The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1876-09-02 00:00:00

At this point the inquiry was adjourned.

The further hearing ot the charge against Paul
Bayart, the young French student, accused by another
young man, named Arthur William Dickens, of
hav:'.ng solicited him to murder the defendant's parent's
at Roubaix. in France. was resumed on Friday morn-
ing at the. Town-hall, Hertford, before the Mayor (Nir.
W. P. Wilson), Dr. Cocks, and Messrs, E. Simpson,
Cocks, Rayment, Adams, And Ludlow, There WAS aI
crowded court. ,

Oc this occasion Mr. Montague Williams, barrister, sp•
peered on behalf of the prosecution, and asked leave to open
the facts he was prepared to put forward in continuation of
the evidence.

Mr. Armstrorg, for the defindant, objected to any such
course as altogether irregular in the middle of a case.
The Bench, as advised by the Town Clerk, allowed the
objection, and the cross. examination of the prosecutor,
Arthur William Dickens, was proceeded with. In reply to •
Mr. Armstrong, witness stated that he had never seen the
defendant write while at Father Stanfield's. Robed not re-
ceived any letter from the defendant beyond the one he had
produced. He had only seen him write on She occasion
spokee to in All Sainte' cturchyard. He had frequently seen
Achille Bayart write and had once received a tette:. from
him. He did not remember having written to Achille. Wit-
ness could draw a little, but only badly. He had shown
Achille a copy he had made of Miss Thompsen's picture,:
" Tents pegging ;" also some illuminated writing that he,
had done. Ho had never shown him his signature that he
could remember. The letter produced was written by
witness on the 21st. It was addressed to Paul ,
Beyart. It was as follows :—" Dear Paul,—l am at the.
castle. I wish to see you or Achille. It I do not, II
shall be obliged to ute some papers I have in my possession
and send the copies to Roubaix by next post. The police
only want my word to arrest you." Witness's object in send.,
ing this was to let the defendant know exactly what he was
doing. On the 21st he wrote another letter to M. Bayed.
see. at Roubaix. The letter produced was in his hand.!
writing. [Letter read.] :—"Sir,—l hold adt aught in your;
son's name for £5(O. it you will pay this, well and good. It
not, I shall be under the painful necessity of haying your soni
Paul arrested for conspiracy to murder, the proofs of which
are in my solicitor's hands." His object in writing that letter;
was to open up a communication with M. Bayart in order to
expose his son, ses he believed at that time, from the slowneu.
wish which the affair was proceeding in the hands of the
police, nothing would be done in it; and as he was deter-
mined to expose the defendant and warn his invents, he
wished to open a source of communication with them. At
that time be thought the best way to do that was by
asking M. Bayart to octet him 1600. The letter was cer-
lainly a sort of threat, but an empty one, and an hour
after he had sent it he determined to counteract it.
This he did by a telegram sent on the following morning.
He had spoken to Mr. Moran about the letter. He told
him the whole contents of the letter, and he said he had done
a very foolish thing and brought him round to his way of
thinking. He did not know then that demanding money by;
threats was a breach of the law, neither did Mr. Moran. Ele
simply raid it was an unadvised step. He sent the telegram'
the next morning at half past ten o'clock. He said in it,
"Letter useless," or "Take no noeice of letter "—be was not
sire which—" Affair in hands of police.", He wrote to Mr.
Bolton, his solicitor, acquainting him with all the circum-
stances. Besides Mr. Moran he stated the fade of the case
to four other people before speaking to Superintendent
Jarrett. Mr. Cobham was one, Mrs. Moran another. Mr.
Cobham said the defendant was a bigger villain than he had
taken him for, and he gave witness all sorts of credit for the
course he had taken. Neither Mr. Moran nor Mr. Cobham'
suggested that witness snould communicate with the de
fondant's father. He was not aware that there had been a
fend between Mr. Cobham and Mr. Moran and the defendant;
there was, however, a bitter feud between witness, Mr.
Moran, and Mr. Cobham against Father Stanfield.
Was not Mr. Stanfield your confessor t—l went to cotfes-
don V) him once. (Leueliter,) I have made the remark that
there was a cloud hanging over Father Stanfield that he
little knew of.
In re-examinaVon by Mr. Williams, witness stated that he
had never tried to write any other hand than his own. He
saw tho defendant sign the bill produced. At the time the
t• er was written to M Bayart, man, all the proofs were in
the hands of the police. The 'slur persons he had stated the
facts to before seeing the Superintendent of police were Mr.
Okeiman, Mr. Fortshaw, Mr. Attenborongh, and Mr. Found
tamn
The next witness was Mr. William Harvey, landlord of the
Vine Hotel. He send he knew both Dickens and the de.
fondant, but did not know the latter as well as he did the
„former. On the 14th inst. he saw Dickens and the defendant
in his billiard-room. Ile did not hear any confersation
between them, but saw a piece of paper something similar
in shape to the bill produced, lying on the table. Be saw the
defendant sitting down writing and directly afterwards he
saw him hand some money to Dickens. On the Tuesday fol.
lowing the defendant came to witness and asked whether a
note had been delivered to Mr. Dickens. Witness said "Yes.
Mr. Moran and Mr. Cobham called when I was out, and have
taken the note to air. Dickens." The defendant either said
"Very good" or "I'm very pleased," and went away. He had
a green book nnder his arm. On the eth witness received a note
from Mr. Dickens and a frock-cost and an opera-glass. The
note sail, "Mr.,. Harvey, will you try and get 801 for the
frock coat and £1 for the opera-glass?" Witness sent his
coat and the opera-glass to Mr. Barnard by his own swank
but both were brought back and witness still had them. He
cffered the defendant lie. fsr the opera-glass, and defendant
sale, "Give it to Mr. Dickens; it's his." He gave the money
to Mr. Dickens in the defendant's presence. He offered the
mousy to defendant in consequence of what Mr. Dickens had
previously said. The witness still retained the coat.
Cross-examined: Mr. Dickens had been in the habit of ire-
quentieg witness's house. He was a very good billiard
player. The defendant never played billiards at the Vine.
The witness was not out of the billiard-room five minutes
to -retch some beer ordered by the defendant on the coca-
lion when he saw the paper on the table. It was something
like foolscap paper. Witness had lent Mr. Dickens is. or
• 10s. at a time previous to this, and was not surprised at his
wanting to borrow lbs.
Mrs Harvey, the wife of the last witness, was next called.
She stated that on the 14th inst., about four o'clock in the
afternoon, a meerschaum pipe was left at her house by a boy,
who Field he had brought it from Mr. Dickens. About five
o'cock the same day the defendant called and asked if any-
thing had been left for him from Mr. Dickens. She replied,
"Yes, Sir, a pipe," and she gave it to him. He asked if her
husband was in and she sail "No." He said ho had a latter
for Mr. Dickens, and if she was not staying In he wished her
to tell her husband as he wonted him to get it, for it was im-
portant. The letter was fetched, about half-past five or six
'clock the same evening, by Mr. Moran and Mr. Cobham.
The following day the defendant called and inquired whether
the letter he had left had been delivered to Mr. Dickens.
Mr. Harvey was there their, and hi her presence replied
"Yea." and the delenupilt replied "Very good. Good day,"
end there left. The letter was addressed to "A. W. Dickens,
Esq."
Mr, Hawkins, a clerk in the London and County rank at
Hertford, stated that he had cashed a check signed by
Francis Stanfiaid and dated Augteit 14, 11116. The check
was preseuted and endorsed by the defendant and paid in
gold. (S conversation followed on a comparison of the
etioetu,o with that on the £5OO bill. There was a strong
reiemblance.)
Mr. Matthew Moran, dentist, of Hertford, was next exa-
mined. He stated that Mr. Dickens had been living at his
house since he left Father Stanfield's. He had, in company
with Mr. Cobham, fetched a letter from the Vine Hotel.
It was addressed to Mr. Dickens, and was opened by Mr.
Dickens in the presence of witness and Mr. Cobham. (It
was produced and was the letter already referred to)
In cross-examination, witness said Mr. Dickens had pro..
tented him with cigars and his wife with a pair of earrge
and a dress. Witness had kept ktin without charge and

..:tlv