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

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY BVgNENG, AUGUST 27, 1882.

to the Cumberland, as supernumeraries ; R. Rundle,
acting second class assist. engineer, to the Indus,
for the Princess Royal; F. S. Scott, acting second
class assist. engineer, to the Indus, as supernume-
rary; E. S. Scorer, acting second class assist, en-
gineer, to the Asia, as supernumerary ; and Mr. J.
H. Pelly has been nominated to a naval cadetship.
The following appointments and promotions were
made yesterday at the Admiralty :—Commander F.
R. Purvis, to the Severn, for service in the Panta-
loon; Lieut. F. H. Hastings, and Lieut. H. L. Gully,
to the Severn, for service in the Pantaloon ; W. H.
Fawckner, master, to the Osborne; J. F. R. Aylen,
master, to the Severn, for the Pantaloon ; A. W. W.
Babin gton, surgeon superintendent, to the York
convict ship; C. W. Herbert and A. J. Leith, mid-
shipmen, to the Rattlesnake ; J. W. Wilkins and
F. H. Keyser, midshipmen, to the Severn, for the
Pantaloon ; C. A. Shapcote, paymaster, to the
Severn, for the Pantaloon ; A. Long, in the Trafal-
gar, J. Cooper, in the Pembroke, and W. Nicholson,
in the Ajax, promoted to the rank of first class
assist. engineers; J. Rogers, in the Melpomene, A.
H. Rogers, in the Neptune, T. S. Grice, in the Am-
phion, W. H. Brincfield, in the London, and H.
Onions, in the Imperieuse, promoted to the rank of
acting first class assist, engineers; G. E. Foote,
second class assist. engineer, to the Terror ; and G.
L. Miller, clerk, to the Severn, for the Pantaloon.

tion for the jury would be whether the letters were
written for the purpose of extorting money, or for
the purpose of obtaining a settlement of a bona fide
claim which the prisoner might have against Rux-
ton.

The Jury acquitted the prisoner.

THE ASHTON MUBDTB.

LIVERPOOL, TUESDAY.
The trial of the four prisoners was resumed at
the South Lancashire assizes to-day.
The court, as on the previous day, was crowded.
After the despatch of our parcel last evening
Richard Pickering, superintendent of police, was
examined. The prisoner Johnson made a state-
ment to this witness, from which it appeared that
Ward went to his house, in Manchester, about six
o'clock on the morning of the murder, and that
Burke arrived there a few hours later. Johnson
then took them up stairs, and he heard both the
men say they had fired at the police, that Jump
was dead, and that Harrop was not expected to
live long. (The learned judge intimated that this
evidence was only to be received against*Johnson,
and not against his fellow-prisoners, as the state-
ment to the officer was not made in their presence.)
After his apprehension Burke went with the officer
to Smalishaw-fold and pointed out the positions
occupied by himself, Ward, and the deceased. He
also made statements which exactly corresponded
with the evidence of witnesses. The piece of
wadding formed of paper was found, and the
words on it deposed to, and being compared with
an account book belonging to Joseph Knott the
handwritinc, was found to be identical. This paper
on the night of the murder was given by Burke to
one of the other prisoners to load his pistol with at
the house where they met to load their pistols and
arrange their mode of proceedings.
A police -officer who was present when the pri-
soner Hipwell was apprehended, and on the day
following the capture, was with Ludham in the
cell with the prisoner when he said, " It's a bad
job, but the company I have kept has led me
into it." This prisoner made a full statement which
was taken down in writing and read as evidence,
the police-officer assuring his lordship that he had
done nothing to induce the prisoner to make any
statement ; it was perfectly voluntary on his part.
The statement of Hipwell was to the effect that he
was present from first to last of the fearful crimes
of the night in question.
James Ashton, a police-officer, said that he found
sticks and other things near Smallshaw-fold, all of
which were proved to belong to the prisoners. He
also found the impression of a boot heel, and at a
little distance another foot print, both of which
were taken up and produced in court. There were
other impressions similar to those taken up, which
indicated the direction the men had taken ; and the
course thus indicated corresponded exactly 'with
the testimony of other witnesses as to the way the
prisoners took after the murder was committed.
Those impressions were exactly such as the boots
worn by Ward would produce. Benedetto Lanarto,
a sculptor, of Manchester, bad been employed to
make moulds and casts, which were produced, and
which were found to coincide in all requisite parti-
culars with the boot of Ward.

John Watts, a police •constable, detailed the cir-
cumstances connected with the capture of Burke
and Ward, at Johnson's house, in Manchester.
Watts, in company with another officer of the name
of Rogers, went into the house and found the pri-
soners named in the bed-room. The men, after some
resistance, were handcuffed and taken to Droyls-
den. He took Ward's boots, which were produced
in court, and compared with the impression on the
sod. There was on the forehead of Ward a bruise
on which there was a plaister. The prisoners were
put into cells, and the officer told them they had no
need to answer any questions unless they thought
proper, as what they said might be taken as evi-
dence against them. (His lordship intimating that
the statement made by Watts was unnecessary, it
was not given.)
Police-constable Rogers was called, and spoke
to the resistance which Johnson's wife offered to
him and Watts when she knew their business.
He saw Ward try to seize a hammer to strike
Watts. In other respects this witness fully corro-
borated his colleague's testimony as to the capture
of the prisoners. There were found in Johnson's
house two jackets and two waistcoats, in which
Burke and Ward appeared in the dock. When the
prisoners were taken to the police-station they were
searched, and in the pocket of Burke was found a
percussion cap, and some dust mixed with gunpow-
der. There was also found a piece of paper, part
of a bill for beer from Joseph Knott. The officer
then went to Ward's house, and on searching it
found a discharged pistol, the charge consisting of
slugs and gunpowder, and the pistol appeared as if
it had been recently wet. After the prisoners had
been before the magistrates Burke wished to speak
to Rogers, who went into the cell. He said, "I am
not going to be hung for what other people have
done." After this Superintendent Pickering was
sent for, and the statement referred to by that wit-
ness was made.

In cross-examination it appeared that some of the
powder was found in the lining of the waistcoat,
but in answer to the Attorney General it, was stated
that in consequence of a defect in the stitching there
was a communication between the pocket and the
lining.
Joseph Bloomfield, optician, of Ashton-under-
Lyne, had delivered to him for examination the
dust and powder found in Burke's pocket. He exa-
mined it with a microscope and found it contained
one-third of gunpowder; he also tried whether it
would explode and it did.
In cross-examination it was stated that, mixed
with the dust and gunpowder referred to, were
found tobacco and bread crumbs, such as men in the
prisoner's station of life had often in their pockets.
Hiram Brown stated that about a year before the
murder he had given to Burke's son a cap. He had
seen the prisoner wear it, and it was the one now
produced and found on the scene of the murder.
Mr. Digby Seymour, Q.C., then addressed the
jury for Ward and Hipwell with great energy for
upwards of an hour. He alluded with great minute-
ness to the discrepancies in the evidence, and dis-
sented vehemently from the assertions of the At-
torney-General, who led the prosecution, that all
present at a murder, when combined for unlawful
purposes were equally guilty. He denied that
when the prisoners and their companions went out
to foolishly and unlawfully spoil the bricks they
had any idea or intention of committing so serious
a crime as murder. He did not deny that the foot-
prints of Ward were proved, but he argued that his
client was running away at the time the shots were
fired.

Mr. Turr then addressed the jury for Burke,
taking in a great measure the same line of defence
as Mr. Seymour. He argued that when the men
were returning from the brick-field they were
joking and peaceably inclined, and the police un-
lawfully caused the disturbance which ended so
fatally, for when they met the prisoners and their
companions they did not positively know what they
had been doing, and in fact their offence was only
a misdemeanour at that time,

Mr. Ernest Jones, for Johnson, argued that when
he received the prisoners into his house he did so
without guilty knowledge.
His lordship then elaborately summed up. Ha
said that when a number of persons agreed together
to carry out a design of revenge, and armed them-
selves with deadly weapons to resist all comers who
might interfere with their designs, then the act of
one was the act of all those who agreed to that
course of procedure. His lordship further argued
that when an act of serious import was carried out
by one of the party carrying deadly weapons
his act was equally the act of all. He was
not, however, prepared to say that this
would apply to such of the party as had left
their accomplices prior to the accomplishment
of a serious and unlawful crime, and who were not
consequently cognisant of it. With respect to the
charge of harboucing with guilty knowledge, pre-
ferred against Johnson, his lordship said that if the
jury should not be satisfied of the guilt of the other
prisoners the charge against him would fall to the
ground. His lordship then went minutely through
the evidence, telling them to judge by what they
had heard and seen as to the credibility of the evi-
dence given by the approver Barlow.
The Jury retired. and, after some deliberation,
returned a verdict finding Burke and Ward guilty
of murder, but recommending them to mercy; John-
son guilty of being an accessory after the fact.
His Lordship sentenced Burke and Ward to
death, and Johnson to 18 months' imprisonment.
Hipwell was acquitted,

COUNT THE CHANGE.—A Brooklyn lady pur-
chased an article in Fulton-street the other day, when she
received the following as change for a one dollar bill:—
Ferry tickets, shin plaster, counterfeit penny, car ticket,
milk ticket, butcher's I 0 U, grocer's I 0 U, bread ticket,
three cent postage stamp, one cent postage stamp, and ice-
cream ticket.—New York Paper.
[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Holloway's Ointment and Pills.—
Admired Remedies.—Sores, ulers, wounds, and scrofulous
blemishes may be thoroughly and permanently removed by
Holloway's world-esteemed ointment and pills. Mrs. Jack-
son, of 17, Upper Brook• street, Derby, records the cure of
her wrist, which had been for 20 twenty years most painfully
afflicted by a scrofulous ulcer, for which she had sought
surgical assistance in vain. Bad legs, varicose veins,swelled
ancles, and erysipelas, soon o the judicious use of
Holloway's cooling, healing, and purifying preparations,
which generally F ive way on their first application. How-
ever painful the affection may feel, however terrible the sore
may seem, the sufferer may be relieved by the knowledge
that these pills have cured as bad, if not worse cam.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-Aug. 26.

MARYLEBONE.—EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF
LIBEL.-Mr. George Loseby Worth, of 2, Cain's-
terrace, Highgate, appeared before Mr. Mansfield,
charged by virtue of a summons, " that he did, on
the 29th of July last, in the parish of Highgate,
unlawfully, wickedly, and maliciously write and
publish a false, scandalous, malicious, and
defamatory libel of and concerning Parton John
Hains, in the form of a certain article, reports, and
information in a certain paper, published by the
defendant, called the North Itiiddlesex TVeekly
Express, on the 30th of July last, well knowing the
same to be false, to the damage, scandal, and tits-
grace, &c., of the complainant."
There was also a second summons against the
defendant for another alleged libel on the 6th of
August.
Mr. William Hammond, solicitor, Finchley, ap-
peared to prosecute; and Mr. Lewis, jun., for the
defence.

On the case being called on, Mr. Hammond said
—I appear for Mr. Parton John Heins, who prose-
cutes in this summons against the defendant. My
client, I must tell you, is a pharmaceutical chemist
at Highgate, carrying on a good business. In ad-
dition to which he is postmaster and manager of
the district telegraph of that town. The defendant
in this case is the editor and publisher of a paper
called the North Middlesex Weekly Express, and
which was first brought out by him, and circulates
in Finchley, Highgate, Hampstead, Hornsey, and
other places in the locality. The article complained
of is dated the 30th of July, and runs thus :—" It
occasionally happens that a bear, afloat on an ice-
berg, drifts into a warmer latitude than the latitude
of eternal frost (laughter) and as the iceberg melts
and melts under the increasing heat, the bear shifts
and shifts, finding his footing passing from beneath
him, and at length bowls piteously to know that the
dissolution of the iceberg must in time occur. This is
our text—now for a parallel. John Parton Haim,
step this way; you shall be the bear. Let that animal
by your side dance this way." I am sorry to detain
your worship,but I intend to read this article from be-
ginning to end, because it shows a most malignant,
malicious, scandalous, and degrading form of libel
ever published. What follows is an allusion to a
party who is in no way connected with my client.
It goes • on :—" Heins, printer, accompany that
individual ; be his cub, and now that we have you
before us, let truth and justice guide us to award
you your deserts. John Parton Heins, you have
been drifting since first we knew you ; your foot-
ing we have found uncertain. We found you
slippery and could not rely upon you. Your last
act upon which we commented has been perfected
by the ludicrous proceeding of the Birthday Club
on Wednesday, the 23d of July last. We now in-
tend placing before the public generally the cha-
racter of a man who had dared to question the pro-
priety of the publisher of this paper's name remain-
ing on the list of its members—the members of the
Birthday Club. Hitherto we have watched this
creature drifting—drifting along the stream of dis-
cord which alone ends in a sea of trouble, We
once advised, counselled, urged him to a different
course, as the one which alone could redound to his
success and honour; reason absent has by pro-
gressive stages led on the lower mind to such
tricks before high Heaven as must make his best
of wishers weep. John Parton Heins, you have
called into question the character of a man you
yourself introduced into the homes and society of
many of our local supporters; how comes it we find
you drifting? John. Parton Hains you introduced
us into the saered chamber as one well worthy a
fraternal greeting; why are you now drifting ?
John Parton Hains you have more than once
publicly declared the man you now endeavour to
injure was the man who could and would reflect
credit on the patronage and support the inhabi-
tants of the hamlet might extend to him. From this
past testimony why are you now drifting ? John.
Parton Heins we must now sacrifice all past con-
ditions. We now stand man to man. You have
assailed us in the dark, as a secret, mean rascal.
We will act with more honesty to you, and leave
the light of our readers' wisdom to decide the truth.-:
When first we knew this slippery gentleman, he
urged upon us the importance of writing up his
numerous virtues. He growled down hia neighbours,
and would have us condemn all who had not his
own peculiarities. He desired entire control of our
journal. This was too warm a request. It was then
we first began to melt—we found the footing uncer-
tain, the man slippery. This was the earliest drift.
Having no longer his own way, he felt angered.
The frequent resort to his neighbour's opposite
brought the mind to a degraded level." I should
inform you, sir, that the neighbour opposite alluded
to is the landlord of the Angel Hotel, which place I
shall have presently to allude to. The learned gen-
tleman then went on—" Night broils and overbear-
ing rudeness brought censure from many of those
who had once wished him well. We became his
phantom—not that we acted ill to him, but that
having felt our slight censure in not complying with
his request, like all who suffer from monomania, he
believed alone that we were his enemies. Time
passed on. We frequently saw him under the influ-
ence that could have but one ending, and prove that
a foolish child is the heaviness of its mother. We
recall to mind that the last occasion we saw him
under, to a certain extent, the influences of mind
and stimulants, addressing himself to a well-con-
ducted serving-maid in language of a blasphemous
and obscene nature, compelled at last to acknow-
ledge his disgraceful conduct, and asked pardon—
pardon from the woman he had vilified in name.
We have watched this man's antics for two pur-
poses. First, we felt something was wrong at the
heart ; and, secondly, we felt sure he would sa-
crifice all feelings of honour to gain his ends.
We have by us numerous of his communications we
intend publishing. Those who know his caligraphy
can then see the original documents. We are so far
in possession of weapons he little thought, while
manufacturing, would some day, by his own folly,
turn against him. Space demands our brevity. We
now leave to our numerous readers to judge how
far a man, as we have shown above, is capable of
distinguishing between right and wrong. How far
he is capable of distinguishing the errors that may
exist in another, when he himself has so many.
Time will show the end of a man drifting on a sub-
stantial basis. It will exhibit him shifting from
one side to the other, a turn-coat to his best friends.
It will exhibit him on the slippery path of false
friendship, and when at last he sees the false grounds
he has taken his stand upon, like a coward and one
who dare not face boldly the truth, we shall hear
him piteously howling under the garb of a sycophant
the injuries he has sustained." The learned gentle-
man then proceeded—This is the article that shows
the number of libels contained and the damage my
client is liable to sustain. In the same paper is a
report of a society held at Highgate, from which
the defendant had been excluded, called the Birth-
day Club. I will not trouble you, sir (the magis-
trate), or Mr. Lewis, with going through the whole
of it, but take it up at the paragraph in it as fol-
lows :—" At that meeting Mr. Parton John Heins,
who not long ago had to apologise in the presence
of a number of persons for using indecent language
to Mr. Dunning's servant girl, was foremost, and
we can tell him of our own experience that he has
been the cause of one young man getting into trouble
by leading him into drink and dissipation, and the
public may judge as they like; but we charge him
with saying one day to a gentleman connected with
a Dissenting congregation at Highgate, Oh, he is
a Dissenter, and he ought to be —, for they will
all go to "
Mr. Hammond proceeded to read the remainder of
the alleged libel, which made a great number of
other statements. He then went on to say that in
another paper of the present month appears these
remarks :—" The business of opening letters and
reading them before they leave the office." There is
also mention of the burning of letters. These state-
ments prove or tend to show the very enviable state
of feeling towards Mr. Heins. It also goes further,
and states that Mr. Hains refused to let a person
have any postage stamps because he advertised ies.
the Ilighgate Express, which is quite an untruth.
I may say that these are only samples out of many
papers launching forth upon Mr. Heins scurrilous
and scandalous abuse, of which he has not taken
any notice, thinking that the defendant would tire
of the game that was being played. (The learned
gentleman then read an extract from another paper
of June 25, of a libellous nature, and then said that
that was all the papers he should produce, but asked
to bind the defendant over to stand his trial at the
Old Bailey in his own surety, and two good men
bail for him.) All that is contained in those papers,
with one exception, are gross and malicious concoc-
tions. I,lr. Heins is a chemist at Highgate, carry-
ing on a good business, and he certainly did upon
one occasion commit himself at the Angel, at High-
gate. It took place at the end of 1861. Then, as
regards the birthday club, the defendant was ex-
pelled from it because he was not deemed fit to sit
with the other members in it. I have a paper in
my hands in which it is stated that the defendant
dined at Mr. Hain ,
S house to commemorate the
Highgate Express starting, and on which occasion
they appeared as bosom friends. After this, a paper
appears about the girl at the Angel, and in which
it states that that affair, if it comes out that he (de-
fendant) had done it for the public good and benefit.
That he would expose him for having allowed him
to come into his house in company with his wife
and famne.
I have to ask you, sir, to commit the
defendant for trial before 12 men, when I hope he
will meet his own deserts. I must say that he has
been bankrupt twice and^
Me, Lewis—l object to your going back. It is

throwing out scandal against the party for whom
I appear.
Mr. Parton John Heins was then called, and said
—I am a pharmaceutical chemist and letter re-
ceiver at Highgate. I have a!so the appointment
to the telegraph. I purchased the papers of the
30th of July and the sth of August from Mr. Cut •
bush (The Highgate Express). There is no truth
in them with the exception of the girl. There is
no truth in the birthday article.. lam a single man
I have some recollection about the affair of the girl.
I had been out one evening in Highgate, and went
into the smoking parlour at the Angel, and found
several people there. The servant referred to
waited on them, and there was a deal of laughing
and joking going on.
Mr. Mansfield—l do not know whether it is any
good going on with these questions. It would not
justify the publication of such an article.
Mr. Lewis—l think it would for the public good.
Mr. Mansfield—Oh, no. Suppose a member of
Parliament, after he has delivered a speech not in
harmony with a certain party's views, would they
be
.justified in libelling that man ?
Mr. Lewis-0 yes ; I think so, sir. It has been
set right where a doctor has misbehaved himself.
Mr. Mansfield—l think not, Mr. Lewis.
Mr. Lewis—l have seen it in the papers.
Mr.Mansfield—Thank God, the newspapers per-
form very important functions ; but they, cannot be
taken as the law.

Mr. Hammond—l like to be right. I have only
two or three more questions to put.
Mr. Hains continued—Highgate is the hamlet
alluded to in one of the papers. lam the receiver
for the letters deliverable in Highgate. The others
do not pass through my hand. I have never been
guilty of opening letters, and gumming them up
again.

-Mr. Hammond—ln reading that little paragraph
in the local news, who should say who it refers to ?
Mr. Lewis--I object to that question.
Mr. Mansfield—That is matter of opinion.
Mr. Hammond—We will take it another way, as
a matter of law. A man who goes to libel another
does not put his name to it, and this baffles the law ;
but still, after all, this is matter of opinion only as
to the party publishing it.
Mr. Mansfield—What is the sentence here ? It
is " how to manage the business of a hamlet.
Mr. Lewis—And there are thousands of persons
managing hamlets.
Mr. Hammond—Bring them here.
Mr. Mansfield (after looking at the article) said
said it might refer to anybody not living at High-
gate. It was quite unintelligible, and seemed like
the writing of some madman.
That part of the case concerning the Post-office
was then dropped.
Mr. Hains was cross-examined at length ; after
which the case was adjourned for a fortnight to see
if an arrangement could not be come to.

HAMMERSMITH. ANOTHER ROBBERY AT
MR. WINDHAM'S.—AmeIia Reeves, aged 19, a ser-
vant, was placed in the dock before Mr. Ingham
charged with stealing 61bs. of loaf sugar and 61bs.
of moist sugar, value ss, 3d., the property of Mr.
W. F. Windham, of No. 3A, Upper Westbourne-
terrace., Paddington.
Mr. Sayre, from the office of Mr. E. Lewis, of
Great Marlborough-street, appeared for the prose-
cution; and Mr. Martin for the prisoner.
It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner
had been in the service of Mr. Windham, as house-
maid, for two months. On Motday Mr. Chattell, of
Upper Seymour-street, who had served the prose-
cutor with grocery for the last three months, sent
some goods to Mr. Windham's house, amongst
which were two parcels of sugar. On the same
day a little girl, who worked for Mr. Wind-
ham's charwoman, went to the house to inquire
for her mistress, and the prisoner answered
her. She told the girl to wait, and she brought
up the area steps the two parcels of sugar
and gave them to her, requesting her, at the same
time, to fetch a cab. The girl thinking something
was wrong declined to go for a cab, and remained
inside with the sugar. Mr. Windham had his
attention draw to the transaction, and he called
a constable, who went to the girl and to3k the
sugar from her. Mr. Windham informed the
constable that he had discharged the prisoner,
and she was about leaving his house. He gave
her into custody, and the prisoner told the offi-
cer that she had ordered the sugar of a grocer to
take home to her father, and that she always took
him something when she went home as a present,
and he returned it twofold whenever she left her
situation. At the station a large bunch of keys was
found in her pocket, and she afterwards stated that
Mrs. Windham gave them to her to throw away.
Mr.. Sayre said the keys opened every place in
the house, and that since this charge had been made
other things had been missed.
The prisoner said Mrs. Windham never locked
up anything from her. She also said that when
Mrs. Windham went to the theatre she never locked
her jewel box, and if she (the prisoner) had wished
to be a thief she had every opportunity of being one
before. She denied having been discharged, and
said she gave notice to leave.
Mr. Chattell was called to prove that he sent the
two parcels of sugar as part of the order for Mr.
Windham.

Mr. W. F. Windham was sworn, and he stated
that his wife engaged the prisoner about two
months ago. He had suspieions of her, and had
communicated his suspicions to Mrs. Windham.
His new servant informed him that two parcels had
gone out of the house, and he then called a consta-
ble. Since the prisoner had been taken into cus-
tody he had made an examination of his house, and
had missed plate and a number of different things.
The keys found upon the prisoner opened his plate
chest, the different drawers in his wife's room, and
amongst them was a duplicate key of his cellar,
from which he had missed wine.

Cross-examined—l believe the prisoner acted as
lady's maid to my wife as well as being housemaid.
I never interfere with the women servants. The
prisoner was in the habit of receiving grocery and
other things for the house.
Mr. Martin—Mrs. Windham was very kind to
her_ I believe she gave her a gold watch ?
Mr. Windham—A watch worth £6 10s., for which
I paid. She was a great deal too kind.
Mr. Sayre—This is the way she rewards the
kindness of Mrs. Windham.

Mr. Ingham—Looking at the keys, I must re-
mand the prisoner fora week. I shall not accept bail.
Mr. Martin—The keys were given to her by Mrs.
Windham.

Mr. Ingham.—Her defence is that Mrs. Windham
gave them to her to throw away, which is not a
very probable story.
The prisoner then asked Mr. Windham to become
bail for her, but he declined.
As she was being removed from the court, she
called out to Mr. Windham that he was mad.

SHOCKING OCCURRENCE IN BLOOMS-

BURY.

Yesterday Dr. Lankester, the Central Middlesex
coroner, held an inquest at the Lord Wellington
Tavern, University-street, Tottenham-court-road,
touching the death of Wm. Henry Wilson, a tailor,
aged 28 years, residing with his mother. a lodging.
house keeper, at 26, Duke-street, Bloomsbury.
Mrs. Mary Wilson deposed that deceased was
her son, a young man of intemperate habits. About
two o'clock on Wednesday morning she was awoke
by the ringing of the street-door bell. She went
down and opened the door to her son, who followed
her upstairs and entered his bedroom, as if going to
bed. Shortly afterwards, hearing no movement in
deceased's room, which adjoined hers, she was in-
duced to go in, and found him absent. Wondering
where he could be, she was suddenly attracted by
a voice at the front door, and another voice imme-
diately following it from the top of the house, say-
ing, " Shall I?" She recognised that voice as her
son's. The two voices appeared to come from the
outside of the house, and she opened her bedroom
window, and again she heard her son say,
" Shall I?" two or three times, the last time
louder than before. She then heard a man from
below in the street answer " Yes." Directly the
man from' below answered " Yes," she saw the
deceased throw himself from the third floor window
to the ground below, a fearful height. She rushed
into the street, and seeing her son lying motionless,
she became insensible.

Frederick Slater, a pianoforte maker, of 1, Kirby-
street, Hatton-garden, said that on the night in
question he accompanied deceased, who was in an
intoxicated condition, to his home. Deceased parted
from him with the understanding that he (witness)
was to wait on the pavement, as he was coming out
to join him again almost directly. Immediately
afterwards ha saw deceased at a third floor window,
and heard-him say, " I am coming down," and wit-
ness, without suspecting anything, answered "All
right." Directly afterwards witness heard him
with frightful violence into the street. Deceased
never spoke after the fall, and appeared to
!Table,
in-
stantly killed by it. He called a polic-
n
who conveyed him to the University College Hos-
pital. He never heard him Ihreataenn
suicide. He was a wild and daring m
the influence of liquor.
f
_
Mr. Sydney Ringer, residentwmheednichale owffiacsero
the hospital, attended deceased
ad-
mitted about two o'clrrohekereonwWaseadnt fracture
yme
of both
He was quite dead.
e
jaws and four upper ribs onth e left side, and other
frightful injuries,
amongdans ee yd
s.
Verdict—" died from injuries sus-
tained h were ruptures of
the
ehiedairett_,li,v,eTrh, and
at d
deceased
by throwing himself from a window, whilst
in an unsound state of mind."

IHE FATAL .RAILipAY ACCIDENT NEAR

RUGBY.

STRETTON, TUESDAY EVENING.

This morning the adjourned inquest on the bodies
of the two men killed in the accident which took
place on the Trent Valley line at this place was
resumed at the Windmill Inn, before Mr. Carter,
one of the coroners for the county.
John Butler deposed that on the night when the
accident occurred he was ‘. piloting" at the Stret-
ton-bridge, which was undergoing repairs, and
where there was only a single line of railway.
About nine o'clock on the night of the 13th inst. he
was taking down a train across the single line, when
he heard an up train coming up rapidly. He at
once jumped from the engine. He had not heard
any fog signal en the up line.
William Caton, the man placed at the distance
signal, deposed that on the night of the 13th ult.
he placed a fog signal on the rails, and showed a
red light as a danger signal.
John Walker was next examined. He deposed—
On the night of the 13th I was on duty, as points-
man, at a place about 190 yards from the bridge,
on the Stafford side. I could hear the train was
coming fast, and I ran about 50 yards up the line,
and showed a red light to stop it. No notice was
taken of my signal, and' then ran back and reversed
the points, so as to keep the up train on the up line.
Had I not done this, there must have been a colli-
sion between the two trains, and as it was the up
train ran forward into the " bridge hole," and the
driver and stoker were killed. The driver might
have stopped the train before it got into the bridge
hole.

William Charnock said he was a breaksman. All
went on right until he heard a fog signal explode
at about three quarters of a mile from the Stratton-
bridge, and saw the signal-man show a red light.
He put down his break hard, but the train was not
stopped, and the fore-end of the train was run into
the bridge hole.
Several witnesses were next called to show that,
although Pittom had received no especial caution
of the repairs at Stretton, he must have read the
general notice posted at Crewe.
The Coroner then briefly summed up.
The Jury found " That the deceased were killed
while engaged as driver and fireman on an engine
belonging to the London and North-Western Rail-
way Company ; and the jury complain that no
notice respecting the state of the rails near Stret-
ton-bridge was personally given to the deceased
while at Stafford Station."