The Sun.
London, England, 1862-04-03 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGEIVCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.—KINGSTON, APRIL 2.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Wightman.)
DESPERATE ATTEMPT TO MURDER.
_ _

Alfred Edward Stevens, 18, a good-looking lad,
was indicted for feloniously shooting at Eliza Dew-
bury, with intent to murder her, and in other counts
his intent was laid to be to do grievous bodily harm.
The prisoner was also charged with intending to
commit the crime of murder without stating upon
whom.

Mr. Robinson and Mr. Harry Gifford conducted
the prosecution. The prisoner was defended by Mr.
Ribton,

The case created considerable interest, on account
of the youth of the prisoner and the circumstances
under which the crime of which he was accused
was alleged to have been committed, and also on
account of the prosecutrix having been subjected
to an attack of the same description about two
months prior to the occurrence that was now the
subject of inquiry, She was at that time in the ser-
vice of a gentleman named Lake, at Chobham, and
one evening as she was passing across the dining-
room, her master and mistress being both in the
room at the time, a gun was discharged through the
window, and the bullet broke a large chimney glass,
but fortunately did no other injury. Tiae prisoner,
it appeared, had been forcing his attentions upon
the prosecutrix, but for some reason or other she
refused to receive him as a suitor, and there was no
doubt that he committed this act of violence in a fit
of jealousy and passion. Sufficient evidence, how-
ever, could not be obtained to justify criminal pro-
ceedings being instituted against him, and the pro-
secutrix, as it would appear, left her service in order
to avoid the chance ce a similar outrage being com-
mitted, and went to live with her father and mother
at a village called Sutton, about five miles
from Chobham, and it was here that the
offence was committed that was the subject of
the present inquiry. The daring character
of the crime, and the evident determination of
the prisoner to do some serious mischief to the
prosecutrix, caused a great deal of excitement in
the neighbourhood, and through the instrumentality
of Sir Denis Le Marchant, who resides near Wok-
ing, and Mr. Lake, the girl's master, Mr. Hum-
phreys, the solicitor, was instructed to conduct the
prosecution, and take the necessary steps to bring
forward all the evidence that could be procured in
support of the present charge.
The learned counsel for the prosecution gave a
brief narrative of the facts he proposed to lay before
the jury, and the following witnesses were then
examined :

Eliza Dewbury, a rather plain-looking young
woman, said—l am a single woman, and live with
my parents at Sutton, near Woking. I have known
the prisoner for some time. He wished to keep com-
pany with me, but I objected to it. I was in service
at Mr. Lake's, at Chobham, until December, and
when I left I went to live with my father and
mother. On Sunday, the 9th of February, I was
at home, and I saw the prisoner go by the house,
but he did not come in. On the evening of the
13th of February I was sitting in the kitchen
with my mother, and heard the report of fire-arms,
and directly afterwards I saw two holes in the
wall. I was sitting between the table and the wall
and there was a candle on the table. The blinds
were down, and the bullets went through the win-
dow. I found a bullet in the room on the same
evening. It is the same now produced. Any per-
son standing outside the house where we lived could
see through the window into the room.
Cross-examined--If I was standing outside the
window the bottom of it would be nearly as high
as my head, and the floor of the room would be level
with the ground outside. My head would not have
been concealed when I was sitting down. I have
met the prisoner accidentally in the village several
times, but he never asked me to meet him. He only
asked me once to let him keep company with me,
and this was two months before he shot at me. He
was always very polite and kind to me, and we
never had any quarrelling. The table at which I
was sttting was directly opposite the window.
There was a white blind to the window, and any-
body outside could see whether there was any one
in the room or not. There were no guns in my
father's house. My brother was somewhere outside
the house at the time the shot was fired, and I saw
him the moment I went out.

Re-examined—My brother is 16 years old: He
is not here as a witness. At the request of the po-
liceman, I and my mother afterwards placed our-
selves in the positions we were in at the time the
shot was fired. When I refused to keep company
with the prisoner he did not seem either angry or
pleased.
Jane Dewbury said—l am the stepmother of the
last witness. I know the prisoner. He called at
our cottage on the Sunday before this happened,
and inquired if my daughter was at home, and in
consequence of a conversation I had had with my
daughter I told him she was not. My daughter
was at home, but she did not wish to see him. 74 On
the Thursday following, about half-past 7 o'clock
in the evening, I and my daughter were sitting in
the kitchen, when a gun was fired, and immediately
afterwards two bullets struck the opposite wall.
The table was in the middle of the room, between
the window and the wall that was struck. I picked
up one of the bullets afterwards and gave it to Lam-
bert, the policeman. The holes made in the wall
by the bullets were exactly on a level with our
heads.

Charles Lambert, one of the Surrey constabulary,
said—l produce the bullet that was given to me by
the last witness, and I examined the window and
saw two holes in the sash, and there were correspond-
ing marks in the wall, but they were rather higher.
James Miller proved that he had measured the
distance from the floor to the window sill, and the
bullet holes in the window, and he gave the dif-
ferent measurements explanatory of the position in
which the person, whoever he was, stood when the
gun was fired. He also proved that while the pro-
secutrix and her mother were sitting in the room in
the situations they occupied on the night in ques-
tion, he stretched a tape line across between the two
holes, and it passed within half an inch of the head
of the prosecutrix, and one inch by the side of the
head of the mother. The blind was pulled down,
and when the light was on the table the shadow of
one person sitting at the table could be seen dis-
tinctly, and the bullet line was completely within
the shadow. =

In answer to a question put by Mr. Ribton this
witness said that he did not hear anything about
the boy being outside on thee night the occurrence
took place.
The mother of the prosecutrix was recalled, and
she explained that the lad in question came home
from his work about the time the shot was fired,
but said he did not arrive until after the alarm had
been given.
Henry Moir, a baker, at Chobham, proved that
on the night of Feb. 13, about six o'clock, he saw
the prisoner at that place. He appeared to be coming
from his father's house, and he went in the direction
of Sutton. He had something under his coat which
appeared long, like a gun, but it was concealed
under his coat, and he could not say positively what
it was.

Jane Elliott deposed that at a little after six
o'clock she saw the prisoner going in the direction
of the prosecutrix's residence, and he was carrying
a gun. _ _

Emma Tucker said that on the evening of Feb. 13
she was passing the prosecutrix's cottage about 20
minutes•past 7 o'clock, when she saw the prisoner
standing opposite the window with something in his
hand, which looked like a long pistol, and when
she had gone on about 15 yards, she heard a loud
report. A. young matt named North came up, and
she went back with him, and she then saw the pri-
soner in the act of running away towards Chob-
ham. The prisoner was shown to her on the follow-
ing morning, and she recognised him immediately.
Several witnesses were then examined, who
proved that they saw the prisoner at different
places on his way towards his father's house, and
that ho had something like a gun concealed under
his coat. It was also proved that upon searching
the house of the prisoner's father three guns were
found, one of which had been recently discharged,
and the prisoner admitted that he had discharged
it on the previous evening, and he said that he had
shot at some rooks. When he was told that he was
charged with shooting at Eliza Dewbury, with
intent to murder her, he made no reply.
Charles Barker, an inspector of the Surrey con-
stabulary, deposed that after the prisoner was com-
mitted for trial he took him in the train from Guildford
to Horsemonger-lane Gaol. When the train had
gone a short distance from Guildford, as they were i
crossing a road, the prisoner asked him if that road
did not lead to Sutton, and he told him it did. The
prisoner then said, " It is a bad job, but if the mo-
ther of the girl had let me see her on the Sunday it
would have been all right. Whatever made me do
such a thing as that I can't think. When I fired I
nearly shot the mother, but I did not intend to
shoot her—only the girl." Witness then asked
him if he had shot at her when she lived at Chob-
ham, and he said he did not do so. He then in-
quired what time he left Chobham to go to Sutton,
and he said about half-past six, and ho pointed out
the bridge he had passed over in going and return-
ing.
Cross-examined—The prisoner made this state-
ment quite voluntarily, and witness wrote it down
with a pencil and read it over to him, and when
they arrived at the prison he signed it.
Mr. Ribton then addressed the jury on behalf of
the prisoner, and said that although the suggestion
on the part of the prosecution was that this
desperate crime had been committed, by him out of