FRANZ MULLER.
24th October 1864
Reference Numbert18641024-920
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceDeath

Related Material

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Navigation< Previous text (front matter) | Next text (trial account) >

920. FRANZ MULLER (23), was indicted for the Wilful Murder of Thomas Briggs.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL, with MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE, MESSRS. HANNEN, GIFFARD, and BEASLBT, conducted the Prosecution. MR. SERJEANT PARRY, with MESSRS. METCALFE and BESLEY, appeared for the Defence. DAVID BUCHAN. I reside at 23, Nelson-square, Peckham—the deceased, Mr. Briggs, was a relation of my wife's—I believe he was sixty-nine years of age, and about five feet nine or ten inches in height—he came to our house on 9th July, almost exactly at 5 o'clock; he came very punctually—he had a black bag with him, out of which he took something at our house—he dined with us that day, and left about half-past 8—I accompanied him from my house to the Lord Nelson, in the Old Kent-road, and saw him into an omnibus—he would get out at King William-street, for the purpose of going to Fenchurch-street railway-station—when I parted with him he was in his usual health and spirits—I know the general appearance of the watch be used to wear; I could not swear to it—I know he wore a watch and chain; be used to wear it in his waistcoat-pocket, attached to a button-hole, the chain attached to his button-hole at one end and the watch in his pocket—he had a small seal attached to the watch, and two keys—I am sure he had his watch that night, from his referring to it before he left my house to see whether he was in time for the train—in consequence of some information that I received I went next morning to the railway, and then to Mr. Briggs's house; it was between 10 and 11 in the forenoon—he was still alive, but quite insensible, and remained so until he died—I left before he died, but I understand he died before midnight—while I was there he did not recover consciousness.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PABRT. Q. Was Mr. Briggs perfectly sober, when he parted from you? A. Perfectly sober—he was in good spirits, and perfectly self-collected; I am quite certain of that—my wife is

here—she was examined before the Coroner—I don't know sufficiently of Mr. Briggs's habits to know whether he had more than one hat; I should think he had—I believe he was a gentleman well off in the world—he lived in a fair and reasonable style—the Peckham omnibus goes up the Old Kent-road, through the Borough, over London-bridge, into King William-street—that is its route from Peckham—I walked with Mr. Briggs to the Lord Nelson, which is in the Old Kent-road—the omnibus starts from there—I am not aware, of my own knowledge, that any threats had been held out by anyone to Mr. Briggs—I heard my wife say so; my wife was examined before the Coroner, but not before the Magistrate.

CAROLINE BUCHAN . I am a relation of the deceased gentleman, Mr. Briggs—he was at our house to dinner on 9th July—he was quite well when he left—he was perfectly sober—I never saw him again alive.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You were examined before the Coroner, I believe? A. I was, and not before the Magistrate; my evidence was considered of no importance, I believe; it was simply corroborating my husband's statement—I was asked certain questions before the Coroner—I have not personally heard any one use threats towards Mr. Briggs—I have not heard it from any person's lips, other than through a third party—the Coroner himself asked me that question—it was a person to whom he refused to leud money.

THOMAS FISHBOURNE . I am a ticket-collector at the Fenchurch-street station—it is my duty to mark the tickets of passengers who are going by the North London railway—for that purpose I stand at the bottom of the stairs which lead up to the platform—there is a considerable flight of stairs up to the platform, which passengers have to pass after they leave me—I was not particularly acquainted with the late Mr. Briggs; I knew him by sight, that was all—he was in the habit of travelling by the railway—I saw him on the night of 9th July—he presented his ticket to me, in the ordinary way, at a quarter to 10 o'clock—a train would start about that time—I don't know whether it was a minute or so late—he presented his ticket to me in time to start by the train which started, or ought to have started, at 9. 45—he spoke to me and I answered him—I marked his ticket—I heard 10. of his death about 12 o'clock on the next day—I went to his house and 11. recognized him there.

HARRY VERNEZ . I am a clerk in the employment of Messrs. Robarts and Co.—on Saturday, 9th July, I went to the Hackney station of the North London railway, at about 10 o'clock in the evening—I was in company with Mr. Jones, who is a clerk in the same employment as myself—I took a first-class ticket for Highbury—on the arrival of the train from Fenchurch-street I went to a first-class carriage—I opened the door myself; it was empty, and I and Mr. Jones got in—I sat on the right-hand side going in—that would he with my face to the engine; about the centre of the carriage, I think—before the train started Mr. Jones called my attention to some blood on his hand—we immediately called the guard—he brought a light, and we all got out; there were two other people besides Mr. Jones and myself, who got into the carriage—when the guard came with the light, I saw a hat, a stick, and a black bag in the carriage—the guard then locked up the carriage, leaving those articles in it, and we got into another carriage.

SIDNEY JONES . I live at 10, Barnsbury-park, Islington, and am a clerk in the banking-house of Robarts and Co.—on the evening of 9th July I was with the last witness, Mr. Vernez—I went with him to the Hackney station about 10 o'clock, and took a first-class ticket; I was provided with a ticket

—I won't say that I took it, or my friend—we proceeded by the train then going to Highbury—we got into a first-class carriage; the same carriage—he opened the door, I believe—on entering the carriage I saw a black bag on the left-hand side of the seat nearest the door, and I threw it on the opposite seat.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARKY. Q. You knew Mr. Briggs very well, I believe? A. Yes—I was in the same bank with him as a clerk—I had seen him during the previous twelve months from day to day—I had known him about four years.

BENJAMIN AMES . I am a guard on the North London railway—I was the guard of the train that left Fenchurch-street at 9.50 on Saturday night, 9th July—it was five minutes after its time—being late in arriving at Fenchurch-street I had no time to see the tickets or shut the doors, because I had to shut the doors on the arrival side—I knew Mr. Briggs just as a passenger—I did not observe him that night—on the train arriving at the Hackney-station my attention was called by Mr. Vernez to the state of a first-class carriage, No. 69; after I got notice from the gentleman that there was something the matter with that compartment of the carriage, I went back to my breakvan and procured my hand-lamp, which we always carry—I then examined the carriage—on the near side cushion there were marks of blood; that is, the cushion nearest the engine—on the quarter-light, on the near side, there was blood trickling down—the quarter-light is a square of glass that shows light into the carriage even with the seat—after examining that part of the carriage I looked underneath and found a hat and stick—the hat was flattened up—this (produced) looks very much like the hat; there were marks of blood upon it—it was flattened up—there was blood also on the stick and on the bag—I pulled the windows up and locked the carriage door—there were no passengers in the carriage when I went to inspect it—I locked up the carriage with the hat, and stick, and bag in it, and told them to telegraph on Chalk Farm for my inspector to meet me there—Mr. Greenwood is the superintendent there—when we arrived at Chalk Farm Mr. Greenwood examined the carriage; it was then locked up again and brought to Bew station—it has never been used since; it stands in the shed there now—the blood has not been washed away that I know of—Mr. Greenwood took charge of the hat, stick, and bag, as lost property, at the lost-property office.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Was there a considerable quantity of blood? A. There was a goodish drop of blood altogether about—there were a great many spots of blood on the carriage-cushion—I did not notice any on the floor—on the opposite cushion there was a finger-mark, as though a hand had been wiped on it—the blood was in a liquid state when I saw it—there was blood on the glass of the window; it seemed to be a spot about the size of a crown-piece, and was trickling down the glass—the largest pool of blood that I saw was, I should think, about the size of a sixpence; it might be a little more; that was on the cushion—there was more than one spot, two or three—I cannot give you the time that I arrived at Hackney; I can tell you the time that I left—we do not book the time we arrive, only the time of departure—we left Fenchurch-street at 9.50 and we left Hackney at 10.15—we left the Bow-station at one minute past 10—there is a station between Bow and Hackney, Victoria-park-station, or it is sometimes called Hackney-wick—I have not measured the distance between the Bow station and Hackney—I did not see Mr. Briggs that night—I did not see him at the Bow station—we left Hackney-wick at 10.5 and Hackney at 10.15—my attention being called to the state of the carriage caused me to be longer at Hackney—we stayed there, I should say, about four minutes—I have not

measured the distance between Bow-station and Hackney-wick—we deviate in the time it takes us to travel—sometimes we run harder than at others; in greasy weather we cannot run so fast—on the night in question we may have been three minutes or three minutes and a half in going from Bow-station to Hackney-wick—I had nothing to do with the discovery of the body—I do not know where it was found.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. You speak of blood on the seat; did you observe blood on any other part of the carriage when you examined it first? A. On the quarter-light and on the off-side cushion, the same side, apparently a piece about the size of a fourpenny-piece—I examined the door on the other side—there was blood there, on the handle, on the off-side.

WILLIAM TIMMS . I am a guard on the North London Railway—I brought up a train of empty carriages from Victoria-park or Hackney-wick station on 9th July—I left about twenty minutes past 10—we have to go over the canal-bridge—when we arrived at about that point, the driver called my attention to an object in the six-foot way—we put on the breaks, and stopped the train as soon as we possibly could—on returning to the spot I found it was the body of a man lying there—he was lying on his back, with his head towards Hackney—he was not lying in a slanting direction, but straight; about midway on the six-foot way; that is between the up and down lines—I picked the body up, and took it to a public-house in the neighbourhood—he was alive at that time—a medical man was sent for directly.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You say you carried the body; how many persons were with you, do you think, or assisted you, or were about at the time? A. It took four or five of us to carry the body across—no persons came to the place where the body lay till they were called upon—we went to the public-house and got assistance—several persons came besides the persons that carried the body; a good many persons came besides, I dare say there might be a dozen altogether.

COURT. Q. YOU found the body lying straight between the rails? A Yes; between the up and down lines, in the six-foot—the head was towards Hackney.

ALFRED EKIN . I was the engine-driver of the train of which the last witness was the guard on 9th July—we started from the Victoria-park station about twenty minutes past 10, and were proceeding on the line towards Fenchurch-street—on my way my attention was attracted to something on the line—it was a black object lying in the six-foot; I should say it was very nearly halfway between the two stations—I have not measured the distance—we had not passed the canal-bridge when I saw it; we were just entering on to it—I called the attention of the last witness to what I saw—we stopped the engine as soon as we could, and went back to where the body was lying—I did not take part in carrying the body; I stopped with the train while they conveyed it away—I did not go to the public-house—after the body was carried away, I did not see any more of it—when I first called the attention of the last witness to it there was nobody else there but our fireman—no one came before the last witness had gone to the public-house.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Where the body was found, do the rails run on an embankment? A. Yes; I cannot rightly tell you the height of the embankment, but I should say it was about eight or nine yards.

EDWARD DOUGAN Policeman, K 71) I was on duty in Wick-lane, Bow,

about twenty minutes past 10, on the night of 9th July—in consequence of a cry I heard on the line, I went up the embankment—it is a steep embankment—I dare say it is about eight or nine steps up to it—there is a kind of path made there, by persons going up and down, at the corner of the bridge—I saw several persons carrying a gentleman down off the line—I accompanied the persons who carried him, to the Mitford Castle public-house—I saw his condition, and sent for a surgeon—I searched him, and found four sovereigns and some keys in his left-hand trousers' pocket—in the vest pocket I found a florin and half of a first-class ticket of the North London Railway—in the right-hand trousers' pocket there was ten shillings and sixpence, in silver and copper, and some more keys—I also found a silver snuff-box, and a number of letters and papers, and a silk-handkerchief, and there was a diamond-ring on the little finger, which I took away—there was a gold fastening attached to his waistcoat, but I could not undo it—it was a patent fastening—I saw that his shirt was much rumpled, and there was one black stud in the front, which I took also, only one—I have measured the distance from Bow Station to the spot where the body was found—it is 1,434 yards, and from the spot to Hackney-wick Station is 740 yards—the whole distance from Bow to Hackney-wick is a mile and 414 yards—I have not measured the distance from Hackneywick to Hackney.

FRANCIS TOULMIN . I am a medical practitioner and Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, carrying on my business at Lower Clapton—I was the usual medical attendant of the late Mr. Briggs, and had been so for some years—I believe him to have been in his 70th year—he enjoyed very good health until this spring, when he had an illness, erysipelas, from which he had perfectly recovered, but he was in danger for some time—on the morning of 10th July, between 2 and 3 o'clock, I was sent for—I arrived between 2 and 3—I cannot speak to half an hour—it was before 3—I found Mr. Briggs still living—he was groaning, but perfectly unconscious—I was with him from time to time, until he died at a quarter to 12 on the Sunday night.

Q. I suppose it was a hopeless case from the commencement? A. Nothing whatever could have been done in a surgical point of view—I made a careful post-mortem examination on the Tuesday following, in the presence of Mr. Brereton, Mr. Cooper, and other gentlemen—I made notes of it immediately afterwards, as soon as I returned home.

Q. I dare say, from your recollection, you can tell us what was the state of the head? A. The cartilage of the left ear was severed by a jagged wound—about an inch anterior to that ear was a deeper wound, that extended to the bone, if not into it; that I will not undertake to say exactly, but it was to the bone—over the temporal muscle was a contused wound, a superficial and grazed wound, not a deep wound, what one would call a contused wound—there were several wounds on the scalp, incised wounds; I think as many as four, and one other, that was near the crown of the head, (pointing out its position)—it was rather behind the others, but on the crown of the head, a little behind what we term the vertex—that was an incised wound, three inches in length—the others were about three-fourths of an inch in length, and all having a direction from before to behind—that applies to all the wounds on the top of the head—those wounds all extended through the hairy scalp, down to the pericranium, the membrane that invests the skull, but had not divided that membrane—on removing the scalp, the skull was found to be extensively fractured, the fissures extending in various directions, radiating as it were from the centre—I have here some sketches that were taken—it is not quite possible to say whether that implies one blow, or more—

in this centre, a portion of the outer commencement of the parietal bone was separated entirely, about three-fourths of an inch in length, and half an inch in width—that was perfectly separated, and fell out—it was a triangular portion, quite detached—there was effusion of blood between the scalp and the calvarium, or skull-cap—there was a large quantity between the scalp and the skull, or bones of the skull—there was further blood between the skull-cap and the dura mater, or investing membrane of the brain—I have not described all the wounds, though probably enough—besides these, the temporal bone was driven in upon the brain.

Q. Were the wounds all, or any of them, in your opinion, inflicted by a blunt or a sharp instrument? A. The wounds on the top of the head I cannot account for, except upon the presumption that they were inflicted by a blunt instrument, used with considerable force—the wound on the left ear I believe to have been also inflicted by a blunt instrument, but of that I will not speak so certainly; that was my impression.

Q. Are you able to say whether many blows had been struck? A. There were four or five distinct wounds on the scalp, which would account, I presume, for so many distinct blows—my observation as to their being made with a blunt instrument applies to all of those, and I am especially guided to that, by what I referred to just now, namely, that the pericranium was not divided, which I assume it would have been if a sharp instrument had been used—there was no wound about the head that could be attributed to a sharp instrument.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. How many wounds were inflicted altogether? A. Five or six—the contused wound on the temple may have arisen from a fall—the incised wounds on the crown of the head were three inches long—they went through the scalp, but not through the pericranium—the thickness of the scalp would probably be not quite half an inch—they were, perhaps, not so much as half an inch deep; so much depends on the thickness of the hairy scalp—Mr. Briggs was about five feet eight inches in height—he was somewhat heavier in weight recently, because he had increased in flesh since his illness—I should imagine he was between eleven and twelve stone, but it is mere conjecture—I should say he was not more than twelve stone.

ALFRED HENRY BRERETON . I am a surgeon, and live in the Old Ford-road—I was called in to see Mr. Briggs when he was at the Mitford Castle public-house, on Saturday, 9th July, about 11 o'clock—I was the first medical man that saw him—I found him in a lower room, near to the bar—he was evidently suffering from compression of the brain—the room being close, I had him removed to an upper room, and there laid on a mattress on a table—I endeavoured to restore reaction by different methods, but failed—there was a jagged cut wound on the ear, across the cartilage of the ear—in front of the same ear, the left, there was also another jagged wound—above the same ear there was also a swelling, a scalp tumour—there were also two deep wounds on the vertex of the head.

Q. Could you judge from the appearances in what manner those wounds had been inflicted? A. I made, at the time, two distinctions between the wounds; that is between the wounds on the vertex of the head, and those on the left side of the head—I thought the wounds on the left side of the head were owing to the fall from the carriage, and the wounds above I attributed to some blunt instrument, probably used with violence—he did not recover his consciousness during the time I was with him—I was with him the whole night, up to 6 next morning—he was then attended by Mr. Toulmin, his ordinary medical attendant—I made some examination of the

carriage at 6 o'clock on the Sunday morning—on the off-side there was evidently blood spurted on the lower panels of the carriage, on the inside of the door—there was also blood on the iron step, and also on the footboard of the carriage, and the platform.

COURT. Q. Will you repeat that? A. There was blood spurted in the outside lower panels on which the body of the carriage rests, and on the inside of the panel of the door as you open the door from the inside; also on the iron step, and on the wooden platform.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. What is the wooden platform? A. The wooden rail which forms one of the steps into the carriage, and which you step on before you get on to the iron step—there was also blood on the kinder wheel of that division of the carriage—I did not observe whether there was any on the door handle—I found a link of a chain in the carriage—I gave it to the police—I found it on the near-side mat, in front of the near-side cushion.

VINCENT MORTON COOPER . I am a member of the Royal College of Surgeons—I was called in to see Mr. Briggs shortly after the accident—I saw him about an hour after the occurrence—I made an examination with Mr. Toulmin and Mr. Brereton—there were some scalp wounds over the two parietal bones, there was a jagged wound of the left ear, also a tumour over the left ear—there were a few bruises about the forehead, one, especially, and also a large wound in front of the ear, a deep wound—the skull was fractured.

Q. Could you form any opinion whether any or all of the wounds you have mentioned were caused by a blunt instrument? A. I think that the wounds on the top of the head were caused by a blunt instrument, but not the wound over the left ear, taking a blunt instrument not to be a stone, or anything of that kind—I think it was caused by coming into collision with a stone on the line.

COURT. Q. YOU think it was caused by a fall on a stone? A. I think so.

GEORGE GREENWOOD . I am station-master at Chalk Farm station on the North London Railway—on Saturday night, 9th July, about half-past 9 o'clock, Ames drew my attention to a compartment of a first-class carriage at the Chalk Farm Station—I took from it a hat, a bag, and a walking-stick—these (produced) are the three articles—I locked them up until the next morning, and then gave them into the hands of Lambert the policeman.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. When do you say you took this hat from the carriage? A. About 10.30—I took it into my own room, and locked it up for the night—that I am sure of—I gave it to Lambert the next morning, Sunday morning—it is not now in exactly the same condition as when I had it—it has been torn about—the lining was not quite so much torn as it is at present—the lining was pointing upwards, as if the hat had been pressed down hard on the head, and pulled off, and the lining taken out with it.

LEWIS LAMBERT (Policeman, K 311). On Sunday afternoon, 10th July, I went to the Chalk Farm station of the North London Railway—the station-master, Mr. Greenwood, handed me a hat, stick, and bag—these are the articles—I took them them to Mr. Briggs's house in Clapton-square, to see if they were owned—young Mr. Briggs owned the stick and bag, but the hat he knew nothing of—I took them to Bow station, and gave them up to Inspector Kerressey—they were in my care till I gave them up to him.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You dropped an expression that young Mr. Briggs would not own the hat? A. No; he did not—he did

not know anything of it—he said it was not his father's hat—that was the hat found in the railway carriage—I had nothing to do with the other hat.

WALTER KERRESSEY (Police-inspector, K) I produce the hat, stick, and bag—I received them from Lambert—they have not been in my care ever since—I handed the hat over to Inspector Tanner on the 11th—the stick and bag have also been under his care since the last examination at Bow-street—up to that time they were under my care—on Sunday morning, 10th July, about 10 o'clock, I went to the Bow station, and in a shed there saw railway carriage, No. 69—I observed its condition—the handle of the door on the off-side was bloody—that would be the off-side, supposing it was going in the direction of Hackney—I also observed blood on the inside, on the cushions, on the front part of the carriage, and likewise on the near window—there was a little blood on the off window, and a little blood on the off step, the footboard outside, on the same side as the handle, and also on the panel of the carriage, outside, on the same side—I afterwards went to Mr. Briggs's house in Clapton-square—I arrived there about 11 o'clock—I saw him—he was then alive, but insensible—I did not take anything from his waistcoat that morning, I did on the Tuesday morning—I observed a hook on his waistcoat that morning—I produce it—it was fastened to the waistcoat at the third button-hole—it was given to me on the Tuesday by Mr. Thomas Briggs—I saw him take it out of the waistcoat—it is a patent hook, difficult to undo—he knew how to undo it—it is now open, but, if closed, there are not many persons would know how to open it—I also produce a ring that I received from police-sergeant Prescott—it is what is commonly called a jump ring—Mr. Brereton was present at the time I received it (produced)—I have heard it termed a jump ring by watchmakers—I also produce a gold chain, with seals attached to it, a swivel seal, and two keys—I received that from Mr. Death.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Had you directions from Sir Richard Mayne to act in this case? A. I had directions from Sir Richard Mayne to go to New York—I went to New York on 22d July—up to that time I had been making inquiries in respect of this case, in regard to procuring evidence of all the facts connected with it, in order to bring them before the Coroner and the Magistrate—I know a person of the name of Thomas Lee—I only know him from seeing him, by being examined—he was not examined before the Coroner in my presence—he was not examined at all in my presence—I have heard that he was examined—I believe the first reward was offered about 11th July—that was a reward of 200l., 100l. by the Government, and 100l. by Robarts's Bank—afterwards, the North London Railway Company offered another 100l. reward, which made 300l.—I cannot tell when that was—it was immediately after, less than a week or so after, I think—these rewards were placarded at my station, and I have seen them at several stations—I cannot say that I have seen them all through London—my station is at Bow—I have seen them advertised in the newspapers—I have not seen them placarded on the walls in London—I have no doubt that they have been—I noticed that the handle of the door was bloody—I am sure of that—there was no blood at all on Mr. Briggs's hand.

DR. HENRY LETHEBY . I am professor of chemistry at the London Hospital—I made a particular inspection of this railway carriage, with a view to ascertain whether there was blood, the nature of the blood, and so on—I examined the carriage on Tuesday, 26th of July last—the carriage was at Bow—it was No. 69 carriage—I examined the first compartment of the carriage, next to the buffers—there were three compartments, I think—three

or four, I am not sure which, but it was the first of the three, the end compartment—I observed blood on two of the cushions—I have ascertained that it was blood—it had all the characteristics of human blood—I have measured the globules of the blood, and believe it to be human blood—it was on the first cushion on the left hand side of the carriage, as we were facing the front of the carriage; I mean, the cushion nearest the engine—it was very nearly in the centre of the cushion—the cushion had been turned—the proper side was covered with cloth, but it had been turned, so that the leather or under part had been turned uppermost, and therefore the blood had been retained in the cushion, and it was in a large quantity—I found the most blood about the middle of the cushion.

Q. I will draw your attention to what I may call the left hand corner, next the window; was there any blood in that corner, or near to it? A. There was blood on the glass immediately over the cushion—it was blood having all the characteristics of human blood—it was blood that had been living when it came on the glass, from the coagulum in it, and it contained also particles of brain matter—it was in the shape of two large spots—they appeared to be splashes of blood, not at all having the character of blood ejected from a vessel, but rather blood that had been splashed from a blow on the surface—each spot was very nearly about the size of a sixpence—if a person had been sitting on that part of the carriage, and had been struck on the left side of his head as he was leaning his head against the glass, that effect might have been produced—on the opposite cushion, the one farthest from the engine, there were about thirty spots of blood—they were small spots—there were two spots on the cushion next the principal cushion on the same side, and there was a spot likewise, I think, on the other side, in fact, there was blood on all four of the cushions—I examined the door, and the handle—there were spots of blood outside the door, but I did not observe any spots of blood on the door itself—there were spots of blood on the carriage, and the spots trailed in the direction of the hinder part of the carriage—I looked at the stick; there was blood upon that; I see it there now—there is very little, but it is there, in very thin layers on the surface of the stick—it covers a large surface, but in quantity it is not much; it extends from the lower part to where my finger is—there was no appearance of blood on the top part—I examined it very carefully, and could not find any blood on the top of the stick—I discovered marks of blood about six or seven inches from the top of the stick—the top is a good deal smoother than the rest.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARBY. Q. When did you examine the carriage? A. On 26th July, and the stick on the 6th October—there was very little blood on the stick—it is there now; I think it can be seen.

COURT. Q. Does it require a magnifying power to see it? A. Not to see the spots, but it requires a magnifying power to discover it to be blood.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You have used a microscope, I take it for granted? A. I have used chemical tests, and the microscope—the microscope is the surest—I have not examined anything else at the request of the prosecution—I have examined no clothes of any kind.

JOHN DEATH . I live at 55, Cheapside, and am by business a jeweller—I know the prisoner very well—I first saw him on Monday, 11th July; he came into the shop just before 10 o'clock in the morning—a chain was produced to my brother—I was called into the shop by my brother—chains were being shown to the prisoner on the counter—my brother handed me

a chain, saying that the customer wished to part with it in exchange, asking me to value it—this (produced) is the chain and appendages—(This was numbered 1, produced by Kerressey)—I examined the chain closely with a magnifying glass in the presence of the prisoner—I then went behind him to weigh it in some scales that were fixed there—as I did so, he turned round to see me do it—I weighed the chain, and then told him that I would give him 3l. 10s. for it—he silently accepted that; tacitly accepted it—I understood him to accept that price—he was to take a chain in exchange—there were chains before him at the time—he then said, "I want one of the same cost"—I understood of the same value; but that was the term he used—I then selected a chain at 3l 15s., which was the nearest in price there—he made some objection to that—he said he objected to it on account of its having the drop appendages like this—it was a chain that hung in this form—it was objected to, but I persevered to sell that chain, and he then said he would take it if I would give it to him for the same sum, 3l. 10s—that I said I would not do—I then looked in my stock, and found a chain at 3l. 5s.—I showed him that, and he very shortly accepted that chain—I then asked my brother for a box, which he handed to me—I put the chain that he had bought into the box, and made a parcel of it, and gave it to him—after a moment's pause, I said, "What will you take for the 5s.?"—he immediately answered, "A finger; ring"—I showed him about half a dozen on a card, one of which was 5s.—I took that from the card, and gave it to him to try—he put it on his finger; it fitted him, and after some little observation of it, he accepted it for the balance—this (looking at it) is the box; the same shape, size, and colour as the one in which I packed the chain—I believe it to be the same box.

Q. Now just take into your hand that chain the prisoner left with you, and that jump-ring, as it is called. Can you tell me whether or not that ring ever formed part of that chain? A. There must have been a jump-ring to this chain at this junction to connect the two parts of the chain and the hook together—there is now a piece of wire to it (examining it through a magnifying glass) it is the same as when I examined it at first—it is a common pin without a head, bent round, which serves the same purpose; but the two parts of the chain are likewise held together by a piece of string, which connects this T with the chain, and that piece of string must have connected the chain for a length of time, so that the chain would not break when the jump-ring was taken away—the piece of string has been used for the purpose of attaching a gold key to the chain, so that the chain would not part on the jump-ring being broken—it is in the same condition as it was when I first saw it—I sent a letter by post to Inspector Kerressey at Bow that same afternoon, as the prisoner had been there in the morning, and afterwards went with the officers to New York—the ring had a white Cornelian stone with a head rudely engraved upon it.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Is it a common business of yours to exchange as well as sell directly? A. Very common—my brother saw the prisoner—the prisoner saw me weighing the chain; he was close to it; there was only a show-case parting him—before asking to exchange the chain, he did not ask me its value—he did not speak to me about it—the chain was handed to me by my brother—my brother is minding my shop—he will come here at short notice—I had never, to my knowledge, seen the prisoner in my shop before that morning—I am mostly in the shop—my brother and I are constantly in the shop; I am the more constantly of the two-my brother might do a little job, and I have nothing to do with it, or he might

receive communications from customers with which I might personally have nothing to do.

Q. Look at that chain (chain No. 2 was handed to the witness). Do you remember an incident of this kind in November, 1863; did not the prisoner get a link put to that chain in your shop, and did not he pay you 1s. 6d for it? A. Certainly not, to my knowledge.

Q. Did he not call two or three times at your shop after he had left the chain to have a link put to it? A. I never saw him before the Monday—the chain I gave in exchange was a chain in all respects the same as this—I believe this is the chain—(a chain numbered 3 was handed to the witness.)

Q. I made a mistake in putting the other chain into your hands; that is the chain I referred to with respect to a link being put to it; it is so trifling a circumstance that you may have forgotten it, but just look carefully at that chain? A. I don't think I ever saw it before—I could not tell my own workmanship in such a matter as the putting in of a link—I do not recollect the prisoner offering to exchange another chain at my shop in June last—my memory is very good for persons—this chain has been mended—I could not say whether it was my work or not—I cannot remember the chain.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Do you say you are sure you have never seen that chain? A. I am quite sure I have never seen that chain—as far as my memory serves me, until that morning I had never seen the prisoner.

ELLEN BLYTH . I am the wife of George Blyth, a messenger, and reside at 16, Park-terrace, Old Ford-road—I know the prisoner—he lodged at our house about seven weeks, ending on 14th July—he occupied the first floor back room—he took his meals with us—I knew what his occupation was, a tailor—he was in the habit of leaving our house about half-past 7, or from that to 8—I remember the morning of Saturday, 9th July—I saw the prisoner that morning—he went away about 11 o'clock—I had no reason to expect him home at any particular time—I sat up till 11 o'clock—he had not come home then—he had a latch-key—I did not hear him come in that night—my husband also went to bed at 11—I saw the prisoner next morning, between 8 and 9 o'clock—he breakfasted with us—he stopped at home during the day, and in the evening he went out with me and my husband, and came back with us—he spent the day with us on Sunday—on Monday morning, I saw him between 7 and 8—he breakfasted with us that morning—he left the house about 8 o'clock—I saw him again between 8 and 9 on the Monday evening—I had no conversation in particular with him on the Monday evening—he spent some time in my room with me—he showed me a gold Albert chain (looking at chain No. 2)—I do not know whether that is the chain; I did not examine it enough to know it again; it is something similar to it—he did not say anything to me about the chain—he left us on the Thursday morning—when he came to us, he brought a hat-box, and a long black box—this hat-box (produced) has the same name in it, "Walker, 49, Crawford-street, Marylebone"—I found that hat-box in the prisoner's room after he left—I delivered it up to police-inspector Tiddey.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. On the Sunday, did the prisoner pass his day much the same as he usually did with you? A. Yes—there was nothing in his manner at all different to that which he usually exhibited—he lodged with me seven weeks, but I have known him for

more than twelve months—I have always known him to be a quiet, inoffensive, well-behaved young man—I had plenty of opportunity of judging of his temper in every respect—he used to take his meals with us—he did so on the Sunday—he was of a very kind and humane disposition—he walked out with us on the Sunday, and exhibited the same manner that he usually exhibited—it was our usual Sunday walk—my husband was with us—my husband was not examined before the Cororner or before the Magistrate; he has not been examined at all—the prisoner wore the same dress on the Sunday that he wore on the Saturday.

Q. Did he wear the same dress on the Monday when he went out as he had worn on the Saturday and the Sunday; do you recollect? A. I cannot recollect the trousers, whether he wore his light trousers or his dark ones—he wore the same coat—a coat has been produced to me, which I recognised as the one that he wore—I believe this (produced) to be the coat that he wore on the Saturday, Sunday, and Monday—I am not sure as to the trousers—I am sure of the trousers he wore on the Sunday; they were the same as those on the Saturday; but I am not sure that the trousers he wore on the Monday were the same as those on the Saturday and Sunday—I was aware that he was lame—I think it was of the left foot—he wore a slipper on the Saturday—I gave that to Mr. Tiddey, the superintendent of police—this is it (produced)—this is the right-foot slipper—I am not certain which foot it was he was lame with—I am quite sure that he was lame, and that he had a slipper on on the Saturday when he went out—this is the slipper that was left at my house by the prisoner—I gave that up with the hat-box to Mr. Tiddey—the prisoner had been lame since the Thursday—the prisoner was very confidential with me and my husband—I do not know whether, when he left on Monday morning, about 8 o'clock, he was going to the docks—I did not know at that time whether he had been to the docks to make any inquiries as to a passage to America—I first heard of his intention to go to America a fortnight previous to his going, a fortnight previous to the 14th of July—he told me when he left in what vessel he was going, the Victoria—he did not give me any address in New York—I knew that he was going to New York—I received this letter from him (read: To Mrs. Blythe, 16, Parkterrace, Old Ford-road, Victoria-park, N. E. London. On the Sea, July 16, in the morning. Dear Friends, I am glad to confess that I cannot have a better time, as I have; if the sun shines nice and the wind blows fair, as it is at the present moment, everything will go well. I cannot write any more, only I have no postage. You will be so kind to take that letter in")—The prisoner is about twenty-three or twenty-four years of age—I did not wash for him until the last week—I then washed six new shirts for him.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. YOU say that he walked out with you on Sunday, how long were you walking? A. Up till 9 o'clock.

COURT. Q. Had he a 'pair of slippers? A. Yes—he went out on Saturday with one of them—this is the one that be wore on his bad foot, the one that he took out with him; the other was left at Mrs. Repsch's.

GEORGE BLYTH . I am the husband of the last witness—I knew the prisoner as lodging with me—he used to go away with me in the morning when he first lodged with me—we sometimes left about half-past 7, or from that to a quarter to 8—from 7th to 14th July, we did not go away together in the morning—I left him at home every morning during that time—I went to town at my ordinary time—on Sunday, 10th, he took a walk with me and my wife in Victoria-park—Victoria-park is about two minutes

walk from our house—he came back with us in the evening—I heard him go up stairs to bed—I did not see him when he came back from town on Monday evening—he came home after I got home, I think, about 8, or between 8 and 9—he and Haffa came in together—I noticed his having a new chain—I had not noticed whether he had been wearing a chain for some time before that evening; he had not one for two or three weeks previously—before that two or three weeks, I had seen him wearing one—it was a different one to that which I saw him with on the Monday evening.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Do I understand you that he used to go out to his work with you up to 7th July I A. Yes—it was about the 7th that he hurt his foot—it was hurt by a cart running up against it—from that time he wore a slipper, up to the Sunday—he wore a slipper on the Sunday morning—I went out with him on the Sunday for a walk in Victoria-park, and my wife went with us—I think we walked all the time—I do not remember sitting down at all in the park—I do not remember whether he sat or not—his dress was the same on the Saturday as he wore on the Sunday—I cannot say as to the Monday; I did not see him much on the Monday; I went out to my work—this coat (produced) is like the one that he wore on the Saturday and Sunday—to the best of my belief, it is the coat—I could not swear to it.

Q. What character did the prisoner bear while he was with you? A. While he was with me, he was a well-conducted young man in every respect; a man of a kind, humane disposition—I never heard of his getting into rows, or committing any assaults—when he left on the Thursday morning, he bade me good-bye—he told me what vessel he was going in, the Victoria, from the London Docks to New York—I had heard of his going to America a fortnight before—it was made quite public amongst his friends and persons living there.

JURY. Q. What time did you leave him on the Saturday morning? A. About half-past 7—I returned home about 7—the prisoner was not at home then—I cannot tell whether he changed his clothes from the time I went out in the morning till the Sunday morning—I did not see him from the Saturday morning till the Sunday morning.

ELIZABETH SARAH REPSCH . I am the wife of William Repsch, a tailor, carrying on business in Jewry-street, Aldgate—I am an Englishwoman, born of German parents—my husband is a German—I have known Muller for some time—I first saw him nearly two years ago—he worked as a tailor—he worked with a person of the name of Hodgkinson for some time, I believe until 2d July—after 2d July he was not in any employment—he came to our house from time to time after 2d July—we were on friendly terms—he had a watch and chain of his own—I have seen it—he has worn it—I connot say for certainty when I last saw that watch and chain on him—I believe he had it while he was working for Mr. Hodgkinson—he told me that he had pledged it—I don't remember whether he told me what he had pledged it for—I believe the watch and chain were pledged separately—on the Saturday, 9th July, he had not got that watch and chain out of pledge—he was at our house on that Saturday—he came, I should think, between 12 and 1 o'clock, or from 11 to 1; I cannot say exactly—he stayed till about half-past 7 in the evening—he was at work there—I don't know whether he was working for himself or for a friend—I know he was not working for my husband—he had met with an accident on the Thursday previous, and he wore a slipper on that day—I can't recollect whether or

not he came in the slipper on the Saturday—he wore a slipper during the day, on the right foot, in fact, he wore two slippers, because he was in the habit of taking off his boots when he came to my house, and putting on his slippers—I remember seeing him with slippers on during the day—I did not see him leave that night—I was out when he left—I have here the slipper of the left foot, which I found after he was gone—the right slipper was gone—he had his boots with him during the day, two boots—whether he came in them or not on the Saturday morning I can't say—he might have had one in his pocket—the two boots were by the side when he changed them, to put on his slippers—when he left neither of those boots remained, they were both gone—he took away both boots, and one slipper—I recollect his changing his clothes that day; he had on a pair of green and black trousers when he came to my house in the morning, and he changed them for a pair of striped ones, an older pair, to sit at work in—when he went away he put on the newer pair, for the working pair was left—I saw him on the Monday morning between 10 and 11 o'clock—he then had on a pair of light trousers—he came in both boots on the Monday morning—he showed me a chain on that Monday morning—I believe this chain (No. 2) to be the same that he showed me—he said he had paid 3l. 15s. for it in the Docks that morning—he had a ring on his finger—it was a plain gold ring with a white stone—he said he had paid 7s. 6d. for that—he said he had got it at the same place that he bought the chain—my husband saw him on the Monday morning as well as myself.

Q. Did you on that Monday morning observe anything with respect to his hat? A. I observed that he had a new hat on, one that I had never seen him in before—I told him he was very extravagant in having another new hat, and he said his old one was smashed, and he had thrown it in the dust-hole—my husband asked him what he gave for it, and his reply was that he had paid 14s. 6d. for it—my husband said it looked more like a guinea hat—nothing more passed about it that I am aware of—I had not seen that hat before—I had observed before that what hat Muller wore.

Q. Before I show it you, just describe to me what kind of hat it was? A. It was a plain black beaver hat with a merino rim inside, and the lining was a striped lining, a broad brown stripe, and a broad blue stripe edged with black and white—my attention was drawn to the lining from its being a peculiar lining—I never saw a hat lined with such a lining before.

Q. How came you to notice the lining? A. As I said before, from its being a pecnliar lining—I have frequently seen him take off his hat, and I have frequently had it in my hands—he was in the habit of putting letters behind the lining—I have seen him do so—before I saw the hat in question I gave a description of it to the police—to the best of my belief this (produced) is the hat—the lining is the same, and the merino also—as far as I can judge it corresponds—I heard the prisoner say that Mr. Matthews made him a present of that hat—Matthews is a cabman—I think it must have been either in November or December of last year that the prisoner told me that—I had not noticed Muller wear any other hat except that—I saw it in the hat-box—he brought it to my house in the hat box when I first saw it—that was either in November or December; Í can't say—it was the same description of hat box as this (produced)—the hat and the hat-box were in my house at one time—he took them away with him again—he brought them to show us, and then took them away.

Q. On Saturday, 9th July, according to your recollection, what hat had Muller on? A. To the best of my belief that is the one, the old one, the

one that I have spoken to—he had a single breasted overcoat—I don't think he had that coat on on Saturday, 9th July, he had a morning-coat on—this (produced) is the light pair of trousers, and this is the old pair I spoke of that he wore on the Saturday at work—the light pair is the pair he came in on the Monday-morning—neither of these is the pair he left my house in on the Saturday-night—I have never seen that pair since.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Do I understand you to say that you actually saw him leave your house that night? A. No, I did not see him leave—the last time I saw him on the Saturday was half-past 7—a person named Haifa was with him—I left him there with him—he had a slipper on the whole of the day on Saturday when I was there—I am not able to say whether he left in the slipper or not—the slipper I have produced is the one that was left at my house on the Saturday—he must have taken the right slipper with him—whether he had it on or not I cannot say for certain, only by what I heard Haifa say—I understood he had been lame of the right foot.

Q. Was Muller rather a vain and boastful man, do you think? A. He was rather fond of finery, and fond of showing the things that he had—I cannot say whether he used to what is called romance a little—he told me that he had told Mrs. Blyth that Messrs. Hodgkinson were sending him out to New York—we of course knew different—he said that he had told Mrs. Blyth that Mr. Hodgkinson was sending him over to America—he did not tell me that he had said he was to have 150l. a year—my husband wears a hat—I could not tell you what was the lining of it—I have constantly had Muller's hat in my hand.

Q. What business had you with the hat? A. He might have put it in my way, and I might have moved it—if it was in my way I had a right in my own place to move it—I was asked just now to describe the hat before it was produced—I saw it at the police-court and before the Coroner—I had it in my hand there—I know Haffa—I have known him about twelve months or more—he has been in the habit of coming to my house, but not of working for me—he works for Mr. Hodgkinson—he does so at the present time—I have known Muller nearly two years—Huffa was constantly in the habit of coming to my place—he wore a hat—I can't tell you the lining of it—I have several male friends who come to my house—I cannot tell the lining of any of their hats.

Q. Then this is the only hat that you looked into so often? A. It was the lining that took my attention—I cannot say how many times I looked into the hat—I cannot undertake to say whether I looked into it thirty, forty, or fifty times—I cannot say whether I looked inside it each time I had it iu my hands—I will not say that I have looked into it thirty or forty times—I may have done so—I know a person named Jonathan Matthews, a cabman—my husband knows him—I have not known him so long as eight years—I should think about six—it was six years ago when I first met him.

Q. How soon after you heard of this murder did you see Matthews? A. Not until after he came from New York—I had not seen him for years, not for all three years—I did not see him before he went to New York.

Q. Were you in the habit of visiting Matthews at all, or he you? A. I think I went there about twice, not more.

Q. Did the prisoner, about a month or two months before the 9th of July, buy some new clothes, to your knowledge? A. Merely a pair of trowsers—I did not ask him about a month or two months before to lend me 5s.—

oh! yes, I did—I cannot remember his saying that he could not do it because he was going to buy a new hat—I do not swear it—I don't believe I said, "Oh! pooh, pooh, you may as well lend me the money"—I don't think I did—I cannot swear it, because I do not remember it—I cannot swear it did not pass—I don't remember his saying it—I remember asking for 5 s. and he lent it to me—I did not say that just now, because I was not asked—he did not say he could not lend it me, he gave it to me—I did not say that just now in answer to your question, because you put another question to me and I had not time; that was my reason, and no other—I don't remember his making any excuse about his going to buy a new hat, because he gave me the money—I have repaid him that;—we settled it—I believe that was the only time I borrowed money from him—I cannot swear it—I cannot swear whether I have borrowed money of him before—my husband was not by when he gave me the 5s.—he knew nothing at all about it—I do not remember Muller saying anything to me about anew hat, nor do I remember saying to him, "You can buy a new hat next week," or anything to that effect.

Q. You told me that you had not seen Mr. Matthews at all until he returned from New York; had you seen Mrs. Matthews? A. Only at the Court—she had not called on me—I saw her at the Court, and only at the Court—I am quite sure of that—I do not expect any of this reward—I cannot say whether the prisoner had the same dress on, except the trousers, on the Monday that he had on the Saturday—I could not say whether he had the velvet-collared coat or the morning coat on.

MR. SOLICITOR GENERAL . Q. Had he the same hat on on the Monday that he had on the Saturday? A. No, he had not—I cannot recollect to a week or two when it was that I asked him to lend me the 5s.—it was repaid in some settlement—I recollect his lending it me—to the best of my recollecttion he did not say anything at all about a hat on that occasion—it was after he had brought the hat in the band-box to show us—he has frequently applied to me to lend him money, and I have lent him a trifle, but he hat paid me back again—I cannot say when the last time was that I lent him a trifle—I don't recollect whether I lent him anything in the last week or fortnight before he went away—I believe I never saw a lining to a hat like this in my life, until I saw this one—I saw the lining when he took it out of the band-box—it was then bran new—I noticed the lining then and said, "What a peculiar lining"—I have seen him put letters behind the lining—I cannot say how often—I think it must have been more than once.

MR. SERJEANT PARRT. Q. Did you pledge a coat for the prisoner on the Wednesday before he left? A. Yes; I believe this is the coat.

Mr. SOLICITOR GENERAL. Q. How came you to pawn the coat for Muller? A. Because he said he had not sufficient money to pay his passage ticket—he asked me to pawn it for him—that was on the Wednesday after the Saturday (the 13th)—I did pawn it for him for 6s. at Mr. Annis's, 121, Minories—I gave the money to Muller on that same day—he came to our house on the Saturday in a pair of dark trousers with green in them, and he took them off while he was working and put on another pair—I did not see him put them on again, or see him in them afterwards before he went away—the old ones which he had worn during the day were left behind, and those that he came in in the morning were gone.

GODFREY FERDINAND REPSCH . I am the husband of the last witness—I have been acquainted with the prisoner some time—he used to come to work at my shop—he came on Saturday, 9th July—I did not see him come in—

I saw him at the time he was working there—he then had on an old pair of trousers—those were trousers which he was accustomed to work in at my shop—when he went away on the Saturday evening those trousers remained behind at my shop—I know of another pair of trousers that he had about a month or six weeks before that, a new pair with green spots, a green mixture—I cannot say when I last saw those trousers—I saw them before he left England, perhaps about a week before; I don't remember—very likely I saw them in that week—I never saw them after the murder of Mr. Briggs—I cannot say that I did not see the prisoner in that dark pair of trousers—I can't say whether I did or not—I remember his coming to my shop on the Monday—he came about 10 o'clock in the morning—he said he had got a new hat, and after that he brought out a watch and chain and said he had come from the docks and he had bought it there; a chain and ring I would say; I beg pardon—he said he bought them in the docks—he said he had bought the hat about two months ago, and he had worn it but three times, on Sundays—he took the chain and ring from his waistcoat pocket—the ring was not attached to the chain; it was on his finger, separate—he took the chain out of his waistcoat pocket—I made an observation about the value of the hat—I said it was worth a guinea—he had told me the price before, 14s 6d

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I believe you had seen him wear the dress that he wore on the Monday, at other times; had you seen him wear the trousers and coat before, that he had on on the Monday? A. Yes, I did so—it was not I that accosted him and said, "You have got a new hat"—my wife made the first reference to it—and he said "Yes, a new hat"—when I was asked to describe what trousers he had on on the Saturday, I said that he had dark trousers, brown and grey, and all colours, very old, and there were brown stripes—that is true—that was on the Saturday—I did not see him go out—I did not ask him to come early on Monday morning—he did come between 10 and 11 o'clock—he had not been there before that I know of—I did not see him before that—I don't know that I asked him to come to Haffa early on Monday morning to help to cut out some pieces of work—I was at home on the Monday morning at 8 o'clock—Haffa was not there then—it was on Tuesday morning that I asked him to fetch some neckties for Haffa—I am sure it was not Monday morning, I did not see him in my house on Monday morning—I knew for some time that he was going to America, and I gave him leave to work up his clothes at my place for that purpose—I went on board the Victoria with him—everybody that knew him knew where he was going to—I have known Jonathan Matthews about eight years—I did not see him at all after the murder till I saw him at Hackney at the inquest—that was the first time I saw him—that was after he had given information to the police—I cannot say whether or not the prisoner wore the trousers that he had on on Saturday, during the week—I cannot say whether I had seen him wear the hat before, that I saw on the Monday—I did not see him for three or four weeks on Sundays at all; I did not see him for a month of Sundays at all.

COURT. Q. Before what day? A. Before the Saturday—he did not come to my house on Sundays.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. About two months before that, had he bought some new clothes, to your knowledge? A. Yes, I know he bought some new clothes—I used not to see him on the Sundays at all—I did not go to see him at Mrs.Blyth's; I never was there.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. You say you had not seen him for three or

four Sundays before then; had you seen him on week days? A. Yes he came to my house in the week days.

Q. Had you noticed before the hat which you noticed on Monday morning? A. No, I did not take any notice, and I should not have taken any notice on the Monday, but for ray wife speaking of it—(looking at a pair of trousers) this is the pair of trousers Muller wore on the Saturday—they are the working trousers—they are the pair that I described to the Magistrate as of different colours—I don't know whether he came in those trousers, or went away in them—I did not see him come in, and I did not see him go away; I only saw him at work—I can't swear whether these trousers were left behind when he went away.

COURT. Q. I suppose it is not unusual for tailors to work in old trousers and slippers? A. It is usual to change their trousers when they come into the room, and to put on slippers.

JOHN HAFFA . I am a journeyman tailor, and work at Messrs. Hodgkinson's—I have known the prisoner about six months—on 9th July, I was at Mr. Repsch's—I saw the prisoner there that day, between 6 and 7 in the evening—I went there and found him there—I don't remember if he was at work or not—I don't think he was at that time—he left before me, between 7 and 8; nearly 8, I may say—he said he was going to see his sweetheart—I had seen him working there before—I did not notice what clothes he had on when he left; it was rather dark when he went away—I saw him again on the Monday following, at Mr. Repsch's, my own lodging, about 2 o'clock in the afternoon—I observed a chain about him on Monday—I had not seen that chain on him before—he said he had bought it—I don't know if he said where—he said he had given 3l. 15s. for it—I left him at Mr. Repsch's, and went to my work—when I came back in the evening, the prisoner was still there—we left Repsch's together—we went together to his lodging and I remained there that night—I took his lodging—I afterwards lent him 12s.

Q. How came you to do that? A. Mr. Repsch came to the place when I work, and told me Mr. Franz Muller had not sufficient money for his passage ticket, he wanted 12s.—I had not the money, and I gave Mr. Repsch a suit of my clothes to pawn to raise the money—that was on Wednesday the prisoner gave me a duplicate of a gold chain as security for my money—I have got the duplicate—it is for a chain pledged at a pawnbroker's of the name of Annis—he did not give me the ticket of a coat—he told me the last evening; as I had the lodging to pay, Mr. Repsch had a ticket for a coat, which I could have for the money that I had to pay for the rent—I afterwards got that ticket for the coat from Mr. Repsch—it is the coat that has been produced to-day—I got it out of pawn the day before Muller came back to London from America—I don't remember the day of the month—I sent it to Scotland-yard the same day I took it out, for him to put on when he came to London.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Was he working for you the week before 9th July? A. He made some things for me, not much—I don't know whether that was on the Saturday or the day before—he was not working the whole week for me—I was well aware of his going to America; he spoke of it as soon as he came to Messrs. Hodgkinson's, and he made up his mind a fortnight before he left—I knew that he was lame—I have seen him in possession of money before 9th July; gold and silver—I can't say how much, but I believe it was sufficient for the passage—I had known him for six months—he bore the character and disposition of a humane and kind

young man—I lodged with him the three last nights—I had. not lodged with him longer, not for some weeks—he slept with me once or twice.

Q. When he said that he was going to see his sweetheart, did he say that he was going to Camber well? A. No, but I understood so—he said that his sweetheart's name was Eldred—this is not the first time I have been asked these questions—I saw him go out from Mr. Repsch's on the Saturday night—it was between 7 and 8, I think it was a quarter to 8, nearly 8 o'clock—he went out with a slipper on his foot—I was aware that he was lame, and had been for two or three days—he told me that a letter-carrier's cart had hurt his foot—I recognise the slipper again (looking at the one produced)—it was a carpet slipper—it was such a slipper as that that I saw on him—that is the slipper—I believe I saw enough money on him the week before the murder to pay his passage—after that Monday, I assisted him in making up his passage-money again—he did not tell me what had become of that money; I did not ask him—I knew of his going to the docks several times, from what he said to me—he did not tell me that he had spent that money in purchasing a watch and chain at the docks; but he said he bought the chain for 3l. 15s,—I could not swear that he did not tell me that he had been down to the docks on the Monday morning; it may be that he said so, I do not remember—I did not know Mr. Deaths, the jeweller's, in Cheapside before this case came on—I do not know anything about Muller's having a gold chain repaired in November last—I did not know Muller at that time.

Q. Did you give him a chain of yours in June to have it exchanged? A. I do not know if it was in June, but he was to exchange or sell a chain for me—I gave him a chain to exchange for another chain, or to sell—he could not do it, and he returned it to me—he did not tell me whether he had been anywhere to change it.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. When was this transaction about the chain; do you recollect at all? A. It may have been at the end of May, or in June—I gave him the chain, and he brought it back again, and nothing more was done—it was the week before he left that I saw him with some money—I did not count it.

JURY. Q. You have stated that on his going away on Saturday, between 7 and 8 o'clock, as he said to see his sweetheart, you are unable to describe his dress because it was dark; do not you know very well that it was not dark at that time in July, but quite light? A. In the lodging where I lived at that time it was rather dark, because it is in a court—the prisoner did not sleep with me on that Saturday night.

ROBERT DEATH . I am the brother of the gentleman who has been examined—I remember somebody coming to our shop with a chain on the morning of 11th July perfectly well—I think I should know that person—I believe the prisoner to be that person—I had never seen him before, to my recollection.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Do you think you had ever seen him before at your shop? A. I don't think I had—I have not the slightest recollection of ever having seen him—I do not remember about June a person leaving a chain with me to be exchanged (looking at chain Ro. 3)—I never saw this chain before, I am positive; it is so peculiar in its character, that I should have remembered it JURY. Q. Has it been repaired. A. It appears to have been repaired. Q. Would you have any entry in your books of the repairing of a chain like that? A. We enter the jobs to the man who does them generally,

but not always, and we could not distinguish any entry, the number of chain repaired are so many.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I think you say it appears to have been mended? A. Yes—we have a boy in the shop—we should send a job of this kind to the jobbing jeweller's; it would be charged to us by the jeweller and we should charge the party.

Q. Do you remember at all the dress of the prisoner on the Monday? A. The coat was dark—I cannot remember the particular dress—my first impression was that his trousers were light, but I was not positive about it; it was a mere impression—we employ several jewellers; we employ one jobbing jeweller, his name is Evans, of Bartholomew-square; I think No. 14, but we often send chains, if they are repaired, to the chain-maker's.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Whoever did the particular work on the chain, would it pass through your hands first? A. Certainly, mine or my brother's—I am certain I never saw this chain before. Adjourned.

Friday, October 28th. JOHN HENRY GLASS. I am in the employment of Mr. Hodgkinson, and have been so for some time—I have known the prisoner about four years—I don't know particularly how long the prisoner Was in Mr. Hodgkinson's employment; I came to Mr. Hodgkinson after him, so that I do not know how long he had been there—on Tuesday, 12th July last, he came to me in Mr. Hodgkinson's shop about 4 o'clock in the afternoon—he offered me a gold watch—he said if I would not buy it he had not money enough to go to America—he said he had a gold chain pledged with a pawnbroker for 1l—he did not say how much he wanted me to buy the watch for—he said he would go to the pawnshop and pawn the watch and chain together, and then he supposed he should get 4l. 10s.—this is the watch—I had seen him wear ring that watch before; it was his own watch that he had been in the habit of wearing—I told him to come again the next morning; he did come about 9 o'clock next morning, and he and I went together to a pawnbroker's, named Barker; I forget the name of the street—we both went into Mr. Barker's shop and took a chain out of pawn [No. 3]—I paid 1l. to get that chain out of pawn—we then went together to Mr. Cox's, in Princes-street, Leicester-square, and there pawned the watch that he had offered me the day before, and the chain that I had just got out of pawn, for 4l.—Muller took the money, I took the ticket—this is it; it is in my name—I gave the prisoner 5s. for the ticket—I gave the pound to redeem the chain, so that I paid 11. 5s. altogether—he and I then went together in an omnibus as far as the Bank—we there parted—he said he was going to the London Docks to get a ticket to go to America.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You say that you had known Muller for four years? A. Yes—he has been in this country daring that time—I believe he is a native of Saxe Weimar—I am not a foreman to Mr. Hodgkinson; an ordinary worker, a journeyman—during the four years that I have known the prisoner he has, as far I know, borne the character of a kindly and well-disposed man—I have had full opportunities, by associating with him, and being with him, of judging of his character for humanity and kindness; that is the character that he has borne—I do not know whether he was in the habit of pawning his watch and chain at times and exchanging them—I did not see him with money—I did not see any money in his pos session the week before 9th July—I don't know what wages he earned—I am a piece worker—I can earn 30s or 36s. a week.

HENRY SMITH . I am assistant to Mrs. Barker, a pawnbroker, of 91, Houndsditch

—on 22d June I took in a gold Albert chain—I have got the ticket—I believe I took in the chain of the prisoner—this is the chain—I advanced 1l. on it—the ticket was renewed, that is, the prisoner had a fresh ticket, on 12th July, his ticket having got damaged, and it was redeemed on 13th July, the next day, I believe, by Muller, but I did not deliver it myself.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Was it 1l. or 30s? A. 1l. ALFRED WEY. I was formerly assistant to Mrs. Barker, a pawnbroker—on 13th June I took in a watch of Muller; this is it—I advanced 21. on it—it was redeemed on 12th July, I believe by Muller.

CHARLES YOUNG . I am assistant to John Annis, pawnbroker, of 121, Minories—on 12th July last I recollect taking a pledge of a gold chain from a man—I have the ticket here—this is the chain [No. 2]—the man gave the name of "Muller," Christian name, "John"—I should not know him again—I advanced 1l. 10s. on it—he gave his address, 22, Jewry-street, Aldgate—I afterwards handed that chain to the police.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. It is very common for you to supply the Christian names for parties who come to pawn, is it not? A. Yes—"John" is the name that we mainly patronize.

JONATHAN MATTHEWS . I am a cab-driver—I know the prisoner—I had known him two years and some few weeks before 9th July last; I could not say exactly—I became acquainted with him by his working with a brother-in-law of mine—he frequently came to dine with my brother-in-law, being a stranger in the country, and by that means I came to know him—from that time I have seen him, from time to time, perhaps twice or three times in a month—he sometimes came to my house, and I have several times been to see him; I always found him at work.

Q. Do you remember anything passing between you and Muller on the subject of a hat, towards the end of last year? A. I do—I should think it must have been the latter end of November or the beginning of December, I could not say to a week—I had a new hat, he came to dine with me on the Sunday after I bought it; he saw me have it on, and said he should like one like it—he looked at the hat, and put it on his head—it was a little too small for him—he asked me what I gave for it; I told him 10s. 6d—he said he would like one like it, and I told him I would get him one if he pleased—he put it on his head, and said it was a little too tight, and I said, "If I get one a little too easy for myself it will suit you nicely"—he said, "Yes," and consequently I got one for him—I got it at the same shop, Mr. Walker's, a hat-maker's, in Crawford-street, Marylebone—the lining of that hat had a kind of resemblance of being a striped lining—I ordered it on the Friday or Saturday—I told one of the men I should want one, and I went on the Saturday evening and bought one, and my wife went with me—I took it away with me in a hat-box—it remained in my house until the Sunday week following, when Muller came for it—he took it away in the hat-box—I paid for the hat; I paid 10s. 6d. for it—Muller did not pay me again; he made me a waistcoat in return for it, which I now wear, a black waistcoat—after that I frequently saw Muller wearing that hat—about the latest time that I saw him wearing it, was, I should think, about a fortnight previous to the murder—I gave a description of that hat to the police before I saw it—I believe this (looking at it) to be the hat that I purchased for him; it corresponds exactly—before I brought it out of the shop I had it turned up a little extra at each side—after I had purchased it I said I should like it turned up the same as the one I had the week previous, consequently they it while I was there—I noticed that there was a little curl in the brim

the last time I had it in my hand, and I said to Muller, "Have you had it done up?"—he said, "No"—I said, "The hat wears uncommonly well"—the under part of the brim is merino, the same as mine—all my hats were much about the same—if I buy a hat I prefer it being merino, because of its not wearing so greasy as the nap—there is no nap on the under part of this brim—I remember seeing a box at my house, a small jeweller's box—this (produced) is the same box—it is the box that I put my foot on, on the Tuesday morning—I noticed it on the Tuesday morning—that was the Tuesday week following the murder—I subsequently saw a handbill, and gave information to the police—I took the box to the police.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. As I understand, be particular in answering me, you identify this hat by the side portion of the rim being turned up? A. Not only by that; that is one thing—I am quite sure of that—I had that done in the shop; I had the rim so turned—my hat was exactly like this, as near as they could possibly get it.

Q. Did not you say before the Magistrate that one of your means of identifying that hat was this: that three weeks prior to 9th July you saw the prisoner, and that the brim of his hat was turned up in one part of it more than another, and you told him so? A. I did so—I never mentioned before to-day that I had the two edges turned round myself, at my own request, at the shop where the hat was bought—I said, before the Coroner, "I saw him frequently wearing that hat, and I had noticed and remarked upon its wearing so well; I fancied one side was turned up more than usual, and pointed it out to him; I said it was not altered in shape, and I suggested that it might have been done from his lifting it from his head on that side"—I cannot tell you how many hats I have bought—I could not tell you the number that I bought within six or twelvemonths of 9th July—I could not say what has become of the hat that I bought, which was just like this, but I think I left it at one of the hatter's shops that I have bought hats at since the one I bought at Mr. Walker's—the hat I now wear I bought in Oxford-street, at Mr. Mummery's—I did not leave my other hat there.

Q. Have you not stated that you left it at Mr. Down's the hatters in Longacre, three weeks before 9th July? A. I stated that I left one there, but I could not say to the time—I did not say so—I believe it was some time, bat I could not state the time positively—I said, "I purchased a hat also at Mr. Down's in Long-acre, and left my old one there; that was about three weeks before I bought the one in Oxford-street; I wore my old hat home when I purchased the new one in Oxford-street"—I bought the one in Oxford-street, I should think it was, I could not say for a few days, before I went to America.

Q. When did you buy the one at Down's? A. Well, I have had two hats; when I came to look at home, and I could not say which of the Down's I bought it at, whether it was the one in the Strand, who used to make for me, or the one in Long-acre, but I find I am in error about my hats altogether; I have had so many that I could not say how many.

Q. Did you not say this, "The next hat I purchased was about June, of Down's in Long-acre; it was a cheap one, I gave 5s. 6d. for it I left the other one at Down's?" A. I did say so; that was not true, because it was longer ago—I could not say the time exactly.

COURT. Q. You say you bought a hat a few days before you went to America; when did you go to America? A. I cannot tell at this moment—I left home on 19th July, and sailed on 20th from Liverpool—I went with Mr. Tanner—I mean when I went to America on this matter.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I want particularly to call your attention to what you said before the Coroner, "The next hat I purchased was about June, of Down in Long-acre; it was a cheap one, I gave 5s. 6d for it. I left the other one at Down's;" did you say that before the Coroner? A. I said so, but it was a mistake of mine; I did not know bow many hats I had had till I got home—I found I had several there.

Q. Have you since found out that three weeks before you were examined before the Coroner there was no such shop as Down's a hatter in Long-acre? A. I did make that inquiry, and then I looked at home to see what number of hats I had had—I found that Down's shop in Long-acre had been shut up for some time—when I came to look at my hats I was surprised to see that I had so many at home as I had; that made me make inquiry—I had two of Down's hats before—I said before the Magistrate, that I had bought that at Down's a fortnight or three weeks before this job—I found out that was a mistake of mine—Mr. Clark went with me to Long-acre—he is one of the detectives; the sergeant who went to America with me—I told him at the time that I was under a mistake.

Q. Where do you believe the hat is now that was just like this; have you any idea whatever? A. No, I have not—I occasionally throw my hats into the dusthole or some place—I said that before the Coroner—I could not swear to the lining of any of my hats—I could not swear to some of my own hate—I first heard of the murder about the Thursday or Friday of the week following—I think it was the Thursday; that would be about six or seven days after—I mean to say that I had not heard of it before—I had been out with my cab—I have occasionally put on the rank when I wanted something to eat, but I never heard of it—I am not a public-house visitor—I may have been to a public-house perhaps once a. day, to have a glass of ale, not more—I do go into public-houses for refreshment every day—I sometimes take in a newspaper, not regularly—I don't take in any particular paper; occasionally I take Lloyd's—I take a Sunday paper; sometimes I buy a daily paper.

Q. Will you swear that you saw no paper from 9th to 14th July? A. Not bringing the murder to my mind—I never looked at the paper—I did not see it in the paper at all—I did not see it in large conspicuous letters, over and over again, before the Thursday—I live at 68, Earl-street East, Paddington—I know the police-station—I pass it—I could not swear whether I passed it every day from 10th to 14th—I never saw the placard or noticed it—I did see a placard at the latter end of the week, but not to read it—I knew that Muller was going to America—I gave information to the police on Monday, 18th—at that time I knew that Muller had gone by the Victoria sailing ship to New York—I knew that he was going to sail, according to what he had left word at my house—he called to wish me and my family good-bye. Q. Can you tell me what you were doing on Saturday, 9th July? A. I was out with my cab, I find—I did not know at the time I was called upon to answer before—I said before the Coroner, "It is impossible for me to say where I was on the night of 9th July, I was about with my cab, but I could not say where"—I have since made inquiries to find out where I was—I made inquiries to know whether I was out with my cab or not, on account of losing a pocket-book which I carried, which I have found since, and it is here—I took a piece of paper out of my pocket just now—here it is; you are at liberty to look at it—it is to prove that I was out—Mr. Beard wrote down after my character—this piece of paper is dated September 29th—that is the date I wrote to know what day I was out, and that is the return

letter from my employer, Mr. Perfitt, that I was at work for on the 9th—that inquiry has been made by me since I was examined before the Coroner.

Q. I believe that your master, Mr. Perfitt, failed, or was "sold up," to use your own expression? A. He was sold off; that is a mistake, "sold up"—it was a mistake in print—I never said, "sold up," I said, "sold off."

Q. Here it is, "Mr. Perfitt lived in Lisson-grove, and was sold up the week after 9th July," you say you said "sold off?" A. Yes, I did—the deposition was read over to me—I could not tell what day it was that Mr. Perfitt was sold off—I first saw Repsch after I had given information, at Bow-street, when I returned from America—I did not see him before I gave information to the police—I am quite sure of that; not for years previous.

Q. How long have you been a cabman? A. I have been licensed between times I suppose about seven or eight years, or eight or nine years; I could not say to a year or two—sometimes I do not hold a license for three or four years between—I have been something else besides a cabman; I have been a coachman, and I have been in training stables—that was, I suppose, twenty-two or twenty-three years ago—since then I have been a cabman—not ever since—sometimes I have been in business—I was in a small fly business, and I was foreman to Mr. Hubble of Camberwell, and to Mr. Langley of Westminster—I have driven for the London General Omnibus Company—I have always been a driver during those twenty-two or twenty-three years—I have never followed any other occupation—I have been an ostler—I have never been coachman to a private gentleman—I know a gentleman named Linklater—I was not his coachman or anything—I never lived with him—I never drove for him—I was not in his service—I knew him by living in the neighbourhood—I have never been insolvent or a bankrupt—I am sure of that; there is no mistake—I was in business at Brixton—I did not fail there; that I swear—I was in business at the Prince of Wales-yard, and at the White Horse-yard, Brixton-hill—that was two years ago last January—I did not fail, or compound with my creditors, nothing of the kind—I gave up the business because I was not getting a living—I owed some money, and I was not able to pay it—I am still in that position.

Q. Have you been to some of your creditors, and stated that as soon as you got your portion of the reward you would be able to settle with them? A. No; I have not been to one of them—I will swear that—I will swear that I have never said that.

Q. Of course you expect a portion of the reward? A. I don't understand you.

Q. Then you are the only person in Court who does not. Do you or do you not expect a portion of this reward of 300l.? A. I leave that entirely if I have done my duty to the country.

Q. Then you do expect a portion of it, do you not, after you have done your duty? A. If they are only satisfied that I have done my duty; if they think proper to reward me, very well—I have no expectation of anything—if it had been a plain bill without any reward, I should have done my duty—I did see the reward, but if it had been a plain bill I should have done the same.

Q. I will have an answer; do you expect a portion of the reward? A. If I am entitled to it, I shall expect it—I have never made use of the words that if I had kept my mouth closed a little longer, they would have made the reward 500l. instead of 300l., nor anything like it—I said I was given to

understand on that morning that they were printing bills for 500l, but had it been a shilling I should have done the same if I had thought of it.

Q. You were once convicted, I think, of a little petty theft, were you not? No theft; it was for absconding, leaving a situation without giving due notice; I swear that—I was conductor of a coach, like most young men at that time, I made a little free, and got out on what we term a spree—I merely went away and left the coach without any one to start it—I was convicted of that; the result was that I had twenty-one days, because I could not pay anything—I have been at Norwich—I was not at Norwich in the year 1851—I was there in 1850, not in 1851—I was in prison there for the twenty-one days; nothing else—I cannot tell you the gentleman's name that convicted me for the twenty-one days—I was tried before a jury—it was for a spree—my box was sent home, and they wanted to make a theft of it because I had got a book and a pair of spurs—they did not actually make a theft of it.

Q. Were you not convicted of having feloniously stolen, taken, and carried away one posting book, of the value of 8s., one pair of spurs, of the value of 2s., and one padlock, of the value of 6d. was not that the matter you were convicted of? A. That was the matter they brought in, because it was in a box, unbeknown to me—it was found on me after the box was taken away—I did not know they were there.

Q. The lining of your hat, you say, was the same as the lining of this hat? A. Similar; I could not say exactly; the same, or similar; I could not say—I said that the lining of both hats was alike as near as possible—I could not say to a stroke or so in the colour of them.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. You say you were sentenced to be imprisoned for twenty-one days? A. Yes, that was in 1850, fourteen years ago—I suppose I was then about nineteen or twenty years of age, I am now thirty-seven, or between thirty-seven and thirty-eight—I was horn in 1829—I have never been in any trouble of the kind since—I gave information to the police on Monday, the 18th.

Q. Just explain how you came to give that information. A. As I was coming by the Great Western Hotel, I called to give my horse some water—while my horse was drinking, I ran the bill over, and I spoke to the waterman, and made some inquiries as to the height I was myself—from the description on the bills, I asked the waterman what height he thought I was—the hand-bill was on the wall, and I then read it—on reading the hand-bill, I spoke to the waterman, and directly went home and fetched a small box—this is the box (the one produced)—I remembered my wife telling me that Muller came to my house and gave the girl a little box—I did not know that Death was the name of the jeweller until I asked the waterman—it was in consequence of some conversation with the waterman that I found out that Death was the name of the jeweller—I took the box to the waterman and showed it to him, and he got in the cab, and I drove him to Hermitage police-station, Paddington—we both went to the station together—we there saw Sergeant Steers—I gave the box to him, and took him to get a small strip of paper that was left at my house by Miller, with an address on it, written by Miller—I also gave a description of the hat on that occasion—this is the piece of paper (produced)—it is Muller's address at Mrs. Blythe's—I subsequently went with the police to America, on the subject of Muller's extradition—I was examined before the Coroner when I came back—I arrived on the Saturday, and I think I was examined before the Coroner on the Tuesday following—I was examined before the Magistrate on the

Monday, and on Tuesday before the Coroner—I was cross-examined at that time as to where I had been on the Saturday of the murder—I had not at that time prepared myself at all to answer those questions—on being asked before the Coroner, I did not recollect precisely where I was that night, not until I got home and I made inquiries of the waterman—I had some little idea of it, but not until I got home—I then wrote a letter to my employer, the answer to which I have produced here to-day—from the subsequent in. quires I made, and the communications I have received from my employer and others, I am enabled to state where I was that night; I was on the rank at the Great Western station from 7 to about 11, and, not having a fare for that time, I went away home, and bought a joint of meat, and took it home, as I usually did—I went to the stable-yard in Lisson-grove and left the cab, and then went direct home with my joint of meat—it was not a leg of mutton, it was an aitch-bone of beef, if you wish to know—I took it home with me for my Sunday dinner—I was cross-examined a good deal about my hats—I had not at all prepared myself to answer questions about my hats, I never gave it a thought—I should think I have upwards of nine or ten hats during the year—I am exposed to a great deal of rough weather—I never wear a weather hat—I was asked questions about my hat which was not prepared to answer—I subsequently made inquiries on the subject, and what I have stated to-day is correct, as near as I can possibly give it—I stated before the Coroner that one brim of Muller's hat was more turned up than the other—that was the fact, there was a slight curl more than usual—both brims were turned up by the hatter—in addition to that, one brim was more turned up than the other—it was the right hand brim as he stood from me that was a trifle more turned up than the other—that brim was stiffish, but rather limper than the other—I called Muller's attention to it and said I thought he had had it done up by its looking so well, I thought he had had it turned a little more. (The witness depositions before the Magistrate and the Coroner were put in and read) ELIZA MATTHEWS. I am the wife of Jonathan Matthews—I was acquainted with the prisoner rather better than two years—he has been in the habit of occasionally coming to our house—I was present when my husband bought a hat—that might be in November or December last year, I can't recollect exactly which month—my husband bought it at Walker's, in Crayford-street.

Q. Have you any recollection of the description of hat it was? A. No, not particularly; only it was turned up rather more at the side than my husband's was—I have seen the bat—this (looking a it) looks the very same hat—I had not noticed any part of the hat except the brim—my husband gave that hat to Muller about a fortnight after—on Monday, the 11th July, the prisoner called to see me in the afternoon—I have four children—he came between 2 and 3 o'clock—he said he had come to wish us good-bye, previous to his going to New York—he remained with me about three or four hours—he told me he was going out for Messrs. Hodgkinson's firm, and he was to get 150l. a year—he said that he had met with an accident on the Thursday, I think a letter cart or a mail cart had run over his foot on London-bridge—during the time he was there, he shewed me a chain—he took it off the button-hole of his waistcoat and put it into my hand—told him I thought it was not a very good one—it looked so pale, much lighter gold than his own watch and chain—I did not make that observation to him, I thought so myself—this (looking at chain No. 2) is the character of chain—I believe that to be the chain—I saw a box on that occasion—this is it

(produced)—he took that out of his pocket, and presented it to my little girl—she is ten years old, she will be eleven in December—I remember my husband afterwards coming home and getting that box—it was that day week after—the child had been playing with it that same evening, it was then put away in a drawer from the Tuesday evening—it was taken out of the drawer a week afterwards—I also noticed a ring that Muller had on—I looked at it, and he told me his father had sent it from Germany—it was a plain gold ring, with a cornelian head and a white face—when he left be wished me good-bye—he said he should call on Tuesday or Wednesday morning to see my husband, to wish him good-bye.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. When he said that Mr. Hodgkinson was going to send him to New York as an agent, and give him 150l. a year, did he not say at the same time that he should like to receive the payment half-yearly? A. He did so—my husband first saw this box on Tuesday morning, it was lying on the table—I did not notice the name of Mr. Death upon it—the prisoner did not say anything to me about Mr. Death's—I am certain he did not—yes; I had forgotten; I remarked that Mr. Death's was a good jeweller's shop—I forgot for the moment—I don't know Mr. Death's—I never saw the shop to notice it—I made that remark about its being a good jeweller's shop, because I should suppose so from where lie lived, from the shop being in Cheapside—the prisoner had on dark trousers on the Monday—he was there from three to four hours—as he was going away, I remarked to him that the hat had worn very well—as he was taking it off the drawers, I said, "How well that hat has worn"—the reply he made was, "It is a different hat"—I heard of the murder on the Monday evening, 11th July, from a lodger—I was told it was a shocking murder in a railway carriage—my husband might have had a penny paper, I did not—my husband was sometimes in the habit of doing so—sometimes he used to leave them, and sometimes I used to take them out of his pocket—I always took a weekly paper on Sunday morning—I did not have one on Sunday the 10th—I might have had one, I don't remember—I had one the following Sunday.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. When did you make the observation on the subject of Mr. Death's being a good jeweller's? A. At the same time while the prisoner was talking to me, while he was showing me the chain—I had no conversation with my husband about the murder.

Q. What number of hours is your husband out generally during the twenty-four hours? A. He leaves home about 9 in the morning, and sometimes I don't see him till the next morning—by that time I have been hours in bed.

JURY to MRS. REPSCH. Q. On what day of the week did Muller bring the new hat in the hat-box? A. Well, that I can't say: it might have been Sunday, it might have been another day—I cannot exactly remember whether it was Sunday or a week day—most likely it was Sunday, but I can't say for certain.

COURT to MR. REPSOH. Q. YOU were asked yesterday about seeing the prisoner occasionally; do you recollect what you said about seeing him on week-days or Sundays? A. I saw him on week-days—I did not see him on Sundays for three or four Sundays at all, only on week-days.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Did you generally see him on Sundays? A. No, I did not.

JOSEPH HENNAQUART . I am foreman in the establishment of Messrs. Hodgkinson—the prisoner was in their service for six weeks before the 9th

of July—he was originally engaged at 25s. a week—I think he worked at 25 s a week very nearly a month—an alteration was then made as to the mode in which he was to be paid, because for very nearly two weeks he did not finish his work, and I told him to work at piecework, and that was what he did—he worked at piecework two weeks—he did not go back to the 25 s a week—I offered him to do so—I think he said he could make more at piece-work, and he refused, and discharged himself a week before the murder—that was on Saturday, 2nd July—he was not engaged to go to America for my employers.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. How long was he in your employment? A. Six weeks—he was always very polite to me—he was not quarrel—some or ill-tempered—we had a few words before he left, that was all—he left, saying he could do better at piecework than at 25s. a week.

EDWARD WATSON . I was foreman in the employment of Mr. Walker, a hatter, of 49, Crawford-street—I left him last April—I had been in his employment about four years before that—I have seen this hat before (looking at the one found in the carriage)—it is one of Mr. Walker's manufacture—the lining of this hat is not a lining that Mr. Walker used for all his hats—it was not appropriated to any particular class of hats—it is not a lining that I have seen used by any other hatter—it was not used during the whole of the time I was with Mr. Walker, part of the time—the price of this hat was about 8s. 6d. I should think—I can't say exactly the price at which it was sold, from the present state of the hat—we have another price besides 8s. 6d., different prices—this was about 8s. 6d.—we do not keep any record of hats which we sell over the counter, unless they are sent home.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Did you say that the lining of that hat was peculiar to Mr. Walker's establishment? A. It is a peculiar lining—I can't say exactly how many hats Mr. Walker manufactures in the course of a year; five or six dozen a week, perhaps—they are not all lined in that way; some of them are.

Q. How many hats with that lining do you think Mr. Walker sells in a week? A. I don't think we have ever had above three or four of that particular pattern lining in the establishment—we do not buy a large quantity of lining—we buy the linings all ready cut—they are not cut out at our workshop.

COURT. Q. Did you say you did not make above three or four hats with that lining? A. This lining was one of a quantity of samples that Mr. Walker bought, and there was not, perhaps, more than one or two of the same pattern in the lot; not more than three or four, perhaps.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You say it was a sample piece? A. A sample lining—I can't say where they were bought, Mr. Walker can tell you—this was a sample lining which he kept—he did not buy any of the bulk—they were all samples, and there were about three or four of that particular pattern lining in the lot that he bought.

THOMAS HENRY WALKER . I am a hatter, carrying on business in Crawford-street, Marylebone—this hat-box is one of ours, and this hat is one of ours—it was a hat sold in my shop—the lining is a peculiar lining—I don't think we had more than, perhaps, one or two of them—I don't think we had more than one, we might have had two of that kind: two linings like that Q. Do I understand you to say that you had not more than one or two hats lined in that way? A. Certainly—it is one of about 500 linings that I bought, all French samples, and there was scarcely one alike—there might have been two of a sort, but I do not think there was—I don't think there

would be two alike—they were all samples, and generally samples distinct from each other—this is a French lining—the price of this hat would be 8s 6d. or 10s. 6d—I really cannot tell now.

WILLIAM NINNIS TIDDEY . I am superintendent of the D division of the Metropolitan Police—I have produced the small box with Mr. Death's name upon it, and the hat-box that I obtained from Mrs. Blythe; also the slipper that was handed to me; one slipper only, the right slipper.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. That is the slipper you received from Mrs. Blythe? A. Yes.

JAMES GIFFORD . I am agent to Messrs. Grinnell and Co. shipowners—they have an office at the North Quay, London Docks—we open that office about 9 o'clock in the morning—I recognise the prisoner—I first saw him on Wednesday morning, 13th July, about 11 o'clock—he spoke to me, and asked about a passage to New York—he asked me the fare—I told him 4l.—he asked when the ship sailed—I said "To-morrow"—that would be Thursday, the 14th—he then went away—he came back about 2 o'clock the same afternoon and said, I have come to pay my fare"—he paid me 4l, and I gave him a contract ticket—he then left—he came back again about half-past three to the best of my belief—he came into the office with three parcels—two were small ones—one was a large one done up in canvas—that was about eighteen inches long and nine inches wide—I cannot tell at all what was the appearance of it—I could not see the angles of any hard substance outside the canvas—I could not tell what Sort of a thing was inside—I told him I could not take charge of the things, he would have to leave them with the foreman of the docks, under the shed—he took them with him out of the office—I did not see his trunk at all—I could not tell what the two small parcels were—the only one I took notice of was the larger one, which he called my attention to as he put it down—the outside of it was canvas—such canvas as I have seen inside the lining of sacks—I saw him on board the Victoria—she sailed on the Friday morning about half-past 6, or from that to 7 o'clock, with the prisoner on board.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Whatever this parcel was if you would have taken it he would have left it with you? A. He would if I had taken charge of it; he asked me to do so—if he had left it in my keeping I should have left the office at 5, and it would have been there till next morning when I came at 9—it would have been in the office all night, and I should have had it in my possession next morning—I had no suspicion at all at the time—it is the custom of poor German emigrants to carry with them little packages of bacon, soap, and so on—the little packages might have been such packages—besides myself there is a German porter, Jacob Weist.

Q. Is he there in the morning before you? A. He cannot get into the office before I open it—he very seldom comes there before me—in my absence he answers inquiries—numbers of persons are constantly coming to the docks and are constantly about—I think the Victoria carried out four or five German passengers—I cannot recollect more—the dock opens in the summer at 6 o'clock—9 o'clock is my time—sometimes I am a little later, but very little—the prisoner gave his right name, Franz Müller—I have not got a contract ticket with me—it is filled up with the name of the vessel, the tonnage, date of sailing, and the passenger's name and age—the prisoner gave his name and age, "Franz Müller, 24 years of age."

MR. GIFFARD. Q. In the course of business, what time would Weist attend at the office? A. About 9 or a little after—he does not belong to our office—he is with Mr. White, a provision merchant—if application were made to Weist about a passage in the Victoria he would answer it, but he would keep the passenger there till I came.

JACOB WEIST . I am in the employment of Mr. White—I attend at the London Docks—I have seen the prisoner on several occasions—I cannot say exactly to a day when I first saw him, but it was some days previous to hi paying his passage.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRT. Q. He paid his passage on the Wednesday, did he not? A. Yes—I am not quite positive, but I have some idea of seeing him there on the Monday—Germans sometimes come to me to ask questions—I am a German.

MR. GIFFARD. Q. What time did you get to the office on Monday? A. About 9 o'clock.

GEORGE CLARKE. I am a sergeant of the detective police—on 24th last August I went on board the ship Victoria at New York—Mr. Tierman, an officer of the New York police, was in company with me—the prisoner was on board—he was called to the after part of the ship by the captain—I seized hold of him by his arms—he said, "What is the matter?"—Tierman said, "You are charged with the murder of Mr. Briggs"—I found that Tierman did not recollect the particulars, and I followed by saying, "Yes, on the North London Railway, between Hackney Wick and Bow, on 9th July"—the prisoner said, "I never was on the line"—I do not know whether he said, that night," or whether he said, "I never was on the line"—I told him my name, and that I was a policeman from London, and pointing to Mr. Tierman that he was a policeman of New York—I then took him down stairs into the saloon—Tierman searched him in my presence—a key was taken from his waistcoat pocket—I have it here—I took possession of it and said, "What is this the key of?"—he said, "The key of my box"—I said, "Where is your box?"—he said, "In my berth"—in consequence of what the captain told me, I went to No. 9 berth and found a large black box which I brought into the saloon where the prisoner was standing—he said, "That is my box"—I unlocked it with this key that I had taken from his waistcoat pocket, and in a corner of the box I found this watch (produced)—it was then sewn up in a piece of leather—I have the piece in which it was sewn up—I said to the prisoner, "What is this?" believing it to be a watch as I felt it in my hand—he said, "It is my watch"—I then took up the hat that was standing in the box, and said, "Is this your hat?"—he said, "Yes"—it is the hat produced—I said, "How long have you possessed them?—he said, "I have had the watch about two years, and the hat about twelve months"—I told him he would have to remain in custody and be taken to New York—I kept him on board all night—Inspector Tanner came in the morning, and I then gave him over to him.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. It was in answer to your questions that he said this; you asked him how long he had had the watch and hat? A. Yes; he answered the questions I put to him very readily indeed, without the slightest hesitation.

Q. When you described to him the name of the gentleman who was murdered on the railway, and the date, did he not say, "I know nothing about it; I never was on the line"? A. My impression is that what he

aid was, "I never was on the line"—whether he said, "That night," or not, I don't know—he did not say, "I know nothing about it;" I believe he did not—(looking at his deposition)—I have no doubt that what is in the deposition, I spoke—I find here that I did say, "The prisoner remarked in reply to me, 'I know nothing about it; I never was on the line'"—seeing it here, I must have said it—my deposition was read over to me—I think I should have detected any word I had not said—the deposition was taken directly I returned—I have no doubt I did say it, and if I did, I am quite certain the prisoner said it—I searched his box.

Q. There were no new shirts, I think? A. I find that was a mistake of nine—I said they were not new, because they were dirty, but on examining them after my deposition was taken, I found they were pretty much new—I took them to be old, because they were dirty, but after they were washed and cleaned I found that they had not been worn much—they were not absolutely new—I should think they had been worn once or twice, probably not more than once, but for a long time, if only once.

RICHARD TANNER . I am one of the inspectors of the detective-police of London—I was employed in this matter by Sir Richard Mayne—I went to America, accompanied by Sergeant Clarke—I also took with me Mr. Death and Matthews—I found Müller on board the ship that he sailed in, the Victoria—when I saw him first Mr. Death was not with me—I had left him on deck—I went below, and found Müller below—I placed him amongst several other persons before Mr. Death saw him—there were eight others—Mr. Death then came down—he pointed him out—I said to Müller, "Have you stated that you have lost a ring on board this ship?"—he said, "Yes-; I have not lost it, it must have been stolen from me"—I said, "Tell me what sort of a ring it is, and I will endeavour to have—it found"—he said, "It is a gold ring, with a stone in it"—I said, "A red-stone")—he said, "No; a white stone"—I said, "A gold ring then, with a plain white stone?"—he said, "It is a gold ring with a white stone, and has got a head on it; I bought it in Cheapside, and gave seven shillings and sixpence for it"—the ring was not found—I took possession of the effects of the prisoner—I showed them to him on board the ship on taking possession of them—he saw all that I had—he said that was the whole of his property, with the exception of the ring; the box contained the whole of his property with the exception of the ring—all the things were in the box—I found no other parcel that he had—he did not speak of any other parcel—I showed him all the things that were in the box, and he said those were all his things, except the ring—I had told him he would have to go home as a prisoner, so he had better tell me what he had, that we might take it all home before we went off the ship—I have the box here—it is a very large one (produced)—this is the box—all the things are in it now, which were in it then—the hat was in it—the blue hat-box was not in it, nor the white one—these are the trousers he had on—there was only this one other pair—these are the two pair that were produced yesterday, and that were spoken to by Mrs. Repsch, the dark pair, as his working trousers—these two pairs of trousers were found, and no others—there was very little other clothing—one or two shirts, some collars, and a few of his working things, his shears, which he would require in his trade, his measure, a few scarfs, a few brushes, and an umbrella—these are tailor's scissors, I think they are called shears—there was also a towel or two, a comb and brush, a pair of gloves, and a handkerchief—there was no coat in the box, or waistcoat—he had no coat except the

one he had on—he has that on now—he had no overcoat—I did not discover any parcel sewn up, such as has been described.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I believe he answered the questions most readily that you put to him? A. Yes; I had heard before I saw him that the ring was lost; Sergeant Clarke reported it—I knew from Mr. Death that it was a ring with a white stone, and a head on it—the prisoner said that he did not take it out of his pocket, but he believed it was stolen from him, and, in fact, that he had a suspicion of the man who stole it—I asked him what sort of a ring it was, and he answered that it was a gold ring with a stone in it—I said, "A red stone?"—he said, "No; a white one"—I think I then said, "Then I am to understand it is a gold ring, with a plain white stone, or a plain gold ring, with a white stone?"—he said, "No, it has got a head upon it;" and that he bought it in Cheap-side, and gave seven shillings and sixpence for it—I did not hear him say while he was in New York, that he purchased the watch and chain on Monday morning at the Docks, but it was suggested by his counsel in New York, before Commissioner Newton—that was after he had an opportunity of seeing his legal advisers—some German gentlemen assisted the prisoner in New York, the same as some German gentlemen are assisting him now—I found eleven shillings on him—he was thoroughly searched, so that I could not have missed any, or made any mistake—I did not ask him how he became possessed of that money—he did not offer or give any explanation to me at all, I am quite sure—I repeatedly saw him, but I have certainly no recollection of his giving any account to me of it—he said nothing to me about having sold any clothes during the voyage—I think he said to Clarke, that some exchange was made about a waistcoat, but that is not within my knowledge.

Q. Have the clothes he had on been analyzed to see if there was any blood on them? A. Not to my knowledge, but they were closely examined.

MR. SERJEANT PARKY to GEORGE CLARKE. Q. Did the prisoner say anything to you about selling any of his clothes, or exchanging them? A. A waistcoat—I do not remember his words—he did not say that he had sold a waistcoat, but that he had exchanged it away for a little leather reticule—he also said, "I exchanged again, and got the waistcoat back again"—that was the waistcoat he wore then.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. Had he a waistcoat on when he was first taken? A. He had, but not the waistcoat I am speaking of—he had on a very old waistcoat—he said that he had exchanged the other waistcoat for reticule—I got that waistcoat, and he wore it home—I do not remember his saying anything else about his clothes.

THOMAS JAMES BRIGGS . I am the second son of the deceased—the last time I saw my father before 9th July was on Thursday—I was called about 2 o'clock on Sunday morning, and then went to see him at the Mitford Castle—he was still living, but was insensible—his clothes had not been removed from him—he was covered with a blanket, and his clothes were open at the neck—this (produced) is the watch which my father was in the habit of wearing—he has not worn it many years, because it belonged to a brother-in-law—I knew it for many years before my father had it, when it was worn by his brother-in-law—I recognize this chain and seals (produced) as those which my father wore—my father had been in the habit of purchasing his hats of Mr. Digance, of 18, Royal Exchange, for many years—I saw this hat at Bow-street, and recognized it as my father's—I did not know it at first, because it is much shorter in the height than those he usually wore—this

stick, found in the carriage, was my father's, and this black bag is my youngest, brother's.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJANT PARRY. Q. Do you know a gentleman named Thomas Lee, who lives in King Edward's-road? A. I do not, or rather I did not until this Occurrence—I saw my father only a few days before his death.

Q. Mr. Thomas Lee, the son of Mr. Lee the coal merchant? A. I never knew him—I live about two miles—from where my father lived—I passed his house every day nearly—I know that Mr. Thomas Lee was examined before the Coroner.

SAMUEL TIDMARSH . I am a watchmaker, and have known the late Mr. Briggs seven or eight years—I have repaired a watch for him once or twice—it is the practice in my trade to take the number in a book when we repair a watch—I know this to be Mr. Briggs' watch—I have repaired it twice for him—the last time was on 6th February, 1863—its value at the present time is, I think, about 10l. or 12l.—I should hardly give so much for it—if a man was pressed to sell it I do not think it would fetch more than 7l.—I should say that it might have been sold originally for 25l, or it might have been 30l.—it is an old-fashioned gold watch.

DANIEL DIGANCE . I am a hatter, and carry on business at 18, Royal Exchange—Mr. Briggs has been a customer of mine for at least twenty-five or thirty years—every hat he has had, has been made to order—by referring to my books, I can say that I made a hat to Mr. Briggs's order, in September 1863, but according to the particulars in this book, this hat does not correspond—it is lower in the crown, but it corresponds in the shape of the crown—we call it a bell-crowned hat—Mr. Briggs ordered a bell-crowned hat—this is lower in the crown than the hat Mr. Briggs ordered—it has been cut down—Mr. Briggs's hat was a little too easy in the head, and I placed a small piece of tissue-paper round—that tissue-paper is not here, but here are fragments of it remaining at the band of the hat—the tissue-paper would be inside the lining—the hat has been cut down, I should say, from an inch to an inch and a half, and the bottom part of the leather has been cut off; the leather lining has been reduced also—the piece has been removed from here, and brought over the band and stitched together, and the silk has been pasted down to hide the stitching.

JURY. Q. Would that make the hat a size smaller? A. No; it would make the hat a size smaller if the outside was brought inside, but that is not the case here.

MR. SOLICITOR GENERAL . Q. You say this hat has been cut down, has it been done in the way that a hatter would have cut it down in the course of his business? A. Certainly not—it is an operation I have never seen—Mr. Thorn will follow me; he will tell you how a hatter would cut it down—if a hatter had to do it, he would secure it with gum, and put it on the block, and press it down with the hot iron—that process has certainly not been used here—it has been sewn, and the silk pasted down, which is certainly not the way a hatter would do it—not having seen anything of the kind before, I should say that it was neatly sewn, and I, should think it was done by a person who understood sewing—with the exception of the cutting down, there is no question about the hat corresponding with the one I made for Mr. Briggs—when a hat is made to order, the customer's name is generally written on the band in the body of the hat; I mean on the band inside the lining—that is the part which has been taken away.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PAURY. Q. I notice here "Francis Miller, 22, Jewry-street; "do you know anything of that? A. No: I see it—

it is not an unusual thing at all to put tissue paper to customers' hats—if they are too large, we put a little tissue paper in, and sometimes leather—my trade in Cornhill is of a first-class; it is not second-hand—I know nothing of the trade in second-hand hats—ray hats may get into the second-hand trade; servants sell their master's hats very frequently indeed (several old hats were here produced)—I believe these to be my hats; they are old affairs I should think.

COURT. Q. Are they all of your manufacture? A. They are; but they are very old, some of them are five or six years old—Mr. Briggs generally had a hat every year—he was a very careful wearer.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Look at that hat? (Another) A. Yes, that is a hat I have sold—this other is also mine—here is a name at the side of it—it is my make; here is my chalk mark in it—there is also a name in this (another)—this was also made to order—Mr. Briggs generally had one hat a year, and he used to have his hat lined very frequently—he was a very careful wearer.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. You have been shown various hats; are they hats of the best quality? A. There are two or three of them of a second quality—this hat is of the best quality; the price was one guinea—putting aside the price of it, I cannot judge whether it is an old one-or not—none of these produced have been cut down.

JURY. Q. Can you say how much of the entire lining has been cut away? A. I cannot; but I should say about half an inch—I did have a slip of leather on my desk this morning, but came away without it—all the hats made to order generally have the name on the band; marked on the leather—if it has been on this leather, it has been cut away.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I believe, you have said this: "I will not swear that the bat produced is the one I supplied Mr. Briggs with: if the piece which has been cut off had been now on it, it would have enabled me to speak positively"? A. Just so.

FREDERICK WILLIAM THORN . I am a hat manufacturer—I manufacture for the trade—I make hats for Mr. Digance.

Q. Will you take that hat into your hand, and look at it; do you recognise it? A. I do—it is my manufacture, and my handwriting is in it—this is it—the two letters, "D. D."—there is nothing about the hat that enables me to say when it was made—it has been altered since I made it—a piece has been cut from the band of the hat; removed entirely—I could not say for whom that hat was made—if a hat is made to order, it is my practice to put in it the name of the gentleman for whom it is intended—it is generally put on the band of the hat; but I won't say invariably; I have sometimes marked them higher up—as a general rule, two, three, or four years back, I marked them higher up the crown; but for the last two or three years, I marked them in the band—I won't say I never deviate from that, but that is the practice—it is done for our own convenience in the course of manufacture.

Q. How much of that hat has been out away? A. From an inch to in inch and a quarter—that would include the name, supposing the name had been in it—it would most likely be on that part—I know by the mark that I made this hat for Mr. Digance—I have known of hats being cut down, but not in that manner—we should unite them together with gum, and the use of the iron—the silk of this hat, as I observed when I was examined before, has been turned back for the purpose of sewing it together, and it has been fastened down again with paste, which we should never think of using—it

has been sewn neatly together; neatly to the eye, but it is not out truthfully—the lining has been cut also; that is evident—there is a little piece cut off.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Do you know that your hats are sometimes sold in the second-hand trade? A. I am not aware of it—mine are first-class hats—I mark all the hats I make for Mr. Digance—I have a different mark for other customers—all the hats I make for Mr. Digance I mark in that way, unless they are hats made to order; then there would be the name in addition—I am constantly making hats for Mr. Digance in very large number—that is my private mark which I put to all the hats I make for him—I make many gross for him in the course of a year—for a different quality hat, I should have a different mark to that—I know my own mark—that mark would be to many gross of hats.

MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL to RICHARD TANNER. Q. Did you try the hat found in the carriage on Müller's head? A. Yes—it fitted.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY to MRS. BLYTHE. Q. Did you know of a coat that has been called an overcoat, with a velvet collar, belonging to Müller I A. Yes; I knew it well—I last saw that coat on Thursday, 14th July—that was the day of his leaving by the Victoria—I can't say whether he wearing it, or whether he had it on his arm; but I am sure I saw it Adjourned, Saturday, October 29th,

Witnesses for the Defence, THOMAS LEE. I live at King Edward's-road, Hackney—I am a private gentleman—my father was not in business as a coal-merchant—I knew the late Mr. Briggs for about three or four years, I should think—I last saw him alive on 9th July, Saturday evening, at the Bow Station, in a first-class carriage, about 10 o'clock, I think—it was a carriage of a train coming from Fenchurob-street—it stopped at the Bow Station—it was about three or four carriages from the engine, I think; but I did not notice that—I spoke to him—I said, Good-night, Mr. Briggs"—he answered, "Good-night, Tom"—he was sufficiently intimate with me to call me in that way—the train stopped rather longer than usual that night—I got into a second-class carriage, near the engine, to go to Hackney, where I live—there were two persons in the same compartment of the carriage with Mr. Briggs—there was a light in the carriage—I believe Mr. Briggs had his hat on, or else I should have noticed it; I should have noticed it certainly—one of the persons was sitting on the side of the carriage, next the platform, opposite Mr. Briggs—the other was sitting on the left-band side of Mr. Briggs; next to him, on the same side of the carriage—I saw sufficiently of those two persons to be able to give a description of them afterwards, one in particular—the man who sat opposite Mr. Briggs was a stoutish, thick-set man with light whiskers, and he had his hand in the squab or loop of the carriage, and it was rather a large hand—it was only a casual glance that I had of the other man—he appeared a tall, thin man, dark.

Q. To the best of your judgment, (I suppose you had but little time to see this man;) is the prisoner either of them? A. I cannot swear to him—I should rather think he was not—I did not give information to the police of what I had seen—neither of those persons appeared to be getting out at that station, or to be moving with the apparent intention of leaving the carriage—I did not see them almost directly before the train went off—I was in my own carriage for some time—when the carriage came up, and I spoke to Mr. Briggs, I saw no apparent intention of those persons leaving the carriage—I first mentioned this, I think, on the

Monday following, or the Tuesday, I am not certain which—that would be nearly as soon I heard of the murder—I did not mention it to the police—I spoke to a friend about it, and I believe it was communicated to the police—I was examined before the Coroner—I was called—I don't know on whose part I was called—the Coroner directed me to be there—I gave my evidence, I think, to Superintendent Howie—I believe he was acting in the conduct of the prosecution at that time.

Cross-examined by MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. You were not before the Magistrate, I think? A. No—I live about twenty minutes' walk from the Hackney station—I went to Bow that night for a change—that was my only object in going—I think I left my house about 8 o'clock in the evening—I cannot be sure what time I left—I walked up Hackney a little way for amusement, for a stroll—I think the train I started by from Hackney was the quarter to 9 train, or 9; I am not certain which—I then went to Bow—I took a stroll down to Bow church—I only went to Bow for a stroll, that was all—I went into a house—I don't know the name of it—I called in and had a glass of ale—it was just beyond Bow church, on the left-hand side—a public-house—I only had one glass of ale—I did not go to any other house—I believe I did not—I cannot swear it—I simply went to Bow for a stroll—that is all the account I can give—I did not speak to anybody—I got back to my house at about a quarter to 11 that night, I think—I did not speak to anybody during that time—I cannot mention anybody that I saw on that occasion, except Mr. Briggs—I don't remember seeing anybody that I knew that night—I believe I did not—to the best of my belief, I will swear it—I cannot go beyond that, because it was some time ago.

Q. How do you know it was Saturday night, 9th July? A. Because I heard of the murder the following week, and that was the only night I saw Mr. Briggs at the Bow station so late—I heard of the murder some time on the Monday—I don't know what time it was; I think it was about the middle of the day—I cannot say whether I heard of it at Mr. Ireland's or Mr. Lake's—Mr. Ireland keeps a licensed public-house in Fetter-lane—that is where I go and have my dinner generally—Mr. Lake's is the Anchor eating-house in Cheapside—I say I don't know whether it was at Mr. Ireland's or Mr. Lake's that I first heard of the murder—I am not certain whether I dined at Mr. Ireland's or Mr. Lake's that day—I heard nothing of it the whole of Sunday—I am quite positive of that—I believe I heard of it on Monday—it might have been Tuesday, but I think it was Monday—I believe so—how can I swear to what I am not certain about?—I am almost certain, but not quite—if I was at Mr. Ireland's on the Monday, I was not there on the Tuesday—I cannot say whether I was there Monday or Tuesday, but it was one of those days.

Q. You heard of it either on the Monday or the Tuesday, having, as you say, seen Mr. Briggs within a few minutes of his murder in the same carriage with two men; why did not you give information to the police of it? A. Because I did not want to be brought up—I did not see what my evidence had to do with it—I mean to adhere to that answer—I did not see that there was any need to describe the two men to the police—I first mentioned to a friend of mine that I had seen two men, whom I could describe, in the carriage with Mr. Briggs—Mr. Tomkins was the friend—I cannot say when I mentioned it to him—I think it was on Monday night—I cannot swear what I only think—I have a wife—I told her of it on the Monday night—I am positive of that—I told Mr. Tomkins first, because I saw him before I got home—I think I saw him on the Monday—I have just

told you that I cannot swear what I only think—I believe I told him on the Monday—he is a doctor, not my doctor—the next person I told was my wife, I believe; then I spoke about it to Mr. Ireland—I did not know at the time that I should be called up for anything, therefore these facts did not impress themselves upon me—I say I think I told Mr. Ireland—how can I swear it when I say I think?—I neither swear one way or the other—I say, to the best of my belief I think I told Mr. Ireland—I think I told him on the Tuesday—I believe the next person I told it to was Howie, the superintendent—I did not go to him to give information; he came to me in consequence of what he had heard I had been talking about—he sent his man round to me on the Sunday morning, and he came on the Sunday afternoon—I should not have given any evidence at all to the police if they had not come to me—that was because I thought it unimportant; and not only that, I know what a bother it is in prosecution cases, and an inconvenience.

Q. Then you mean to say that, although you could give evidence on the subject of a murder of this kind, of your friend, as you represent him, you thought it a bother to come forward and speak about it; is that what you mean to say? A. Yes—I have something to do; I collect my own rents—I was examined before the Coroner—I believe I gave the same description of the men before the Coroner as I have done to-day.

(MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL proposed to refer to the witness's depositions, which had been read to the Jury by Mr. Serjeant Parry in his speech, as a statement of what the witness would prove. MR. SERJEANT PARRY objected to any reference to the depositions unless put in evidence by the Crown, entitling him to a reply; the statement he had read to the Jury was not from the depositions, but from a copy contained in his brief. THE COURT was of opinion that the deposition could not be referred to unless put in. THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL was content to let the matter stand as it did.)

Q. Do you remember who the ticket-collector was that night who took your ticket? A. No—when I saw Mr. Briggs, the train had just stopped—I am sure of that—I went into my carriage directly after I bade him good night—I had been in Mr. Briggs's company several times—more than half-a-dozen times, a good deal; I will undertake to say that—I had never visited him at his house—he had never visited me—I had never dined with him, or he with me—I never took a meal of any kind with him—I had seen him in the City, and often riding home with him in the same carriage—that was my only acquaintance with him—he called me Tom lately—I am sure of that—he had called me Tom before—he was in the habit of calling me so latterly—I will swear he called me Tom that night—I got into the carriage next to his, one nearer the engine—I got out at the Hackney station—I did not observe the guard come with a lamp to the door of the carriage in which Mr. Briggs had been—I did not observe any commotion on the platform—I got out quickly—I heard of nothing extraordinary having occurred in the carriage next to me.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. How far is Hackney from Hackney-wick? A. Not far—I am able to swear that I heard of the murder either on the Monday or Tuesday—on the following Sunday afternoon, Mr. Howie, the superintendent, called on me—I then gave him an account of what I had seen—I gave him the same account that I have given here to-day—he wrote it down—I have not seen him here—on mentioning this account to whoever I have mentioned it, I believe I have always given the same account that I have given here to-day—I was examined twice before the Coroner—I

was not examined before the Coroner in the same sharp way that I have been by the Solicitor-General to-day—Mr. Beard asked me one or two questions—I was afterwards told to go to Bow-street—I think it was by Mr. Howie, or one of the officers in the case—that was to see if I could identify Müller—I was not called—I told them I could not identify him—I never knew the prisoner before—I had known Mr. Briggs two or three years—he was a gentleman of rather a cheerful and affable disposition—he generally used to sleep coming home in the railway carriage—he was not asleep when I bade him good-night at the Bow station on this night.

COURT. Q. Do you say he generally used to go to sleep? A. Yes.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. When you arrived at Hackney, I believe the train was late; did you immediately get out of your carriage? A. Yes, and left the station rather quicker because I was rather late.

JURY. Q. When Mr. Briggs was asleep, was he in the habit of having his hat on or off? A. He used to have it on.

GEORGE BYERS . I live at 4, Bridge-road, Ebury-bridge, Pimlico, and am a hatter—I was brought up to it from a boy—I am acquainted with all the branches of the hat trade, and the second-hand hat trade most particularly—cutting down hats and sewing them is usual in the second-hand hat trade with me and others—it is usual to stitch them when they have been cot down—this hat is not as I should do it, because it is not stuck—I should stick it with dissolved shell-lac, as well as stitch it—that would involve more time and trouble in the work.

COURT. Q. You say that you would do it in a different way; what is that? A. I should stitch it, and then fasten it with dissolved shell-lac; in fact, it would be then independent of the stitches—that is the usual way in which it is done in the trade—I should cut it down of course, but I should likewise gum it or fasten it as I have said with the dissolved shell-lac—that is the way in the trade—it is usual—others do it.

JURY. Q. Do you think any hatter would do it in that way? A. Well, some men, as I may say, are bunglers—they might probably, in a hurry, put a hat together for a customer if it is wanted in a hurry, and not have time to stitch it—I cannot answer the question, whether this way of stitching is a hatter's method—when a hat is cut down, I could, independently of the sewing, gum it, and make a good job of it, probably in half an hour—I mean to say that it would take half an hour to gum it, to finish it, to stick it on, and then to put the silk in its place after it is stiched; and then it is finished.

Q. Should you cut the lining down as well as the leather? A. Well, I should take the leather out to do it—I should not cut the leather off—if I had a job of that sort, I should put a new leather in.

WILLIAM LEE . I am a hatter, and live in Queen's-road, Chelsea—I have been six or seven years in the trade—after cutting second-hand hats down, I always stitch them—the object in cutting hats down is because they are worn lower now—besides stitching them, hatters use varnish—I have done a great many hats in the same way as this—if any one asked me to cut this hat down, who did not require a new lining, I could put the old lining in—it is cheaper to stitch them in the second-hand trade, because we save the expense of buying shell-lac—I know nothing of the prisoner, and have never seen the hat before—I did not volunteer to come, I was subpaenaed.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Look at the lining of this hat; is that cut in the way you would cut it?—you observe it is cut, do you not, the edge of it, the leather? A. It is lower—the leather has been

cut—I do not know why the leather should be out—we do not cut the leather in our trade.

Q. I suppose people would never think of cutting a piece out of a good hat, would they? you say they are cut down for the purpose of improving them? A. The hat is worn lower now, and therefore we take a portion out; that is to say it would become a more saleable hat after it had been so treated.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Have you, as regards the stitching of that hat, done many hats in the same way in your trade? A. Yes—I never had to cut down any hats on account of the grease from the head having destroyed them—I never cut one down for that reason.

JURY. Would you have stitched the hat in the same way in which this is done if you had done the job? Look at the underneath part, under the lining. A. Yet, this is done in the way that I should stitch a hat.

Q. Exactly in the same sort of way, you would put the stitches in the same zig-zag way as this is done? A. I should not put so many stitches—not so close together—this is cut down rather lower than they have been worn.

ALFRED COOPER WOODWARD . I am a clerk in the Electric and International Telegraph Company—the London District Company is in exclusive connexion with it—it is quite a separate company—I produce from the office the original telegram, of which this (produced) is the copy delivered—it was sent from the office on 9th July—(Read: "Sender of message, Alexander Gill Strachan, Mr. Drake's, Somerset-street, Whitechapel To Miss Eldred, Stanley-cottage, James-street, Vassal-road, Camberwell New-road. Gone to Stratford, but I shall be with you to-morrow, Sunday, at 3 o'clock. Be at home. I shall come without fail Yours in haste, Alexander Gill Strachan.") I have been looking at this while the original has been read—this is an exact copy—it was, I should think, sent out from the office on 9th July.

Cross-examined by MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. Just tell me what means you have of knowing that it was sent on the 9th? A. It bears the date of the 9th at the top, I think it is the third line.

COURT. Q. At what time was the message sent? A. It was given in at our Mincing-lane office at half-past 4, and was sent at twenty-five minutes to 5—it might be half an hour or less reaching its destination.

ELIZABETH JONES . I live at 1, St. George's-road, Peckham—I do not know how far that is from Camberwell-gate—in July last I lived at Stanley-cottage, James-street, Vassall-road—I have two female lodgers—they are young women who receive the visits of men—I have a young woman living with me named Mary Ann Eldred—she lives with me still—she has lived with me ten months—I know the prisoner—he has been in the habit occasionally of coming to see Mary Ann Eldred—I had known him visiting, her for about nine or ten months before 9th July—she knew him before she came to me—she has known him about twelve months, I believe—I remember her receiving this telegram quite well—I do not recollect what time I received it—it was some time in the afternoon—I saw Müller on 9th July, about half-past 9 in the evening—Mary Ann Eldred was not come home—she had left the house about 9—she had been out about half an hour—Müller called to see her, and found she was not at home—he stayed about five or ten minutes at the door, talking with me—I am sure it was as much as half-past 9—he then left—bearing in mind this telegram, I am sure it was on Saturday, 9th July, about half-past 9, that I saw the young man

—we used to call him Miller—I always called him the little frenchman—the young lady used to tell us he was a German, but I always used to call him the little Frenchman if ever he called when she was out—he had a slipper on that night, and he told me that he had hurt his foot—I did not notice what colour the slipper was, but he told me he was obliged to come out in a slipper, for he had met with an accident, and had hurt his foot—I next saw Mary Ann Eldred on Sunday morning, and told her that her friend had been—(MR. R. SERJEANT BALLANTINE submitted that this was not evidence,

MR. SERJEANT PARR* contended that it was not a conversation, but a statement of a fact. The COURT considered that the conversation would not be evidence.) I made a communication to her the next morning, and to my husband the same evening—I do not know the distance from my then house in the Vassall-road to Camber well-green, where the omnibuses start from, but I should say it is more than half a mile, three-quarters of a mile; Beresford-street is a very long street.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I suppose Miss Eldred is here? A. Yes—I am living now in another house, but in the same name that I passed by in Vassal-road—I am sure of that—I do not know what name my husband took the house in, whether in the name of Kent or Jones—his name is Kent—my name has been Jones some thirty-six years, and I have always gone in the name of Jones—this is my second husband—I do not know Nelson-square, Peckham—I know nothing about Peckham—I am living at Peckham, but I do not know any part, I am a stranger to that part—I am living about half a mile down the road from where I lived before—it was Camberwell before, and now I have got down the road to Peckham, but I do not know where Nelson-square is—supposing a person wanted to get to Fenchurch-street or King William-street, he would go up towards Camberwell-gate for an omnibus—it would take a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes to walk there from Vassall-road—it is half a mile, or more—you can then get plenty of omnibuses to London-bridge—the Peckham. omnibuses do not go to Camberwell-gate, they go by the Lord Nelson—I do not know whether the Peckham and Camberwell omnibuses meet in King William-street—I believe they both go over London-bridge—I cannot give the Jury any idea about the time I received this telegram, it is so long ago—my memory is good in relation to the time the prisoner called—I took in the telegram of the postman; of the messenger—I believe I had to sign for it—it was taken up stairs—it was so long ago I do not remember anything about the letter, only about the time on that day—the gentleman that sent it lives in the neighbourhood of Peckham—directly I received it, I took it up to Eldred—she occupies the first-floor upstairs—when at home I generally dine at 1 or 2 o'clock—not always at one hour—I can't say exact to an hour—I am never later that 2—the telegram came after dinner—I really do not remember how long after dinner, because I had no reason to remember all that—Müller came about half-past 9 in the evening, about half an hour after Miss Eldred went out—I know what time she went out, because she called to know the time—she did not leave home till 9—that is the way I know it—I remember at this distance of time that Miss Eldred called to know the time before she went out—I cannot say what time after the telegram Muller called—I had a clock in the kitchen, I looked at it, and called out to Miss Eldred, "9 o'clock," and then she went away—when inquiries were made, she remembered receiving this telegram, and, afterwards, that Müller called in the evening—it is seven or eight weeks ago, I think, that somebody came to inquire what I knew about Muller calling on that

evening—a German gentleman called first, and another gentleman—we did not know before that that Mailer was the man—when the German gentleman came, he asked if we knew him, and when he was at our house last—they called two or three times—I can't say how long the first time was after Mailer called.

Q. You remember with minuteness the particulars of Müller's calling on you; I ask you, how long after he called did somebody call to inquire about him? A. It was some weeks after we had seen Müller—the first persons I saw were a German gentleman and another gentleman—we had heard at that time that Müller was suspected, but we did not know whether it was the same or not, as he went by the name of Müller—we did not know it was the same till the German gentleman came—Eldred was with me when the German gentleman came; she was called into the room—she produced the telegram, she had it in her box with other letters and papers—we had not the telegram on the table when he came, it was fetched afterwards—Miss Eldred remembered haying the letter on the same day, and she fetched it—the German gentleman did not mention the day, but Miss Eldred heard that the murder was committed on the 9th—she and I had had conversation about the murder no more than reading the paper—I mean that she was not at all aware that the man accused of the murder was her friend Miller—she had no idea of such a thing for some time, but when we used to read the papers, he being a tailor, and the names being Müller and Müller, we thought it seemed to correspond with the same young man who we knew, also from his being lame when we saw him last, and what was stated in the paper—she did not get out the telegram before the German gentleman came, nor had she said anything about it—she did not know the day till she looked, but she remembered that she had the telegram on the day he last called at our house, and she said, "If I can find the telegram I will, if I have not destroyed it"—when she looked for it she found it—the telegram was not shown to the German gentleman then—it was only two or three weeks ago that it was found—she has always had it by her, but it was never sought for.

Q. It is six or seven weeks since the German gentlemen came who were assisting in the defence of Müller; if she had the telegram when they called why did not she go and look for it at once? A. She might not have thought of it—I do not know whether she told the German gentleman that day that she had the telegram; I was not in the room all the time—nothing was said about the telegram while I was in the room—I remembered distinctly that the telegram was received on the day that Muller called last—I did not tell the German gentleman so, but she gave him the letter to convince him as soon as she found it.

Q. Why did not you tell the German gentleman that Müller had called at half-past 9 on that evening, and that you remembered the day by the telegram? A. Well, I do not know—I did not interfere with her affairs—I did not think of it at the time; they did not refer to any letter, neither did I—I do not know whether Eldred told him—I left him and her alone in the room both before and after—the first time that Eldred and I had any conversation about the telegram may be three weeks ago, that would be some three or four weeks after the German gentleman called on us—I never knew of it until about three weeks ago, because we did not know the day of the month, but she said, "I had a letter from my friend," calling him by his name," and if I can find that letter I shall know the day of the month;

I hope I have not destroyed it"—that was two or three weeks ago, and she looked in her box and found it.

Q. Can you say how she came to say this two or three weeks ago, never having referred to it before; can you explain that? A. She remembered having the letter the same day, and she knew if she had to come up she would not like to false swear, and she would know by that letter the date—I took the telegram to Miss Eldred—I have parted with it to the gentlemen who are defending the prisoner—my husband gave it to them in my presence, but not in Miss Eldred's presence; Miss Eldred sent it to him, but she said she did not know if it would be of any service—I think that was a fortnight ago come Tuesday; a week last Tuesday the German gentleman has had the letter in his possession—Miss Eldred brought it down, and gave it to my husband; I saw her do it; it was last Monday week she brought it down, and on the Tuesday she gave it to the German gentleman—I mean that at the time she gave it she said that she did not know it was of any service—Miss Eldred was sometimes in the habit of asking the time before she went out, but not always—I cannot say whether she did so the night before; I think she did—she generally wants to know the time—I cannot say whether she did on the night after—she does not go out on Sunday evenings—I cannot recollect whether she did on the Monday—sometimes she will ask the time three or four times a day—there is no clock in her room.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I believe you said that you should never have been able to fix the date unless that telegram had been found? A. Yes—I knew it was on a Saturday—I think it was seven or eight weeks ago when the German gentleman and one of Mr. Beard's clerks came—I told them merely that Müller had called, that he had been in the habit of visiting our house, he called on the Saturday, as we heard of the murder on Tuesday—I was not able to fix the date except by the telegram, but we should have known by hearing of the murder on Tuesday; that made me so positive as to the day of the month—I never eat supper, nor does Miss Eldred, before—she goes out.

JURY.* Q. Had Müller a hat or a cap that evening? A. A hat.

MARY ANN ELDRED . In July last I lived at Lant-street, in the Borough; I now live at Peckham—before I went to Lant-street I lived in Islington; I once lived at Camberwell, with the same landlady I am with now—it was at Stanley-cottage, James street, Vassall-road—I was living there in July last—I know Müller; I have known him twelve months—I was often in the habit of seeing him—I remember receiving this telegram—I had met Müller on the Saturday previous to receiving that telegram in the Old Jewry, Cheapside; that was the Saturday before 9th July—on the day I received the telegram I went out at 9 in the evening—I remained out till after 12—I came home that night—I did not see my landlady till the morning—she then told me that a friend of mine had called—I cannot recollect how long it was after she told me that, before I heard of the murder; I can't tell at all—I am quite sure I went out at 9 o'clock—I generally went out at 9, and the prisoner called at half-past 9—he did not call before I went out—I knew that he was going abroad, several weeks before he went; he told me, and asked me to go with him; he said he was going to America to see his sister, and if I did not go with him he should remain there only six months.

Q. When did you first make any communication to anybody about his having been there that night? A. I don't remember telling any one—I remember a German gentleman calling; I did not see them the first day

they came—I can't remember a gentleman afterwards calling and speaking to me about it—I did not make any statement, or say anything that was taken down in writing by a gentleman—I have seen Mr. Beard—I have had the telegram a long time—I gave it up to Mr. Beard or some one sent by him two or three days ago, I think.

Cross-examined by MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. When did you see Mr. Beard? A. A few days ago; it was not so long as a month ago—I can't remember how long it was after I last saw Müller that I spoke to anybody about this; I don't remember that I ever did—I did not see a German gentleman; I saw two gentlemen together at Mrs. Jones's, some weeks ago; three or four weeks ago—I did not say anything about the telegram then; I did not know I had got it till I was looking over my letters—I first said anything about the telegram a few days ago—until the two gentlemen called about a month ago my attention had not been called to the date or time of Müller coming to see me—when the gentlemen called I remembered at once the exact time that I went out that night; I remembered going out at 9—having the telegram from this gentleman made me recollect going out at 9 that night—I cannot say the time I received the telegram, but it was toward? the afternoon; I cannot tell within an hour when I received it, it might have been 1 o'clock, or it might have been 2—I dined that day after 4—I can't exactly tell the time; I should say it was about that time; I can't tell within half an-hour—I can't remember what time I breakfasted that day; it might have been 10, or it might have been 11—it was after 11 when I got up—it was much after 12 when I went to bed; it was past 12, I dare say half-past; I only guess—I am positive I went out exactly at 9; that was about the time I generally used to go out—I went out every night at that time—I can remember it so well, and the telegram—I don't know that the telegram had anything to do with the time I went, out that night—I recollect the time because I can remember so well my landlady telling me that Müller had called in the evening; it was the next morning she told me that—the receiving the telegram had nothing to do with the time of my going out—I don't know why that should assist me in recollecting the time I went out.

JURY. Q. Have you been in the habit of seeing Müller's hat? A. No.

THOMAS BEARD . I have conducted the prisoner's defence, instructed by the German Legal Protection Society—I have heard Haffa examined here in the course of this trial—I heard him say that Müller told him when he left the Old Jewry, Aldgate, at a quarter to 8, that he was going to Camberwell to see his sweetheart—Haffa had communicated that fact to me before the arrival of Müller in this country—I am not quite sure whether he had said it at the police-court, but he had communicated it to me out of court—I received that communication somewhere about four or five days before Müller's arrival from America—he arrived on 17th Sept—in consequence of that I instructed my clerk to accompany one of the gentlemen of the Protection Society to make inquiries about this matter, and he did so—he brought the result back to me—this telegram must have been first handed to me about twelve or fourteen days ago; I am not quite sure as to the day, but about that time—I had proofs produced to me by my clerk and a German gentleman before Müller's arrival, and also the proofs of Eldred and Jones—the telegram was shown to you on consulation—I don't know the day exactly—I dare say it was Thursday week—I had not then had it in my possession above a couple of days.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I suppose it was under

your judgment that neither of these witnesses were called either at the police, court or before the Coroner? A. It was.

CHARLES FOREMAN . I am an omnibus-conductor, living at 7, Norfolk-street, Montpelier-street, Peckham—I conduct an omnibus of Mr. Barwick's, a fly-master, of Camber well-gate, running from Peckham-rye to Gracechurch-street—we go from Peckham right through Camberwell, and Walworth, and Newington, to the Borough—the Peckham-rye omnibuses run through Camberwell-gate, up the Walworth-road, Newington-causeway, and so into the City—mine is a Peckham omnibus; we go to Peckham and then to Peckham-rye—there are other Peckham omnibuses that go up the Old Kent-road—they start from New Peckham; that is quite a different route from ours—they go to the Elephant and Castle, and branch off by St. George's church—leave Camberwell just about five minutes to 10—I generally arrive in King William-street about twenty minutes past 10, and leave again at the half hour, or a minute or two over the half-hour—the journey before that I leave Camberwell-gate about 7 o'clock—it is a little more than a quarter of a mile from Camberwell-gate to Camberwell-green—it may be about a quarter of a mile from Camber well-green to Vassall-road; I cannot say exactly—one end of it comes into the Camberwell New-road and one end into the Brixton-road.

Q. Do you remember on any occasion carrying a man in your omnibus with a slipper on his foot? A. I had a gentleman ride in my omnibus with a slipper on his foot, but when that was I could not say—it was the last journey, the five minutes to 10 journey towards the City, getting in at Camberwell-gate—I could not at all say what day of the month it was, or what month it was in—I could not say at all how long ago it was; it was in the summer, but I could not say the month or date, or whether it was July or August—I cannot tell the day of the week—my attention was not called to it till about a month or five weeks ago—the gentleman appeared to me to be lame, and how I came to notice him was, as he was getting out of the omnibus he seemed rather stout to me, and he leant rather heavily on the left arm, and I thought to myself, "You have got a touch of my complaint," that is the gout—that was how I came to notice him.

Q. Did you notice at all the colour of the man's hair? A. To the best of my belief he seemed rather fair, and to the best of my belief rather stout—to the best of my belief the slipper looked like a Brussels carpet slipper—I could not swear that this was the slipper (looking at the one produced)—I cannot say whether it resembles it; it was a carpet slipper, to the best of my belief.

GUILTY .— DEATH .


View as XML