Year: 1879

name of the field was "Pardon's Piece. !"


The man was a small carpenter and
builder, 10 the town, who bore an indiifer-
ent character. On the evening in ques-
tion distant relative of his, employed as
farm bailiff by gentleman in the neigh
borhood, happened to be passing a stie
which led from the field into the rad,
and saw a gentleman leaving the field by
way Of this stile rather in a hurry. He
recognized the gentleman (whom he knew
by sight only) as Mr.. Dubourg.


They passed each other on the road in
opposite directions. After certain lapse
Of time-estimated as being a half hour
the farm bailiff had occasion to pass back
along the same road On reaching the
stile he heard an alarm raised and entered
the field to see what was the matter. He
found several persons running from the
further side Of Pardop's Piece toward
boy who was standing at the back Of
cattle shed, in remote part Of the enclos-
ure screaming with terror. At the boys
feet lay, face downward, the dead body Of
man with his head horribly beaten in
His watch was under him hanging out of
his pocket by the chain. 1t had stopped
evidently in consequence Of the coucus-
sion of its owners fall on it-at $50.
The body was still warm. All the other
valuables, like the watch, was left on IT,
The farm bailiff instantly recognized the
man as the carpenter and builder mention
ed above


At the preliminary inquiry, the stop
page Of the watch at $50 was taken as
offering good circumstantial evidence that
the blow which had killed the man had
been struck at that time.


The next question was, if any one had
been near the body at S.302 The farm
bailiff declared that he had met Mr.. Du-
bourg hastily leaving the field by the stile
at that very time. Asked if he had look
ed at his watch, he owned that he had not
done so. Certain previous circumstances,
which he mentioned as having impressed
themselves on his memory, enabled him
to feel sure of the truth Of this assertion
without having consulted his watch. lie
was pressed on this important point but he
held to his declaration. At $50 he had
seen Mr. Dubourg hurriedly leave the
field. At $50 the watch of the murder.
ed man had stopped


Had any other person been observed in
or near the field at that time?


No witness had been discovered who had
seen anybody else near the place. Had
the weapon turned up with which the blow
had been stuck2 1t had not been found.
Was any one known (robbery having
plainly not been the motive of the crime J
to have entertained grudge against the
murdered man? 1t was no secret that he
associated with doubtful characters, male
and female; but suspicion failed to point
to any one of them in particular.


In this state of things there was no al
Tentative but to request Mr.. Dubourg-
well known in and out of the town as n
young gentleman of independent fortune,
hearing an excellent characterize give
some account Of himself


lie Immediately admitted that he had
passed through the field. But, in contra
diction to the farm baiifi, he declared that
he had looked at his watch at the moment
before he crossed the stile, and that the
time by it was exactly s.15, Five min
utes later, that is to say, ten minutes be-
fore the murder had been committed, on
the evidence of the dead mans watch
he had paid visit to lady living near
Pardon's Piece, and had remained with
her until his watch, consulted once more
on leaving the lady's house, informed him
that it was S.45.


Here was what the defence called an
"alibi. 1t entirely satisfied Mr.. Dubourg s
friends. To satisfy justice also it was ne
cessary to call the lady as witness. In
the meantime another purely formal ques.
tion was put to Mr. Dubourg. Did he
know anything of the murdered man?


With some appearance Of confusion Mr.
Dubourg admitted that he had been in.
duced by friend to employ the man on
some work. Further interrogation ca
traeted frol him the following statement
of facts


That the work had been badly done;
that an exhorbitant price had been charged
for it; that the man, on being remonstra-
ted with, had behaved in grossly imper-
tinent manner; that an alteration had
taken place between them, that Mr.. Du-
bourg had seized the man by the collar of
his coat, and turned him out of the house;
that he had called the man an Internal
scoundrel (being in passion at the time J
and threatened to "thrash him within an
inch Of his life" Ger words to that effect. J
If he ever presumed to cone near the
house again. that he had sincerely regret.
ted his own violence the moment he re.
covered his self.possession; and lastly, that,
on his oath (the alteration having occur
red six weeks ago, he had never spoken to
the man, or set eyes on the man since.


As the matter there stood, these cir
cunstances were considered as being un-
fortunate circumstances for Mr.. Du6ourg
nothing more. He had his ''alibi'' TO
appeal TO, and bis character to appeal 10;
and nobody doubted the result.


The lady appeared as witness.


Confronted with Mr.. Dubourg on the
question of time, and forced to answer,
she absolutely contradicted him, on the
testimony Of the clock on her own mantle.
piece. In substance, her evidence was
simply this:--She looked at her clock.
when Dubourg entered the room, thinking
il rather late hour for visitor to call on
her The clock REGULATED by the maker
the day bcforo) pointed to twenty-five min
utes to nine Practical experiment show
ed that the time required to walk tho
distance, at rapid pace, from the stile to
the lady's house, was just Ave minutes.
Here, then, was the farm bailiff (himself
respectable witncss) corroborated BY an :
other witness Of excellent position and
character. The clock on being examined
next, was found to be right. The evidence
Of the clock-maker proved that he kept
the key, and there had been no necessity
/ -. H. a "A