The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-16 00:00:00

vionsly. At the place called the Lock-bridge there
was a lock ; no boat had passed through that lock
on the night between the Saturday and Sunday.
On Sundr;,y morning, at 11 o'clock, the lockkeeper
opened the lock, in order to let a boat pass through,
and he then sa w what he thought was a bur.dle of
rags. He took a boathook and drew it to the bank
of the canal, when to his horror he found it was the
body of a wonaan. Herelothes were very muck torn,
and she had. on the white jacket, but no skirt, Her
left shoulder bore the mark of a severe bruise. , A
piece of thie jacket at the shoulder was torn out,
and the edges were covered with clay or sand, as if
the hole had been 'caused by the girl having been
draggcd in the mud. A surgeon was sent for and on
examination he found a large abrasion of the skin
on the shoulder and dirt and sand had been rubbed
into -;.t, and these appearances would seem to have
been caused during life. There were symptoms
which led the surgeon to believe that the death had
been caused by drowning. There was a bruise on
the right arm as if it had been violently grasped,
and this was done during life. The surgeon was
of opinion that the deceased had been in a state of

syncope or fainting, from the effect of a violent
blow, and while in that state had ben dragged to
the water and thrown in, and had been drowned
before she recovered from her state 'of syncope.
All the appearances lead to the inference that this
unhappy girl had been foully murdered by some
person. The question then arose by whom was
this dreadful deed committed ? The girl had lived
at the Hero of Lucknow, which was kept by a
Mrs. Davis, and in the afternoon of Saturday,
about 4 o'clock, she had been nursing a baby for
Mrs. Davis, who observed that her skirt, which
was lying on the bed, was not torn. She took out
a purse with a ,metal clasp to pay Mrs. Davis some
money, and, Mrs. Davis saw some coin in it, but she
refused to take the money. She left the house on
the 12th of May, having that purse with her, and it
was on the evening of that day that she met the
prisoners and accompanied them to the Alma pub-
lic-house. Marks as of a scuffle were afterwards
found near the Alma, and there was the appear-
ance of a person having been dragged along, and it
was near those marks that the poor girl's skirt was
found. About 12 o'clock that night, as two girls,
namearßlower and Dommett, were passing in the
neighbourhood of North-lane, they heard the
screams of a woman ; there were the cries of
"Murder!" "Leave me alone !" and " Provost !"
Those screams were believed to have proceeded
from the unhappy girl, and it was supposed that
the fatal struggle was then taking place. The
sound certainly proceeded from the direction of the
North Camp. Similar cries were heard by a sentry
in the South Camp, and the lockkeeper was awoke
by them. It would seem that the prisoners had
passes which permitted them to remain out of
their quarters until 12 o'clock at Bight. The sentry
supposed that the prisoners had returned to their
quarters about 12 o'clock. They had not, however,
left the public-house until ten minutes after 12
o'clock; therefore it was clear they could not have
returned until some time after 12. There was no-
thing particular in the demeanour of the prisoners
when they returned, nor were they much affected
by liquor. In consequence of the prisoners having
been the last persons with whom the deceased was
seen alive suspicion naturally fell upon them, and
a policeman went to the prisoner Conway and asked,
him if he had been at the Alma public-house on
Saturday evening. He made answer "No." This
Was false. Conway added that he was very drunk
on the Saturday night, und did not know what ho
did. The camp constable and the seutry at the
prisoners' quarters said the prisoners were not
drunk, but were sober. The prisoner Farrell was
then sent for, and, in answer to the policeman, he
denied having been at the Alma on the Saturday
night, and he also denied all knowledge of the girl.
The prisoners were then charged with the murder,
when Conway said, " Yes, and a very good thing
too," and Farrell added to this, "-Yes, and so say
I." And this was after they had both denied all
knowledge of the girl. The prisoners were after-
wards taken before the coroner, and were committed
for trial, and on their way to the gaol Conway
turned to Farrell, and crying, said to him, " If you
had done what I told you and left the girl alone
we should not have been here." The poor girl's
purse was found in the possession of Conway after
his apprehension. The learned counsel said these
were all the facts he should place before the jury,
but the jury would naturally inquire what were
the motives which could have induced the pri-
soners to commit this murder. It was often
difficult to discover motives which prompted to
crime, and there hai been many instances where
no motives could be discovered. One of the most
common motives for the. commission of the crime
was that of robbery, or gain or plunder, and not-
withstanding the spoil might be but small yet the
perpetrator of a crime frequently imagined the
property to be of greater value than it afterwards
turned out to be. One great feature was that'
the purse belonging to the unfortunate woman was
found in the possession of one of the prisoners, an(l.
the obtaining that might have induced the prisonfers
to destroy the girl. The jury would take all the
circumstances of the case into their considers:6°n,
and would do their duty with firmness as w ell as
with mercy.
The facts as above stated having been 1.”-.oved,
Mr. Edwards with great zeal and ability ad-
dressed the jury for the prisoners, putting forward
every point that could be suggested in their favour,
urging upon the jury that the only features against
the prisoners were their being seen with the de-
ceased and their having the purse. The fact of
their having been with the deceased on the night
in question was no proof whatever of guilt, and as
to the purse that might have come into the posses-
sion of the prisoner in various ways. He also
urged that the evidence of the surgeon as to the
cause of death was extremely unsatisfactory.
The learned Judge summed up with great care.
The prosecution was bound to make out the case.
If the evidence did not satisfy them that the woman
was murdered, or, being murdered, that it was done
by the prisoners at the bar, they were entitled to
an acquittal, but if the evidence in their opinion
did bring home guilt to the prisoners they would
pronounce their verdict accordingly.
The jury then retired for a short time, and then
returned a verdict of not guilty.