbing his master, rifled his pockets and escaped to his own room, which was scarcely two seconds before Bradford's entering the chamber. The world owes this knowledge to a remorse of conscience of the footman on his deathbed, eighteen months after the murder ; and dying almost immediately after he had made the declaration, Justice lost its victim. It is, however, remarkable that Bradford, though innocent, and not at all privy to the murder, was nevertheless a murderer in design. He confessed to the clergyman who attended him after his sentence that having heard that Mr. Hayes had a large sum of money about him, he went to the chamber with the same diabolical intentions as the servant. He was struck with amazement ; he could not believe his senses ; and in turning back the bedclothes to assure himself of the fact, he in his agitation dropped his knife on the bleeding body, by which both his hand and the knife became stained, and thus in- creased the suspicious circumstances in which he was found. CASE OF JOHN JENNINGS, EXECUTED ON A FALSE CHARGE OF ROBBERY. In the year 1742 a gentleman in travelling was stopped by a high- wayman in a mask, within about seven miles of Hull, and robbed of a purse containing twenty guineas. The gentleman proceeded about two miles further, and stopped at the Bull Inn, kept by Mr. Brunell. He related the circumstance of the robbery, adding that as all his gold was marked, he thought it probable that the robber would be detected. After he had supped, his host entered the room and told him a circumstance had arisen which led him to think that he could point out the robber. He then informed the gentleman that he had a waiter, one John Jennings, whose conduct had long been very suspicious : he had long before dark sent him out to change a guinea for him, and that he had only come back since he (the gentleman) was in the house, saying he could not get change ; that Jennings being in liquor, he sent him to bed, resolving to discharge him in the morn- ing; that at the time he returned him the guinea, he discovered it was not the same he had given him, but was marked, of which he took no further notice until he heard the particulars of the robbery, and that the guineas which the highwayman had taken were all marked. He added that he had unluckily paid away the marked guinea to a man who lived at some distance. Mr. Brunell was thanked for his information, and it was resolved to go softly to the room of Jennings, whom they found fast asleep ; his pockets were searched, and from one of them was drawn a purse containing exactly nineteen guineas, which the gentleman identified. K 129 Thurtell and Hunt. John Thurtell Jennings was dragged out of bed, and charged with the robbery. He denied it most solemnly ; but the facts having been deposed to on oath by the gentleman and Mr. Brunell, he was committed for trial. So strong did the circumstances appear against Jennings that several of his friends advised him to plead guilty, and throw himself on the mercy of the Court. This advice he rejected ; he was tried at the ensuing assizes, and the jury without going out of Court found him guilty. He was executed at Hull a short time after, but de- clared his innocence to the very last. In less than twelve months after this event occurred, Brunell, the master of Jennings, was himself taken up for a robbery com- mitted on a guest in his house, and the fact being proved on his trial, he was convicted and ordered for execution. The approach of death brought on repentance; and repentance, confession. Brunell not only acknowledged having committed many highway robberies, but also the very one for which poor Jennings suffered. The account he gave was that after robbing the gentle- man he arrived at home some time before him. That he found a man at home waiting, to whom he owed a small bill, and not having quite enough of money, he took out of the purse one guinea from the twenty which he had just possessed himself of, to make up the sum, which he paid to the man, who then went away. Soon after the gentleman came to his house, and relating the account of the robbery, and that the guineas were marked, he became thunderstruck. Having paid one of them away, and not daring to apply for it again, as the affair of the robbery and the marked guineas would soon become publicly known, detection, disgrace, and ruin appeared inevitable. Turning in his mind every way to escape, the thought of accusing and sacrificing poor Jennings at last struck him ; and thus to his other crimes he added that of the murder of an innocent man. CASES OF CONVICTION ON CIECTJMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN FBANCE. The case of M. de Pivardiere is one of the most singular instances of criminal precipitation and iniquity that the annals of French justice furnish. Madame de Chauvelin, his second wife, was accused of having had him assassinated in his castle. Two servant maids were witnesses of the murder ; his own daughter heard the cries and last words of her father: "My God! have mercy upon me!" One of the maid servants, falling dangerously ill, took the sacrament; and while she was performing the solemn act of religion, declared before God that her mistress intended to kill her master. Several other witnesses testified that they had seen linen stained with his blood ; others declared that they had heard the report of a gun, by which the assassination was supposed to have been committed. And yet, strange to relate, it turned out after all that there was no gun fired, no blood shed, nobody killed ! What remains is still more extra- ordinary : M. de la Pivardiere returned home ; he appears in person before the judges of the province, who were preparing everything to execute vengeance on his murderer. The judges are resolved not to lose their process ; they affirm to his face that he is dead ; they brand him with the accusation of imposture for saying that he is alive ; they tell him that he deserves exemplary punishment for coining a lie 130 Speech by the Prisoner Thurtell. before the tribunal of justice ; and maintain that their procedure is John Thurtell more credible than his testimony ! In a word, this criminal process continued eighteen months before the poor gentleman could obtain a declaration of the Court that he was alive ! In the year 1770 a person of the name of Monthaille, without any accuser, witness, or any probable or even suspicious circumstances, was seized by the superior tribunal of Arras and condemned to have his hand cut off, to be broken on the wheel, and to be afterwards burnt alive, for killing his mother. This sentence was executed, and his wife was on the point of being thrown into the flames as his accomplice, when she pleaded that she was enceinte, and gave the Chancellor of France, who was informed of the infernal iniquity that was perpetrating in the sacred name of justice, time to have the sentence as to her reversed. [" The pen trembles in my hand," says Voltaire, " when I relate these enormities ! We have seen, by the letters of several French lawyers, that not one year passes in which one tribunal or another does not stain the gibbet or the rack with the blood of unfortunate citizens whose innocence is afterwards ascertained when it is too late."] Gentlemen, there is one more case to which I shall call your attention. It is from the Newgate Calendar. As it is long, I shall not detain you by reading it all, but shall give you the heads of it. It is the trial of a man named Coleman, in 1748, at Kingston, for the murder of a young woman. The young woman lived for ten weeks after receiving the wounds which eventually caused her death. She stated before her death that she had been attacked by a man named Coleman. Coleman was taken up, and, a strong case of circumstances being made out against him, he was executed, protesting his innocence to the last moment. In about three years after this two persons were tried for another murder and found guilty; they then confessed that Coleman had suffered undeservedly, that he was wholly innocent of the crime. They acknowledged that it was committed by one of them, who assumed the name of Coleman in order that he (Coleman) might afterwards be charged with it. And now, gentlemen, having read these cases* to you, am I * It must be stated that none of the English cases referred to by the prisoner can in any way be traced from the Circuit Records except this fast one. Coleman's Indictment is in R.O. Ass. 35/189 ; that of the two men subsequently convicted is in R.O. Ass. 35/191. There were five wit- nesses in Coleman's case, and six against the other two Welsh and Jones. Not a single witness appeared in both cases. James Nicholls turned " approver." For a better outline of the facts, see Gentleman's Magazine, 1749 and 1751. No such persons as Bradford or Jennings appear to have been indicted or convicted at the dates assigned. I have examined the indictments and books of the Oxford and Northern Circuits with care. E. R. W. 131 Thurtell and Hunt. John Thurtell not justified in saying that unless you are thoroughly convinced that the circumstances before you are absolutely inconsistent with my innocence, I have a claim to your verdict of acquittal? Am I not justified in presuming that you may have arrived at the conclusion that all the circumstances stated might be true, and yet I be innocent? I am sure, gentlemen, you will banish from your minds any prejudice which may have been excited against me, and act upon the principle that every man is to be deemed innocent until he is proved guilty. Judge of my case, gentlemen, with mature consideration, and remember that my existence depends upon your breath. If you bring in a verdict of guilty, the law afterwards allows no mercy. If upon a due consideration of all the circumstances you shall have a doubt, the law orders, and your own consciences will teach you, to give me the benefit of it. Cut me not off in the midst of my days. I implore you, gentlemen, to give my case your utmost attention. I ask not so much for myself as for those respectable parents whose name I bear, and who must suffer in my fate. I ask it for the sake of that home which will be rendered cheerless and desolate by my death. Gentlemen, I am incap- able of any dishonourable action. Those who know me best know that I am utterly incapable of an unjust and dishonourable action, much less of the horrid crime with which I am now charged. There is not, I think, one in this Court who does not think me innocent of the charge. If there be, to him or them I say, in the language of the Apostle, " Would to God ye were altogether such as I am, save these bonds." Gentlemen, I have now done. I look with confidence to your decision. I hope your verdict this day will be such as you may ever after be able to think upon with a composed conscience, and that you will also reflect upon the solemn declaration which I now make So help me God, I am innocent ! Mr. JUSTICE PARK Joseph Hunt, it is now your time, as your counsel cannot address the jury on your behalf, to say what you think proper in your defence; but before you begin the purposes of justice require that the witnesses for the other prisoner should be heard first. Evidence for the Prisoner Thurtell. s. Wadeson SAMUEL WADESON, examined by Mr. ANDREWS I am a solicitor. In the course of my profession I became acquainted with Probert when he became a bankrupt. I was the solicitor 132 Evidence for the Prisoner Thurtell. for the creditors. There were several meetings and examina- S. tions. From what I then saw and knew of Probert I would not believe Eiin on his oath unless his testimony was supported by other and credible evidence. LANGDON HATDON, examined by Mr. PLATT I am a land L. Haydoo surveyor. I have known John Thurtell for some years. The impression on my mind, from my knowledge of him, is that he is humane, kind, and good-hearted. By Mr. JUSTICB PARK When was your last intercourse with him?- I have not ceased to know and see him. I have met him frequently. Captain JOHN M'KINLAY, examined by Mr. ANDREWS I am Captain John a captain in the Royal Navy. I am one of the captains in Greenwich Hospital. I have known John Thurtell. He served under me. He was under my command from 1812 to 1814. I was then captain of the " Bellona," He always acted with correctness as an officer. I found him correct, humane, and liberal. By Mr. JUSTICE PARK I have known nothing of him since 1814. JOSEPH WALMSLET, examined by Mr. CHITTT I have known j. John Thurtell for the last thirteen or fourteen years. During that time I always considered him a humane, well-disposed man. Evidence for the Prisoner Thurtell closed. JOSEPH HUNT My lord, I have a defence to make, but from extreme anxiety of mind I do not feel myself competent to read it. Mr. JUSTICE PARK Let the officer of the Court read it. Defence by the Prisoner Hunt. My lord, having under a positive assurance that I should be admitted a witness for the Crown made a full and true confession of all the facts within my knowledge respecting this horrible and melancholy event, and having implicitly relied on the good faith of the magistrates for the due performance of their solemn promises, made previously and subsequent to my disclosure, I forbore to make the slightest preparation for my defence; 133 Thurtell and Hunt. Joseph Hunt and, after your lordship shall be made acquainted with all the circumstances under which that confession was drawn from me, your lordship's feeling and compassionate heart will be able to appreciate, although I am unable to describe the painful emotions of surprise and disappointment by which I was over- whelmed, when, only a few days before the assizes, it was notified to me for the first time that I was to be placed in my present perilous and awful situation. Your lordship will perceive that the very circumstances which I was told would procure me forgiveness and ensure my safety has alone rendered me amenable to the laws, namely, my own disclosure and declarations; for, although the prosecutors may not offer my confession in evidence, yet, as that confession has been published in every newspaper in the kingdom, and has been circulated in many thousand pamphlets, and been the subject of universal conversation, is it probable, or even possible, that any of the gentlemen who are now sitting in judgment on my case can be ignorant that such a confession has been made? How futile, then, and unavailing would be any observations or arguments to raise a presumption of the innocence of a man who already, to a certain extent, stands self -condemned ? Feeling myself in this dilemma, I shall abstain from troubling your lordship with any detail of facts or observations upon the main question involved in the indictment, but merely assert that I was not present when the unfortunate deceased lost his life, and that I was ignorant of any premeditated plan or intention to destroy him ; I never knew of the murder until after it was committed; my crime consists solely in concealment, and my discovery could not bring the dead to life ; my error arises, not from any guilt of my own, but from my concealment of the guilt of others. I am now on my trial for having been privy to the previous design. I never was; I certainly concealed it afterwards sooner than betray the misfortune which had been confided to me. Your lordship, however, will, I am sure, tell the gentlemen of the jury that no concealment or conduct of mine after the death will make out the present charge; and I hope both your lordship and these gentlemen are too just and merciful to convict me from prejudice, and not from proof. I now, my lord, most respectfully solicit your humane attention to the following statement : On the morning of Wednesday, the 29th October, I was apprehended in London, and directly conveyed to Watford, where an investigation was going on respecting the then sup- posed murder of Mr. Weare. On my arrival I found several 134 "** V - Joseph Hunt. After a pfiicil ikftch by William Mitlr-'ady, R.A. Jose Defence by the Prisoner Hunt. magistrates assembled, and Mr. Noel, who was apparently con- Joseph Hunt ducting the prosecution, addressed me as follows : " Mr. Hunt, for God's sake, tell the magistrates whatever you know of this murder, and in all probability you will be admitted as an evidence. It is clear that Mr. Weare has been murdered, and we only want to find where the body is, and if you know, for God's sake tell us." I repeatedly denied all knowledge of the circumstance, and Mr. Noel as frequently importuned and urged me to confess. At last the magistrates said, " Mr. Hunt, you had better retire and consider the offer made to you, and recollect your perilous situation." I was then conveyed into another room, and was presently followed by Mr. Noel, who, in the presence of Ruthven and Upson, repeatedly told me that if I would tell where the body was, provided I did not actually commit the murder, I should be admitted as an evidence, and my life would be spared ; and added that the magistrates had authorised him to make a pledge to this effect. Still, however, I was firm in my denial, and continued so until Upson, the officer, tortured my feelings by the mention of my family. He said to me, " Hunt, you have a mother? " I answered, " Yes, I have." " And a wife also?" I said, "Yes." "And you love them dearly?" I answered, "Yes, very dearly." Then said he, "For their sakes do not risk suffering an ignominious death, but tell where the body is, and give your evidence immediately, or you may be too late ; for Probert or the other will disclose, and then nothing can save you." This address had a great effect upon me, and Noel perceiving it again pressed me, saying, ' ' Do not hesitate, for you have now a chance; consider the situation you are in, and avail yourself of the offer now made to you, for I am authorised by the magis- trates to say that you will be admitted as an evidence for the Crown, and not treated as the others. You will merely be confined until the trial to give your evidence and then dis- charged." On receiving this assurance I consented to become a witness, and Mr. Noel then asked me if I knew where the body was? I told him yes; that I could not describe the place by name, but I could point it out, on which Mr. Noel struck his hand on the table, and exclaimed, " That's all we want," and shaking me by the hand, said, " Hunt, I am very glad to have saved your own life." We now returned into the room where the magistrates were, and Mr. Noel told them I was ready to make a disclosure, and said, " I have made known to him, by your orders, that if he 135 Thurtell and Hunt. Joeph Hunt discovers where the body is he is to be admitted as an evidence ; but before he says anything I wish him to have that assurance in your presence that he may be satisfied from yourselves that I was authorised to make the promise." The magistrates, Mr. Clutterbuck and Mr. Mason, replied that Mr. Noel had their authority for what he had done, and then Mr. Noel said, " Now, Mr. Hunt, having heard the magistrates' decision as to your being a witness, I hope you are satisfied, and I beg you will take a seat and tell us all you know." I then detailed every- thing that occurred to my recollection, but having been appre- hended early on the preceding day, conveyed into the country, and harassed and importuned throughout the night, it could hardly be expected that I should, at four or five o'clock in the morning, in making a very long statement, recollect every circumstance; indeed, the magistrates were aware that such could not be the case, and they told me that as in the hurry and confusion of the moment I had no doubt omitted many facts that I should afterwards on reflection recollect, if such should be a case, I had only to address a letter to the magis- trates, and they would immediately attend to it. Shortly after quitting the room several particulars came to my recollection which I had not named, and I directly sent for Mr. Noel and mentioned them to him. At nine o'clock the same morning I went with the officers and pointed out the spot where the body had been deposited. I was then taken back to the magistrates to sign my statement, and previous to my being taken to prison Mr. Clutterbuck desired that I should be treated with kindness, and not put under any unnecessary restraint. I was accordingly conveyed to St. Albans, without being ironed or handcuffed, and was there treated with every possible indulgence. On being taken before the coroner I experienced very different treatment, but still I had no intimation given me that I was not to be admitted as a witness for the Crown until just before the present indictment was found. It is perfectly true that when before the coroner I was admonished to make no further confession, but the admonition was a mockery. I had already, under a solemn promise, con- fessed everything material, and the coroner himself, when he thus affected to forewarn me, well knew that he and his jury were that instant sitting in inquest on the body solely in conse- quence of my disclosures; no jury could have sat no death could have been proved no body could have been found no trial could have been had but for my instrumentality. 136 Defence by the Prisoner Hunt. I was trepanned into a confession by the plighted faith of Joseph Huat the magistracy of this county. If they break it now they will not merely make me the victim for its violation, but they will be answerable to society for every future crime against the discovery of which their conduct will be an eternal admonition. Who can confide in promises hereafter? Who can rest his life on magisterial assurances? To no human being can they ever pledge themselves more sacredly than to me; yet here I stand to-day a proof of their insincerity; nay, more than this, not only have they broken faith and violated honour, but while the Press was unceasing in the ezcitement of prejudice while the theatre and the painter were employed in poisoning the public mind while every engine was at work to diminish the chances of an impartial trial, these very men, who had thus ensnared me by perfidious declarations, closed their prison door against friends and legal advisers, and opened them only to the mandate of the King's Bench. Thus was I first ensnared, and afterwards sought to be sacrificed. Seduced into a confession, which was trumpeted through the world, and then cruelly secluded until the time arrived when I was to suffer not for my crime, but my credulity; not because I erred, but because I trusted; not be- cause I violated the law, but because I confided in the conscience of its ministers. It is in vain to say that my confession was not complete; it was as ample as could have been expected at the moment from an exhausted frame and an agitated mind. It was subsequently amended where it was at first deficient ; and no sophistry can evade the fact that through that confession alone the body was discovered. Thus, then, the main circum- stance, that on which everything turned, was disclosed at once; and it is absurd to attribute to aught but momentary confusion any minor concealment, when the great, essential, and indis- pensable development had taken place. As a proof that even the coroner himself considered my confession so ample as to ensure my pardon, and that in his mind, notwithstanding his admonition, the promise of the magistracy ought to be held inviolate, hear his own words to Mr. Nicholls, one of the witnesses examined " The conse- quence of your delay has been the escape of Hunt from justice; for he has been admitted a witness for the Crown by the magis- trates, as they were afraid the body was disposed of." Now, what did these words mean if the coroner was not fully con- vinced that I had merited and ensured my pardon? The prosecutors, my lord, may affect to say that as they 137 Thurtell and Hunt. Joseph Hunt refuse to grant me the boon promised for the disclosure, they will decline using, or taking any advantage of, the confession, and I humbly submit that such a line of conduct would be alone consistent with justice and fair dealing ; for if they retract their engagement, they ought not to place me in a worse situation than I was in a,t the first moment, when, confiding in their integrity, I unbosomed the secret. If the prosecutors act with liberality, and forbear to offer a tittle of evidence respecting the body, and, in conducting the case, consider it as still un- discovered, I can have no cause to complain of plighted faith and broken promises, because your lordship need not be re- minded that it has been laid down as a principle that no death can be considered as proved unless the body be found, and, consequently, in this case, no conviction can take place. But if witnesses are produced to prove the finding of the body, can it be said that my confession has not been taken advantage of? and will not the prosecutors be taunting me by an affectation of candour if they take credit for not giving in evidence any declaration made by me, while they avail themselves of the very essence and substance of the communication? In confirmation of the promises made to me by the magis- trates and Mr. Noel, I beg to refer to a statement which the latter gentleman has published in the newspapers, wherein he says ' ' It is now incumbent on me to state the reasons for the offer of mercy held out to Hunt," and then he thus proceeds " Notwithstanding the most diligent searches for the body, no discovery had been made of it as late as four o'clock past mid- night of Thursday morning, the 30th of October, the sixth day after the murder, and at that hour the informations and investi- gations had terminated with no clue whatever to the real person murdered." Mr. Noel next describes his invitations to me to make a disclosure, with a view to my being admitted as an approver ; his desiring me to retire to consider of his proposal ; and after I had left the room, he says he addressed the magis- trates as follows: " Gentlemen, if you do not approve of the offer of mercy held out to Hunt, say so, and I will go to him. Recollect, without the body is found, notwithstanding the strong evidence against one of the parties, we shall do nothing, and Mr. Clutterbuck and Mr. Mason both gave unqualified approba- tion to my mode of examination, and of the offer of mercy held out to Hunt." And in another part of Mr. Noel's statement he says " Not only at Watford, but at the inquest, it was the general opinion of Mr. Mason and the magistrates that the body might have 138 Defence by the Prisoner Hunt. remained concealed in Hill's Slough, the place where it was Jowh Hunt found (a distance of 3 miles from the spot where the murder was committed), until it had been decomposed, and beyond the possibility of identifying; and such was the insignificance of the slough that persons employed to drag all pits, ponds,