The Sun.
London, England, 1814-04-08 00:00:00

TRIALS FOR AIURDEIL.

Ironk, MARCH 28.—Jaroes Flybes was charged
with the wilful murder of IVir. John Taylor, of
Sutton, neat' Hull, by shoocing hint with dpistol
loaded with balls, on Thrirsday the 24th of Fe-
bruary, and acquitted,
.the same day for the
Robert :firmer w:*
wilful
munkr of, Margaret Appleby. The trial
commenced at t.%Vo o'clock in the afternOon, and
c ,ntivied an.:til half past ten at night.. The de-
Ceased had Oliated a grill! upon the prisoner, who
Was a 81111111 farmer at Low Worsall, in the North
Riding. The deceased was a pauper in the work-
homse at Yarm, and came to Stokesley on the 6th
of February, fur the purpose of attending a
meeting of the Justices, to grct an order nputi :he
prisoner for the, maintenance of the child. At
this conduct the'sprisoner expressed much displea-
sure, arid endeavoured, without snceess, to prevail
upon her to go to the Magistrates to unsay all
that she had sworn. Alniust immediately after
this, he presented the deceased with a glass of rum
and warm watcr, which he himself brought from the
bar of a publip-house; she drank the whole of it,
and was instantly seized with the most violent
vomitings, attended wirh the, most excruciating
pain. She languished until the 12th of Fehruety,
When she died. These eiictunstances, togefter
with the disappearance of the prisoner, who ab-
sconded before tire: death of the deceased, and was

tit length fotind tonOeiiled at South Shields;toyned

the principal part of the evidence against hint.
No poison was found in, her stomach. The Jury
retired about twenty minutes, and on their return
found
,the prisoner guilty. Sentence of death was
immediately passed on him.
John James, of West- Wilton, in the North
Riding, was charged with the wilful minder of
William Ridley, of Middlesham, Sheriff's othccr,
on the 24th of November, by stabbing him in the
neck with a knife: Wm. James, brother-to the
aboYe, was charged with ai:Jing and ahettingin
the said murder. The evidence against the latter,
however, only proved the use of expressious,which
imported, that he had an will.to the deceased,
and was not sorry for his death : an 4 his. Lord-
ship observed, that whatever unfavourable impres-
sion they might give the Jury as. to the obduracy
and hardness of liis heart, they did not amount to
a participation in the murder, .and directed the
Jury to acquit him.
Thomas Serjeantson, on the trial ofJohn James,
stated, that in consequence of an application from
the deceaSed; who was a Sheriff's officer, and au
auctioneer, be went with him to seize some hay •
and corn belonging to the prisoner.. For this
purpose they went to a field belonging to the pri-
soner, in which the stack.of hay was, which was
sold by the deceased : they then went out cf the
'prisoner's field to the barn of Mr. King, to which
the corn of the prisoner had been removed, Wit- •
ness went into King'S field the first, and was fol-
jo-ved by the deceased, who WhS removing a bar
to give them a better entrance, when the prisoner
rushing from behind', struck him on the neck with
his fist; he placed his left hand on deceased's
shoulder, and struck him with the right ; ,he re,
peated the blow. Witness then saw that he. had
a knife in his hand; blood immediately gushed
front the wound ; the first stab was immediateli
under the ear, the second about the collar 04 the,
coat. Witness took hold of the deceased wltri
one hand, and seizel the priioner with the oilier,
but the deceased fell to the ground,
.and almost.
instantly expired. The wounds werb inflicted with
a pocket-knife. Prisoner said, he would' not hurt
any other person that was there ; adding, " I have
done what I wished to do ; it {vas my intention,.
and I'athsatisfied."

John Abbot stated, that in the morning of the
day the murder took plate, John James had de-
clared to him, that if they took. his hay he wonlftt,
be revenged.
The prisoner, being called upon for his defence,

*4l'. Pr°.
My, property with my life."
M sr..ltAtt4E, who.was Connsel.(6i the risollei.;
called a nutnher of witnisSei, the object of which
was to prove that no rent was. doe to the land-
lord; Mr. Chayters, of Leyburn, and Oat of coarBe.
the distress was wrongfully Made; and tins pint •
,Seemed to be made but in evidence. It alSo• al);
pealed in the course of the,cross-eititninatiOn 0
the different witnesses, that a quantity of l'"Y;
Which was worth froM: -four to ve poutul,
.sOld, by the dectased to himself for the stIM °
fAteen Shillings'. These were, no doubt, the
causes which. worked the Mind of the prisoner t°
take so deadly a revenge. But . though kr. jos-
tict ciumgßE permitted this evidence to be P°e
.into, .he stated, that, if it was prOved ever 5.`"
clearly there was not even a colourable pretest f' r.
the distress, it would not in tire least
nature .of -the act the prisoner had coninntt"'
which. was most clearly a deliberate murder.
His LOrdship said, the evidence against
James did not appear to him-sufficient to It-1110'
rate him as a principal in the second degree'{
aiding •and abetting in the murder.
• The Jury, after conferring together for about"
minute, found John James guilty, and aegnitteo
William James.
The prisoner, when he was asked what he had
to say why=sentence of death should not be POW
ed on him ? • replied,. 1 give myself tip to tbj
laws of my king and Country,. though I have-I,Y'
no law shewn to me,

Mr. Justice (inmuakE, in an impree'sive ialdresc,'
in which he dwelt on the deep-rented - tual;:i.;nl
manifested by the prisoner' against the deceast.,!:
passed
*upon him the aurftil•sentence of death, o',
resting that it should be eathetl into execution:.'
'1 -