The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-23 00:00:00

with M 135 &Bryan had been published in the news-
papers, and must have been well known to her. The
question having been raised in one of the courts of
law, it had been determined by the authorities that
marriages like the one spoken of were valid. The
writer said he had seen Catherine Creagh in Cork
as late as 1855.
Prisoner said that these letters were dated from
Woolwich, and he never was there.
Mr. Lewis intimated that Catherine Creagh was
alive now, and had given evidence a few days ago
in the Court of Chancery respecting some property
transaction.
Prisoner said that a woman had been brought
from Ireland certainly.
Mr. Miller, on being cross-examined by the pri-
soner, said that at about the time the letters were
received, there was some treaty about the raising of
some money; the object was that the settlement
should be set aside. He was about to lend Miss
O'Bryan some money, and he wanted to be satis-
fied on some points relating to the prisoner. A pas-
sege in one of the letters purporting to be written
by the prisoner was pointed out as showing that
he well knew his first wife to be alive at the time of
his marriage with Miss o'l3ryan. It stated that
Catherine Creagh resided at Cork, in 1844, and she
continued to live there, and that he repeatedly saw
her.
Miss Mary Ann O'Bryan, who described herself
as a single woman, said she was married an the 29th
of June, 1844, to the prisoner.
This was the evidence in support of the first
bigamy, and the second was now proceeded with.
Mr. Lewis proposed that the evidence of the first
marriage should be copied upon the depositions in
this case, and called
The Rev. W. Bell M'Kenzie, incumbent of St.
James's, Holloway, who stated that on May 22,
1852, he nerformed the marriage ceremony with
Eugene MTarthy and Emily Verling. They signed
the register which he produced.
Dr. John O'Bryan proved that the name of
M'Cartny was risoner's handwriting.
Miss O'Bryan staid that Emily Verling unfortu-
nately resided in th'e same house with herself and
husband. Prisoner at,'d Miss Verling left the house
together.
It was stated that Miss Verling, finding that she
had been deceived, left the prisoner and went
abroad.
Mr. Arnold asked what evidence there was to
show that in 1852 prisoner knew his first wife was
alive.
Mr. Lucas said that the letters proved the pri
soner knew she was alive after 1854.
Mr. Arnold pointed out that he might have be-
come acquainted with that fact in 1854, but he
might have been ignorant of it in 1852.
A certificate was now produced in the third case
against the prisoner, in which he had sworn in his
application for a license to be married to Miss Ver-
ling on the 19th of May, 1852, that he was a ba-
chelor.
Mr. Arnold observed that the question in this
case would again arise, whether in 1852 the peti-
tioner knew thet his first wife was alive.
Miss O'Bryan was again called to supply the
proof required, and her brother was also put into
the witness-box to give secondary evidence of the
contents of a letter written by the prisoner,
which had been destroyed. It was addressed to
Dr. O'Bryan, and written after his connexion with
Miss Verling, and stated that he had left his (Dr.
O'Bryan's) sister because she was not his wife ;
that in 1839 he was married to Catherine Creagh,
who died in 1851, and was buried at a cemetery
described ; and further stated that he was married
to Miss Verling, as he was at that time an unmar-
ried man.
Mr. Arnold said that this evidence was not
against the prisoner, but in his favour.
Mr. Lewis applied to have the depositions
copied up for prisoner's committal on all the
charges, and asked for a remand, for witnesses from
Ireland.
Mr. Arnold remanded the prisoner for a week,
but said that at present he could only commit upon
he first charge, as the others were not pressed.

ALLEGED IITURDEB AND .ROBBERY
BY GA_ROTTING.

A protracted investigation was held at the Green
Man Tavern, Hoxton Town, by Mr. John Humph-
reys, one of the Middlesex coroners, on Monday
evening, respecting the death of Mr. Samuel Chap-
man, aged 70, a deacon of Ebenezer Chapel,
Reeves'-place, Hoxton, who was found robbed
and insensible in the adjoining house, with
marks of having been violently garotted under very
extraordinary circumstances.
Mrs. Elizabeth Gardiner, No. 20, Union-street,
Kingsland-road, daughter of the deceased, said—
My father was a woollen draper, retired from busi-
ness, and resided in the house alone—in the house
adjoining the chapel of which he was deacon. I
saw him in good health on last Sunday week. On
the following Monday evening I was sent for, end
found Min speechless and in a dreadful state, but
quite sensible. He seemed to wish to communicate
something which he could not articulate. After
some time he placed his hand around my throat, as
if to imply that his throat had been grasped. That
was what we understood by the sign at the
time. He was in the habit of keeping a policeman's
staff under his pillow to protect himself with, and
I missed it from its place. When I found it after-
wards there were stains of blood upon it. I asked
him if it was a friend that he wanted to make me
know about, and he intimated " no." I asked if
the person belonged to the chapel, and he said not,
but placed his hand to his throat.
The Coroner—You understood that your father
had been garotted by this person ?
Witness—No ; we did at first. We asked him
and he said " yes." I asked him the next day and
he said "no." I cannot say why I asked him the
question after he had said he had been garotted. As
deacon of the chapel he received the quarter's col-
lections. He might have received some recently
before his death, bat I am not certain of this.
Whilst I was there on the Monday night three
gentlemen, whom I did not know, took away the
drawer, with the money in it just as it was. He
died last Friday. The witness in her evidence in
chief spoke with such manifest desire to explain
that the deceased withdrew the statement that he
had been injured that the coroner expressed his dis-
satisfaction with her manner of giving her evidence.
The Coroner What do you suppose was the
caused of deceased's death ?
Witness—Natural causes.
Coroner—Have the goodness to explain why.
Witness.—l have no reason to suppose otherwise.
He was regularly attended, and a doctor was called
in. My husband had not been unfortunate in busi-
ness ; he gave up business only in consequence of
a month's illness. He gave up business recently,
and went into the employment of Mr. Stephens as
a journeyman. We did not think deceased well off,
because we knew what he had. He had had two
slight fits ; one six weeks ago, and one six months
ago.
Samuel Gardner, a little boy, son of the last wit-
ness, said that he used to sleep with deceased, and
go out in tile day time to get his errands. At half-
past twelve on the Monday he left deceased in good
health and went to his mother's. He returned at
six o'clock. He was away longer than usual, for
be was getting a lot of messages for his mother—
more than usual. He believed she was at home ail
the time, but his father was out at work. He saw
deceased put his hand to his mother's throat, and
when she said, " It must be a friend," deceased said
it was no friend, and put his hand to her throat
' again. He seemed indignant. Two or three days
before his death he had received some money from
Messrs. Walton. He kept his money in a purse,
and he had a watch.
Mrs. Sarah Curtis, 6, Albion-place, Hackney-
road, pew-opener, said that she went as usual on
the Monday afternoon, and could not get deceased
to answer. The key was not in the door leading
from the chapel to the deceased's house as was usual.
Mts. Lambert said that when she was called in
saw deceased lying with his head to the fender, and
resting on a Bible. The carpet was pulled up in
two places. His cravat was apparently very tight
indeed. He seemed to clasp one of his pockets
tight, as if to take care of it.
Dr, C. Benley said he was called to deceased on
Monday and found him quite sensible, but he could
not articulate, He was not breathing like a person
in apoplexy. There was a broad mark round his
throat, as if from compression of his handkerchief,
which he always wore remarkably lax, so as not to
confine his throat. In consequence of what witness
heard afterwards he inquired for the staff which
deceased was in the habit of keeping under his
pillow. There were stains of blood upon it, and
witness showed it to deceased. He
grasped it, and
seemed pleased at the blood stains, as if satisfiedhe
had inflicted some injury on some one that had tried
p
to injure him. The carpet was much pulled from
under the fender, and near the table the_r_eitwneerse
marks as if a struggle had taken place. W s
side of
which was an action
appeared to defend his pocket,
was informed that deceased's purse was gone. He
ld -f
conscious. The post
partially
which a person recently attackbeldowwoonu
mechanically whilethep
mortem examination showed a
the head externally. Internally there was blood
effused on the temple as if from a violent blow or
fall. There was also extravasatio-n on the left ven-
tricle, and slight
escape of blood, arising either from
.
strangulation or a fall. The man's purse has not
been discovered since.
By the Jury—The watch was hanging up, and
the pew-opener's calling out might have disturbed
any one before it could have been taken.
The Coroner isi.44, 'JAI in so serious a case he