The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1881-11-12 00:00:00

T

4

/3
1 i

T.'
414:'

Our Nonbon Corttspubint.

f:

1

[We deem it right to state that we do not at all
identify ourselves with our Correspondent's opinion.

The fifth of November celebrations passed off very
quietly so far as the metropolis was concerned. The
date marks a double event in English history—the
discovery of the Gunpowder Plot in 1605, and the
Battle of Inkermann in 1854. Yet amid all the mul-
titude of squibs, crackers, rockets, and fireworks of
all descriptions, which vanished in smoke on the sth
instant, and amid the blazing of the huge bonfires in
country towns, the battle was scarcely thought of,
albeit it took place two centuries and a half after Guy
Fawkes was seized in the cellars of the Houses of Parlia•
-40
* - reient. The colours of every regiment in the British army
which took part in the engagement of seven-and-twenty
years ago were dressed with laurel, but the crowds
which at night gathered round the leaping fires had
little thought of General Liprandi. The notorietyof
Guy Fawkes seems truly enough- to be immortal, and
yet that Fifth of November, 1854, ought not to be foie
gotten amid the fizzle of the gunpowder and the glare of
the bluelights and Roman candles w_hich annually per-
.; petuate the name of so daring a conspirator.
$ When the Battle of Ink ermann was fought, the aled
I armies had been investing,Sebaestopol rather less than ,
e month. There had been a bombardment from the
land batteries and an attack by seb, on the 17th of
October, after which the allies settled down to the
work of a regular siege. The Russians did not see
matters quite in this complacent light; and on the sth
November made a desperate attempt to drive the
hosts ..of their enemies into the Black Sea. In the
t misty grey of a wet morning 60,000 of them issued
out from the beleagured fortress, and attacked 14,000
of the allies, in the proportion of 8,000 French and
- 6,000 British. The dim haze which throughout the
day hung over the scene of conflict prevented any.
thing like generalship from being attempted, and the
4 rank
.and file were left to fight it out much as they
best could. As night came on theeßussians withdrew
behind their fortifications, sullen and defeated ; the
great sortie had failed; the allies were left to pursue
t that investment of the city which led to its ultimate
fi capture; and the Battle of Inkermann is to this day
known as "The Soldiers' Victory."
In the protracted negotiations between England
and France, with the hope of renewing the Treaty
of 1860, experts both French and Engliets in the
several trades concerned were beard at great
length ; but the statements and opinions laid before
the Commission were of a somewhat contradictory
character. A considerable amount of attention was
devoted to the cotton trade; and the difficulties which
arose in discussing the duties on woollen goods were
also of a formidable nature. There can be little doubt
that the obstacles which stood in the way of a seftlee
merit were largely due to the uncertain status of the
French administration. A general election has lately
taken place in France, and it is known that the results
involve a change of Government. The French Minister
of Commerce, M. Tirard, has naturally been anxieus to

propitiate .the manufacturers of Lyons and other large

towrz„ for mainly upon the support of those great com-
a .tnunities the existence of the Ministry of M. Jules
Ferry depended. But now that its continuance in office
is no longer in question, and with the known views of
M. Gambetta, who has been designated as the new
Premier, there is stitl hope for a renewal of the Treaty.

At all events, England would prefer no treaty at al
intn, to a retrograde one. By this time business men have
become accustomed to the possibility of a complete
abrogation of all treaty regnlations in the commerce
between the two countries, so that a total collapse of
the negotiations would not surprise one. Concession
on this side has gone to the utmost limit consistently
with the maintenance of the national dignity.
- While the Revenue Returns show week by week an
improvementin the Treasury receipts, and the census
totals of the present year prove that the population of
- the kingdom was increasing, there is no cessation in
the tide of emigration. Residents in all parts of
the country are constantly seeking new homes and
better fortunes in distant lands. British emigration
in the last quarter for which the records have been
made up very considerably exceeded that in . any
corresponding period of the last ten years. No
fewer than 72,665 British emigrants left
,our shores
in three months 71 'per cent. of whom took their
departure for the United States, 12 per cent.
fer British North America, 9 per cent for the
Australian colonies, and 8 per cent. for all other
places. Compared with the proportions in the corre-
sponding quarter of 1880, emigration to the United
States showed an increase last quarter, while that to
the Australian colonies declined. The preference for
a foreign country over a part of the Queen's own
dominions is somewhat remarkable. Neither Canada
nor Australia seems at all able to compete with the
United States in the inducements offered to emigrants
to settle there- The length of the voyage to Australia
eperates as a deterring influence with some; but this
warld not apply to the Canadian Dominion, which is
really nearer to us than New York.
The statistics issued from the tlovernment offices,
dry and uninteresting as they often look, are fre-
quently full of useful and interesting information,
showing by their rows of figures the direction of the
tide of national prosperity or adversity. Few returns
are more worthy of study than those sent out from
the department of the Registrar-General, in Somerset
Hcuse, who draws deductions from the fluctuating
birth, death, and marriage rates that might well be
pondered. He tells the people that when there is
a high marriage rate, the indications are that
an increasing proportion of the population feels
itself in a position to take upon itself the additional
responsibilities which such a step involves. In 1873,
perhaps the best year in which these islands have
experienced for a very long time, the marriage rate
was 18 per 1,000 of the population; in 1879 it had
gone down to 14. It is now gradually recovering,
although yet some distance from what it was .in
1873. •
The attention paid both by the Corporation of Lon-
don and the Metropolitan Board of Works to the ques-
tion of the fish supply of the capital, shows the impor-
tance which both these bodies attach to the distribution
of a valuable and nutritious article of food over the vast
area of the metropolis. The Court of Common Council
—the City Parliament, that is—has itself decided that
Billingsgate, as a river-side market, shall be supple-
mented by an inland market, in the heart of the City
itself, into which the fish could be carried ditect from
the great railway termini on the north of the river,
thus avoiding the delay which now takes place in con-
sequence of the narrow atlproaches to Billingsgate. It
is singular to note that while official records are kept
of the prices of wheat and animal food, at Mark-lane
and Smithfield respectively, there are none given to the
public concerning the sales of fish at Billingsgate.
For example, it is of considerable interest to know that
the average Price of wheat during the three months
ending September was 48s. 10d., showing a further
increase of 4s. 4d. on the mean prices in the first two
quarters of the year. It was ss. 10d. higher than in
the third or Corresponding quarter of last year, and
higher than the mean in any quarter since the second
of 1878. The mean wholesale price of beef and of
mutton, daring the last quarter was 57,-d. and 7h per lb.
respectively. The price of beef showed an increase of
t two-eighths of a penny upon the mean ia the preceding
quarter, while there was no variation whatever in that of
mutton.

It does not require the teaci•ings of philosophy to
prove the existence of a universal law of average ; it is
sufficiently obvious from the lessons of experience.
Abnormal heat or extreme cold is often followed by
such a change in these latitudes as brings the tempera-
ture, spread over a stated period, to about the average
of previous years when there have been no such violent
fluctuations. Not many have forgotten the fierce
heat with which the second half of the present year
opened, when the blaze of the meridian sun exceeded that
ordinarily felt at the equator. This was, however, only
for a brief_ sea&on, for the end of the month has
variable; August was for the most Part wet, cold,
cloudy, and unseasonable; and while the first half of
September was cold, the weather was moderately fine
during the second. But taking the whole of those
three Months—so critical in the fortunes of the agri-
eulturcet—the temperature was less than one single
degree above the average in the corresponding quarter
of 110 years. There was an excess of three in July,
but _rather more thad one in both August and
' embet: The heavy deluges of August were coun-
terbalanced by the number of dry days in July and
September; and the rainfall for the quarter was only ,
three-quarters of an inch below the average for the
same period during the past sixty-six years.
No tuatttir what political party may happen to be
in power, the utterances of the Prime Minister of the
day at the Guildhall banquet are bound to command
attentit i. not only from every class of the community,
but throL6hout the civilized world. It is the custom
of the .new Lord Mayor, whatever be his politics, to
invite Her Majesty's Ministers to dine with him on
,the day of his installation let° office; and the
party complexion either of the chief magis-
trate or of the Government never interferes with
the genuine character of the feast. It is always
the custom of the First Lord of the Tressury
to speak on these occasions, not as the leader of a
party, ilnt as her Majetty's„ First Minister of Stat.&
and .he head of the. nation. Dealing with broad
quektions as well as with donle.stie POlitial
affairs, the Speech is not only anticipated with great
interest at home; but even before its publication here
its substance is telegraphed to all the capitals of
Europe, and is issued to the people of New York the
same evening, the difference of five hours of daylight
in favour of America enabling its perusal in New
York even before its delivery in London.

THE MURDER ON THE BRIGHTON
RAILWAY.

On Friday morning in last week the trial of PERCY
LEFROY AIAPLETON, otherwise Percy Lefroy, on the
charge of murdering Mr. Frederick Isaac Gold in a
carriage on the Brighton Railway on the 27th of June
last, was begun in the Assize Court, Maidstone, before
Lord Chief Justice Coleridge. More than an hour
before the proceedings began a miscellaneous audience
thronged every part of the building pnoccupied by the
officials and members of the bar. The dock is fenced
in with high-aril:al railings, and, by means of it sub-
terranean passage, is in communication with the
county gaol hard by. Right and left the prisoner was
flanked by the jury and a portion of the reporters, the
majority of whom occupied seats high over the heads
of all other persons. In the grand jury gallery, in a
line with the bench, scats were reserved for the local
magnates and others, and several ladies occupied these
places. Lord Coleridge took his seat on the bench two
minutes after ten o'clock, a buzz of nervous excitement
marking his entrance. The Clerk of the Assize having
held a hasty consultation with the j ridge, PERCY LEFROY
INlAnrrox, otherwise Arthur Lefroy, was called for, and
in response the prisoner, conducted by two gaolers,
slowly emerged to view from the gloomy passage lead-
ing to the dock. Lord Coleridge was one of the first
to note his appearing, and, amid solemn silence the
ler, nervous but self-possessed, bowed respect-
the bench. He was neatly dressed in a black
froe.. coat, and altogether bore himself as a person of
goo breeding. •
it reply to the usual quesilon if he was guilty or not
guilty of the crime with which he was charged, the
prisoner replied in tones subdued and indistinct, "I
am not guilty." When he was informed that he
could challenge the persons about to be sworn on
the petty jury, who would have t 3 decide between
him and her Sovereign lady the Queen, Lefroy
exhibited no interest in the empanelling of the jury,
which only occupied a few minutes. At ten minutes
past ten o'clock, the Attorney-General rose to open
the case for. the Crown, and then the prisoner folding
his arms across his breast sat down in a cushioned
chair immediately towards the front of the door, and
throughout the day maintained a quiet and undis-
turbed manner which was in marked contrast with the
nervous interest visible in every other face in the
court.
The Attorney-General, Mr. Poland, and Mr. A. L.
Smith conducted the prosecution on behalf of the
Crown; and the prisoner was defended by Mr.
Mmtagu Williams, Mr. Forrest Fulton, and Mr, H. G.
Kisch.

The Attorney-General, at the commencement of laid
opening address, expressed a hope that the jury would
dismiss from their minds any of the excitement or that
prejudice which the murder of Mr. Gold at the time
created, and confine themselves strictly to the evidence
which he should have to lay before them against the
prisoner. He then proceeded to give an outline of the
case, and whilst so doing the Attorney-General had
no more attentive listener than Lefroy himself, who,
with gaze steadily fixed on the speaker, heard un-
moved the learned counsel lay before the jury a
narrative of the circumstances surrounding the case
which has commanded so much public interest. The
Attorney-General concluded his address (which occu-
pied an hour and five minutes) by asking the
jury to deal with the case by the light of common
sense, and if the facts led them clearly to the con-
clusion that the prisoner committed the murder, then
they must not shrink from their duty in saying so by
their verdict.
We take the following report of the evidence
given at the trial from The Times of Saturday, Mon-
day, and Tuesday :

Mr. Goldsmith, an assistant in the engineers' depart-
ment, produced a section of the railway—showing the
tunnels, distances, ct.c. He also stated that the distance
from the pawnbroker's to the London-bridge Station was
274 yards and 49 steps the nearest way, the shop being at
the corner ot Si. Thomas's-street, Borough, and from the
booking-office to the platform was 150 yards. The distance
from London-bridge to Merstham Tunnel was 17 miles; to
Horley, 25 miles 35 chains. From Merstham to Morley the
train would pass through Itedhill Junction and through
Earlswood station—then came Morley. Next came Three
Bridges—about 30 miles from London; then Balcorebe
tunnel, 32 miles from London; so that the distance from
3lerstham to Balcombe would be 15 miles. Next came
B.Alcombe station, and then Hayward's heath, 33 miles from
London; then Burgess-hill, 41 miles from London ; then
Hassock's-gate, 43 miles from 1 ondon ; and between that
and Preston there were two tunnels—the first, Clayton
tunnel, 2,252 yards long, and then Patcham tunnel, 484
yards long. Clayton tunnel was 45 miles from London, and
from the end of that tunnel to Preston-park was three miles
and a quarter.

The next witness was the widow, Mrs. Gold, who, being
examined by Mr. Poland, stated that her husband had lived
at Preston, and was 64 years of age. He had retired from
business about 18 years. He was, she said, a healthy and
powerful man. He had a first-class season ticket, and was
in the habit of going to London, usually on a Monday. He
had a freehold shop at East-street, Walworth, and used to
go there every Monday to receive the money, and used on
the last Monday in the month to bring her down money for
housekeeping, besides which dividends were due at that
time. Be had sometimes brought down from £5O to £lO0—
not usually so much as that—generally in gold and notes.
On the previous Monday he was expected to bring down
money. On the morning of Monday, the 27th of June,
he left Preston to go to London, taking with him an
umbrella, which he usually carried hooked up on his waist-
coat under his coat, and she had identified the umbrella-
before the magistrate. (11r. M. Williams said no question
would be made of it.) She had identified the fragments of
his eye-glass. He carried a gold watch, withan old-fashioned, ;
long chain round the neck. He had formerly lived at Mile-
end, and she knew he had purchased the watch there of a
Mr. Griffiths. It was a watch with a white face, and it was ,
repaired this year at Brighton at.a Mr. Bovin's. He also
carried, she said, two purses, one for gold, and one for
silver. She had also seen and indentitied his hat. (The
chain, the pieces id eye-glass, the umbrella, the hat, and a
. purse were here called for, produced, and identified.) The
other purse, or pocket-book, she said, she had not heard of.
A pocket-book was produced and identified, but she said he
had another, which contained his more valuable papers, and
In which he would have his railway-ticket, and one or two
blank cheques; that she had not seen. He kept an account
at the Whitechapel branch of the London and Westminster
Bank
In cross-exardinatiou by Mr. Williams, the widow said her
husband was powerfully built. He carried two purses, and
to the best of her belief had both with him that day. In the
smaller he carried gold, usually £2 or £3. He also carried
two pocket-books, and she believed had both with him on
that day. He also had a skull-cap with him, which he wore.
He had only one shop in London at this time, but had had
three or four. For four years he had collected the money
from this shop himself. Before that his brother had col-
lected it. The sums he would bring down would vary, and
would be usually £3O to £4O from the shop; it he brought
dividends it would be more.
In re-examination by the Attorney-General, she said that
her husband usually came down by the two o'clock express. '
He never carried firearms with him.
In answer to the Judge, she said he usually brought
every Monde), £3O to £4O. Anyone who knew his habits
would know that, but she did not know anyone who knew
it.
The next witness was Kate Bovin, daughter of a watch-
maker at Brighton who had repaired the watch of the de-
ceased, and who was called to identify the watch found by
the maker's name and number. She stated that she had
seen the watch and had booked it by her father's orders, and
she produced the book and read the entry.
Mr. Williams said he presumed the watch would be traced?
—The Attorney-General said it would.
Witness: The entry was dated May 31, 1881 :—" Mr. Gold,
Preston. Patent lever watch to be adjusted and cleaned,
No. 16.261." It was, she said, a gold watch, white faced.
She believed the maker's name was Griffiths. She never
booked the maker's name. The repairs took a week. The
• watch was taken home and paid for.

Matilda Bovin, the sister of the last witness, was called to
confirm this evidence. She remembered, she said, Mr. Gold
bringing the watch—a gold white-faced watch. She gave it
to her father, and saw her sister make the entry of it by his
orders. (These witnesses were not cross-examined.)
Mr. Joseph ovin, the father, was also called and gave
confirmatory evidence as to the identity of the watch. he
had, he said, repaired Mr. Gold's watch twice, once before
this occasion. On this last occasion, he recollected his
daughter making the entry of it by his directions. Ile
returned it himself to Mrs. Gold at her husband's residence,
and a few days afterwards Mr. Gold called and paid for the
repairs.—ln ccoss-examination, he said the second-hand
value would be from to £lO.

The next witness was Mrs. Catherine Cross, who kept the
shop at Walworth with her husband for Mr. Gold. He was,
she said, in the habit of calling iihere every week for the
"takings," and she remembered, his calling there on
Monday, the 27th of June, between half-past ten and eleven.
She gave him £3.3 in gold and Is. in silver in a small holland
bag with a memorandum of the amount on a small piece
of pink paper, and he left, taking the money with him. (No
cross-exam in ation.)
The next witness was a cashier of the Whitech%pel branch
of the London and Westminster Bank, who proved that Mr.
Gad, on the 27th of June, banked £33 in gold.

Franks, the ticket-collector at the London-bridge Station
of the Brighton Railway, who was called and examined by
the Attorney-General, stated that he knew the late Mr. Gold
through his travelling on the railway as a first-class season
ticket-holder. He saw him on Monday, the 27th June, at
the London-bridge Station about ten minutes to two. He
saw him on the main line platform, the train being then
"made up," and standing at the station. Next ts the
engine was a third-class brake, then a composite carriage,
the first compartment of which was a second-class, then a
first-class smoking, a first-class non-smoking, and then a
second-class, and then there was another carriage similarly
made up. Witness was standing close to the train, and
spoke to Mr. Gold, who was walking up and clown, asking
him if he was going on by that train, and he said he
was, and get into the second compartment of the
second carriage—a first-class smoking compartment. Mr.
Gold took his seat, he said, between six and .five minutes
to two. Before this time, the witness said, he had known
the prisoner by sight as a traveller on the line, and
on one occasion his attention was drawn to him as travel-
ling without a ticket. He saw him at the station, he said,
upon this occasion about two minutes before two o'clock,
walking very sharply towards the engine ; he had got as far
as the first compartment of the. first carriage next the
brake, when he turned round sharply and walked back as-
far as where Mr. Gold was seated, looking at the carriages
at the same time. When he got to where Mr. Gold was
seated he tried to open the carriage door, but could not do
so, and witness opened it for him and examined his ticket, a
first-class single express from London to Brighton. Mr. Gold
was then seated there, and there was no other person It
was then about a minute to two, and no one else went into
the compartment before the train started. The witness said
he stood opposite to it, and if anyone had tried to get into it
he should have to see that he had a ticket. Mr. Gold sat
on the middle seat, facing the engine ; the prisoner sat with
his back to the engine, in the far corner, facing Mr. Gold. To -
the best of his belief the prisoner was wearing a low felt hat.
In answer to the Jury, witness said the carriage was not
locked on that stile; he could n.ot say as to the other side.
Mr. Gold got in himself.
In cross-examination by Mr. Williams he was asked
whether he had always been of the same opinion as to the
hat. lie said before the coroner, "He had on a low felt
hat." The words of his deposition were read, "A hard felt
low hat, with round top." That was what he said. Before
the magistrate he said he could not swear, but he believed
he had on a felt hat. Ile was not prepared to-day to swear
he had on a low felt hat. The prisoner got into the carriage
about a minute beiore it started. Before the coroner he
spoke to his height as sft. Sin, or gin., and to a light 'over-
coat with pockets and unbuttoned. lie stated that he did
not take his left hand out of his pocket when he produced
his ticket, that the under coat was buttoned and its colour
black, and not new, that Ile took his ticket out of the
ticket pocket on the right hand side, that when he got in he
"drooped forward his head," and that his hair was cut
similarly to the witness's.
Vr. Williams : You noticed all this at the time ?—Yes. He
was asked if it was the duty of others to see if anyone got
into the train without tickets, and he said it was the duty
of another besides himself. Asked as to how many persons
were in the next compartment, he said he would not
pledge himself positively now, but the evidence he ! gave
re the magistrate was true. He said before the
-.oiler that the next compartment was empty It was his
duty, as to all the trains he was "on," to see what persons
got into the train. Asked whether the prisoner was carry-
ing anything, he said nothing--that he would swear. lie
had nothing in his hand, but he could not see his left hand,
which was in his overcoat pocket. He had not had any
words with the prisoner as to his not giving up a ticket.
The prisoner was reported about it, and his name and
aiidress taken. Witness did not report him, but he was

before
14 coroue

present when he was stopped. The prisoner, as he went
along, looked into the carriages as if looking for some-
body. A young lady was in one of the carriages, looking
out of the carriage. He could see her, and he did not go
quite so far as that carriage. He had not heard that a felt
hat had been found upon the line. He had not read the
reports of the hearings in the case in the papers. He had
seen a portrait given of the prisoner before he was taken
into custody, not before he gave his evideßce. He gave his
evidence on the 2nd of July before the coroner.
The Attorney-General said no portrait was shown to him
before the witness gave his evidence.
The witness said the coroner showed him a portrait of
the prisoner something like that (in a paper produced, dated
July 1).
The Lord Chief Justice pointed out that the witness said to
the coroner, "the photograph produced was not like the
young man;" so it appeared that it was a photograph.--Wit-
ness said it was pasted on a card.
Lord Coleridge said it was a photograph from a portrait,
and so would look like a drawing.
The cross-examination was continued. The witness was
asked whether he was in court when a witness named
Clayton was examined and he said he was not; he was sent
away on duty, and so, as to the examination before the
magistrates, he did not hear Clayton examined. Asked
whether he took a great interest ia the case, he said, " No
more than as it referred to myself." He repeated that he did
not know that a_low felt hat had been found.

Re-examined by the Attorney-General, he said he had seen
Mr. Gold's body on the same evening, and saw by the wounds
upon him that he had been murdered. That was within a
few hours of seeing him alone in the carriage with the pri-
soner. That was on the 27th of June; he was examined
before the coroner on the 2nd of July.

The Attorney• General then read the terms of the witness's
depositions before the coroner to show that he had given his
evidence in substance as he had given it now, not speaking
positively as to the prisoner's hat.
It appeared that the witness described the prisoner as a
young man, sickly-looking, clean shaved on the chin, and
with small moustache, ezc.

The next witness was Sewell, the booking clerk at the
London-bridge station, who issued the tickets on the day.
He was examined by the Attorney-General, and stated
that he issued two first-class single tickets—both to a
lady—Nos. 3,179 and 3,180. (The two tickets thus issued
for that train were here produced.) The witness then
stated that after these two tickets were issued, a third
ticket was issued, to the best of his belief, to the prisoner,
whom he had seen standing behind the lady—or a young
man very winch like the prisoner. To the best of his belief
it was the saine man. Certainly that was the third ticket
issued—No. 3,181
. _ _ _

The Atteniey-General stated that it would be proved
that this was found in the possession of the prisoner at
Brighton,

The witness said it was a single first-class ticket, He
had issued no other first-class Brighton ticket for that
train, and, indeed, no tickets for that train except for
Croydon and Brighton cr Worthing. - No first-class ticket
was issued for Worthing. The person who took the ticket
produced a sovereign, and the price paid was 12s. 3d.: a
" return " would be 17s. 6d. ; a single second-class, Bs. 6d.
Tickets were issued for this train at Victoria to join
at Croydon, but tha carriages would join on. Tickets
given up by passengers went back to the accountant's
office.

_
Cross-examined by Mr. Williams, he said before the
coroner that he did not notice an overcoat, and thought the
prisoner had a high hat on. A first-class return ticket for
Brighton was available for a week, and return tickets taken
at Victoria would be available for London-bridge.
The next witness was the booking-clerk at East Croydon
Station, who stated that on the 27th of June he issued three
first-class single tickets for this train to Brighton. The
numbers were 8,505, 8,606, and 8,507. No return tickets
were issued.

A porter at the East Croydon Station stated that on that
day three first-class passengers got in—all ladies.

A clerk from the accountant's office proved that the tickets
thus spoken of had come in due course to his office, but No.
3,181 (the one taken from the prisoner) had not come back.
Ho had found no other first-class tickets than those thus
produced.
A juror asked as to tickets for Worthing.
Lord Coleridge observed that it had been proved that no
Worthing tickets had been issued.
The witness said no Worthing tickets had come back. In
the ordinary course of business all tickets would be sent
back at the end of the day. No others were in existence
than those produced.
In cross-examination, the witness stated that he could
only speak as to the tickets issued for this train, not as
to the tickets, if any, given up by persons returning by this
train.

The next witness was Mr. Gibson, the Brighton chemist,
who was a passenger in the train in a compartment next to
Mr. Gold's, and heard the sound of explosions, at the entrance
to Merstham Tunnel. The next compartment, he said, to
his own was a first-class. The train stopped at Croydon, and
at the entrance to Merstham Tunnel, immediately the train
entered it, he heard four or five reports which at the time he
took to be fog signals. They were heard, he said, in five
or six seconds. When the train stopped at Preston, the pri-
soner got out of the next compartment, besmeared with
blood from head to foot; no one else got out; and on the
foot-board of that compartment he noticed marks of blood.
Ebi saw the body of Mr. Gold at Balcombe, and recognized it
as the body of a gentleman he had seen on the platform of
the London-bridge Station.
In cross-examination, he stated he had said before the
coroner that he saw no one else there, and that he had not
seen Franks, the ticket-collector, and should not have seen
any one getting into Mr. Gold's carriage. He was awake
during the whole of the journey. He could not say
whether there were four or five explosions, nor could he
say whether there was any slackening of the train at
Hassock's-gate.
In re-examination by the Attorney-General, the witness
said he got into his carriage live minutes before the train
started. He had only seen one ticket-collector, whom he
believed to be Franks, and what Ile said was that he did not
recollect seeing him standing by the carriage when the train
started. But Frank's certainly was there, and took his
ticket.

The next witness was Mrs. Brown who lives at a cottage
at Honey, facing the line, and about five minutes walk from
the station and 100 yards from the line. On Monday, the
27th of June, in the afternoon, while sitting in her room in
the cottage, between two and three o'clock in the afternoon,
she saw a train passing to Brighton, and noticed two men
standing up in a carriage, who looked to her to be fighting
or "larking." She was sitting, she said, in her room, in
front of the cottage. The carriage was not the first or the
last, and she could not say whether it was a first-class or
second-class carriage. Her daughter was in the room with
her.

In cross-examination, she said it was about 100 yards
from her window. She only saw two persons in the
carriage. She could not say if there were more. The
daughter of this witness was called to confirm her. She
said she saw two men standing up in a carriage in the
train, "apparently fighting or playing, playing with their
arms." In cross-examination, she was reminded that before
the coroucr she said she "did not take much notice."

The next witness was Watson, the guard of the train,
who was examined by the Attorney-General, and stated
that he rode in the "brake," next to the engine. There
was, he said, a third-class brake next the engine, then
a " composite " carriage, and then another. He read
from his book, showing that the prisoner was in the second
"composite ' carriage, in a first-class compartment.
Franks was the ticket-collecioor in charge of the first part
of the train. He saw Mr. Gold there ; he saw him at
London-bridge. After leaving London-bridge the train
stopped at Croydon, and there he saw Mr. Gold. He
did not notice any one else in the carriage with him. He
observed that Mr. Gold had a white handkerchief over his
head. He saw no one else get into the carriage at Croy-
don. He heard no fog signals at Nlerstham, and if they had
been used he must have heard them. He always heard
them when used, and was quite confident that none
exploded. The train arrived at Preston at 3 20, and the
distance from London was about 50 miles, so that the
actual time of the journey, excluding the stoppage at
Croydon, was about an hour and a quarter. No other car-
riages were joined to the train at Croydon. The train
slackened speed to about four miles an hour at the stop
signal at Hassock's-gate, on the London side of the Clayton
tunnel. At that time he was "looking ahead" through the
glass end of the brake, which commanded both ends of the
train. He was confident that no one left the train at Has•
sock's-gate, because he "looked out both sides," there being
a side light on each side projectUag several inches for the
purpose. He saw nothing thrown from the train. (The
footboard was nearly four feet from the ground. The
Attorney-General stated that it had been measured, and was
3ft. lOin., and that the carriage, which had been brought
there for inspection, was near the Court-house.) At Preston
he saw the prisoner standing on the platform close to the
compartment in which he had been riding, speaking to one
of the ticket-collectors. He had then nothing on his head,
and had a dark under coat on, without any shirt collar. He
seemed completely smothered in blood—his head, his face,
and his hands. He was speaking about medical advice. He
said that he had been brutally treated, that some one had
tried to rob or murder him. He said there were two persons
in the carriage beside himself, and that they had got out on
the way.
Lord Coleridge Did he say whether both of them attacked
him?

itness : tie did not say. He only said they "both got
out on the way." In the carriage on the further side one
blind was down—the corner blind. The blood had gone
through the cocoa-nut matting in the bottom of the carriage,
so that it could not be fully seen until the mat was moved,
but he saw some, and their was blood on the footboard.
While the prisoner was standing on the platform he observed
a piece of watch-chain (like that produced) hanging out of
his shoe, and he said aking hold of it), "What have you got
here?" and on pulling it a watch came mit. It was a gold
watch. Witness said, "How do you account fcr this?" and
the prisoner replied, "I know nothing about it. I have
been cruelly treated." Witrress held out the watch, but he
took no notice of it, and then witness put it on the seat.
Prisoner went on to Brighton with a collector. On getting
to Brighton the witness saw two "flash" sovereigns (the
Hanoverian medals), which he took to tho Superintendent's
office, and he also saw a white pocket-handkerchief, which
he likewise gave to the Superintendent's clerk at the office
Witness said to the prisoner, I have found these two flash
sovereigns." he said, "I know nothing about them. They
are not mine. You had better keep them," and witness
handed them to the Superintendent. Witness said to the
prisoner, "You don't seem to me to be hurt much." Ile said he
was hurt. There was an electric alarm communication
through the train, and it was right through and was in good
working order. If that had been used it would have at-
tracted his attention.

In cross-examination, he said that when the traip slackened
to four miles an hour it went at that rate, and it began to
slacken 50 yards on the London side of Hassock's-gate. It
would only go at that slackened speed kr 15 yards, and then
make up its speed again. On both sides of the train the
doors were unlocked. Before the magistrate he said "he
did not think' any one could have got out. He felt quite
confident of it. When at Preston the prisoner spoke first to
Gibson. He did not hear hildsay anything about a pistol, or
that he had been struck by a countryman, who struck him
with a pistol; or that the elder passenger did not attack
him. Witness said he was confident he used the word
" flash " sovereigns—in his depositions it was "two sove-
reigns "—and that the prisoner said, "I had no sovereigns
about me," and " You had better keep them."
At the instance of the Attorney-General, the original de•
position were referred to by Lord Coleridge, and it was
round to be so ; but Lord Coleridge observed that just before
the a itness had said, "I have found these flash sovereigns,''
that he had them in his hand ; and that looking at them he
said to the prisoner. " I have these sovereigns "—namely,
those he had just called " flash" sovereigns
The cross-examination was then continued, and the witness
admitted saying before the magistrate that it was possible
for a person to get out of a train going Gu miles an hour,
though not with safety. He had also said it was possible for
a passenger to go along the footboard and get into another
carriage if the window was down. He meant that it would
be po,sible, but that there would be great danger in it. The
prisoner had 110 hat on at Preston.
In re-examination by the Attorney-General, the witness
said that the train was slackened only for twenty-five
seconds.
The Attorney-General handed two of the Hanoverian
sovereigns to the witness, and he said those he found were
similar. The two he found, the Attorney-General said, weie
given back to the prisoner. (They were handed to the
Jury)

In 'answer to a question from the jun as to why the train
was slackened, the witness said it was because the signals
were against the train.

The next witness was Stark, a ticket-collector at Preston,
who stated that it was his duty to collect the tickets. For
that purpose he went to the " composite " carriage, and, on
opening the first-class compartment, he ssw the prisoner,
who asked if he could have a wash, and a medical man. He
had no hat on nor any collar round his neck, and he had an
overcoat over his arm. fits face and hands were smeared
with blood, and so was his neck, and there was blood
between his flriers, on his dress, and on his knees. He got
out of the carriage, and then he had a hat—a low felt hat.
Oii lookimg inside the carriage, he found a pool ot blood at
the bottom slid blood on the footboard. 'he prisoner went
on with Gibson, the ticket-collector, to Brighton.
Cross-examined, he said he did not, to his knowledge, say
before the coroner that the prisoner, when the train stopped,
had his hat tn, nor did he remember saying so before the
Magistrates.
In re-examipat,iou, witness said no one
.else got olit at
Preston.

The next witness was Gibson, the ticket-collector at Pres-
ton, who went with the prisoner to Brighton, and who
stated that when the train stopped the prisoner had no hat
on, and that he said he had been murderously attacked, and
wanted a doctor, ache got out of the carriage. Mr. Hall, the
station master, same sip', he observed the watch-chain
hanging out of the prisoner's shoe, three or four inches of

It, The watch was taken out, and the prisoner said he put
it there for safety. His face, hands, and neck were covered
with blood, and he had no collar on. There was blood
inside the carriage close to the door—a considerable quan-
tity of it. When the prisoner was on the platform he put
his hat on—a high hat, a high silk hat The witness went
to Brighton with the prisoner, who said he had been fired at
three times and struck on the head with a blunt instrument;
that he was struck by a countryman; that there were two
persons in the carriage, one of them elderly, who did not
attack him. Witness asked him where the countryman got
out, remarking that the train had not stopped after leaving
Croydon, and prisoner said he got out "on the road."
The Attorney-General ::..etd he say anything about the
elderly gentleman ?
Witness : Yes, he said he also got out on the road. Wit-
ness further stated that he asked prisoner for his ticket, and
he gave it up —No. 3,lBl—and it was now produced. The
prisoner gave his name and address of "Arthur Lefroy, 4,
Cathcart-road, Wallington, Surrey." The prisoner was
taken to the office of 111 r. Anscombe, the superintendent,
and what prisoner had said was stated. A policeman named
Martin was sent for, and then the prisoner was taken to the
Town-hall at Brighton, where he made a statement, which
was taken down in writing. The prisoner was afterwards
taken to the County Hospital, where he was attended by Mr.
ft. Hall, the surgeon, and stated that he had been fired at
three or four times and struck on the head,that he became in-
sensible,and same to his senses just before reaching Preston.
park. In the pocket of the prisoner's overcoat he found a
pocket-book, inside which he found one or two pawn-tickets,
Witness, asked Mr. Hall. the surgeon, whether he meant to
detain the prisoner for the night, and he said he did, and the
prisoner said he could not stay, as he must be at his club.
He was advised by the doctor to stop, but he said he 'roust
go. In going from the hospital to the Town-hall the prisoner
desired to buy a new collar, and the policeman asking the
size, the prisoner said, " 141 in." At that time the prisoner
took out money, and appeared to have 13s. or 14s. A ques-
tion arose as to a cab, and the prisoner said he had not much
mcney, as he had to pay his railway fare. The witness
fin ther stated that he found in the prisoner's pockets two
"Hanoverian sovereigns," such as those produced. He left
the prisoner at the office at Brighton.
Cross-examined by Mr. Williams, witness stated the pr-i
Boner said he had put the watch in his shoe for safety. tie
did not hear Watson say, "What is this ?" He did not hear
all that Watson said. Witness saw the chain hanging out,
and the prisoner said, "I put it there for safety," and then
in a few seconds Watson pulled the watch out. Witness did
not hear the prisoner say he did not know hosv4t came there.
When witness said to the prisoner, "Where did the coun-
tryman get out?" the prisoner said, "He must have got out
on the road." He would not swear that the prisoner said
the elderly gentleman had got out on the road. Before the
magistrate he said he had not asked him about the elderly
gentleman. He was not certain about it. The prisoner was
wearing a high hat.
Lord Coleridge: When he said he was going back to his
club, with a single ticket to Brighton, did no one ask how it
was he had not taken a return ticket?

Witness said it had not occurred to him at the moment.
The prisoner said he had come to Brighton to see Mrs. Nye
Chart, of the Theatre Royal, Brighton.
Lord Coleridge: With a single ticket ?—Witness: Yes.
In answer to Mr. Williams, the witness said the last time
he saw the watch it was in Watson's hand, with a piece of
the chain attached to it. He had said before the magistrate,
"I rode in the carriage from Preston to Brighton, and he
could not dispose of the watch and chain, and did not."
Lord Coleridge: That only shows that he did not dispose of
it then. He was not asked about it at Brighton. Watson
said he put it on the seat, and that it had then a piece of
chain attached to li. His Lordship read his note of Watson's
evidence on the point :—" I handed the whtch to him (the
prisoner). He took no notice of it. I put it on the seat.
He went to Brighton with Gibson in the same carriage."
His Lordship observed that Watson parted with it then,
putting it on the seat.
The next witness was Mr. Hale, the superintendent at
Preston-park, who gave evidence as to what occurred when
the train arrived there. He met the prisoner, who said,
"I have been murderously assaulted by a fellow-passenger
and shot at. Could I have a medical man ?" Be was
covered with blood, but walked with a firm step. He had
no collar or necktie. On his head he had a high hat. The
floor of the carriage and the cushions were covered with
blood, and blood was on the footboard. He turned to the
prisoner and said, "Where is the other passenger ? " Ile
said, "He got out at a station further up.', Witness
said, "That cannot be, as the train does not stop after it
leaves West Croydon," to which he made no reply.
Witness ordered Gibson to get into the compartment with
the prisoner, take him to the superintendent, and tell
him what he had seen and heard. As the prisoner was get •
ting into the carriage, witness saw four inches of a chain
and the edge of a watch hanging out of his shoe, and ob-
served to him, "That is a peculiar place to put it in," and
the prisoner said he did not know it was there. Witness
told him he had better take it out, and Watson stooped
down and pulled it out. The piece of chain resembled the
part now produced, and he was certain that the pieces
formed part of the same chain. There was a great deal of
blood on the floor of the carriage. Gibson, who went with
the prisoner to Brighton, brought back the ticket, No. 3,181,
already produced.
Lord Coleridge: Did you give any Instructions about the
watch ?—Witness: No, only to go with the prisoner to the
superintendent.
That was the last you saw of it ?—I saw it on the cushion.
What was your notion of it ?—I thought he had attempted
suicide
But about the watch? Why should he have it in his shoe?
What did you think about it ?—Well, my Lord, the truth
is, the train was just going off and I had not time to think
about it. _ _

Well, I suppose that is the only answer to be given—that
you did not think about it at all, or else you yourself would
have observed how strange it seemed. You said it was im-
possible that any one else could have got out, to which he
made no answer, and a watch was hanging out of his shoe,
and you sent him on to Brighton with the watch ?—With
directions to the collector to tell all he had seen and heard.
Mr. Williams: Well, at all events, when you last saw the
watch it was with the chain?—Witness: Yes. . . .

Hooper, a clerk in the office of the superintendent at
Brighton, was next called, and stated that the prisoner said
two other passengers had got in at London-bridge, one older
than the other, and that the younger one had fired at and
struck him, and he became insensible until he got to Preston-
park. Watson gave bins two LTanoverian medals which he
had found in the carriage, and he offered them to the pri-
soner, who said they were not his, and they were given to the
policeman, Martin. There wAs a white pocket-handkerchief
saturated with blood. That also was given to Martin, and
they all went to the police office at the Town-hall. Holmes,
the railway detective, searched the prisoner, and the watch
was taken from his pocket. At that time no chain was
attached to it, and it was given back to the prisoner with
the pocket-book. In cross-exmination witness said when
he saw the watch at the Town-hall there was no piece of
chain attached to it. When the watch was produced Watson
had left.

Lord Coleridge asked whether it was mentioned to the
prisoner that the two Hanoverian medals produced were just
like those found upon him.
The witness said it was mentioned, he believed, but he
paid no particular attention; on which
Lord Coleridge observed: You seem, all of you, to have
"paid no particular attention "to anything. It was men-
tioned that the medals picked up, waich the prisoner said
he knew nothing of, were similar to those found upon him.
The witness said it was, and the prisoner said perhaps he
took them at whist.

Lord Coleridge :That is, having just said that he knew
nothing about them, he next said that perhaps he took them
at whist.

I The next witness was Mr. Weston, a town councillor of
Brighton, who was present at the superintendent's when
the prisoner was there, stating he had been shot at. On
examining the slight wounds on his head, the witness said,
You were never shot at. These are mere prods' with
an umbrella." Witness further said he saw bloody finger-
marks on one side of the prisoner's neck and a thumb-mark
on the other, and he pointed out the mar's, and remarked,
"It must have been a hot struggle while it lasted." He
also observed that there were no wounds upon the prisoner
to account for the great quantity of blood found in the car-
riage and the quantity of blood also found upon the prisoner,
and he pointed out a great deal of blood upon his coat.
The witness said he observed that it didnot at all appear to
be a case of suicide, and that the prisoner ought to be
ta`-• en to the Town-hall. The prisoner made no reply at all.
The witness was cross-examined by Mr. Williams as to the
circumstances of this interview It was, be said, outside
the office. He had made a statement about it to a solicitor
at Brighton. This statement was that he saw there were no
gunshot wounds on the prisoner, and that there were bloody
marks upon the neck, which showed that a great strtinle
had taken place. He had not suggested that Lefroy should
be handcuffed on his way to the police-station, but that he
should be taken there. Ile did not tender himself as a wit-
ness at the inquest or before the magistrates. He had ex-
pressed his surprise that he had not been ealled, and his
solicitor had written to the Treasury about it. He had re-
mained outside the office; he did not go inside.
In re-examination by the Attorney-General, the witness
said he suggested that Lefroy should be taken to the police-
station in a closed fly, because he believed he had commited
some crime. -

The next witness was the police-constable Martin, who
stated that he went with Leiroy to the police-station with
two Hanoverian medals and a pocket handkerchief saturated
with blood.
Lord Coleridge : Did you see if it was marked?—No. At
the police office the prisoner made a statement, which was
taken down and he was then taken to the hospital and on his
return purchased a new collar, size 14iin.
Lord Coleridge: Why in the world did'nt you look to see
if there was a mark of a name on the handkerchief ?—I don't
know, my Lord.
Lord Coleridge: Did anybody ever look to see what mark
was on the handkerchief?

-
The Attorney era! s‘u.d no one had. It appeared that
the coins and the handkerchief had been left at the police-
office.

Mr. Gibs,m, the ticket•collector, was re-called, and stated
that he went straight to the superintendent's office, and took
him right into the office, and never saw Mr. Weston, the
previous witness, that he recollected. Had any such con-
versation as represented by him taken place, he must have
heard it. He did not hear it.

_
In re-examination by the Attorney-General, he said he did
not hear any such conversation, and did not see Mr. Weston,
whom he knew very

.
Lord Coleridge : Did you see the watch again: No; never.
Lord Coleridge observed that it appeared clearly to have
been put into the prisoner's pocket.
The Attorney-General said there would be further evidence
that he claimed it as his own.

Mr. Thompson, a clerk in the office of the Clerk of the
Peace, Brighton, was then called, and stated that Lefroy
made a statement to him which he took down in writing,
and which was now read—" Mr. Lefroy reported that he
had been assaulted in the two o'clock train ; that there was
an old gentleman sitting opposite him, and a man having
the appearance of a countryman, who were the only persons
in the carriage; that after passing Croydon, before entering
a tunnel, a shot was fired, and he felt a blow on the head,
and had no further recollection until he arrived at
Preston."

Mr. Terry, the Chief of the Brighton Police, was then
called, and stated that he received the statement at four
o'clock, and that when the prisoner returned from the hos-
pital he read the chief portions of the report to him, and
asked him if they were correct. He said, " Certainly," and
hoped that witness would do his best to find those who had
assaulted him, which witness promised ter do. Witness
asked him if he knew anything of the Hanoverian coins
found in the carriage, and he said " No, and that they
must have been dropped by those engaged in the attack
up:m him. Lefroy was ndt searched ; but witness asked
him what brought hin down, and he said to see Mrs. Nye
Chart. Witness asked him if he would not go to see her,
and he said, "No; not in this state." His head was ban-
daged, and witness said he did not think that Mrs. Nye
Chart would miod about seeing him in that state, but he
said he had important business in town, and must go.
N.thing was said to witness as to the watch found in the
shoe. This Passed in the presence of three officers. He
gave his address, and went home to Croydon.
Lord Coleridge : Did lou see the pocket handkerchief?—
No. . _

I thought it was left at the Town-hall 2—Not in my pre-
sence, my lord.
At all events you did not see it ?—Not until afterwards.

The next witness was Mr. Ball, the house surgeon at the
Sussex County Hospital who had treated the prisoner
there. There was, he said, one slight wound on the
forehead and six small circular wounds on the scalp, and
a small grazed wound at the back of one ear. None of
these were caused by gunshot ; the latter was the only one
which by any possibility could have been, and he thought
it was not. The six seruicirzular wounds were such as might
be caused by the barrel of a small pistol or the end of an
umbrella. The wounds only went down to the lining mem-
brane of the skll three-eighths of an inch. Two or three of
the wounds were oozing blood, and there were smears of
blood. The blood on the face might have oozed from those
wounds, but from the quantity of blood on the clothes he
should say it had not come from him, but from some one
else. There was blood on his legs and on his coat—
great smears of it. (1 he Attorney-General said the clothes
would be produced.) Witness asked prisoner how he came
by the wounds upon him, and he said he did not know, that
lie was shot at, and remembered nothing more. Witness
asked as to his assailant, and he said he was an old man.
Then he said he looked like a countryman, and that there
was another person. Witness wished to keep him at the
hospital. but he said he had to be in town to keep an engage-
ment. The wounds being bandaged and plastered he left.
Witness then went on to state the result of a post-mortent
examination of Mr. Gold, the effect of which was that he
had sustained a pistol shot wound in the neck, and many
gashes on the face, and a fracture of the skull, with various
contused wounds &c., which might have been caused by the
fall from the carriage. The cut wounds, he said, mast have
been caused by a sharp cutting weapon ; there were nine
of them altogether. The pistol shot entered below the right

ear, and lodged in the neck. The immediate cause of death,
he said, was syncope, or failure of the heart caused by the
loss of blood and the shock to the syStem resulting from the
pistol shot wound.
Lord Coleridge: Would the effect of that wound be to
stun him?—Witness ss. And so to stop his powers of
resistance ?—Yes.
In answer to the Attorney-General, the witness stated
that lie should say the pistol had been fired close to the
head.
In cross-eftamination he said some of the wounds—the
cut wounds—must have been caused by a sharp instrument
like a razor or knife. The six circular wounds .on the head
went down almost to the bone, and he believed tney wete not
self-inflicted. Mr. Gold's clothes were much torn—Lefroy's
not at all. The blood on the face and neck might have
proceeded from the six wounds on the scalp.
A juror : Do you consider from the nature of the wounds
on the prisoner's head that he might have been insensible?
Witness : Ile might have felt fainting.
Lord Coleridge : Looking at the quantity of blood in the
carriage, and the nature of Lefroy's wounds, were they in the
least sufficient to cause such a flow of blood ?—Witness : No.
_ _ _

But looking to the nature of the wounds on Mr. Gold's
body they would be sufficient to cause such a flow of blood?
—Certainly.

At this point the trial was adjourned until Saturday.

SECOND DAY.

In a crowded Court, which showed no abatement
of interest in the proceedings, the second day's pro-
ceedings commenced at ten o'clock on Saturday morn-
ing. _ .

The first witness called was Mr. Anscombe, the station-
master at Brighton, to whose office Lefroy was taken, and
who was examined by the ALorney•General. He said he
was at the station on the 27th of June, at twenty minutes
before six, when the prisoner was brou_tht there from the
hospital with Gibson, the ticket-collector, Barnes, a police
inspector, being also there. Witness had had some sailor
mation as to what had already occurred. He questioned
the prisoner, whose head was bandaged, and he said
he had been shot at ; that when he left London-
bridge there were two persons in the carriage, one a
countryman, the other an elderly gentleman. Asked where
they were, the prisoner said, " I don't know." Asked where
he was shot, he said, on entering a tunnel at some dis-
tance, and that he became senseless till he got to the
Preston station. Asked if he was much injured, he said,
"I should think I was, having four or five bullets in my
head." He also said, "I shall want a lawyer and shall
offer a reward." Witness asked the police if he had beets
searched, and told the prisoner he must see what he had
about him. The prisoner said, "What do you mean ? "
Witness said, "To see if you have a knife or pistol," and
he said he had not. At this time Holmes ang Howland
(detectives) came into the office, and the first proceeded
to search him. There were 12s. or 14s. in silver and a
small gold watch in his pocket, with a white face, without
any chain attached to it, and there were also two Hano-
verian medals taken from his pocket, which were like
those already produced. Witness said to the prisoner,
"That looks queer: for some similar were found in the
carriage." He said, "I know nothing about them," adding
"I must have got them in playing at whist." A pocket-book
was also found (produced). When that was taken from his
pocket, the prisoner said, That's private," and it was given
back to him. At six o'clock he left the station with Holmes
and Howland. About seven witness heard of a telegram of
the body being found in the tunnel.
Cross-examined by Mr. M. Williams, witness said the pri-
soner said, "The two men were with me in the carriage at
London-bridge." Holmes was a detective of the London
police. The prisoner was thoroughly searched so far as he
could see, and no chain was found upon him.
Lord Coleridge asked how the chain was fastened to the
watch.

The Attorney-General said Mrs. Gold should be asked.
Lord Coleridge: The chain was broken, and a part would
be attached to the watch. I want to know how. If attached
in the ordinary way, by a swivel, nothing would be easier
than to open the swivel and throw away the chain. There-
fore I want to know about that.
Counsel said it should be inquired intl.
The witness, in further cross-examination, said he saw
nothing of the bloody handkerchief spoken of on Friday.
Howland was then called, and stated that he was at the
Town-hall between five and six, when Lefroy came with
Martin, the policeman, and Gibson, the ticket-collector. He
took notes of what Lefroy said and read from them the effect
of what he stated. Frederick Terry's note (given on Friday)
was read to Lefroy, and he then stated just as he entered the
first tunnel a shot was fired and he felt a blow on his head
which rendered him insensible, and when he recovered
conssiousness it was just before he came to Preston. Wit-
ness put some questions to him, and Lefroy said he sat on
the left-hand side, facing the engine. He was asked where
the two men entered the train, and he said at London-
bridge ; he said that both were there before it left the
station. He said the first was aged 60 or 80, the other about
50; that the one was slight, with gray whiskers, the other
with dark whiskers. He could give no description of his
dress. Asked if he had any firearms about him, he said
" No; you can search me if you like." Witness said it would
be satisfactory that he should be searched and Holmes
searched him. Witness saw a watch, taken out of his pocket,
and prisoner said,' That's mine," adding that the chain was
stolen ; and being asked what kind of chain it was, he said
"A metal cable chain." He also said, "I found the watch
on the floor of the carriage when I recovered ; " he added
that he had lost 20s. or 255. in money. He then said he
wished to return to London as he had an appointment in the
Strand at eight. Witness told him he had better return to
his friends, and he left by the 6.10 train in charge of Holmes,
wituess going part of the way by the same train.
Cross-examined by Mr. Williams, witness said he did not
tell Lefroy who he was. He had made no entry in his book that
Lefroy said "The watch is mine." He did not think it neces-
sary to put it down.
The Attorney-General observed that it did not purport to
be a record of the conversation.

-- --
Lord Coleridge: They are mere notes.
Mr. 'Williams asked witness if he thought it of any im-
portance, and he said he did not at that moment—he
thought it was his watch. He believed Holmes and Ans-
combe were present—he believed so—he was certain that
Anscumbe was there. He thought it necessary to write
down about the cable chain, not about "That's my watch."
Adied to read what he had written, he did so :—" Two
gents in carriage, one an old gent. After passing Croydon,
shot, ezz. Sat left-hand corner, old gent opposite. Saw
flash close to where second gent was sitting, but did not see
firearms. Insensible at Preston. Gold watch on floor, metal
chain gone." Witness said Lefroy made the statement as to
the gold watch and metal chain at the office at Brighton,
and also as to the watch being his. Witness heard nothing
of the handkerchief. No knife or firearm was found on the
prisoner, nor cartridges. He had heard that a search had
been made for the firearm. He did not think the matter of
sufficient importance to detain the prisoner.
Re-examined by the Attorney-General: He did not know
at that time that any one had been murdered. He had not
put down everything that occurred at the search, but chiefly
what the prisoner had said as to what passed in the carriage.
He was certain that the prisoner said, "It is my watch,"
and certainly he never said, " It is not mine," nor disclaimed
all knowledge of it. _

Lord Coleridge (to witness); You did put those questions?
—Yes.

Lord Coleridge: You did not ask him what he came to
Brighton for 17-No ;_Mr. Terry mked him.

ferd Coleridge: You are a detective; did you ask how he
had only a single ticket?—No, my lord, I did not know what
ticket he had.

Holmes was then called, and stated that he was a detec-
tive of the railway company attached to the Metropolitan
Police Force. At the office he heard Mr. Terry (the chief
of the Brighton police) read the note of the prisoner's pre-
vious statement, and prisoner said it was quite correct.
He was with Howland at the office and searched Lefroy
and found in his pocket the gold, white-faced watch with-
out any chain attached to it. The prisoner said he had
lost the chain in the carriage, and that it was a common
metal chain—a " cable " pattern—adding that he had lost
255. in silver. Some silver was found in his pocket. Two
Hanoverian medals were taken from his pocket, and he
said he supposed he had taken them in playing whist. The
pocket-book produced was also found. On opening it,
prisoner said, "I have something private there," and it was
given back to him. Witness went with the prisoner to
Croydon by the 6.10 tram, and on the way asked him if
he was in the habit of carrying firearms, and he said, "NO.
They stopped at Balcombe, and there he saw Howland on
the platform, and Howland made a statement to him.
Brown, the stationmaster at ,1 hree Bridges, went with him
to the carriage where the prisoner was. The prisoner sat on
the near side, with his back to the engine, and witness sat
directly opposite him, and Brown got in and sat on the same
side as the prisoner. Brown (said the witness) spoke te me
and said something, but I don't think the prisoner heard it.
(That being so, the statement was not gimen in evidence.)
The witness went on to state that he went with the prisoner
to 4, Cathcart-road, Wallington, and they went Into the
house, and he then asked the prisoner to give him the par-
ticulars, and he took them down.
Lord Coleridge: Particulars of the whole story ?—Witness
Of the case.

The statement taken down was here produced, and read
as follows :

"Arthur Lefroy, (to., took the two o'clock train from
Londou-bridge, first class. Two other passengers in the com-
partment—one younger, the other elder. On arriving at the
first tunnel after passing Croydon, saw a flash and heard a
report of firearms. Received a blow on the head from the
younger man and became insensible. Recovered conscious-
ness at Preston."

Further, the prisoner stated, and witness took down these
particulars

"Six wounds on the head, supposed to have been caused
by a gouge. Six Hanoverian medals found in the carriage
and three in his pockets. A metal chain was taken from his
watch. Watch of Abyssinian gold, No, 56312 (true number,
16261) ; maker's name Griffiths."

The witness, in answer to the Attorney-General, said he
asked Lefroy the number of the watch, and he told him
16312. Witness then asked for it, and tried to open it and
could not, and gave it to a Mr. Clayton, who was at the house,
and he also could not open it, and gave it back to witness,
who then opened it and found the number 16261 and the
maker's name Griffiths. Witness said to prisoner, "You've
made a mistake," and he said " Yes, I forgot." Witness
as ed him if he knew the maker's name, and he said, "No,
I bought the watch for a friend of mine some time ago."
The maker's name was Griffiths, Mile-end-road, London.
He then wrote the number and name down on the paper pro-
duced, his original note made at the time. All was written
down, witness said, at Wallington. On the sth of July
witness was examined before the coroner. Before that lie
had had no information as to the number of the watch from
the watch-cleaner, Bovin, or from anybody but the prisoner.
He was examined, he believed, before Miss Bovin, and he
producd his note before the coroner.
Lord Coleridge : This matter is of importance-- the dates
of the examinations.

Ihe A.ttorne)--General said the coroner should be communi-
cated with.

The witness went on to state that Lefroy told him he
should be at Wallington till twelve next day, and then at a
club in the Strand. Then witness left the house and went
to the railway station, 400 yards from the house, and there
he had a telegram, in consequence of which he returned to
the outside of the house, having been away, he should think,
six or seven minutes. He did not enter the house, but
remained outside, and while he was there he did not see
the prisoner leave • he thought he could not leave at the
front door without his seeing him. Ile remained outside
about an hour, until the police came. One went to the back
and the other entered, and the prisoner was not thera.
Cross-examined by Mr. Williams, the witness said he had
not seen pawn-tickets in the pocket-book.
The Attorney-General said another witness spoke to
that.
Cross-examination continued ; The prisoner did not resist
a search. No knife, or firearms, or cartridge was found
upon him ; no chain, no second pocket-book, and no purse.
lie knew after passing Three Bridges that a dead body had
been found in the tunnel. fie first heard at Wallington that
there was no watch on the body before he put these ques-
tions to the prisoner.
Lord Coleridge : Just remember. You said the telegram
was after you left the house.
Witness said he had a telegram at East Croydon to take
the number of the watch.
Lord Coleridge : You have not mentioned that.
The Attorney-General produced the first telegram from
Balcombe to East Croydon :
" Tell Holmes to take number of watch on wounded man.
Man found has no watch."
Cross-examination continued : The witness stated that at
Balcombe Brown said, " Man found dead in tunnel." He
did not think thai the prisoner heard it. Asked as to how he
wrote the statement, the witness said the whole was written
at Wallington in the house there. • No part was written at
Brighton.
Mr. Williams said he thought that the passage as to the
metal chain was written at Brighton.

Lord Coleridge referred to hi'S note, and said it was not so.
The witness had said that all was written at Wallington.
Mr. Williams : Then, you took no note of the conversation
at Brighton?—Witness: No.
The cross-examination was continued as to a portrait of
Lefroy in the Daily Telegraph, on v.hieli Lord Coleridge said
that if it was suggested that it might have influenced the
witnesses as to identity, it ought to be produced, and it was
accurdihgly produced, and by his Lordship's direction shown
to the jury. (It did not bear any resemblance to the
prisoner.)
The cross-examination was continued, and witness said
he had not himself taken part in the search for the pistol.
When he left the house at Wallington Mr. Clayton was
with him. He did not at that time know that the watch
had been found in Lefroy's shoe. No one mentioned it to
Lord Coleridge: I think you may take it tha.t whenever
there was anything of importance to be mentioned, it was

not mentioned to any one to Whom it Would be of any nee
to mention it.
Witness, in further cross-eXaminatiori, said he knew that
the prisoner was wounded, that thcre was a dead body
found on the railway without a watch, and that the prisoner
had given a wrong number of the watch found upon him;
yet, know,ing this, he lett him at the house.
In re-exartination by the Attorney-General, the witness
said he had reported the statement as to the number of the
watch to another officer (Sergeaiit floss) that night.
Lord Coleridge :You were told by the Vrinoner he had
bought the watch from a friend. Did you ask sui Tho it
was ?—Witness: No.
Lord Coleridge: It would have been a very natural thing
to ars, roul4 it not? You knew there was no watch found
on the dead body, ~.!nl he had given you a wrong number of
the watch he had, and said he lrtd, it from a friend, and you
did not ask him whol—Witness : No.

Ross being caned, stated that at two o'clock did th.o morn-
ing of June 28, Holmes told him the number of the watthj
and he circulated it to the different stations. He and
Sergeant Tobart received from Holmes the number and the
maker's name, and they were circulated. The number was
1,6201; maker's name Griffiths, Mile-end-road.
-• • "

The next vVittess Vas Thomas Jennings, who, with his
nephew, found the body of Mr. Gold in the tunnel at Bal-
combe at five o'clock in the etening of the 27th of June. It
was, he said, lying on the six-foot way, the space between
the two lines, the up and down line. The body vas on the
back, the head towards Brighton. It was still Warm, but
life was extinct. About 18 yards above that, or nearer
London, there was a mark of blood on a sleeper, also
marks as if some heavy body had fallen down at that
spot, and the appearance of dragging or disturbance of the
dust. Seven yards below the body, nearer Brighton, there
was a boot, and on the body was only one boot, and the
coat was dragged up under the shoulders. One cuff was
found on the body and another off, and there was no hat
there.
In cross-examination, he said the body was that of a large,
heavy man.
The witness's nephew was called to confirm him, and was
not cross-examined.
Lewis, a policeman at Balcombe, gave confirm4ory evi-
dence, anti stated that he found a broken eye-glass near
the body, the rest of it and the cord being on the body.
He also found a lcng piece of gold neckchain (produced)
a little piece of which broke off in taking it off. He also
found a pocket-book, containing some blank cheques and a
first-class season ticket, and Mr. Gold's name upon it. Mr.
Gold's collar and necktie were also found, saturated with
Mood, and the collar with his name upon it. In cross-
examination he said Mr. Gold's coat was not:torn. He only
found one pocket-book on the body, and no purse, nor skull-
cap, nor money bag, nor money, except a copper or two.
He had helped to search for the pistol, and had not found it.
Diligent search had been made, and gangs of men employed,
but it had not been found. He had heard that a knife had
been found.

The Attorney-General said that several knives had been
fonnd, and they should all be produced, though he did not
think that any of them would be material. A great number
of things were found on the line.
Mr. White, a carriage inspector, was then called to prove
the state of the carriage. There was, he said, a great
quantity of blood on the footboard, running from the floor
of the carriage, and he observed marks of bloody fingers
on the footbovd. The carriage was stopped, and taken
from the traffic, and he searched it. He saw a large
quantity of blood on the floor and on the cushions on the
off-side. He found three bullet marks—one close to the
bell-pull (on the side nearest the engine), one on the
" top-back " (above the shoulders) on the same side, and the
third in the cushion on the other side opposite to the Well-
pull. The bullet near the bell-pull was still in the carriage.
embedded in the wood, and the carriage was close to the
court. There was also a small hole in the cushion of the
seat. One of the bullets had been taken out. From the
footboard to the floor was if I. 2in., and from the footboard
to the sleeper 31 t. 10in.
Cross-examined by Mr. Williams, he said two of the bullet
holes were near the alarm bell—the other on the opposite
side. He only found three. Re-examined, he said there
were other marks as of a struggle on the edges of the seats
on both sides of the carriage. One bullet was near the bell-
pull, the other over the near side seat of the train going from
London to Brighton. It was the platform side of course, the
near side—the left-hand side going down to Brighton.
Lord Coleridge here observed that if either side desired
the jury to see the carriage they could do so.
Mr. Williams said he should desire it.
Lard Coleridge said they could see it as it was near
the court-house, at the station of the Chatham and Dover
Railway.
Mr. Williams said he should like them to see it to-day
before the evidence was concluded.
Lord Coleridge: Then, let it be so.
It was then arranged with the Sheriff that the jury should
go to see it during the midday adjournment.
Barns, a policeman, stated that he took a bullet from the
"top back," and it was produced before the coroner and
before the magistrates. It was a small bullet.
The Attorney-General said he now proposed to call the two
other medical men who had seen the body, Dr. Bond and
Mr. Byass. As far as he was concerned, he was satisfied to
leave that part of the case on the evidence of Mr. B. Hall;
examined on Friday; but he would put these witnesses in
the box that his learned friend might ask them any ques-
tions.
Dr. Bond was first called. He stated that he had made
the poet martem examination in the presence of Mr. Byass
and Mr. Hall. He had heard Mr. gall give Ms evidence,
and it was correct. One wound on the knee, he said, was
during life; an injury on the other leg was after death.
The skull was fractured, and probably was caused by the
body being thrown out; he could not say whether before or
after death—he rather thought after death. All the cut
wounds were during life, inflicted by a cutting instrument.
One was a sort of stab in the eye, causing a wound he
could put his finger in. He found a bullet-hole in the
neck, and found a bullet, rather a small bullet, the size of
a bean, such as could be fired from a small revolver. Such
a wound would be likely to cause momentary insensibility,
and it would eventually cause death—perhaps in a fortnight
or three eeks. The actual cause of death was syncope,
caused by the loss of blood and the shock to the system. In
cross-examination, he said there would not be much loss of
blood from the shot wound, but there was a grew, flow of
blood from the cut wounds, of which there were six in the
face, besides two on each thumb and several on the fingers
of the left hand, making fourteen altogether.
Lord Coleridge: Was there anything to indicate that the
pistol shot was close to the head ?—Yes. There were marks
of powder on the skin, so that the pistol was fired probably
within a foot.

(Mr. Byass was not called, as Mr. Williams, in answer to
the Attorney-General, said he did not desire him to be called,
and the Attorney General did not think it necessary.)
A labourer working on the line named Windsor stated
that after the train passed Hassock's-gate having slackened
its pace for a short time, he picked up a low-crowned hat
(produced), and he saw no one get out of the train. If any
one had got out he must, he said, have seen them. Cross-
examined, he said the train slackened 400 yards above the
station, and he was about 300 yards above the station, so
that it began to slacken 100 yards from him. After the
train passed he saw the hat. He was sure it was not upon
the line before it psssed.
A lad named Short, who was with Windsor, the previous
witness, was called to confirm him. It was, he said, the day
he heard Mr. Gold's body was found. The train slackened
its pace, and then went on as before, and after it passed he
saw a low-crowned felt hat. When the train slackened
no one got out, and if anyone had he must have seen
them. He saw the other witness pick up the hat. It was
not there before.

A corndealer named Wood, residing near Hassock's-gate
who was a passenger in the train, stated that near Hassock's
gate he found the train losing speed—indeed, it woke him
and he looked out, and observed that he was close to Has-
sock's-gate, and he noticed a hat on the line. No one got
out there that he saw. The train went slowly for a little,
and while it was going slowly he looked out. He saw men
working on the line, but he saw no one getting out. In
cross-examination, he said the speed of the train was so slow
that it woke him up, and he thought it was stopping, to that
he actually thought of getting out.
Peel, the engine-driver who drove the train, was then
called, and stated that he heard no fog signals on the
journey. At Hassock's-gate he slackened speed, as the
signals were against him, and he was looking out and saw
no one leave the train. In cross-examination he said at no
place did the train slacken to a less speed than thirty miles
an hour, certainly never to four.

Aylwin, the stoker, was called, and stated that the steam
was merely shut off, and he saw no one leave the train.
In answer to Lord Coleridge, the witness said they first
saw the signal at Burgess-hill, two miles off, and they had
the Westinghouse brake, which could stop a train at 150
yardz.
Nye, tilt) rear guard, stated that the speed of the train
for three or four seconds slackened to four miles an hour.
He saw no one leave the train. lie looked out, and could
see along the whole of the train, and he saw some lads on
the line.

Mrs. Nye-Chart, lessee of the theatre at Brighton, stated
that she had no knowledge of Lefroy, nor did she know of
any business on which he would have called to see her.

Picknell, a ganger on the line, proved that on the evening
of the 27th of June he picked up a collar ou the line, three-
quarters of a mile below Balcombe. It had blood on it. (It
was produced, stained with blood, and bore no Jeanie.) It
was torn.

A platelayer named Tulett stated that at five minutes to
three on the 27th of June he picked up a hat produced, and
already proved to be Mr. i 4 old's, on the line, half a mile
below Burgess-hill. lie saw it, he said, directly after the
two o'clock train to Brighton had passed.

Kate Greenfield proved that on the 3rd of July, near Has-
seek's•gate, she picked up a purse on the grass, just within
throwing distance of the line. It was a little purse (already
indentified as like Mr. Gold's, and now produced, torn).
It was a quarter of a mile above Hassock's-gate, towards
London.

----- .
Lord Coleridge observed that Mrs. Gold had said her
husband had a purse like that to keep two or three
sovereigns in.

A small bullet was here produced, and identified by Dr.
Bond as that found by him in the body of 51r. Gold.

A ganger on the line proved that he found the umbrella
already identified as Mr. Gold's. He found it in the Clayton
tunnel, on the up-side. (Clayton tunnel follows Hassock's.
gate, towards Wighton )
At this stage of the trial the usual adjournment took
place, and
Lord Coleridge dire3ted that the jury should be taken by
the UndereSheriff to view the carriage. At their desire the
inspector of carriages was to attend them.
On the reassembling of the Court, Mr. Ellis, the stationer
at Croydon, at whose shop the prisor-er paid away the two
11 auoverian medals, was called and examined by the
Attorne)-General. He had known the prisoner, he said, for
18 months as Lefroy. On the morning of the 27th of Juno
he had a note from him (read), written in his handwriting,
but in the name of airs. Clayton, at whose house he lived,
desiring him to call at the house for an order for
stationery. He went accordingly a little before ten
o clock, and saw a servant, but did not see Mrs. Clayton.
He waited about ten minutes. While he was waiting
a note was brought to him in the handwriting of the
prisoner, desiring him to get several beoks, One of which
was "Love's Labour Lost." While he was waiting he
heard some one leaving the house. He heard the gate click,
and looked out and saw the top of prisoner's hat. Knowing
him well, he knew it was him. When lie got home his
boy gave him an envelope, addressed in the prisoner' a hand-
writing, and containing Os o Hanoverian medals, a shilling,
and a black piece of paper. lhe medals were produced, and
the Attorney-General stated that the three found upon the
prisoner were given back to him, to which Lord Coleridge
assented. The three found in the carriage were missing.)
At this time the witness stated the prisoner was indebted
to him in the sum of .£1 is. 61., and had promised payment.
The htY told him how he had come to receive the envelope
containing thtse medals. The boy told him he had been
given the envelope by the prisoner as containing two
sovereigns, and had given him 139. 6d. change. Upon hear-
ing this he at once sent his boy back to the house, hut the
prisoner had left.
A juror asked what kind of hat Lefroy had on, and the
witness said a tall one.
The boy was called, and confirmed Mr. Ellis's evidence,
and stated that Lefroy told him there were two sovereigns
in the envelope (which wasclosed), and asked for the change,
saying it was 133., and witness gave it to him. Lefroy said
he was in a hurry, as he was going by the train. He left at
about five minutes past ten. There was a train which left
Wallington for Loudon at 10,49, and he was at the station
to sell papers, but did not see the prisoner. In cross-examin-
ation, the boy said he had stated before the magistrates that
he must have seen Lefroy if he had been there, and he was
sure he did not go by that train.

Mr. Turpin, a detective of the company, stated that he
knew the Wallington Station, and there was a station at
waddon, nearer London, about two miles from Wallington.
There was a train from Wallington at 10.49. which left
Waddon at 10 53, arriving in London at 11.20. me next
train from Wallington was 11.23, leaving Waddon at
11.27, and arriving in London at 11.53. There was another
from Carshalton, arriving in London at 11.23. In
cross-examination, he said Carshalton was a mile from
Wallington across the country. The nearest station for
the prisoner would be Wallington, where there was a train
at 1.. 4P.

1 t next head o. evidence gone into was as to thr pawning
and r deeming of the pistol. Creek, a pawnbroker's as-
sistant at Mr. Adams's. High-street, Borough, stated that on
the 2nd of June, 1881, au overcoat was pledged by William
Lee, 8, Southampton-street, Peckham, for 10s. Looking at
the ticket he identified it. The coat, he said, had never been
redeemed, and was given up to the police. Then, on the
11th of Juno, a dress suit had been pledged, and taken by
another assistant. Then, on the 21st of June, a small re-

volver was pledged for ss. (One similar was produced, and
handed to the jury, the barrel only 3in. long.) On Monday,
the Tith of June, some one came to redeem it. The other
assistant went for it to the warehouse. The ticket foe the
pistol was in these terms :—" Revolver, William Lee,
Southampton-street, Peckham."
The Attorney-General pointed out that the ticket was the
same ge the other in the name and address, except in sub-
stituting "g il for " 8 "
Witness said Whew the revolver was pledged some
cartridges Were brought by the person who brought
it, and he took them avea7. The pistol was loaded,
cud witness declined to take it in in that state, and
the Pereon pawning it took the cartridges cut and took
them away esieh him. The person stood in one of the
"boxes," or compartments in the shop facing the
counter, and behind trle counter the witness stood. He
had seen the prisoner in Lewo Gaol and before the magis-
trates. He saw him at the gaol with seven or eight other
men, all dressed in ordinary dress, and he then recognized
the prisoner, and he now said that he firmly believed he was
the man who pledged the clothes and the pistol. "To the
best of re,e judgment and belief," said the witness, "he is
the man.' It was the same person, he believed, who pawned
the things who redeeraed them. It was between eleven and
twelve in the forenoon on the 27th of June that the prisoner
(as he believed) redeemed the revolver. After the inquest
witness sent to the police about the matter, his attention
having been directed to it. (The overcoat and dress-suit
were here produced and identified.)
The Attorney-Geieeral observed that the ticket!' of the 2nd
and 11th of June were found in the prisoner's pockets.
Cross-examined by Mr. Williams, the witness stated that
his attention had been directed to the matter by what Ap-
peared in the newspapers, and it was after that that he com-
municated with the police and went down to Lewes to iden-
tify the prisoner. Before the magistrates he said that to the
best of his belief the prisoner was the man, but he could not
swear to him, and he said so now. As regarded the hour at
which the pistol was redeemed, he said before the magis-
trates that he could not speak positively, as the matter was
net eufffciently impressed upon his mind. He had also said
he could not speak to the address, and that he could only
speak to the prisoner to the best of his belief "as a customer."
Mr. William!' : Now, pawnbrokers are not very particular
as to names, are they ?—Witness: All I can say is that I am
very particular.
Mr. Williams: Look at these three tickets; are they the
same ? Witness said the names were "William Lee,'-'
"William Lee," and "James Leigh," and the addresses
differed as to the numbers of the street. He had not brought
his book, not having been desired to bring it.
The Attorney-General: If my friend desires it, the book
shall be telegraphed for.
Mr. Williams said he had not asked for it.
Lord Coleridge: If the Attorney-General is wise, he will
send for it.
The Attorney-General: Telegraph for it at once.
Mr. Williams continued his cross-examination : He asked
the witness whether he did not say before the magistrates,
"I swear he is the man who pledged the goods on the 2nd
of June, because the name and address are the same, that is
the only reason" and he said he did say so.
The Attorney-General said that answer only applied (ae
the context showed) to the pledging on the 11th of June. as
to which the witness had said he was not, he believed, in the
shop when the clothes were pledged.
Lord Coleridge said it was true that the witness had
spoken a little hastily as to the 11th of June, when he was
not in the shop, and as ,to that he said be could only swear
because of the similarity of the name and address. But he
saw the man on the 2nd of June and the 21st of June.
Mr. Williams asked the witness whether he did not mean
that he spoke to the identity of the man on the 2nd of June
and the 21st on account of the similarity of the name and
address, and he said no, he did not mean that.
Lord Coleridge said the witness had never said so, he con-
tined it to the occasion on the 11th of June, when he was not
In the shop.
Mr. Williams then put it to the witness again whether he
had not said he only believed the prisoner to be the man,
and would not swear to it, and he assented to that. Mr.
Williams then elicited from the witness that after the 27th
of June a youth pledged with him a small pistol, on which
he asked Is. Witness asked him whose it was, and he said
It was his own. There was then in an adjoining compart-
ment an inspector named Jarvis, who had charge of this
case, and the inspector desired him to bring it with him to
Cuckfield, when he went before the magistrates. It Was
a few days prior to the examination before the magistrates.
The inspector told him to bring it to the solicitor's office at
London-bridge. He did so, and showed it to the solicitors,
and his statement was taken down, but not about the pawn-
ing of the pistol, and he took it back to the shop. ',this was
a few days before he went to Cuckileld, and when he went
to Cuckfield he took it with him—no doubt because he was
told to do so. He did not show it to anyone at Cuckfield.
In re-examination by the Attorney-General, the witness;
stated that on the 2nd of June he gave out the ticket for
' the coat with the name "William Lee," and he ceuld not
say whether the personpledging told him how to spell the
name. On the 21st of June it was "William Leigh, ' and he
could not say whether he wrote it so by the person's direc-
tion or not. Persons did not always pawn things with their
- right names and addresses, and those given were taken.
As regarded the second pistol mentioned (the Attorney-
General said he did not know with what view), the witness
stated that he told the inspector it was similar to the one
before pledged on the 21st of June. and then the inspector
told him to bring it to Cuckfield. That was all. It was not
the same pistol, but similar. It had not been redeemed, and
it was at the warehouse.
The Attorney-General: Let us have it on Monday with your
book and the duplicates of the tickets.
The other assistant, whose name is Allright, was then
called, and spoke to the pawning of the 11th of June, when
Creek was not present. He said he was present on the 21st
of June, when the revolver was pledged. He was standing
by the side of Creek, who asked Lefroy to draw the cart-
ridges from the pistol, and he did so
The Attorney-General: Is or is not the prisoner the same
person who pledged it'?
The Witness : He is.
The Attorney-General: Do you speak with doubt or with
certainty?
The witness: With certainty. Witness further stated that
on the 27t1s of June he was asked to fetch the revolver, and
did so. It was about twelve, he knew, for he was just about
to wash himself to go ieto the shop, and he did so about
twelve at noon. He did not see the person who redeemed
the revolver, but he fetched it about twelve o'clock.
Cross-examined by Mr. Williams, he said that on the 21st
of June he stood next to Creek when he took the revolver in
pledge. He saw the other pistol pledged after the 27th, and
it was not the same.
An assistant at the shop of a pawnbroker named Vaughan,
in the Strand, proved that a watch (of aluminium) was
pawned there on the 30th of May last, and he produced the
ticket.
Mr. Williams asked how it was connected with th
prisoner.
The Attorney-General said it was found in his pocket at
the house.
The ticket was put in, and bore the words "John Lee,
Southamptonstreet, Peckham. Metal watch-55."
The witness, being asked to look at the prisoner, said he
believed him to be the person who pawned the watch. In
cross-examination lie said he had only seen him in the dock
here since the pledging. _

A juror asked the number of the watch, if there was one.
It appeared to be 1,135.
An assistant in the shop of another pawnbroker—a Mr.
Sutton, in Stockbridge.terrace, Pimlico—identified a ticket
issued by him on the 20th of June, 1881, bearing the words
'James Leigh, New-street. Two coats.'
The Attorney-General stated that this also was one of the
tickets found in the prisoners pocket at his house, about to
be produced and identified as so found.
An assistant to another pawnbroker, in Croydon, iden-
tified a ticket issued by him on the 22nd of June, 1881, in
the name of "John Lee" for "four plated spoons, in a black
bag." (Neither of these witnesses had any recollection of
the prisoner.)
- - •

A sergeant in the Sussex Constabulary proved that on the
night of the 27th of June he with another officer visited the
house where the prisoner lived (at 4, Cathcart-road, Wal-
lington) and found a light overcoat (produced), stained with
blood, still damp. On searching the pockets of the coat he
found a pocket-book, and also five pawntickets—those
already produced.
The Attorney-General said two related to the revolvers
and the others to the other pawnings proved.

_
The superintendent of the East Sussex Police stated that
in Lewes Gaol the prisoner, on the day after he was appre-
hended, asked him who had the pawntickets found in his
coat, and witness said he had them. He then asked witness
to give him the ticket for the dress suit, for the purpose of
his defence. One of the tickets was for a dress suit pledged
On the 11th of June.

The next witness was Mr. Clayton, at whose house the
prisoner lived. The prisoner, he said, had lodged at his
house. His real name was Percy Lefroy Mapleton, and he
was related to his wife. He had lived with them since his
return from Australia, occupying a room with one Seale.
The prisoner paid be. 6d. a week for his lodging, but had
not paid for some weeks. At one time the prisoner had a
second.class ticket to London, but it had run out. He
believed the prisoner had some employment . • he said so—
on the staff of the Era newspaper. On the 27th of June
the witness left his home at a quarter to nine to go to his
business. At that time the prisoner was not up; but he saw
him before he left, and he had not told him he was
going to Brighton. At a quarter-past six witness returned,
and later in the evening, about nine, he saw the prisoner
with his head bandaged up, and asked him what was the
matter. He said he had been assaulted in the train going
to Brighton and knocked on the head with a gouge, and
that he had become insensible until he got to Preston, and
he pointed to the blood on his trousers. At that time
Holmes, the officer, was with him, and he appeared lo be
telling Holmes what had happened. He asked the prisoner
what had become of the men who assaulted him, and he
said they must have got out of the train; he did not say
at any station ; he supposed he meant as the train was
going on. Holmes said he had come with him to see if
he could remember more clearly what had happened.
Holmes wrote down what he said and then read it over to
him, and the prisoner assented to it as correct. Holmes
asked the prisoner she number of his watch, and he gave a
number, and then Holmes asked to look at the watch, and
did s'e. • He then said, "You have given me the wrong
number," and mentioned another number, and he also men-
tioned the maker's name and the address, "Mile-end." The
watch had no chain to it at that time. After Holmes left
witness spoke to the prisoner, and said, "It's a strange
affair." Ile said it was, and that he hoped those who had
done it would be canght. He told witness he should go to
Dr. Cressy, a medical man there. After this witness went
out, leaving the prisoner there, and a little after ten he
came home and found the prisoner Ilea gone; and then the
police came and searched the house, and took the overcoat
and other things. Asked to look at the overcoat and to
say if it was the prisoner's, he said he believed it was. Asked
to look at the ether things pledged—two coats, said
lie could not swear to them and had no believe about them.
Asked to look at the black beg, he said he believed it was his;
he had missed one, and believed this was the osse. Asked to
look at the plated spoons pledged, he said they were not
his ; and being asked whether he knew any one with the
initials It. M. D. (the initials on the spoons), he said "No."
He did not know that the prisoner had any relations or
friends of that name. Asked if the prisoner had a watch,
he said he had a metal one, and being shown the aluminium
watch produced and identified as pawned, he said Is
bought that was the one,
in answer to Hr. H. Williams, he said the prisoner was
twenty-ote, and had always been sickly, and often very weak.
On the 23rd of June the witness's wife was confined, and on
the 21st the prisoner volunteered to remain at home to
fetch a doctor if necessary. Ile came home about twenty
minutes past seven in the evening, and he saw the prisoner.
who, indeed, opened the door to him. (The witness said
his wife was here subpoemed by the prosecution.)
Re-examined by the Attorney. General, the witness said the
prisoner was a second cousin of his wife, and had lived with
them nine 3 ears. He was examined first before the coroner
and the magistrates. Of course he had taken great interest
in the case. A solicitor, Mr. Dutton, had attended for the
Prisoner and examined the witness, and slid not ask him as
to the prisoner being at home on the 21st of June. Asked
when he first recollected that the prisoner was at home that
day, he said it was never out of his mind, but he had not
mentioned it to the prisoner's sulictur, nor to any one
(except his wife) until to-day.
Lord Coleridge, looking to the depositions, observed that
the witness was not examined until several days after
Creek, the pawnbroker's assistant, who spoke to the pawn-
ing on the 21st of June, and asked the witness whether he
had not read Creek's evidence, and he said he had, and his
Lordship then asked him why he did not mention what he
had now swore to the solicitor, and he said he did not
think it necessary to do so.
Lord Coleridge : You reserved it for the trial ?—Witness :
Yes.

_
Lord Coleridge; Ah ; yes.
she Attorney-General observed that the prisoner's solici-
tor had exarnided the witness at great length.

Lord Coleridge : Yes. _
The Attorney-General read from the cross-examination
at some length to show that this matter was not adverted
to, and the witness again admitted.that.le had never men-
tioned it to him. Ile said lie had discussed it with his wife
before and after he went before the magistrates.

Mr. M. Williams applied to be allowed to re-examine the
witness, and was allowed to do so, and elicited that the
communications with the solicitor were through his wife,
and there was Mr. Seale, the prisoner's fellow lodger, in
the house. No question was asked by the prisoner's soli-
citor as to this matter. - -

The Attorney-General asked witness whether the prisoner
had communicated to him his address between the 27th of
June and the 9th of July, whin he was arrested; aid he said
he had not.

The Attorney-General said he did not suggest that he had;
that was not the view with which he put the question at all.
Lord Coleridge: You took, you have said, a great interest
in the case; you knew the general effect of what Creek, the