The Sun.
London, England, 1870-05-26 00:00:00

THE UXBRIDGE TRAGEDY.

EXAMINATION OF THE PRISONER.
Jenkins was yesterday morning brought up before Sir R.
13.
The court
Captain Farrar, and Mr. Coleman, at Slough.
court was closed to the public, but a large and excited
crowd congregated outside, their shouts and loud con-
versation being plainly heard through the open windows,
and occasionally reaching a pitch that interrupted the
Proceedings.
The prisoner, who had remained in the police ceils all
night was brought in shortly after eleven o'clock and
Placed in the dock handcuffed. He is apparently a man
ti)if,.,2, or 43 years of age, and was dressed in clothes which
Itu been supplied by the police. In appearance he is
Brrt, thick-set, with black, bushy beard and moustaches
looked
cut round. His face was ghastly pale, and he
roked like a man who had not slept for several days. He
leaned over the bar of the dock and listened, apparently
without emotion, to the circumstantial relation by Super-
tentlent Dunham of the position in which the several
"letinii of the murders were discovered, with the marks
each bore of the blows of the axe.
The witness having deposed to the finding of the bodies,
edentinued : In the front room" I found a pair of old care
trousers and a pair of boots (produced). There are
marks of blood on the trousers, and the boots are saturated
:ithl, blood. Upon one boot there is a piece
thi 'ulnan brain. There was nothing abstracted from
cps room. In the room facing the Smithy I found an
were corduroy coat and waistcoat patched all over. They
f ere Pushed under a imall table in the room. I also
°nod a number of pieces of old flannel, a fustian jacket,
In
old blue shirt, a necktie, and an old " billycock " hat.
'al this room two boxes and two drawers were pulled open,
and several articles were lying about the floor. On the
ate est of drawers there was a watchstand and key, but no
h• Yesterday afternoon I went to a lodging-house
ealled the Oxford Arms Reading. A man named
,-;(,.)orebs was with me and a policeman from Reading.
a';':e went into the tramps' kitchen, where there were
rut twenty persons. The prisoner was sitting facing
thtte as we entered, and Coombs directly said, " That's
man." The prisoner said, " I have never murdered
4-aa., woman, or child." The charge had not been made
4salust him then. I went to him, and cauFht him by the
I:croat: The Reading policeman said, He's pulling
tjalnetning out of his pocket," and, catching him by
e hand, pulled out this pistol. It was loaded
Prnt,c, the muzzle with powder, and pieces of iron wire.
The Clerk : Which pocket was it in ?
„The prisoner (in a sullen tone) : The left-hand pocket.
f Witness : The pistol was not capped, but I afterwards
ild a cap in his pocket. I charged the prisoner with
the murder, and he replied, "I have never murdered any
411 e, but I know who did." I said, " Why, you've got on
he murdered man's shoes." He said, " That may be." I
We a black silk necktie (produced) from his neck. I then
t to a second-hand clothes shop in Reading, and re-
eelvd from Margaret Lyons, the shopkeeper, a black cloth
hat and a light waistcoat. The prisoner at the time of
is apprehension was wearing a calico shirt, dark striped
th°l'scre, and spring side boots, which I now produce. On
9eft boot there is a spot of blood.
prisoner.„ : The blood came out of my nose last night.
Ivjtness : A silver watch and gold guard I produce I
ained from the shop of Mr. Butcher, pawnbroker, at
xbridge.
v,efiarles Coombs said : I am a bricklayer, and first saw
eg,e Prisoner at Bullen's lodging house, Uxbridge. He
Zille in about half-past three o'clock on Saturday after-
e-en• I came back at nine o'clock, and found the
ii,soner had gone out. He did not come home again
list night. I next saw him on the following morning.
ve came down about 10 o'clock in a new suit
at clothes. He 'had on the black coat, light vest,
iloi_striped trousers produced by the last witness. I said
b I don't hardly know you now." He said, " I've
hate to my brother's and got a suit of clothes off him."
tk t Witness here identified the old corduroy coati a
:;Which were found in the house of the murdered man
luescribed in the evidence of Superintendent Dunham.]
of 4'w the prisoner wearing those things on Saturday
eruoon when he arrived at the lodging house.
yesterday morning about five o'clock the prisoner came
a,° nay bedroom and asked me for some tobacco. I
.‘": I had none, and he then asked me for some break-
I gave him what I had, but he did not touch
At seven
said he was going off to Reading by the 6.45 train.
If seven o'clock on Monday night 1 was in the Queen's
ottad, Reading, in company with the prisoner and several
bel' men. A man came in and said, " Have 3ou
eard tell of the murder ?" The prisoner said, " Has there
i 4.
;e4, a murder done ?" and asked me to shew him the way
°lnto the back yard. He came back in ten minutes, and I
4d;, Well, I'm going home." The prisoner said, "I'll go
tout
We both went home and the prisoner went to bed.
awat five minutes to two on Monday I met the prisoner,
th-told me he was going to pawn a watch. He was
p_wearing the watch and chain now produced.
the witness
Clerk to prisoner : Have you any questions to ask
,e Witness ?
me : Yes, sir, I have. Now, Charlie, did you see
37 at three o'clock, or four o'clock, or five o'clock on
-W,a37' afternoon? Now tell the truth.
!Lness : I am not sure, but I think—
°, ,Ilsoner • I was not there at three . o'clock or four
e.Loek. •
officer: Don't make a statement; ask any question
Yon want
P • •
21soner : What's the good of me being here if I am not
Teak
t' Tile Clerk : You can ask questions, but this is not the
le to make a statement.
The
: All right ; it don't matter.
'ae Prisoner was then remanded till Tuesday.
ta he left the dock he nodded to the witness, and said,
°od bye, Charlie."

f,The prisoner's arrival at Slough, and hib departure
Pe.,et,
—lat the examination was closed, attracted a crowdPe of
- e. It required all the exertions of the constabulary,
balit had done on the previous night, to prevent him
411 g seized by the mob. This was especially the case
`Yesterday afternoon. When the examination was over he
taken to the cell at the back of the station to await a
quiet Opportunity for removal to the Sloug
1 h Station,
hence he was to proceed to Aylesbury Gaol. At half-past
Cae,suLe Was put into a cab and driven towards the station,
ah-r• Drake, the Chief Constable, Superintendent Denson,
other officers attending. The 8.35 train for Aylesbury
NvBey. due when the police reached the station, and there
the few persons about. The prisoner was taken to
ero-office,-office, and his appearance soon attracted a
vai"u• The officers of the railway company tried in
to keep the platform clear. By the time the 1.35
down Aylesbury train arrived at Slough it was
do-I.ei,,aPparent that the police would experience consi-
e difficulty in getting the prisoner into the train.
croblllse mass of people, principally working men,
rsa;fued the platform opposite the doors, and
WO a desperate rush whenever the door was opened.
vveo the train ran into the station an effort
me „ Made to put the prisoner into a compart-
(Run which the officials at Paddington had been re-
t-44ed by telegraph to reserve. So great, however, was.
lio,st.lbishing, yelling, and hooting, that it. was foiindt_ml-
effo_l le to get the man into
.the train, and. in heir
Ilkirts to effect this object Captain Drake and his officers
t 6 to stand some rather rough work. In the midst of
inn confusion then.persons in the train showed their feel-
de,,ias Well as those upon the platform. Meanwhile, the
hitje of the crowd to get at the prisoner and to ill-treat
compel
no abatement, the officers were reluc-
NW compelled to return him to the booking-offic.
tea ue this
was
going on the up Gloucester goods train
to teilted Slough, and the down Windsor train was run up
to it. e latformpi with a couple of empty carriages attached
by th 'lle people were then cleared from the platform
of the eklice and railway officials. The two last carriages
Weat ncisor train were deta
run into the empty ched—the Windsor part
tartrhell,i and the prisoner was cora-
np;ent of a second class carriage, Captain Drake, Mr.
being with him. As qukl as osible th Glou-
the• et goods engine was hooked toy p the carriage ine which
While stoner was seated, and it was run out of the station.
,the ~,eisthe Police were getting their prisoner into the train,
'1'441-"wd again broke into the station, surrounded the
rri; and yelled and hooted to their hearts' content.
• telighout the journey to Aylesbury he behaved in a
• audacious manner, and at various places while
threwl.lg. trains, or on taking his seat in the cab,
7kaselled what he would do to some of the
.
wileiirated if he were only free. At one place hems aid,
gip ,:u.) watched pretty well, but I may give you the
t. eio.ts as Ido not mean to dance in the air if I can help
ella 'Le eared very nervous each time he had to
"tit 1108:: and walked hurriedly from carriage to carriage,
toahe_ safely taking his seat assumed in turns a look of
/4a:tuba Jeering defiance.
,411110,, eight most intense excitement was created by the
ac,ement that John Jenkins, the alleged murderer,
°)N„„".°11e he was in the police-cell at Slough, made the
it • og confession :—" I did it. I alone was engaged in
ilr'othe °/ly else had anything to do with it. lam not a
Tiler of Marshall."
keci h. Itkede in which the murder of Emanuel Marshall
It al family was effected has now been clearly shown.
orti 8 Probably committed before three o'clock on Sunday
ce thg, the murderer waiting until after daylight, that
fortatt obtain the plunder he sought, and from the com-
',l3tai, e 40Pearance of the cottage, he might expect to
„`uko\,„,„.-1-11 the interval which elapsed between the
k'tisoa,,ThY of the murders and the apprehension of the
Public every alehouse, lodging-house, and house of
,Nhresort in Brentford, Uxbridge, and the surround-
olerbouthoods was closely searched for the prisoner.
,!'4llt of ljenderson sent down an inspector and an assis-
,4 detective police of Scotland-yard, to assist
-I.livectseareh, but the capture was made when they
The k
''et 1,3 a eY of the murdered man's house or shop—it is
atiat.Yeari,,ll
_vv,hich—has been found in the lodging-house
(4,.:t Where the murderer was captured. It appears
in the day of his capture he offered the key to any
'jeer]. e lodging house who would accept it, but all
ho --' allegingthat they did ot wish to be taken up
L.l-18:bereakin-g.
He then pushedn the
.key through a
chell .pboard that was kept locked in the tramps'
'lllsbo • esterda a an named Willis unlocked the
thli,atios:dii,tftoluand the key and took it to the Reading police
an ordinary, but rather large door-key , the
oil it. T e bent, and there is also some white paint
ho here is no doubt but that it belonged to Mar-
l% Ilse.
day. e belt
D • es of the murdered victims are to be buried to-
P'leellerionfgi-the Whole of yesterday large crowds visited the
oolatahli,wle murders. About mid-day, several carriages,
ThieeellPaattf
elualies of high position, were driven up, and the
14d. holvey `teaveured to obtain admission to the cottage.
les, eoh_si de rel,
awbai lot
appepr
omi
ni ttteedd,
wentb y thae
wpaoyl.i ce, and the

IMPERIAL PAMAA aiENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS--WEDNESDAY.

The Speaker took the chair at twenty minutes past
twelve.

CLERICAL DISABILITIES BILL.

Mr. HIBBERT moved the second reading of this bill, and
in doing so said he must disclaim any desire on his part to
push forward the subject. He would much rather the
Government had taken it in hand, but probably, seeing
the great business which the Government had
,in hand, it was perhaps excusable that a pri-
vate member should introduce the question ;
The bill proposed to deal with a grievance not affecting a
large class, but still a very considerable class of her
Majesty's subjects. The grievance was one which had
existed for a great number of years, and although efforts
had been made to alleviate it to some extent no success
had been achieved. In 1862 the member for Kilmarnock
brought in a bill to relieve the clergy from the disabi-
lities which weigned upon them. Thatbill, although it only
dealt in a more limited manner with the subject than
his bill, did not pass through the House. The measure
to which he referred only allowed a clergyman to relin-
quish his calling when he professed dissent from the Esta-
blished Church. Now, in the bill which he had intro-
duced it was thought better to allow a clergyman to
relinquish his calling " without giving any reasons why
he did so relinquish his calling." He believed that the
actions of a man should be looked to, not his motives.
It had been stated that these disabilities weighed upon a
very few people. Still, if they were few in number, when
Parliament had removed the grievances complained of by
other classes, he did not think the House would refuse
to take away the disabilities under which the clerical
body laboured. He referred to the disabilities imposed
upon a clergyman who wished to retire from his calling by
the 76th Canon. by an Act passed in 1801, and by the
Municipal Corporation Act. The hon. member called
attention to the fact that the canon said nothing
about a man being in holy orders, because at the
time it was passed the feeling of the Reformed Church
in England was contrary to the doctrine that Holy Orders
were indelible. He did not intend to go into the question
as to whether Holy Orders were indelible or not. By one
of the clauses it was provided that if a clergyman, after
having left the Church, wished to return to it, he could
upon certain conditions; with the consent of the Bishop
and Archbishop. Having commented upon the
disabilities which clergymen suffered under in
respect of not being able to sit in Parlia-
ment, he remarked that he should not object to
unattached clergymen being allowed to take seats in the
House. The hon. gentleman said when they considered
the early age at which persons were admitted into the
Church, and that there were 20,000 clergy in the country,
it might be assumed that some who were ordained at an
early age, might, either through unfitness for their calling,
or through dissenting from some of the formularies of the
Church, or from change of circumstances, wish to
become laymen.
Mr. JOHN LEWIS seconded the motion. He said it
might be argued that the bill would admit an inferior class
of men into the House, but he believed that the present
system in consequence of the irrevocable character of the
engagement, tended to keep out many men who would
become admirable clergymen. _ _

Mr. WALPOLE stated two broad objections to the bill.
In the first place it was extremely undesirable that
persons who took holy orders should enter the sacred
profession lightly or unadvisedly with an experimental
mind. He thought the mind of a person should be
thoroughly made up before he took the step. In the next
place he did not think that when a person had served in
the Church he should chop and change about. He thought
it was undesirable that the services of a minister of reli-
gion should become more or less of a merely professional
character ; and that, according to profit or advantage, he
should change from this side to that. He saw no reason
why unbeneficed clergymen should not occupy seats in that
House and Corporation.
Sir L. PALK said that the bill would but add to the in-
ducements to young men to enter the Church when they
found that they could retire when they pleased from their
calling. Besides, it was a new matter to him that the
House had any right to release men who had taken
deliberately, and of their own accord, the most solemn
oaths, and bound themselves by the most solemn obliga-
tions. There never was a more objectionable bill intro-
duced.

Mr. B. HOPE said the bill provided a measure of relief
for those who had the moral courage to declare their un-
fitness for the Ministry, whilt those who still remained
in the Church were denied the rights of citizenship. He
would much rather that the bill had only dealt with civil
disabilities. A distinction should have been drawn be-
tween the clergy in the actual discharge of their duties
and the clergy who had no immediate cure of souls either
as incumbents or curates. There were good reasons for
persons holding the cure of souls not to be involved in
secular occupations. He approved of the provisions as
to the readmittance of the retired clergy.
Mr. BOUVERIE could not agree to the plan suggested by
Mr. Hope as to relieving unbeneficed clergymen from
the restrictions imposed upon the clerical body. In speak-
ing of the proposition that unbeneficed clergymen should
have the opportunity of entering that House, he said it
was a well.known fact that the Crown had the largest
share of Church patronage, and it might be that one of
these gentlemen might, by becoming the favourite of the
Prime Minister obtain livings and high position in the
Church. It was really a question of . the
rights of the constituencies to elect whom
they pleased. He thought it was a most cruel
hardship that a young man who on entering the Church
had to subscribe to a vast number of theological and dog-
matic teaching should be compelled to remain in the
service of the Church, if he afterwards conscientiously
felt that he could not believe in them.
Mr. NEWDEGATE argued that if they admitted the clergy
into Parliament, they would have to admit the Roman
Catholic priests. He complained that step by step,
indirectly the house was being persuaded to disregard and
contemn every one of the restrictions, which at the
revolution and subsequently were found necessary to
guard the freedom of this country.
Mr. HENLEY objected to the bill.
Mr. BRUCE, on the part of the Government, supported
the second reading of the bill.
The House divided.
. Ayes
Noes

Majority

The hill was read a second time.
GAME LAWS ABOLITION BILL.

Mr. TAYLOR moved the second reading of this bill. He
spoke of the universal condemnation of the game laws.
Wherever farmers met together there was discontent and
complaint about them, and there was not a public meet-
ing in the great centres of the country without the utmost
indignation being expressed. Judicial statesmen and
philanthropic authority had long since condemned the
game laws, and it was now a case of the upper classes
against the benefit and interest of the general order. The
game laws were a curse to farmers, as was universally
admitted—(no, no). At any rate the farmers thought so,
and the laws placed them in the most ridiculous and
anomalous position. It had been said that farmers ob-
tained compensation for injury, but he had accumulated a
mass of evidence which proved to him that compensation
was seldom asked for, and that it was impossible to
estimate the damage. The game laws were
not only a curse to the farmer but to the
agricultural labourer, who was constantly tempted to
commit crime. He alluded to the great increase in the
number of convictions under the Game Laws, and then
quoted figures to shew the loss of food to the people and
the consequent rise of prices by the preservation of game.
He asserted that there was a regular system of warfare
between gamekeepers and poachers, and remarked that
the most shameful feature was that the latter were
bunted down by dogs like slaves. One
remedy which had been proposed was to make
game private property, but he contended that it would
introduce an indefensible principle into the English law.
The bill he proposed, in his earnest conviction, was a
simple measure of justice, and was in his opinion a matter
of inevitable necessity. It was only a question of time, to-
day or to-morrow, and he appealed to the House to deal
with the question in a comprehensive spirit, and he ap-
pealed to the landed gentry to do what could be done
with some remains of graciousness rather than to prolong
a struggle, the continuance of which would tend to increase
the already sufficiently lamentable indifference to the
interests and sympathies of various classes.
Mr. DICKENSON seconded the motion. He condemned
the game laws as a great public evil, and he thought the
sooner they were expunged from the statute book the
better. He was quite aware that there were certain pro-
tective laws with respect to the Reeerfalticon of figraCtA

but then he contended the two things were totally
different, because the latter was an important
article of rood. It was also most important that steps
should be taken to prevent the taking of those fish in the
close time, when they were unfit for human food ; there-
fore some public object was served by the maintenance of
laws for the protection of salmon, but such was not the
case as regarded the protection of game. There were number-
less arguments in favour of the repeal of these game laws,
and he did not know a more important one than the put-
ting an end to those dangerous conflicts that took place
between keepers and poachers, where human life was so
commonly destroyed in the most reckless manner for the
sole purpose of preventing a pheasant or a partridge being
shot.

Mr. HARDCASTLE opposed the motion, and moved the
previous question. He objected to the bill because, if it
should pass, it would become quite unworkable, and result
in the end in a more stringent law with respect to trespass
taking its place. He also thought the bill was a step
backward in legislation. He did not believe that tenant
farmers could not fight their own battle. The last election
shewed that such was not the case, and to his mind it
proved most indisputably that if the tenant farmers put
their heads together and took any matters up with a view
of change, that change took place without any extraneous
aid being required. (Hear, hear.) The bill in his opinion
would become inoperative, because it set out with calling
upon the landlord to tell how much game he was the owner.of,
an estimation it was impossible for him to make. He
regretted that, as the Government had touched the
matter, they had not taken it up in a bolder spirit than
they had, but with regard to the present bill he had the
greatest objection, and therefore he asked the House to
agree to the motion he had submitted to it.
Mr. STURT opposed the bill, believing, from a long ac-
quantance with tenant farmers, and not the subject under
discussion, that it would be most unwise to pass the bill
because it would increase crime, and bring about a
most lamentable state of things.
Mr. M'ComsrE read a number of private letters from
large tenant farmers in Scotland, all condemning the
Lord Advocate's measure, and approving of the bill
brought in by the hon. member for Leicester. He said
he should give his vote in favour of the second reading of
the bill now under consideration.
General FORESTER said he should not have spoken had
not an allusion been made to his brother. It had been
stated that a little boy had been fearfully lacerated by a
dog belonging to his brother. The fact was that much
annoyance had been experienced by the depredations
of boys, and the dog was kept to scare them
away. On the case in question, the dog was
muzzled, and only scratched the boy. The sum of £5 was
sent to the boy's mother, and the keeper was discharged.
The case had been much exaggerated in the public
prints.
Mr. M'LAGAN objected to the bill, and " talked it
out."

TELEGRAPH EXTENSION BILL.

The Marquis of HARTINGTON obtained leave to bring in
a bill to extend the Telegraph Acts 1868-69 to the Chan-
nel Islands.