The Sun.
London, England, 1861-10-16 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, OCTOBER 16, 1861.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE, Oct. 15.

T.
WESTMINSTER.—THE WESTMIITER
DEL—In our last notice respecting the convict
William Maloney, it will be remembered that Mr.
Arnold, before whom a number of affidavits im-
puting perjury against Joseph Saunders, had been
placed, expressed his opinion that one of the assign-
ments declaring that Saunders had never been in
Legg-court on the day of the fatal occurrence, and
therefore could not have seen the fatal blow struck,
was entitled to weighty consideration, and that
with a view of testing the weight of the testimony
of five witnesses who had deposed in their written
informations to that effect, he would, before he cast
an imputation upon the truthfulness of Saunders,
carefully examine the several witnesses himself.
Accordingly, Mr. Bury Hutchinson yesterday
appeared with his witnesses, and the police were
prepared with some on the other hand to confirm
Saunders.

Mr. Hutchinson, before proceeding to call his
witnesses, pointed out that there was in the present
stage of the proceedings much difficulty in obtain-
ing testimony, because there was no mode of com-
pelling the attendance of witnesses; but should his
application for a warrant or summons against Saun-
ders be that day successful, he had no doubt that
he should be able to strengthen his case by further
testimony, and he might have the important ad-
vantage of Maloney's own testimony. It must be
premised that he adhered to the truth of what
he had said at that court, that the deceased
fell by her own hand, and as a consequence
if he did not commit the act, neither Saunders nor
any one else could have seen him do it, and there-
fore Saunders must have spoken untruly. The medi-
cal gentleman examined upon the trial (Dr. Paine)
would also most importantly prove the impossibility
of the deceased having received the wound in the
position described, and other collateral testimony
might be adduced proving the falsehood of Saun-
ders. Mr. Hutchinson further urged that the whole
question of the further respite hung on the truthful-
ness of the evidence of Saunders, and implored the
magistrate to consider that the proceedings of that
day were of vast and important interest to a fellow-
creature standing on the verge of the scaffold. Mr.
Hutchinson having proceeded to other parts of his
case, which have already been detailed,
Mr. Arnold pointed out that they would not be
admissible in the present inquiry, and that there
was much inferential matter involved in them. The
simple question now for consideration was, whether
Saunders had sworn falsely in stating that he was
in Legg court on the occasion in question. The re-
spite of Maloney was not for a stipulated time, but
during her Majesty's pleasure, and everybody well
knew what was meant by that; this inquiry was
distinct from it. lie was justified in stating that
the respite had been granted without reference to
the present proceedings, but upon the re3ommenda-
tion of the jury to mercy solely on the fact that it
was not a premeditated blow with malice, and with
the intention to kill. This was the cause of the re-
spite, not on the slightest doubt on the evidence of
the case.

Bridget Bailey, of 4, Legg-court (Maloney's
sister), was then called—She said she was at home
on the day Mrs. Maloney died. When she first heard
of it she was sitting outside her own door on a
stool. She was looking down the com t towards
Peter-street. Her house is next door but one to
Maloney's, and she saw him come home to his
dinner, and again when he came out of his
house to give the alarm. She had not seen
Mrs. Maloney that morning, and never moved
from where she was until he came out to give the
alarm. Knew all the people by sight who lived
in the court. Saw Saunders on the night of the
inquest. From the time Maloney went in to his
dinner till the time he came out of his house
Saunders did not come down the court. Witness did
not see him. Situated as she was, if he had come
down the court she must have seen him. _ _

B y Mr. Arnold—Had seen Saunders several times.
Had heard him give his evidence. The first person
she told that Saunders was not down the court was
her master. Told him over night. When she heard
him give evidence knew he was not down the court.
Did not tell her master or anybody else that he was
not down the court. The same day Saunders gave
his evidence. Did not know whether it was not a
week after wards before she mentioned it to anybody.
Mr. Arnold—Do you mean to say that you heard
a man swear that he saw your brother stab his wife,
and that you never told anybody fora week or more
that it was false, and that you knew the man was
not there ?

Witness—l told on the Monday night I think,
not the first Monday after Saunders gave evidence
here.

Mr. Arnold—Did you tell anybody before your
brother was committed for trial from this court ?
Witness—l am not sure.
Mr. Arnold—When did you first tell Mr. Ilutchin-
son, his solicitor, before he was sent for trial ?
"Witness—He had been sent for trial before I told
him.

Mr. Arnold—Knowing what Saunders said was
not true, why did you not tell him before ?
Witness—l cannot say exactly. I think I did not.
Examination continued by Mr. Arnold—l was
sitting at needlework. Maloney was not five
minutes in his house. When he came out I was
still at needlework. I was looking into Peter-street
and at my needlework at the same time. I had no
reason to be looking into Peter-street. I did not
see Mrs. Maloney go into her house, nor the wit-
nesses Casey or Ducklow till after the doctor arrived.
Could not swear they were not in the court before
Maloney came out.
Mr. Arnold—lf you can swear so positively
Saunders did not come into the court, how is it you
cannot swear they did not ?
Witness—l don't know.

Margaret Norton, examined by Mr. Hutchinson
—Lives at 3, Legg-court, three doors up on the
other side to Maloney's. Remembered the death of
Mrs. Maloney. Was standing at her own door
when Maloney came out and gave the alarm that
his wife had killed herself. Saw him come home to
his dinner, and remaind at the door till he came out.
Did not see any stranger come into the court. Had
seen Joseph Saunders eight or ten times. Did not
see him come into the court from the time that
Maloney went in to dinner till he came out. Was
prepared to say that if he had come down the court
she must have seen him, but did not.
By Mr. Arnold—First saw and heard Saunders
at the inquest. Was examined at the inquest. Was
at this court, but was not called. Is Maloney's
niece. Did not see Mrs. Maloney after eleven on
the day of the occurrence. It was five minutes from
the time Maloney went in till he came out. Was
standing at the door all that time, and was looking
down the court towards Peter-street. Did not
speak to her uncle when he came out. Saw Duck-
low come after the doctor. Saw Mrs. Bailey stand-
ing at her door at needlework, and Mr. Goodhall
and his daughter saw Mrs. Reardon looking out of
her window. There might have been others in the
court. Was not prepared to swear there was no
and else. There might have been others, but
Saunders was not there. Could not swear there
was no one else and could not say who were there.
There was nothing going on in the court at the time
to attract particular attention. Mrs. Maloney could
not have gone into her house between twelve and a
quarter-past without witness seeing her.
Elizabeth Ann Goodhall, of 11, Legg-court, said
she was at her door at 25 minutes past twelve, when
Maloney came out of his house. 'Witness was doing
nothing. Had just had some words with her
father, and ran out to the door to avoid him. Had
been standing there five or ten minutes, but did not
see Maloney come home. Saw Saunders twice at
the coroner's inquest. Did not see him come up
the court. Was prepared to swear that she must
have seen him had he come up the court. He was
not there.

By Mr. Arnold (in allusion to the written infor-
mation on oath of the witness before him).—l have
sworn to a statement in writing. It was read over
to me. I did not see Maloney come up the court
and go into his house.
Mr. Arnold read her affidavit, which declared
that at about 12 at noon she saw him come home.

Thomas Goodhall said he was in the court repair-
ing a truck, First heard of Mrs. Maloney's death
from her husband, who said, "Mary is dead—dead
enough." Had not seen Maloney that day before
he told him. Did not believe he had seen him that
day before. Did not know Saunders.
Mr. Arnold pointed out to witness that he had
sworn in his information that he saw Maloney come
up the court and go into his house shortly after 12.
Witness positively denied it, but upon the magis-
trate reading the information, said it must be a
mistake.

Mr. Arnold also pointed out that he had sworn,
in the written information, that the man Sanders
did not pass up the court---the man Saunders win;
had been examined—and he now WON that he had
never seen him, and, therefore, did not know him.
The worthy magistrate observed that, at the time
of rn-
..ceiving, Lae intormations, ne had made some
remarks upon their peculiar sameness ; the two
witnesses had broken down.
Mary Reardon, of 3, Legg-court, said Mrs.
Maloney had some beer with her on the day in
question at twelve o'clock, and then went in to pre-
pare
her husband's dinner. Witness sat at the win-
dow then, and every door in the court was open.
Saw Maloney come home and go into his house, and
in a few minutes come out again, and heard him say
his wife had done what she always said she would.
Had seen Saunders, On her oath, he never came
up the court while Maloney was indoors. Must
bare seen him if he had come up the court.
By Mr. Arnold—Had been summoned to the Old
Bailoy, but dud not boon ozwinocl Anyyflaoso. kict4