The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-07 00:00:00

into custody for having murdered the woman in St. Giles's,
on Monday evening." The prisoner said, "Yes, sir; oh, yes."
I then brought him to Bow-street.
The prisoner had no question to ask.
Adolphus Lonsdale, 110 F, examined—l was directed to
take charge of the prisoner, preparatory to his examination
before the magistrate, and I was therefore placed in the cell
with him from. nine o'clock last night till nearly nine this
morning. About four o'clock this morning the prisoner said,
"I am sure to be tucked up, if those two women come and give
evidence against me, that saw me oh MOnday night be-
tween eight and nine o'clock. I know them to be prostitutes."
I asked him no question on the subject.
The prisoner declined asking any question.
James Brothers, the husband of the deceased woman, was.
called, and proved the identity of the deceased. She was
wife, and her name was Mary Brothers. lle had heard that
she lived with a person named Tape, and was afterwards
called by his name.
This closed the list of witnesses, and Mr. Pearce had no
wish to have the case remanded for further witnesses.
The depositions were then read over, and the witnesses
bound ever to prosecute.
The evidence having all been read over by Mr., Burnaby,
the chief clerk,
Mr. JARDINE, after cautioning the prisoner, asked him if
he had anything to say then ? The prisoner—No, Sir, I have
nothing to say.
The only time the prisoner seemed affected was when his
identity was so positively sworn to by one or two of the
witnesses.

The prisoner was then fully committed for trial.
The crowd outside the Court was computed at two thou-
sand persons, who had waited patiently for five hours and a
half (the period of examination) to get a glimpse at the
prisoner. In this 4ish they were not gratified.

INQUEST ON THE BODY.
THE CORONER AND THE POLICE.

The inquest on the body of Mary Brothers was resumed
on Saturday afternoon at three, at the Angel Inn, High-
street, St. Giles's, before Mr. Wakley, M.P.

The Court having been opened,
Mr. WAKLEY inquired of Harvey, the beadle, if there were
any additional witnesses ?
Harvey said there were none summoned in addition to
those in attendance on the last occasion.

Mr. WAKLEY ;Are all the witnesses here ?
Harvey said he had summoned them, but he understood
from Inspector Black that all the witnesses were at Bow-
street, and that the prisoner was then under examination.
Mr. WAKLEY said he had issued a warrant this morning
for the production of the prisoner before them at a quarter-
past ten; and complained that it had not been complied with.
From questions put to the inspector and sergeant, it ap-
peared that the warrant was in their possession, and that they
could not inform him whether the magistrate, Mr. Jardine,
had seen it or not, though from Mr. Burnaby, the chief
clerk at Bow-street being aware of the tenor of it, and their
superintendent sitting by the magistrate, it was not un-
likely that he had. The prisoner had been taken into cus-
tody at six o'clock last night, and conveyed to the Court as
early as half-past nine this morning, and they had no power
to interrupt the usual course adopted in respect
to persons taken into custody, who were taken
on the morning following their arrest before the sitting ma-
gistrate.
Mr. WAKLEY said that if the magistrate bad not seen the
warrant, or was not acquainted with its purport, and unaware
of what transpired here, he might commit the prisoner for trial
without coming before them.

Sergeant Logan said it was intended to submit the Coroner's
warrant to the magistrate at the close of the examination.
Mr. WAKLEY said—Gentlemen, I will tell you what trans-
pired at the last examination. You remember that the
inquest was adjourned, in order that, if any person was
taken into custody on the charge of having murdered
Mary Brothers, we might sit immediately on the spur of the
moment, and go on with the investigation. You will also recol-
lectthat the police in the room received that intimation—they
were told that information should be conveyed to the Coro-
ner's office directly any one was taken into custody on the
charge of having slain Mary Brothers. I heard of no person
being taken into custody until about 6 or 7 o'clock last nights
in the House of Commons. lam not quite sure as to the
time, but I think it was about the time I have mentioned.

I received information to that effect from the Secretary of
State for the Home Department on the floor of the House
of Commons. He handed me a note which he had re-
ceived from Mr. Mayne, the Police Commissioner, stating
that a man had been taken into custody, and was at Bow-
street. Determined not to act by messenger—taking
especial care that no misconception, no misconstruction, and
no misrepresentation should occur, I went to Bow-street my-
self to ascertain the accuracy of the statement. When
there I saw the inspector now present (Black)
and the person who had been taken into custody. I imme-
diately addressed a letter to Mr. Mayne, stating that I was
to hold the adjourned inquest either at half-past nine o'clock
this morning or at three this afternoon, and asking
him if he would consider himself justified in sending
the prisoner here this morning at half-past nine, that
I might go on with the investigation. A policeman was dis-
patched with this letter to Mr. Mayne, and last night at 12
o'clock, I received the following reply :

" Eleven o'Clock.

"My Dear Sir—l have received your note relating
to the party in custody on suspicion of murdering
Mary Brothers; and I beg to say, in reply, that
I do not conceive I am authorised to direct the police to de-
part from the ordinary established course, according to which
he will be taken before the magistrate at his sitting in the
morning.—l am, dear Sir, your obedient servant,
" it DIAYNE."

Of course, when I received this note. seeing no chance of
the prisoner being brought here at half-past nine o'clock
this morning, I inferred that by appointing the further in-
vestigation for three o'clock this afternoon, that the magis-
trate would have completed,or proceeded so far in the inquiry,
that the witnesses, or at least some of them, could be
here, that we might be enabled to go on with the
.investiga-
tion. I do not think it was an unreasonable inference on my
part—( Hear, hear)—there was ample time between ten this
morning and three this afternoon. One witness, however, is
here—Mr. Fitzgerald, who we did not examine on the
last occasion ; and I will write to Mr. Jar-
dine, stating that the jury is now sitting and
desiring that the prisoner may come here as soon as he
has done with him.—( Hear, hear.) These things (continued
Mr. Wakley) are very perplexing and especially annoying to
me ; and I suspect that in the end it will produce a great
deal of indignation in the public mind, and I am strongly
of opinion that it is impossible that jurymen can perform
their duty in being obliged to return verdicts of wilful
murder against persons whose identity is not proved before
them.—(Cheers.) I entertain that opinion, and juries also
entertain it. I cannot conceive how any obstacle can exist in
any quarter—juries cannot properly determine on the guilt of
persons accused of such serious offences and discharge their
duty to society, unless the suspected party is before them.
Many county magistrates are of a different opinion. Such a
course is most unreasonable, and he could not conceive why
it should be entertained. Juries are most ancient
institutions, and protect the interests of the
people from aggression. The Honourable Gentle-
man then went on to say, that for the last six years he
had been endeavouring to sustain the powers belong-
ing to the Coroner's Court, and if jurymen themselves
would not take the subject up, it must in effect be abandoned.
Nothing could be more repugnant than to, return a verdict
against a man without his being present
to hear the evidence on which it was arrived at,
and without having the opportunity of uttering
one word in explanation or his defence—(Hear, hear)—nor
to suggest a single question, or check by his presence
every one who may be disposed to give false testimony.—
(Hear, hear.) They would not like such treatment them-
selves and in his opinion it was a violation of
the law. The police were hostile to the production of
persons before the Coroner's Court, and thought
that jurymen could not form proper opinions.—(Hear, hear.)
The next time ♦ot.es of money were proposed to the police
he would take care that they had especial trouble in getting
it.—(Laughter and cheers.) He then read the warrant he
had issued for the production of the prisoner before him,
and which had been handed by him to the police. He con-
cluded by stating that, unless some effort was made, the
prisoner would be committed without his being brought
before them.

The jury being unanimously of opinion that the Coroner
should write to the Magistrate as he had suggested, a letter
was written by the Coroner to that gentleman, the sub-
stance of which was as follows :

" That, at the desire of the fifteen jurymen, he had to re-
quest that the prisoner, Joseph Connor, should be sent before
the Coroner's Court, in order that he might be identified
by the witnesses."
The Foreman said the Coroner bad better add to it, that
he had issued a warrant for the production of the prisoner
before him, which had been suppressed by the police.
• Inspector Black—lt has not been suppressed. The chief
clerk knew the purport of it.

Mr. Wakley did not appear in favour of this course, and
the letter was dispatched.
Mr. WAKLEv—We want the witnesses to identify the
man charged with committing the murder. None have yet
seen him in the presence of the jury.
Several of the witnesses who had been examined at Bow-
street then repeated the evidence which they had given.
Towards the conclusion of the proceedings the following
letter was received by the Coroner from Mr. Jardine :
" Police-court, Bow-street, April 5, 1845.
_ _ _

" Sir,—ln reply to your letter, just received, I have to in-
form you that Joseph Connor has been this day committed
by me to Newgate to take his trial for the murder of Mary
Brothers.—l am, Sir, your obedient servant,
" D. JARDINE.

"To Thomas Wakley, Esq."
Mr. Wakley having in strong terms animadverted on the
conduct of the magistrate and the police, and having stated
his intention of bringing the subject before Parliament, put
it to the jury whether they would then agree to a verdict or
adjourn, in order to have the prisonerbrought before them.
The jury retired to consult, and on re-entering the room,
The CORONER asked "were they prepared to say they
could come to a verdict of wilful murder' against any indi-
vidual, without having the individual before them.°
A juryman—l for one, say we could not.
The Column—What does the foreman say ?
M. BcSlo—Tho beet ewer I ow give to that gladiola