The Express.
London, England, 1862-08-27 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, AUGUST 27, 1862.

THE MURDER OF A POLICEMAN AT ASHTON.
The case was renamed yesterday, when, after additional
evidence.
Mr. Digby Seymour roes to address the jury on behalf of
Ward and Hipwell. The learned gentleman said that sal.
dour had • jury in St. George's Hall been called to thread
their weary way through such contradictions and difficulties
as the case for the prosecution presented. He bad watched
the case carefully to see how the Attorney-General would
prove the facts alleged ; and was bound to say that
the learned gentleman had signally failed to prove
his allegations. The Attorney-General had said that
if • number of men went with a common consent
to perform some unlawful deed, all were guilty ; but Mr.
Seymour besought the jury to consider carefully whether
they would consign to death men who, though combined
for one purpose not lawful, had no hand in the murder
perpetrated. The eight men who had spoiled the bricks,
under the influence of that foolish excitement which
machine-made bricks had engendered, were returning quietly,
without any murderous intention, when the police came
into collision with them. Those officers in the exercise of
their duty laid hands on one of the party, and after that a
scuffle ensued, when the mischief and murder were done.
The learned gentleman admitted that the heel-print was
that of Ward, and produced a placard blued by the police
immediately after the murder. On that placard it was
stated that a person (not two) had fired twice, and by one
of those shots the officer was killed. Then the prosecution
spoke of a murderer, and used the singular number ; now
the plural was adopted. There was no evidence, the learned
conned contended, against Ward as to anything more
than the assault upon Harrop. Mr. Seymour did not
deny that Ward had taken the course alleged, but he
had a right to say it was likely that a man
who had been engaged in an encounter with the police
would wish to escape as quickly as possible, but that
did not prove that his client was the perpetrator of the
crime alleged. The learned gentleman then went through
the evidence adduced by the prosecution, dwelling with
great earnestness on what he designated its discrepancies.
On the confession of Johnson, Mr. Seymour animadverted
severely, and blamed Superintendent Pickering in going
beyond his province in receiving the statement of that pri-
soner while he was bordering on delirium tremens' from a
long-continued debauch. In speaking on behalf of Hipwell,
the learned couosel contended that there was no reliable
evidence before the jury is to anything manacling =
in relation to the murder of Jump. Mr. Seymour's
occupied about an hour and half.
Mr. Tory, after a short adjournment of the court, rose to
speak on behalf of Michael Burke. After • lengthened
exordium the learned gentlen.an began to analyse the evi-
dence adduced against Burke. The main facts of the
case were glanced at by the learned gentleman, and
he drove to chew that the object of the prisoner in bearing
arms and bludgeons was to defend themselves from any in-
t/Throws with their purpose of destroying the bricks in
Clifford's field. The men were passing along • public road,
and the officer had no right to arrest men under circum.
stances spoken to by the prosecution. Even if Harrop and
Jump had known (which they did not) that the men in
questionhad spoiled the 18,000 bricks, they had no right to
arrest any of the men eogsged in that act, because 'polling
bricks was only a misdemeanour, and not • crime for which
a man is subject to apprehension, before a hearing in a ma-
gistrate's court had taken place. When the eight men were
retiring from the brick-field, they indulged in • jocularity,
which proved that they had no malicious intention ; but
when they met with the unwarrantable interference of the
officers they became irritated, and in a moment of passion
an act might have been done, which, however, could not
be construed into murder. Mr. Tory went on to
show that there was no satisfactory evidence that
Burke was the man who fired the shot that killed Jump.
That statement which Burke bad made against himself was,
the learned counsel said, " a thous of lies," which a das-
tardly spirit bad prompted him to utter with a view of
saving his own life at the expense of his companions. The
paper found in the bullet holes of the deceased man was,
according to Hipwell's confusion, given by Burke to Ward,
so that the shot which was supposed to cause death was
not fired by Burke.
. . . .

Mr. Email' Jane* rose to deliver an address an behalf of
Johnson, who was charged with harbouring Burke and
Ward after the murder of Jump. It was stated by Burke
that he went to Johnson's miler, and told Ward that
Jump was dead, but there was no evidence that Johnson
beard that announcement. He was drinking almost con.
steely, and at the time in question was in such a morbid
condition of mind as to prevent • due appreciation of the
crime attributed to him. _

The learned judge commenced his summing up at 3.50.
His lordship told the jury that the duty they had to dis-
charge was a most important one. Thu must not be led
away by any speculative theories set up by
learned counsel, but judge according to the evidence,
and, regardless of consequences, do their duty as indi-
viduals. The law was, his lordship said, of Each a nature as
to make all the persons agreeing to accomplish any act
guilty of that act, although only one of the party should
strike • fatal blow in furtherance of the common object.
The learned judge then went most carefully through the
evidence against each prisoner. The testimony of Barlow
should be looked upon with caution ; the statements of the
prisoners should also be looked upon as worthier against
any person but tree who made them.
The jury found Burke and Ward Guilty of murder, with
a recommendation to mercy. Both were sentenced to death.
Johnson was found Guilty of harbouring, and was sentenced
to eighteen months' impneonment. Hipwell was Acquitted.