The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-17 00:00:00

But who ordered you to go to Mr. Wain.
Wright ?—I do not know.
Were the Magistrates getting
,up the prosecu-
tion do not know.
Were not they, the Magistrates, the Judges
before whom the case was tried ?—Yes, they were.
And am I to understand that they are the
persons who sent you to those different places to
make inquiries I—Yes.
Did they send you, to the Old Bailey also to
give evidence I—No, they did not. I was bound
in a bond to go there, and I was told by the In-
spector when the trial was to come on.
You were examined before the Grand Jury ?
—I was.
On both the bills ?—Yes. •
On the bill that was found against Lord Cardi-
an and the bill against the other gentleman that
was thrown out I—Yes.
The same witnesses were examined on both
the bills I—Yes.
You were examined on both I—Yes, I was.
And pray did you give the same ,evidence on
both?—Yes, Sir, I did.
And upon the same evidence and the same wit-
nesses one bill was found, and the other bill was
thrown out ?—Yes, Sir, it was so.
Will you be so kind as to go back a little and
state what you have said. Did you see three
persons get out of the carriage and go to the
place whre you saw the firing ?—Yes, I did, Sir.
You state that when you saw them you recog-
nised one of them to be Lord Cardigan?—Yes.
Pray what distance from your ?louse was the
place where you saw them get out ?—Two hun-
dred and twenty yards.
Do you mean to say that at that distance you
were able to see and recognise the persons of
those three partiesl—No ; I do not say so, but I
never lost sight of them from that time.
You did. You say that at that distance you
knew Lord Cardigan—did you not I—No, I never
said so. -
Could you, at that distance, know any of the
parties so as to be able to speak to them again ?
—No, I could not.
You have said that you saw them come out
of the carriage, and that you knew and recog-
nized one of them to be Lord Cardig-an I—l never
said so. If I did say so I mistated. 1 did not mean
it. But I never lost sight of them from that time
till I came up.
You say that when you first saw the fire you
were standing at the gate; at what distance was
that?—About the same distance-220 yards.
Could you at that time recognise the persons?
*--No, I could not.
You say you went towards them ?—Yes; I did.
Where were you first able to recognise their
persons I—l did not lose sight of them at all.
I am not saying you did ; but I ask you, when
were you first able to discover who they were ?
I cannot say.
Was it after or before the second shot ?—lt
was after the second shot.
Then I understand you to say now that you
were not able to recognise them or to know their
person, so as to speak to them at another time,
until after the second shot?—No, I cannot say
that. I did not lose sight of them at all.
Where was Lord Cardigan when you first re-
cognised them I—Standing near the spot.
That was when you came up to them ?—Yes.
Where were all the other gentlemen at the
time ?—Close by.
And what were they doing ?—I cannot ex-
actly say what they were doing because my at-
tention was directed entirely to Lord Cardigan.
Your attention was directed entirely to his
Lordship—you do not know what the others
were doing I—Not for a second or two.
Were you then able to tell which of the
parties it was that fired the shot ?—I was certain
as to which was the party, because I never lost
sight of them till I got up to them.
You never lost sight of them; but how did you re-
cognise the party I—Because I saw the pistol in
his hand.
He had a pistol in his hand when you came
up I—Yes.
How soon after that was it that you saw the
other gentleman that you said was a doctor?—
When I turned round from Lord Cardigan then
I perceived there were four.
Very well, then ; how soon after that did you
see another? You saw four besides Lord Cardi-
gan ?—Yes.
Did you recognise the prisoner so as to be
able to know him again ?—Yes.
And he went up to the house also with the
other parties ?—Yes.
Very well. Now there is one question that I
will ask you as to the different places that you
have been to. Have you been paid your charges
for going I—No ; I have not.
Did you go to the Home-office at any time ?
Yes.
When?—A week ago last Saturday..
What did you go far I—l was requested to go
there, and then I was asked questions as to my
evidence.
Who asked you questions at the Home-office ?
—A gentleman of the name of Vizard.
Was your exa.nination taken down at the time?
—A gentleman was writing at the time, but
whether he wrote down what I said, I do not
know.
You had not been there before 7—No; that was
the first time.
And that was the only examination of y-our's
taken for the purpose of this trial ?—Yes.
You had not been examined from the time you
went to the Old Bailey till you went to the Home-
office last week. Was any one else there be-
sides you ?—My wife and son, Mr. Busain, and
Mr. Bignall. We all went to the Home-office,
but what occurred there I know not. I only
answer for myself.
Have you presented this bill anywhere for
payment I—l applied to the Magistrates for my
expenses, and they gave me a certificate.
Very well, have you received it I—No, I have
not.

other gentleman ?—Yes, my. Lord, he wrote a
note to the• Magistrates, and signed his name.
A 'PEER—Signed his name Tuckett ?—Yes, my
Lord.
Was the other the gentleman that you saw at
Wimbledon Common ?—No, my Lord, it was a
different gentleman.
Did you see that gentleman every time that
you were shown up to Captain Tuckett ?—I think
I did not see him the last time.
The Earl of RADNOR—You are sure that you
did not see him every time I—Yes, my Lord.
In each case you asked for Captain Tuckett ?
Yes, my Lord. -
You were shown directly up to this gentleman.
(The shorthand writer's notes were here re-
ferred to.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I now propose to
your Lordships that I be permitted to bring in
evidence the card which was delivered to the
witness in the 'presence of the Noble Earl, the
prisoner at the bar. I apprehend that it is part
of the res gestce, and on that ground it is admis-
sible. Your Lordships will observe that the evi-
dence relating to it is not that it was given by
Lord Cardigan, but that it was given with his
knowledge.
Sir W. FonLETT—It is clear that the Earl of
Cardigan did not see the card. He did not see
what was written upon it. There is no evidence
to show that he was aware of any card being
given. The object of this evidence is to prove
who the person was who gave that card. The
Attorney-General says it is part of the res
yestce. A person might give a card not for the
purpose of giving his real name, but of giving
another, and unless that was done with the full
knowledge of the prisoner at the bar, your
Lordships will see that it is not evidence against
him. It has appeared that he knew nothing
about it—that he never saw the card, and there-
fore I submit to your Lordships, that it ought
not to be given in evidence against the Noble
Earl.
The ATTORNEY-Gttcnitan—The witness cannot
tell whether it was the gentleman himself or the
person who accompanied him that gave the
card; but it was given by either of them. But
supposing that it did contain the real address of
Captain Tuckett, and that was N 0.13, Hamilton-
place, and thereupon the witness going to that
place sees the wounded gentleman, would not
that, my Lords, be admissible evidence
on this trial?---It is entirely for your Lordships
to say—indeed, the only question is, whether it
is admissible or not. It appears that the ca d
was given in the presence of the Earl of Cardi-
gan. Then I submit to your Lordships it ought
to be given in evidence.
A PEER—Do you mean to contend that be-
cause it was liven to him in the presence of the
Earl of Cardigan, the prisoner at the bar, that
makes it evidence ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—By no means; far
from it. But this card is to be considered merely
as the address of the person who gave it.
Sir W. FOLLETT—But you are stating the con-
tents of it?
The ATTORNEY.LGENERAL—NO, I abstain from
that. But when a person wishes a person to call
at his house, and gives a card such as this is, it
must be presumed that it contains his address,
stating his name and place of abode. I sub-
mit it would be admissible as such, and not
on the ground of its being given in the presence
of the Noble Prisoner.
Sir W. FoLnnrr—The ordinary rules of evi-
dence are the same in civil and criminal cases;
and it is not usual in either to press matters of
evidence of which there is a doubt that they
existed. This prosecution is conducted in the
usual mode, and the Attorney-General now
attempts to submit in evidence what is contrary
to the ordinary rule, and lie is asking to prove an
important fact by an apparent admission
that the Noble Earl was aware of what was writ-
ten on the card. I ask whether that should be
submitted in evidence against the prisoner. Your
Loedships must see that this is an important fact,
whether your Lordships are prepared to say
it could be proved upon the statement of a person
who did not know who gave the card. It does
not appear that the Earl of Cardigan ever saw or
knew what was writtenlon the card. I submit,
therefore, that it should not be brought in evi-
dence against the Noble Lord.
The LORD HIGH STEWARD—The decision upon
this question, if we are called upon ultimately to
decide upon it, can be postponed.
Sebastian Byron Dann, examined 'by the
ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
How old are you ? Fourteen years last
August.
Are you the son of Thomas Dann, the
last witness, the miller of Wimbledon ?
Yes.

On the 12th of September last were you at
home at yonr father's house ?—Yes.
In the afternoon of that day, did you observe
anything that attracted your notice ?—Yes.
was standing at the mill door and saw a post-
chaise on the road.
Did you observe that post-chaise ?—Yes.
Where ?—On the road.—(Laughter.)
How far from your father's mill ?—Nearly half
a mile.
Where did the post-chaise go to ?—lt stood still.
Now did you see any one in the post-chaise ?
—Not at that time.
Did you afterwdrds see another post-chaise ?
Yes.

How far were you from it?—Near a quarter of
a mile.
Did you see any person come from the post-
chaise ?—No, Sir.
Did you see any person near it ?—Yes ; there
were two persons about a hundred yards from
the post-chaise.
What were they doing ?—They were walking
about.
Did you see them do anything there ?—I could
see that they did something, but did not know
what it was.
What did you next observe ?—I went up on
the stage of the mill.
Being on the stage of the mill, what did you
see ?—I saw gentlemen walking about.
How many were there ?—Five, Sir.
How were they arranged ?—Two in one place,
two in another, and one at the corner of Mr.
Currie's garden.
What did they do ?—They separated.
Who separated ?—The two.
After they separated, where did they go ?
They walked about a little while, and then the
two parties came and met.
What was then done ?—They walked about • a
minute or so, and then knelt down together.
Well, what] then—were they near each other
when kneeling ?—Close together.
What did those two who were kneeling close
together?—They got up in about two or three
minutes and stood back to back, and then walked
five or six paces from each other.
What was then done ?—They beckoned to the
other two gentlemen.
What then ?—The other gentlemen came and
took the pistols, and fired.
Do you know the gentleman who fired ?—I
I did not know them at the time.
Can you say whether the Noble Lord at the
bar was one of them ?—Yes, Sir.
Do you know who the other was ?
[Sir W. FOLLETT objected to this question
being put; it was then withdrawn.]
Examination resumed—Having fired, what
was then done ?—The seconds gave them other
pistols, _ _ _

Now I understand you, Mr. Dann, to say that
you never lost sight of these gentlemen from the
time when you first saw them 1-0 h no, Sir, I
have not said that.
Did you tell me in answer to a question a mo-
ment ago when I asked you about their coming
from the curricles that you never lost sight of
them ?—lt certainly was a mistake if I did.
You certainly said so ?—lt was a mistake.
Then you did lose sight of them I—After 1
first saw them come on the ground I did.
For how long I—A few minutes.
Where were you during that time I—l was on
the stage of the mll, twenty feet high. I went
to my house ; there I lost sight of them till I
came to the gate ; then I did not lose sight.
How long did you lose sight ?—No longer than
it took me to lay my hand upon my constable's
staff.
Why did you not go at once when you sus-
pected a duel ?—I thought it better not to go
without authority.
You thought it better that they should fight
the duel before you interfered P—No, I did not
think that.
What Was the meaning of your answers when
you said that you told your wife to watch 2—l set
my wife to watch and let me know if it was a
duel.

Your wife was to watch, and as soon as she saw
what was sufficient for a duel, then she was to tell
you, and then you were to go 220 yards for
the purpose of preventing it—that was your
plan ?----Yes.

- And when you got up you found that the gen-
tlemen had exchanged two shots ?—Yes.
Who instructed you to prevent the gentlemen
from fighting a duel on Wimbledon-common ?
—Mr. Carter, the Coroner, I believe, was the
person.
And you have ever since interfered ?—Yes.
And this was the first job that you made of it?
—I have prevented several.
Why did you not call out to those gentlemen
when you supposed they were about to fight a
duel ?—I do not know my reason. I ran to them
as fast as could.
You changed your coat, did you not ?—No.
Did you stop the mill ?—No.
Re-examined by Mr. WADDINGTON—Did you
state what was the number of the house in Ha-
milton-place where you saw the gentleman that
you call Capt. Tuckett?-13, Hamilton-place.
How often did you see him there ?—Three
times.

A -Noble Lord suggested that the witness
should be placed on a chair, as they could not
hear his answers distinctly.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he was most
anxious to make the answers of the witness audi-
ble without repeating them.
A chair was then procured, and the witness
placed on it, when the examination proceeded.
You said the seconds gave them another pis-
tol ?—Yes.
Each of them I—Yes, Sir.
How near were you at the time I—About 100
yards from them.
When they got the other pistols, what was
done ?—The seconds came away from them, and
they fired again directly.
What did you do then ?—I went up to them.
You say his Lordship (pointing to Lord Cardi-
gan, who was in front of the witness) was one of
them ?—Yes.
Did you observe anything in
his Lordship's
hands ?—No, not then.
What did you observe ?—Myfather was there
then.

Upon three different days ?—Three times upon
three different days.
Did you ask for him on each occasion ?—Yes.
You asked for Captain Tuckett ?—I did.
You have been asked as to losing sight of these
gentlemen. Did you ever lose sight of the gen-
tleman who fired the first shot from the time of
leaving your gate till you got up to them ?—No.
Can you undertake to state positively whether
the gentlemen who fired the second shots were
the same as fired the first ?—I am positive of that.
When you got up you said that Captain
Tuckett had a pistol in his hand. . Had Lord
Cardigan also a pistol in his hand?
The Earl of RADDrou—Each time that you
went to Hamilton-place did you ask for Captain
Tuckett?—Yes, my Lord.

Yes, but tell me what you saw ?—I saw a gen-
tleman, and the doctor examining the wound.
Was he one of the gentlemen o fired?--Yes.
You say you saw the doctor examining the
woundl—Yes, Sir.
Did you see whether the gentleman was woun-
ded ?—Yes.
How did you know that he was wounded 2—l
saw the blood.
Was there much blood ?—Yes, a great deal.
Where did you see him wounded?—Just at the
top of his hip.
Your father then came up
?—lie was there
before me.
What was then done 2—They walked up to our
house.
To the mill ?—Yes.
Did you go along with them 2—Yes, Sir.
What became of them I—They walked in our
yard a little while.
About how long?—About a quarter of an hour
or twenty minutes,

Were you each time shown to the same gentle-
man ?—Yes.

And did you see any other gentleman there ?
—Yes.
And did you address him by the name of Cap-
tain Tuckett 7-1 don't know that I did.

Did anything that passed enable you to deter-
mine that it was Captain Tuckett, and not an-

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1841.

What did they do then ?—The gentleman and
his doctor went into the house.
Now long did they remain there ?—About fire
minutes:
What became of them then?—They got into
one of the post-chaises.
Who got into the post-chaise ?—The wounded
gentleman and the doctor, and one of the other
gentlemen, and then they drove off.
What became of Lord Cardigan and the other
gentleman ?—My father walked with them over
to the other post-chaise.
Then ybu lost sight of them ?—Yes, Sir.
Cross-examined by Mr. WRANGHAM—Have
you ever been examined on this subject before ?
—Yes.

Before the Magistrates?—No, Sir.
Before the Grand Jury ?—Yes.
Who told you to go before the Grand Jury?—
I had a subpoena.
Who gave you the subpoena ?—Mr. Busain..,
Had you been examined by any one before
you were examined by the Grand Jury ?—No,
Sir.

You have not told any one ?—No, Sir.
Have you since told it to any one ?—No, Sir.
You have' not told it to any one since ?—I
went to the Home-office.
I thought so. Did you tell it to any one
there ?—Yes.
Did you go with your father ?—Yes.
You were examined by Mr. Vizard ?- Yes.
You say when you first saw them you were at
the door of the mill?—yes.
Was your father there ?—No.
Then you went upon the stage of the mill ?
Yes.

Was your father there ?—Yes, Sir.
How far was it from the door of the mill to the
place where you saw those gentleman ?—About
220 yards.
About 100 yards from the post-chaises ?—No,
Sir, about half a mile.
I understood you to say that the spot
where the gentlemen were when you first saw
them was one hundred yards from the post-
chaises ?—When I first saw the gentlemen—(a
pause)—then they walked about.
Was that about one hundred yards distant
from the post chaises ?—Yes, Sir.
Were the post-chaises together ?—No, Sir.
How came you to say the gentlemen were 100
yards from the post-chaises?—They were about
100 ysords when I first saw them.
And the chaises were not together?—No.
How far were the chaises from each other?—
About a quarter of a mile.
Now I want you to explain how it was that the
gentlemen were only 100 yards distant from the
chaises, when you say the chaises were a quar-
ter of a mile from each other I—The parties
were not together. There were two parties, and
two in each party.
Then do you mean to say that the two gentle-
men were 100 yards from one of the post-chaises
and the other two 100 yards from the other post-
chaise?—Yes, Sir.
And the chaises were 100 yards apart ?
Yes, Sir.
Were the two gentlemen whom you afterwards
saw kneel down the parties who came out of one
of the post-chaises ?—No, Sir, one of each party
went and knelt down.
Did you not tell me just now that the two gen-
tlemen who knelt down were a quarter of a mile
from one of the post-chaises ?—WD, Sir.
[The shorthand writer's notes were here re-
•ferred to.]
Mr. WADDINGTON—He said that one of each
party knelt down.
Explain to their Lordships what you mean ?
I mean the two gentlemen were 100 yards from
each of the post-chaises ; two of them came and
met, and walked about together, and then they
knelt down.
At the time when the two gentlemen knelt
down together, how far were you from them ?
About 220 yards.
Could you clearly discern who the parties were
who knelt down ?—No, Sir.
Could you distinguish who the Parties were
who did not kneel down?—No, Sir.
Could you tell if Lord Cardigan was one of
the parties who knelt down ?—He did not kneel
down.

How could you tell that ?—I could see who
they were.
I understood you to say that at that distance
you could not distinguish who the parties were
who knelt down ?—I could see who they were.
I thought you said you could not distinguish
them at the distance of 220 paces ?—I could dis-
tinguish the other two.
How long did you remain on the stage of the
mill ?—Not a minute.
Were you there when the firing took place?—No.
Where were you then ?—When the last firing
took place I was half-way to the gate.
Where were you when the first firing took
place ?—Upon the stage of the mill when the first
firing took place.
WIS your father on the stage at that time ?
No, Sir.

When did he come upon the stage ?—He was
not up at that time. He came up a moment after.
Did you see your father get up ?—No, Sir.
Did you see where your -father was when the
two firings took place ?-He was at the gate, but
I did not see him.
You could not see him ?—No, Sir.
Then you remained on the stage about a mi-
nute after the first shot was fired ?—Yes, Sir.
Were there one or two shots fired ?—I heard
one report.
And the same at the second fire ?—Yes.
Did you follow your father to the ground ?
Yes, he was there when I got up.
You saw a gentleman wounded ?—Yes, Sir.
What makes you say you saw a gentleman
wounded ?—I saw his blood.
Was he on the ground when you saw the blood
you talk of?—Yes.
You mean standing on the ground ?—Yes,
standing.
You did not see him afterwards at the. mill?—
I saw him get out of his carriage.
You have never seen him since ?—No.
Nor before ?—No, except on that occasion.
All you know is then, that you saw a gentle-
man wounded—that you do not know that you
eversa.w before and have never seen again?—Yes.
Then why do you speak of the wounded gen-
tleman as Captain Tuckett ?--My father told
me so.
That is not evidence. Of yourself you know
nothing except what your father told you ?
Re-examined by the ATTORNEY'-GENERAL.
Were yob on the stage of the mill when you
first observed the carriages?—No.
• Where were you then ?—At the mill door.
And then you got up upon the stage ?—Yes.
How far were the parties from each other ?
About 100 yards each.
Were they two and two ?—Yes.
How far was one couple from the other ?
About 150 yards.
Did you see each party go towards the other ?
--Yes.
One of each of the parties knelt down ?—Yes.
Did you see this from the stage of the mill ?
Yes.
What interval was.there between the first and
second shots ?—Not about more than a minute.
How far was it froin the mill that the two shots
were fired ?-100 yards, or a little more.
Did you go up to the place where the gentle-
men were standing - •
Did the wounded gentleman hold anything in
his hand ?—No.
Had Lord Cardigan anything in his hand?—
No, not at thaitime.
How far was Lord Cardigan from the wounded
gentleman ?—About a dOzen yards.
By Lord AUDLEY—Don't people sometimes,
come upon the Common to shoot small birds?--
Yes.

How can you tell that the reports you heard
were not caused by persons so engaged?—Be-
cause I saw the smoke come from the pistols; that
the gentlemen held in their hands.
The witness then withdrew.
Sarah Dann was then called in, and examined
by Mr WADDINGDON.
Are you the wife of Mr. Dann, the miller of
Wimbleton ?—I am.
Were you at your husband's mill on the after-
Inowoa.
nsof Saturday, the 12th of September last ?
Did your husband give you directions to watch
any persons at that ti,me ?—He did.
In consequence of what he said to you, where
did you go ?—On the stage of the mill.
Tell me what you saw when you went
on the stage of the mill by his direc-
tions?—l saw two gentlemen kneeling on
the Common, in the direction of the gate.
At what distance were you from the gate ?--
About 220 yards.
Where were the two other gentlemen ?--One
on the left and the other on the right of the first
two.

Did you see a fifth gentleman P—l did. Where was he standing ?-0n the Common,
a little distance from the others.
What did the first two gentlemen do after you
saw them kneeling ?—I saw them knocking or
hammering something into two pistols, each of
them into one.
Was that while they were kneeling on the
ground ?—Yes, it was.
What did they do afterwards ?—I saw them
apparently holding the.pistols up together.i
Was each holding up 6i Pist",l—After this
they appareutli pistols.