Denton and Haughton Examiner, etc. — 1889-01-12 (Denton, Greater Manchester, England)

BRADFORD.  At Bradford Borough Police-court, on the 2nd inst., William Barrett, milkman, aged 23, was again brought up in custody on suspicion of having murdered the boy Gill. Mr. Armitage presided, and there was a full attendance of magistrates. It having become known that important evidence would be given, great public interest was evinced in the case, and many people were unable to obtain admission to the court. The prisoner, on entering the dock, displayed remarkable nonchalance, but as the day wore on and new facts were disclosed ; his demeanour underwent considerable alteration, I and during the whole of the afternoon he leaned as : far forward as possible and followed the evidence with eager attention. Mr. Withers, chief constable, conducted the case on behalf of the police. Mr. Craven, solicitor, appeared for the prisoner, and Mr. Freeman, solicitor, watched the case on behalf of the relatives of the deceased. Mr. Withers, in his opening statement, briefly re' capitulated the circumstances under which the deceased left home on Thursday morning, and then proceeded to give an outline of the new evidence which he proposed to submit. He said witnesses would be called to prove that the boy was in Barrett's cart after the time the prisoner said he left it. It was a peculiar thing that prior to the morning in question the boy had never gone home to breakfast when he had been round with Barrett. It seemed odd that he should have done so on Thursday. A witness would be called who would state positively that Gill delivered milk at her house for Barrett shortly before ten o'clock that morning, and three persons would come forward and state that they had seen Barrett with the deceased after half. past six, when the prisoner said the boy left him. It would be proved that although the prisoner said he did not leave home between ten on Thursday night and seven on Friday morning, he was seen walking from his house in the direction of the stable at :half-past five on Friday morning. Another witness would swear that there was a light in the stable at twenty-five minutes put six. On Friday evening Mrs. Gill met the prisoner, and asked if he knew where her boy was. She added, " You will have to know, for the detectives are coming up in the morning, and you will have to tell them something." The prisaner replied" All right," andwalked away. A draper, who passedthestable on the way home at night, would prove that there was a light in the building at eleven that night, and another witness who lived at the Servants' Home at the back of the stable would give I important evidence respecting the noises she heard during the same night. At half-past six on Saturday , morning Barrett called on Mr. Gill, and it would be , shown that he was then going towards his home and not coming from it, as might have been expected. In coming down the street, moreover, the prisoner must have passed within 40 yards of the spot where the body was found an hour later. The state of the deceased's clothes was sufficient to show that he was not murdered in the street but in some I building. Three pieces of textile fabric had been I discovered in the stable, and in one case at least the borough analyst had found blood thereon. The most serious part of the case was the question of motive, and in this connection the nature of the mutilation was a matter which was very material. Police and other evidence having been given bearing out the Chief Constable's statement, the proceedings were adjourned for another week. Mr. Craven protested against so long an adjournment, but Mr. Withers intimated that it was absolutely necessary for the police to have a considerable period to complete their investigations. Moreover the case was of so serious a character that it would be necessary for him to consult with the Treasury about it.