State Trials, Political and Social. Volume 2 (of 2)

Part 15

Chapter 154,205 wordsPublic domain

and afterwards, in jocular conversation, I believe Mr. Stephens might ask Mr. Gurrey if he knew of one Mrs. Sarah Stout? And the reason why he asked that question our witness will explain. I believe he might likewise ask what sort of woman she was? and possibly I might say the words, My friend may be in with her, though I remember not I did say anything like it; but I say there is a possibility I might, because I had heard she had denied Marshall's suit, and that might induce me to say, My friend may be in with her, for all that I remember. I confess Mr. Rogers asked me what money I had got that day, meaning at the Borough Court? I answered fifty shillings; saith he, we have been here a-spending our money, I think you ought to treat us, or to that purpose. As to the bundle mentioned I had no such, except a pair of sleeves and a neck-cloth. As to the evidence which goes to words spoken, the witnesses have fruitful inventions; and as they have wrested and improved the instances I have been particular in, so they have the rest, or otherwise forged them out of their own heads.

HATSELL, BARON--Mr. Rogers, what do you say to it?

ROGERS--We came down with the marshal of the King's bench, it rained every step of the way, so that my spatter-dashes and shoes were fain to be dried; and it raining so hard, we did not think Mr. Marson would have come that day, and therefore we provided but one bed, though otherwise we should have provided two, and were to give a crown for our night's lodging. We went from the coffee-house to the tavern, as Mr. Marson has said, and from the tavern the next way to our lodging, where there was some merry and open discourse of this gentlewoman; but I never saw her in my life, nor heard of her name before she was mentioned there.

STEPHENS--We never stirred from one another, but went along with the marshal of the King's bench, to accompany my lord chief-justice out of town, as is usual.

HATSELL, BARON--I thought it had been as usual for him to go but half the way with my lord chief-justice.

ROGERS--They generally return back after they have gone half the way, but some of the head officers go throughout.

STEPHENS--It was the first circuit after the marshal came into his office, and that is the reason the marshal went the whole way.

HATSELL, BARON--Did not you talk of her courting days being over?

PRISONERS--Not one word of it; we absolutely deny it.

STEPHENS--I never saw her.

JONES--Mr. Marson, did you ride in boots?

MARSON--Yes.

JONES--How came your shoes to be wet?

MARSON--I had none.

_Hunt_ gave an account of how he was at the Old Devil Tavern at Temple Bar, on Sunday night, and Marson and three or four others of Clifford's Inn being there at the same time, discoursing of the marshal's attending the Lord Chief-Justice to Hertford, Marson said he too might be required to go; on which one of the company said, 'If you do go to Hertford, pray enquire after Mr. Marshall's mistress, and bring us an account of her;' and it was this discourse that gave occasion to talk of Mrs. Stout at Gurrey's house, which was done openly and harmlessly. This story was corroborated by one Foster, who had been at the Devil; and Stephens offered to call another witness to the same purpose, but was stopped by the judge.

_Hanks_ was called, and gave the same account of his arrival in Hertford as Marson had already given. He was in Marson's company from the time he met him till he left him at his lodgings, at about eleven o'clock.

_Rutkin_ was called by Marson to give an account of his coming to Hertford.

RUTKIN--My lord, I came to wait on the marshal of the King's Bench to Hertford, and when we were come to Hertford we put up our horses at the Bull, and made ourselves a little clean; we went to church, and dined at the Bull, and then we walked in and about the court, and diverted ourselves till about seven o'clock; and between seven and eight o'clock came Mr. Marson and Dr. Hanks to town, and then we agreed to go to the Dolphin and Glove to drink a glass of wine; the marshal went to see an ancient gentleman, and we went to the Dolphin and Glove, and staid there till past ten o'clock, and after the reckoning was paid we went with them to their lodging, with a design to drink a glass of wine; but then I considered I was to lie with the marshal, and for that reason I resolved not to go in, but came away, and went to the Bull Inn, and drank part of a glass of wine and afterwards went to the next door to the Bull Inn, where I lay with the marshal.

_Marson_ called witnesses to character, who swore that they had always had a good opinion of him, that they had never seen him but a civilised man, that he had been well brought up amongst them, and that they had never seen him given to debauchery.

_Cowper_ said that he was concerned to defend the other prisoners as much as himself, and that there was something he wished to say in their behalf.

'The principal witness against them is one Gurrey; and I will prove to you, that since he appeared in this court, and gave his evidence, he went out in a triumphant manner, and boasted that he, by his management, had done more against these gentlemen than all the prosecutor's witnesses could do besides. To add to that I have another piece of evidence that I have just been acquainted with; my lord, it is the widow Davis, Gurrey's wife's sister, that I would call.

_Mrs. Davis_ was asked by her sister to help her lay the sheets for the men in Gurrey's house, and while she was doing so the gentlemen came into the room; it was then about ten, or something later. They had three quarts of wine and some bread and cheese, and then went to bed; and after that Gurrey went to fetch Gape, who lodged at his house, from Hockley's.

COWPER--I only beg leave to observe that Gurrey denied that he went for him.

HATSELL, BARON--Ay; but this signifies very little, whether it be true or false.

Various other witnesses were called, who gave all the prisoners excellent characters in their private and professional capacities.

JONES--My lord, we insist upon it, that Mr. Cowper hath given a different evidence now, from what he did before the coroner; for there he said he never knew any distraction, or love fit, or other occasion she had to put her upon this extravagant action. Now here he comes, and would have the whole scheme turned upon a love-fit. Call John Mason.

_Mason_, in answer to questions put to him by Mr. Stout and Jones, said that Cowper, before the coroner, had said that he knew no cause for Mrs. Stout's suicide; and that she was a very modest person. He was asked whether he knew any person she was in love with, and he said he knew but of one, and his name was Marshall, and he was always repulsed by her.

_Archer_ was present at the inquest, and heard Cowper say that he knew no occasion of Mrs. Stout's death, nor of any letters.

COWPER--Then I must call over the whole coroner's inquest, to prove the contrary.

HATSELL, BARON--Did they ask him concerning any letters?

ARCHER--They asked him, If he knew of any thing that might be the occasion of her death?

HATSELL, BARON--I ask you again, if they asked him if he knew of any letters?

ARCHER--My lord, I do not remember that.

MR. STOUT--I would have called some of the coroner's inquest but I was stopped in it.

JURYMAN--We have taken minutes of what has passed; If your lordship pleases we will withdraw.

HATSELL, BARON--They must make an end first.

_Mrs Larkin_ was called, and said that Rutkin came to her house between nine and ten, and that the marshal did not come in till an hour afterwards.

_Mr. Stout_ desired to call witnesses to his sister's reputation; and _Jones_ said that the whole town would attest to that.

_Hatsell, Baron_, then summed up. He said that the jury could not expect that he should sum up fully, but that he would notice the most material facts, and that if he omitted any thing, Jones or Cowper would remind him of it. He then recapitulated Sarah Walker's evidence, very briefly; and then went on:--

The other witnesses that came afterwards, speak concerning the finding of the body in the river, and tell you, in what posture it was. I shall not undertake to give you the particulars of their evidence; but they tell you she lay on her right side, the one arm up even with the surface of the water, and her body under the water; but some of her cloaths were above the water. You have also heard what the doctors and surgeons said on the one side and the other, concerning the swimming and sinking of dead bodies in the water; but I can find no certainty in it; and I leave it to your consideration.

Further, there were no signs of water in the body, and it was said that this was a sign that she was not drowned; but then it was answered that it might show that she had drowned herself, because if she wished to drown herself she would choke herself without swallowing any water.

The doctors and surgeons have talked a great deal to this purpose, and of the water's going into the lungs or the thorax; but unless you have more skill in anatomy than I you would not be much edified by it. I acknowledge I never studied anatomy; but I perceive that the doctors do differ in their notions about these things.... Gentlemen, I was very much puzzled in my thoughts, and was at a loss to find out what inducement there could be to draw in Mr. Cowper, or these three other gentlemen, to commit such a horrid, barbarous, murder. And on the other hand, I could not imagine what there should be to induce this gentlewoman, a person of plentiful fortune, and a very sober good reputation, to destroy herself.'

But if they believed the letters that had been produced to be in her hand, there was evidence to show that although she was a virtuous woman, a distemper might have turned her brains, and discomposed her mind.

As to these three other gentlemen that came to this town at the time of the last assizes, what there is against them, you have heard; they talked at their lodging at a strange rate, concerning this Mrs. Sarah Stout, saying, her business is done, and that there was an end of her courting days, and that a friend of theirs was even with her by this time. What you can make of this, that I must leave to you; but they were very strange expressions; and you are to judge whether they were spoken in jest, as they pretend, or in earnest. There was a cord found in the room, and a bundle seen there, but I know not what to make of it. As to Mrs. Stout, there was no sign of any circle about her neck, which, as they say, must have been if she had been strangled; some spots there were; but it is said, possibly these might have been occasioned by rubbing against some piles or stakes in the river. Truly, gentlemen, these three men, by their talking, have given great cause of suspicion; but whether they, or Mr. Cowper, are guilty or no, that you are to determine. I am sensible I have omitted many things; but I am a little faint, and cannot remember any more of the evidence.

The jury then retired, and in half an hour returned with a verdict of Not Guilty as to all the prisoners.

The acquittal in this case led to an appeal of murder, the most curious survival of the earliest English criminal procedure, which was not finally abolished till 1819. The effect of such a proceeding was that after an acquittal on an indictment for murder, the prosecutor might challenge the accused to an ordeal by battle. Accordingly, in the long vacation following the trial, Mrs. Stout, the mother of the dead woman, sued a writ of appeal out of Chancery, against Cowper, in the name of an infant who was her daughter's heir. The sealing of the writ was delayed, it is said to nearly the last possible day, a year after the alleged murder, for the purpose of keeping the matter in suspense as long as possible; and the consent of the mother of the infant to Mrs. Stout's being named as his guardian for the purpose, was obtained from her by a fraudulent representation that the object of the proceeding was to obtain the deceased woman's property for him. On discovering what its real effect was, she and her friends applied to one Toler, the under-sheriff of Hertfordshire, for the writ, and on his giving it up to them, burnt it. On a rule being obtained for the return of the writ, and it appearing that Toler had delivered it to the infant's mother, he was adjudged guilty of a gross contempt, and heavily fined. Holt, Lord Chief-Justice, said on this occasion that

he wondered that it should be said that an appeal is an odious prosecution. He said he esteemed it a noble remedy, and a badge of the rights and liberties of an Englishman. The court of king's bench, to show their resentment, committed Toler to the prison of the king's bench for his fine, though the clerk in court would have undertaken to pay it. And Holt, chief-justice, said to Toler, that he had not been in prison long enough before, and that he might now, if he pleased, go to Hertford and make his boast that he had got the better of the king's bench.

Afterwards Mrs. Stout petitioned the Lord Keeper for another writ; the infant and his mother presenting a counter-petition disowning their former writ as sued forth without their consent. After an argument before a full court it was decided that the Court had power to grant a new writ, but that it would be unjust to grant one under the present circumstances, because, among other reasons, the appellant and his mother had renounced the writ as soon as they understood its nature, and there was no proof that the appellees had been privy to their action.

FOOTNOTES:

[43] Spencer Cowper (1669-1727) was the younger brother of Earl Cowper, who was the first Lord Chancellor of Great Britain. He was educated at Westminster, and made Controller of the Bridge House Estates in 1690. At the time of this trial his brother was the member for Hertford. In 1705 and 1708 he represented Beeralston in Parliament; he was one of the managers in Sacheverell's trial, and lost his seat in consequence, but was afterwards elected for Truro in 1711. In 1714 he became Attorney-General to the Prince of Wales, and in 1717 Chief-Justice of Chester. On the accession of George the Second he was made Attorney-General of the Duchy of Chester, and a Judge of the Common Pleas in 1727. He died the same year. He was the grandfather of William Cowper the poet.

[44] Sir Henry Hatsell (1641-1714) was the son of an active Roundhead who sat in the House of Commons during the Commonwealth. He was educated at Exeter College, was called to the Bar in 1667, and became a Baron of the Exchequer in 1697. The present trial was the most conspicuous with which he was connected, from which fact it may be supposed that he never enjoyed a very high reputation. He was removed from the Bench soon after Queen Anne's accession.

[45] This John Dimsdale was apparently the father of the first Baron Dimsdale, who inoculated Catharine of Russia and the Grand Duke Paul, her son, for smallpox in 1728. John's father was William, who accompanied William Penn to America in 1684; so that it is not clear who the Mr. Dimsdale, senior, and Dr. Robert Dimsdale of this trial were. The family is, however, one which has long been settled in Hertfordshire.

[46] _Vulgar Errors_, Book IV., ch. vi., 'Of Swimming and Floating.'

[47] The Lord of the Manor might have a right to the forfeited goods of a felon.

[48] Sir Hans Sloane (1660-1753) was born in Co. Down. He studied medicine abroad, and was elected a member of the Royal Society in 1685. In 1687 he went to the West Indies as secretary to the Duke of Albemarle, and made valuable scientific collections. He was elected secretary of the Royal Society in 1693, and succeeded Sir Isaac Newton as president of the same body in 1727. He was physician to Queen Anne and George the Second, and founded the botanical garden at Chelsea for the Society of Apothecaries. He left his collections to the nation, and they formed part of the original nucleus of the British Museum. Sloane Street and Hans Square derive their names from him.

[49] The lay reader must observe that Sloane is talking of the 'civil law.'

[50] William Cowper (1666-1709) was a leading surgeon at the time of this trial, having been elected a member of the Royal Society in 1696, and in 1698 having published a treatise on anatomy, which led to a vigorous controversy between him and a Dutch doctor of the name Bidloo, whose anatomical plates he seems to have adopted for his own work. He subsequently published a variety of papers on surgery, and was the discoverer of Cowper's glands.

SAMUEL GOODERE AND OTHERS

On the 18th of March 1741, at the Bristol Gaol-delivery, Samuel Goodere,[51] Matthew Mahony, and Charles White were indicted for the murder of Sir John Dineley Goodere, the brother of the first-named prisoner. They were tried before Serjeant Michael Foster.[52] The trial was adjourned to the 26th on account of Goodere's health, when there appeared for the prosecution _Vernon_, and for the prisoner _Goodere_, _Shepard_ and _Frederick_. The other prisoners were undefended.

_Vernon_ opened the case. He began--

May it please you, Mr. Recorder, and you, gentlemen that are sworn on the jury, I am counsel for the King against the prisoners at the bar, who stand indicted for the murder of sir John Dineley Goodere; they are also charged on the coroner's inquest with the same murder; and though it is impossible for human nature not to feel some emotions of tenderness at so affecting a sight as now presents itself at the bar; yet, gentlemen, should the guilt of this black and frightful murder be fixed upon the prisoners (as from my instructions I fear it will be), pity must then give way to horror and astonishment at the baseness and barbarity of the fact and circumstances; and our sorrow ought to be that, through the lenity of the laws, the unnatural author and contriver of so shocking a piece of cruelty, and this, his brutal accomplice in the ruffianly execution of it, should be to share the common fate of ordinary malefactors.

He then proceeds to point out that the indictment alleges that Mahony strangled the deceased, and that Goodere was present aiding and abetting him in the act; that therefore it would be immaterial for the jury which of the two actually committed the act, if they were acting together; and that it would not be material whether they strangled the deceased with a rope, a handkerchief, or their hands, 'so the kind of death be proved.' Goodere was Sir John's brother, and there had long been a quarrel between them owing to various causes, particularly because Sir John had cut off the entail of a property in Worcestershire, to which Goodere would otherwise have been the heir in default of Sir John's issue. He had recently been appointed captain of the _Ruby_ man-of-war, and in January last she was lying in the King's road, within the county of Bristol. Sir John had been ordered to Bath for his health, and had made an engagement to call, on his way there, at the house of Mr. Jarrit Smith, in Bristol, to transact some business. Goodere had asked Smith to arrange a meeting between him and his brother to effect a reconciliation, and accordingly this visit, which was to take place on Tuesday the 13th of January, had been fixed upon for the purpose. On Monday the 12th, Goodere and Mahony called at the White Hart Inn, near the foot of College Green, in view of, and almost opposite to, Smith's house; and Goodere, commending the view from a closet above the porch, ordered breakfast to be prepared for him there the next day. On Tuesday, Goodere, accompanied by Mahony, and a gang of men belonging to a privateer called the _Vernon_, whom he had hired to assist him in seizing Sir John, 'but whom one would have thought, the name of that gallant admiral should have inspired with nobler sentiments,' came to the White Hart, where Goodere went upstairs to the closet he had ordered, and the others posted themselves below to watch for Sir John. He soon arrived, armed with pistols, and followed by a servant, but only made a short stay at Mr. Smith's, promising to come again the next Sunday. He was too well protected for it to be advisable to interfere with his movements, but Goodere's men, at his order, followed him a little way down the hill as he left the house. Mr. Smith afterwards told Goodere that his brother would return the next Sunday, and advised him to be in the way, that he might bring them together. Goodere accordingly made all his arrangements to effect his purpose. He ordered one Williams, a midshipman, to bring up the man-of-war's barge on Sunday, to leave it at a point a little below Bristol, with two or three men in charge of her, and to bring on the rest of the crew to meet him at the White Hart, explaining that he was going to bring some one on board. Accordingly, on the Sunday, Goodere, the barge-men, and the privateersmen, all met at the White Hart; and at three in the afternoon Goodere went across to Mr. Smith's. There he met his brother, with whom he spent some time, conversing and drinking with him apparently on perfectly friendly terms. After half an hour, however, Sir John rose to go, followed by his brother; as soon as they got into the street Goodere made a sign to his men in the White Hart, who immediately seized Sir John, and partly led him, and partly carried him towards the boat which was waiting for them, as Goodere had ordered. Sir John made what resistance he could, calling out that he was ruined, and that his brother was going to take his life; his captors, however, explained to bystanders who tried to interfere that he was a murderer, whom they were arresting, and kept off the crowd by means of the bludgeons and truncheons with which they were armed. They could not prevent Sir John, however, from calling out, as he was being put into the barge, that he was going to be murdered, that the people by were to tell Mr. Smith, and that his name was Sir John Dineley. The privateersmen were landed lower down the river, and at about seven in the evening Sir John was brought on board the _Ruby_. There his brother pretended to the crew that he was a madman, and shut him up in the purser's cabin, on to the door of which he had two new bolts fitted. A sentry was posted outside the door, but at some time after midnight he was relieved by Goodere himself, who admitted Mahony and White, keeping back another man from approaching it. A struggle was heard in the cabin, and Sir John calling out, 'Murder! must I die! Help, for God's sake! save my life, here are twenty guineas, take it!' Then Mahony called for a light, which was handed in to him by Goodere, while he still kept another man away from the cabin door by his cutlass. Goodere then withdrew to his cabin, and Mahony and White were put ashore in the ship's yawl. In the morning the ship's cooper, who had heard Sir John calling out, and in fact seen a part of the attack on him through a chink, broke open the door of the purser's cabin and found the dead body. Goodere was then arrested by the crew, and brought before the Mayor of Bristol, where he denied all knowledge of the matter.

_Shepard_ asked that the witnesses for the prosecution should be ordered out of court.