« AnteriorContinuar »
ensuing morning to put the business corroboration. It was understood, in train of legal investigation. In or rather supposed, that the prisonthis investigation by Mr Kearney, er had assented in the examinations Quia Pei avowed himself the princi- before Mr Kearney; although it was pal perpetrator of the murder, but admitted that such supposed assent charged the prisoner with having was given tardily and reluctantly, suggested it to him, and with having and after many urgent instances and pointed out the deceased, Zongobia, representations of the inutility of deas a fit object for such a design; he nial on the part of Quia Pei. But also charged the prisoner with having this assent the prisoner denied, and participated with him in the perpe- denied also having had any concern tration of the murder, by holding the in the murder. In the particular inhands of Zongobia behind his back, quiries directed to obtain a correct while he, Quia Pei, threw him over, knowledge upon this point, it was and proceeded to disable him by cut found, that one of the interpreters ting off his hand; after which he cut through whom the examination was his throat also, and severed his head managed was detained in the counfrom his body. Quia Pei showed to try by sickness; but the other, the Mr Kearney the place where the African interpreter, was in Court, murder was perpetrated, and where and was the same who was then in. the head was buried, which was re- terpreting between the Court and the cognised as bearing the features of prisoner. This interpreter, Cockeye, Zongobia. The reason given for was examined as to his having consparing the head in the horrid vora. veyed, or having been authorised to city exercised on the body, was a be- convey, any assent on the part of the lief in Quia Pei's nation, that to eat prisoner to the charges made against the human head, or any part of it, him by Quia Pei, of having suggestcaused madness. The bones of the ed and participated in the murder. body were found in a shocking con. He answered, that he did not condition, bare, and some of thein bro- vey any such assent, neither was he ken. Quia Pei is the leading per- authorised to do so: on the contrary, son in all those discoveries, and he the prisoner had then, as well as now, alone appeared to have carried off constantly denied all participation in the mangled fragments; for it did the transaction and all knowledge of not appear
had been found it, till after it was perpetrated. Here, upon any other.
Quia Pei was, then, was an end of the prisoner's therefore, in every respect, the lead- confession ; for if the first interpreing actor in the atrocious deed, and ter, through whom alone it could was proved to be so by undeniable come to the others, had neither gicircumstances, as well as by his own ven it, nor been authorised to give it, confession. That confession impli- it was of no consequence how strongcated the prisoner at the bar, as ha- ly the impression might have been ving suggested the design originally, made, nor upon how many; it was and as having also assisted in the but misconception more widely and execution of it; but that confession more strongly diffused. After this was not evidence to convict the pri- derangement of the train of evidence, soner, unless confirmed by the assent which, it was understood, was to lead of the prisoner himself, or by the to the conviction of the prisoner, the testimony of other witnesses, or by Court felt considerable embarrassconcurring facts, or circumstances of ment. There was not any collateral or corroborative evidence, nor any ground of a persuasion in his coun. matter of fact, nor circumstance af- try that eating human flesh would fecting the prisoner. To put ques. cause madness, his country being tions to him with a view to inform not the country of Quia Pei, where the Court, would have the effect of human flesh is eaten, but bordering inducing him to give answers tend- upon it. Thus, unless it is supposed ing to criminate himself, which was that the prisoner had sufficient cuncontrary to the spirit and principles ning, under all the difficulties of very of British justice; or, if he was imperfect interpretation, through two sufficiently artful, to frame answers successive stages, to collect the bearfor the purpose, he would thus de- ings of the points of evidence on prive the Court of the little mat. which the Court particularly dwelt, ter of evidence already in its pos
so as to frame his statements and session, or destroy its effect. The allegations in the manner best cal. matter of evidence of which the culated to save himself, and with Court seemed to be previously in this view to retract ultimately what possession, consisted of a supposed he was understood to have freely assent on the part of the prisoner to admitted at first, there was no evi. his having held previous communi. dence against the prisoner beyond cation with Quia Pei, on the design the accusation of the chief perpeafterwards executed, of putting Zon- trator, which was not supported and gobia to death ; and of an admission confirmed by other testimony. It of being at the time near the spot would be for the Jury to consider where the murder was perpetrated, whether the circumstances of prewith a pot and a knife, and of having vious communication and subsegone subsequently to the spot when quent presence near the spot at called. If the Court and the Jury the time when the murder was percould be satisfied of the fact of this petrated, and junction with the previous communication and concert perpetrator, or perpetrators, upon in the design on the part of the pri. being called, had been at first freesoner, and of his subsequent pre- ly admitted, and afterwards artfully sence near the place where the mur- retracted by the prisoner. If those der was perpetrated, so as to be with. facts were established, the succesin call, and to have joined on being sive train and concert marked in called, the concurrence would be them would connect the prisoner sufficient to establish the prisoner's sufficiently with the act; but consiguilt. But it was found necessary to dering the way in which any
knowrefer again to the prisoner in respect ledge that might have been had of to these points, and his answers con- these matters was obtained, it would veyed a distinct denial of his having probably appear too slight a foundaheld any communication respecting tion for pronouncing the prisoner the murderous design, previous to guilty. the perpetration of the murder ; as The Jury retired, and after an abalso of having in any way partici- sence of about half an hour, return. pated in the act, or having known ed their
verdict-Guilty of assisting. of it, till after it was perpetrated, The Chief Justice informed them when he was called by the perpe- that this verdict could not be receitrator or perpetrators, and invited ved. The indictment charged the prito join in the horrid feast, which soner, not as assisting, but as the ache says he refused on the express tual perpetrator of the murder, and
as such alone the only verdict that Thomas Cole, the foreman of the the Jury could regularly give, or that Jury, was a white man, the other the Court could receive, was, sim. jurors were coloured men of the setply, one of Guilty or of Not Guilty. tlement. The Chief Justice said, that although On the last day of the Session, he conceived he had already mark- previous to the passing of the sen. ed, as distinctly as he could, with- tences on the other convicts, the out appearing to dictate to the Jury, Chief-Justice intimated, that it was his sense of the insufficiency of the thought proper to refer the case of evidence to convict the prisoner, he Pei, with his (the Chief Justice's) thought it right now, lest there exception to the verdict of the Jury, should be any misconception, to say and the grounds thereof, to superior so expressly. It was not sufficient. authority in England. A statement
The Jury retired again, and re- of the case, with the evidence and a turned in less than half an hour, copy of the indictment duly authen. with a verdict-Guilty.
ticated, having been soon after placed The Chief-Justice observed, on re- in the hands of the Governor for that ceiving this verdict, that it would be purpose, the same was transmitted incumbent on him, in the ordinary by his Excellency to Earl Bathurst, course of his duty, forthwith to pass his Majesty's principal Secretary of sentence of death upon the prison. State for the Colonial Department. er, in one of the most awful forms Earl Bathurst, in consideration of the prescribed by law; but the same circumstances, thought it incumbent statute which enjoined that course of on him to recommend Peito his Royal proceeding, gave a power to the Highness the Prince Regent for his Judge to postpone the judgment if Majesty's most gracious pardon. he should see sufficient cause. Af. The pardon was duly received, acter the opinion which he (the Chief. companied by an official letter to his Justice) had expressed of the insuffi- Excellency, and the prisoner was, ciency of the evidence, he would act in consequence, liberated without very inconsistently with himself if he delay. did not avail himself of this power : he therefore postponed the judg. ment.
PROSECUTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS CASES.
ging of their merits, the defendant's
brother mounted one of them, set Court of King's Bench, Guildhall
, his groom-boy on the other, rode Tuesday, January 19. (Before them into some fields at no great disLord Chief Justice Abbot and a
tance from his stables, in DukeSpecial Jury.)
street, Manchester-square, and there MARQUIS D'Aoust, v. Elmore. galloped them for some time. This
was not, however, sufficient to satisfy This was an action brought to re- the French nobleman, who, as he cover damages for a malicious arrest, was purchasing hunters, wished to without any reasonable cause. see how they would leap as well as
Mr Gurney stated, that the plain. how they would gallop. He theretiff in this cause was a nobleman of fore desired Mr John Elmore to leap distinction in France, and the defen- one of the hedges in the field, which dant a horse-dealer of some celebrity that gentleman promised to do, but in London. The insult and injury forgot to perform ; he made, howwhich his client had sustained, from ever, several abortive attempts to the improper conduct of the defen- clear it, but succeeded in 'none, dant, were such as most imperiously owing, as Mr Elmore himself confesscalled for redress. The Marquis d'. ed, to the weak state of his nerves. Aoust had come to England in Sep. The Marquis was much displeased tember 1817, partly with a view of at this triling, and asked him, visiting the country, but chiefly to through Mr Bradley, if he did not purchase some English hunters, intend to let the horses leap, why he which of late years have become of had given them the trouble of gohigh repute upon the Continent. In ing into the country. To this Mr furtherance of this object, he was re- Elmore made no other answer than commended by one of his friends, a this, that they might leap the horses Mr Bradley by name, to visit the themselves if they choosed, but.for stables of Mr Elmore, the defendant himself he must decline, as his nerves in this cause; and he did so visit them, were not too strong. The Marquis accompanied by Mr Bradley, who, and Mr Bradley did not however as the Marquis could not speak much follow Mr Elmore's advice; they English, served as interpreter be- did not leap the horses, though they tween the two parties. Two horses, did mount them to try their paces : one a brown, the other a bay, which and the result was, that the Marquis were at that time in Mr Elmore's determined not to buy the brown stables, particularly attracted the no- horse, though he thought of making tice of the Marquis, who said, that an offer for the bay. This was afif he liked their action in the field, terwards on the same day communihe would give two hundred and twenty cated to Mr John Elmore, but no guineas for them. In order to afford bargain was then entered into. The the Marquis an opportunity of jud. Marquis was, therefore, not a little
surprised at being arrested, within amined with the original; Mr Wil. two or three days of this circum- son, a sheriff's officer, the warrant; stance, at the suit of Mr George El- Mr Duke, the bailbond ; and Mr more, for the cost of two horses af. William Romley, the copy of judgfirmed to have been delivered to him ment of non-pros., wbich had been by the defendant in the present ac- sued out in the different periods of tion. He was in custody for some the cause of “ Elmore v. D'Aoust.” hours on this process, and was not Mr Spurr, of the firm of Kearsey released till he had deposited the and Spurr, then deposed, that in money for which he was arrested, in consequence of his signing judgment the hands of the sheriff. So shocked of non-pros., the defendant's attorney was he at the treatment which he had paid him dine pounds for taxed had received, that he left England costs; the Marquis was, however, in the course of a few days, under still fifteen pounds out of pocket, in the impression that it was one of the consequence of that arrest, not to most inhospitable countries in the say any thing of the fee which had globe. Before he left it, however, been paid on the bailbond. he left orders with a most respect- On Mr Scarlett making an obserable solicitor to defend the action vation in this stage of the business, which had been brought against him, that no proof had been exhibited of as he was determined that Mr El the affidavit to hold the Marquis to more's scheme of bullying him into bail, Mr Gurney declared his intenbuying the horses should not be at- tion to call Mr Bartlett, defendant's tended with the slightest success. attorney, to prove it. When Mr Elmore found this to be Mr Bartlett then deposed, that Mr the case, he never dared to proceed John Elmore, defendant's assistant, in the action, though the money re- gave him instructions to arrest the mained deposited, and would have Marquis; he had no authority from been immediately paid over to him Mr George Elmore, the defendant, had he proved successful. He had personally. since discontinued the action, and Joseph Bradley, Esq. had known paid his (Mr Gurney's) client for the plaintiff for several years, who is that discontinuance. If he had ac- of great distinction in France. He tually sold him the horses, was it accompanied him on the 24th of Sepprobable that he would have acted tember 1817, to defendant's stables, in such a manner? and if he had not where he (witness) acted as interpresold him them, was it to be tolerated ter. A brown horse first attracted that such an outrage as this should their notice, and afterwards a bay be committed in a country like Eng. one: for the brown one hundred and land with impunity? He (Mr Gur. fifty guineas were asked, for the bay ney) trusted that the jury would, if one hundred and eighty. The he made out by evidence what he Marquis said that he would give two had asserted in his speech, show by hundred and twenty guineas for the their verdict of that day the decided two, if he liked their action. Mr abhorrence in which they held the Elmore would not at first accede to brutal conduct of the defendant El. this proposal, but showed them to more.
two other gentlemen then in the Mr Gurney then called his wit yard, one of whom he understood to nesses ; on which Mi Thomas pro- be a Mr Lee, of Bexley, in Kent. duced an office copy of the writ, ex- After this he took witness into a