lodged in the house of a Mrs. Allen, who lived in Pocock's-fields, near the cottage of the deceased. The most important facts proved against him were, that previous to the murder he had frequently declared to many of his companions that he was greatly in want of money, and that he had suggested to one of them, a potboy at the Duchess of Kent public house in the Dover-road, that he knew an old man who had got money, for that he had seen him flashing about a 50l. note; that he knew where to put his hand upon it in the drawer where it was kept, and that it was "just like a gift" to him, and that he wished he could get "a right one" to assist him in the robbery. Other witnesses proved that he had expressed to them a desire to procure a screw" and "a darkey" (meaning a picklock key and a dark lantern), to "serve" an old gentleman in a lonely cottage; and the concluding evidence was that of Mr. and Mrs. Allen, his landlord and landlady, as to his conduct on the night of the murder, and of some police officers, who proved the discovery of some money in the rafters of the washhouse of Allen's cottage, corresponding in its. denominations with the silver which had been paid to Mr. Templeman by his lodgers at Somers Town.

66

Allen's evidence was as follows; "I live at Wilson's Cottage, Pocock'sfields, Islington. I know the cottage in which the deceased lived. I have known the prisoner about twelve months; he has lodged at my house several times, and he came to lodge there seven nights before this occurrence took place. I remember the 16th of March; and at that time, from circumstances that occurred, I am confident that he had no money. On that day the prisoner went out between eight and nine o'clock without having any breakfast. He had on a pair of shoes which I sold him, and they had nails in them. The prisoner wore them constantly. He returned home about three o'clock

in the morning, and he immediately. went into his room. My wife said to him, 'Richard, is it early, or late?' and he replied, 'It is early.' The prisoner got up between eight and nine o'clock the next morning, and came into my sitting room, and passed through into the washhouse, which leads to the privy. He stayed out from five and twenty minutes to half an hour when he returned into the house and went out at the front door. I did not observe anything unusual in his appearance. The prisoner returned home about seven o'clock in the evening, and in the meantime I had heard of the murder of Mr. Templeman, and I told him of it. The prisoner said it was a shocking thing, and he asked me if I considered Mr. Templeman could have done it himself. I said, 'Richard, how can a man bind his own hands and eyes?' The prisoner then appeared agitated, and said his inside was out of order, and he went into the yard, and remained for a few minutes. . . I asked him where he had been so late on the night before. He said he had been at the Rainbow, and had stopped there until twelve o'clock at night, and when he came out he met some friends, who detained him. Before this time I had a piece of wood in my possession, which was about a foot and a half long. The prisoner went to bed about nine o'clock, and I bolted him in and gave information to the police. He accounted to me for the possession of the money by saying that it had been given to him. by his relations."

Mrs. Allen's evidence was to the same effect; but she proved in addition, that a stocking in which the money was found concealed belonged to the prisoner.

The evidence otherwise was of a very general description, and although many expressions of a very suspicious character were attributed to the prisoner by the witnesses, none of them amounted to an admission by him of his guilt. The jury, after

strongest poison I could for Sir T. Overbury. Accordingly I bought seven, viz. Aqua fortis, white arsenic, mercury, powder of diamonds, lapis costitus, great spiders, and cantharides. All these were given to Sir T. Overbury, and the Lieutenant knew of these poisons. Sir T. Overbury never had salt but there was white arsenic put into it. Once he desired pig, and Mrs. Turner put into it lapis costitus. At another time he had two partridges sent him from the Court, and water and onions being the sauce, Mrs. Turner put in cantharides instead of pepper, so that there was scarce anything that he did eat, but there was some poison mixed. For these poisons the Countess sent me reward. She afterwards wrote unto me to buy her more poisons." It is obvious from this confession that the poisons supplied had no power, and it would seem that Franklyn was making income for himself by supplying harmless preparations for the poisons for which he was being paid. As far as it is possible to judge by reading the evidence, there was proof that attempts had been made to poison Sir Thomas Overbury, but no proof that any poison was ever given to him. However, the evidence appears to have been quite sufficient to convict the prisoners.

After the execution of Mrs. Turner and Weston came the trial of Franklyn, who confessed that poison had not been the cause of Overbury's death. Weldon, who, in 1755, pub

lished a history of the Kings of England, describes how Franklyn and Weston "came into Overbury's chamber and found him in infinite torment with the contention between the state of nature and working of the poison, and it had been very like that nature had got the better in that contention . . . but they, fearing it might come to light by the judgment of physicians that foul play had been offered him, consented to stifle him with bedclothes, which accordingly was performed. And so ended his miserable life, with the assurance of the conspirators that he died of poison, none thinking otherwise but these murtherers." The account

two

given by Weldon of the manner in which the Lord Chief Justice received this confession is well worth quoting. . . "Then was Franklyn arraigned, who confessed that Overbury was smothered to death, not poisoned to death, though he had poison given him. Here was Coke glad to cast about to bring both ends together, Mrs. Turner and Weston being already hanged for killing Overbury by poison. But he being the very quintessence of the law, presently informed the jury that if a man be done to death with pistol, poniard, sword, halter, poison, etc., so he be done to death, the indictment holds good, if but indicted for one of those ways. But the good lawyers of those times were not of that opinion, but did believe that Mrs. Turner was directly murthered by Lord Coke's law, as Overbury was, without any law."

William Habron, convicted at Manchester Autumn Assize, in 1876, before LINDLEY, J. (now Lord Lindley), for the murder of Police Constable Cock. It may be remembered that the fact which cast a

doubt upon the propriety of his conviction was the confession of Peace, in February, 1879, when lying under sentence of death for the murder of Mr. Dyson, at Bannercross. This led to a free pardon

and £1000 compensation being granted to Habron. It is common ground that the conviction of Habron took place purely on circumstantial evidence, and it was considered, at least at the time, that the case was perhaps the most remarkable case on record of circumstantial evidence. The facts as set forth in the Times in 1879 — it was not reported in 1876-are as follows:

There were three brothers, Frank, John, and William Habron, living together at Chorlton, a village three miles from Manchester, in the employment of Mr. Deakin, a nursery gardener. In July, 1876, summonses were taken out against John and William Habron for disorderly conduct and drunkenness by Police Constable Cock. After the summonses were served the Habrons were heard to say that if the "Bobby" caused them any trouble, they would shoot him. At the hearing of the summons, Police Constable Cock, immediately on leaving the witness box, went to Mr. Bent, his superior officer, and a superintendent, and stated that William Habron had said to him, "If you get me fined, I will shoot you before the morning." This was on August 1st. The case against John Habron was dismissed, but William Habron was fined. The policeman was evidently laboring under some apprehensions; but Mr. Bent, knowing that coarse and vulgar threats were common enough among people of the condition of life of the Habrons, took no notice of it at the moment; but towards the evening, on reflection, he thought there might be something in it, and he intended next day to have given orders for the men on that beat to go in couples. Here a very singular and undoubted fact has become known; Cock had to go on duty that night at nine o'clock, and, as evening came on, he fell into a state of extraordinary depression, and told his landlady (he being a single man living at lodgings, having

joined the police only a few months before) that he was sure something would happen to him that night. With a great effort he, however, conquered his depression and went on his usual beat. He was on duty at Whalley Range, a district composed entirely of mansions and villa residences, and a few minutes before twelve o'clock he and Beauland, another constable, were together at West Point, near the residence of a gentleman named Gratrix. There they saw two men, one of whom was leaning against a post. A third man whom they did not know, and whom Peace claims to be, passed them. They did not know him. The officers knew all the three Habrons, and therefore this third man could not have been one of them. Beauland looked at this third man as he passed and asked Cock who he was. Cock said he did not know. Beauland then said he would follow him, and he went towards Mr. Gratrix's house, towards which he had seen the man disappear, and examined the place, but could see no traces of the man. He thought from the sudden disappearance that it was young Mr. Gratrix coming home. He turned back, and as he was turning he saw a flash and heard a report, and almost instantaneously it was followed by another flash and a report. The officer described them as following each other just as quickly as one could pull the trigger of a revolver. He heard Cock scream, "My God! I am shot," and ran up to him and found him lying on the footpath. He asked what was the matter, but Cock could make no reply, as he lay writhing on the ground.

Beauland heard a man exclaim, "Here is another policeman!" and then he heard footsteps running away. He whistled for assistance, and some carters and their carts came up, together with a young gentleman named Simpson, who had been talking with the two

at

officers only a minute or two before and heard the report of the two shots. Cock expired an hour afterwards from a wound in the breast, having been unable to make any statement. Information was once given to Superintendent Bent, whose house is about a mile away from the scene of the murder. Instantly remembering what Cock told him of the threat to shoot him, he took officers with him and surrounded the cottage of the Habrons, which is about a quarter of a mile from where Cock was shot. As the officers approached the cottage a light was seen in one of the windows, but when they knocked at the door the light was extinguished. The police broke into the cottage and found the three brothers in bed. Mr. Bent ordered them to get up and dress, and each to put on the clothes and boots he wore that night. When the dressing was completed, without one word having been said as to why the arrest was made, Mr. Bent said, "I charge each of you with the murder of Police Constable Cock." Two of the brothers made no reply, but Frank Habron said, "I was in bed at the time." They were taken to Old Trafford Police Station, and Mr. Bent then took a posse of constables and formed a cordon round the spot where the murder had been committed. When daylight appeared it disclosed a number of footmarks at the place, one of which was very peculiar. The boots

of the Habrons were sent for, and it was found beyond a shadow of doubt that one of those footmarks must have been made by the boots of the prisoner William Habron. The bullet which had killed Cock was found to be an ordinary revolver bullet, and the police at once set out on a strict search for firearms, but they were never able to find any. Some percussion caps were found in the pockets of one of the brothers, but this was accounted for by Mr. Deakin, who

said that he had given the prisoner a waistcoat and they might have been in it when he had given it to him. It was stated in the course of the investigation, however, that William went to a gunsmith's in Oxford Street and inquired as to the price of revolver cartridges. A box was shown to him, but he hesitated about the price and went out, as he said, to see a person outside, who was supposed to be his brother, and he did not return. It was found afterwards that three bullets had been taken from the box, but here another mysterious circumstance arose namely, that those bullets did not correspond in size with the one that killed the constable. On this and other evidence William and John, Frank having been dismissed by the magistrates, were committed for trial both before the coroner's jury and the justices.

The trial came on at Manchester Assizes before LINDLEY, J., and the main defense set up was that at the time the accused could not have been in Oxford Street, but were really working at Chorlton, several miles away. On cross-examination, however, the alibi failed utterly as regards the prisoner William Habron, and after a long trial he was convicted and sentenced to death. Much dissatisfaction was expressed with the verdict, and a large number of people signed a petition for a reprieve.

Peace's confession [that he was the real murderer] was received with considerable incredulity in February three years afterwards, and it seems to have been even believed that it was merely made with a view to obtain a respite [from his sentence of death for another murder]. The most serious criticism of his confession was undoubtedly the remarkable fact that if he had run away from the scene of the murder in the direction he represented in his confession, he must have run into the arms of Beauland,