Swansea and Glamorgan Herald, and South Wales Free Press. — 1860-11-28 (Swansea, West Glamorgan, Wales)

ROAD CHILD MCRDER.—It will be recollected. that among the statements volunteered before Mr. Saunders was one by Sergeant Watts, of the Somersetshire constabulary (confirmed by some officers of the Wiltshire force), to the effect that on Saturday, the 30th of June, the day on which the murder was discovered, he found a woman's night-shift stained with blood secreted in the boiler hole of one of the kitchens of Road-hill House. This garment wftafterwards handed to Mr. Superintendent Foley, whMited that he was confirmed in his own opinion by that of Mr. Stapleton, surgeon, that the marks of blood proceeded from natural causes, and had nothing whatever to do with the murder; and acting on that opinion he directed the shift to be replaced, on the following Monday, in the place where it was found, whence it disappeared. It has now transpired that up to the time of Mr. Saunders's inquiry the fact of the finding of this shift had been kept a profound secret by the police, and that Mr. Stapleton, the surgeon, denies that any such garment was ever shown to him. Mr. Stapleton states that the only article of the kind which he inspected was one belonging to the elder Miss Kent, which was produced from her bedroom. The magistrates who have pursued the investigation held a meeting at the policestation, Trowbridge, on Thursday, at which inquiries were made, from which it was ascertained that the shift was found by Sergeant Watts wrapped in a brown-paper parcel in the boiler hole of the back kitchen, about five o'clock in the afternoon cf the day on which the murder was discovered. There were large stains of blood on it. in the front and back. The fire in the boiler was lighted by the cook about seven a.m., and let out about nine o'clock, so that the shift must have been secreted after the latter hour. The cook and housemaid were interrogated for the first time on the subject last week, and both denied any knowledge of it. An examination of their linen, and that of some of the family, was subse • quently made. That of the housemaid is said to be made in the same way as the shift found in the firehole, but not to correspond in length. The garments of the cook and of Miss Constance Kent were not made in the same way as the missing article. Miss Constance, however, had a new set, and the washerwoman described her old ones as being similar to the one so strangely found, and which has so strangely disannesred Mr. Stapleton was confronted with Mr. Superintendent Foley, and denied that the shift in question was ever shown to him. The excuse of Mr. Superintendent Foley for not communicating the finding of the shift to the magistrates is that he was ashamed to do so, feeling convinced that it was not connected in any way with the murder. The bench are naturally annoyed at the ill-judged reticence of their officer, as they feel that the garment now missing might have afforded an important clue to the discovery of the murder if properly followed up at the time of its having been found ; but that at a distance of nearly five months from the commission of the crime it is almost hopeless now to expect that any light will be thrown on the matter by the disclosure which has been so tardily and almost unexpectedly made. The circumstance of the finding of the shift was not even mentioned to Mr. Inspector Whicher while he was engaged in the investigation of the case.—Application was made at the Court of Queen's Bench on Saturday by the Attorney General for an order quashing the verdict of the Coroner's jury, on the ground of misdirection, and for the issue of a special commission to hold another inquest. The Court granted a rule calling upon the Coroner to show cause why his proceedings should not be set aside. Singularly enough, this rule would not have been granted but for the accident of the record of the inquest having been made on paper instead of parchment. This legal informality was enough to make the inquest of no effect. The Attorney General remarked that if a verdict of "manslaughter" had been found, and any one tried upon it, the prisoner must have been acquitted, because of the one mistake of the Coroner's in using paper instead of parchment.