Carlisle Patriot, 04 Mar 1826 - Cumberland Lent Assizes (3)

[petra.mi...@doctors.org.uk]

Saturday 04 Mar 1826   (p. 2, col. 4 - p. 3, col. 5)

 

CUMBERLAND LENT ASSIZES, 1826.

 

CHARGE OF MURDER.

 

[continued]

 

Robert BROWN slept at Mrs. ELLIOTT's house, that night, in the soldiers' room. In the course of the night, prisoner took a sword from the wall, and just as he did it, witness thought the sheath fell off. He carried the sword down stairs. Afterwards, he came back again, took a pistol from the wall, and stepped over the feet of witness, as he lay in bed, where there was some paper, which witness heard him tear. I said (witness continued), "Soldier, you had better go to bed, and not go down stairs again." He was then on the stairs, apparently ramming down his pistol, and he exclaimed that he now "had their master."

 

By Mr. ALDERSON.—There was no candle in the room: I had not been asleep.

 

Wm. DAWSON was also in bed in the soldiers' room, and remembered the prisoner coming up and taking, first his sword, afterwards his pistol, and heard him say on the stairs, when coming up, that "he would fetch all their masters." He entered the room, took a pistol from the wall, and then stepped towards a sort of shelf, from whence he took something, tore the end off, put it into his pistol, and rammed it down. On seeing him thus load, as he conceived, witness told him he would perhaps do that which he would rue all the days of his life. Prisoner made no answer, but stepped to the door, where witness heard him cock the pistol, and very soon heard the discharge.

 

Thomas ROPER was asleep in the bar, and awakened by the report of a pistol. After the accident, heard MAHON say he would have done the same to his superior officer if he would not deliver up his arms.

 

Thomas YOUNG, acting constable, was called in. Found the deceased lying on the ground. He took the prisoner in custody, and told him that he had done a very rash deed. He said he would do the same thing again, if it were to the Duke of Wellington, for he was fighting for honour.

 

By Mr. ALDERSON.—He was very drunk; and appeared to have been much beaten about, and irritated. One of his eyes was black, and his face swelled. He complained of ill-usage.

 

Mr. James MARRS, surgeon, Carlisle.—I was called up to BELL, whom I found lying on his back, on the floor of the Crown and Anchor kitchen. He was bloody, but dressed. Having got him upstairs, I found a hole about five inches below the groin, on the left thigh. On introducing my finger, having removed a little coagulated blood, the wound bled afresh. After death, we saw that the ball had passed through part of his thigh, through the groin, wounding the femoral artery, and passed out at his back. I suppose his death was caused by loss of blood, as, when I came to him, there was no circulation.

 

This was the case for the prosecution.

 

On being asked by the Judge, what he had to offer in his defence, he said:

 

"My Lord, what I have got to say I will, with your permission, read to the Court."

 

He then read his defence to the following effect.

 

"My Lord, and Gentlemen,—No one can be more sincerely penitent than I am on account of the melancholy event which has been the consequence of my rash conduct. I had been unfortunately drinking a good deal, but I do most solemnly assure you that I had not any intention of injuring the deceased, with whom I had always been on the most friendly terms, and for whose death I am very sincerely sorry. In the struggle which ensued on the deceased's attempting to disarm me of the pistol, I was endeavouring to extricate my right arm from him, and in so doing stretched it forwards. In doing this the pistol unfortunately went off and wounded the deceased. Gentlemen, I have been attacked and my conduct severely commented on in the public papers. I trust, however, that you and my Lord will dismiss all such prejudices from your impartial and intelligent minds, and give my case a merciful and candid construction; and even though you may consider my conduct highly reprehensible from the very great imprudence and rashness with which I have acted, I trust you will not consign me to an ignominious and painful death, when I had no real intention of killing or even injuring the deceased, with whom I was on the most friendly terms. Gentlemen, his almost dying words shewed his feeling. He said, 'Don't hurt the soldier.' Can you suppose then that he thought I had intended to murder him. Gentlemen, my life is in your hands, and may God give you understanding to decide my case aright."

 

Mr. ALDERSON next called several witnesses to character.

 

Capt. William BRAGG, of the 3rd Dragoons, said the prisoner had served in the regiment nine or ten years, the greater part of the time in the Captain's own troop. When he first entered the regiment, he brought a letter from an Irish Member of Parliament; in consequence, the Captain had paid particular attention to his conduct, and he pronounced him a sober and excellent soldier, and believed him to be a humane man.

 

Sergeant Major BIRD, Sergeant Thomas WOOD, Corporal DELMAR, and Private John LOWES, all of the 3rd Dragoons, spoke warmly to the same purport.

 

The Learned Baron then summed up the evidence, and elucidated it as he went along. The Jury would have to decide whether the death of the deceased was the result of accident or design. If the latter, the prisoner was guilty of murder; if the unfortunate transaction arose out of accident, then, in point of law, the offence was manslaughter, because the prisoner had wilfully placed himself in an improper situation, and the verdict of the jury should be to that effect. He might have been drunk, and in a state of irritation, bordering on frenzy, still the deceased had not given him cause. Even though the prisoner himself, in the struggle, ran some risk of being hit by the ball, the nature of the offence was not altered, because if a person fires at one man and kills another, he is still guilty of murder; and if the Jury believed that the prisoner actually turned the muzzle of the pistol towards the deceased for the purpose of shooting him, he, too, was guilty of that crime. There were features in the case, however, from which a different inference might be drawn, and the accused should have the benefit of all reasonable doubts. It was quite clear, his Lordship thought, that the circumstances of the night were by no means the natural result of his ordinary disposition. The cause was in their hands; and they, the learned Baron doubted not, would find such a verdict as impartial justice demanded at their hands.

 

The Jury, after consulting about ten minutes, requested leave to retire.

 

Mr. Baron HULLOCK.—I hope you understand me. You will not acquit the prisoner. You will have to decide whether he be guilty of murder or manslaughter.

 

Foreman.—We fully understand.

 

The Jury remained out nearly an hour, and returned a Verdict of MANSLAUGHTER.

 

Sentence not yet passed.

 

 

[to be continued]