The Sun.
London, England, 1861-10-07 00:00:00

TUE WESTMINSTER MURDER.

At the Westminster Police•court, on Saturday,
Mr. Bury Hutchinson, solicitor, waited upon Mr.
Paynter, and made a lengthened application upon
the .subject of the condemnation of the convict 'Wm.
Maloney. He said he was instructed to make an
application for a warrant for wilful and corrupt
perjury against Joseph Saunders, the principal
witness in the late trial of William Maloney for the
murder of his wife, in Legg-court, Peter-street,
Westminster. The evidence of which he com-
plained was that given before the coroner's jury,
at this Court upon the committal of the ac-
-Icused. He had sworn on these occasions that he
was in Legg-court, and saw Maloney stab his wife ;
that he came out of the court and remained at the
corner of it until the accused was brought out by
the police • that he had no dinner, and wertt into no
place of refreshment until he had subsequently been
to Bennet's-yard, at five or six o'clock. There were
the assignments of perjury. At the trial the evi-
dence went clearly to show that the wound which
caused death was self-inflicted, and this view of the
case was alone contradicted by • the evidence of
Saunders, who had further declared that he never
spokettfanybody abouttheoccurrence until he told
his wife When he got home that evening. He was.'
now in a.ondition toshow that Saunders had bean
guilty of
..Ntilful and corrupt perjury by the fol-
lowing testimony. He would call a grocer, whose
house faced the end of the court, to prove that he'
was standing outside his door talking to a person
upon business at the 'very-time the alarm wlttitileen
that the ,woman had tital4bed' 'herself; that he was
in thif,Ortioti seirealui;nutes within ten yards of
the Contif,' and 'that there vas nobody standing at
the end of the court on either his side of the way or
the other. Ho went down the court and saw the
woman dead upon the floor, and both be and
another respectable person who accompanied him
would clearly
.prove that Saunders was not at

the end of the court, or near it, nor there when
the police arrived, or when the prisoner.
was brought out; and the most reliable testimony
could be produced that during all this time no
stranger was seen in or near the court, and he must
amark that Saunders was a very peculiar looking
persji, and that had he been there he must have
• • -4. This was the first portion of his evi-
been notice,. was corroborative of the fact
dente. The secs_ there, and, contradictory of
that Saunders was not, -f been to a refreshment
his assertions, that he had nu. -r. Further, also,
house, and had not had any dinne_ —erred about
that the first person to whom he con, .id prove
the occurrence was his own wife. He COl._ ‘Trs
that he entered a refreshment house, kept by
Crow, and called for a pennyworth of pudding at a
few minutes past twelve, and that while there
eating it a little girl came in and said what a shock-
ing thing had just happened, that a woman had cut
her throat in Legg-court. Saunders, who complained
of being tired, sat down, although he had subse-
quently sworn that he did not sit down anywhere,
and there remained twenty minutes conversing
about family matters, and having another penny-
worth of pudding, and while he was there so seated
the accused was brought out of the court to the
station. This negatived at once the assertion that
ho remained at the court until the prisoner was
brought out, and the shocking occurrence alluded to
was spoken of and talked about between the keeper
of the shop and Saunders as a matter to which at
that moment Saunders was a perfect stranger.
Surely, a fellow-creature' should not suffer the
penalty of death upon such evidence as that of
Saunders, and the matters he had mentioned, com-
petent of proof by a host of respectable witnesses,
were so material that he hoped the magistrate would
feel no hesitation in granting him the warrant for
which he applied.
Ia answer to inquiries from the magistrate'
Mr. Hutchinson said that the place where Saun-
ders, obtained the pudding was 140 or 150 yards
from Legg-court. The woman had died immediately
the wound was inflicted, and the police were
proniptly on the spot, and he was in possession of
this information at the time of the trial at the Old
Bailey.
Mr. Paynter inquired why he had not used it
there ?
Mr. Hutchinson replied that he could not in law;
it could not be given in evidence. He was not
justified in raising collateral issues.
The Chief Clerk of this Court, who was at Ma-
loney's trial, informed the magistrate that Mr. Jus-
tice Byles, who tried the case, afforded every faci-
lity for calling the evidence irrespective of the
strict rule of law. He stated that, in a matter of
such moment, he would not exclude anything of
advantage to the prisoner.
Mr. Paynter asked whether Mrs.Crove was called.
Mr. Humphreys, an inspector of the B division,
said she was called for Saunders to see, when
said he did not know her, or remember her e
as the
person who kept the shop, but readily admitted he
had
Mr. Hutboht some pudding at a shop.
bought some pudding at a shop.
Mr. Hutch inson said that he had denied at the
ii29.llefit A. 114 at that ORA thAtt he PM .