The Sun.
London, England, 1848-01-24 00:00:00

A WOMAN SHOT BY A SOLDIER

AT LEEDS.

THE INQUEST UPON THE BODY.

The inquest upon the body of the murdered woman
was held in the grand jury-room of the Court-house,
on Saturday morning, before John Blackburn, Esq.
William Garrett, private in the 57th Foot, and
husband of the deceased, stated that he was present
when the prisoner murdered his wife, but that h•
could'assign no cause for it, no words having passed
between them.

William Keenan—l am a sergeant in the 57th
Regiment of Foot. The prisoner has been in the re-
giment about two years. I was in the room when
this murder happened. I had been there from five, or
a quarter past, till seven, when it occurred. Mrs.
Garratt (the deceased) was there, and her husband,
and Stokes, the prisoner. I did not leave the room
until after this happened. During this time I neither
saw nor heard any conversation between the prisoner
and Mrs. Garratt, or the prisoner and her husband.
The prisoner, Michael Stokes, was in the room all
the time, lying most of the time upon a form near
the fire•piace. He was seemingly asleep,:but I saw one
of his eyes open once or twice to look at me. I saw
him doing something to his musket about a quarter
before seven. His musket had been hanging up in
the armoury, in the sane room. I did not see him
reach it down, but I saw him with it in his hands,
seemingly in the act of cleaning it. About seven o'clock
I was within two yards of him, and saw him lift his
firelock to his side, and the lock clicked, from his
cocking it. I supposed he was cleaning it, as the
men are in the habit of clicking the lock when doing
so. Just at the moment I heard the musket cocked
he raised it towards his shoulder and fired. He had
not time to take deadly aim, but he pointed the
muzzle to the woman. It was certainly not an acci-
dent, it was done deliberately. He did not take the time
to aim that I would at firing at a target, but he aimed
at the woman. The musket was aimed at her body.
As soon as he had fired he threw the firelock at my
feet. He said, " There now, that will do, and I'm
satisfied." He then took his jacket off, but did not
speak. lat once seized him, and made a prisoner of
him. He made no resistance, but seemed willing
that I should make a prisoner of him. Mrs. Garratt
was four yards from him when he fired ; but I cannot
positively swear that she was standing with her face
towards him. When I looked at her after the shot
she was staggering, and her face was then towards
him. She had been standing near to her husband,
and she staggered sideways two or three yards, and
then fell down. lam not aware of any quarrel hav-
ing taken place between the deceased and the pri-
soner. They appeared to be upon good terms : but
he was a very distant man, and was not in the habit
of speaking to any of the rest.
By a juror—A man may clean his accoutrements
at any time in the day and take down his piece. The
woman was very much respected by all the men, I
believe ; at least she was by me. She was a pru-
dent, correct, industrious little woman.
Jeremiah Dooly corroborated the evidence of the
last witness.

The depositions of the witnesses who had been ex-
amined were here read over, and the prisoner was
asked if he wished to ask any questions of them. lie
asked Keenan, " Did any one see me raise my fire-
lock to present ?"
Keenan—No, you did not present it. You brought
it up near to the shoalder, and fired immediately.
Stokes—l had not full cocked it. I was just rais-

ing it when it went off.
William Mustard stated—l am a sergeant in
the sth Dragoon Guards, now lying at the Leeds
barracks. I have known Stokes for two or three
months. I was in the guard-room when the pri-
soner was brought in, after the shooting. He was
given into the custody of the sergeant of the guard
of the 57th Foot. They put a sentry over him. The
sentry stood close to his feet whilst he lay upon the
guard-house bed. About eleven o'clock he said he
wanted to go to the rear, and four of the guard took
him out. When he came back he sat near

the fire, and a man named Jones asked him if he
was sorry for what he had done . He said
" No." He then asked Stokes if it was his intention
to shoot the woman. Stokes replied, yes, it was his
intention to shoot her two months ago, and he was
prevented, and took a second thought, and did not
do it. I asked, him if he had a spite against the
sergeant. He said he liked the man as well as his
own brother. Jones asked Stokes if he had had any
falling out with the woman. He said no, but the
woman had said words to him which no one should
know but the priest. Jones asked if he knew the
woman was dead. lie said that he thought he heard
them talking about it while -he lay on the bed. He
asked if she was dead. He was then told by Jones
that she died at half-past eight o'clock, and Stokes
then said, " If she had lived I could not have died
happy, but now she is dead I can die happy."—(Sen-
sation.) I asked him if he had animosity against any
body else. He said that there was a man on furlough
whom he would have shot if he had been there. I
asked him when he loaded the musket. He said he
had it in his mind at two o'clock, but he could not get
a chance till five o'clock, when he loaded his piece
with ball cartridge. Jones asked him if it was actually
loaded when he put it into the arm rack. He said " I
loaded her and put her into the rack." He said "he
did not get a chance till about seven o'clock, when he
ran over, took her out, and shot the woman." Jones
asked him, in a joking way, if he would tell the se-
cret, and he said, " No one on earth shall know it
but the pr iest." By " the secret" was meant his rea-
son for doing the act. This ended the conversation,
and the prisoner went to bed.
The prisoner declined cross-examining this witness.
Thomas Jones, a private in the 67th Foot,,corro-
borated the evidence of Sergeant Mustard.
Patrick ode!, a sergeant in the 57th Regiment,
deposed that on examining the pouch of the prisoner
he found a package of ball cartridges broken, and a
round gone. It was contrary to the rules of the
army to have a musket loaded in the armoury.
James Jackson, assistant-surgeon of the 57th Re-
giment, stated that he had examined the wound of
deceased, and there was no doubt of her having died
of a gun-shot wound.
The CORONXII, after cautioning the prisoner, asked

•
if he had anything to say ?
Stokes—No, Sir, I have nothing to say at all.
The CORONER then proceeded to sum up ; and
t !The jury, after a lapse of five or six minutes' con.
sultation, returned a verdict of Wilful Murder against

Michael Stokes.
The inquisition was then signed by the jury, and
the Coroner issued his warrant for the prisoner's conl-
tnittal to York Castle for trial at the next assizes.

IMPORTANT JURY TRIAL, 1N

SCOTLAND.

On Monday morning last the great Farrell case
was decided at Aberdeen, before Lord Ivory and a
jury, after a trial of fourteen days' duration. This
we believe to be unprecedented in the annals of trial
by jury in Scotland.
The issue for trial was whether the pursuers (Mrs.
Willoz and Mrs. Pope and husbands), or the defender
(Mrs. Farrell) were the nearest heirs portioners of
the late Alexander Wood, of Woodburnden.

It appeared from the evidence that in 1749 a man
of the name of James Wood, a mason, settled in
Kirkton of Fetteresso, near Stonehaven, and in 1755
married Margaret Barclay, by whom he had a family
of five sons and two daughters, none of whom were
ever married. The youngest son, Alexander, emi-
grated to Canada in 1793, where he accumulated a
large fortune, and returned to this country in 1842,
taking up his residence in his mansion of Woodcot,
where he died in 1844. On his death it was found
he had left no settlement, and that consequently his
nearest heirs would inherit his property ; and after a
long search, Mrs. Farrell, a granddaughter of a sister
of James Wood, was discovered by the late Mr.
Smart, solicitor, of Stonehaven; and although her
right was disputed by another party, such was the
evidence obtained by Mr. Smart, that no appearance
was made by the party opposing on the day
of trial, and Mrs. Farrell iconsequently entered
into possession in September, 1845. The present
pursuers afterwards set up their claim on the ground
that the father and mother of James Wood, of Fette-
resso, were George Wood and Jane Young, in the
Brae of Kintore, so that, in fact, the issue to be de-
cided was, who was the father of James Wood and
the grandfather of Alexander Wood. A jury trial
took place in Edinburgh in October, 1846, before
Lord Robertson, when a verdict was given for the
defender, but after appealing first to the Court of
Session, and then to the House of Lords, the pursuers
obtained an order for a new trial on the ground that
the evidence of a witness had been illegally reected.
The case consequently came on again for trial at
Aberdeen as mentioned above, and, after long and
able pleading on both sides, the jury found a verdict
for the defendant. Mr. Dens took an exception to
the finding, on the ground that evidence which had
been taken by commission for a former trial, in this
case ought not to have been used in the present trial.
The expense will be enormous, the jury alone receiv-
ing 1641. for their attendance. But who can calcu-
late the counsel's fees ? For the pursuers—Counsel,
Hon. Stuart Wortley, London ; the Lord Advocate ;
Messrs. Deas, Inglis, and Hunter, Edinburgh.
Agents, John Hunter, Parliament-street, London ;
John Hunter, W.S., Edinburgh. For the defender—
Counsel, Sir Fitzroy Kelly, Messrs. Robertson and
Anderson ; Messrs. Robertson, /lacfarlane, and
Campbell, Edinburgh. Agents, Johnson, Farquhar,
and Leitch, London • James Arnot, W.S., Edinburgh.
—North British Mail.

RUSSIAN SLEDGES.—A vessel just arrived from the
Russian port of Cronstadt has brought two cases, con-
taining two sledges, with the harness and shafts apper-
taining to the vehicles, consigned to order. They hays
arrived at Liverpool.