The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1883-10-27 00:00:00

THE ALLEGED MURDER NEAR CORK.

On Monday the charge against the men in ctutody
for the murder of James Spence, on Sunday week,
near Dripsey, was partly investigated at Coachford,
before Mr. Starkie, R.M., and two local magistrates.
The ten prisoners who are charged with the offence
were conveyed from the county gaol, in Cork, on cars,
guarded by a heavily armed escort. No demonstra-
tion t )ok place, but the large crowds of peasantry who
collected in Coachford showed the great interest th4t
was felt in the proceedings. The principal parties in
custody are John Murphy and his wife Ellen, and a
farmer named Walsh. The remaining seven prisoners
consist of five farm labourers, a stonemason and a
shoemaker.

The evidence given in the course of the Inquiry
went to show that a few days previous to the murder
the prisoner John Murphy was in Cork, and meeting
one of the sons of Spence, warned him that his father
bad better be caretul of what he was about. The
threat had reference to the letting of the grazing at
the -farm which Spence had taken from Murphy's
sister. On Sunday morning young Spence and his
brother went to look after the cattle that had been
placed on the land in dispute, and found them missing.
They met John Murphy, who stated that he had the
cattle in his stall. An altercation ensued between them,
Murphy asserting that Spence had no right to put his
catt2e on the land, and that he would drive them off, by
force if necessary. The two young Spences
auently went to Murphy's house for the cattle, and
Mrs. Murphy, the wife, struck one of theta in the face
with a stick, and accompanied the assault with a threat.
The cattle were again put on the farm, and old Spence
remained about the place during the day for the pur-
pose of taking care of them. An old woman, a servant
in the employment of Miss Murphy, deposed that at
about nightfall she heard a discussion going on in the
field between Spence and the prisener Murphy with
regard to the cattle, Murphy warning him to take
them off. Shortly afterwards a large crowd of people
gathered, and she saw the prisoners Walsh, Barrett, and
Quinlan pass by Miss Murphy's house and go in the
direction of the mob. She heard a great tumult, and
saw the cattle being driven away, The prisoner
Walsh was on a fence 4" wheeling" a stick, and when
the crowd dispersed, ete and Miss Murphy went out
and found out Spence lying insensible in the field near
where Walsh had been standing. The medical evi-
dence proved that death was the result of a terrible
wound, which smashed in the back of the head, sepa-
rating the occipital and parietal bones.
The case had not concluded at the rising of the
court.

On Tuesday the inquiry was resumed. The ten pri-
soners were present in custody. A young lad named
Murphy proved that he saw the prisoner John Murphy
collecting a crowd on the day of the murder. The men
armed themselves with sticks, and Murphy divided
the handle of a pitchfork in two, giving one part to the
prisoner Quinlan, and the other piece, upon the end of
which was a metal ring, to the prisoner Walsh. The
witness identified the latter weapon. Catherine
Murphy, the claimant of the farm in dispute, and the
sister of John Murphy, was examined. She said that
on the evening of the outrage she saw a crowd of
persons, but did not leave her house. It was dark And
when the people left she went into the field and found
Spence lying insensible. He lived only half an hour.
A young man named Murphy assisted in removing the
injured man into her house, but she had to place a
shawl over Murphy's head in order to disguise him, as
otherwise he would have been afraid to lend assistance.
The inquiry was again adjourned.

THE BURGLARY AT WIMBLETMN.
In London, on Tuesday, at the Surrey Sessions,
before Mr. W. Hardman, Thomas Webb, 41, described
as a sailor, was indicted for feloninusly breaking and
entering the dwelling house of George Tollard, at
Wimbledon, and stealing therefrom a clock, a gold
pencil ease, and various other articles, of the value of
i:4O, the property of the prosecutor. The prisoner
Ilea3td Not Gutlty. Mr, Lilley and Mr. Thompson
prosecuted on behalf of the Public Prosecutor; and
Mr. Broun appeared for the defence.

- -
According to the opening statement of Mr. Lilley,
which was supported by the evidence for the prosecu-
tion, the offence with which the prisoner was charged
was committed on May 25, when the prosecutor's house
was broken into between three and four o'clock in the
afternoon, and the stolen property was taken away by
three men in a cart. Two of the men had since been
arrested, tried, and convicted; but the prisoner es-
caped and eluded detection until Sept. 8, when he
was arrested by Inspector Chamberlain of the Criminal
Investigation Department. According to the In.
evidence, the prisoner had been under
his observation for some days before he took him
into custody. On the night in question he saw the
prisoner and a female named Kate Hamilton, who
lived with him as his wife, leave No. 1, Garden-row,
Southwark, and go up the London-road towards the
Elephant and Castle. The Inspector followed and
stopped them, and told them he should detain them
on a charge of breaking into the prosecutor's dwelling-
house at Wimbledon on the 25th May last. Prisoner
looked at the officer in the face for a moment, but
said nothing until they had walked about 200 yards.
He then said, "Is there anything else you have against
me?" To which the Inspector replied, "Not at pre-
sent." Pr goner then added, "You can bring 500
cases against me if you like." Inspector Chamberlain
then said to him, "No doubt you will be further
charged with shooting Police-constable Cole at Dalston
in December last; also with shooting Police-constable
Boans at Cox-hill, Wimbledon, in August last," to
which the prisoner made no reply. On being taken to
the station, he was asked to give his address. He
replied, "Let the same person give you the address
who has given you the information about- me."
On the female being asked for her address, she said,
"Find out." Upon that the Inspector said, "I know
where you live. I saw you leave No. 1, Garden.
row, where you have lived, under the name of
Williams, in the second floor back," to which the
prisoner said, "That's a lie; you don't kncw me." On
being searched a key was found in his possession, with
which the Inspector opened the prisoner's room in
Garden-row. There he found an enormous number of
house-breaking implements, which were produced in
court. Amongst these were 83 skeleton keys, four
jemmies, one pair of pliers, one chisel, one candle, one
match box, four knives, four boxes of silent matches,
four ropes, two files, and a six-barrelled revolver loaded
in each chamber; also a large quantity of jewellery
and other property, believed to have been the proceeds
of various burglaries, and a number of pawntickets
relating to goods pledged by the prisoner.

A number of witnesses were called, who identified
the prisoner as one of the party of three who had
broken into the prosecutor's premises. The prisoner
remained with the pony and cart while the other
men effected an entrance into the building and brought
away the property. As they were leaving the house,
which they ransacked from top to bottom, breaking
open all the drawers and boxes, they were observed by
some of the passers•by, pursued, and captured with some
of the stolen property in their poagession. An attempt
was also made to detain the prisoner, but he drove away
in the pony cart. The prisoner's associates were
afterwards brought to trial at the Surrey sessions,
and were sentenced, one to 12 manths' hard labour,
and the other to ten years' penal servitude. It was
further proved that on the same day that the robbery
was committed the prisoner arrived at his lodgings
in Garden•row with a pony and trap, and that he
drove away shortly afterwards with the woman.

The Jury found the prisoner guilty.

Previous convictions having been proved, Mr.
Hardman sentenced him to twenty years' penal ser-
vitude.