The Sun.
London, England, 1869-01-21 00:00:00

THE MYSTERIOUS .3IURDEA

William Sheward, the man charged, on his own conted•
eion, with the murder of his first wife, Martha Sheward,
at Norwich, in 1831, was again brought up for examina-
tion before the Mayor (Mr. E. K. Harvey) and magis-
•rates, on Wednesday.

Dr. Dalrymple, M.P., deposed : In ISSI I was a prac-
tising surgeon in Norwich. In June 1851 I examined
some portions of human flesh and bones, at the
police-station. I examined them first by myself, and
then in company with Mr. Norgate and Mr. Nichols.
On referring to a deposition I made on oath on the 26th of
June, 1851, before Mr. Woodcock, the mayor, I am
enabled to say that the bones examined by me consisted of
one hand, part of a thighbone, which had been sawn in
two, two small bones and one large bone of the leg,
one knee-cap, a part of the large bone of the arm, &c.
I have no doubt they were the bones of a female. The
pelvis bone appeared to have been sawn through. It was
not sawn through as a practised anatomist would have
sawn it. I have no doubt the thighbone was the bone of a
female. The pelvis and the vertebrae are also the bones of
a female. I made no examination in 1851 to shew the
height of the female. The bones were unquestionably the
bones of an adult. One day last week—yesterday week—
I was present when bones were exhumed from a vault
in the Guildhall, now used as a coal cellar. I recog-
nised the same class of bones as I examined in 1851,
and I believe in the identity of some of the bones of
the vertebrae, but the means taken to preserve them have
so destroyed the identity of the other bones that I cannot
undertake to say that they are the same. Since the last
examination I have not taken pains to discover the height
of the female of whom the bones formed part. My
opinion is that the subject was about sft. or sft. lin. in
height, but without further examination I decline to
state this positively. The bones were those of a
perfectly adult subject, I am quite sure ; but the entire
disappearance of all ligament, cartilage, and other guides
for recognising age prevents my forming any precise
opinion as to the age of the subject. In 1851. the carti-
lage was on the heads of the bones ; this would have
enabled me to form an opinion then as to the age of the
subject. In 1851 I formed an opinion that the subject
was a youngish adult female. I would not undertake to
fix the age within ten years. In 1851 I made an
examination with Mr. Nichols and Mr. Norgate. I
heard Mr. Nichol's evidence before the magistrates,
and I agreed generally with it. I don't remember
that Mr. Nichols said in his evidence that the remains

indicated youth and health in the subject at the time of
death. The habits of life, nourishment, and constitution
of a subject would have some effect upon the appearance
of the cartilage, and as regards conjectures as to age. In
the absence of surrounding circumstances, I could not
certify as to age, except that the remains were those of a
full-grown adult.
Mrs. Hannah Lawes, wife of John Lawes, of St.
Faith's, deposed : I know the prisoner. He married my
aunt. Her name was Martha. She was a twin ; her
other sister's name was Mary. She is dead. I recollect
the prisoner living in Norwich. I went to the house where
my aunt lived in St. Martin's-at-Palace some time before
the Exhibition of 1851. I only went once. She was Mrs.
Sheward's sister. My aunt never came to me at St.
Faith's after I visited her at St. Martin's-at-Palace. I
have never seen her since, nor heard from her since. I
have been to a house in King-street, Norwich. I don't
know where the prisoner lived between the time when he
resided at St. Martin's-at-Palace and when he lived in
King.street. It is about twelveyears ago since I went to see
}aim in King-street. He was then living with his present
wife. I did not ask him any questions where my aunt