The Sun. — 1844-06-15 (London, England)

BODIUN—I opened the door for the prisoner, and afterwards was placed in the same cell. I offered him some bread and cheese, but the prisoner said he was so agitated that night that he could not eat any. He then said that if a reward were offered he should choose his man to give himself up to. Superintendent Bicknell, of the V Division, produced some papers. William Daniel Andrews, deceased's brother, said that his sister's boa was so saturated with blood that he destroyed it. He had, likewise, for the same reason, burned her white straw bonnet. Her age was 45 years and three months. Police-constable Langton produced the shawl and dress worn by deceased on the evening of the 29th April. William Connor, M.D., Battersea, proved the female's death, and the cause of it. He should think, from the situation and appearance of the wound, that it was not inflicted by herself. The letters were then put in and read. (Such portions of those letters as are fit for publication have already appeared in our report of the examination before the Magistrate at Wandsworth). Mr. Wflainis then addressed the jury in a most effective speech. He said, that in rising on behalf of the prisoner, he was encountering a fearful responsibility, partly in consequence of the fair, straightforward, and impassioned manner in which his Learned Friend, her Majesty's Solicitor-General had stated the case; and more, in consequence of the witnesses called into that box (the brother and sister of the deceased.) In consequence of the mental suffering, they appeared to feel, it was quite natural that they (the jury)' should turn with a feeling of overwhelming indignation to the unfortunate man at the bar whom they were given to understand was the cause of all that suffering. But he (Mr. Wilkins) trusted that they would bear in mind that the evidence produced had been wholly circumstantial, and though the case as advanced for the prosecution was barely possible, yet he begged to remind the gentlemen appointed to examine into those circumstances, that they must not judge of the innocence or guilt of the prisoner from mere possibilities. Let them examine the case, as stated by his Learned Friend. The Learned Barrister then dissected the evidence in detail, and contended that the words spoken by the deceased were merely the unconnected ravings of a mind, weakened by loss of blood, and mechanically uttering sounds which, because spoken by those around, vibrated upon her ear also; for was it at all likely that if she had been cut and injured by the man with whom she had been passing the evening, her exclamation to Hall, the toll-keeper, and to other persons, would have been, "See, how some one has used me." He thought that great caution was necessary in admitting the evidence of the coalporter, Cooke, who had so positively sworn to the identity of the prisoner with the man who called, "Police, police !" on the night of the murder. He wished particularly to call their attention to this part of the case. The little boy, Evans, who ran for the surgeon, to the Chelsea Old Church, did not observe the witness Cooke at the place he stated that he was standing at. He did, indeed, see one young man whom he had never seen again. How did this harmonise with Cooke's evidence ? Ile thought the simple fact was—that Mr. Mullins, who had also run to Chelsea for a surgeon, and who wore a dark frock coat and a broad-brimmed hat, was the very man who called " police," and whom the witness Cooke supposed to be the prisoner. They knew that it was a feeling with the lower classes to overrate and exaggerate facts, where they were supposed to militate against a man placed in the same situation, and charged with a henious crime, as the prisoner was. The Learned Gentleman concluded a powerful address, by imploring the jurymen to lean towards the side of mercy to remember, that though their erring judgments might fail, yet an all-seeing eye would, if the prisoner were guilty, pursue him, and an omnipotent -and an all-powerful and unerring arm would punish his secret crime ; but that if they had reason afterwards to repent of a too severe verdict, it would be when repentance would be too late. The