The Sun.
London, England, 1830-03-12 00:00:00

Ind stated it to be his hand-writing. He wrote it at the
request of the prisoner Clewes, who said he should with to
see the Coroner and Jury.
Cross-examined—lt was written in consequence of a
request personally made to him by the prisoner. The
word " prison" in the note was underlined. It was a
matter of discussion whether Clewse should be taken to
tie inquest, or should he visited in the gaol ; it was at
witness's request the meeting was fixed at the gaol, as being
safer. The Rev. Robert Clifton is not a vi.iting Magis-
trate, but acts for one now absent from this part of the
country. Previous to this note being written there was an
interview in which the Rev. R. Clifton and the prisoner were
left alone; there might have been more than one inter-
view. Th' Rev. Mr. Clifton attended the inquest. It
was Mr. Clifton that committed Clewes for examination.
Re-examined—lt was at. the desire of Clewes he wrote
the note. The word " prison" was underlined ;he
begged to explain, because Mr. Smith, the coroner, doubt, d
whether they could adjontn to the gaol, unless the prisoner
wished it, and witness therefore communicated with
Clewes, who said it was a matter of indifference whether
he saw them at the gaol or elsewhere.
James Hooper re-examined—ln consequence of the note
from Mr. Lavender, Mr. Smith and the Jury went to the
gaol; witness went with them. Mr. Smith told Clewes
before he said any thing. that any confession or admission
he made, would be produced against him at the next As-
sizes, on a trial for the murder of Hemming, and that no
hope or promise of pardon could be held out to him, either
by his Majesty's Government, or any body else. Having
been told this more than once by the Coroner, he said,
" Well, Sir, I shall state all I know about it."
Crosss-examined by Mr. Serjeant LUDLOW.—When he
I did not hear him say so.
nshoatll
dsolatiet
va,ll IWkintnoewss...abrTiuot
tibt,e"
beat
he oy4; add,bWelef
Well,
l
Mr. Serjeaut LuoLow contended, that before the con-
fession made to Mr. Smith was reed, it was the duty of
the Counsel for the prosecution to call the Rev. R. Clifton.
To make the confession valid it was necessary it should
he clearly made out to be voluntarily made. It was the
duty of the Court to see that it was his spontaneous act,
and. not brought about either by tonere or persuasion.
If any person not in authority hail an interview with the
prisoner previous to the note being read, he could not
have asked to have had the party produced, but when the
party was a visiting Magistrate, and was closeted with
him alone, it was proper to show that nothing had passed
to induce Clewes to think it would be better for him us
make some communication. The second confession ought
to be a continuation of the first. If the Coroner had
told Clewes that his communication to Mr. Clifton would
not be received as evidence against him, then he could
contend against the admission of the second confession.
Mr. Justice LirmsnaLz said as it was possible some-
thing might have passed between the prisoner and Mr.
Clifton connected with the confession, he thought it
would be but fair and proper on the prosecution to call OR
Mr. Clifton to state what he knew, but it did not lay
with him to compel them.
Mr. Serjeant Rosszu, would call Mr. Clfton.
Mr. Clifton being sworn, was examined by Mr. Serjeant
RussELL—He is a county Magistrate. He signed the
warrant for the committal of Clewes. He saw Clewes
several times in gaol. He has a distinct recollection of
seeing him thrice. No one was present at these inter-
views. Has had a correspondence with the Secretary of
State en this subject. He thinks he told Clewes he would
communicate with his Majesty's Government. He cer-
tainly told him he would use all his endeavour and influ-
ence to prevent any ill consequences from falling on him,
if he would disclose what he knew respecting the Odding-
ley murders. This was before he had made any state-
ment. Witness was a clergyman, and was particularly
anxious to have the mystery cleared up.
Re-examined—Witness went home immediately after
making the promise, and wrote to the Secretary of State,
to the effect that he thought he had been indiscreet in
making the promise, and without stating the particulars
of the confession ' • asked if the promise could be held good
provided it turned out that the prisoner was not the man
who struck the fatal blow ; witness had so qualified his pro-
mise to the prisoner. He received an answer from the
Secretary of State, and instantly called on the prisoner
and saw him the third time, and told him that he had ut-
terly failed in obtainingany promise or hope forhim from G-
overnment—that the letter he then held in his hand he had
that morning received from the Secretary of State, from
which he then read a particular part which contained the
reasons why Mr. Peel considered mercy could not be ex-
tended : one of the reasons was, that he might be the most
guilty person now living of those concerned in the trans-
aciton. The letter is not now in existence. He had not
communicated to any body the particulars of what the pri-
goner had said to him. Witness told the prisoner that he
might still consider the knowledge as locked up is his own
breast, for that he (witness) considered himself in the
double light of a Clergyman and a Magistrate, and should
make no mention of what had been told to him. Witness
had determined rather to submit to be committed by the
Crown for contempt than disclose what had passed be-
tween the prisoner and himself. Witness told the prisoner
that there was an end of hope in the strongest possible lan-
guage, and more than ores.
[The trial was proceeding when our account left Wor-
cester, which was at about four o'clock.]