Star. — 1822-08-10 (London, England)

CROWN SIDE.  Robert Peat was indicted for the murder of Robert Peat, his own relation, to whom the prisoner was heir at laW.—Mrs. Peat, widow of the deceased, deposed, that her hu band was possessed of some small property, which he had disposed of by will some years ago, in distribution between the prisoner, the witness, and other relations. The precise disposition of the property was not known to the prisoner, and his display of anxiety to know this had much displeased the deceased, and determined him to revoke his former will, by which he made more ample provision for her, his wife. This he executed in August, 1815. This circumstance coming to the knowledge of the prisoner, it would appear had engendered feelings of revenge. He disguised his disappointment, however, regularly calling on the witness and her husband every Monday at Darlington, in this county, where they lived, and • generally at a time when he knew they were absent from home, attending the market. On Monday, the 17th of June, the witness purchased some lamb, and having put it on the fire for broth, she went out, and was followed on her return by the prisoner, who said he had been at her house timing her absence, and asked her if she had read in the Newspapers of some persons having been poisoned by bad water. She (lid not mach attend to the observation at that time. The prisoner having left the house, some pieces of broken phial were found upon the hearth, but this did not then excite suspicion. The aged couple at their usual hour sat down to dinner (the deceased was upwards of 76),— They both observed the lamb which they ate had a peculiar taste; and in about half an hour after the  • deceased was 'seized with a veinitmg • and violent pains, and at half-past twelve that night he expired. The witness herself was likewise extremely from a smaller portion of the lamb which she ate, and in consequence kept her bed till after her husband's death.. The prisoner called to inquire after the health of the parties on the afternoon of the same day on which he had poisoned the broth. It was afterwards suspected this was to ascertain whether his diabolical purpose had been effected. On the same evening it appeared a female, named Mary Smithwaite, and ate some of the lamb for her supper, and was dangerously ill for several days after. The same effect was experienced by Sarah Stainsby, who likewise partook of the lamb. It was not till after all these had felt the effects of the poison that suspicion fell upon the prisoner, and that the meat had been poisoned by him. Another witness, named Blinkerton, deposed, that the prisoner said to him, 4, There was an old woman (meaning Mrs. Peat) in the town of Darlington, who wished to wrong him out of his brass, but he would take care to watch her out and get possession of the old man's will," (meaning the deceased); and afterwards told the witness he had succeeded. This was on the morning the deceased was poisoned ; the prisoner likewise exhibited a bottle, which he said contained laudanum, which he wished the old woman to take.—A witness of the name of Cradock deposed that the prisoner confessed the murder to him by means of a bottle of laudanum. Mr. Smith, a druggist, of Darlington, deposed that the prisoner called on him on the morning of the 14th of June, and purchased an ounce of laudanum, which he said was for some Ladies at Middlethorp. The prisoner since called at witness's shop, and asked him if he knew him? adding, that he was blamed about Robert Peat, the deceased. Witness acknowledged the prisoner purchased the laudanum of him. The prisoner being found guilty, Mr. HOLT moved in arrest of judgment, on the ground that the prisoner did not know that the broth was intended to be drank by the deceased. The CHIEI JUSTICE, after consulting with Mr. Baron WOOD, from the other Court, decided against the objection.—The prisoner was sentenced to be exe; cuted, and his body given for dissection.