The Sun.
London, England, 1839-05-20 00:00:00

identified him. ) He asked me if I was an inspector, and
I replied " Yes." I said " Why ?" He said ‘• I wan
to give myself up." I asked what for, and he then said ii
was for the murder of a young woman at No. 21, Cado.
gan-place. I took him into the station. I
had not pre-
viously heard of the murder.—( This remark occasioned
some surprise.) I then cautioned him that anything he
might say would be us•:(1 against him hereafter. He then
said—." Its no use to deny it." I took down in writing, in
a rough state, what he said. I took it down before him.
This is the paper. He stated that he murdered—
CORONER—If you wrote down his words you had better
read them from the paper.
Witness reading—" Wm. John Marchant stated, that
about half-past four on Friday afternoon, the 17th of May,
lie murdered Anne Paynton, by cutting her throat with a
razor—that he immediately left the house and went to
Windsor, to the Two Brewers public house. He left
there to-day, and surrendered himself to me at ten minutes
before six. He is servant to Harry Edgell, Esq , 21, Ca.
dogan-place, Chelsea." As I was conveying him to
Hounslow, I saw him looking about several times suddenly,
as if meditating an escape. I asked him what he was
looking at, and he said—" Don't you see her ; she has been
haunting me the whole of the day." I then left a man with
'min all night. I said, as you left the house immediately, per-
hapsishe is not dead ? He said he knew too we that she was
dead. I asked him how he did it, and he said he cut her
throat in three places, and he was certain she eas dead. I
asked him why he did it, and he said he scarcely knew, for
he had been good friends with her half an hour before, and
had taken water, and, as I understood, coals up for her. I
asked if he was jealous of her, and he said " rather." He
was then in a very agitated state, and gave him in charge
to some of the men. I found on him a watch, and a du.
plicate for a chain pledged in the name of John Davis. He
said he did not wish to be known, and that was why he
gave the name of Davis. His waistcoat sleele was covered
with blood—the left sleeve. He showed it to me himself.
[The top coat worn by the prisoner was then removed, and
he held up the sleeve of his coat, which was completely co-
vered with blood. His appearance produced a thrill of
horror in the room.] I found no money upon him, but
this bit of rope.
The prisoner here rose and said—lt was net intende d
for self-destruction, but to carry a gentleman's portman-
teau a few evenings bcfcre.
After the evidence had been read over, the Inspector
added that he said she had called him names, but had not
inquired what they were. Ile also stated that it was usual
to inform the police of any act like the present that was
committed. Generally the next morning, except in this
individual case, which he believed arose from the neglect
of a serjcant at Hammersmith.
The CORONER then asked Marchant if he had an
to say as to the testimony atilt-, Inspector ?
Marchant said there was a mistake in that part about his
having taken up water and coals to the deceased. He had
not taken up any water.
Mr. Jay, the surgeon, said that on first seeing the body
he thought the deceased had committed an act of suicide.
Mr. Edgell observed that his servant, who came
down to him in the country seemed fully impressed
with the belief that the young woman had committed
suicide. He had not the least suspicion of the prisoner,
with whom he had received a most excellent character
with regard to mildness of disposition, good temper, and
diligence.—The prisoner was then removed.
Policeman 2 B went to the door of the house a little
before one, and entered at two on Saturday morning. I
was the first policeman that entered. I saw the
body in the drawing-room. I found a razor
lying about a yard from the feet of the deceased. On
the sofa I found the upper part of the razor-case, and close
to her body I found the remainder of it. Down stairs, on
a chair in the pantry. I found a white-handled table-knife.
There was blood on it. The cap of the deceased was
was her feet, as was also a white apron, and one side hair-
comb. The articles I produced are in the same state in
which they then were.
This being the whole of the evidence,
The CORONER summed up. He was desirous of abstain-
ing from making any remarks that might complicate a case
which seemed to be simple. In the Coroner's Court no
person was on his trial—their duty simply was to inquire
into the cause of death, and investigate all the particular
circumstances relating immediately to that cause. If a
person made a confession, he conceived it was the coroner's
duty to give that person an opportunity of being in the
Court to hear what all or any of the witnesses had to say
against him. That appeared to him to be acting
but with strict justice to the accused party, who
had confessed. In this case there could not be a doubt
as to the cause of death or of the person who com-
mitted the act. What they had to determine was, whe-
ther there was malice prior to the act, or whether it was
committed in a moment of excitement or passion.
Whatever might be said by hired advocates, or by
persons who appeared in a Court of Law, and who
were paid to distort and destroy the truth, no one
should influence his (the Coroner's) conduct in that
Court. He had learned what the law was, and he would
endeavour, as far as his duty permitted, to see that the law
was upheld and enforced. With regard to this particular
crime, the jury had to determine whether it was manslaugh-
ter or murder. They knew that in all cases of manslaughter
there must be an absence of malice. If malice were proved,
or could be inferred to have existed by the facts developed
in evidence, that was undoubtedly a ease of murder and
not of manslaughter. In a case, which he would not allude
to further than to say that where the parties had not
spoken for a week, and one killed the other, it was held to
be only manslaughter. Here the prisoner in his confession
stated that he and the deceased were good friends only
half-an-hour before the crime was committed. Were they
in such a case at that to presume there was no malice at the
time the act was committed ? ha order to create a respect
for the law, and to make the people love the institutions
of the country, it was of the utmost importance that
I the situation of the party, or his position in life should
have no effect either on the decision of a Judge or a
Jury. They were to look singly to the facts as they
found them. Therefore, if it were proved that no
malice existed that would be evidence:of manslaughter;
but when they found a razor had been taken from the I
pantry, where it was placed by the footman, when the
party himself had acknowledged he saw the razor was
placed there, when they found the deceased was destroyed
not in the pantry but in the drawing-room, he feared they
would be able to come to no other decision than that the
deadly instrument was taken out of the pantry to the
drawing-room for the malicious purpose of committing
the act.

thin,

After recapitulating the evidence, the CORONER said he
would leave it in the hatds of the Jury, being fully satis-
fied that the dignity and utility of the law would be main-
tained by the decision to which they would come.
A Juror thought that there was an absence of all malice,
and that the act was not maliciously premeditated.
The CORONER had restrained from dwelling on that head,
because he thought it might have appeared harsh towards the
prisoner. There was no evidence to prove he had attempted
to violate her person—there was no marks of violence on her
'body—there was nothing but a confusion of her dress ;
but it was not palliation for one felony, that a man had been
baffled in attempting to commit another.
A Juror—Would you explain the law on manslaughter ?
Mr. WAKLEY said that in cases of manslaughter there
must be an absence of malice.

The Foreman—h there any reason why a verdict of
x•ilful murder should not be at once returned?
The Juror dissented from such a verdict—there was no
ill will proved. It was only the impulse of the moment.
The Jury then expressed a wish to retire, as there was
one of a different opinion from the rest.
They returned in about half an hour with a verdict of
" Wilful Murder against Wm. John Marchant." The
witnesses were then bound over to appear at the next
Session of the Central Criminal Court.
The prisoner was then removed in custody.