The Sun.
London, England, 1861-10-09 00:00:00

POLICE INIELLIriENCE, Oct. 8.

WESTMINSTER.—THE WESTMINSTER Mull,-
DER.—Mr. Bury Hutchinson, solicitor, repeated to
Mr. Arnold the application he made on Saturday
to Mr. Paynter, detailed in our impression of Mon-
day, for a warrant against Joseph Saunders, for
wilful and corrupt perjury against William alo-
ney, under sentence of death for the murder of his
wife in Legg-court, Westminster.
Mr. Hutchinson at great length detailed the cir-
cumstances upon which ho grounded his applica-
tion, without any material difference from the
statement already published, and solicited the
magistrate's earnest consideration in a matter of
such serious moment as the life of a fellow-creature.
Saunders had sworn that he saw the woman mur-
dered, that he remained at the corner of the court
afterwards till the police brought Maloney out, and
that he had not been into any place of refreshment
until he had been subsequently into Bennett's-yard.
He swore he had had nothing to eat or drink
during the day, while that he had had two penny-
worths of pudding could be most distinctly proved.
Mr. Arnold—Supposing that to be false, would
it be a material fact in a charge of murder ?
Mr. Hutchinson—ln the case of Dr. Griffiths
Jones, last sessions at the Central Criminal Court,
where he had sworn before Sir Cresswell Cresswell
that he had a Scotch diploma as well as being a
member of the College of Surgeons, the former was
held to be material, as tending falsely to give more
pesitiveness, and induce the Court to rely with
greater credit upon what he said.
Mr. Arnold—l am not aware that Saunders swore
before me that he had had nothing to eat
or drink ; and whether he had or had not, I cannot
see that it could be material to the issue.

Mr. Hutchinson—lt goes to his credit ; if he is

discredited in one particular his evidence is not re-
liable in another. But the evidence of his being
at the shop of Mrs. Crowe and purchasing this pud-
ding involves another and more important point.
It shows that he has again falsely stated that he
saw the prisoner brought out of the court by the
po)ice ; that after seeing Maloney commit this mur-
der lae remained at the end of the court until he
was se brought out, when in truth he had been in
Mrs Cro we's shop some minutes when he was brought
out perynit me to call your attention, particularly
to the circumstances that occurred at Mrs. Crowe's.
A little girl aimed Scott ran into her shop at a few
minutes past 1.2, and explaimed that a woman had
cut her throat i.,%; Legg-court; immediately upon
which Saunders eaters the shop, complains of being
very tired, sits down and calls for a pennyworth of
pudding, remains thero until he has talked about
family matters and Maloney is brought out, and
afterwards swears that Ile went into no refresh-
ment-house, but remained at the top of the court.
Surely this shows him unworthy of credit.
Mr. Arnold—What do you allege as the first
assignment of perjury?
Mr. Hutchinson—The first part is to negative
his being near the spot at all.
Mr. Arnold—According to your own showing he
was within a 150 yards of Legg-court when at the
shop of Mrs. Crowe; her evidence would set him
up and show that he must have been close to it.
Mr. Hutchinson—Not at the time Maloney was
brought out by the police, which he swore.
Mr. Arnold—But he might have been when the
alleged fatal blow was struck.
Mr. Hutchinson—We deny that he saw any such
blow struck, or that it ever was struck. We can
show by the most abundant testimony that Saun-
ders could not have been in Legg-court at all; he
must have been seen had he been there.
Mr. Arnold—That is very negative evidence; the
testimony of Mrs. Crowe would go to prove that he
was about the spot, and the evidence of the wit-
nesses taken before me shows that there were a great
nu,:ny people about.
iii: Hutchinson—Not at first, I think; not till
after th..*:' policeman went down the court.
Mr. Arcold—l understand there were two wit-
nesses calle.l upon the trial who swore they saw
him go down
court.
Mr. Hutchinson—There was a woman who swore
she lived opposite te'l o court in Peter-street, and was
looking dow when she saw a man go
down out of the withwin: a black felt hat on, whereas Saunders
wore a brown straw ore ; that she did not see his
face, and did not see him tame back out of the
court. She was asked if she co, ild point him out,
and did without seeing his back, b:tt at time the
matter had been so canvassed, and he had been
brought backward and forwFd by the ;3. olice that
every one in the neighbourhood knew him. She had
caught but a casual glimpse of him.
Mr. Humphreys, an inspector of the B divisfon,
the officer engaged in the case, and the chief
clerk of the court, explained that the woman had
identified the man Saunders, and had sworn at
the trial that she distinctly saw his profile each
way on the day the woman died. The conduct of
the other woman who swore she saw Saunders there
was most extraordinary. She said she was passing
the court, saw him there, and heard him say there
was murder being done ; but did not attend before
the coroner's jury to give that evidence; she did
not come to that court to give her evidence before
the magistrate, but made her appearance the very
day before the trial at the police-station, after a num-
ber of examinations, and the matter had gone the
round of the newspapers, to say she saw Saunders
in the court. I have every reason to believe that
these two women are mistaken in Saunders' iden-
tity. lam told that there is a man for whom
ho has been taken, so much like him that if he Were
placed in a corner amongst others, he would be
picked out for him:
Mr. Arnold—lt comes to this, that two women
swear, to the best of their belief, Saunders was in
the court, and those whom you would call would
swear to the best of their belief that he was not;
how could you expect that upon such a conflict of
testimony any one would be convicted of perjury.
Mr. Hutchinson—l have not only the evidence of
four or five other respectable persons, but that of
Mr. Howe, the grocer opposite the end of the court,
who, standing there transacting business with a
gentleman, must most unquestionably have seen
Saunders had he been there.

Mr. Arnold—A man who was standing at his
door talking to another on business is not likely to
take cognisance of any person who passed.
Mr. Hutchinson—Sounders is so very peculiar
and conspicuous in his appearance that any lady
must have remarked him.

Arr. Arnold—l do not see anything so remarkable
or conspicuous in the man, unless attention was
prrticularly called to him.

Mr. liutolLioaou—lt if 3 impossible for Any

stranger, whatever his appearance, to be in that
court without everybody coming out to see him.
Mr. Arnold—Let me understand exactly what
you propose to prove step by step.
Mr. Hutchinson—Firstly, that Saunders has
falsely sworn that he saw the deed done, for that he
was not in the court at all ; and that five persons,
all worthy of credit, will swear.
Mr. Arnold—Again, the two witnesses who were
called upon the trial will swear that he was. Pray
understand me, in a case of life and death like the
present I am most anxious that the fullest and
fairest investigation should be given to the matter
on behalf of the accused; but at the same time I
must observe that only in common justice to the
witness against whom you ate now applying, I
should be exceedingly sorry to cast the imputation
of perjury upon him unless I saw my way very
clearly. And Ido not think that a jury, with the
conflict of evidence before them about his not being
in the court, would convict him on that ground.
Mr. Hutchinson —My other point is, that
Saunders falsely swore before the coroner—and I
have the foreman and four others of the jury to
prove it—that he remained at the end of the court
till the man was brought out ; that he had no re-
freshment ; never went into any refreshment house ;
in all of which I will prove he has sworn falsely.
Mr, Arnold—The foreman and jury may speak to
the best of their recollection, but their memory is
not to be relied upon for precise words which may
be very material—like depositions or notes. If there
was perjury committed upon the trial would it not
be better to apply to the Judge at Chambers ?
Mr. Hutchinson I understand Mr. Justice
Byles is out of town. I understand that this
is my proper course. Permit me to point out
how very material his statement is, of remaining at
the top of the court, because it is by that he
fixes the identity of the person he saw brought out ;
he was, in truth and in fact, in the pie-shop, and
had not the same opportunity of seeing, although
ho went outside with Mrs. Crowe, as though ho
had been where he declared.

Mr. Arnold—lt is not material as to seeing the
blow struck, as it had been struck before he went in.

Mr. Hutchinson—The matter is discussed over
his pudding, and he makes a declaration to Mrs.
Crowe that he had heard of it, when, if he is
to be believed, he has seen it. We always thought
from the beginning that he never saw the
occurrence, but that he heard of it ; that while talk-
ing to a friend the next day he boasted about seeing
it, was unwillingly brought forward by that friend
to this court, and was then obliged to stand by his
declaration. Maloney now, as before you, most
strenuously denies his guilt ; his condemnation rests
upon the contradicted evidence of Saunders. Re-
member, sir, how strong the evidence was in
Hatch's case, remember what was the result, and.
this is precisely similar.
Mr. Arnold—There was certainly this difference,
that the judge ordered the proceedings in Hatch's
favour, and that he was suffering his punishment
when they were taken. You cannot try this per-
jury before the law should take its effect upon the
convict.

Mr. Hutchinson—lf I am successful, as I hope I
shall be, in this application to you, and you grant
process against Saunders for perjury, there would
be an immediate reprieve while his truth was be-
ing tested.
Mr. Arnold—This is of course a very serious case,
and I should wish informations on oath in writing
of all the assignments of perjury; it is better than
viva voce testimony. I shall then see how far the
facts go, how far they are contradicted; and if so,
whether material. In an important matter of this
description that course would be more satisfactory.
Mr. Hutchinson undertook to supply the infor-
mations as directed, for the worthy magistrate to
give the matter his most careful consideration.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

NEWCASTLE-UNDER-LYNE—Ocp. 7.

At this corn market there was a tolerable show of wheat,
which met a healthy demand ; prices rather improved on
the previous week—white making 56s to 635,1 red 48i
to 578. The demand for barley was middling, and the
same in valuo. Oats were in small show, with a slow
sale, from 24s to 30s per 24 stone. Be= met with a
firm sale, from 48s to 50s per qr.