The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-07 00:00:00

LAND JUNCTION.

should he taken first to-morrow, the East Coast to be taken next.
The Committee then adjourned.

GROUP XLIV.
The Committe met again in Room 25, New Houses of Parliament,
at the usual hour ; Lord Palmerston in the chair, and present the
same ➢lembers as on the previous clays. They immediately pro-
ceeded to the engineering evidence on the part of the
LIVERPOOL, MANCHESTER., AND NEW—

CASTLE-UPON—TYNE JUNCTION.
Mr. Hawkshaw, the engineer to the line, being examined by
Mr. AusTiN, gave the usual engineering evidence. The length of
the line will be 47 miles, and that of the Hawes branch nine miles.
There are no engineering difficulties and the gradients are all favour-
able. There would be a tunnel of 3,850 yards in length. The esti-
mate was 1,300,0001.

23
2%
1%,
7
6%

The witness was cross-examined at great length by Mr. MANESTY
on the part of Sir W. Lawson.
The cross-examination and re-examination of this witness occupied
the Committee for more than an hour.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY

The Court gave Judgment to-day in two cases of not the leas
public interest. The notice paper of the Court has the following an•
nouncement

" The following cases have been selected from the special paper,
and will be heard on Saturday.
" Cooke v. M`Pherson, Wilkinson v. Gaston, Day v. Harrington,
Mitchell v. Johnson.

" The Court will, on Saturday, the 9th, and Monday, the 11th of
May, hold sittings, and will proceed in disposing of the business in
the special paper, and new trial paper, and ix giving judgment in
cases that may be then pending."

BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
Mr ANDERSON applied to the Court for a mandamus to compel the
Tithe Commissioners to make public tke terms of a certain arbitra-
tion made under the following circumstances. It appeared that the
rector and the parishioners of a certain parish in Cumberland had
had some difference upon the amount of tithe to which they were li-
able ; and, in consequence, an Assistant-Commissioner was sent
down to arrange the disputed question. After havirg made the ne-
cessary inquiry and examined witnesses, he made a report, upon
which the Tithe Commissioners made an avowal ; but the terms of
award not having been made known to the parishioners, they applied
to the Commissioners to have it made public ; but though they had
made several applications to the same effect, they never received an
answer, and were therefore now compelled to adopt the present
course.

The Learned Judge (Mr. Justice Wightman) was of opinion that
this as a question which should be argued before the whole court.

THE MYSTERIOUS DEATH AT
BROMLEY.—(THIS DAY.)
The jurymen so often assembled met for, we believe, the 18th
time, in the Swan Inn, Bromley. for the purpose of finally coming
to a decision on the mysterious circumstances attending the death of
Ilarriet Monkton, who was (as our readers may remember) found
dead in a water-closet attached to Verulam Chapel, in this town.
The position of the deceased led to the inference that some foul play
had been perpetrated, and an inquiry was consequently set on foot,
which involved (to use the mildest term) some of the more important
personages connected with the religious denomination to which the
deceased belonged. This fact had in a great measure prolonged the
inquiry, and added, in an eminent degree to the interest felt upon the
subject, which interest has been, if possible, increased by the an-
nouncement that another witness, who could throw some light on the
matter, was to be examined,
At about half-past 10 o'clock, W. J. Carttar, Esq., Coroner for the
Western Division of Kent, took his seat. The names of the jury-
men having been called over,
Frances Williams (the new witness) said, that on the last occasion
on which she saw Miss Monkton, Thomas Churcher had called on
her before they had finished tea. Miss Churcher also called.
and she (witness) 'sent Thomas Churcher out for some gin,
giving him a stone bottle. The deceased had left before it
was brougot in, and Thomas Churcher left as soon as he had
brought it. He afterwards returned, and said that he
had forgotten some biscuits which he ought to have left before. Wit
ness, going to post wit* letter, looked at the clock, and found it was
eight o'clock. He (Thomas Churcher) did not sit down; he said
that he was going home to bed, and wondered why the deceased did
not come back. Witness did not take the letter, and Churcher did.
Witness had asked the deceased to return for the letter, but she did
not so return. She had a perfect recollection of deceased not return-
ing for the letter, and her giving it to Thomas Churcher as It was
striking eight o'clock. She keew it could not be nine, because then it
would be too late for post. Ile made no other observation than that
he should not wait, as she (the deceased) had not returned.
The CORONER questioned the witness as to whether she had had
any communication with any person in Bromley since the first
inquiry, and was answered in the negative.
In answer to questions :from Mr. CARTTAR, the witness said that
she recollected no conversation with Thomas Churcher further
than charging her (the deceased) with unkindness in not coming
back. On an after occasion Thomas Churcher said that it
was not necessary for her to mention his name. The de-
ceased was in the habit of going to the school-room to take back the
books. She (witness) acted as librarian, and was therefore obliged
to keep an account, and the only communication between herself
and deceased was that she requested her to " keep the books
tidy." She went to the library afterwards, and found
that the deceased had not kept them so. She knew
Mrs. Sharpe, and if Mrs. Sharpe had stated to the jury
that she (witness) had said that Thomas Churcher had asked her to
conceal his name, she (witness) believed that Mrs. Sharpe had not
spoken the truth. She did not remember that the deceased had gone
to the chapel on the Monday on which she was missing. The cakes
received by Thomas Churcher were from his sister. She had never
mentioned to any one that she (the deceased) and Churcher had met
that day in the chapel, and if she had thought that Thomas Churcher
was in the chapel in the middle of the day, she would not have sent
Harriet with the books there.
The CORoNER—Why ? Witness—Because the people in Bromley,
as they always do, would have talked about it.
The CORONER—Why did you withhold Churcher's name on
a former examination? Witness said—Because she did not think it
neceesary to state it. He did not positively request her not to state
his name. She did not believe Mrs. Hopperton's evidence,v because
she ecanse
she knew that she had in too many instances stated that
quite untrue. The deceased seemed very much excitedt on
ed
Thomas .
the Sunday evening previous to her being misst. ,
Churchenremarked that she seemed to heas
be in very good spiita,
had had no conversation with Thomas Churcher abousthe beythesteartetelodf
Harriet Monkton's mind until after her decease.
witness that Thomas Churcher visited her at Id been made olackney. On recol-
lection, s
she was aware that some
visiting her. Thomas Churcher afterwardsmention ha
b a marriedout six M airYnonA
He had been paying his addresses to her
never paid his addresses to her (witness).
A juryman (Mr. lledges) suggested that the witness should tell all
she knew, because it might otherwise be necessary to send for her
frem the country a second time.
Miss Williams said that many of the new inquiries were suggested
by the tattle of the town of Bromley, and if she were to reply to all
lls observations made, she would probably detain the jury some
three days.— (Laughter.)
'dry
ri
Nicholas Pearce, superintendent of the F division, said that he had
to make inq
uiry
into the year 1843 come down to the town of Bromley
into the circumstances connected with the death of the girl Harriet
Monkton, He had among other persons examined Thomas Churcher,
deceased before she was
and he had admitted that he had seen the
missed, but he denied all knowledge of being more intimately con-
nected with her.
John Joyce went with Mr. Field, the inspector, and Mr. Carpenter,
to Mr. Churcher' s house, and lie refused to answer Rather questions
than had already been put to him by the Coroner.
Charles Frederick Field, inspector of police, had, in course of his
examination respecting the causes of the girl's death, ascertained that
Mr. Cranfleld had no connexion at all with the girl.
The evidence having been closed,
The CORONET: proceeded to address the jury. He had, had the
honour of acting as coroner for this division of Kent for some fourteen
years, and this was the most lengthened and most unsatisfactory
case that had ever come befere him ; and this state of things had
arisen solely from the reluctance of some four or five individuals
connected with the chapel to which the deceased had belonged—aea
in the exercise of his public duties he felt bound to mention the names
of Mr. Verrall, Mr. Sweeting, Mr. Beasley, and the
younger Mr. Churcher—as those who were reluctant to give
evidence. It was impossible that he could knew everything that witnesses could throw light upon, and the principal facts were
therefore, only elucidated by a sort of accident. He considered'
hOWeTtr. that considerable benefit had arisen flora the 401 q, be_