Star.
London, England, 1824-03-05 00:00:00

precis
will,

to tha
view
to yoi
of 14i
"attefic

*Lana
witne
Alen*
to the
l'attit
Count
Cool
sa •ni
The

cntiiui
'they
tbe.b•

order
took
}arse
team

dwell
found
of w
o as
of anc
ted.
vestib
shut;
nolly
Brow
sayin4
knew
• VMS t

comp
Ha•ii
Sri
,

state(
he ha
him,
he m

cem
and

deli
Jae

soft
/450)
PrO4
ran
evil

orhsil
the'

CASE OF SU.RGEoN CoNOLLY AND 6 TiIERS.I

• -HERTFORD, MARCH 4. -

The ,:io CHIEF BAtioti and Sir J. D.•BesT, Knt.
wrist' .!i llertford the,, in, o ning, and immediately pro-
open the Comore -.shin for the Spring Assikei.
after the custoniary forms; the-following Gentlemen
were swOrn Members of the Grand Jury:
The Hon. Wria.mas Liam, FOremans
Sir J. S. Sebright. N. Calvert, Esq.
Sir C. Sio:±6..._ I Thomas Da"iel, Esq.
J. Tim .1 S. H. W. Ileatheote, Esq.
Robert Livtoo,9;q. Thonias Byron, En.
%Mel Giles, Esq. J. Tinimeron, Esq.
Thomas N. Keppel, &q. I , George Caswell, Esq.
George .Palmer, Esq. I AslolphoiMerealte, Esq.
John Green, Esq. Robert Taylor, Esq.
N. S. Parry, Esq. William Franks, Esq.
John Barlow, Esq,
ALLEGED MURDER AT SHE NLF.Y MILL.—CIIAGE
• TO THE GRAND JOKY.
Mr. Justice Best., on the Jury being swots's, addressed
them to the following effect Gentlemen of the
Grand Jury—l am extremely happy to know, horn the
experience which 1 obtained when it was eery duty, on
former occasions, to visit this county, that the Gentle-
siren of the Jury whom I have now the honour to ad-
dress ate, from the knowledge which- they possess in
matters of criminal jurisprudence, fully able to dispose
of the most difficult cases which can, by possibility,
come before them, Gentlemen; a case will Ise brought,
under your consideration, which will, unquestionably,
deserve all the attention which you can give to it. I al-
hide to the case against Patrick Cottony, Hugh Moran,
Elisabeth Brown, Amelia Morgan, and Edw. Travers;
who have been committed, and also stand charged upon.
the Coroner's Inquisition, for the wilful murder of
Grainge. Gentlemen, the depositions whick.have been
returned to me, give a very full account of this trans-
a:tion ; but, in all human probability, the fate of these
persons will depend upon points of law, with which it
cannot be expected that Magistrates or Coroners can be
so perfectly acquainted as those in my situation. The
depositions are not so clear and explicit, in some of the,
points winch are likely to present themselves-, as I
could wish, in order to be enabled to give you that
precise direction which might be desirable. You
gill, however, apply yourselves to the facts, and come
to that conclusion obi& your own calm and careful
view of the charge shall fairly warrant. I will present
to your notice a short outline .of the case, and the rules
of law • which apply to it; begging you, however, to
attend particularly to:smy differences in the circum-
stances which may arise from the examination of the
witnesses whotri it will be your duty to examine. Gen-
tlemen, it will appear that a writ of execution was sent
to the Sheriff of this county against one of these parties,
Patrick Conolly. How the warrant was issued in this
courtly does not appear—nor does it appear whether
Conolly was in his own house: bur 'I believe he was 'on
a visit to a person who is an inhabitant of the county.
The Sheriff's officers who were appointed for the exe-
cution of this civil process, went to the house, where
they expected to find Mr. Conolty. Upon coming to
the house, it appears, that in the first instance, they had
recoil, se to various stratagems, with a view of ascer-
taining whether Conolly was in the house or not, in
order that they might get poisession of his person. They
found. however, that the persons in the House were pre-
pared to expect them, and no information could be ob-
tained as to the precise object they. had in view. At
last they presented themselves at the back door ; of the
dwelling, and, as is stated on the depositions, they there
found open a pair of folding doors; the construction
of a iiich it appears to me you will have particular
o •as n to examine, with a view to the consideration
of another offence which is charged to have been commit-
ted. On getting within this door they came into a small
vestibule, and then to another door, which they found,
shut; they knocked at this decor, and asked if Mr. Co-
nolly was at home ? One of the persons charged (Mrs.
lirowo) came forward, and answered in the negative—
saying, that no such person was there, and that she
knew of no such- person. However, while the `officer
was talking to this Lady, one of the persons who ac-
companied him observed Mr. Conolly in the parlour.
Having thus obtained a knowledge that Conolly was in
the house, he immediately proceeded to break the inner
door, by giving it such a kick as be thought would
have forced an entrance ; b; this drift, however, he
only shattered some of the panes.of glass, upon which
'Conolly presented himself before him. The officer then
stated to Cunoily the object of his visit, and, told him
he had a writ from the Sheriff of the County against
him, and desired the door to be opened, in order that
he might execute that writ. Conolly insisted that the
door should not be opened, and threatened instant death
to any person who should make such an attempt. He
then called for some weapon to carry his threat into execu-
tion. A spit Was speedily brought him by another of the
prisoners, Amelia Wigan. He, however, did not think
proper to use that spit, whether he thought it likely
to do more me-chief than he intended or not, does not
appear ; but he called for further assistance, and a pitch-
fork e as handed to him by one of the other persons, with
which he wounded %s atson, the Sheriff's officer, as he was
advancing near the door, in some way which does not.
clearly appear upon the depositions ; but the nature of
which wound it will be material for you exactly to as-
certain. The officers were then driven out of the house,
and the doors were afterwards shut. In consequence of
the violent temper which Conolly thus manifested, the
officer then had recourse to the Magistrates in the neigh.:
Lourhood, and made complaint of an assault having
been committed on his person. I -believe, in fact, two
assaults %vele charged to have been committed ; one on
Watson, and a second on some other person. The Ma-
gistrates, on hearing 'the depositions, granted a warrant,
and in my opinion they could not do otherwise, for it ap-
Pc'ne,l tlia an outrageous breach-of the peace had been
committed towards a person acting under the authority of
law. The warrant having beds thus granted,was, I believe,
delivered to the deceased, James Grainge. Whether
-.able of Shenley or not, does
ter which, for teasoes I shall
our serious consideration.
lirected to constables gene-
In particular, I am also un-
- sonietime, directed to A B,
, of -a particular place, and
warrant, directed to all con-
'hen the warrant in this case is
to decide on its precise clia-
ien, with this warrant, what-
aents, Grainge, the deceased,
-son of the name of G rainge,
and constable of Shenley, to
Ily still remained. This se-
,een seven and eight in the
le transaction having been at
,ey went again to the back

_

door, and deinanded admission, but without success.
It appears that several persons were present on this oc-
casion, beside Grainge the deceased ; and it further ap-
pears that from the back they. went to the front door.
There, it is stated, by one witness, that Grainge de-
manded admittance in these words: " I am Constable
of Shenley, and have a warrant from the Magistrate to
apprehend you, 'Mr. Conolly." Another witness will
tell you, that the words of the warrant were read through
the door, and a third says the writ was not read, but-
that the substance was stated. Gentlemen, it will be
material for you, upon the consideration of this case,
to look to the manner in which these accounts vary,
because it makes a very material difference in the of-
fnce presented against these persons. An attempt was
then made to break open the door. Conolly, who was
inside, called on the persons who were making this at-
tempt, to dcsi3t, and threatened de.truition if they pro-
ceeded. It appears that the deceased remonstrated with
him oft the rashness of such an intention, and expressed
a hope that he would not carry so desperate a resolu-
tion into effect; bat he,still persisted in his threats. The
unfortunate 'man believing that Conolly merely used the
words to terrify them, but did not intend to carry them
into execution, proceeded to break the door, upon
which Conolly presented a gun from Reopening in the
•door, fired the tatal shot, and death ultimately ensued.
—With respect, Gentlemen, to the other parties in
this transaction, it appears that they all took an active
part, more or less, from the commencement of the oc-
currence. Ilugh Moran-furnished the gun and balls;
Amelia Morgan fetched the spit, but what she had to
do with the latter part of the transaction is not stated.
—As to Mrs. Brown, I believe it will appear that she
,gave considera'de encouragement to Cottony from the
first tb the last. Gentlemen, these are the facts of the
case, and I now come to what appears to me to be the
law on the subject. There are here two distinct trans-
actions; the first, the breaking by the Officer under the
authority of the warrant of the Sheriff, and under a
civil execution. Gentlemen, I have to state, that, in
point of law, if the outer door of the house 'through
which the officer first entered had been closed, the
offiCer had no right to do what he did. This was, cer-
tainly not the house of the' prisoner Conolly; he was
there as a visitor or a lodger. Gentlemen, •I beg to
.state that my idea of the law does not go to that extent,
and I for one shall always think that the law on such
points should not be extended. The privilege of a man's
house most be guarded against a civil suit as far as it
can ; because it is much better that the sanctity of a
man's •chvelling should be protected, than that the per-
son of an individual should be taken possession bf under
some civil warrant. Those who have acted upon a con-
ttary principle have, I apprehend, mistaken the appli-
cation of a rule laid down by my Lord Coke; I think
my Lord Coke meant to say nothing more, than that
it a man makes his escape from an officer, after
caption has been made, and takes refuge in another
aran's house, he has no right to protection ; and if
the officer in pursuit shall be refused admission, then
that he shall be justified in forcing an entrance to ref
take his prisoner. If a contrary doctrine were held,
none of our houses would be -safe. If we- had a guest
who happened to be in debt, no door would be free'
from invasion, because any Sheriff's officer might break
it open, who wished to possess that guest's person. - But
it: an outer door is open, it is perfectly clear that a,
,Sheriff's officer, after making demand, and stating that
her has a warrant to execute fur a civil judgment against ]
an individual whom he buoys to be in the house, if re.l
I usal should be made to admit him further, has a right.
to break open the inner, and if in resisting such an at-
tempt, death should ensue, undoubtedly the persons in-
strumental to that death would be guilty of murder, and
liable to all the punishment which the law denounces'
against such offenders. The law must be submitted to
by those who keep within the pale of the law. Gen-
tlemen, it will have occurred to you that the at-
tempt to break this door took place a long time be-
fore the murder was committed ; but I allude to the
circumstance, because it is material to another point
to which I shall now direct your attention. Gen-
] tlemen, if the officer was justified ins doing what he
did, as lie clearly was with the warrant which he held ;
and that Conolly in resisting him inflicted a wound
which was likely to occasion death:although not guilty
of murder, still he has brought himself within reach of
an Act of Parliament, which I shall read to you, and
which is known by the name of Lord Elleuborough's
Act. I allude to the 43d of his late Majesty. The
Learned Judge then referred to the provist.ois of the
Act in question. Nov, Gentlemen, there are two
things necessary to constitute an offence under this
Act. The wound inflicted must be either a stabbing
or a cutting. I am not aware of the extent of the
injury done to the officer by the pitch-fork; 6ut I
have no hesitation in saying, that if it was a mere
scratch, it does not come within the meaning of the Act.
—lt must be an opening of the flesh of some kind, or a
positive stab; and as this is a highly penal statute, you
will take care, in forming your judgment, not to go fur-
ther than the law will warrant. Whatever .was the in-
jury inflicted, unless there was a cutting or stabbing,
the offence committed ceases to be a capital crime. You
must therefore examine the evidence carefully, and col-
lect from the manner in which the injury was given—
from the declarations at the time, and from the other do.
cumstances attending the conduct of Conolly,what were
the ref gestde. If upon the whole of the case you find,
that the wound was of the serious nature I have de-
scribed, then you will bring in a bill to that effect ; but,
if you entertain any• doubt, it is your duty to give the
person accused the benefit or that doubt, taking especial'
care not to extend the operation of this highly penal law.
" Gentlemen—l come now to the second transaction, namely,
the murder of James Grainge. If, after the Sheriff's officer had
been turned out by force, having previously gained an entrance, he
had gone back with his writ and demanded an entry, and on being
refused had attempted to break the door, and that death had then
happened—that, I have no hesitation in saying, would have been
murder ; for, once in possession, he ought not to have been re-
moved by force. But, Gentlemen, the Sheriffs officer did not go
back—although some of his party might have remained in the back'
ground, it does not appear that be had anything to do with demand.
ing admission of Conully on the second occurrence. The main
object of your inquiry on this point, therefore, will be, whether
the person demanding admission was a constable, and whether it
was to him the executiou of the warrant for the breach of the
peace-was intrusted ? It isnot only necessary; that the warrant in'
itself shoold be justified, but that the person by Whom it was
borne should have sfiewn it to the person in the house against
whom it was directed, before he proceeded to break open the'
door. You know that every Warrant which a Magistrate has it
in his power to grant, does not justify the breaking of a door.
A Magistrate may grant a warrant for a civil injury ; but only in
cases of felony, suspicion of felony, er breaches of the peace, would
his warrant justify the course which was adopted on the present oc-
casion. If, therefore, this man was only resisting a civil process,
he.was not guilty of murder, nor unless he wassexpressly informed
that the object in view was to arrest him for a breach of the peace.
Then we come again to *hat was the conduct of Conolly. Now,
Gentlemen, it is only stated that the warrant was addressed to the
constable of Shenley, and it is necessary to inquire whether the per-
son acting iu capacity of constable, was, in point of faot, consta.

James Gntinge was a consta
rot appear. That is a math
hereafter state, requires yn
Whether the warrant was di
rally, ni to any constable in
able to state. Warrants ate
sometimes to the constable
t.,metirnes it is a general w
!table, of the county. Wm
produced, you will be able tc
ractei. It appears, Gentlemi
ever may have been its cola(
%vela back with another pets
'vho, I believe, was the actu
t'ie Louse, in which Conoll
coed visit was made betwt
tveilitig, the beginning of the
in the afternoon.. The