The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1880-11-13 00:00:00

THE MURDER AT ST. ALBAN'S.

On Friday in last week, at the assizes held at Chelms-
ford, before Sir Henry Hawkins, Thomas Wheeler,
described as a labourer, 46 years of age, was indicted
for the wilful murder of Edward Anstie at Saundridge,
near St. Albans, on the 22nd of August last. He
was also indicted for a burglary in the house of one
George Woollatt, at St. Peter's, St. Alban's, and
stealing therefrom a meat saw and other articles ; and
also with a burglary in the house of one William
Woollatt, and stealing therefrom a hammer and other
articles. But the charge of murder was first tried.

Mr. Talfourd Salter, Q.C., Mr. Snaggs, and Mr.
Fulton were for the prosecution; Mr. Woollett and
Mr. Grubbe were assigned by the learned Judge as
counsel for the prisoner.
The following is an outline of the case :
On the night of Saturday, the 21st of August, Mr.
Anstie, the tenant of Marshall's Wick Farm, very
near to St. Albans, an elderly man, retired to rest
at an early hour—about half -past nine. He slept on
the second floor in a back bedroom, the window
of which opened towards the rick-yards and sheds at the
back of the house. The only other inmates of the house
(Mrs. Anstie being away) were a Mrs. Lindsay, an old friend
of the family, and a servant maid named Coleman. In the
course of the night—it must have been very early in the
morning of Sunday—the women were awakened by the re-
port of a gun, and almost immediately afterwards they
heard footsteps from Mr. Anstie's room, going down
stairs to the front door and then coming upstairs
again and going into Mr. Anstie's room, which was
unoccupied, and in which the plate was kept. There the
person remained some ten minutes, and they heard the
sound of knocking, and then the person, who turned out to
be a man went into Mrs. Lindsay's room and asked for
money. She said she had none. He went away for a light.
She jumped out of bed and locked the door, and when he
returned and repeated his demand she put a florin under
the door for him, which turned out to be one of the links
in the eaain of evidence. He then went dowigtairs and did
not come up again, and about a quarter of an hour after-
wards he went away, carrying several bundles in his arms.
It was one of the many remarkable circumstances in the
case that, though there was a fierce house dog on the
premises; he appeared to have given no alarm. The women
waited in fear and trembling until half•past four in the morn-
ing, when the cowman (named Bailey) came, and then, he
being told what had occurred and that Mr. Anstie had not
been heard, he went into his room and found the unfor-
tunate man crouching down under the window, which was
open, covered over with some bedclothes, on removing which
a spectacle was presented which, he said, quite shocked
him—indeed, at first he could not recognize his master, the
upper part of his skull being quite blown away. The
position of the body, the open window, near which was a
ladder, and the dreadful traces on the window sill and wall
outside showed that the poor, man, alarmed by some noise,
had opened the window and was looking out, when a gun
was fired a few feet from his head, which was thus blown
to pieces. His head, the surgeon said, must have beenturned
on one side, towards where the dog was, probably listening;
and the gun could not, he thought, have been less than
31 t. off, or more than 10ft. The house was found to have been
ransacked and several of the rooms rummaged, and many
articles of value were missing. The women were of opinion
that only one man had been in the house. In the passage
leading to the front door a big hammer was found, and
this was another of the links of evidence in the case. A
ladder was found against the back wall of the house.
On Monday a double-barrelled gun was found in a wood
150 yards from the house, the right hammer being down
and the left at half cock. The left barrel appeared to have
been lately discharged. In the course of the morning the
superintendent of police went to the house of Henry Wheeler,
he prisoner's brother, and there found certain articles which
were said to have been stolen from another farmer named
Reynolds, and it was found that the prisoner had between
two and three in the morning brought certain other articles
there, which his sister-in-law said she had refused to re-
ceive, and made him take away. In the course of the day
bundles containing the things stolen at Mr. Anstie's were
found in a field. In the evening a police-constable went to
a public-honse, where he found the prisoner with other men,
and he heard him say to one of them, "Do you know
whether the things are found that were stolen from Anstie's
farm this morning?" The man answered that he believed
they were'found in a field, and then it was said the pri-
soner "changed colour." The policeman then charged the
prisoner with the burglary at Mr. Reynolds, which he
denied. Be was then charged with the burglary
.at the
house of Mr. Woollatt, which he also denied. He was then
charged with the burglary and murder at Mr. Anstie's that
morning, and he said he had just come out of St. Thomas's
Hospital, and, as the policeman said, "shammed lameness,"
and said he could not walk.

Mr. Talfourd Salter having opened,the case for the
prosecution,

The first witness was Mrs. Lindsay, the lady who was
sleeping in the house, and into whose bedroom the burglar
came. She described him as "a man with dark hair and
dark dress, and a hat tightly on his head," and also stated
what passed between them. He first looked into her
room and said, "Mr. Anstie is gone out to a cow." Then
he went downstairs and came up again with a light and
spoke to her. . He said he was cold and would get into bed.
She called Mr. Anstie. He said, "He is gone out." She
called the servant. He then went out with the light and
she fastened the door. He then came back and asked for
money, threatening her, and then she gave him the florin
under the door. When asked whether she could recognize the
man, she sail td the best of her belief it was the prisoner,
He went downstairs again, she said, after he had the florin,
and he came back again and asked for beer, and she told
him he would find it in the cellar, and again he went down.
Sonic time afterwards, looking from her bedroom window,
she saw him go down the garden with two bundles, one
under each arm. In ten minutes he came back and went
away with two more bundles. The witness stated that a
few days after the murder she went to the Town-hall to give
a description of the man; and she was taken into a room,
where there were eight men. She was ten minutes in the
room, and when she came out she made a statement to the
police; and she had seen in the room the man who was at her
bedside on the fatal night, and she now saw at the bar the
same man. While she was in the room she saw the man
who was at her bedside, and that man was the prisoner
at the bar. No one had told her before she went in that
any one charged or suspected was there. Moreover she had
heard the prisoner's voice, and it was very much like the
voice of the man at her bedside. His general appearance
also was that of the man.

In cross-examination, she was asked If she had not said
she could not swear to the man, and she said no; she had
always said that to the best of her belief it was the
man. She was asked, she said, to go into the room to see
if she could recognise anybody. Asked why she did not
point out the man to the police, she said she did tell the
police it was the man. When the man first came into the
room he had a lamp in his hand, the light of which shone
on-his face, and she could see it plainly. There was a dog
on the premises accustomed to bark at strangers, but that
night he did not bark, and in the morning he seemed rather
dull. She had not noticed a strange man about the pre-
mises before that night. In re-examination, she repeated
that she saw the man's face quite clearly, and it was the
prisoner's.
In answer to the Judge, she said Mr. Anstie was a hale,
strong, hearty man.
The servant girl was called, and said she heard the man
ask for money and for beer, and so she had heard the man's
voice, and she had also heard the prisoner's voice, and is was
exactly like the voice she heard that night. Downstairs, she
saw the hammer. When she looked out she saw the dog in
his kennel, and he did not bark.
In cross-examination she said that she heard two reports
of a gun.
In re-examination she said that next morning the dog
kept in his kennel, lying very quiet and still, and he ap-
peared in that state the whole of the day. She had heard
the syringe spoken of, though she had not seen it herself.
•
She ,mentioned the other. articles missing.
In answer to the learned Judge, she re peated that she
heard two reports of a gun, .h.pon which the Judge referred
to the original depositions, from which it appeared that she
only said before the magistrate "I heard a report of a gun.
The Judge asked her Are you sure there were two re-
ports? "to which she replied, "It sounded like two." The
Judge, reading from her depositions, arbed her whether
what she had said was not "that it sounded like two
reports," to which she replied that it was, and in answer
to a further question, she said the sound woke her from
sleep.
The cowman who came early in the morning, proved that
a ladder belonging to the premises was against the wall by
the window of Mr. Anstie 's bedroom, and that any one by
the ladder could get into the bedroom and so into the in-
terior of the house. He stated that the dog was ordinarily
"very sharp."
The learned Judge observed that this matter of the dog
was not material; some one, it was clear, had robbed the
house and murdered Mr. Anstie. Whether he did it by
drugging the dog or otherwise disposing of him did not
matter.

The witness then proved the finding of the hammer down-
stairs, which was produced, and was a very heavy and for-
midable weapon He had never, he said, seen it before.

The surgeon, who stated that he extracted 37 Nos. 5 and
6 shot from the head of the deceased, said that he should
think the gun was held between three and 12 feet from the
head when it was fired, and the prisoner, when arrested,
had on his shoulder a bruise which might have been caused
by the "kick" of a gun. He had had such bruises himself
many a time. The No. 5 shot was a common size
A policeman who was at the house at half-past five on
the fatal morning proved that he foundt on the bed in Mr.
Anstie's room four shots and on the floor eight shots, and
outside the window he picked up five more—all of which he
produced.
In cross-examination the policeman stated that he had
found, at a spot adjoining Barnard's-heath, a pair of trousers
stained with blood, and also a bag. He found them on the
30th of August' he had said nothing to the magistrates
about them, but had them here, though he had not been
asked about them to-day. It wet well known that he had

found them. The trousers had been shown to Dr. Tidy, the
analyst. He had heard there was a witness who said the
prisoner wore the trousers the day before the murder. In
re-examination he stated that he found them on his beat,
and could not say whether they were there since the 22nd.
They were hidden; they were wet, and there had been rain.
They might have been there since the Sunday—the day of
the murder. He had reported the discovery in the usual
way, and made inquiries about the matter. The trousers
were found in field, over a hedge, among some nettles.
The Inspector proved that in the pocket of the prisoner's
jacket he found several shots, and in his waistcoat three
(produced) similar to those extracted by the surgeon—that
is "No. 6."

The next witness was Mr. Anstie's widow, who was not in
the house at the time, but was called to prove her husband's
possession of the syringe. She remembered, she said, his
being afflicted with deafness some years ago, and.getting the
syringe spoken of. It was kept in her cupboard in the
dining-room. After the murder the syringe was gone. At
first she did not notice its absence, but a friend reminded
her of it, and on looking for it she found it gone. The
syringe found upon the prisoner being produced, she said,
"To the best of my belief, that is the syringe." She had seen
it a few weeks before she went on her visit.

- - - -
Being cross-examined as to it identity, she adhered to
her belief and said she knew it.

The prisoner here desired, through his counsel, to have
the syringe to examine and point out something to them,
and it was accordingly handed to his counsel.

A friend of the deceased was thencalled, who had seen the
syringe at his farm, and seen it hanging up in the cupboard,
and had seen it used by the deceasad in the presen,•
wife. He had been intimate with the family for 20 years,
and had frequently been to the cupboard and seen the
syringe there. Being shown the syringe found on the pri-
soner, he looked at it carefully and said, "That is the
syringe, to the best of my belief. I have no doubt whatexer
about it. I have seen it so often that when it was produced
I was sure it was the same." Examining the piece of tow
or hemp wrapped round the piston, he said he put it there
himself in addition to the cotton ordinarily round it. (The
syringe was shown to the jury, who said there certainly were
some hemp and some cotton round it.) He said lie had put
a piece of hemp or some stuff round it to make it tighter
than it was. . . .

In cross-examination' he said that before the search for
the syringe he had not heard that one was found on the
prisoner, but he believed Mrs. Anstie had heard of it, and
in consequence of that there was a search for the syringe.
For some years it had not been used. It was quite familiar
to him, he had seen it so often. He had seen it a few months
previous to August. He saw it whenever he went to the
cupboard.
In re-examination hvointed out something particular in
it. There was cotton on it, and he put some hemp over it,
and unwinding the hemp he found the cotton.
The friend of Mrs. Anstie, a Mrs. Mackay, who had re-
minded her of the syringe, was called to confirm the evi-
dence on this part of the case, and gave confirmatory evi-
dence as to it.
The trial was then adjourned until Saturday.

The trial was resumed on -Saturday. and the proof
of the case for the prosecution was continued.

A policeman proved finding a double-barrelled gun at a
spot 150 yards from the house of Mr. Anstie, going towards
Barnard's-heath.

A shepherd proved picking up a waistcoat 500 yards
further on, and Mr. Anstie's servant proved it to be his.
Another witness proved finding the parcel of plate hidden
in a wheat-shock in a field at a spot further on towards
Barnard's-heath. A coat and trousers and other articles
which had been taken from the house were found at dif-
ferent spots in the same course.

The servant-maid having said she had not seen the syringe
which was hanging up in the cupboard—as Mrs. Anstie
and her two friends had sworn—she was re-called and re-
examined about it, and said she had not noticed a china
mug, which certainly hung there on the same peg; and the
only other metal article in the cupboard, a plated toast-
rack, was taken. She had never notiied the mug, she said,
the inference suggested being that as she had not noticed
the mug, which certainly was there, her not noticing the
syringe did not at all weaken the evidence of the three wit-
nesses who had sworn that the syringe was there. _ .

It was Proposed, as great stress Was laid on this incident
of the syringe to call another witness to throw light upon
it, and
The learned Judge said that anything that could throw
light on it was important.
A policeman was called, who stated that when he searched
the house in the morning the mug was in the cupboard,
standing on a shelf; so that if it had been hanging, as was
said, on a peg, it must have been moved off the peg, and the
three witnesses had said the syringe hung behind the mug
on the same peg.

Mrs. Lindsay, the elderly lady wha was sleeping in the
house, was re,called, and stated that she had seen the fling
on the Saturday evening hanging up on the peg in the cup-
board. The mug—a china mug—being produced, she identi-
fied it, and proved that it had not been stolen. In cross-
examination she said she had not noticed the syringe.

Several witnesses then gave evidence showing that
the prisoner was in the neighbourhood of Mr. Anstie's
house on August 21st and 22nd.

William North, who lives at St. Albans, and had known
the prisoner for 14 or 15 years, stated that he knew him
when he was working at Smith's farm, now Reynolds's. On
Sunday, the 22nd of August, the prisoner came to his house
at half-past three in the afternoon and spoke to him, and,
asked him in to sit down, and he did so, and said he came
along the Luton-road, and witness's wife asked him if he had
heard of the murder of poor Mr. Anstie, and he said "Yes,"
he had heard of it coming along the road. " Poor fellow,"
he said, "a shocking job." He asked witness to lend him
his razor to shave, and he did so, observing that he had a
wonderful beard on his face. It looked like a week's
growth. Wheeler also had hair on his upper lip, perhaps a
week's growth, and he shaved his upper lip as well as his
beard. Ile also went into witness's yard, where there was
water and a handbowl and a towel, and though he did not
see him wash, he saw lihn, he thought, wiping himself.
Afterwards Wheeler said, "Let us have a pot of beer,"
and gave him a form—a two shilling piece—to pay for it.
lie took it out of his pocket, and witness did not see that
he had any other money. Wheeler asked witness to go for
the beer, and gave him the two-shilling piece to pay for it,
and witness gave him the change. He saw a little blood on
Wheeler's face, and Wheeler said he had been picking a
sore. Witness said he had heard of the murder of Mr.
Anstie; he did-not say anything to Wheeler about it. He
had been told of it while Wheeler was in the yard, and
went into the yard and said to Wheeler, "Tom, you ain't
in this, are you? "and he said "God bless you, I'm as inno-
cent of it as a child." The man who had told him of the
murder (one Hitchcock) had not told him they were after
Thomas Wheeler. This was after Wheeler had shaved.
He shaved in the back room • he was shaving when the man
came in (Hitchcock) who told them of the murder. Wheeler
had shaved when he was in the yard. Before he went
they had some more beer. Wheeler went away before it
was all drunk. He left about half-past six. (He was ar-
rested about seven.)
In cross-examination, he said Wheeler had no moustache.
The learned Judge.: He said that Wheeler had hair on
the upper lip- about a week's growth—and that he shaved
it.
It was while Wheeler was shaving, he thought, that
Hitchcock came in and told of the murder. At all events,
he was in the room, and he went out into the yard after
Hitchcock came in. He said he was innocent, but he would
go and give himself up ; and witness's wife said to
'Wheeler, "If 1 was innocent I would not give niyiplf up.
I'd go to the 'Pine Apple,' and there you will hear more
about it," and he went there ; and there he was taken.
They were then looking after him at the "Pine Apple."
Hitchcock said so.
In answer to the learned Judge, the witness stated that
Wheeler said he had a bad foot; his shoe, he said, had
hurt it in walking. He seemed to limp a little—not much.
Being asked, with reference to his depositions, whether he
had not said "he did not complain of being lame, neither
did he appear so," witness hesitated a good deal, and
said he "could not recollect ;he could not say." Since
Wheeler was in prison, he had heard that he had said he
was lame.
The landlady of the publichnuse at St. Albans, where the
last witness got the beer, proved that a two-shilling piece
was given to her in payment, giving as change a sixpence, a
shilling, and fourpence. She had placed it in her tlll with
other money.
The learned Judge: I take it for granted that you cannot
identify it?
Witness: No, my Lord.
The learned Judge : You are sure it was a florin?
Witness: I am, my Lord.
A police-constable named Butterfield, who arrested the
prisoner at the" Pine Apple" en the evening of the Sunday,
the 22nd of August—the day of the murder— described
what occurred on the occasion. He found, he said, the
prisoner there with other men, and heard him ask the man
next to him (one Whitehead) whether he knew if the things
had been found which had been stolen from Mr. Anstie's
that morning? Whitehead said, " Yes, they were
found in a field, in a ' shock ' of wheat "—a field near Mr.
Anstie's farm. Witness went across the room, and asked
the prisoner if his name was Thomas Wheeler, and he said
it was. Witness then said, "You are the man lam looking
for." Wheeler said, " What.for ? " Witness said he should
take him into custody for the burglary at Reynolds's farm.
Wheeler said, "I don't know anything about it." Witness
told him ha must go with him. He put his hands down
and said, "I'm done." . Witness then handcuffed him and
took him into custody, and then he further charged him
with the burglary at Mr. Woollatt's farm, He said, "I '
know nothing about it." Witness then charged hill with
the murder of Mr. Anstie and the burglary at his house
that morning. The prisoner said, "I've just come out of
St. Thomas's Hospital." As he was going along in the
street he shammed lame; he had not walked lame at first,
but then he did. Witness told him if he did not walk Re
would carry him. Prisoner then held up his hands (which
were handcuffed) and rattled the handcuffs, and hooted at
the crowd. In cross-examination, witness said the prisoner
said, "I'm done" after being told he was charged with the
burglary at Reynolds's. He did not now remember the
prisoner saying, "I've done no work; I've got no money"
(words in the witness's depositions).
Mr. Ryder, Deputy Chief Constable of Hertfordshire,
stated that between six and seven on Sunday, the 22nd of
August, he saw the prisoner in custody at St. Albans, and
had his clothes taken off—a pair of cord trousers, a corded
jacket, a dark waistcoat, a billycock hat, a shirt, and scarf.
Next day he searched the jacket and waistcoat, and found
in the jacket and waistcoat pockets ten shots (produced) ;
and they were shot of Nos. sor 6. On the cord trousers, on
the right knee, he found fresh blood, and he had taken the
clothes to Professor Tidy to be tested. On the prisoner
he found only 6d., a threepenny piece, and a penny. He
alsq found the syringe which had been spoken to by the two
witnesses as in their belief Mr. Anstie's. The prisoner, being
charged with the murder, said, "I am innocent." Witness
said to him," Where were you on Saturday night?" He
said, "I went on the St. Alban's-road to Harpenden-
common. I Sat down on the common, and walked about
all night. I had not been in my bed during the week. I
came from. my house at Lewisham, in Kent, on Monday,
the 16th, to Hatfield and Wheathampstead. On Friday,
the 20th, I sat under the hedge at No Man's Land all night,"
(" No Man's Land "is close to St. Alban's.) He also said,
after hearing witness had observed the blood, that he had
killed a pig for a woman on the 17th, and that on another
day he had cut his finger, but witness saw no cut on his
finger. He also said he had bought a gun and shot sole
three months before, but that the gun had been taken ffom
him by a policeman at Clapham when arresting him for
horse-stealing.
In cross-examination, the witness said he saw the marks
of blood on the evening of Sunday, and more clearly next
day, when he also found the shots. He had sent to make
inquiries at Lewisham, and found prisoner had a wife and
children there. He had also made inquiries as to the killing
of the pig.
The learned Judge observed that this would not prove the
fact.

Witness said he found blood on the trousers and also on
the waistcoat, jacket, and sleeve of the shirt, and on the
clothes he had sent to Dr. Tidy.

In re-examination, witness said that the prisoner, when
he saw him find the shot in his pockets, made the statement
as to his having bought a gun and some shot.
The landlord of the "Rule and Compass" at St. Albans,
and who has known the prisoner some years, stated that a
twelvemonth ago the prisoner came into his house, called
for a pint of beer, and sat down, and while drinking it,
some reference:being made to Mr: Anstie, he said he hated
him. Witness said, "You should not say so, as it might get
you into trouble some day or other." Re said, "I don't cat's;
I will do for him some day or other."

In cross-examination he said other persons were in the
room, and among them his wife, who was not here as a
witness. Ha.did not think much of the words at the time.
He made this statement to the police two or three weeks
after the prisoner was arrested. He did not know whether
It was necessary to do so. He did not attend the inquest or
the magistrates inquiry.
A man named Pearce, who lives at St. Albans, and has
known the prisoner nearly twenty years, and had worked
with him at Smith's farm (next to Anstie's), said that last
November he had met the prisoner in St. Albans, who said
he was tired, and witness had then invited him to his house,
and they had a little conversation together about old times,
and he said he "would do for -- old Anstie."

In cross-examination, the witness said he had given infor-
mative ulx.-2t the conversation to the police the day that
Wheeler was arrested, thcugh. aot tammoued as a
witness until three weeks afterwards.

Professor Tidy stated that on the 2.lrd August he received
the prisoner's clothes—trousers, scarf, jacket, waistcoat,
shirt, and boots. On the trousers he found, on the right
knee, a large and very light stain, which he found after-
Tfard/5 to be blood. It appeared to have been washed, and

he was of opinion that it had been washed in cold water.
The trousers were distinctly damp, and especially on the
part where he found the stain. The stain was equally dif-
fused, and had no defined edge or bound, and it was equally
on the under side as on the outside. When blood was
spilt on a thick substance the mark was defined, and did
not go through. He was, therefore, of opinion that the
stain was washed, and in cold water, because blood was not
soluble in hot water, but was in cold, It was, therefore,
difficult to fix the age of the stain. From the scarf he re-
moved two spots, each about the size of a threepenny-
piece, and these were certainly recent spots. He found
none on the waistcoat or jacket, but he found a considerable
amount of blood on the wristband of the left sleeve, and
that was very recent.

The learned Judge: Within what time would you say?
Dr. Tidy: I would say up to eighteen or twenty days.

Being asked whether he could say positively if it was
within two or three days or twenty, he said he could not.
He had an opinion, though not positive, but certainly the
recent stains might have been within two or three days, and
he should say, in his opinion, they were certainly not a
week old. The stains on the old tweed trousers found in
the field were elder. He could not say if it was human
blood. In -cross-examination, he said one of the stains he
spoke of as recent might have been on the 22nd of August ;
the other he thought not. As to the stain washed out, he
analyzed it, and beyond question it was blood.

In re-examination, being shown the syringe apd the hemp
round the piston, and being asked whether it might have
been on it for 20 years, he said, decidedly, for 200 years, for
hemp was practically indestructible by air. Cotton was not
anything like so enduring; it soon became oxydized, and so
destroyed. (The piston has a piece of hemp round it, spoken
to by Mr. Anstie's friend as put on it 20 years ago.)

The surgeon, being recalled, stated that it seemed to him
that the body of Mr. Anstie had been put in the potion
in which he was found, with his back to the wall His head
must have been well out of the window when he was shot,
as blood had fallen right ouc on to the ground. The shot
had gone right through the head, and some had come out
on the other side, so that the gun must have been flied
point-blank, not at an angle. Death must have been in-
stantaneous, and his knees would give way under him;
there could have been no muscular action, and he would
sink down. His opinion, however, rather was that the body
was raised up and put into the position in which it was, with
its back to the wall under the window.
in answer to the jury, he stated that he did not think that
Mr. Anstie carried the bedclothes with him to the window
as a covering, but that they had been put over his body after
his death. That was quite clear, because they were thrown
over his head and shoulders and covered the upper part of
the body. His opinion was that Mr. Anstie was shot with
his head well out of the window and then sank down inside
the room, anpi that it was probable that his body was then
put up against the wall, but certainly the clothes had been
thrown over his body.
The landlady of the publichouse at "No Man's Land,"
near St. Albans, proved that on the 20th, the Friday, the
prisoner came to her house and asked for a drink of water,
and then went towards Harpenden-common. He was
dressed in a pair of dark tweed trousers like those found on
the heath and produced.

A man named Vass, who had known the prisoner for years,
stated that he saw him two days after the burglary at Mr.
Woollatt's, and he had on the dark tweed pair of trousers
found in the field and now produced.
A man named Welsh, who lives at NVheathampstead, and
had known the prisoner for twenty years, said that on the
17th of August he was in his company at the "Red Lion"
there, and that he said he had been to work, but he thought
that he could get his living without hard work. He had a
pair of tweed trousers on, and he believed these to be the
trousers. He had described them to the police before they
were found.
Evidence was then gone into as to the burglary at Mr.
Reynolds's and the robbery of the hammers, one of which
was found in Mr. Anstie's house and the other at Mr.
Reynolds's. Mr. Reynolds, who is now the occupier of the
farm at Barnard's-heath (next to Mr. Anstie's), previously
occupied by Mr. Smith, in whose service the prisoner was
many years ago, was called, and stated that on the night
of he oth of June there was a burglary at hiehouse, and
a rifle and some articles of plate were stolen. The rifle
was produced and identified. A heavy hammer (produced—
a blacksmith's hammer, like the one found at Mr. Anstie's)
was found in the morning outside his house. It was found
by his governess, who also was called as a witness, and
proved that on the morning after the burglary she found the
hammer outside the school-room window. It was by that
window the burglar entered.
Superintendent Pike, of St. Alban's police, stated that on
the 22nd of August he went to the house of Henry Wheeler,
the brother of the prisoner, and there got the rifle and other
things produced and identified by Mr. Reynolds. The rifle
he found at the bottom of a clothes-box of George Wheeler,
son of Henry Wheeler, and the other things were brought
out by Henry Wheeler's wife.

The wife of Henry IVheeler was called as a witness, and
stated that he lived near Wheathampstead, and said she knew
the things and the rifle which was found upstairs. Being
asked who brought them to her house, she said "Thomas
Wheeler, the prisoner." . He brought them on the 9th of
June at three o'clock in the morning. She had not seen him,
she said, for five years, and did not know he was coming, and
next night he brought some plated articles. She knew such
things had no business in poor people's houses, and she was
glad to give them up.
The blacksmith at St. Albans, from whose shop the two
hammers were stolen in June—the night before the burglary
at Reynolds—identified the two hammers produced, one
of which had been found at Mr. Reynolds's and the other at
Mr. Anstie's. The two were stolen together on the same
night—the night before the burglary at Mr. Reynolds's.
He had had them for years, and was certain of their identity.
He had used them constantly for two years. He had known
Wheeler, the prisoner, some years ago, and he was then
living at the same place, and the prisoner used often to come
to his shop.

Evidence was then gone into as to the burglary at Mr. E.
Woollatt's, where the double-barrelled gun was stolen, and
the reticule. His farm was called Samuel's Farm, and was
near St. Albans. On the night of August 19 a fire broke out
at his father's at High Beach Farm, and he was called by
some one to go and render assistance there. On his return
he found that a man had broken into his own house, and he
missed a double-barrelled gun, the one produced, as found
150 yards from the imuse of Mr. Anstie, and he, looking at
it, identified it as his. It had not, he said, been used by him
recently, not within three weeks or a month. (When found,
as already stated, it appeared to have been fired quite
recently.) If overcharged it would "kick." It had been
proved that the prisoner had a bruise on the shoulder such
as might have been caused by the kick of a gun.)
Mrs. 'Woollatt, the wife of the last witnus, stated that
after her husband had been called away by some one to the
fire at his father's, at one in the morning she heard a noise
downstairs, and opened her door and asked, thinking it was
her husband, "Ted, is that you?" In answer she heard a
"sound more like the growling of a wild beast than a
human voice." She could not understand anything dis-
tinct. She heard sounds about the house some minutes,
and then heard some one come upstairs, and a light came
under her bed-room door, and some one tried to open the
door, which, however, she had previously locked. Sh,e
asked, "What do you want ?" and the voice said, "Beer,
or wine, or 10s. in money." She went down by a back stair-
case into the garden. A reticule being produced, she
identified it as hers, and she missed i after the burglary,
which was early on the morning of Thursday, the 19th of
August. She found afterwards a shot-bag, being marked
"No. 6," with a few shots in it. It had been moved from
one part of the house to another, She could not say if any
shot were missing, but Mr. Woollatt, being recalled, said he
had not used it for some time before the burglary.

A young woman who lives at Luton proved that on the
19th of August the prisoner came to her house with the
reticule stolen from Mr. Woollatt's and wanted to sell it,
and sold it for Bd. He said he had been walking ever since
two, and had strained his ankle. He held up the reticule,
and said he had picked it up earning along. She said she
would give 6d. for it, and he said she should haVe it for Bd.
This was confirmed by another witness, and this closed the
case for the prosecution, which was not concluded until
between five and six in the evening.

On the resumption of the trial, on Monday morning,
the prisoner's counsel, when asked if he would call-any
witnesses or give any evidence for the defence, inti-
mated that he should not.

Mr. Talfourd Salter then addressed the jury on the
evidence in the case, urging that it clearly broirght home
to the prisoner the guilt of murder. He observed that
the case against the prisoner had been left wholly without
an answer, except such as the ingenuity of counsel might
suggest. Poor Mr. Alastie had been cruelly shot in his own
bedroom, and it was clear that the motives of the murder
were combined of revenge or hate and of the hope of gain.
It was beyond a doubt that the perpetrator of the deed
had deliberately intended murder, for he began with
murder; he had the loaded gun ready for it; he induced Mr.
Anstie to put his head out of window, and then shot him
dead. Thus he at once effected the murder and gained
easy access to the house. The numerous facts in evidence
all pointed to the prisoner. He was about the spot the
night befere the murder and the morning after it.
He was wandering about a vagrant and an outcast,
living only by violence and plunder. On the night before
the murder he was quite destitute—he had not twopence
to pay for a pint of beer he owed. He was seen that night
without a gun before he reached the heath, whepe a
gun could be hidden, and several witnesses saw a man
just like him going from the heath towards the farm between
nine and tento'clock at night. Next morning before eleven
o'clock he was seen coming from the heath, where the gun
and the things stolen were found hidden. The lady who
met him swore that the man she met was the prisoner, and the
lady who saw him in the house also identified the prisoner.
Another man, who knew the prisoner wen, met him linger-
ing about a little further on the same afternoon, and stated
that the prisoner avoided him. Then he was traced to a
friend's, where there was no doubt as to his identity, and
where he washed and shaved himself. The language used
by the prisoner towards Mr. Anstie, and the threat he
uttered that he would "do " for him, quite agreed with the
character of the murder, which was clearly intended before-
hand. The evidence of Dr. Tidy, the analyst, as to the re-
cent stains of blood upon the prisoners chess confirmed the
other evidence as to his identity. The lady who had seen
and heard him in the house picked him out among others,
and when she did so was not aware that he had lie
stains upon his clothes and the shot and the syringe
in his pocket, and that he had stolen the gun with which
the murder was committed, and had left the hammer behind
him at the house of the murdered man. Thus her direct
evidence was given when she was quite unconscious of the
confirmation afforded
.by the other circumstances in the
case. As to the suggestion that the prisoner had been
killing a pig; if so, it was when he was wearing the old pair
of tweed trousers found on the heath, and which were
clearly shown to have belonged to him and to have been
worn by him a few days before. But the trousers he had
worn on the night of the murder were those he had on next
morning, and which agreed with the description the lady
gave of his dress —the dark corduroy trousers woich were
found to have upon them recent stains of blood. Then the
shots found in his waistcoat pocket corresponded with
those picked up in the bedroom or outside the house under
the window. Then as to the syringe ;it was a most unlikely
thing to find in a labourer's pocket. and three witnesses
swore that such a syringe ming up in Mr. Anstie s cupboard,
and it was sworn that it was seen there a short time before
the murder and missed soon afterwards, though not imme-
diately. When the syringe was produced the prisoner
made a kind of suggestion by pantomime and appa-
rently by intimation to .his counsel that it was
his own syringe. That showed that he had occa-
sion for the use of a syringe, and if it was his
own he could have proved where he got it. But
two out of the three witnesses—the two who knew the
skringe -identified it as the one found on the prisoner, one
witness particularly identifying it by a piece of hemp he
had twisted round the piston. Then there was the forth,
the only .piece of money the murderer obtained, and the
only piece of money the.prisoner, destitute the night before,
had the next morning, No evidence was offered by the pri-
soner to show how he obtained that florin which he changed
the morning after the anurder. Then the hammer left be-
hind by the murderer, and the gun with which, no doubt,
the murder was committed, were both traced clearly to the
prisoner. The hammer was the companion of that left at
Mr. Reynolds's by the man who committed the burglary
there—that is, by the prisoner, who had the rifle and the
other things stolen; and the double-barrelled gun was
proved to have been stolen by the prisoner from Mr. Wool-
latt's,• for he was proved to have sold the reticule stolen at
the same time—that is, the prisoner was proved to have
been in possession of the gums with which the murder was
committed, and that fact alone was conclusive of his guilt:
but, taken in conjunctions with the evidence of identity, and
all the other circumstances in' the .lase, it was simply irre-
sistible. All the facts in the case pointed to him and tended
to establish his guilt.

•
Mr. Woollett then addressed the jury on behalf of the
prisoner. Beyond a doubt, the prisoner had committed
many crimes, and if the jury were to acquit him of this
murder he might yet be punished by a long term of penal
servitude for the burglaries he had undoubtedly committed.
But now his life was in question for the murder. It was a
case, no doubt, supported by a larger number of witnesses
than he had known in any other case, all, without excep-
tion, respectable witnesses. But the jury had to consider
whether the case, as to the charge of murder, had been
proved beyond all reasonable doubt. low difficult was it
for the jury not to be prejudiced by the criminality of the
prisoner as to the burglaries? That Mr. Anstie had been
murdered no one could doubt. But was the case proved?
If Mrs. Lindsay, the lady 4n the house, could have sworn
positively to the identity of the prisoner there would
ban been no need of any further evidence; but she WU

not able to swear positively to him. It was said she had
pointed him out at the Town-hall, but then' the murder
was. known; but she only said she believed he was the man,
• and the man was marked out by having pieces cut out of his
jacket.
The learned Judge said he understood the prisoner's
clothes had been taken off in order to their being sent to
the analyst.
Mr. Talfourd Salter said it was so, and the prisoner and
the other men were all dressed in clothes provided by the
prison authorities,
The deputy chief constable,'Mr. Ryder, was recalled, and
stated that he took all the prisoner's clothes from him, but
when he found him in custody on the Sunday, and when
Mrs. Lindsay saw him at the Town-hall, he had the clothes
on in which he had been arrested, and which were put on
for the purpose of identification.
Mr. Woollett said he had so understood it, and the
supposed identification under those circumstances was de-
lusive. It came to this, therefore, that there had been no
identification of the prisoner by either of the two witnesses
in the house. The witnesses who saw the man over-night
said he was " like " the prisoner; but men were not to be
convicted of murder upon mere likeness. The case was
reduced to circumstantial evidence. The first piece of
evidence relied on was as to the florin, and he did not
deny that it was a circumstance and a link in the chain
of evidence; but he denied that it was conclusive, for
the man might have borrowed a two-shilling piece, though
he was not in a position to prove it. Then as to the syringe
—he was challenged to call witnesses to prove that he had
the syringe. But why should he call witnesses to prove
what the prosecution proved? Beyond a doubt the prisoner
had a syringe; but the servant girl had never seen -a syringe
in the house of Mr. Anstie, though she went daily to the
cupboard where it was kept. No one had been called from
the hospital to show that he had not a syringe, and the girl
never saw one at the house. The prisoner's mouth was
shut—

The learned Judge: No, not so; the prisoner's mouth is
not shut ; he has a right to say what he pleases.

Mr. Woollett : That is true in a certain sense, but he now
speaks through his counsel, and the evidence must be taken
favourably for him, so far as it is in his favour. The servant
girl said there were two reports of a gun, but the double.
barrelled gun found, and said to have been traced to the
prisoner, had only had one of its barrels discharged. He
denied that it had been traced to the prisoner, and denied
that it was the gun with which the murder was committed.
It might be asked, How came the gun hidden there? But
that was not for him to explain. Enough for him to
contend that it was not traced to the prisoner (for his
having the reticule did not. prove that he had the gun),
and even if it was treed to him, it could not be
the gun with which the murder had been com-
mitted, for there were two reports heard. These were the
three main points in the case, and he contended that they
all failed, and that the last was conclusive in favour of the
prisoner. So as to the pair of trousers found on the heath
they were probably the trousers worn, not by the prisoner,
but by some tramp who was the murderer, for it was pro-
bable that the murderer would change the trousers he wore.
It was true that the witnesses identified these trousers also
as the prisoner's, but they were very likely mistaken. Then,
as to the stains of blood on the trousers worn by the prisoner,
the analyst could not say they were stains of human blood,
and the prisoner said he had killed a pig, and that was not
disproved. Thus, therefore, no part of the case was con-
clusive against the prisoner, and he was entitled to be
acquitted of this foul crime.

The learned Judge then proceeded to sum up the case to
the jury, thanking the counsel who had acted for the pri-
soner, for the service they had rendered. It now became
the duty of the jury to determine the case as judges, and
to decide whether or not the evidence satisfied their minds
that the prisoner was guilty of this murder. If the evi-
dence did not satisfy them of it, he was entitled to be ac-
quitted, if the crime was not established by the evidence ;
but, on the other hand, if when they came to consider the
body of evidence submitted to them it brought home
to their minds the conviction of his guilt, then they
were bound by their oaths and by their duty to society to
pronounce a verdict of guilty. The learned Judge then
proceeded to enter into the facts of the case. Commenting
on the argument of prisoner's counsel that the girl had
heard two reports, he pointed out that in her deposition
she could not say Vositively there were two reports, but
only that it seemed so to her, and she slept in another part
of the liouse, and was awakened by the sound. Mrs. Lind-
say, however, stated that she heard after the report la
loud bang of a door. The learned Judge pointed out
that the only money the murderer got at the house was
the florin, as he could not find where Mr. Anstie kept
his money, and the lady said she had no more money to
give him. The cupboard in which thd syringe was said to
have been hanging had certainly been rifled, for the, only
plated articles in it had been taken. The hammer had
been left behind, and before noon the same day a double
barrelled gun, the one taken from Mr. Woollatt's, was found
hidden in a wood, and one of the barrels had been recently
discharged; and the articles stolen were also discovered at
different places on the hessth. No one saw the gun fired; no
one saw that gun hidden in the wood; but it was for the
jury to say what conclusion was forced upon their minds by
the combination of circumstances brought out in the evidence.
Why was the gun hidden in that wood? The prisoner s
counsel had suggessed that it might have been a poacher's
gnu; but no evidence showed that anything had occurred
that night to make a mere poacher run away and leave his
gun rusting in the wood. The lady who was sleeping in the
house and saw the burglar at her bedside said she believed
the prisoner was the man, and that she recognised him at
the Town-hall. •The prisoner's counser:urged that this was
delusive, as she knew of the murder and knew some one
was in the room whom she was expected to identify, and,
moreover, that he was marked out by his dress, but she
recognised him by his face and voice, and as to his voice she
was confirmed by the servant girl, who heard him speak. That
was the direct evidence in the case, and, as the prisoner's
counsel had said that if the jury.were satisfied of their re-
cognition, then the evidence was cogent and sufficient, for
it was obvious that the burglar was the murderer—no one
could doubt that the man who committed the burglary
had that night slaughtered Mr. Angie. The prisoner had
lived some years ago at the farm adjoining -Sir. Anstie's,
and two witnesses spoke to his having used language of a
threatening character towards him. The import of those
threats if made in serious earnest, clearly indicated hatred
and a desire to "do " for him. This was matter for the
serious consideration of the jury if they believed those
threats weria uttered in earnest. The prisoner was certainly
about the place on the evening previous to the murder, and
was proved to have been without a penny. The witnesses
who spoke to their seeing a man overnight with a gun did
not identify the prisoner, but the lady who met the man
close to the heath before eleven on the next morning swore
positively to his identity, and a man who met him aftgrwards
on that day, and who was friendly with him, swore positively
to him, and also said that the prisoner avoided him, Later
in the afternoon lie went to the house of another friend,
and there he washed and shaved, and gave a two-shilling
piece in payment for some beer. When he was arrested,
a few hours later, the syringe was found in his pocket
(a matter deserving the gravest consideration), and in his
pockets were also found some shot which corresponded
with that picked up in the bedroom, and upon his clothes
were found stains of blood, two of which Dr. Tidy declared
to be recent. It was true the shot was common shot, but
still , the murder was committed with shot, and the shot
found on the prisoner corresponded with the shot used in
the commission of the murder. As to the syringe, three
or four witnesses spoke to it, and believed that found upon !
the prisoner to be the same ; and if it was not so, where
was that which used to be at Mr. Anstie's? It was true
that the servant girl had not noticed it; but the evidence
of one person who had not noticed a thing was no
answer to that of several who had noticed it. No
one swore to seeing it on the Saturday, but the lady
swore to seeing it in the cupboard only a few weeks before
the time of the murder, and that it then hung behind a
mug ; and that on the Saturday—the day before the murder
she saw the mug hanging up as usual, and next morning the
mug had been moved off and the syringe was gone. The
syringe hi the cupboard at Mr. Anstie's was missing, a'
syringe was found on the prisoner, and he gave no evidence
about it. It had been hinted that the hospital doctor would
have been able to give evidence about it in favour of the pri-
soner, but if so, whywas he not called? No explanation had
been given of it by the prisoner, and the jury were asked to
draw the inference from the evidence that he had taken it
on the ni,ght of the murder. Then they were to consider
whether the hammer found had been used by the murderer
and burglar that night. It was found in the house; it was a
strange hammer—one of two stolen from a blacksmith. The
noise of a heavy implement had been heard. What other
conclusion could the jury come to than that it had been left
behind by the burglar? Was the prisoner the man who
had used it on that night? As to this the proof was of
the most simple character. A burglary had been committed
at Mr Reynolds's, where a rifle was stolen with other articles,
and next morning another hammer—the other of the two
stolen—was found left behind; and the rifle and other
things stolen had been left by the prisoner at
three in the morning at the house of Ids brother. Were
the jury satisfied that the prisoner committed the
burglary at Reynolds's and left the hammer behind?
If so, were they also satisfied that he was the man who left
the fellow hammer behind at Mr. Anstie's on the night of
the murder? There was another matter—as to the gun, the
double-barrelled gun found in the wood 150 yards from Mr.
Anstie's house. If the jury were satisfied that it was the
gun used in the murder of Mr. Anstie, they had to con-
'sider whether it was connected with the prisoner. It was
proved that it had been stolen three nights before from Mr.
Wooliatt's. along with a reticule, which the prisoner
was proved to have offered for sale early next
morning, and it was only a natural conclusion
that he had also stolen the gun which was found
hidden in the wood not far from the house on the morning
after the murder. The learned Judge said he had thus
drawn the attention of the jury to the salient points in the
case. Ms duty was now discharged, and it was for them
to determine the case. The case for the prosecution
was that the prisoner was the man who with that gun corn-
Plated this murder; it was for them to decide if that were
so. If they came to the conclusion that the circum-
stances in evidence were not sufficient to satisfy them of
the prisoner's guilt, then they would acquit him ; but if,
looking at the whole of the evidence, they were satisfied
in their consciences that the prisoner was the man who
committed this foul and cruel murder, then it was their
duty to society, and they were bound by their oaths, firmly
to say so by their verdict.
The jury then, at ten minutes past two, retired to
consider their verdict.

In less than half an hour they came back into court,
and pronounced a verdict of Guilty.

The prisoner, being called upon, said, "I am not
guilty.'
After a brief pause, the learned Judge proceeded
to pass sentence of death upon the prisoner. •Xou
have been, he said, found guilty by the jury, after a
long, a patient, and an anxious investigation, of the
crime of wilful murder. The jury upon the evidence
before them have felt themselves compelled to pro-
nounce you guilty of as foul, as wicked, as cruel, as
diabolical a murder as ever was committed—the
slaughter of an, unoffending man. I not only en-
tirely. concur in the verdict they have pronounced,
but m my own mind I am as satisfied of your guilt
as if I had seen you with these eyes commit your
cruel crime. I hardly know whether I ought to
say one word more to you before I pronounce upon
you that sentence which the law compels me to pass.
It is difficult to know what would touch the heart of
one who conld in the dead of night rouse an unoffend-
ing man from his slumber, and when he looked forth
from his window deliberatly shoot him dead. You
hurried him to his death withouta moment's warning.
Your own death is an event which speedily awaits
you. But you have yet before you a short time for
penitence and prayer, by which to make your peace
with the Almighty and seek for that mercy which, on
earth cannot be shown to you: The learned Judge
then proceeded to pass upon him the sentence of death
in the usual form.
The prisoner at once dropped on his knees and re-
peated the Lord's Prayer, and then, rising, began
to launch forth invectives against the witnesses who
had given evidence, when he was removed from
the dock, glaring savagely at any of them within
sight.