The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-11-08 00:00:00

OUGHT MULLINS TO BE EXECUTED ?

JAMES MULLINS will be put to an ignominious
death in a few days, if the law is to be allowed
to take its ordinary course. It is very eviden
however, that ever since his condemnation a fee]
ing of uneasiness and doubt as to the completeness
of the evidence, and the legality of the verdict
against him, has been rapidly and extensively
gaining ground. However strong may be the
suspicion against MuLLINs, and however bad the
antecedents of the man, that strong feeling in
favour of fair play, which always characterises
Englishmen, demands that even he shall not be
executed upon mere suspicion, but on the contrary
that he shall have the full benefit of any doubt
that may exist as to his guilt.

The words addressed to the prisoner by the
Lord Chief Baron iu passing sentence, certainly
seem calculated to strengthen some fears as to
the justice of the verdict. His Lordship told the
prisoner that, notwithstanding his condemnation,
if he could yet give a satisfactory account of the
possession of the cheque, he might be saved from
the gallows. Now it is trite law that no man
bound to exonerate himself from such a charge.
The law holds a man to be innocent until it is
proved beyond a doubt that he is guilty. The
judge admitted that certain facts might yet be
explained away; and, if it be so, it seems to follow
that these facts do not necessarily imply MuLLlNs's
guilt. For illustration, suppose that MuLLINs
came to be possessed of the cheque merely as a
receiver; in that case he cannot be held guilty
of the murder. If there was nothing in the evi-
dence to render some such supposition impossible,
how can thp unexplained fact positively prove
guilt; and if not, were the jury nut bound to
give the prisoner the benefit of the doubt ? Was
the judge warranted in throwing the onus of
proof upon the prisoner, instead of the prosecu-
tion ?

Circumstantial evidence, when the chain of
proof is complete, is the surest and most reliable
of any. At the same time, the utmost care and
skill are requisite in judging of the relevancy of
the circumstances, and in distinguishing between
what has been really proved as matter of fact,
and what may be merely inferences rightly or
wrongly deduced. therefrom. Mere inferences
are not evidence ; and yet there is nothing more
common than to lose sight of the difference
between them, and to assume that to be proof
whiCh is after all only matter of opinion. - The
catalogue of those who have been condemned, and
punished for crimes of which they were subse-
quently ascertained to be wholly innocent, is
unhappily long and startling ; and in too many
instances they have suffered their unmerited doom
from a misconstruction of circumstantial evidence.
Let us briefly review some of the leading circum-
stances referred to at MULLINS'S trial. But in the
first place let us premise that we are not warranted
in holding any ivirnurracrtgarnno c•e. ca.zz.d.
accused, simply because it may not be in his
favour; neither are we entitled to give weight to
any suspicion it might raise against him, if the
fact is capable of any reasonable explanation
consistent with the supposition of the prisoner's
innocence ;—in short, the whole facts must be so
unequivocal in their bearing, as to render it quite
certain that no other person but the accused could
have been the murderer. Unless this conclusion is
irresistibly supported, the evidence is insufficient
to convict.

The case for the prosecution in this instance
depends greatly upon its being able to establish
the exact time at which the murder was com-
mitted: It is admittedly of considerable import-
ance to ascertainwhether the deed was perpetrated
on the evening of Monday or on the morning of
Tuesday. The theory of the prosecution assumed
that the murder was committed on Monday even-
ing. Anything tending to shake this assumption,
therefore, must throw doubt on the whole case. A
very respectable witness,BAßNEs, residing opposite,
swore to having seen some person moving papers
at the top window of the deceased's house, on
Tuesday morning, between nine and ten o'clock.
This witness could scarcely hitve been mistaken
in her observation, as the circumstance referred to
occurred in broad daylight. This witness's testi-
mony seems to be corroborated by that of another,
STEPHENSON, who saw a man named ItowLAim,
one of the deceased's collectors, leaving her house
between ten and eleven o'clock with a quantity
of paperhangings under his arm. If the person
seen at the top window on Tuesday morning was
MuudiNs, he must either have remained in the
house with his murdered victim all night, or if
not, he must have returned next morning.
Either supposition is beset with difficulties.
MuLLlNs's children swore that he was at home
all night ;, and other witnesses swore to having
seen him abroad betwixt the time that the
murder is assumed to have been committed,
and the hour at
which BARNES and STEPHEN-
SON saw some man in the house and leave
it. In any case 111uLLINs could not have been in
the house all night; and there is no evidence to
show that he entered the house in the morning.
If the person seen at the window by BARNES in
the morning was not MULLINS, the whole affair
is as mysterious as ever. Moreover, whether the
person so seen was MULLINS, or some one else,
the fact, if admitted, throws considerable doubt
upon the assumption that the tragedy was enacted.
on the previous evening, and as a consequence,
casts uncertainty upon ;the whole case for the
prosecution.

One important link of evidence is entirely

wanting, namely, that of any traces of blood on
the prisoner, his clothes, his boots, or the harcuner
with which the prosecution assumes he inflicted
the mortal wounds. In the circumstances this
seems to be very difficult, if not impossible, of
reconciliation with his having been the actual
murderer. After the most minute and careful
examination this >part of the case completely
broke down.

Much stress has been laid upon several apparent
inconsistencies and contradictions in the pri-
soner's statements. Thus, it has been held as
proved that Emms could not have committed
the murder on Monday night. But the pri-
soner does not undertake or require to prove
that the murder was committed by EA1314
at all, far less that he did so on Monday
night. Rums might have only been a receiver;
and, besides, it has not been proved that the
murder was committed on that evening—on the
contrary, doubt has been thrown on the assume'
tion that it was so. Then it is supposed to hare
been proved that EMMS could not have deposited
the parcel in the shed at the hour stated by
MULLINS. The condemned, however, admits that
he may have been wrong as to the hcnn.
as he had no watch or clock to inform hire'
correctly. Some reasonable allowance on
this point might remove the difficulty. A
key was found in deceased's house after the
murder, which it is said is the very key given to
MULLINS by Mrs. EMSLEY at a friend's house oa
the, afternoon before the murder, and as MuLLISs
does not adMit having been in the house after
receiving that key, this is held to be irresistible
evidence of the prisoner's guilt. Could any wit'
ness be relied on who pretends to identify a key
seen passing from hand to hand between two other
persons ? At all events might there not have
been duplicate keys The possession of certain
trinkets, formerly belonging to Mrs. EmsLET, by
the prisoner's wife, is pointed to as evidence
against MuLiaNs. But might not these hale
been presented to Mrs. MULLINS by Mrs.
EMSLEY ? It is certain that she did on one
occasion present MULLINS with a gold ring•
Might she not have presented his wife with a
gold pencil case? Great weight has been given t°
the supposed impossibility of any one seeing tha
slab stone under which the concealed parcel was

found, from the field where MULLINS said 10

had watched ,EMMS depositing it ; but are we at
, liberty to accept this apparent difficulty as alto'
gether inexplicable ? One or two discrepancie
as 'to time and place—the supposed identification
of a common key—the possession of what might
have been a gift—and one or two similarly
common-place difficulties may have been made
rather more of than is consistent with the general
scope and character of the evidence.

If the circumstances to which we have referred
are the main links in the chain of the evidence
upon which MULLINS has been convicted, what
more are we justified in saying of them than that
they excite serious suspicions as to MuLLiss's
condUct ? Are they wholly inconsistent with the
belief that some one else may have committed the
crime ? Have the exertions and the success of
the police, in investigating the circumstances con'
nected with the case, been so unquestionable and
exhaustive as to satisfy any one that all is known
that it is possible to ascertain about this said
event ? Witness their inefficiency in searching the
shed. Why has the person named by the prisoner
Mrs. Music not been made forthcoming ?
She is said to have been at MuLLiNs's
house on the evening of the murder ? While all
important point remains uninvestigated—while
others are wholly involved in doubt and mystery
—and while essential facts, sworn to by some of
the chief witnesses, are flatly contradictory to
each other, is it permissable that sentence of
death should be carried out ? Is our knowledge
of the facts so full and complete, and the infe-
rences drawn from them against MULLINS So
infallibly sound, as to warrant his execution ?
We do not presume to answer these questions.
If we have our doubts, we feel perfectly satisfied
that the whole case will be dispassionately weighed
and fairly disposed of by the Home Secretary'
with whom it now rests to determine the fate Of
the convict.

FOREIGN INTELLIGE NCB•

FRANCE.
(FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.)
PARIS, Wednesday, Nov. 7.
One effect of the extraordinary despatch et
Lord John Russell has been a rise on the Paris
Bourse, but I am not prepared by any means V"
say that this circumstance affords conclusive
evidence as to the merits of that most unstates-
manlike document. On the contrary, it rather
indicates, in my opinion, the existence of a very
unhealthy and, so far as England is concerned, a
very discreditable tone of public feeling on the
subject of international law and constituted
rights. But, besides, there are so many wheels
within wheels" at work in the present manage-
ment of the political machine in France, and the
relations between the French Government and the
operations on the Bourse are of so abnormal a
character, and so secret and underhand in their
mode of action, that the state of the Paris Bourse
manifestly is scarcely ever a safe or reliant?,
guide.
the last report i have neara on tne su °pot of
the Warsaw Conference is, that a French officer
arrived in that city on the morning of the 25th,
had a private audience of the Emperor
Alexander' and departed the same evening; the
supposed object of,the mission of this officer being
to express to the Czar the desire of the Emperor
Napoleon to hand over the entire consideration
of the present state of affairs in Italy to the
decision of an European Congress. It is added?
however, that the proposition, on being comma'
nicated to the Emperor of Austria and the Prince
Regent, was at once declined, on the around that
they could not think of co-operating in any
d
diplomatic meeting with a Power which had
acted as France had done in, the case of the
annexation of Nice and Savoy. I give you this
story, however, "under all reserve."
It appears, further, that another effect of the
circular of Lord John itussell has been to cause
most of the representatives of the foreign European
Powers at the Court of St. James', to decline the
invitation to attend the Lord Mayor's dinner on
Friday next. I mentioned in my letter yesterday
that Count de Persigny
the diplomatic recusants, and that he had rpesolved
was o be an excetion ti 9
to tear himself away from the pleasures and ameni-
ties of his country seat, in order to be present a;
usual upon this famous occasion ; but I now find
that the Count, like the rest of the foreign
diplomatic corps, in the first instance, likewise
declined the invitation, and that he consented tn,
alter his determination only at the persona'
request of Lord John Russell, whose good offi. ,ce6
the Lord Mayor put into requisition for Ml.'
purpose.

The papers of last night specify the changes
which the breaking up of the camp at Chalons
has caused in the arrangements of the army r
Paris, recently designated the Ist Corps d Armee'
Paris will be again occupied by an enormous
force. The reserve brigade alone consists of tW°
battalions of infantry of he Paris Guard, four
squadrons of cavalry belonging to the sole
corps, and a splendid battalion of engineer fire;
men (sapeurs pompeirs), besides a company (3';
the Gendarmerie of. the Seine, which is distribute"
in the different quarters of the capital to be
ready in any emergency.
The following is the latest intelligence received
here from the seat of war in Italy :
King Victor Emmanuel received on the 29th ult.,
Sessa, where his head-quarters were fixed, a deputation
sent from Naples, who came to ask him to make his
entry into the city without delay, as the state of affairs
rendered his presence imperatively necessary; and elf
informed the members that he would comply with their
wishes at soon as his army had effected the passage of thee
Garigliano. His Majesty was to remain only a few day
f
absent from the theatre of war, 'as he is desirous
directing in person the operations against Gaeta, all,!0
brin_ging hostilities to an end as soon as possible. Tu..
Piedmontese being now certain of not being attacked c!,'
the Mincio, are about to direct almost the whole of their
military strength upon Southern Italy. That measure,
in fact, has become necessary, not only to continue the wan
but also to put a stop to the auti-annexationist attenll3.
which are manifesting themselves on a great mall,' dif-
ferent points of the Neapolitan territory. AlreaYe
some moveable columns have appeared tbd
Abruzzi Ulterieur and in the Terra de Labore. They
s
have a double object : the first, being to repreil
all acts of
."anti-unitarian" tendency, and the secoll.o
to intercept convoys and detachments of troops on till_r
way to Gaeta. The movement of the Neapolitan ?°.s
diers to rejoin the Royal army still continues and it is
ascertained that these soldiers, eontrary to what was
formerly the case, are now enabled to pursue their jour
,
ney Without molestation of any kind, and that they_
received and willingly lodged at each stage of
route, by the inhabitants of the country districts, Pi*