The Sun.
London, England, 1840-06-22 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.
(Before Lora Chief Justice TIDAL and Mr. Baron PARIS.)

TRIAL OF COURVOISIER FOR THE MURDER
OF LORD WILLIAM RUSSELL.
Log before the opening of the Court on Saturday, the Bench an
et cry pant' the Court was crowded by
well-dr,,tsed persons.. Never
has there been known such an assemblage of ladies on any preceding
oc,asion in a criminal Court. Every chair in front of the Bench
had its lade occupalt, and during the whole of the three days the
ladies have been indefatigable in their attendance—many of them
not quitting the Court even during the time of the adjournmen t
Ili Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex was not present.

Shortly after ten o'clock the Judges took their seats upon the
B:neA, and immediately afterwards Francois Benjamin Courmi.
zz 'r was placed at the bar. lie appeared pale and downcast, and
an'ious; but his krumess did not desert him.

Lord Chief Justice TINDAL suggested the propriety of examin-
ing the person who had made the model.
Charles Augustus Rivers was cross-examined by Mr. BODKIN—
I ant a sculptor. I made the model produced. It accurately re-
pre eats the premises. The height of the back wall is 16 feet 3. It
continues along the whole row of houses. The height of the wall
on the right side is 8 feet 7, and of the building on the other side,
10 feet 4. The height of the weather boarding ti feet 10. Imme-
diately behind it on the other side is a bottle rack. It was in a very
rotten state. 1 cannot form a judgment if it would have borne
the weight of a man. The height of the wall from Sir Howard El-
phinstone's garden next door is 14 feet.

Sarah Mansell recalled. v The prisoner remained in the house in
N ,rfolk street from the time of the discovery of the murder until
he was taken into custody.
Inspector Tedman recalled. I examined the bottle rack, but not
perfectly. Beresford examined it. lie is sent for.
Mr. C. PHILLIPS then rose to address the Jury for the defence,and
said that after thirty years' considerable experience in his arduous
profession, he had seldom had to addre-s a Jury under
more painful or anxious circumstances. There were circumstances
produced before the Magistrates calculated to cause consider-
able anxiety, and he left them to judge how much snore that
anxiety must have increased by the production of evidence yester_
day, without notice, calculated to increase the danger of the unfor-
tunate man who now stood at the bar. Ile said danger, because
he should show
presently that that evidence was by no means con-
clusive against him, and he had the sympathies of the Jury in his
levour, as they were embarked in the same cause, and if they came
to an unjust decision so surely would they have to answer for it to
their God. He wes filled with dread when he considered the po-
pular prejudices which had been raised agai .st the prisoner before
my investigation had taken place. When he considered that this
ease had not been left to be dealt wills by the ordinary in
struments of justice, but that the investigations had been
stimulated by a large Government reward, as if the grave
knew of any pristocracy, and when he saw this crowded Court,
and almost heard the throb of indignation which beat in every
bosom on considering the crime with which Ilse prisoner was
charged ; and when he saw that unfortunate man at the bar, stand.
ing there alone, friendless, far from his friends, his country, and
all those vs ho in his misfortunes could have afforded him comfort
and assistance—the object of all this prejudice and this indigna-
tion, be owned he should have felt dread, did he not fix the
anchor of his hope in the justice and good sense of the Jury ;
and lie was sure that when the prisoner, two days ago, re-
fused a foreign Juicy, he was perfectly right in trustieg himself
to an English Jury. The case was most mysterious. Ile
had to complain of Mr. Adolphus in his opening. That
gentleman had attempted to excite a prejudice against the
prisoner because he was a foreigner. Foreigners rob, and murder
when they rob. It was a libel on the human race. His (Mr.
Phillips's) countenance fell when he heard Mr. Adolphus say this—
he dared not look up, lest be should see some of the representatives
slay crowded this Court.
()1
Mr.t h'ose
Adolphusi-orei was an ti ogn'p a
st could h everye
point out an instance of a
murder in Switzerland ? Was not that country celebrated for its
historian,
whooria n had
humanity, its kindness, and its virtue, and that was the country of
Courvoisier. What would be their feelings if in a Court of Jus.
Lice its Vsenna or Madrid they were to see a fellow countryman on
his trial for efe—svhat would be their feelings, if they were to hear a
Counsel say, This men comes from the country of Patch, Greenacre,
a';d Thurtell, and Englishmen always murder. What must have
been the feelings of Courvoisier's countrymen in listening to Mr.
Aciolishus's speech? Mr. Adolphus had attempted to induce them
to believe that crimes might be committed without a motive.
Ile could attribute no motive to Courvoisier, and therefore he hail
recourse to this absurdity. His allusion to the case of Oxford was
!nest unfortunate. lie firmly believed that he was a maniac. It
actuated by morbid motives of notoriety he had dared to direct his
murderous aim at her, the beloved, the beautiful, the virtuous,
who was enthroned its her people's hearts, be must have been, if nut
mad, at least on the very verge of inaeness. What motive coul,l
Courvoisier bare for committing this crime—revenge?—
there was no quarrel between him and his mas-
ter. Jealousy ? Ile was a favoured and a trusted
Plunder ?-lie bad every opportunity of plundering
wholesale, almost to any extent, without suspicion, or if suspicious
were excited, shared among him and others. lie could imagine
a midnight plunderer entering the house, and, to prevent discovery,
committing the horrible crime with which the prisoner :tool
charged. But eyes, supposing the prisoner to have committed the
crime, must he not have been mad—mead to have cenunitted it
without motive—mad to have remained after the commission of the
crime in a place where he could scarcely avoid being detected.
Let the ingenuity of the bar discover a motive, if they could.
They bed endeavoured to do so ; they had failed. They then taid
a crime could be committed without a motive—a contradiction to
experience--a contradiction to common sense. This was a
case entirely of circumstantial evidence, and therefore every
minute circumstance was entitled to their consideration. The pro-
secutors were bound to prove, not by inference, not by argument,
not by subtle ingenuity, but downright paipaule demonstration,
that the prisoner bad been guilty of this crime. It was not for I
him to say who did it. if they asked him who did it, he would
say, ask the onsniscient God—he knew not—he was not called upon
to rend asunder the mantle of darkness, and throw a brilliant light
upon this most mysterious crime. He imputed it to no one. Ile
sought not, as had been insinuated, to cast any imputation on the
female servants. The first fact relied on by Mr. Adolphus was the
prisoner's agitation Now here he was called up by the housemaid,
and she said to Itim, Let us go and see where soy Lord is. He
owned that expression struck him as very remarkable. If
she haul said, let us tell my Lord that the house has been
tabbed, it would have been natural ; but why should she
suspect that my Lord was not safe ? Courvoisier did as
he was bid—went first into the room, opened the shutters,
the housemaid saw a spot of blood upon the pillow, screamed, and
ran out. Now he had referred to the Coroner's depositions, and
Me. Adolphus had very generously said that he might put in
these depositions, and the prosecution would waive the right of
reply. The Judge had very property interposed, but the Coro-
net's depositions were before the Bench, and the Bench could see
what she had said before the Coroner. lie should not put ii) the
depositions, because he could not expose the prisoner to another
exercise of Mr. Adolphus's ingenuity. The shutters were opened,
the prisoner saw Ills master murdered—aged, respected, verses,
ble, beloved—there he lay, weltering in his blood ; and it was ex-
pected that the prisoner should show no agitation. had he shown
no agitation, would it not have been said that a cool, deliberate,
eold.blooded wretch, who could look upon such a scene without
agitation, would have been the matt, of all others, capable of com-
mitting the crime. Why, his own witnesses exhibited the
same agitation. I say the agitation is a proof of their
innocence. Ile says it is a proof of that man's guilt.
Ile wished Mr. Adolphus had been in Hyde Park with
him the other day to have witnessed the agitation of the bye-
standers when the attempt was made upon the life of the Queen.
If agitation was a proof of guilt, there was not a person there
but was guilty of the attempt upon the life of the Queen. But
he rendered no assistance. He •;id as soon as he recovered. He
went to write to Mr. W. Russell. He (Mr. P.) knew that gentle-
man, and deeply did he sympathise with the grief of that last scion
of that illustrious stock. While writing he was interrupted by the
housemaid, with that feminine exclamation, " What the devil are
you doing here." Ile is told Mr. Russell must be sent for, he
goes to the door, and calls the first man he sees, to send him—
but is again interrupted by the servant. There were horses
..in
the stable, he•had an opportunity of taking one of them, and es-
caping—lse had some hours to have done so—but he remained
answering every question put to him, and answering those clues_
lions truly. Ile is left closely watched by the police—tortured
wills questions which he answers truly—and every question
he answers truly increases the suspicions against him.
The occasion of taking him into custody vas the finding the locket
upon him. " Dare you look me in the fa: e?" said flue police-
man. " Yes," said Courvoisier. "It is the murdered man's," said
the policeman. "It is mine," said Courvoisier, and he is taken into
custody. The locket is shown to Ellis. he says "It is very much
like my Lord's." "It is mine" said Courvoisier. His Lordship's
locket is found concealed in the pantry, and Courvoisies turns out
to be right. If it had not been found this locket would have been
rodsuced. Ellis, like an honest man would have said it was like
it, and it would have been insinuated that the locket found in the
prisoner's pocket was the murdered Lord's. Again, theimpression
oft's. seal was found in the possession of the prisoner. He said
this was given to him by Mr. W. Russell, but this, although said at
Bow-street Court, did not suit the gentlemen conducting the pro-
secution to admit, but he must do justice to one of the gentlemen
attending for the prosecution, the worthy representative of the
Bedford family, Mr. Wing. That gentleman had heard what
was said at Bow-street; he had gone to Mr. W. Russell,
and that gentleman, its a =lnner which did honour to his
justice and his humanity, at once admitted that such was the case.
Mr. Wing with the greatest kindness and humanity informed the
prisoner's Counsel of it, and thus they were saved from perilling
the safety of the prisoner by being driven to put Mr. Russell into
the box, and perilling the prisoner's safety by subjecting him to Mr.
Adolphus'; ingenuity in reply- Every answer of the prisoner had
turned out to be true. In the opening it was said that the candle
was so placed that his Lordship could not read in bee. Now it
appeared in evidence that it was not so placed. Again, Isis trunk was
searched ; and, said Mr. Adolphus, do you think lie would have
Ind the evidence of his guilt into Isis own trunk. Indeed he must
have been a fool or a madman if he had done so. 'reamers, to
whom he would do the justice to #ay that he had givers his evidence
most fairly, searched hit trunk en the (As, and found nothing in it.
Now what would an apprentice policeman oft be old school have done?
Vs'hy,for the interests ofjustice it was his bounden duty tolsave corded
and sealed that trunk, and put it in some place of -safety, where no
miscreant, tempted by a reward of 4001., should have an opportu.
nity of introducing proofs of guilt, but it was left open to all the gang
of police in the house and to the maid.seryants. They ex anined it
Why ? And Tedman, an honest mars, extanines
again on the
it again again on the 13th—why Ile gives an honest reason. The
uncle of flue prisoner came and requested a change of linen for the
prisoner.
prisoner sends his uncle to the house to the police
'
11se
to get a shirt out of Isis trunk, which had been searched on the 6th.goes and takes out a shirt and shakes a pair of bloody
Tes! rn an wee put the gloves there whilst the man was
its gaol ? Or
gloves f rOM it.
vould he, knowing they were there, have sent the
is:slice to exar
n'ne it ? Tolman does not have recourse to the
scoundrel'; excuse, that he did not search minutely. Was there
not practice in this?
Thus bad begins, but worse remains behind."
Collier, who, for reasons best known to himself, would not go to
the truss en
k without a witness after Ilse search by Tedman on the
and on the 13th, gos to the trunk on the ISth, and finds, in
h
6tltte ery top of the trunk, two bloody handkerchiefs, marked with
ttie prisoner's initials. The trunk had been examined after Cour-
voisier was in prison ; so that he totuld not have had the oppor-
tunity of putting evidences of his guilt into Isis trunk. Why did
the policemen go one after another to this same trunk, which had
been proved to be free :from suspicion on the oth ? Suppose
the shirts might not have been secreted, how did they account for
the handkerchiefs and the shirt front ? fedman saw nothing of
Omens on the dth ; they were not seen on the Sth ; who put them
into the „we, ? Not Courvoisier ;he was ill his dungeon, What
villainy had been at work. Why was the injustice done
of not cording and sealing up his trunk, so that it saiglit
have been produced as it was found on the morning of the murder 9
lied net some one been at work to make the prisoner the victim of
his machinations ? He supposed he was not going too tar in
saving
there were strong suspicions that the trunk had been practised on ;
those who had done that might do other things. Mr. Inspector
Pearce,who would not intimidate a wretch to endeavour to hang him,
pantry,
1 finds the things in the prisoner's and takes them up and
shows them to him These was no need to use words to intimi-
date the prisons ;under these circumstances if he had been guilty ;
lie shows hint those things, and says, Leok here, Sir, dare you look
me in the face?
Was anything so likely to strike a person dumb
these things, and that in • •
as the production of , inquisitor inflicting worse
than physical torture ? Courvoisier did look him in the face, and
said he knew nothing about them--he was innocent. Contrast the
conduct of these two men, and see on whose brow guilt is most
deeply branded. Did you not use them to intimidate the
man P said my friend. I did not, said
Pearce. Now, could
,he believe him ? Mr. Maine was in the house at that that.
s Mr. Hobler was in the house at the time. Why did they let
that fellow go up to the prisoner and exhibit those articles be.
fore him, and try to intimieate him into a confession ? It was
their duty to Wive gone up themselves to him, and said, These
articles were found in your pants-
1--can you account for them?
but instead of that they send this fellow to torture him. Why,