Star.
London, England, 1823-07-26 00:00:00

ASSIZES:.

CROYDON, JULY 25.
MURDER OF' MRS. RICHARDS, AT CLAPHAM.

Philip Stojill and Charles Keppetll were indicted
for the wilful murder of Elizabeth Richards, by suf-
focating her with an apron, at Clapham, on the Bth
of April last.
The intense interest which this case excited is almost
incredible. Every part of the Court was, at an early
hour, crowded to excess; and when the doors were
opened to the Public it was a useless ceremony, as
there were then no More accommodations for the
spectators. Even the Gentlemen of the Bar were
obliged to make a special application to the Bench
to be accommodated with sitting room. The Gentle-
men connected with the Press were absolutely ex-
cluded by the pressure of the crowd ; but upon an in-
timation being given to C. H. TURNER, Esq. the High
Sheriff, of their situation, he with promptitude and
the greatest politeness did everything in his power col
affOrd them such accommodations as circumstances
avould permit. The majority of the crowd consisted
of Ladies, who had influence enough to pre-occupy
every desirable seat in the Court before the doors
were opened.
As soon as something like order was restored, the
prisoners • were placed at the bar. Both were very
young men, the olde,t not being more than twenty-
one. Their deputtment was feral, correct, and be-
coming their awful situation. On the arraignment,
the prisoner Studell pleaded Not Guilty to the in-
dictment for murder, but said he was Guilty of the
robbery in the house of the deceased. He was re-
minded, that he was then called upon to plead only
to, the alleged murder; to which, with a firm voice,
he pleaded Not Guilty, and put himself upon GOD
and the country. The other prisoner put an a like
plea. They were then arraigned upon a second in-
dictment, charging them with a burglary and rob-
bery in ahe house .of the deceased on. the same day;
to which they severally pleaded Nut Guilty. At half-
past nine the trial commenced.
The Jury were Gentlemen of respectable. appear-
ance, and throughout the trial paid the most anxious
attention to die case on both sides.

Mr. CONIYN opened the case .with great temper and
moderation, and called upon the Jury, in an earnest
exordium, to dismi.s from their minds all pi-econ-
_ _

ceived impressions which they might have imbibed
from the improper, and indeed unlawful, publication
of the proceedings which had taken place before the
committing hlagisti rtes prior to the trial. Upon this
point the Learned Counsel observed with gie•at
earnestness, and insisted that the publication of an
ex-parte statement of proceedings before Magistrates
against a prisoner, was a common law offence, and
indictable, as had been held by the highest authority.
Such publications were destructive of the first princi-
ples of justice, because it was utterly impossible for
the human mind to reject those impressions which
they were calculated to produce against unfortunate
persons, labouring, perhaps, under an unjust accusa-
tion, and subjecting them to a degree of prejudice,
inconsistent with the impartial administration of jus-
tice. The avidity of public curiosity upon matters of
this kind, might, perhaps, afford some excuse; but
the interests of justice, a rational feeling of humanity
towards the accused, ought to suggest a course far
. different, and prevent the disclustne of exparte state-
ments until the solemn deliberation .of a Court and
Jury upon the offence of the alleged crimidal. In
this case the most exaggerated statements had been
sent forth by the public press, and he earnestly im-
plored the Jury to dismiss, if possible, the impres-
sions uhich they were calculated to excite, and bring
their sober judgment to an impartial consideration of
the facts and circumstances of the case submitted to

them as a judicial tribunal. The Learned Counsel
then entered into a detail of the circumstances of the
case (the particulars of which have already been ab-
solutely forestalled and anticipated in the police re-
ports), and concluded by au earnest appeal to the
Jury to decide the guilt or innocence of the prisoners
upon the evidence they should hear disclosed on oath.

The evidence against the prisoners ranged itself
under four heads : first; the facts and circumstances
of the murder of Mrs, Richards ; second, the testi-
mony of Robert Scott, an accomplice of the pri-
soners; third, the voluntary coufession of the prisoner
StoiDill; and fourth, the testimony of a great num-
ber of witnesses, Arroborating the testimony of Scott
and the confession of Stollen, in many collateral but
material circumstances. A brief outline of the lead-
ing features of the case will, for the present purpose,
be sufficient to recal the attention of the Public to the
atrocious crime with which the
.prisoners stood
charged. The deceased, Mrs. Elisabeth Richards-,
%% as a widow woman of small income, and turned of
seventy-four. She resided in a cottage, forming one
of a row of houses in the Clapham-road, near Acre-
lane, on the left-hand side going lions Loudon. An
elderly woman, named Bell, lodged with her, who
WAS in the habit of going to a Dissenting Chapel
on certain evenings in the week. The deceased was
occasionally visited by a young worhan named Sophia
Jones, a dress-maker, whose constant practice was
to call upon the deceased every Tuesday evening, for
the purpose of reading for her amusement. On Tues-
day evening, the Sth of April, Mrs. Bell left the cot-
tage of the deceased, for the purpose of going to
Chapel as usual. The deceased, who occupied the
front parlour, which opened upon the road, without
a hall or passage, fastened up her doors. Between
seven and eight o'clock Miss Jones called to read to
her, according to her practice. She knocked at the
door, and received no answer. The knocks were re-
peated, but without effect. Observing the door n,-r.
to be fastened she pushed it open, and found every
thing in dat kness. Site vthernently called to the de-
ceased, but received no reply ; upon entering she
found the deceased lying on her back, apparently
dead ; an alarm was given; the neighbours collectedr
and, upon entering, the deceased was found a lifeless
corpse upon the floor. Her face was covered with
a white apron, one end of which was twisted, and
thrust down her throat, to. the extent of several
inches. Upon pulling it out, the part which had been
in her mouth was saturated with saliva, and stained.
with blood, in consequence of the forcible expulsion
of a tooth from her jaw, which was supposed to have
been swallowed in the agonies of death. A surgeon
was called in, but the spark of life was irrevocably
extinct, though the body was still warm. These
were the outlines of the circumstances and manner

of the death. To prove that the prisoners were the
perpetrators of the crime, the facts elicited in evi-
dence were these house had been robbed of
a metal watch, some silver spoons, some wearing ap-
parel, and some money to the amount of about £3 10s.
On the table, in the apartment, was found a brown
paper parcel, addressed as follows:—" Mrs. Bell,
hat Mrs. Richard's, Clapham, Surrey," which, upon
being opened, was found to contain nothing but a
piece of blank paper. Next day the police were on
the alert. A reward of £2OO .was offered for the ap-
prehension of the murderers. Hall and Glennon, two
active police officers, of the Public-office Union-hall,
obtained information which led to the apprehension
of the prisoner Stoffetl. He was taken into custody on
the 11th of April, and brought before Mr. Allen, the
Magistrate. The officer, Hall, being possessed of the
brown paper parcel above mentioned, induced the
prisoner to re-write the address written upon it, upon
a piece of white paper, and having done so, spewed
him the brown paper parcel, and asked him if he
knew that? The prisoner, panic-struck by this testi-
mony of his guilt, which was found exactly to cor-
respond with the hand-writing upon the piece of
paper, immediately said he certainly was concerned
in the robbery, and was present at the murder of the
deceased; and said he would confess all. The Magis-
trate; who wus present during part of the time the
prisoner was writing, warned him that he was not
bound to confess anything to his own prejudice:
However, the prisoner desired his statement to be
received, and he entered accordingly into a minute
detail of the circumstances of the robbery and murder.
In this he implicated Scott, Keppell, and a man
named Prichard. From his statement, it appeared,
that the robbery had been planned a month before it
was effecteJ. No personal violence was intended to-
wards the deceased; but it was arranged that an
entry into the house was to be gained by making up
the brown paper parcel above mentioned, directed
for Mrs. Bell, who was known to lodge with the de-
ceased. This plan was accordingly executed. The
accomplice, Scott, knocked at the door, which was
opened by the deceased, and upon receiving the parcel
she took 'out her spectacles to read the address.
Whilst sbe was engaged the rest of the party entered.
The prisoner Stollen; who was her nephew, laid hold
of her, told her no violence was intended, and ad-
vised her to make no noise. She was laid down on
the floor, and the prisoner, Keppell, was left to keep
her quiet, whilst the rest of the ganroceet4d to
rifle the house. As soon as they hadg accomplished
this object, !they quitted the house, having the door
ajar.. These, which were the only leading circum-
stances of Stoffell's confession, led to the apprehension
of Keppell and Scott, who, after the robbery and
murder, had gone with Prichard to Bristol, but re-
turned to London after a week's absence. The father
of Scott, aho was a rat-catcher by trade, was in-
strumental to the detection of his son, on condition
that he should be admitted as an approver. On the
day fixed in the following week, Scott accordingly
surrendered himself into the custody of Hall and
Glennon, the officers, and was confined in the house
of the latter for nearly two months before he was
brought up for examination. This delay as to Scott,
was suggested to be o ith a view to render him instru-
mental to the apprehension of Prichard, who had
absconded, and was not yet brought to justice.
The same information given by Stoffell led to the ap-
prehension of Keppell, who, being brought before the
Justice, desired to hear Stoffell's statement read over
to him, which was accordingly done. He was about
make an admission tending to implicate himself,
when the Magistrate, at the suggestion of Mr. An-
drews, the. Counsel, who was attending the Office at
Union Hall; upon another case, told him that any
confession or statement he should make would be ad-
duced in evidence against him on his trial ; he there-
fore declined saying anything. The accomplice Scott
made a full confession of the robbery and murder,
which, in the details, did not differ materially from
the statement of Stoffell. Throughout the whole
transaction it was quite manifest that the death of
the deceased was not originally contemplated, and
that the fatal termination of her life seemed to have
arisen from a(}esire to prevent any interruption whilst
the desperate gang were accomplishing the robbery.
A great number of witnesses were examined in sup-
port of the fourth head of evidence, with a view to
corroborate the accomplice and the confession of the
prisoner SLoffell. It was stated by the accomplice
that the plunder had been sold to a man named Par-
kins, who kept an iron-stall and rat Shop in Ball-
alley, in the Mint, in the Borough. This person was
called as a witness, but denied all knowledge of the
transaction.

In the course of the trial, Mr. Serjeant Omsr.ow
animadverted in strong terms of reprehension upon
the practice of publishing Police Reports of cases'
!Nought ex-paste before the Magistrates, and ob-
served that it was a matter which ought to be taken
notice of by the Attorney-General. In the time of
Mr. Wallace, the Attorney-General, no such publica-
tions ever took place.
The case for the prosecution being closed, the pri-
soners were called upon for their defence. The pri-
soner Keppel replied that he had nothing to say, but
that he was entirely innocent of this murder.
The prisoner S.offell said that he !rad nothing to
add to what he had already spoken.
Mr. Serjeant ONsLow then summed up the evi-
dence with the greatest minuteness.
The Jury asked leave to retire, and, after being
absent about 35 minutes, returned with a verdict of
Guilty against both prisoners.
The Clerk of the Arraigns then asked the prisoners
, what they had to say why sentence of death should
not be pasted upon there
On their giving no answer, silence was proclaimed
in Court, and Mr. Serjeant ()snow having put on ,
the black cap, proceeded to address them In nearly
the following terms: " You Philip Stoffell, and you
Charles Keppell, after an investigation into your case,
full and as minute as it was possible to be by a
Jury, who, as I could not help observing, paid the
most unwearied attention to the mass of evidence
which came before them, have; after due deliberation
on the part of that Jury, bad a verdict of Guilty re-
turned against you both. Yours, Charles Keppell,,
there can be no doubt, was the hand which occa-
sioned the death of this unfortunate old woman, and
immediately afterwards, when an expression was used
indicative of a hope that she had not been murdered,
you used language which shews a heart the most un-
feeling and the most depraved. When you were

asked whether the life of this poor defenceless oli
woman was or was not taken away you said, in terms
which I cannot repeat, ' What odds is it !' I did
not think that there was any being in human shape,
who could talk in a straiu of such levity of such an
atrocious crime within so short an interval after its
commission. Philip Stoffell, though you were not the
immediate cause of the death of this aged woman,
still you were the planner and contriver of this trans-
action, which terminated so fatally, and therefore for
all its lamentable consequences you art justly answer-
able. Your case is marked with many circumstances
of aggravation. You stood in a situation of consan-
guinity to the unfortunate deceased. Whether you
knew her or not, I cannot say; but you were the
means of getting admission into the house, and there-
fore unto you her death is principally owing."
The Learned JUDGE then stated the sentence, or-
dering their execution on Monday next, and giving
over their bodies to the surgeons for dissection.
The trial closed at half-past six in the evening.
Both the prisoners, during the time that the Jury
were deliberating on their verdict, and also at the.l
moment when it was delivered in, and subsequently
whilst the Judge was passing sentence upon them,
presented an aspect almost entirely unmoved. There
was, however, a transient flushing of blood under
the eye, an involuntary biting of the lip, and also a
slight convulsive tremor in the cheeks of Keppell,
which shewed that, however hrmight wish to hide it,
he still was agitated by some strong internal feeling.
There was something peculiarly daring and reckless
in his glance during the whole continuance of the
trial; and yet we are inclined to think that if it had
not been for a.catlike slyness, with which he some-
times eyed the witnesses that were produced against
him, an indifferent spectator would have judged,
from his countenance, that he was a person whose
habits were that in general of a mild and gentle de-
scription. Of the innate ferocity of his disposition,
however, few doubted who heard the evidence offered
at his trial. if there were any persons in whose minds
even the shadow of a doubt lingered, it was entirely
removed by his exclamation to the Court on leaving
it. As he descended the steps by which the prisoners
leave the bar, he apostrophised the Learned Judge
who had tried him, as a " b—y old rogue," and
damned him and his b—y laws together. The ap-
pearance of Stoffell was much more savage than that
of Keppell, but did not exhibit that careless hardihood
which strtick you so forcibly in contemplating the
features of his companion. His conduct during the
trial was perfectly correct, add he frequently seemed
impressed with a full sense of the dangerous situation
in which he stood.

We are informed that the property of Mrs. Rich-
ards has been considerably overrated in some of the
Public Journals. Her whole income consisted of a
life annuity of £75, out of which she had contrived
by great parsimony to save a considerable sum. A
legacy of £4OO, with all her silver plate, was left to
Mrs. Martha Hooke, Stoffell's aunt, who appeared
against him on the trial, and another of £2OO to Stof-
felt's mother, with all the furniture found in her house
at Clapham. The old Lady had not seen Stoffell for
seven years, and it is supposed he was, at the time of
the murder, hardly known to her.
Part of the scaffolding on which the spectators
stood gave way during the trial, but no person was
seriously hurt by it.
John Lawrence was indicted on Thursday, under
Lord Ellenborough's Act, for stabbing James Tay-
lor the younger, at Kingstou-upon-Thames, on the
17th of May last, with intent to murder him. Two
other counts varied the terms of the charge accord-
ing to the language of the Statute.
Mr. LAW colkducted the prosecution, and called
several witnesses, from whose testimony it appeared
that the parties were in a bumble condition of life.
The prisoner had mart ied the prosecutor's sister. In
consequence of a complaint that the prisoner had ill
used his wife, the prosecutor called upon him, to re-
monstrate with him upon his conduct. Some angry
words ensued ' • the prosecutor reproached the prisoner
for ill using his wife, and told him he must amend
his behaviour ; the prisoner damned his own eyes,
and told the prosecutor he had better mind his own
business, and not interfere between man and wife. In
reply to this, the prosecutor tauntingly told the pri-
soner he need not damn his own eyes, for be had but
one, which was the fact. This incensed the prisoner,
who aimed a blow at the prosecutor, but did not
hit him. The mother of the prosecutor, who was
present, beard the prisoner say he would do for
the prosecutor, and she advised the latter to get out
of the way, for the prisoner had a knife under his coat.
The prosecutor did riot take the advice, but immedi-
ately struck the prisoner; a scuffle ensued ; both fell
as the ground, the prosecu for being uppermost ; when
the later arose, he observed blood issuing through
his coat from his side, and then perceived that he
was wounded. The prosecutor deposed, that he was
not sensible of the wound till be saw the blood, and
did not know but he might have fallen upon the
knife which the prisoner had* his hand. Upon this
statement of facts—

Mt.
Seijeant ONst.nw charged the Jury, that the
prisoner was entitled to an acquittal on two grounds ;
first, that supposing death had ensued, the offence
would only have amounted to manslaughter; and
second, it was at least doubtfUl whether the prosecu-
tor, in the scuffle, had not falleAto4 the knife, without
any malicious intention on thesurtsof.the prisoner.
The Jury found the prisoner INDS Gray.

• DERBY..
THE KING, ON THE PROSECUTION-OF COOKE V. SMITH.
This case, which occupied the Court four hours,
was an indictment for 'A libel, brought by the noto-
rious James SLatilp Sutton Cooke, against Mr. Smith,
the publisher of the Pottery Gazette and Newcastk-
under-Lyme E. of which Mr. Amphlett is pr'
prietor. Justifications of the several libels we
pleaded ; and, after the,ptiblicatiorthad been prninedr
the justifications were its osoit parts established..(o'
The Learned Judge etpressed himself to the.*
that if there was a 'Mallet t:biktharY a farthing iiither
realm, he should thiek.itfrilltlsidEcient for the ptilti=
tiff.—Verdict for thi.pliiiritifr,:-Vite Farthing Ott. t'
:pi two counts, andfc*.Vialalitefidaat generailiv.
the others.
~: • ..- tit:•-
.Et " '
coOlfi V. 'ampt. •-.
This was another indictment, iirriilat to thepie
Ceding, of flies ame party, but the plaintiff Witfi; so'
fie wetiejfed with the result of the formers, 'chit he
consented to have the same verdict recorded. • ,