The Sun. — 1845-01-09 (London, England)

CORONER—Are there any witnesses for the defendant ? Mr. Chambers—l tender no evidence. There is in fact, no one who can be strictly called the defendant. The CORONER then proceeded to read his summing up from a paper which he held in his hand. He was sorry that the inquiry had been so long protracted, and he was also sorry that there had been any publication of the evidence. He begged the jury to attend solely to the evidence, and to be misled by no vague newspapers reports, but to give the verdict in accordance with the depositions, and with the depositions only. There were many declarations which were not evidence; but Starkie laid it down, that a declaration accompanying an act might be taken as part of the act itself. (The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to read the evidence, and in relation to the evidence of the witness Moss, he said that he had it on the deposition that she lived at 93, Crawfordstreet, and that the report that she had lived at 45, Crawford-street, which had been contradicted in the Times, and on the subject of which he had received a letter from a person residing at 45, Crawford-street, was not correct, and had originated in the error of the reporter, for she herself had stated that she lived at No. 93.) There was no direct evidence as to the administration of any poison to the deceased, but there was indirect evidence sufficient to enable them to form an opinion. There were the means found in the late deceased's house by which poison might have been administered to her without her knowledge, and that she had swallowed poison was evident. Although it was possible that she might have swallowed the poison knowingly herself, still it was very improbable. She was seen by White and Marlow at half-past six in the evening well, and in good spirits. The next aceount they had of her was from Mrs. Ashlee, who, between six and seven o'clock, heard deceased's stifled screams, and on running out met John Tawell coming from deceased's cottage and asked what was the matter with her neighbour, but could get no reply. Now, it was a most important fact that a man should have left her in the agonies of death without giving any alarm. It was evident that the poison had been administered after the stout had been fetched, and that the poison was quick and most deadly in its effects. If a man wilfully laid poison in the way of a person and it was taken, that was murder, but if it were taken accidentally there was no murder. Now, with regard to the evidence affecting the priioner, Mrs Ashlee saw the Quaker-looking person coming from the door while the deceased wes in the agonies of death, and she recognised John Tawell as that person. It was also an important fact, that on the Monday when the prisoner was with deceased, Keziah Harding had heard him ask her if she should be alone the next time he called on the Wednesday or Thursday. They should also recollect that a description of the Quaker had been forwarded by the telegraph to London, and that by the description he had been followed and arrested, and that when arrested, he said he had not been at Slough the day before. There was no direct evidence to show who had administered the poison to the deceased; but circumstantial evidence in many cases was of much greater cogency. If they had any doubt as to the guilt of John Tawell, they would give him the benefit of that doubt ; but if they had no moral doubt as to his guilt, it would be their duty to say so by their verdict, without regard to his station in society. The room was then cleared, and the jury, after remaining in deliberation for three-quarters of an hour, returned a verdict of WILFUL MURDER against JOHN TAWELL for poisoning Sarah Hart with prussic acid.