The Sun.
London, England, 1868-04-09 00:00:00

CRIMINAL COUR r.—This Day.

OLD COURT.
(Before Ur.. Justice heating.)
CHARGE AGAINST A FATHER 01$. DROWNING HIS

SON.

Richard William Woolcott, 39, cabinetmaker,
was indicted for the wilful murder of his son, Thos.
George, by drowning.

Mr. Sleigh prosecuted, and Mr. Warner Sleigh
defended the prisoner. _ _ _

George Jeffery said he resided at 2, Crescent-
place, Hoxton, and the prisoner had for three weeks
lived in the same house as a lodger. Prisoner's
family consisted of five children, four of whom lived
with him. The boy Thomas George was about ten
years of age, and he last saw him alive between five
and six o'clock in the afternoon of the 17th of
March.

James Slater, a barge carter, said on the 17th
March he was on the banks of the canal near Kings-
land-bridge. The path is about 14 feet at the place
where the prisoner and the boy passed him, but
near the North-road-bridge it is only five feet six.
Charles Thompson, another barge carter, said he
was at the entrance to the basin of the Kingsland-
bridge on the evening of the 17th of March. A man
and a boy passed him on the bridge, the man was
pushing on quick, and the boy was trying to keep
up with him. . .

By a Juror—lt is by no means a usual thing for
persons to walk where the man and boy were, as
there was no thoroughfare ; but he had often seen
many people there.

James Pritchard, a boy, living at Limebouse-
field, said he was an apprentice to a lightermau,
and was 19 years of age. On Tuesday, the 17th of
Alarch, he was on the towing path of the Canal,
near the New North-bridge, when he saw a man
kneeling down with his hands in the water. The
prisoner was that person. Witness was about a
yard from him when he first saw him. He (wit-
ness) did not see anything in the water, and after
he had passed him about a yard, he said " Are you
drowning a dog ?" to which the prisoner said,
" No, a boy is in the water." When he told him
a boy was in the water he (witness) pulled off his
coat and handkerchief, and shortly after that he saw
the hair of some person's head and a hand moving
about in the canal. Prisoner asked him, when he
saw him pulling off his coat, whether he could swim.
He replied "No." He (witness) threw his hand-
kerchief over the boy's head to try to pull him
ashore. He succeeded so far that the prisoner
could have taken hold of him had he liked.
Prisoner was still kneeling down when some
sugar in a paper fell out of his coat pocket, when
he turned round and picked it up. He told the pri-
soner to take hold of the boy, as he was sinking, but
the prisoner, instead of doing so, turned round and
picked up the sugar. It was very dark at the time.
The boy then disappeared beneath the water, and
he never saw him come up again. Witness then
told the prisoner he had better get the drags, and
we both went to the lock-house and got them. A
man came with us with .a lantern. He had shown a
policeman the spot where the boy went down.
Whilst we were going for the drags he asked the pri-
soner who the boy was, when he said it was
his son, that he had sent him for some sugar
two hours previous, and he (prisoner) had come
there to look for him, and that he found him,
and was going to take him to the City-road. After
we had got the drags he (witness) asked the pri-
soner how the boy got into the water, when he said
the boy slipped in, and his slippers fell off, at the
same time taking the boy's shoes out of his pocket.
The soles of the shoes were a little damp, but not
wet. The prisoner did not assist iu dragging, but
said he would go for a policeman, but did not do so,
as a policeman came up. Prisoner stood looking on
whilst he (witness) was dragging. He was dragging
an hour for the body, but it was not recovered until
the next morning, when he (witness) assisted to
pull it into the boat. There was nothing tied round
the boy's legs.

In cro3s-examination the witness said it was very
dark at the time. The prisoner had one hand in
the water and the other on the bank. The prisoner
appeared to be trying
to pull the boy out of the water
as well as he. When the prisoner asked him
whether he could swim, he said his boy could not
as his legs were tied. The prisoner could not
assist him with the drags, as it was only one per-
son's work. The policeman took the prisoner away
before he (witness) had done dragging. The pri-
soner was writing his address when the constable
got up. The boy did not slip out of
the handkerchief when he told the prisoner
to catch hold of him ; but he was told to take hold
of him as he was slipping out of it. He knew
nothing about the slippers until the prisoner pulled
them out of his pocket. Neither of us called for
assistance whilst we were trying to get the boy out
of the water.

By —The boy was in the water right
under
thethe j
bridgetgde

Cross-examination continued—The pathway is
narrower there than at either side of it. There are
no weeds growing in the canal near the bridge.
Police-constable Hubert Stammers said he went
to the lock-house, and there saw the prisoner. He
(witness) said he had been told that he (prisoner)
had thrown his son into the canal. Such a charge
would amount to murder ; but as there was no per-
sonhe should not take
him tihnetroe
owushtoodsyawf
ohrismuodhoa
but that he should
detain him. As they were going to the station-house
when he was talking about the matter, the prisoner
said, i 4 May the Lord's name be praised if ever I
did such a thing." When the charge was read over
to the prisoner at the station-house, he said he was
innocent. When the prisoner was searched, half a
pound of sugar, some thick cord, and a pair of slip-
pers were taken from him. He was quite sure that
when he took the body of the boy out of the water
the next morning there was nothing tied round the
legs. _ _ _

Police Constable Bradshaw said when he went
to the lockhouse, after it had became known a boy
had been drowned, he found the prisoner. He was
very calm and collected. He said, " I'm the man."
Prisoner accounted for the cord found upon him
by saying that it had been tied round some waste
paper which he had just sold.

The surgeon said he had made a minute examina-
tion of the body and could find no marks of any
ligature round the legs.

Mr. Sleigh, in summing up the evidence, said the
whole of the conduct of the prisoner when his son
waR drowning wag- altogethik = opposed- to that

which would actuate a person whose child was
drowning accidentally.
The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a
verdict of not guilty.

NEW COURT.
(Before Mr. Baron Piggott.)
THE ATTEMPTED MURDER IN FINSBURY.

Thomas O'Hearn, 21, shoemaker, was indicted
for feloniously shooting at John Hills with intent
to murder him.

It will be recollected that the prosecutor had for-
merly been in the police force, and on the 3d of
March he was returning home, near Fitzroy-square,
on his way to Chiswell-street, when he saw two
young men run past him. He turned round to
watch them, and when the prosecutor had fol-
lowed in the same direction, and had
arrived at the corner of Whitecross-street,
the prisoner came up to him and deliber-
ately fired a revolver at him. He heard
the ball whiz past him, and in his fright he leaned
against the shutters of a shop, and called out
" Murder," " Help." The prisoner then turned
round and fired another shot, and then a third,
but the prosecutor accidentally fell to the-ground, and
thus providentially escaped death. Prosecutor,
when Constable Maley came up, told him to take
the prisoner into custody on a charge of attempting
to murder him. A struggle took place, when the
prisoner again fired at the prosecutor, and then at
the constable. The prisoner was known to the police
as one of the persons frequenting the house in
Pulteney-street, used by the two Desmonds and
O'Keefe, the men now under a charge of wilful
murder arising out of the late terrible explosion at
C lerkenwell.

Hills, in his cross-examination, said he had, since
his quitting the police force, been employed by the
police to watch suspected persons. On the even-
ing of the occurrence he had been to Hackney-
wick, where there had been a benefit for the
Clerkenwell sufferers. He had also heard that two
constables, named Chown and Chamberlain, had
been shot at by a man named Clancy. He had
also heard that the prisoner was connected with
Fenianism.

The jury found the prisoner guilty, and the
learned judge in passing sentence told the prisoner
he seemed to be mixed up in and to form a mem-
ber of a body of persons who thought to terrify
the public. However, they would find they were
mistaken. The learned judge then sentenced the
prisoner to penal servittide for the term of his
natural life.

The prosecutor (Hills) and the constable (Maley)
were ordered a reward of £5 each by the judge for
their meritorious conduct.

THIRD COURT.
(Before the Common Sergeant.)
Frederick Toomey and Henry Solomons pleaded
guilty to an indictment charging them with stealing
some boots. They were sentenced to nine months'
imprisonment each.
Walter Rose, William Tant, and William Adams,
pleaded guilty to an indictment charging them
with a burglary in the house of Mary Ann Ashby.
Rose was sentenced to seven years' penal servitude,
and the other two prisoners to one year's imprison-
ment.