The Sun.
London, England, 1842-06-18 00:00:00

RAILWAYS BILL.

The Order of the Day was then read for the House going
into Committee on the Railways Bill.
Mr. HARDY wished to inquire whether, when her Majesty
had travelled frcm Slough to London. on the Great Western
Railway, proper care was taken to prevent her Majesty's cat-
riage from corning into ccllision with the engine.
Mr. RUSSELL said, there were two carriages between
her Majesty's carriage and the engine, and there was not the
least risk of a collision.

Mr. 110DGSON HINDE then moved the insertion of the
following clause :—" And whereas, by vari.ius Acts relating
to Railway., it is provided that the Companies shall cause to
be painted on boards, and to be affixed, and continued and re-
newed as often as the same shall be obliterated or defaced, to or
upon every toll-house or building at which any rates or tolls
shall be collected or received, in some conspicuous .place, in
large and legible characters, an account or list of the several
rates and tolls which the said Companies shall from time to
time direct and appoint to be taken; and whereas it is for the
public convenience that the said list of rates and tolls should be
printed and affixed within every station-house, or other place
where such rates and tolls shall be payable : Be it enacted,
that it may be lawful for any Railway Company to affix such
printed list of rates and toils in a conspicuous situation within
every station-house or other building where such rates or tolis
are collected, instead of affixing such boards, painted as afore-
said ; and that such Company shall be held to have complied
with the provision of the said Ac:s as (ffectually as if the said
table of rates and tolls had been painted on boards and affixed
to such toll.hcuse or building; and that such rates or tolls
shall be payable, and may be demanded and taken during the
time in which such printed lists are affixedas aforesaid, in the
same manner as they are authorised to: be demancied and
taken during the time that such hoards shall remain so affixed."

Dr. 130 WRING said the question Wasithe greater or less
convenience of the public, and as it appeared to him that the
existing practice would afro, d the greatest security against im-
position, he should oppose the insertion of this clause.
Mr. WALLACE opposed the clause.
Mr. GLADSTONE opposed the clause. The object of
the Bill, as might he gathered from the preamble, was to make
provision for the public safety, and he thought that was the
object which they should keep in view. Whatever might be
the abstract merits of the clause, he could not think that that
was the proper time for discussing it, and he 'hoped the Hon.
Gentleman would not persevere. The clause was foreign to
the purposes of the Bill.
Mr. DARBY thought the safety' of the public was the most
important object, and the clause appeared to him likely to dis-
tract attention from it.

After a brief conversation between Lord R. GROSVENOR
and Lord SEYMOUR,

The Committee divided, when there appeared--
For the clatne
Against it
Majority against the clause -102
Mr. R. PALMER moved the following clause :—" And be
it enacted, that whenever it shall appear to the Lords of the
said Committee, that the line of any railway is carried so neatly
parallel to, or at so short a distance from, any turnpike or
public carriage or bi idle road, as seriously to en: anger the
public safety, it shall be lawful for the Lords of the said Com-
mittee to c.ll on the Directors of any such railway to erect and
maintain a sufficient fence between the line of railway and any
such turnpike, carriage, or bridle road, as the nature of the
case may require." '
Mr. GLADSTONE was not opposed to the clause, but he
hoped his Honourable Friend would not press it on the
Committee, becruse the object of it was a ready pro-
vided for in the partictilar Railroad Acts. The power given
to two Justices by these particular Acts was sufficient. In
these cases, too, the Board of Trade had been accustomed to
act by suggesting necessary precautions, and in all eases those
suggestions were attended to by the Hallway Companies.
AfttE•r a few'words from Sir. HINDLEY,

Mr. C. RUSSELL confirmed the statement of the Right
Hon. Gentleman as to the readiness of the Railway Companies
to comply with the suggestions of the Board of Trade. He
thought the danger, too, from this cause, had been much ex-
agger at ed.
A desultory discussion followed, which was interrupted by a
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS,
Bringing up certain Bills.
RAILWAYS BILL—RESUMED.

The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the
whole House, when
Mr. PALMER withdrew his clause.
Mr. CRAVEN BERKELEY was understood to withdraw
the clause of which he had given notice, making it incumbent
upon all Companies applying to Parliament for any new Act,
or amendment of their original Act, to make provision for
maintaining the poor, and those appl3ing for parochial relief,
caused by the intreduction:of labourers into) the different parishes
through which the railway passes, in the same manner as has
heretofore been the case in Canal Acts.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN rose to move the insertion of
a clause to prevent the locking of the door of any carriage
containing passengers, on the side nearest those stations at
which such carriages stop. If the Right Hon. Gentleman
would say that he could command every Company to cease
locking their carriage doors at any time he pleased, withcut
the insertion of this or a similar clause, he should consent to
withdraw his motion ; but unless that could be ac-
complished, he thought it to be his duty, for the protection
andsafety mass of people. who travelled by
railway,
immensethis motion to a division. He need not refer
to o
press
r e thess
to particular cases in proof of the necessity for such a clause ;
the recent Paris case must live in the recollection of them all ;
but even without that example of the destructive consequences,
he thought it must be evident to every one that it was a most
dangerous thing, and a thing unattended with any good conse-
quence, to lock the doors of the carriages. He thought the
safety of the public was concerned, and that this matter re-
quired the particular attention of the House.
Mr. RUSSELL was understood to say that in the Paris
case, which had created so much consternation in the minds of
the public, the whole of the carriages were second-class car-
riages, where the whole top and sides were open ; and the per-
sons inside, ii they had contemplated danger, might have got
out with as much chance of safety by those openings, as by the
doors if they had been unlocked. He held in his hand
a paper containing a list of the accidents which had
occurred on the Great Western Railway, and these
ran "jumping out of carriage whilst train in motion," " at-
tempting to get into carriage whilst train in motion," &c.,
whilst not one accident bad yet occurred on that railway whilst
the doors were locked which would not have occurred if the
doors had been unlocked., He contended that it was far safer
to lock the doors than to leave them open.
'1 he clause was read a first time ; and on the question, that
it be read a second time, _ _

Mr. GLADSTONE thought' the practic?, of unlocking one
door having been adopted, ought not to be resumed. The
question was not wh. ther the matter of the clause was ob-
jectionable or not, but whether there should be any
legislative enactmmt on the subject or not. It had
been thought advisable by a Committee, which had re-
ported on the sOject, that compulsory powers should not be
given to the Board of Trade. That would be throwing upon a
Government office responsibilities which should devolve upon the
Directors of Companiesalone. He would remind the House that
the Inspector of the Board of Trade had recommended the practice
of locking the doors ; and this fact showed, at least, that the sub-
ject was one of much difficulty. Under those circumstances,
he did not think it advisable that the House should now pass
any law which would prevent any further consideration of the
matter. _ .

Captain LAYARD said that he was decidedly in
favour of the practice of locking-up carriages on rail-
ways, inasmuch as he thought that it contributed on the
whole to the greater safety of the public. He had lately
been travelling on the lice to Liverpool, and an accident hav-
ing occurred, the passengers finding the doors of the carriages
open, leaped out. Now, if a train had been passing at the time
the most serious consequences might have resulted. As it was,
one gentleman had lost his hat—( Laughter)—and in looking
for it he ran the risk of losing his head in ad.tition.
Atter a few words from Sir C. Busmen'. and Mr. C.
RUSSELL, which were inaudible in the gallery,
Mr. M. MILNES said that public opinion was so decided
on the matter that it must be effected. It was necessary the•
a compulsory power should be given to the Board of Trade to
act in the matter on their own responsibility.
Sir R. PEEL said that if the principle of defining by
legislation what the regulations should be according to which
railroads should be conducted, the next accident that occurred
some gentleman would come forward with a new clause to pre-
vent the recurrence of such an accident, and thus it would be
on every such occasion. He thought that the persons who
travelled by railroads were the best guardians of
their own safety, and he saw no necessity whatever
for any legislative regulations on this matter. When
the Committee on Railways sat last year they had come
to the unanimous determination that security to the public
would be best insured by giving to the Board of Trade a
poser enabling them to make suggestions, so as in
flet to aggravate the responsibility of railway companies.
It was by far the best way to let public opinion, which generally
acted in the right direction, set the matter right ; and if there
were any old ladies or ecclesiastics who were afraid of being
locked up, let the Railway Directors and them people settle it
between t hem.— ( Hear, and laughter.)
GRANTLEY BERKELEY wished to ask if any di-
rections had been given to the Greenwich and Blackwell Rail-
way Companies on the subject.
Mr. GLADSTONE understood that the conduct of those
companies had exempted them from animadversion cn that
point.
;Vs-. M. PHILIPS was opposed to minute legislation on
the subject. Be would suggest a test to . the Railway Com-
panics to ascertain publ c opinion. Let them have a certain
number of carriages locked up, and a certain number un-
locked. andin a fortnight they might discover what. was public
opinion on the subject, and act accordingly.
Air. B. ESCOT f would vote for that measure which would
give the most unlimited power to the Railroad Companies to
make any regulatiot }ti •might think- fit. The lion. Member
they •
who had just sat down was hardly an impartial witness, inas-
much as if he were upset, and thcr door were locked, he could
mot gel out of the window.—( A laugh. )

Mr. M. PHILIPPS Iliad once in a common coach bern
in the unfortunate position alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman.
He had Veen upset. In the coach there were besides himself
two gentlemen of abaut the same size as the Hon. Member.
They had attempted to get out together ; of course they could
not succeed $ • and he proposed that they should toss up for
choice.—(A laugh.) Had he known that the door of that
coach would have been locked, he certainly never would have
booked him elf to go by it.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN denied that he had been in-
duced to propose this clause in consequence of the aceident on
the Versailles Railway. Public attention had been drawn to
the subject long before that accident had occurred. He felt it
necessary to say this to vindicate himself from the charge of
having l roposed this measure hastily and without sufficient
grounds.
ROYAL COMMISSION.

The Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod entered the House,
and having advanced to the table, summoned the House to the
bar of the House of Peers, to hear the Royal assent given by
Commission to certain Bills.

The Speaker, accomi anied by several Members, then left
the House, and proceeded to the bar of the House f Peers.
After a short absence the Speaker returned, and announced
to the Ilouse, that he had been at the bar of the House of
Peers, and had heard the Royal Assent given by Commission
to a variety of Bills— (for which see Lords' Report).
. • [LEFT SITTING.]

MAL OF COOPER,
THE M URDERER.

CRIMINAL COURT.:7(THIS DAY.)

OLD COUR'''.

This morning, at ten o'clock, Thomas Cooper was arraigned
upon an indictment for maliciously shooting at and murdering
Timothy Daley, a policeman ; and also upon two other indict-
ments for shooting at and maiming, with intent to murder,
Charles Mott and Charles Moss. _ _

'I he prisoner, who was dressed in a suit of black, appeared to
be pale, but was much imkroved in his appearance since last
session. He pleaded Not Guilty, in a faltering tone.
The Judges who presided were Mr. Justice Matteson and Mr.
Baron Gurney.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Chambers appeared as Counsel for the
prosecution, and Mr. S. C. Horry defended the prisoner.
Mr. BODKIN having briefly narrated the evidence he proposed
to lay before the Jury, concluded by saying that he should not
weaken the defence of insanity, which he believed would be set
up for the prisoner, as it would be necessary, in order that it
should have any avail, to support it by evidence; and if that
course was pursued, he (Mr. Islodkin) would have an opportu-
nity of again addressing them.
Charles Moss e ,imined by Mr. Chambers—On the Bth of
May last I was a cons• able in the V division of police. I was
by the side of Hoe nsey-wood in the afternoon of that day. I
met a gentleman, and he had a bunch of sea's. I had pre-
viously received information of several robberies having been
committed, and therefore I watched the gentleman. As 1
turned round to go away from the gentleman, after watching
him to the tnd of my boat, I saw the prisoner Cooper. I was
in my police uniform, and when Cooper saw me, he ran across
the road into a field. I followed him, and found him stooping
under the hedge. He had two pistols lying before him
on the ground. I asked him what he did there, and
he said, Nothing particular. I told him if he could not
give a better account than that that I most take
him into custody. He then sprang forward, and stood
before inc. He held the pistols in each hind, and appa-
rently aimed one at my head. I was then two yards from
him, and I put up my left arm to save my head. He fired the
pistol he held in his rig lit hard, and something struck me
above the wrist. He then stepped bark ,two or three steps,
and changed the pistols from the left to his right hand, and I
advanced towards him. The pistol he had previously held in
his left hand he pointed at my head, but I was nearer to him, and I
rushed at him. lie pulled the trigger, and I heard it snap, but a
think the second pistol was-not loaded. We then struggled
together and his hat fell off. I was obliged to let him go as
I had not the least use of this arm (pointing to his left arm,
which was in a sling). He their ran about 15 yards, and I was
about to follow him, upon which he said, if 1 followed him or
made any alarm_he would shoot me dead. Ile then ran away
without his hat, and I pursued him, crying out " N:urder !"
When he reached the opposite field he put the pistol he had
held in his right hand into his breast and pulled out from his
trowsers what appeared to be a large carving knife. Ile
said if I followed him any further he would certainly do
for me. I pulled out my staff and he then ran away, and upon
attempting to get over a hedge my arm failed me, and then I
discovered it was bleeding. I continued to cry. out murder,
and I could see from the opposite side of the hedge that he
stepped and appeared to be loading a pistol. I did not attempt
to go near him, and he aimed a pistol at me and said some-
thing, but I could not hear him. Hallett, another constable,
and several persons came up. I have since been in Bartholo-
mew's Hospital in consequence of the waur.d, and am not 3et
discharged.
James Wallcott was next examined, but his evidence was
not important.
John William Young, the waiter at Highbury Barn Tavern,
after repeating the evidence given before the Magistrate, said
as Mott the baker approached the prisoner he raised his arm,
which bad been previously by his side, and shot the baker
through the shoulder, and as Daley advanced he shot him
through the body, and he instantly fell dead. He appeared to
take an aim at Daley. Upon this be was immediately seized
by the persons around him, and taken to the station-house.
I saw him searched and two bullets taken from him. The boy
Euson brought a bat to the station-house, and I showed it to
the prisoner and he said it was his. I saw Mr. Drury, the
surgeon, when he attended Daley, after his death.
John William Howard, examined by Mr. BODKIN, said I
saw the prisoner in the way described with a crowd of persons
standing round him, and a pistol in each hand, and in a few
minutes I heard the report of a pistol, and directly afterwards I
saw Daley fall. Daley had not laid his hand upon the prisoner
before he was shot. The people then closed upon the prisoner,
and took from him two pistols and a knife, upon which the pri
sone'. said, "I am done." I said it was almost time he had,
and he was then secured and taken to the station-house.

Stepl.en Turnbull repeated the evidence Le gave at the first
examination proving that he saw the prisoner shout Daley.
After the examination of Wm. Smith, whose evidence was
not materitl, the next witness was

Charles Mutt, who was examined by Mr. CHAMBERS, and
said—l am a journeyman baker, and was delivering my bread
on the sth of Ala!, at liighbury, when 1 beard the alarm raised
against the prisoner, and joined in the pursuit. I came up to
him in the lane with other persons. The prisoner put his
back to the palings, and holding up two pistols told Daley to
keep off or he would hare the contents of the pistols. Daley
asked him what he had been doing, and be said he had been
cutting turf. I asked him why he wanted pistols to cut turf,
and he made no answer. When Daley said the pistols were
not loaded, the prisoner told him to " try them." A number
of persons had come up by this time, and I attempted to rush
in on the prisoner, and he fired immediately, and I received
the ball in my shoulder. I had got hold of the ptisoner, but
my foot slipped. In consequence of the injuries I received, I
have since been in the hospital. I had no stick at the time in
my hand.
Cross-examined—l will swear positively I had no stick in
my hand. I did not see any stick broken over the palings by a
blow made at the prisoner.

Erasmus Symonds stated that he was in Highbury Barn
Tavern at the time the prisoner was pursued, and that witness
joined in the pursuit. The remainder of his evidence was of a
corroborative character.

James Wheeler was a waiter at the Highbttry Barn Tavern.
He received two pistols from the last witness. Before the pri-
soner fired, he said he would shoot any person who attempted
to take him. Saw Daley dead.
Christopher Norman was a sergeant of police. Searched
and found two bullets in the prisoner's pockets, and two pistols,
which were handed to Sergeant Thatcher.
Sergeant Thatcher produced the pistols and bullets; and
stated that the prisoner, on being told Daley was dead, turned
very pale.
Several other witnesses corroborated the previou3 statements.
Mr. Drury, a surgeon, was called to see Daley, and found him
dead from a Otol wound.
Cross-examined —Continued excitement would keep away
sleep. Want of sleep is not always a symptom of affection of
the brain, even if sleeplessness was habitual for many years. A
man calling himself Dick Turpin, and saying he
wanted his father out of the grave, for it was no use his lying
there, would be symptoms of unsoundness of mind. An ex •
pression of weariness of life, was not a symptom of insanity ;
but, perhaps, coupled with other circumstances 'it might be.
A high state of lever commonly affected the brain. Sometimes
the effects of the disease did not sosn pass away. Has known
persons to be affected for two or three years after the fever.
Insane persons are particulatly prone to resist any violence. It
is also a symptom of insanity to go wandering about without
any object. Quiet and repose are favourable to a person in
such a state.

Re-examined— Does not think that from the evidence of the
conduct of the prisoner, that he is a man of unsound mind.
Assuming a man to have committed several robberies, and that
man, seeing a policeman coming behind him, witness would not
consider it an act of insanity for the man to jump through a
hedge; it would be a s 3 mpton of perfect consciousness.
Mr. R. Mould deposed that he was clerk to the Magistrates
at Clerkenwell. Heard Mr. Greenwood put a question to the
prisoner. At the conclusion of the examination of each
witness the Magistrate asked the prisoner if he
wished. to put a question to the witness. On the con-
clusion of Young's evidence, this question was put
to 'the prisoner, and he said, " I did not say that I
would shoot, but I said I would shoot whoever took
me." This was in correction of Young's evidence. '1 he pri-
soner paid great attention to the reading of the depositions.
More than that, the Magistrate asked him if he perfectly under-
stood what was being read to him, and he expressed assent.
The Court here aejourned for a quarter of an hour.
. On the re-.assembling of the Court,
Mr. BODKIN said the case for the prosecution had terminated.
Mr. floe z then addressed the Jury for the prisoner.
He said that for the first time during the seven years
that he had bsen at the bar, he was called upon to
address a Jury upon a charge, cenviction upon which was
certain death. He almost felt that his anxiety would defeat
itself Ile coutd not help referring to different
published statements, most of them monstrous per-
versions of the fact, and all calculated to excite
the 1 rejudices of a Jury. When he saw these, he could
hardly fancy that they lived in an enlightened age. Was
it a symptom of enlightenment to load a falling . man ?
They knew in private life how difficult it was to.eradicate pre-
judices. He could not hope that they would forget what they
had heard ; but what he regretted was, that a man placed in the
unfortunate situation of the 1 risoner, should be subjected to such.
prejudices. He caled upon them to consider before they gave
an opinion, whether that opinion was founded on what they had
heard that day, or what they hail heard elsee here. This was
the only course by which they could escape being cha-ged.
before the Almighty at the great judgment of having sacrificed
human life. It had been well known the line of defense he was
about to take. They had concealed nothing from the prosecu-
tors. They said, in fairness, if the man is worthy of puteshment,
let him meet it; but if he was a being upon whom the light of
reason did not shine, then would he be entitled, by the
law of the country, to be released. from the awful charge
under which he stood. This case, involving such difficulties
as it did, must be looked at in two lights, first, whe-
ther the act itself was not so extraordinary. that it
was a proof of insanity,;: and they must recollect that
this was not a premeditated murder. It was a murder so
called purely by the operaticn of the law. In the case of a
suicide the goods of the suicide were held forfeited to the Crown,
but this was avoided by proving the person in a deranged state.
Suicide was murder—self murder. 'There was no differenca
with respect to the law. If they proved the man insane his
goods were saved. Take the case of Lord Castlereagh, the
only proofs were dejectedness and lowness of spirits ; these could
be pi eyed with respect tot he prisoner at the bar. Why should there
be a difference in the case of the prisoner and the suicidt ? With
respect to insanity, there e ere manv cases similar to the one
.before them. In Ryan's Report was the account of a man hav-
ing thrown his child into the e ater, whereby it was drowned. This
was held to be an act of insanity. The keeper of the lunatic
asylums said that the fact of the person being subsequently
able to give a rational account of himself wis no proof
of the man's sitsi• Learii. a s, ' • 1
a great number of other cases of a similar description. Take
the . case of Margaret Nicholson. There was but the
;one act of insanity brought against her, and that was
raising a - knife against • the • Sovereign, yet this was

held sufficient, and she was not subjected to a trial.
So with the case of Oxford, there was no other proof of insanity
for them, than the one act of firing at the Queen. Now look
at Cooper's act and compare it with these cases 'lf the cases he
had referred to were acts of insanity, how touch more was
Cooper. Here there was no premeditation shown, :and
the evidence of Mr. Drury proved that insane persons were
prone to resistance. Was the act reasonable—would a
reasonable man have aqemptedi it, the penalty Mpg cer-
tain death. It was consistent only with the act of
a madman. Had he been a sane man he would have accom-
plished his flight, as innumerable opportunities were offered.
Then they had a firing with ut an adequate motive; by firing
at the men he placed himself in greater jeopardy than before.
The act of firing must have entirely prevented the possibility
of his escaping. . . .

The Learned Counsel was proceeding when we went to press

INSOLVENT COURT-(THIS DAY)

IN RE JOHN ALTON.

The insolvent was described as a currier and leather-dresser,
carr3ing on business at Mill-wall. In his schedule she amount
of debts appearing exceeded 2,5001., and tke assets, consisting
of-stock in trade, machinery, and the interest in the lease (if the
premises, used as a factory, with good debts, was about 7501.
lii. petition to be discharged, was opposed in person by a
creditor named Etty. The grounds of opposition was for hav-
ing vexatiously defended a suit for the recovery of 57/., for
which sum he became liable, in consequence of having joined
his bro'her-in-law in a promissory note fcr that amount. It
appeared, in a very lengthened and contradictory evidence, that
the insolvent was to get half the amount of the promissory
note, upon the opposing creditor discounting it ; but th;s prr-
son paid over the whole amount to Smythe. the brother-in-law,
who never gave the insolvent any of it ; and he urged in his
defence that he was, therefore, nut liable for the amount of the
note, having received no consideration for it.
After several witnesses Ladijecn called in support of the pe-
tition, the insolvent was ordered to be discharged forthwith.
Several unopposed petitions were heard during the day, and
the applicants ordered to be discharged.