The Sun.
London, England, 1829-03-09 00:00:00

THE PORTSMOUTH MURDERS.

The following particulars of the Inquest is from
the Hampshire Telegraph :
PORTSMOUTH, MARCH 4.—Ann Dyatt sworn—
My husband arid I live in Messum's-court, Prospect-
row. We receive parochial relief. I knew the de-
ceased (Langtrey and Jolliffe) very well. They lived
a short distance from us. No person resided in the
house with them. Langtrey was an old man, about
eighty years of age, and a cripple, and could not
sptak intelligibly. Jolliffe was about fifty years of
age, a single woman, and had lived with him as
housekeeper several years. I understood she was
his niece. The house in which they lived was his
own. About fourteen months ago Langtrey and his
housekeeper engaged me to come to the house every
morning and evening, to dress and undress Mr. L.,
and put him to bed, he being so helpless, and I re-
ceived Is. per week for my trouble. I have never
missed attending him morning and evening except
once. He generally went to bed between six and
eight o'clock in the evening, and rose about nine in
the morning. The housekeeper did not go to bed
until some time after him. There are four rooms in
the house—two on the ground floor, and two bed-
rooms over, and a small kitchen in the yard attached,
and communicating with the house. They lived and
eat their meals in the front bed-room. Jolliffe has lately
slept in that room, and Langtrey in the back room. I was
in their house the Sunday morning before the murder,
arid dressed him, arid left the house about a quarter
before ten o'clock to go. to church. The house-
keeper and he breakfasted in the front bed-room.
Jolliffe seldom left the house. I used to go on
errands for them. I went as usual to the front door
of the house on Sunday evening at six o'clock, and
,tried the latch, and found it fastened. It being
rather before my usual time I did not knock, but
went home and returned about seven ; the door
was still fastened. I shook the door, and called
Charity Jolliffe by name, but received no answer.
On Monday morning, between seven and eight
o'clock, I went to the house again, and knocked at
the door and called, and receiving no answer, I went
to Mr. Hendy, a builder, in Warblington-street, who
was a friend of Langtrey's to inform him of the cir..
cumstance. I don't know where Langtrey kept his
money. He always appeared to have plenty of
money. He could not walk from one room to
another, but he was moved in a chair with castors
on the legs. Langtrey had several houses in Ports.
mouth, and when they required repairs he was in
the habit of employing a person to repair them, and
this person used the deceased's ladder and tools, and
Langtrey generally bought the. materials. He was
very penurious in his habits, and Charity Jolliffo
was an extraordinary woman. I think that some-
times she was not altogether rational. Langtrey
trusted her with money, and she sometimes went to
market and paid bills for him. The front door was
generally bolted on Sunday.
James Hendy, of Warblington-street, Portsmouth,
builder, deposed as follows have known the de-
ceased, Samuel Langtrey, for twenty-five years
past, and his housekeeper, the deceased Charity
Jolliffe, for about twelve years. It was generally
understood by the neighbours that he was possessed
of money. I have not been in his house lately.
This morning the witness, Ann Dyatt, came to my
house, and stated that she was afraid that some-

. -
thing had happened at Mr. Langtrey's, as she had
called at the usual hour and could not get in;_ and
wished me to come round; 1
went sound to the
house of Mr. Langtrey about nine o'clock. We
found the door of the kitchen, which lead% into the
yard, open, and the window-shutter of the back
lower room was also open ; it appeared as if it had
not been fastened, as the bolt was in the window

frame, and I am also sure that the kitchen door had
not been broken open. We went into the kitchen,
and from thence into the back lower room—the door
between the kitchen and this room was also open.
I immediately discovered the deceased, Charity
Jolliffe, lying dead on the floor, and a quantity of
blood on the floor. We immediately left the house,
and returned into the Blue Bell passage, and I sent
William Raggett to Weeks, a constable. Having in-
formed Mr. Lipscomb, a neighbour, we went together
to the house of the deceased, and went up the front
stairs into the upper front room, and from thence into
the back upper room. We discovered the deceased Sa-
muel Langtrey, lying dead on the floor, and a great
quantity of blood. I observed that his throat was cut,
and in the room I saw a hammer (such as is used by
bricklayers when putting on tiles); it was smeared
with blood,and some hair adhering to the po:nt of the
hammer. The bed in the room had nut been lain
on. I saw a box or chest in the room, with the
lid open, and some silver spoons lying in or near the
box, and a silver cream-jug on the bed. We found
some deeds, five half-sovereigns, and five half-
guineas, at the bottom of the box. There were nq
clothes in the box. The box had two trays ;:,, it ;
the deeds were in one and the spoons were in the
other;
the moneylinenny the
before-mentioned
trays re l
i ft e di
loose.--
we dis-
coveredthe deeds and
We
pssoioonns
undmoney.
possession
pllalrp.elL.sipascnodmablsotoookf
then returned down stairs, a
an•-. examined the front
door of the house, which I found fastened by one
bolt at the top, but the lower bolt was not bolted,
nor was the lock turned; the key was in the lock on
the inside. The wintlow.shutter of the front room
was shut and fastened, I have omitted to mention
that in the front upper room I observed some silver
spoons, and the deceased Langtrey's watch hanp:,n,r
by the fire-place. In the lower back room, wrier:
the deceased, Charity Jolliffe, lay dead, r
..as a chest
of drawers, which were all locked.

Joseph Clapshaw, of Messuni s
-court, Prospect-,
row, r...td occasionally worked
or did any other Wr.,ri, .
'.„e.y, as bricklayer's labourer,
for him which he required ;
knew the home for
now
forthse adide
aunf
produced by Mr. Lipscomb
to have —cealseadmSa. Lb
tcrhel,
/:,eionged to the deceased. S. Langtrey, and
had. used it. A week ago yesterday the deceased
Charity Jolliffe sent for me, and having gone into
the house, she told me that some person had the
previous evening. attempted to open the kitchen
door by putting his hand through the kitchen win-
dow, rind had unbolted the door-bolt; it was locked
also, and the key was not in the lock; the door
could not be opened; the same afternoon she told
me of this I observed on some slack lime, which
was lying in the yardok footstep;; it was the tofj
part of a shoe or boor having small tikils in it; the
deceased Chaney .b.Aliffe voluted out this kkhtsteta
to rno, lARd she chewed where she supposed some
one 1410 got over the paling,
Diary Sheaves depPseCt—My busbaud keeps the
Blue Aell tap. i went out into Prospect-ro‘v on, Sunday afternoon last about ten minutes after routo'cloelz. saw the deeeksed Samuel Langtrey stand
at the front window, and he spoke to me, -and asked
me how I was, He said he was muc,',l better than
he had Wert., I asked " How is old Mrs. r and
ha kcOed, that she was gone to lie down. The
Vue Bell tap is in the passage or court in which
the yard of the deceased's hoarse atuts, and is about
twenty yards distant twn the. back of Langtrey's
house.

NER reoqiiiilatell, and the Jury
dd
j
No furt* evider,:ce
ulayrenteuerdt,iedthae
vCeordßioct,
of 41. Matsui IrAurcler against some person or persons
unkr^Z)Wn:'

- -
A Coroner's inquest was held at Norwich, on
Tuesday last, on the body of a man named Burgess, an in-
mate of the workhouse, who hod died from eating a pud-
ding made from flour in which. arsenic had been mixed.
It appeared from the evidence that this flour belonged to&
man named Briggs, also in the workhouse, fur whose use
it had been brought by a blacksmith, named Strafford, by
wham the wife of Briggs was pregnant. The wife of
Briggs had been in the habit of sending flour to her hus-
band, and it would seem that the our last taken had been
delivered in her name; but Briggs; having other. &Ur,
did not touch it, and the. deceased, thinking it would voltj
made use of it: The jury returned a-verdict. of "liVilful'\
murder againsttrafford," who,. instintly cousniiitia
to prilozi. The •wife of Briggs stated, in her e""f'4
that iiagiverOler.a powder to take' for she pur-
pose, as was supposed,: 'of .sausing abortion, but- that She.
destroyed it. •

SPIRIT OP THE LONDON JOURNALS•

(FROM THE TIMES.)

It is ascertained that Lord Lowther, Sir Alexan-
der Grant, and Sir Charles Wetherell, all holding
office under his Majesty's Government, presumed
to fly in the face of the Government, and to vote,
on Friday, against Mr. Peel's resolution. Sir John
Beckett, another placeman, was prevented by illness
only, or the profusion of illness, from joining in this
act of mutiny (rather too had for a Judge-Advo-
cate!) These personages, we have no doubt what-
ever, have been preyed upon by much distress of
mind, tetween the ruin of the country, the over-
throw of the Church, and the risk of losing their
employments. If his Grace the Duke of Welling-
ton thinks it worth while, we know what he will do
before this day's business commences : he will dis-
miss the gentlemen without another word, and
thereby relieve them from one at least of the con-
flicting apprehensions which embarrass them. The
glorious majority of 188—the manly decisio❑
of the Whigs and Liberals to support the ten
pound Freehold Bill, for fear of endangering
the other—and the no less manly and vigorous
determination of a Sovereign personage to main-
tain his honour, in spite of those who have
dared to insult him with hourly importunities
to betray it, afford the most lively and animating
prospect that the success of the Relief Bill in the
House of Commons will be every day, if possible,
more signal than the last, and the evidence and mor-
tification of total defeat more crushing to the Titus
Oates faction. But there is one person who, we
trust, will yet listen to our warning. We know his
movements—we have the clue to all his intrigues—
the opinions he has taken—the subtle old conspira-
tor at whose instigation he has called for them—
the fierce and fruitless end to which he applies
them. But these are nothings. We know all:
past, long past—as well as present. The whole
affair, with its body of records, will doubtless, come
before Parliament. The only thing that restrains
us is compassion for the unhappy victim. But jus-
tice—virtue—outraged nature—must be vindi-
cated. Why does he press upon forbearance ?
Why forfeit the mercy—the generous mercy—we
have offered him ?

The detailed provisions of the Bill for placing
our Catholic countrymen on the same footing with
the rest of his Majesty's loyal subjects, in whatever
touches the enjoyment of their individual rights as
freemen, are now before our readers. The speech
of the Secretary for the Home Department, which
developed and justified at the same time the scheme
of policy adopted by the Government, was so full,
perspicuous, and satisfactory, that little or nothing
remains to be said by way of commentary on this
most important measure, but briefly to characterise
it as one which cordially embraces the entire lay
community of the Catholics, while it wisely rejects
the Catholic church and priesthood, disburdening the
State of all connexion with them,—of all respon-
sibility about them,—of all plea whereon they
can rest their complaints, demands, or interference.
In short, it meddles not with them. We can
state, with perfect truth, cur persuasion, that
.no former plan, from whatever quarter, corn
Lined SO much of simplicity and dignity, with
such liberality, sagacity, and foresight, as are
all to be. found blended in this statesmanlike and
noble project. The Catholic peer, and gentleman,
lawyer, and elector, are oil placed, in respect to pri-
vileges—political and profeseiceel—on precisely the
same ground with their Protestant neighbours.
What form of government, what condition of policy,
what free Constitution, existing elsewhere, could
offer them an equivalent for what is now in this
united kingdom open to their full and voluntary
acceptance ? What more is left for the spirit of
patriotism to aspire to ? What more for manly am-
bition? Miracles, indeed, cannot Ise expected from
ay.y effort of human iegislation—the nature of things
cannot be altered by it—every poor man cannot be
enriched by emancipation, nor all the temporal ills
a life at once assuaged ; but as the rich Catholic
will be henceforth on a level with the Protestant,
so will the Catholic poor man with the Protestant
poor; there will be no eaate, no invidious pre-
ference, no heart-bursting degradation, At an ea' ly
period after the passing of this great law, the Legis-
lature may proceed,with mind unfettered,to revise the
general relations which exiet in Ireland between
rich and poor, for the salutary purpose of establish-
ing some means through which guiltless destitution
and suffering may be systematically alleviated. A
bad law, that creating the 40s. freehold, induced
gentlemen to overstock their estates with a species
of marketable vassals. The repeal of that law will
be very likely to produce consequences of a serious
character, through the mere administration of the
:lateral remedy for the evils of which it was the
cause. When landlords begin to reduce the mete-
dicant freeholders upon their properties, the ejected
paupers will, if some precaution be not taken, have
recourse to outrage; but this will not result from
emancipation, let it be understood—it will be a tem-
porary misfortune, arising from the alteration of the
franchise. We mention it in time, to prepare the
country against any perversion of an intelligible And
anticipated event to faetions and insidious purposes.
The Whigs have had a meeting, and have deter-
mined to support Government in the Disfranchise-
ment Bill. The meeting was held at F. Bur-
gett's, and the determination was made kneeest to
Mr. Peel through Lord Althorp and the Knight of
Kerry.
(FROM THE MORNING CHRONICLE.)

The Intolerants complain of the contemptuous
manner in which they were treated by the Majority
on Friday night. But how is it possible to treat with
respect speeches which cannot be met by argument,
because they are throughout a tissue of senseless
ravings about the Protestant Constitution of 1688,
and the dangers from Popery ? Among the whole
of the speakers of the Opposition, there was not one
who combatted the premises of Peel, that the evils
of Ireland had attained a height which imperiously
demanded interference on the part old): Legislature,
or attempted to show that without adm;l:ting the
Catholics to an equality with the Protestants, !here
was any hope of tranquillizing. Ireland. The able
Editor of the Leeds Mercury justly observes, that
the vllage population of England, so ignorant that
it cannot be reasoned with, has been filled with the
most ridicuit:us apprehensions by designing indivi-
duals. The Minority, no doubt, represent very faith-
fully this large 07,3a53 of Englishmen; and their
speeches, addressed to audiences persuaded that
the measure would subject them to fire and faggot,
would have been suitable enough. But really such
twaddle was too great an outrage on common sense
to be offered with impunity to the liow.e of Com-
Pons.

We have received an early copy of an able and
instruck:;ve pamphlet, published by Ridgway, on the
subject wtlich now engrosses the public attention.
Its title is " The Dangers of the Removal of Ca-
tholic Disabilities Considered, by Andrew Marvell,
the younger." We cordially agree with the author
in thinking Lord George Gordon a sensible politi-
cian, when compared with those who figure as No-
Popery leaders at present. " 'fLut worthy au4
Protestant Lord," says the author, " like many
other great men, was too much in advance of the
age in which he lived ; and it is in the brightness of
our more perfect day that his merit is seen to ad-
vantage. The opinions of Lord George Gordon,
and his worthy disciples of the Protestant Associa-
tions, went to the root of the evil. If their wis-
dom had prevailed, Parliament would have repealed
the crude and recent commencements of toleration
to the Catholics, and restored the penal system to
its original perfection. Lord George Gordon was
well justified in accusing the Parliament of that day
a overthrowing all the bulwarks of our Protestant
Constitution—for at that time there was much to
pull down—Lord George had seen the ancient
edifice in its glory. The tower—the keep—the
dungeon—the frowning battlements---indicated un-
diminished strength, and promised as much per-
manence as may belong to the works of man,
When they werc Mailed by the trews of parlia.

ment. When, therefore, he taw the pfocess of
destruction begun, and the train laid to blow the
whole into the air, no wonder that, provoked at the
profanation he witnessed, and the greater which he
saw in vision about to happen in after days, he
should testify so vigorously against that malignant
sacrifice of the Protestant cause. His successors in
' the glorious career have not the same excuse for the
fury of their zeal and the intensity of their alarm.
They seem to entertain no suspicion that the penal
laws, and most of the disabilities to which the Ca-
tholics were subject have been repealed both in
England and Ireland for these forty or fifty years ;
and the only question now to be considered is—
whether Parliament, and possibly a few offices of
trust, from which they are still excluded, shall be
opened to Catholic Noblemen and Gentlemen."—
The absurdity of the position that the Revolution of
1688 justifies the. principle of Protestant ascendancy
is shown in a very able and luminous manner; but
our limits will only allow us to refer to the pamphlet
itself. One very curious part of the pamphlet, the
similarity of the language held now respecting dan-
ger from the Catholics to that held at the Union
with Scotland, as to danger from the Presbyterians,
has been, in part, alluded to in the House of Lords.
It is so curious, however, that we cannot pre-
vail on ourselves not to lay it before our readers.
" There is nothing new under the sun. The
alarms which are now conjured up to frighten this
Island from its propriety are the long-laid ghosts
of departed intolerance. The arguments which
are 110:1, vatnped up in speeches, and addresses and
letters to a friend, are the exploded contrivances of
former faction to distract the Government, and to
unsettle the minds of the people. To some of those
ancient and curious relics, the Earl of Winchilsea
has an undoubted hereditary right, and Lord Re-
desdale is hardly justifiable (at least without leave
and licence) in pillaging the family treasures of his
Noble Friend. When the Union with Scotland
was in progress, the Earl of Nottingham (he was
son of the Chancellor) and many others, appear to
have considered the Ecclesiastical Constitution of
this country (how many mortal murders has it sur-
vived I) would be utterly destroyed and subverted
' by the sixteen Presbyterian Peers and the forty-five
Members of the House of Commons about to be
introduced into Parliament. They said* That as
(see might very well suppose that those Scots Peers
would be such as were addicted to the Kirk, it
might prove of a dangerous consequence to the
Church of England'—the only part of the Consti-
tution that was the object of their solicitude. The
then Bishop of Bath and Wells, on the same occa-
salon, said, 'that as their _Bench was always rec-
. koned the dead weight of the Douse,t so these six-
teen Peers (being admitted to sit therein) would
more cfeetnally make it so, especially in any future
debates relating to the Church, towards which they
could by no ways be supposed to be well affected ;
and therefore he was humbly of opinion that some
provision should be made for debarring them of their
vote in any Church matter that should hereafter come
in agitation.' Fhis brilliant idea, however, was
not received with favour, and I hope will be left in
the Bishop's undisturbed possession, or that of his
personal representatives. These alarmists were an-
swered by Lord Somers and Lcrd Halifax, who do
not seem to have thought that the Union was at all
inconsistent with the Bill of Right, the Pro:estant
cause, the Church of England, or anything done at
the Revolution. Lord Nottingham considered the
very name of Great Britain 'so great an innovation
in this monarchy as- totally subverted all the laws of
England!'
" Indeed, when the Earl of Nottingham found the
Union likely to be carried, with all its Presbyterian sins,
he seems to have been very deeply moved—whether to
tears the record is silent ; but he concluded with a form of
prayer, which has since been adopted without due ac-
knnwledgement. After alluding to Sergeant Maynard's
lively observation to King William, the Earl continued,
' so if this Union did pass, Which he had no reason to
doubt, most certainly. he might, with as much reason and
as justly affirm he had outlived all the laws and the very
Constitution of England, concluding with a prayer to
God to avert the direetfects which might probably ensue
from such an incorporating Union.' It is pleasant, at the
diatai•,ce of a hundred and twenty years, calmly_to contem-
plate the eventful period which has gone by—to think of
the agitations of the troubled wave, while the winds
whistled and the tempests roared, and now to hear it break
gently on the shore, and to find how completely his Lord-
ship's prophecies have been falsified, and how happily his
prayer has been answered."
The author adds..--

" However extravagant it may appear in our days to
suppose the Church of England was in danger from the En-
groachmentsi of Presbytery in the year 1707, yet if there
be aay degrees in the substantiality of phantoms, the dan-
ger was much greater from Presbytery than from Popery
now. We must nat compliment the living at the expellee
of the dead, nor pronounce the Earl of Nottingham of the
last century a tnore unreasonable alarmist than the Earl of
Winchilsea of this. Within less than sixty years from
1707, the Church of England had !teen subjugated by the
victorious Presbyterians, and the Food old cause of that
Church Militant was still supposed to aim at nothing less
than complete ascendancy. It is difficult at the present
moment to conceive any man so thorough a visionary as to
speculate on the restoration of the Church of Rome to
plenitude of power in defiance of the resistance of the
Church of England, and of Dissenters of every class
and denomination whatsoever, who, in that resistance at
least, would be united."
!FF,031 THE NEWS.)

BILL FOR THE RELIEF OF THE CATHOLICS.—The
" Grand Secret" is at length disclosed, and the
p;gilic are now in possession of the views of Mini-
sters ion the great question of Catholic Emancipa-
tion'. We to admit that, as far as concerns
the Belief Bill, then p views are far more liberal
than our most sanguine hope; ever led us to expect.
In future the two Houses of Parliament, and every
office of the State, with the exception of the Lieu-
tenancy of Ireland and the Chancellorship of Eng-
land, will be as open to the Catholics as to their
Protestant fellow-subjects. All the Judges May be
Catholics—the Privy Council may be Catholics—
the Cabinet may be composed of Catholics—nay,
even the Prem4 may be a Catholic. We say may
be, for under a Proteztant King, and with the large
majority of the nation essentially Protestant, it is
not at all likely that such things will bc,-still, how-
ever, exclusion is virtually done away; and a British
Mongrel' may in future range among his Catholic
subjects, it; search of talent of which to avail himself,
instead of being, p heretofore, confined to one class
only of those over whom he is called to rule. We
must, however, qualify our praise of this measure,
by objecting to the clause preventing the !fish Roman
Catholic Bishops from assuming the title of sees over
which they preside.l We ere surprised, amid'
the sound sense which pervades the Relief Bill,
to see such importance attached to so trilling
matter. Be;ides, it should be recollected, that
though an Act of Parliament may prevent the '
Bishops assuming or ggning these titles, no Act
can prevent people writing to theq, and addressing
them by such.--Nay, we cannot see how they can
be addressed otherwise than by the names of the
Sees over which they bear spiritual rule. We admit
that in the Roman church, there are many Bishops
in nubibus—but then it must be taken into con-
sideration that their dioceses are also in nutibzes.
This is not the case with the Catholic I3ishops in
irelao. They all rule over dioceses, and how can
they be 4.esicrnated but by the names of the
dioceses to wnfcii they severally belong. When
Prottitunts write or spe4-, of them they al-
ways acid the word " and if this
word is =WO on a point of faith by ti
Catholics, no Act of parliament will be able to
compel their wiling them by a title, which carries
with it no reference either to their domicile, or to
the duties, which the prelate in question may be in
the habit of performing. We Lope that the very
impossibility of accomplishing his objeci will prevail
* Parham. History, vol. vi. pp. 5 and 69.
t The allusion to the expected ac.cession of dead weivlit
from another quarter is not altogether intelli;!,ible; the
whole passage must be construed nieteori s.ensu.'
1 This, we suppose, is meant for a little sop, to soften
the Clergy, and reconcile them to the conciliation measure.
Vain attempt ! They neither deserve it, nor will they
receive it witli the least ErAtitude,