The Sun.
London, England, 1860-10-02 00:00:00

THE ROAD CHILD MURDER•

TROWBRIDGE, OCT. 1..
This morning Elizabeth Gough, late nursemaidb
in the service of Mr. Kent, was placed atiltehexeaurt,
charged with the murder of Francis S
aSvulnerinten-
She was brought from Devizes by
dent Wolfe, and reached.Trowbridgers'horuilykbefore
10 o'clock. The arrival was not by
yknown
to the public, and was unattended by any demon-
stration of popular feeling. _
Mr. T. W. Saunders, of theicito Western Circuit (in-
structed by Mr. Slack, solicitor, of Bath) appeared
on behalf of the Craven ; Mr. Edlin, of the same,
(instructed by Mr. Dunn, of Frome)
Circuit
case on behalf of Mr. Kent and his
watched the
family ;
and Mr. Ribton, of the Home Cir I
cuit in-
structed by Messrs. Farrell and Briggs, of sle-
worth), appeared for the accused.
The magistrates present were Sir J. W. A wdry,
Chairman of the Wilts Quarter Sessions, president ;
Messrs. H. G. G. Ludlow, Stancomb, W.
Stanconabe, the Rev. R. Crawley ; and Mr. J.
Valmesley.
The warrant charged the prisoner, "for that she,
on the 29th or 36th of June last at Road, in the
parish of North Bradley, in the county of Wilts,
did feloniously, wilfully, and of her malice afore-
thought kill and murder one Francis Saville Kent,
against the peace of our Lady the Queen." The
warrant was signed by Mr. H. G. G. Ludlow. and
was endorsed at Marylebone by Mr. J. S. Mans-
field.
Under the direction of Captain Meredith, chief
constable of Wiltshire, Mr. Superintendent Foley
had caused ample accommodation to be provided
for the representatives of the press, of whom a large
number were present.
On the magistrates taking their seats, &c.
Mr. Ribton rose and stated that he appeared
won
n
behalf of the prisoner, and requested to be all
to see the information on which the warrant
He
for
the apprehension of the prisoner was grant
had two reasons for this application, In the first
place he wished to see the statements made in the
information as to this most mysterious affair, and
in the next place he wanted to know who was the
nominal prosecutor in the case.
The Chairman inquired whether there was any
objection to, complying with the request of the
learned. counsel.
Mr. Saunders—Not in the least.
The prisoner was here brought into court, and
was placed in the dock, where she was accommo-
dated with a seat. She was dressed in deep mourn-
ing. During the proceedings she betrayed no symp-
toms of emotion, but paid marked attention to the
opening statement of 'Sir. Saunders, and especially
to the evidence given by Mr. and Mrs. Kent, fre-
quently handing notes to her attorney.
Mr. Clark, clerk to the magistrates, then read over
the information of Samuel Meredith, chief constable
of Wiltshire, upon which the warrant was issued,
which was in substance identical with the terms of
the warrant already given.
At the request of Mr. Ribton all witnesses were
ordered out of court.
Mr. Saunders then stated that he appeared for
the purpose of preferring and bringing home, as he
trusted he should, the charge against the prisoner
at the bar which had just been read by the officer
of the court. The offence they were now about to
inquire into was one of the most enormous charac-
ter, and one which had conveyed a thrill of horror
into every family in the country, and if he estab-
lished the facts he should open, and he believed he
should prove, he thought it would be the duty of
the bench to: commit the prisoner for trial; and an
opportunity would be afforded to the prosecutors to
elaborate those facts into a shape moie perfect than
they would possibly be presented on this occasion.
The Chairman inquired whether Mr. Saunders
intended to elaborate his evidence at the time of
trial, supposing the prisoner to be committed, or to
ask for a remand.
Mr. Saunders thought he was in possession of
evidence which would enable him to complete the
case at once, and having heard that evidence he be-
lieved the bench would be of opinion that he had
established a case for inquiry in another court. The
offence charged was the murder of a little boy about
four years of age. It appeared that on the night
of Friday, the 29th of June last, this little fellow
was murdered, and the murder was discovered
early the next morning. A coroner's inquisition
was held, but, unfortunately, it was so conducted
that it was not attended with any satisfactory re-
sult. The magistrates of this division of the county
thereupon took the investigation in hand, and sus-
picion WI the first place fell strongly upon the pri-
soner now at the bar. She was apprehended, and
several meetings of the magistrates took place, but
that inquiry produced no more satisfactory result,
and the prisoner was discharged. The public feel-
ing upon the subject was this, that by a diligent
and careful inquiry the murder was to be discovered,
and Government, acting on the suggestion of the
magistrates of this division, had decided on the
further investigation which had taken place. The
matter had been intrusted to Mr. Slack, a gentle-
man of great eminence in his profession, and, thanks
to his skill, zeal, and ability, they were now in a
situation to present those facts which he believed
would tell so much against the prisoner as to leave
the magistrates no ether alternative but to commit
her for trial at the next assizes for this county. The
learned counsel then alluded to alluded to the em-
ployment of Mr. Inspector Whicher, and to the
apprehension of Miss Constance Kent. With re-
spect to that young lady he (the learned counsel)
felt bound to say, after a most careful investigation
of the case, that from first to last there was not the
slightest ground for justifying suspicion against
her, and he believed at this moment that young
lady to be as clear of suspicion as any one of the
gentlemen whom he had now the honour of addres-
sing. Having stated this much he would now draw
attention to the facts of the case. The murder was
committed at Road-hill-house, the residence of a
gentleman named Kent, who was one of her Ma-
jesty's Inspectors of Factories for this district.
His family and household on the night in question
consisted of himself and wife,twoyoung ladies,
daughters by a former marriage, Miss Constance
a
Kent, and her brother, youth of about 15
years of age. There was also the little fellow
who was murdered, who was about four years
of age, a daughter five years old, and another
s
daughter about two years old. These were the
members of Mr. Kent's family. The other in-
mates of the house were Sarah Cox, the housemaid,
Sarah Kerslake, the cook, and the prisoner at the
bar, who was the nursemaid. Mr. and Mrs. Kent's
bedroom was on the first floor,-and in that room the
little girl five years old also slept. On the same
floor the prisoner at the bar slept, in another room ;
the little murdered boy and another child two years
of age also slept in the same room. There were
only these two sleeping apartments on the first
floor, a passage dividing the sleeping apartment of
Mr,
and bars. Kent from the sleeping apartment of
the nursemaid and the little boy anZgirl. Above,
the two elder Misses Kent slept in one room, Miss
Constance Kent in another, the two servants in an-
other, and Maste Wm. Kent in another. Now, on
l
the night of Fr'd June 29th, the little boy was
taken to bed by the about the usual time s
somewhere between and 9 o'clock. Before he went
to bed, having been in delicate health, a pill was
administered to him in the presence o f his mother.
Something would turn upon that, it was an ape-
rient pill, and according to the doct
would have taken effect in about six hours. That
fact was only material as showing that in all pro-
bability the murder was committed between 1 and
2 on the follo
• wing morning, as it was clear the pill
had not operated. Now, the little boy was taken to
bed at the
tmo'clock, and the e stated; Mrs. Kent retired about 11
was securely house when all the inmates had re-
tiredhimself seeing to fastened and locked, Mr. Kent
the house the last thing, as was
his custom. It would
to the drawing.r be necessary to draw atten-
tionthe subject of much M) because that would be
discussionwi in the course of this
investigation. The dra
looking out upon the lawng-room had three windows
by shutters, fastened by an)band they were secured
and by an ordinary
gs, andnvct
hasp. He should call Mr. Rear, who would give the
details of the fastenings, id state that these
windows were securely fastened the night of the
murder, when he went to bed etlabout half-past 11.
On that night Mr. and Mrs. Kent lieatV nothing to
anedlittle boy
m his body
excite their attention, nevertheless
was murdered, carried down stairs,
nsteries
secreted. It was strange, and one of thetakey
of this case was that all this could have
th place
without alarming any one of the inmates of
house. Nothing, however, transpired till the nexte
morning, when the nursemaid went and tapped at
the door of Mr. and Mrs. Kent's room, and made
the inquiry whether Master Saville was there. She
received an answer from 3irs. Kent, who was then
dressing, that he was not. The nursemaid then said
that he was not in his cot, and that being so the
parties in the house were roused, and the premises
were searched fruitlessly. In the result, however,
the body of this little boy .6-as found in a murdered
state in a privy on the outer part
of the premises.
The drawing-room window and door, which had been
left securely closed the night before, were found to
have be
en opened, but there were no marks of vio-
lence
whatever. Now, this fact necessarily led to
the conclusionuse,h that nobody by violence had entered
the h
to have had his
The little boy was discovered
into the house, as
throat cut. The body was taken
were taken suesr alarm was given, and proceedings
already indicated.as The
(the learned- counsel) had
boy found the th root he surgeon who saw the little
the head from th ebodwry cut so as almost to sever
Titling from left to right,
and he came to t he coYnclusio...n. that that wound had
been inflicted aft cr death. There was a stab four or