The Sun. — 1842-04-08 (London, England)

THE LATE MURDER AND SUICIDE NEAR BRISTOL. The adjourned inquest on the bodies of Samuel and Edith Cook, who were found on the morning of Thursday the 31st alt., with their throats cut, at a cottage on Kingswood-hill, near Bristol, was resumed on Tuesday, before W. J. Ellis, Esq., Coroner for the county, at the King's Arms Inn. As on the former occasion the investigation seemed to excite much interest, and a number of the inhabitants of the village and neighbourhood assembled in front of the inn. The first witness called was Aaron Batt, who deposed to having had a conversation with the murderer, Samuel Cook, a few days since. Batt said the deceased appeared in a very sound state of mind, and spoke to him as rationally as any man could. A woman named Lucy, who occupied a house belonging to deceased, also deposed to her belief that he was not out of his mind. She described him as being a very kind brother, and very respectable man, and spoke to instances in which, within one or two days of his death, he had shown acts of kindness to the sister Edith Cook. The sister was quarrelsome and aggravating, and on Tuesday accused him of having broken a jug purposely. He told her she was telling wilful lies, but she was in a passion and persisted, and he then said she should have her own way. He was sitting over the fire at the time, leaning his head down upon his hand, and she raised a poker, with which she was in the act of trimming the fire, and struck hint on the hand. According to the witness he made no complaint of this. Never heard him before then speak angrily to her, but she would often answer him crossly. She was dissatisfied, and would argue with him. By the Foreman of the Jury—Never saw anything in him that appeared as if he was out of his mind at all. He always spoke very reasonably. Elizabeth Fry, the wife of a labourer, residing in the village, proved that she was at Cook's cottage for several hours during the Wednesday, when they seemed very comfortable together, and did not quarrel at all. Edith complained of being in great pain, and said, " Poor Sara" troubled very much about 11 her, and had been in and out of bed all night with her. kihe had begged him not to trouble himself, but he would do so. She said he wanted her to have Dr. Briggs to her, but she did not like to do so, as if he was to put on a blister on her hip she could not endure the pain of it. The sister was at this time unable to stand without hotting by the mantel-piece, and witness did not believe that she could walk at all. Witness recommended her to get some herbs and put to her hip, and the brother went out and got the herbs and made the dressing, and witness put it on the sister's person. The brother seemed quite reasonable at this time. At about a quarter-past seven o'clock witness went away. Samuel told her to come betimes next morning, but his sister said the afternoon would do. William Willis, labourer, said he went on Wednesday morning to give a message to Cook about the price of some timber. He saw Edith in the garden, and told her to tell her brother, but she said, " I will net. What is the use of talking to a crazy man ? lam afraid to 'bide in the house with him for he said he would kill me." , In answer to a question by the Jury, he said he was not struck by the remark of the sister at all, as persons often quarrelled in the neighbourhood. Did not tell any one of it. Arthur Stone (a brother-in-law to the Cooks), stated that about twenty-one years ago Cook received powerful religious impressions, which made him for several years low and unhappy. About ten years ago, both he and his sister, in common with other members of the family, were afflicted with a " heavy fever." She went out of her mind for a while completely, and he had since been more careless respecting reli. gious matters, from which the witness was led to believe that he was not as right as he wes before that time. A member of the Jury said there was a very general rumour in the neighbourhood, that an improper intercourse had subsisted between the two deceased persons, and that the sister was pregnant. He (the Juror) thought it would be well if that point were investigated. No other Juror expressed a similar wish, and uo evidence on the subject was called. The surgeon (Mr. Briggs) stated that in consequence of the doubt expressed at the last meeting of the Jury with respect to the place where the body of the sister was found, and the probability of her having run to it, he had been again to see the body, and found a nightcap pulled forcibly into the wound, which must have considerably impeded the bleeding, and given the unhappy woman time to escape as far as the garden. There were no wounds on her fingers, and there could be no doubt that the wound was inflicted unexpectedly, as she was sitting in her chair by the fire-place. Francis Bryant deposed that he had observed latterly an alteration in the manner of Cook, who was his landlord, and had got more cross and crabbed than he used to be. About Christmas last be applied to witness for the same rent twice over. Witness told him he had paid it, and explained to him the circumstance, and he then said he recollected it. By the Jury—He was cross and crabbed. He spoke very reasonably, but seemed in a enrious way. Sarah Fry deposed to having visited the cottage on Wednesday night after the witness Elisabeth Fry had left. She went to buy some potatoes, and Samuel Fry came down stairs and served her and took the money for them. She did not see the sister at that time, but heard some one moving about up stairs. Lived next door to the cottage, and heard no noise or quarrelling during the day or night. The CORONER inquired if there was any other testimony that could be adduced to threw light on the occasion. The constable said he had made every inquiry and could find no one else. The Court was then cleared, and after the Jury hadremained in deliberation several hours, the public were re-admitted. The inquiry on the body of Samuel Cook was then adjourned sine die, the Jury being unable to agree. In the case of Edith Cook the verdict returned was one of " Wilful murder against Samuel Cook."