The Sun.
London, England, 1849-10-26 00:00:00

most improbable. Even if it were true, the act
of shooting wes proved not to have caused the
death of O'Connor. A man who was at home when
the intended victim called, when ;le must have been
murdered, and who was there for a long time after,
was doubtless the murderer. The re were three points
upon which he felt it necessary to remark relied upon
by the Crown, as showing that the woman was
an accessory before the fact namely, the
evidence with respect to the crowbar, the lime, and
the shovel. The shovel was an ordinary dust or coal
shovel, and it was absurd to suppose. that a hole could
be dug with it. Therefore, he beheved the purchase
of the shovel rather favourable to the accused than
otherwise. Why, if she required to dig a
hole, which could have been better done in :the
garden than in the back kitchen, it would
have been as easy to have purchased a spade.
Being about her usual household affairs in the
purchase of a shovel on the day before the murder
was inconsistent with the fact that she was then con-
templating the murder. It would b 3 for them to say
whether the lime was purchased for the destruction of
the slugs in the garden, or for aidde gin the murder.
The boy who took the lime, and oa/ded the next day
for some halfpence for doing so, would not swear
positively that the money was paid by the female
prsoner. It might have been given to him by
the charwoman. Then, with re svect to the crow-
bar, which was falsely called, as was in reality a
chisel, commonly known as; a lipping-chisel, why,
it was a common thing for per ions to say, when
about to make a purchase, " I s sail send so and so
home ;" and he might have said " 7 shall send a chisel
home for some work I have to d o." Then Manning
stopped the man who was carr;sieg it, and had it
wrapped in paper, and being wrapped in paper
Mrs. Manning might be utterly ignorant of
what the parcel contained ; and the most innocent
person might say that the charge was too high. How
often did a person, when he went Jut in the morning,
say to his wife or to his servant, "I shall send a
parcel home—will you pay ha lf.a.crown, or some
definite sum for it ?" A husbinnel had no right to
shield his wife from the consequences of a murder
which she had committed, but in this case
the husband had thrown all the blame upon the wife.
And when taken into custody, lifter he had had time
to consider the course he should take, the first thing
he did, like a low poltroon, was to accuse his wife in
order to save himself. Then the spots of blood upon
the dress were proved to be iron molds and not marks
of blood. It was true there w ere marks of blood
on the toilet cover, but there were a hundred
ways of accounting for blood upc n such an article
which they could account for. The stains of blood
they would find were inside and not outside the dress,
which doubtless arose from, natural causes. He ft It
no delicacy in stating this, not withstanding the fe-
male listeners, who were mere spectators, and had
no further interest in the c Ass, the important
nature of which compelled Wm to be thus
explicit. Indeed, wherever a murder was committed,
if toilet covers and linen were carefully examined
blood might easily be discovered. Before the murder
took place there were the conveasations as to the
influence of laudanum and chloroform, and the most
tender part of the skull, and the purchase of the
crowbar and lime by Manning, for he threw the
shovel overboard altogether ; and then they found
Mrs. Manning writing a letter to O'Connor on the
day before the murder, inviting him to dinner. Now
was it not possible that Manning, desirous to impli-
cate hie wife in the murdei., got her to write
the letter of invitation, so that )so handwriting of his
should be found on the body, raid might he not also
have placed her in a position to take in the crowbar for
the same end? Her statement to Walsh when he
called, that she had invited O'Connor to dinner the
day before and that he had not oo.me, and her cool-
ness and absence from all guile, showed guiltlessnes ;
and when O'Connor became faint, and she bathed
his head with eau de Cologne, did it not show that
she was the most unlikely person to have committed
the murder ? Why she would have recoiled from the
titan whose murder she had determined upon. The
most abandoned and callous woman—the woman who
was the common prostitute of several men—nay, the
most abandoned woman that obtained a wretched
subsistence in the streets, could not act in this way
if she had contemplated a foul suld awful murder.
When Mrs. Manning called at the deceased's house
on the evening of the murder she was observed to
look pale. Suppose she knew the murder was about
its commission, and that she should find the friend
of her youth, the friend who had assisted her in her
business affairs,:a corpse when she -went back, it was
natural that she should look pale ; but they ought
-not to convict her upon such testimony. The neat
evening, when she came again , and might have
known of the murder, she was said to have
trembled. If so it only tended to show that she was
an accessory after the fact. During the absence of
the wife the husband might hv,ve committed the

murder in consequence of a qmtrrel with the de-
ceased about his wife; and she, on her return, learn-
ing from her husband the dead Vaat had been com-
mitted, and knowing the nature of her connexion with
O'Connor, :and that disgrace world attach to her,
fled in fear. Mrs. Manning! had lived in the
service of Lady Blantyre and other families of dis-
tinction, and had no doubt saved some money, and
hence the conversation with O'Connor about invest-
ing a small sum of money in Sambre and Meuse
shares, which she wished to possess without
the knowledge of her husband. Shortly before
the murder they found O'Connor purchasing Sambre
and Meuse and Amiens and Boulogne ; and it was
not unreasonable to suppose that the shares were
purchased with her money ; also, that other shares
bad been purchased with her money by O'Connor,
depending on him, and not being able to depend upon
her husband.; and that, in fact, the shares she took were
her property. That a person, wleen told of the murder,
as he suggested Mrs. Manning was told, would rush
into the streets and at once betray her husband, or do
her best to screen him, depended upon the tempera-
ment of the person placed in such a position. Was it
not natural that a woman like her would leave her
husband as soon as she could, and it was but natural
that she should at once proceed to O'Connor's
lodgings and obtain her property ? And it was
shown that she had taken nothing but shares ; or she
might have gone to see if there was the will of which
they had heard something, and that O'Cononor in-
tended to leave her his property. The money re-
ceived: by Manning might have been handed to her
by him, in order that she might leave town and meet
bun elsewhere, and return it to him. Then they
found her changing her name and seeking to
sink into obscurity. Admitting that there were
some facts, not, however, clear, that she knew of the
intent to murder, yet the balance. of facts tended the
other way. The Learned Counsel concluded an elo-
quent speech, at four o'clock,,, by . imploring the jury
t° Weigh all the facts, and to give the prisoner the
benefit of any circumstance or doubt that might
Suggest themselves to them.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL rose to reply.
Mr. BALLANTINE rose and objected to the Attorney-
General replying.
Mr. PARRY said Mr. Bodkin, who often represented
the Crown, did not reply in such' cases.
The Came BARON said the Attorney-General at-
tended in his public capacity, and had the right of
reply. Did Mr. Parry object to the right of the
Attorney- General ?
Mr. PARRY said he did.

The CHIEF BARON said he could not let him raise
the point, it was too late.

Air. PiRAY appealed to the _Attorney-General not
to avail himself of his right in this case, where the
lives of two persons were concerned. His Learned

Friend and himself had to compete against the great

odds of two of the ablest Counsel at the bar.

The ATTORNEY- GENERAL then replied, and said his
great and paramount object was to evenly hold the
scales in order that the two prisoners at the bar
might have the fullest justice accorded to them. He
Called upon them to dismiss from their minds all pre-
judice, and particularly some of the erroneous
statements which the two advocates of the
prisoners had thought: proper to introduce in their
laudable zeal to their clients. It was admitted by
both that the murder was committed on the 9th of
August, and it was committed and carried out under
Such circumstances that it was altogether im-
possible that one person could have done the
Whole. It was evident that more than one
must have been engaged in its perpetration,
It was argued on the other side that the male pri-
soner had known nothing of the murder, but on
arriving at a conclusion upon that point the jury must
couple the statements of the prisoners with the
evidence itself. The woman had stated that
finding that O'Connor had not come to dinner,
she went to Greenwood-street to see for him,
Now it had been proved that Manning was seen
somking on the garden wall till seven, when he
jumped down. Was it not reasonable to suppose
then that the female had returned from her search
With the deceased, and that some signal was given to
Manning when he left the wall to go and dress. Besides
it had been proved that Manning was in negotiation
With Bainbridge fur the sale of his furniture some days
before the murder, so that it was not unreasonable to
auppose that he was even then contemplating a
Right. Be presumed, therefore, that the mur-
der had not been committed when the woman
went to Greenwood-street on the Thursday,
but there was a very important piece of evidence
which had not been touched upon by the defence.
The jury would remember that when Keating called
4011 Mrs. Manning on the 12th, she said it was very
strange O'Connor had not been there, as he was to
llave dined there on Thursday. Keating said he had
been seen on London-bridge that evening by two
ir,teuds, but mentioned no names. Oa the
eating
euth, when Flynn called, she said it was very strange,
b." Connor had been seen on London-bridge by
4. •
and a friend. Now who told her that it
/vas Zeating? Certainly not Keating himself. Why,