The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — 1841-04-09 (Liverpool, Merseyside, England)

TEMPLE.—The road is a regular turnpike-road, from Liverpool to London, but not direct to Macclesfield.  Mary Lea, niece to the deceased, identified the canvas bag produced. She made it for her uncle, and swore to certain peculiarities.  Rebecca Morgan, on being recalled, also identified the bag, she having seen the unfortunate gentleman within a few days before his death.  Terence Riley keeps a lodging-house in Knutsford. Had known the prisoner some time. On the Sunday before the murder, he arrived in the house at two o'clock • slept there all night. Fetched him out to go to a public-house. The following night he came in while witness was in bed. Saw him come in that night; it was about a quarter-past ten. Our clock is a quarter before the regular time. Did not speak to him at all ; witness's wife asked him why he had been so late, and he replied that he had had six or seven miles to walk. He also said that he had three-quarters of a day. She asked him why he did not sleep in the barn, and he said there was no straw in. She next asked him whether he was going away in the morning, and he said " No; for there's no work for me." She then desired him to go to bed, and light a candle, which he refused to do, adding, that he knew which way to go. Witness slept below, and did not again see the prisoner until he was in the Knutsford prison. He had a brownish coat on, with bright buttons. Hannah Riley knew Bartholomew Murray. Heard of Mr. Cook's murder ; prisoner slept at our house on the Sunday arid Monday nights. This witness corroborated the cony ersation described by her husband as having transpired between the prisoner and her. He was the first to leave the house on Tuesday morning; it was between four and five. He had paid her a shilling which he owed her, saying that he did not think that he should return, it being his intention to apply for work towards Manchester. Miles Tyson, shopman to his brother, a shoemaker in Tithebarn-street, remembered seeing a person coming into the shop either on Tuesday the 25th or 26th of August. He had on a light jacket and moleskin trowsers ; and sold him a pair of shoes ; had seen the some shoes in Knutsford in September last. _  At tfie close of the case the prisoner addressed the jury at a great length, and in fluent end correet language, arguing that so great a length of time had elapsed between the evening on which the order was presented, and the time when the witness next saw him, (nine or ten weeks) that she could not with any degree of prudence, undertake to say that he was the same individual, unless, indeed, she being an old maid, and he dared say, having been frequently disappointed in love, had taken particular notice of the person who presented the order, thinking that her chance of a hnsband had then arrived. But thislshe denied ; therefore, as, according to the evidence, the person, whoever he was, had his hat on, and held down his head to write the receipt for the money, it was quite impossible she could undertake to identify him. The learned JUDGE summed up very favorably for the prisoner, and the jury retired, and were absent upwards of an hour, when they returned into court and asked whether this prisoner had any witnesses as to his previous character. Upon which, he turned to the jury and said :—Gentlemen, you are sworn on your solemn oaths to decide this case according to the evidence;and you have no right to take into your consideration any extrinsic circumstances. The very fact of your long deliberation and then asking the question you have done, shows that there is at least some doubt, and according to the law of the land, I am entitled to the benefit of that doubt. _  By the