npedrazzini/19thc_murder_suicide_news huggingface dataset:
The Sun. — 1845-01-10 (London, England)

LONDON, FRIDAY, JANUARY 10, 1845.  Another striking illustration of the mischievous working of the game-laws has recently occurred in the neighbourhood of the city of Worcester. It seems that one Thomas STAITE, who had been hired to watch the game in the preserves of the Earl ef COVENTRY, was met on the night of the 19th of December, while in the discharge of his perilous duty, by a gang of poachers, by whom he was so roughly used, together with others of his party, that he died shorty after of the severe blows he received in the scuffle. An inquest was immediately held on the body of the murdered man, which, from a deficiency of positive evidence, was adjourned to the 7th el January, on which day the jury returned a verdict of wilful murder against two of the poachers, JOSEPH TURVEY and FRANCIS DINGLEY, and some other persons at present unknown. On the close of the inquiry a very important and significant circumstance occurred. One of the jurors deemed it to be his bounden duty to address some strong remarks to thy Coroner and his fellow-jurymen on the subject of the game-laws, which were so intimately connected with the investigation. He observed that the ghastly spectacle which they had witnessed at the commencement of their proceedings in the mangled corpse of STAITE, to say nothing of the revolting details given by the several witnesses who had been examined, could not fail to have excited in them emotions of the deepest sorrow and disgust; and though he was perfectly aware that their duties as jurors were limited to an inquiry as to how the luckless gamekeeper came by his death, yet he thought that they could not con scientiously overlook the cause which had led to so fatal a catastrophe ; and he therefore proposed that they should append to their verdict a declaration of their sentiments to the following effect :—" That the 11 jury cannot but deplore the continuance of laws so immoral in their tendency, so fruitful in crime, and so destructive to human life as the game-laws have proved, after long experience throughout the length and breadth of the country, and that they strongly recommend their abrogation." Several jurymen expressed their cordial concurrence in these sentiments, and all of them unhesitatingly signed the declaration, which the Coroner promised to forward to the Home Secretary of State; while one of the jurors added, that our gaols were half-filled with offenders against the game-laws, for the shooting and snaring of hares, pheasants, partridges, B‘c , was a great temptation to the lower orders, who could not be brought to believe that such an offence was any moral crime. This decided, deliberate expression of their sentiments on the subject of the execrable game-laws, does infinite credit to the Worcester jury, and we hope that at every future inquest of a similar nature—and they are of frequent occurrence—which may take place in the country, their example will be closely followed. It is only by keeping the grievance constantly before the public eye that we can entertain any hope of its removal, for the number of those who take a deep
The Sun. — 1845-01-10 (London, England)

ATTEMPTED MURDER. At the Bury sessions, on Monday last, John Warburton, who keeps a house of bad character, m Hamer's-yard, near Clerk-street, was brought up, charged with attempting to shoot a young woman, named Martha Ackers, and then endeavouring to murder her, by striking her with the butt-end of the gun. The complainant, a young woman, about twenty-three years of age, said she had lived at John Warburton's house for about six weeks. She went to his house on Saturday night last, about half-past ten o'clock. When she ,entered the house, she saw Warburton, an old man, and a woman, named Alice Ashworth, who lived with him. As soon as she entered, he rose from his seat, and pointed the gun ; it dii not go off. He then struck her with the but end of the gun, and felled her to the ground. She believed it was his intention to shoot her ; for he came into William Walker's (formerly Jenkin son's) beer-house, in Clerk-street, about nine o'clock, and then said he would shoot her. Complainant put Mrs. Ashworth to bed, about five o'clock on Saturday night ; she was tipsy, and they had some words. Eliza Walker said, she saw the prisoner at half-past nine o'clock on Saturday evening in his own house ; he had a gun in his hand. He said, " You are welcome to come into my house at any time, but if Martha Ackers comes any more, I will shoot her." Prisoner then told her the gun was loaded, and said that Martha had been insulting his mistress. He appeared to have had some liquor. Witness then left the house from fear. Isaac Ramsden, a labourer on the Manchester, Bury, and Rossendale Railway, said he went to Walker's beer-house, in Clerk-street, on Saturday evening, and also into the yard leading into the yard where the prisoner resides. He heard a noise, and seeing some boys run, went towards the prisoner's house to see what was the matter. He saw the prisoner with a gun in his hand, and heard him say he would shoot the prosecutrix. He pointed the gun at her, and the next moment he turned the butt-end, and struck her several times on the head ; she fell to the ground, and bled very much. A young man named William Turner, and witness, then went in and took the gun from him They hadgreat difficulty in getting it from him ; they each " loosed" a hand. He was very determined. The young woman, Martha Ackers, was quite insensible. She lay on the floor bleeding for several minutes. Edmund Yates, a boy fifteen years of age, said the prisoner sent him on Saturday evening last to Mr. Peel's, ironmonger, for a pennyworth of powder, a pennyworth of shot, and a halfpennyworth of caps. After he had bought them, prisoner began to load the gun, saying he would shoot Martha (meaning prosecutrix) ; this was a few minutes before nine o'clock on Saturday evening. Mr. Superintendent Henhall produced the gun, which was loaded with powder and shot. He found the prosecutrix in the the prisoner's house on Saturday night, about half-past ten o'clock. Prisoner was committed for trial at the next Liverpool assizes.— Manchester Guardian.  IMPROVEMENT of the
The Sun. — 1845-05-30 (London, England)

POLICE INTELLIGENCE GUILDHALL.  Yesterday Thomas Cox, a dock labourer, living in Whitecross-street, was brought before Mr. Alderman Challis, charged with assaulting his son, George Cox, with a poker. Hannah Cox, the wife, a decent-looking woman, said she was frequently beaten by her husband. He was in the habit of spending what he earned, and this led to strife at home. She did not wish to punish him far the assault upon herself, but she rather came to give evidence for her son, who was married and living separate from them. Her husband had beaten her, and she was lying on the bed on Monday when her son came up. He saw what had happened, and said it was no man that would beat a woman. Her husband started up, and ordered him to leave the room. The son replied he had called to see his mother, and he should ,not go. Her husband took up the poker, and struck him with it. It was feared her son was seriously injured, and the father was taken into custody by the police. George Cox, whose arm was in a sling, stated that upon calling to see his mother he heard below stairs that his father ,had been beating her dreadfully. He went up stairs, and found her lying on the bed with her hair hanging loose about. He asked her what was the matter ? She replied, " Nothing ;" but his .father said he would not put up with her abuse. Witness told him he did not behave like a man to her. His father seized the poker, sad ordered him to leave the room. This he refused to do, and his father struck at his head with the poker. Witness warded the blow off with his arm. He was obliged to go to the doctor, who said his arm was not broken, but the bone was severely injured. Mr. Alderman Cl:lslam told the prisoner this appeared to be an aggravated assault, and he should be glad to hear anything he could offer in excuse. The prisoner replied, when a son lifted his arm against his father, what would not a man do ? He admitted he struck at the wainscoat in a moment of irritation. He had a most abusive wife, who gave him " tongue-pie" for supper, and tongue again at breakfast. His case would draw sympathy from every gentleman in Court if he could tell it. His sun told him in his own place that he had been " at his tricks again, and he would not have it." Mr. Alderman CHALLIS said, however much his wife might abuse him, it would not justify the resort to blows; and if he did not learn to control his temper, he would commit murder some day and be hanged. He had nearly committed that crime even now upon his own son. He should commit him to the sessions, as the magistrates there could punish him more severely than magistrates sitting out of sessions. He ordered defendant to find bail, himself in 201., and two sureties in 10/.. each. The prisoner was committed in default of sureties.
The Sun. — 1845-05-30 (London, England)

POLICE INTELLIGENCE. GUILDHALL. Yesterday Thomas Cox, a dock labourer, living in Whitecross-street, was brought before Mr. Alderman Challis, charged with assaulting his son, George Cox, with a poker. Hannah Cox, the wife, a decent-looking woman, said she was frequently beaten by her husband. He was in the habit of spending what he earned, and this led to st,-ife at home. She did not wish to punish him for the -11, upon herself, but she rather came to give evidence or her son, who was married and living separate from them. Her husband had beaten her, and she was lying on the bed on Monday when her son came up. He saw what had happened, and said it was no man that would beat a woman. Her husband started up, and ordered him to leave the room. The son replied he had called to see his mother, and he should not go. Her husband took up the poker, and struck him with it. It was feared her son was seriously injured. and the father was taken into custody by the police. George Cox, whose arm was in a sling, stated that upon calling to see his mother ho heard below stairs that his father had been beating her dreadfully. Ile went up stairs, and found her lying on the bed with her hair hanging loose about. He asked her what was the matter ? She replied, " Nothing ;" but his father said ho would not put up with her abuse. Witness told him he did not behave like a man to her. His father seized the poker, and ordered him to leave the room. This he refused to do, and his father struck at his head with the poker. Witness warded the blow off with his arm. He was obliged to go to the doctor, who said his arm was not broken, but the bone was severely injured. Mr. Alderman CHALLIS told the prisoner this appeared to be an aggravated assault, and he should be glad to hear anything he could offer in excuse. The prisoner replied, when a son lifted his arm against his father, what would not a man do ? He admitted he struck at the wainscoat in a moment of irritation. He had a most abusive wife, who gave him " tongue-pie" for supper, and tongue again at breakfast. His case would draw sympathy from every gentleman in Court if he could tell it. His sun told him in his own place that he had been " at his tricks again, and he would not have it." Mr. Alderman CHALLIS said, however much his wife might abuse him, it would not justify the resort to blows; and if he did not learn to control his temper, he would commit murder some day and be hanged. He had nearly committed that crime even now upon his own son. Ile should commit him to the sessions, as the magistrates there could punish him more severely than magistrates sitting out of sessions. He ordered defendant to find bail, himself in 201, and two sureties in 101. each. The prisoner was committed in default of sureties.
The Sun. — 1845-04-16 (London, England)

THAMES POLICE.  CITAIIGE OF MITIIDER.--An Irishman , named Simon a glass-blower, who is about 29 years of age, was brought before Mr. Ballantine, charged with the wilful murder of Jane Thruesell, in a low lodging-house, kept girl, and the circumtntdhe rof whiche it took place, have caused by a woman named Sheehan, in Blue Anchor-yard, unfortunate Boesmary-lane, Whiteehapel. The d great excitement in the district. The place where the murder took place is a narrow. dirty, ill-paved alley, leading out stances eia of Rosemary dane, which is chiefly inhabited by the lower classes of the Irish, who have made a lodgment in a great number of dilapidated tenements, few of which possess any legal owners. In the house, No. 5, Blue Anchor-yard, one of the dirtiest, and most ruinous of the Irish freeholds, the prisoner lodged, with many others, in the midst of filth and pestilence. From the evidtsice it ap peered that the deceased, a Yorkshire girl, who came from Newsholin, near Howden, about six months ago, lodged in the same house, and was in the receipt of an allowance of 4s. per week, which was forwarded to her monthly by her friends in the north. On Friday morn• ing, about half-past ten o'clock, the prisoner came home drunk, and enterid the room where Mrs. Sheehan, the landlady, and the deceased were in bed. Mrs. Sheehan asked Hill for some rent, aid he refused to pay her any. They began quarrelling, and the prisoner threw various things at Sheehan, and they abused each other grossly At last the prisoner took up a chair and hurled it at the landlady ; it missed her and struck the deceased, who was lying down at the foot of the brd. She immediately exclaimed, " Oh, Simon, you have hurt me ; yam have struck me on the head !" and she began vomiting. The prisoner immediately left the room. The deceased lingered about three hours, when she expired, and the Irish people in the house immediately laid out the corpse, anti commenced the preparations for waking the body, although the girl did not belong to religi©~ their country or I' • ttempts were made to conceal the circumstances of her death, but on the same evening Inspector Donegan and police-srgeant Hobert O'Brien received information which induced them to visit the h use, and found the body of the deceased laid out in the usual way. There were six men, of whom the prisener was one, and a female in the room, and Mrs. Sheehan was lying on the bed alongside the corpse in a beastly state of intoxication. The other parties ware also very drunk and noisy. Mr. Garrett, a surgeon, of the New-road, was called in, and examined the body. He had not made a posi mortent examination, and could not take upon himself to speak positively as to the cause of death. As it was necessary to obtain the attendance of several other persons, the prisoner was remanded till Thursday next.
The Sun. — 1845-08-11 (London, England)

CROWN COURT.  Mr. Justice Coltman i;ok his seat in bourt at nine o'clock, and proceeded to try John Foley for two rapes, committed upon two children at Dunkenfield. . . .  The offence was committed and the prisoner taken into custody so long ago as the sth of December in the last year. In consequence, however, of the defective education of one girl, and the deplorable ignorance of the other, the Learned Judge who presided in the criminal court at the last assizes for this county felt it necessary, for the purposes of justice, to remand the prisoner to the present assires, in order that the children might be sent to school. Of course the evidence adduced in the case was of a character quite unfitted for the pablie eye, and we shall not give it. Sufficient evidence was given to justify the jury in returning a verdict of guilty of an aggravated assault, and the prisoner was sentenced to two years' imprisonment in Knutsford House of Correction. His Lordship was next occupied some time in trying another of this class of cases ; but at the suggestion of the Judge the Attorney-General abandoned the charge, and the prisoner was acquitted. The business of the assizes came to a close at seven o'clock, the services of the second list of jurors not being called into requisition.  NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Carlisle, Ang. 7. The two charges of murder, the one against Jane Crosby, and the other against John Graham, at these assizes, have caused quite a ferment in this town and its vicinity. Yesterday, during the trial of the former, which lasted from the commencement to the close of the day, not only the whole Court, but every passage around it, and even the street, were crowded with people. Jane Crosby was acquitted after a short deliberation among the jury, who retired fur but a few minutes. She was defended by Mr. Wilkins. The principal facts deposed to were, that she had held her little child upon the fire for such a time as to cause it to be burnt so severely that ,it died of the injuries thus sustained. But it had already been partially burnt by its clothes accidentally taking fire, after which the mother had first extinguished the flame, and then, as stated by the other daughter, a child of 11, she had put the living child upon the fire and held it there. In this case the Court concluded in the view taken by Mr. Wilkins, the defending counsel, namely, that although the prisoner was shown to have been rendered in a manner crazy from the habit of drinking, and had treated both her children with occasional great harshness, there was much inconsistency in her conduct if she really intended to put the child to death. It was suggested to the jury as being not at all improbable that she in fact, so placed the child in order to " draw the fire out," which had already been communicated to the child's body, it being a common notion with some people that such means of " counteraction" will be efficacious. ( Before Mr. Baron
The Sun. — 1845-12-04 (London, England)

THE PIRACY AND MURDER CASE.  Sir J. DopsoN (in continuation from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday) said—lt was urged on the other side, that the capture was not made in accordance with the instructions issued to the Royal Navy under the treaties; but it must be remembered that these instructions were altered when the convention of 1830 was agreed to, and for his part he thought the seizure in question in no way violated them. He admitted that this country had no right to punish these prisoners as pirates at all, but it had the right of capturing a vessel suspected to be engaged in the slave-trade for examination, and if the crew of such vessel committed an offence after such capture, they rendered themselves amenable to the laws of this country. That was the case here, and therefore he contended that this country, having a right to capture, and the capture itself having been properly effected, the prisoners had laid themselves open to the vengeance of the English laws by the murder of Mr. Palmer subsequent to the seizure of the Felicidade. In a time of war it often occurred that neutral vessels were captured, but he had yet to learn that the crews of those vessels, following out the argument of his Learned Friend on the other side, had a right to disregard the privileges of the British flag, and murder the whole or any of their captors to recover their vessel. It was objected that the Echo was not captured by a lieutenant in her Majesty's Royal Navy, or by a vessel having certain instructions on board. Now he should contend that the Echo was captured by a jolly-boat of the Wasp, acting under the directions of Lieutenant Stupart, commander of the Wasp, but before the capture could be made by the jolly-boat, the Echo struck, and how it could be objected that this was not a capture effected by a vessel in the Royal Navy, he could not for the life of him understand ; but of this he was confident, that the mode in which the Echo was captured could be no justification for the murder of Mr. Palmer. He submitted, in conclusion, that both the Echo and the Felicidade were lawfully captured by a British vessel in the Royal Navy, and being then under the control of the British flag, any offence committed on board of either, whether by an Englishman or a Brazilian, against the municipal law of England, rendered the offender liable to be dealt with and punished by those laws. Dr. ADAMS replied, reminding the Court that his Learned Friend, throughout the whole of his address, had been contending that the country had a general right of visitation. Now he maintained, that in a time of peace it had not, except by especial contract entered into with a foreign nation whose vessels were to be searched, and unless the conditions of that compact were strictly complied with, no right of visitation existed. That was the case in this instance, and he humbly submitted that their Lordships' decision ought to be in favour of the prisoners. Dr. lIARDING also replied, and the Court adjourned shortly after five o'clock.  ARCHES' COURT, Dec. 3. (Before Sir 11. Jr:pun:ft Fun.)
The Sun. — 1845-12-04 (London, England)

MURDER ON THE HIGH SEAS  THAMES POLICE COURT.  ADJOURNED EXAMINATION OF CAPTAIN JOHN STONE.  Yesterday the prisoner, Captain Johnstone, was brought up at half-past twelve o'clock, for further examination ; and it having been thought necessary to take additional evidence of the seamen in support of the charge of murder, the following witnesses were called, mainly relating to the death of Rambert :  Thomas Spence, examined—l made the entries in the logbook. I was engaged to do that from the 22d of September. I made the entries entirely under the dictation and direction of the captain. The log-book now produced is the one in which I made the entries.  Mr. Simmons then requested the witness to turn to the page on which he made the entry of the deaths of Mars and Reason. Witness did so, and in continuation said,-1 made the entry of the death of Reason, as here written, on the 24th of October. I wrote it at the dictation of the captain. When I came into the cabin, he told me that Thomas Reason had died in a fit, and that I was to note it in the log-book to that effect. I made an entry of the death of Mars, on the 25th of October. I was instructed by the captain to enter that Mars had been murdered by the crew. The captain's words, "That they (the crew) had put an end to him." I stated in my previous examination that I had been called by the captain to take the evidence of the men. This was on the 3d of December. I went to do so in the larboard cabin, and found a man there. I don't recollect who he was, but the captain was not present. I was called out of bed by the boy Glover to takethe evidence. The man whofirst gave his evidence was very nervous and excited, and I was requested to take particular notice of what the men had to say. There was no one armed where I was at the time. I cannot exactly say whether any one was armed on deck. I took statements from five or six of the crew. They came in separately to give their statements. I don't remember seeing the captain at any part of the time. The statements were signed by the men after they were written down. I can only swear that David Johnstone told me to take my time and be particular to what might be said. I would wish still further to say in regard to the log-book, that the captain after these circumstances was in the habit of calling me into his own cabin five or six times daily to read over the entries I had made to correct them, and to make additions to what I had already written at his direction. The captain, I must say, did not dictate all the entries I made in the logbook, but only those that had relation to the disturbancesin the ship. Stephen Cone re-called, and deposed—l was Johnstone in iro on the 23d of September by the orders of Captain Thomas Lee and Thomas Reason were also put in ironsat the same time. We were confined on the main hatchway. On the 25th of September, after eight o'clock in the evening, we were put on the IWO wizen t9P. While time, during the