The Sun.
London, England, 1856-06-11 00:00:00

THE CONVICT PALMER.

Last night a public meeting, densely crowded, was
held in St. Martin's hall, Long-acre, to consider the pro-
priety of arresting the execution of the convict Palmer,
on the ground of doubtful and conflicting testimony pro-
duced at the trial, and to give time for medical investi-
gation. The greater part of the people present were
working men, with a considerable proportion of the
middle•classes, and here and there a few women. After
the doors were opened the hall speedily became com-
pletely filled, and it was said that hundreds who
could not obtain admission remained outside during
the proceedings. A petition praying that the execu-
tion might be stayed on the grounds stated lay in a
lobby outside throughout the evening, and a great
number of persons appended their names to it. The
feeling manifested by the greater part of the audience
was in favour of a respite, but a very considerable
number obviously held a contrary opinion, and vo-
ciferously asserted it on every practicable occasion
during the proceeding. So high, indeed, did the con-
flict of feeling run at one time that a well-dressed, portly
man, named Bridd, who jumped upon the platform
and insisted, in defiance of all order and of the re-
monstrances of the chairman, upon addressing the
meeting, while another speaker was in possession of the
chair, was only brought to reason by the appearance of
a policeman amid a scene of indescribable collusion.
Mr. P. EDWARDS, who was called to the chair, said
he and the rest of the protectors of the meeting had no
sympathy whatever with William Palmer, knew nothing
of him, never saw him, and never had any intercourse
with him or with any of the members of his family.
They had no morbid sympathy with crime or with crimi-
nals, and if the case of the convict as it stood satisfied
public opinion in this country, he, for one, should never
think of arresting the progress of the law, which on all
occasions was a thing to ne respected and protected.
(Cheers.) But, as there was on this occasion ground for
doubt, and as public opinion was divided on the ques-
tion of Palmer's guilt, and as, moreover, a number of
aisle men, such as Mr. Herapath, of Bristol, Dr. Lethe-
by, and others, stated that if they had more time they
could throw additional light on this subject, the meeting
had been convened to ask for more time. (Cheers.) He
and those who acted with him on this occasion did not
wish for a reprieve, nor did they ask for mercy, but they
asked for justice ; and if the evidence submitted at the
trial was considered by the meeting to be doubtful, he
hoped they would assist him in an endeavour to procure
a re-investigation of the case, so that there might be
afterwards no cause for unavailing sorrow. An im-
portant fact bearing on the case had been made known
within the last few days. Professor Rogers, an analy-
tical chemist in London, bad this week dug up a dog
which was poisoned by strychnia 14 months ago, and,
though the body of the animal was completely rotten,
he found strychnia in its stomach, its tissues, and its
skin at this day. Mr. Rogers had communicated the
fact to Sir George Grey, by whom he did not doubt it
would receive the consideration it deserved. To take
away human life was at all times an awful thing, but
to take it away when there were doubts as to the
guilt of an individual was infinitely more awful ; and
he had not met with a man who had ventured to say
that there was positive proof of the guilt of Palmer.
(Cheers and uproar.) Though every opportunity was
given to Palmer for a fair trial, there were many
who thought that he had too many counsel against him,
and that even Lord Campbell himself might be said
to have been counsel for the prosecution. (Renewed
uproar.) He believed his lordship to be above all inte-
rested motives, but he was at the same time fallible,
like other men, and he might have erred in the course
ho took against the prisoner. He (Mr. Edwards) him-
self believed that Palmer was guilty ; but belief was one
thing and certainty was another, and surely a man was
nut to be hanged on mere belief.
Mr. BAXTER LANGLEY moved the first resolution,
"That there being grave doubts as to whether or not
John Parsons Cook died from strychnia, and it being
essential to the interests of society, the progress of
science, and the safety of individual life that those
doubts should be removed, the meeting was of opinion
that the execution of William Palmer should be de-
layed till an opportunity was afforded of proving whether
or not strychnia could be found its all cases where
death bad resulted from that poison." He had no
sympathy with the convict Palmer or with his pursuits.
He stood there simply to vindicate the majesty of the
law, which was dear to every Englishman as a protec-
tive, and not as a destructive, principle ; and he asked
tt at the public mind should be satisfied that no link
was wanting in the chain of evidence against the pri-
soner before the sentence upon him was carried into
execution. He did not say that Palmer was innocent,
but he said for their own sakes, and for the sake of the
law, let them give the prisoner the benefit of the
doubt which hung over his guilt. Lord Campbell, in
his summing up at the trial, assumed that the prisoner
had committed murder, and then laid before the jury
facts to prove his own hypothesis. (" No, no," and
counter cheers.) Ho contended that the summing up of
Lord Campbell was unfair, because lie had not put
the question to the jury whether strychnia had or had
not been administered to the deceased, but whether
his death was consistent with poisoning by strychnia,
thus assuming that death had occurred from strychnia,
which was not proved. His opinion was this, that if
Palmer was executed he would be executed to satisfy a
scientific hypothesis. (" No, no," and uproar.)
Mr. R. HART seconded the resolution, and contended
that if capital punishment• was to take place it should
only be in cases with respect to which there was not a
particle of doubt. When they had once taken a man to
the scaffold and deprived him of life, if proof of his in-
nocence was afterwards established, it brought no com-
pensation for the wrong !which had been inflicted, but
only sorrow and remorse to those who executed an irre-
vocable sentence on the fallible testimony of man. They
were not there to consider whether Palmer was a gambler,
a blackleg, or a forger. The question was, had murder
been legally proved against him ? ("No, no," and up.
roar.) He would not do Lord Campbell the injustice to
suppose that he was an accessory willingly to a legal
murder. This case stood !completely isolated. The
evidence was wholly circumstantial, not only as to the
guilt of Palmer, but as to the fact of a crime basing
been committed. They had doctors contradicting one
another, and propounding opposite and adverse theories
throughout the trial, thus raising on all sides of the
question a doubt whether Cook died by natural or non.
natural means. He contended that the whole operation
of the old English law observed on trials for murder had

[PRICE 4D. STAMPED SD.

in this case been reversed; first, because before pro-
ceeding to prove a murder they proceeded to prove a
murderer, and, instead of inferring the criminal from
the crime, they inferred the crime from the criminal.
A Mr. T. BALL proposed what he called an amend-
ment, but it turned out to be so very like the original
resolution that the meeting refused to entertain it, and
the original motion, which was also supported by the
Rev. Mr. Thomas, was put and carried by a considerable
majority.

Mr. H. HARRIS, a surgeon, then moved the appoint-
ment of a deputation, consisting of the chairman and
several other gentlemen on the platform, to wait upon
the Secretary of the Home Department, and lay before
him the resolution which the meeting had just sanctioned.
To this an amendment was moved by Mr. BRIDD,
and seconded by the Rev. Mr. Porn, to the effect that
the verdict of the jury was perfectly correct according
to the evidence given on the trial.
The amendment was lost on a show of hand 3, and the
original motion affirmed by a large majority.
The meeting then separated.