The Express.
London, England, 1868-02-25 00:00:00

MITTAL OF THE PRISONER&

THE FENIAN_PROSEOUTIONEI,-00M.

BOW-STREET.—(THIS DAY.) •
The seven prisoners, William and Timothy Des-
mond, Nicholas English, John O'Keefe, James O'Neill,
Michael Barrett, and Anne Justice, who stood remanded
on the charge of wilful murder of the persons killed by the
Clerkenwell explosion, were again placed it the bar for
Said examination at the Police-court, Bowntrect,Uore
g. ••• • • • ,
the aid magistrate, nu. lietty, who sat
specially for the purpose, the ordinary business of the
court being transacted at the F division station-house,
before Mr. Flowers.

Mr. Giffard, Q.C., and Mr. Poland, instructed by the
Treasury solicitors, appeared for the prosecution ; and
Vt. Lee ii iefeaded the prisoners O'Neill, O'Keefe, Bar-
rett, and Justice.
Mr. Giffsrd stated that the case for the crown was
closed.

Mr. Lewis said that on behalf of the prisoners O'Keefe,
l;arrett, and Justice he should not make any observations
at present, preferring to reserve their defence. But
t. his mind the case of O'Neill seemed somewhat
different. On the last occasion the chid magistrate was
kind enough, with the consent of the learned counsel for
tie crown, to postpone the committal in order to give him
as opportunity of calling witnesses for O'Neill. He was not,
however, about to call those witnesses, for the simple
reason that the poverty of O'Neill prevented him from
bringing them up from Glasgow, where they all resided.
But the CU. against O'Neill was so slight that he felt
La should not do Lis duty if be did not remark upon it.
trNeill was charged with wilful murder, not with treason-
f.lony, but even if it had been the latter offense, he
~bould have been prepared to contend that the evidence
negatived it. Massey, Corydon, and all the approvers bad
been examined, and not one question had been put to
either of them about O'Neill. He surely had a right to
assume that if they Lad known him the question would
base been put to them, and that as it had not been put
that could only be because he was not known to them.
Boaever, he had not to deal with that question now even
if O'Neill was a Fenian. What he bad to consider was,
what was the evidence against him on the charge of
murder? The only eviibmoo against him was that of the
witness Young, who first identified William Desmond as
the man who fired the barrel, and then when O'Neill
was brought to this court he suddenly tamed
round and raid that was the man. But very much
t.trunger, in his opinion, was the negative evidence,
and ou this point he could not do better than quote the
observation of Mr. Gifted at the last examination, when
peiking with reference to the then prisoner Allen, that
the fact of being unknown to Mullany rendered it difficult
to believe that he had been concerned in the plot. That
was a conclusion in whioh many would agree, bat it
d. rived additional weight when coming from the learned
:uutisel for the crown. Now, with regard to O'Neill, it
ICJ not merely that Mullany did not my be knew
him, but on being asked the question by him
(Mr. Lewis) be distinctly said that he did not know
and that he had never seen or heard of him before.
This went to show tLat the case as against him ►as one
tf mistaken identity. He eonsidered, indeed, that
alien the prisoner was taken in Glasgow, it was
:he dity of the police to have made in-
,eiriea :at once, and on the spot; then they
would have found what ho was doing and where he
was e,aoloyed the day before and for several days after
;ha itAti 4t the explosion, wimich weed have been cair

hetreevidence to thorn that ho could not have horn
n I ned in that outrage.
mu Thomas Henry said it WAR irregular for Mr. Lewis to
,t de what he alleged that lie could prove, if he was not
.1.0.0 to call witnesses to prove it.
Mr L wif tl o idit it was f-ir matter of comment.
it ;aromas heap-1 think not.

Nr. Lewis said at all events he was entitled to urge the
Ice of the negative evidence, and to complain that he
teed been %objected to the suffering he must have under-
himiclf to be innocent, and being dragged
a,) from his family and friends, and remanded to prison
Ir.m week to week.

Mr. Miner, who append for the two Desmond, and
DuAish. said they would reserve their defense.
T....itias Ilmry—The sue againd all the prisoners
e.ust r suhmitted to a jury.
Mr. I..wis applied for the admission of O'Neill to ball.
Tplllllllll4 henry refused.
Mr. I ,rper complained of a statement whieh had
appealed in 'ionic paper, that Eaglich had made a state.

ill h submitted to the COMIlliaiall•TI of
Th .t statement wu uofouuded.

sir 7.mims I lenry said that statement was net made in
iroL :re r. this court.

M. 11 irper said that it was stated as part of the pro-

co ton., of the court.
Nit Thomas Henry seta that made no differetios. It vas

Inmi.lar to allude to it, and he could not permit any
butler remarks on the subject.
IThe statement in question did not appear as part of the
n port of the proceedings of this court.]

Di:. Ld SAESTER AND THE HOME SECRETARY.

ing is a copy of a letter which Dr.
Luken,' 6,.v addressed to tho Home Secret►ry :

" Central Middlesex Coroner's Office,
Marlborough•street, W., Feb. 24.
"Sir. - I Kg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of
the in.t., and to express my regret that it did not
ith a.r tit :die: the inquest on the bodies of Martha
P.m.... :cad Humphrey Evans had been concluded. I
bi-...A.!). reason to believe that your letter was sent to
lot one . Ull Thursday evening, but through the negligence
of 1.0. ri ..uts it was not delivered wMe until after the
.1,..,• o.yost. I should not have applied to you at all for
bad I not been made aNuainted with
to in the act I referred to, and of this I was not
as are 'ill Thur...l iv morning, when I at once wrote to you
ritounhe : you of the power I supposed you to pommels
cut,: 11“,c...ct. I sin glad to find from your letter that
you admit t'.e right of the coroner to have before him
prisuu.r ..0 tonand as witnesses, as it is the peculiarity of
the coroner'. court that this is the only object with which
accused parti,s are brought before it. I trust that in
future then- will be no difficulty on the subject.—l am,
our obedient servant,
" EDWIN LANICINTIR, Coroner.
"To the I:ight Hon. Gatherer Hardy, Secretary of
State for the Home Department."

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-(THLS DAY.)

COURT OF BARKRUPTCY.
(Before Kr. Bagidur Popp.)
El 11 CAPTAIN swirr.—rns CANNIIIDON CUTS.
This was the first sitting under the bankruptcy of Wm.
ARM! Swift, desaribed as of Grafton-street, Old Bond-
Mr est, hotel and club house keeper. The club refined to
ior known as the Cambedp Club, and hu been going
ron fur about a twelvemonth. (Several debts were proved,
but the choice of assignees was adjourned.
From an intimate prepared by Messrs. Johnstone and
Co., the accountants, the debts appear to be about 3,0001.,
and the meets are expected to yield about fr. in the
pound.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
(THIS DAY.)

(Before the Common Serjeant.)
DARING HIGHWAY ROBBILRY. _

John Rought;;;;:ii:hs;;;;;;r7w;:i;Kied for a robbery
with others, on Francis John Lovett, and stealing from
him a watch and chain.

-
Mr. Poland and Mr. Begley conducted the prosecution.
Mr. Lovett was book-keeper to a veterinary surgeon in
the Minories. On the evening of Wednesday, 29th
January, about 8 o'clock, lie was on his way from the
Ilincries to Finsbury-square, when four men came
out of an archway and two of them held him
by the arms while the others took his watch
and chain. An alarm was raised, bet the whole
of the men escaped. On the let of February Houghton
was taken to the Mansion-house. on another charge, and
Mr. Lovett there saw him and identified him as one of the
men who stood in front of him and stole his watch and
chain. While on his way to the station the prisoner told
the officers that if it was not for thieves like him, the
police would have nothing to do.
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty.
The Common Serjeant, addressing the prisoner, said be
bad been oonviekd of an offence which was
now very common and exceedingly mischievous,
and which must be put down by the strong hand of the
law. If he had used any violence to the prosecutor
further than holding his arms, he should have sentenced
him to be flogged, but under the circumstances, and seeing
that he bad been several times previously convicted, the
sentence upon him was that he be kept in penal servitude
for seven year.