The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle. — 1867-04-13 (Stourbridge, West Midlands, England)

WAGER OF BATTEL.  Mr. O'Neill, writing to the Herald of Peace, says that ha thinks the readers of that journal will be interested in hearing that a poor old man died in Birmingham on Friday, February 18, one event of whose history forms an important mark in the progress of civilisation in England ; especially as relating to the old barbarous mode of settling disputes, and trying causes by the "Wager of Battel."  The deceased William Ashford was the last person who was challenged in an English court, to meet, in single combat, a man whom he had accused as the murderer of his sister. The circumstances attending the murder, and the subsequent trials at Warwick and London, are most peculiar; and seem more like a romantic tale of the middle ages than a real case occurring in your own day. On the 26th of May, 1817, a beautiful young woman named Mary Ashford, in her 20th year, went tea dance at Erdington, without proper protection. She left the festive scene at a late hour accompanied by a young man named Abraham Thornton, a farmer's son in the neighbourhood. They were last seen talking together at a stile near the place, but next morning she was found dead in a pit of water; and there were fearful evidences that she had been abused, violated, and murdered. General suspicion pointing to Thornton he was arrested and tried for murder at Warwick Assizes in August; but though strong circumstantial evidence was against him, the defence, which was an alibi, obtained a verdict of "Not Guilty." The feeling of surprise and indignation at his acquittal was so intense that a new trial was called for, and an appeal was ,nitered against the verdict by William Ashford, the brother, and next of kin to the murdered girl. Thornton was again apprehended and sent to London in November, to be tried before Lord Ellenborough and the full court of Queen's I:ench. . .  Instead of regular defence by arguments, evidences, and witnesses, Thornton boldly defied all present modes of jurisdiction, and claimed his right, according to ancient cur torn, to challenge his accuser to fight him, and decide his innocence or guilt by the " wager of battel." His answer to the question of the court was, "Not guilty, and I am ready to defend the same by my body." He accompanied these words by the old act of taking off his glove and throwing it down upon the floor of the court. At this stage of the proceedings William Ashford, who was in court, actually came forward, and was about to accept the challenge by picking up the glove, when he was kept back by those about him; not only because single combat was soforeiga to the spiritand custom of the age, but also because of thestriking inequality in the appearance and strength of the accuser and accused; for William Ashford was but a youth, weak, awl small in Etat ure while Thornton, the supposed murderer, was a p owerftil num. With what wonder did the assembly, and indeed the nation, ask, "Can a prisoner insist on Sc obsolete is ntode of trial in such a time of light as the nineteenth century I" But with greater wonder awl regret was the judgment of the court received; for, after several adjournments, it was deuided, in April, 1818, that the law of England was in favour of the "wager of hattel ; " that the ohl laws sanctioning it haul never been repealed; and that though this mode of trial had become obsolete, it must still be allowed.