The Sun.
London, England, 1860-10-08 00:00:00

THE _ROAD 3IU.RDEB.

THE LATE EXAMINATION AT TROWBRIDGE.
The fruitless conclusion of the public examination
at Trowbridge, from which so much was hoped, and
which caused such intense excitement throughout
the country, as well as in this neighbourhood, seems
to have thrown a gloom over the locality from
which the satisfaction derived from reading for the
first time the evidence of Mr. and. Mrs. and the
Misses Kent scarcely relieves it. While both the
press and the public all over the country regard the
decision of the magistrates as just, yet the failure
to produce a great amount of evidence appears to
occasion a deep and universal disappointment.
The recognisances of Elizabeth Gough were taken
in one sum of £lOO by Mr. Arthur John Spack-
man, of Blackheath, her uncle, who offered volun-
tarily to increase the amount to £5OO if he might
be allowed. This, however, was deemed unneces-
sary. Another uncle of the prisoner was present,
a respectable tradesman of Oxford, who likewise
offered to be bail for any amount.
Elizabeth Gough, when discharged from custody
did not leave the station for some hours, but re-
turned to London by the last train at night. She
expressed her thanks for the kindness she had re-
ceived from the police superintendent before leav-
ing. As was to be expected the intense excitement
of those four days' trial has resulted in a reaction,
and she is now, we learn, exceedingly unwell at her
home at Isleworth.
It will be remembered that at the close of the
examination of Mrs. Kent, that lady, who had
given her evidence in so clear and straigtforward a
manner as to secure even from Mr. Ribton, the pri-
soner's counsel, a high compliment, volunteered a
statement, which the bench, on the solicitation both
of the prosecution and the defence, did not permit
her to make. We learn that the statement she
was about to make was this—that not having been
permitted by the examining counsel to express
herself on the point, she begged to be allowed to
state most emphatically that her husband was not
away from her side for a quarter of an hour during
the whole night, and that the state of her health at
the time enabled her to swear positively to this fact.
Our readers will recollect also that at the close of
the evidence of Mr. Parsons, surgeon, he handed a
written communication to the bench, the contents
of which were not allowed to transpire at the time.
We find that his statement was, that having exa-
mined Mr. Kent subsequent to his having given
evidence the previous day, he was opinion that his
mind was so affected by intense excitement, and by
persecution he had undergone, that no amount of
reliance ought to be placed on any statements,
which, under such circumstances, he might make.
Subsequent to the examination on Thursday even-
ing some severe remarks were made by Sir John
Awdry, whiCh time did not permit us to report, on
the fact of Mr. Kent's having locked up the police
on the night after the murder, and on his having
refused, through his attorney, to allow a plan of the
premises to be taken, which last step Sir John pro-
nounced to have been very ill-advised. Protesta-
tions were made at the time by Mr. Edlin and Mr.
Dunn, and since we have ascertained the facts to be
as follows :—On Mr. Slack's leaving Roadhill House
after the examination, he requested to be allowed
to return " for a purpose." Conceiving that he could
only wish to revisit the premises for one of three
purposes—viz., to have the deposition signed, to
examine the nurse in the nursery, or to take a plan
of the premises—Mr. Dunn advised that he be per-
mitted to do as he pleased, but Mrs. Kent was so
indignant at the treatment she had received from
Mr. Slack, and the surveillance under which she
had been placed by him, that she vehemently op-
posed his being permitted again to enter the house.
The point was submitted to Mr. Kent's counsel,
Mr. Edlin, of Bristol, who advised that the permis-
sion should be withheld until Mr. Slack stated his
object. The next heard of the matter was, Mr.
Kent's being asked in court if he had ever refused
the prosecution a correct plan of the premises
Fearing that his general refusal, as above, might be
so construed, he replied that he had, which was im-
mediately denied by Mr. Dunn. On Tuesday, how-
ever, a plan was taken, and put in in evidence, and
Mr. Kent himself took one end of the measuring-
tape in assisting to make it.
An instance of the eccentric and unjust character
of the working of legal regulations is shown in this
case. The prisoner not being committed for trial,
not only do the witnesses receive no expenses, but
Mr. Clark, the indefatigable magistrate's clerk, will
receive not one farthing remuneration for all his
exertions, including
the copying of 84 folios of
depositions.

After the inquiry on Thursday the 24 witnesses
were collected, some being fetched from Road for
the purpose, and the evidence read over to and
signed by each.
Admiration is
expressed on all hands at the iDi.