The Sun.
London, England, 1846-04-01 00:00:00

man till it was mentioned to the magistrates. It was some
time after. I cannot tell how long it was after. It might
be three months before I mentioned it. I was at Yarmouth
all that time. Yarham was not, to the best of my knowledge.
I did not see him. I saw Yarham at the old Gaol Hall. I
asked the mayor to see Yarham that I might see him, be-
cause I wanted to see if it was him.
Witness (in great agitation)—My Lord, am I obliged to
answer these questiens?
JUDGE—Yes, indeed you are.
Witness, I thought it was not right to give the man in
charge after what the mayor had said. I saw him'when he
was before the magistrates. When I saw him there f thought
I knew him, but could not recollect for the moment who it
was.

Re-examined by Mr. PALMER—I did not expect to meet
Yarham. My husband told me not to say anything about
it, for he said they should get into trouble, as no one
.could
put an ounce of weight upon his (Yarham's) evidence. I
first told a married daughter of mine about it, and she told
me to tell the gentlemen ; and it was she that told the gen-
tlemen about it, and they came down to her about it.
Sarah Dick, examined by Mr. O'Mara.nv—l am daughter
of last witness. I lived in 1844 at the battery. On Tues-
day, the 19th of November, I remember a man coming and
speaking to my mother. There was a boy in the battery
who told me that the man's name was Yarham. The pri-
soner at the bar is the man. I remember going to Norwich
after the trial. Yarham and his wife were there. I know
him to be the same man that spoke to my mother. My
mother told me the conversation she had with Yarham, and
I told Mr. Wm. Yates, the magistrate, about it. There was
some disagreeableness between my ather and my mother,
and I asked her the reason. She then told me all about it.
I told the magistrates, because I thought it not a proper thing
to be kept a secret.
Re-examined—l had heard my mother mention, speaking
to Mr. H. Palmer, who was then mayor, and I did not think
it was necessary to mention it again.
William Seamen, examined by Mr. PArzirn, deposed—l
remember the 19th of November, 1844. I looked out at the
gate and saw a man whom I knew to be Yarham. I had
known him before. He lived at Mr. Catchpole's. I had
seen him there when I swept the chimneys.
John Dick, examined by Mr. 0'31.t1 1.1,Y, deposed—l am
a gunner of the artillery, and I remember finding the money.
I was at the trial, and in the witnesses' room, but I did not
see Yarham then. I saw him down at the railway station ;
my wife said something to me. I told her to have nothing
to do with him, we had had trouble enough. Some time
after my wife was going to tell me some conversation with
Yarham about it, but I refused to listen to her.
Cross-examined—l read the account of the trial in the
newspapers to my wife in my own house, and read over her
own evidence. I. at her request, read out the trial.
Re-examined—My wife was busy about the hou-e. It did

not take me long to read it.
James Kemp. governor of the workhouse at Yarmouth—
On the 18th of March 'Verb= applied to the board fir some
money to ge away. The board took time to consider about
it, and he was to call upon me on Tuesday the 22d. It was
to enable him to leave Yarmouth. I gave him 31.
William Shuckford, keeper of the borough gaol—Yarham
was in my custody in December, 1844. The paper pro-
duced I received from Samuel Yarham ; it is in his hand-
writing. It was given to me to give to the Mayor. I also
received two other papers, which I received from the pri-
soner, or one of the assistants, while they were in my cus-
tody. I delivered them to the borough magistrates. On
Sunday, Dec. 8, 1844, i went into the prisisner'a room, cod
he felt very uncomfortable, sad said, it was very hard that
he should be shut up there for what he did not know any-
thing about. I said if he was innocent he had no reason to
fear. It was a serious matter, and I had no doubt the truth
would come out, and that the reward that was offered would
help to get at the truth. Prisoner said if he knew anything
about it he would freely tell. The schoolmaster then entered
the room. and the prisoner asked him to pray with him,
which he did. I never held out any inducement to him to
confess.
Joseph Jackson, schoolmaster to Yarmouth gaol, held out
no inducement whatever to make him confess.
Cross-examined—The magistrates several times saw the
prisoner, but I was not present, and cannot say what passed.
Henry Worship, surgeon to the gaol—l remember seeing
the prisoner on the Bth of December. I held out no induce-
ment or threat whatever to draw out a confession. _

. _
Mr. Holt, clerk to the magistrates, was present when the
prisoner was committed the last time. There was no induce-
ment made to him whatever. These are signed by him.
Cross-examined—The magistrates had many interviews
with the prisoner on the Bth of December, and before too,
and they put questions to him. None of them said in my
presence that it would be better for him to tell the truth,
and then he would be admitted as evidence. He was com-
mitted as principal at first, and was not examined after he
was committed. He was committed on a charge of murder.
I do not know that the magistrates sent men to try to get
eat of him what they could. Some of the magistrates
came and examined the prisoner nearly every day. I can-
not say whether much impression was made upon the pri-
soner by the questions that were asked. He always seemed
collected. Sometimes the magistrates visited the prisoner
three times a day, and sometimes as many as six magistrates
examined bim at once. I was present on most occasions,
and Mr. Palmer, the solicitor, was there too. He was very
busy about the case, but did not ask any questions of the
prisoner. I suggested to the magistrates sometimes. They
used to take their friends sometimes, but I didn't think the
prisoner was made a " show" of. Their object was to elicit
the truth. He was questioned and cross-examined by
them. have known prisoners questioned, by justices in
public court. These interviews were all in the gaol, and
were privately conducted.
Re-examined—The visits were made in the justices' room
at the gaol, to avoid the neces'ity of taking the prisener
through the streets each time.
Mr. PALMER then offered to put in evidence certain writ-
ten statements made by the prisoner on and after the 8:h of
December.
Mr. DASENT Ilhjectel to their admissibility after the ac-
count which had been given of the treatment experienced
by the prisoner before those statements were procured from

h;m; a
His LoaDstur Paid that he should only receive them sub-
ject to the opinion of the judges. Tee prisoner certainly
:appeared to have been dealt with in a most extraordinary
manner by the magistrates, though it is difficult exactly to
say that they acted improperly. lie was subjected, at all
events, to their visits for several weeks, and often three times
in one day, there le tag sometimes six magistrates present,
besides other parties. If the statements were pressed, he
should receive them, but it would be at the peril of the pro-
secution to use them.
Mr. PALMER then declined to put them in evidence, and
then closed his case.
Mr. Daszerr then addressed the jury. confessing that he
rose to do so with great fear and trembling lest the interests
of the unfortunate man at the bar might have suffered from
the peculiar circumstances under which he had been called
upon to defend him, coupled with his inability as an advo-
cate. He had only been instructed at nine o'clock on that
very day, and but for the feeling that, having been present
at the former trial, he had a general idea of the case, and
that it was his bounden duty not to refuse his professional
services—weak though they might be—when they were
required in aid of a man accused of so heinous an offence as
that of murder, he should certainly have declined to under-
take so arduous a task. The case of the prisoner was one
which had attracted public attention to an extraordinary
extent. The peculiar circumstances which formed the
groundwork of this charge had found their way not only into
the country papers, but into the metropolitan preas ; but he
hoped that the jury, in coming to a verdict on the case now
presented to them, would discard all rumours and prejudices
which they could not but have imbibed when abroad, and
would bring to the consideration of the important questions
about to be submitted to them the firm determination to
administer justice with impartiality, steering a middle
course between the desire to shield a murderer from false
sympathy on the one hand, and that blind rashness which
hurries to a conclusion of his guilt, simply because the
offence with which he was charged was that of murder.
The case now ripe for their verdict was one which was
perhaps unparalleled in the history of crime. Never before
had a charge been brought forward under circumstances so
extraordinary, so exposed to suspicion ; and it therefore was
the duty of the jury to watch and scrutinise the evidence
with which it was supported with the utmost jealousy, for
if it should appear to them to be a charge capable of proof to
a certain extent at least on the former trial, and yet kept
back most sedulously from public view on that occasion, in
order that the evidence of that day might tally with the view
then advanced by the prosecution, it did strike Ishn most
forcibly that they ought at once to acquit the prisoner. It
was idle to conceal from himself or the jury the notorious
fact that Yarham had been examined on the first trial, and
had then made certain statements implicating the three men,
Royal, Mapes, and Hall, in this murder, under very peculiar
circumstances. Mrs. Dick was then a fellow-witness with
Yarham, was engaged with him, and acted in support of him
in the attempt to take away the lives of those three men,
and yet she was then, if she is now speaking truth, in posses.
sion of the astounding and conclusive confession of that very
fellow-witness, made to her and her daughter too on the day
after the murder, that he was the murderer, while he then
denied it on his oath. That fact she kept back from the jury
on that occasion. So did her daughter. Seamen was not
called, and yet the mayor, according to her statement,:knew
that she had that information! Was such a case to be readily
trusted? If such important evidence was kept back then, and
the proof was then dressed and trimmed to suit the peculiar
theory of the prosecution, and that, too, with the sanction of
the magistrates, who had so conducted themselves towards the
prisoner at the bar, when they wanted to extort a " state-
ment " from his lips, what might there not even now be in
the back ground? This case to-day might be as vicious as
that, and it was the imperative duty of the jury to interfere
and put a check upon such conduct by at once declining
act upon the testimony of Mrs. Dick and her daughter. He
left his client's cause in their hands, satisfied that they could
come to no conclusion but that which would be favourable
to him.
Mr. Justice MAULE then proceeded to sum up the case.
The jury retired for a quarter of an hour, and at the end
of that aeon interval returned into court with a verdict of
Guilty'.
The Learned JUDGE then, proclamation being made, which
scarcely stifled a low buzz of approbation consequent on the
verdict, passed the awful sentence of death upon the wretched
man, whom he conjured to apply himself to the task of pre-
paration for the future world in the most solemn and im-
pressive tones, nolding out no prospect or hope of mercy
from human laws.
The prisoner received the admonition of the Learned
Judge and the thrilling sentence of the law with a subdued
but indifferent demeanour, and at the conclusion of the scene
in which he had borne so prominent a part, was immediately
removed by the gaoler from public gaze.
Mr. Baron Parke has been trying prisoners during the
greater part of the day, and so has Mr. Sergeant Byles, the
civil business having terminated rather abruptly.
SATURDAY, TWELVE O'CLOCK, P.M.
Both the Courts sat all day, the one to five o'clock, and
the other, the Crown Court, to nine o'clock, by which time,
with the aid of the Learned Sergeant, the whole calendar was
disposed of. Many of the cases tried during the day were of
a serious character, but the length to which our report of
yesterday's proceedings have carried us, must plead as our
excuse for their unwilling omission.
On inquiry this morning, it was stated that the convict
Yarham was low and dejected, and that he had had frequent
and casual interviews with the worthy chaplain of the gaol,
but no indication had as yet been given of any desire to give
his sanction to the verdict of yesterday, which he had met
with the solemn expression, "I am innocent, so help me
God."

NORTIIERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, March 27.
CROWN COURT.
The Court opened at nine o'clock.
MALICIOUSLY WOU )(MTG.—John Kirkham, Samuel B,oad.
hurst, William Savage, Charles Dakin, and James Clarke, were
indicted for having feloniously assaulted and wounded with a
sharp instrument James Jones, with intent to maim, disable,
or do him some grievous bodily harm.
The jury returned a verdict—Kirkham and Broadhurst
Guilty of assault ; and Savage, Clarke, and DakiniNot:Guilty.
The former were sentenced to eighteen months' imprison-
ment and hard labour.

Mr. WILKINS intimated to his Lordship that he had been
given to understand that it was the intention of the counsel
for the prosecution to prefer another indictment for inter-
ference with the officers in the discharge of their duty.