Transcribed from the [1817] John Fairburn edition by David Price, email
ccx074@pglaf.org
[Picture: Public domain book cover]
FIFTH EDITION,
_Church burnt in Effigy_! _Rev. J. L. Garrett’s Vindi-_
_cation_, _the Whole of the Evidence_, _&c. &c._
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HAY & TURNER have had the affrontery to call their Scribble the only
Genuine
Edition! whereas, it is not so correct as FAIRBURN’S.—_John Church_.
* * * * *
THE
TRIAL
AND
CONVICTION
OF THAT
_INFAMOUS HYPOCRITE_
JOHN CHURCH,
The SURREY TABERNACLE PREACHER,
BOROUGH-ROAD, ST. GEORGE’S FIELDS,
FOR AN
Abominable Offence;
INCLUDING THE WHOLE OF
THE EVIDENCE;
Tried before LORD ELLENBOROUGH, at the Surrey Assizes, Croydon,
Saturday, August 16, 1817.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TAKEN IN SHORT HAND.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TO WHICH IS ADDED,
HIS LIFE,
CONFESSIONS, NOTES OF ONE OF HIS SERMONS,
THE WHOLE OF
THE LOVE-LETTERS, &c. &c.
* * * * *
“_Woe unto you_, Scribes and Pharisees, _Hypocrites_! for ye compass
sea and land to make _one Proselyte_; and, when he is made, ye make
him _two-fold more the child of Hell_ than yourselves.”
“Ye Serpents! ye generation of Vipers! _how can ye escape the
damnation of Hell_?”
ST. MATTHEW, CHAP. xxiii. v. 15 & 33.
* * * * *
LONDON:
Published by JOHN FAIRBURN, 2, Broadway, Ludgate-Hill.
(_Price Sixpence_.)
* * * * *
Marchant, Printer, Ingram-court, London.
* * * * *
SURREY ASSIZES, CROYDON,
_Saturday_, _August_ 16, 1817.
THE KING v. JOHN CHURCH.
THE Indictment charged, “That the Defendant, late of the parish of St.
Mary, Lambeth, in the county of Surrey, on the 26th day of September, in
the fifty-seventh year of the reign of George the Third, with force and
arms, at the parish aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, in and upon one
Adam Foreman, in the peace of God and our said Lord the King, then and
there being, did make an assault, and him, the said Adam Foreman, then
and there did beat, wound, and ill treat, so that his life was greatly
despaired of, with intent, that most horrid and detestable crime, (among
Christians not to be named,) with the said Adam Foreman, against the
order of nature, then and there feloniously, wickedly, and devilishly, to
commit and do, to the great displeasure of Almighty God, to the great
damage of the said Adam Foreman, and against the peace,” &c.
The second count charged a common assault.
The Defendant pleaded NOT GUILTY.
Counsel for the Prosecution—Mr. MARRYATT and Mr. BOLLAND; Solicitor, Mr.
HARMER.
Counsel for the Defendant—Mr. GURNEY and the COMMON SERJEANT.
The Jury being sworn:—Mr. BORLAND opened the indictment, as follows—
May it please your Lordship, Gentlemen of the Jury—The Defendant, John
Church, stands indicted for a misdemeanour. He has pleaded Not Guilty,
and your charge is to inquire whether he be Guilty or Not Guilty.
Hearken to the evidence.
_Mr. Marryatt_ then stated the case on the part of the Prosecution; after
which the court proceeded to call witnesses: the first witness called was
ADAM FOREMAN _sworn_.
_Examined by Mr. Bolland_.—Will be twenty the first day of December next.
Is an apprentice to Patrick, the potter, of Vauxhall. Has been with him
about five years. Knows the Defendant, John Church, by sight. Has known
him about two or three years. Church is a preacher. He, Witness,
attended the congregation in the Chapel where Church preaches and has
often seen him. Witness sleeps generally at his father’s. There are
occasions upon which witness sleeps at his master’s house when he goes
out of town. Church lived by his chapel, in St. George’s Fields, the
Borough-Road. Came to take up his abode at Mr. Patrick’s the 25th of
September, he came to sleep there that night. Witness slept there that
night. Does not know whether he (Church) had been there before. Cannot
say whether he had seen him there before. Knows that he slept there on
the 25th September, and that he, witness, was there. Witness’s master
that night was out of town; but where he cannot say. Mr. Church,
witness’s mistress, the children, and the two maid servants, slept in the
house that night. There was no other man in the house except himself and
Church. Witnesses bed-room was the front parlour on the first floor over
the kitchen. It is not a bed-room in common in the house. Witness slept
there, because there was no other bed-room that he could sleep in. There
was a temporary bed, therefore, put up for him there. Witness retired to
rest about one o’clock. The reason for his being up so late was because
there was a kiln burning, and he (witness) was obliged to sit up to let
the man into the kiln when he came. It was necessary for him to sit up
to attend that kiln, and to give the key to the man, Thomas West.
Witness went to bed about one o’clock,—went to sleep directly he went to
bed. Had not been asleep more than half an hour before he was awoke by
some one putting his hands under the bed clothes, and laying hold of his
private parts very tight. Witness put his hand out of the bed-clothes,
and caught hold of him and asked him who he was? and laid hold of him, as
near as he could guess, by the upper part of his arm; felt lower down,
and found by the sleeve that he had got a man’s shirt on; found the wrist
was buttoned; knows very well it was a man; could not tell that from the
feel of the flesh. Witness was here asked by _Lord Ellenborough_ by what
circumstance? and answered because he had got a man’s shirt on. The
person, in answer to what he said, answered—“Adam, don’t you know me? I
am your mistress,” in a faint voice, like a woman; it was not the voice
of his mistress, Mrs. Patrick; witness knew the voice directly he heard
it; it was Mr. Church’s voice; Church fled the room directly, that is he
went out in a hurried step. Witness then got out of bed, and put on his
small clothes and shoes, and went to the man up at the kiln. As he
opened the door witness saw by the lamp that it was Mr. Church, and he
had only his shirt on. The lamp that enabled witness to see the person
of Church is outside of the front street door, on the terrace. The lamp
throws a light through the fan-light of the hall door. Witness was here
asked by _Lord Ellenborough_ whether the lamp was at the street door? and
he answered, yes. It is a parish lamp; not one of the new lights; nor a
gas light. Question by _Lord Ellenborough_—Where were you standing at
the time?—I was getting up, my lord. Witness went out of his room. In
answer to a question by _Lord Ellenborough_, witness answered, he saw it
was Church by the lamp at the street door. Witness was then in bed,
sitting up; had not then left his bed; did not open the door; Church did
that. Witness saw him go out through that door; and then observed that
he had a shirt on. The shirt or dress of a man is much shorter than that
of a woman, and, therefore, he must have seen whether it was a shirt or a
shift. It was the shirt of a man witness is sure. Did not see his face
at all; his (Church’s) back was towards witness. When he was gone,
witness got up and put on his small clothes and shoes, and went into the
pottery to get the man to come up to the house; told Thomas West of it.
Witness was here asked by _Lord Ellenborough_ whether West was in the
pottery?—and answered, he was; it was the Thomas West that was in the
pottery before witness went to bed.
_Cross-examined by Mr. Gurney_.—The person, whoever it was, opened the
door and went out, afterwards shut the door after him. Saw him when he
opened the door. There was no light in the room. The light came from a
lamp on the Terrace. The lamp is between five and six yards from the
door on the Terrace. The Terrace on which witness’s master’s house is
situated, is a row of houses raised above the road. The lamp is upon the
Terrace opposite the door. About five or six yards from the door. The
light which it gives to the passage is through the fan-light over the
door. Did not see the face of the person. Saw that the person had a
shirt on. Was rather alarmed, waked out of his sleep in this way. It
was not long about. Witness don’t know how long he (Church) had been
there before witness awoke. Witness went directly to West, who directly
came with him and searched the house for thieves. Did not know whether
any body had got in or not. Looked at every chamber-door in the house
except Mr. Church’s and witness’s mistress’s. Looked at the door of Mr.
Church and that of his mistress, but did not open them. They were both
of them shut. Did not find any door open. Looked at all the doors in
the house, and found them all shut. The maid servant’s door was on the
jar. All the other doors were shut. After that witness and West
searched the house all over. West stopped while the witness put on the
remainder of his clothes, witness then went back with West to the
pottery, after having locked the door. Told West this story directly,
told him that Mr. Church came down into his (witness’s) room and behaved
in a very indecent manner, that he had laid hold of his private parts,
&c. Did not search the house for thieves in particular; but searched if
any body was in any of the rooms. _Mr. Bolland_ here said, I asked you
before whether you did not search the house for thieves; and you answered
“Yes,” are you right or wrong in that?—I asked you before whether you and
he did not search the house for thieves, and you told me that you
did?—Witness answered, we searched the house: we looked all over it, to
see if there was any body in any of the rooms, but not for thieves in
particular. Witness did not think of thieves, because he knew who it
was. Did not go into the maid servants’ room; only looked in; having
found the door open, looked in. The two maids slept in that room; one is
witness’s sister. The door being ajar, witness pushed it in a little,
and saw they were abed. Did not speak to them.
_Re-examined by Mr. Bolland_.—Witness did not search the house for
thieves because he knew who the persons was. The reason of his searching
the house was because he wished to be quite right before he made the
accusation against Mr. Church. Witness and West found there was no other
man in the house but Mr. Church. There was not any door or window open
at which any other man could have come in. The light from the Terrace
struck through the fan-light or window over the door. It gives a pretty
fair light to the hall, it shews a little light up the stairs. It was at
the time the person opened the door and went out that witness got this
view of his person.
_Examined by Lord Ellenborough_.—Did not hear Church when he first came
into the room. Was awakened by the application of his hand to witness’s
person. He was standing upon the floor. Witness has not any difficulty
in hearing. Witness did not call to him by name, or give him to
understand that he knew who he was. Witness saw his (Church’s) back as
he went out of the room. It appeared to be the height of Mr. Church.
Cannot say what height he is. He had a night-cap. Cannot exactly say
whether it was a man’s night-cap or no. Thinks it was a handkerchief
tied round his head. Cannot tell what sort of handkerchief it was. When
witness and West searched the house and examined the different doors they
went to Mr. Church’s door, but did not touch it, nor did they go in.
West wanted to go into the room and pull him out. When West wanted to
putt him out, witness did not call to him because he was afraid of
disturbing his mistress; she would have been very much alarmed. Church
never had any conversation with witness, nor did he ever make any
overture of this sort to him before this time. There was nothing
particular in his manner or conduct towards witness before this time.
Witness has not spoken to him at all since. Has attended before a
Magistrate with him; spoke in his presence there, but not to him; did not
hear him speak before the Magistrate. He did not speak at all before the
Magistrate. Witness gave the same account before the Magistrate that he
has now done here. Did not know whether it was a handkerchief or a
night-cap that was upon his head. There are not any other circumstances
from which he, witness, collected that it was a man. The hand did not
continue upon witness’s person after he awaked at all. The hand was
withdrawn then. He said that he was witness’s mistress. By the height
of the person he saw, witness could ascertain whether it was or was not
the height of his mistress, or any of the female part of the house; Mr.
Church was a great deal bigger than any body there; witness does not
think he is quite six foot; he is a tallish stout man. There was light
enough by the lamp that witness has spoken of to see the outline of the
man so as to be able to say that he was a tall person. Mrs. Patrick is a
very little woman, quite a different person from the person witness saw
in the room. The maid, who slept in the room with witness’s sister, was
about as tall as witness—(_The Witness was about five feet seven_)—not
quite so tall. Witness was sure it was not her.—_The Witness withdrew_.
THOMAS WEST, _sworn_.
_Examined by Mr. Marryatt_. Is workman to Mr. Patrick, the Potter. On
the morning of the 26th September last relieved Adam Foreman at the kiln.
It was about half past twelve o’clock. Went to the pottery to relieve
him. Foreman left witness shortly afterwards, for the purpose of going
to bed. It was about an hour before witness saw him again, when witness
did see him again he was only part dressed. He had on his small-clothes,
his shoes, and one-stocking. He came to witness in a very great fright,
and bid him light his candle; he appeared very much alarmed, and bid him
light his candle, and come along with him up to the house. He told
witness, as they were going along the garden, that Mr. Church has been to
him and behaved in a very indecent manner. Did not explain how. He
unlocked the door and witness went into the house with him; it was the
back door of the house; the outer door; the garden door. When they got
to the house he went and put the remainder of his cloths on and they went
and searched every room in the house, beginning at the bottom and going
to the top, except witness’s mistress’s room and Mr. Church’s; they went
into all the rooms except Mr. Church’s and Mrs. Patrick’s. Did not open
the door of either of those two rooms. When they came to Mr. Church’s
door witness said, “I’ll go and pull him out; shall I?” The lad said,
“No,” for fear of disturbing his mistress. Upon that observation of the
lad’s, about disturbing his mistress, witness forbore going into the
room. Foreman came along with witness into the pottery; became down
stairs, locked the back door, and staid with witness the whole of the
remainder of the night; he returned with witness to the pottery, and
staid till the morning; searched all the rooms of the house, to see if
there was any other person in the place; did not find any window or door
open, at which any body could have got into the house; they were all
close and fastened.
_Cross-examined by the Common-Serjeant_.—When Foreman came to witness, he
told him that Mr. Church had been there; but did not explain what he had
done; is quite sure of that.
_Lord Ellenborough_.—What words did he use?—He only told me that Mr.
Church had behaved in a very indecent manner to him.
Witness had never any intimation that there were thieves in the house;
did not go to search for thieves in the house. When Foreman told him
that Mr. Church had behaved in a very indecent manner to him, witness
went to see if there was any other person in the place. Foreman did not
tell witness he believed there were thieves in the house. Witness is
quite sure Foreman did not explain in what way Church behaved to him. He
did not say any thing like—That he came to his bed-side and laid his hand
on his private parts. This was on the night of the 25th of September;
witness afterwards went before the magistrate, at the same time with
Foreman, the apprentice. To Union Hall. Foreman did not, in the course
of the morning, when staying with witness, and after he had been to the
house, tell witness what Church had done to him, and that he had laid has
hand upon his private parts; never told him so, from first to last.
Witness cannot say at what time it was that he went before the Magistrate
with Foreman; cannot say the day of the month; it was some time
afterwards; believes it was six or seven weeks after; the lad then went
with his father; the lad generally slept at home at his father’s; his
father’s is about a quarter of a mile from his master’s; he slept at his
father’s the next night but one; it was not till about six or seven weeks
after that, they went to the justice; witness did not communicate with
Mr. Patrick upon the subject before he went to the justice.
MR. PATRICK _sworn_.
_Examined by Mr. Bolland_.—Is a potter at Vauxhall. The boy, Foreman,
has been with him ever since he has been in the pottery business, between
five and six years. He only slept in witness’s house occasionally; that
is, whenever he (witness) leaves town; and then he has the key of the
pottery, there being no other male in the house. Witness was absent from
home on the 25th of September last. The boy on that occasion was to
steep in his (witness’s) house. The bed that had been put up for him was
a chair-bed in the front parlour; a temporary bed for a nurse
occasionally. Witness knows the Defendant, John Church. He is a Baptist
preacher. Witness first became acquainted with him when he came to
Vauxhall. Witness attends his chapel, and so became acquainted with him.
His residence is adjoining the chapel. In the month of September he came
to sleep at witness’s house. Witness put a bed up for him. He had
complained of ill health occasionally; and thinking that he was ill,
witness asked him out of friendship to take a bed at his (witness’s)
house, supposing that the air would be of service to him. Does not live
very close the river. Witness was out from home on the 25th of
September. Did not return till the evening of the 26th. The boy,
Foreman, made a communication to him the next morning when he saw him.
Witness returned on the evening of the 26th.
_By Lord Ellenborough_.—Then it was the day but one after, namely, the
morning of the 27th that the boy made the communication to you?—Yes; my
Lord.
Did not see Foreman on the night of witness’s return—not to speak with
him. On the morning of the 27th he made the communication to witness
respecting this transaction. Witness told Foreman he was extremely sorry
for what had happened. Witness had had many applications from the
congregation, to whom he made it known. It was in consequence of the
information they had received from general report, that they applied to
witness for authentic information. Several of the congregation made
those applications. There was a meeting upon the subject. In
consequence of applications made to witness from the congregation, he
went to the Defendant, Church. Thinks it was on the 9th of October.
There had not before that been a meeting of the congregation, at which
witness was present. Did not take any steps between the 27th of
September to see Church, and the 9th of October, upon the subject. That
was the first communication witness had with Church upon the subject.
Church said to him, he took it extremely kind of witness in calling upon
him. Witness told him he might take it as he pleased; that he did not
come willingly, but that some of his congregation thought that witness
ought to see him on the business. Patrick cannot say Church, appeared to
be apprized of the subject before witness began; but believes he was
apprized from what afterwards occurred. Witness told him he (witness)
waited upon him, having seen a letter wherein he denied three particular
points of the boy’s statement; and witness wished to know what those
points were. He said that he denied having hold of the boy, or the boy
having told of him; or he, Church, saying that he was the boy’s mistress.
He admitted he was in the room, but denied laying hold of the boy’s
private parts; did not state any reason for being in the room at all. He
said that he denied three particular points, two of which witness had
already named. The other was something that did not occur to witness to
be important, and which he did not take any notice of, consequently does
not remember it. Witness told him that, of these two points mentioned,
the boy was positive, and witness had no reason to doubt any thing that
the boy had said, as he had never known him to tell a lie. He said that
he was sorry for it, because that confirmed _antient reports_; witness
told him it did so; and, of course, that now he should believe all that
he had heard heretofore. Witness then wished him a good morning. Did
not see him at any time afterwards to speak to him; has seen him, but not
spoken to him since. The letter that witness had seen, which he spoke to
Church about, was a letter dated the 6th of October, addressed to a Mrs.
Hunter. Witness took an exact copy of it. Mr. Harmer has it. Is that
the copy? (_A paper put into the witness’ hand_.) Yes; it is an exact
copy. Witness did not read that copy of the letter to Church; he had.
not the copy at that time; only told him he wished to know what the three
things were which he could deny, as asserted by the boy; does not
recollect the third point; it is not material. He admitted being in the
room, but denied the laying hold,—he said, “I was in the room; but I did
not lay hold of the boy.” Did not say why he was in the room. Witness
returned the letter of the 6th of October to Mrs. Hunter. He got it from
Mrs. Hunter, and to Mrs. Hunter he returned it.
_Cross-examined by Mr. Gurney_.—Meant to say that Church said distinctly
to witness that he was in the room. Did not mention to any person, after
he had see Mr. Church, that he was not implicated in the affair at all.
Never said any such thing. Did not give any person an account of the
conversation you had with him, and accompany that account with this
observation, “He is not at all implicated.” Mr. Thomas went to the door
of Mr. Church with witness. Thomas is no friend of witness’s; witness
had only seen him at the door. It was _his_ wife and witness’s that
wished witness to make the application to Mr. Church. Mr. Thomas went
with him as far as the door, but did not go in with him. Witness told
him briefly what had transpired; it was very short what did transpire.
He told Mr. Thomas what had transpired at the interview with Mr. Church,
when he came out. Think he told Mr. Thomas that Mr. Church admitted
having been in the room, but is not positive as to that point; knows he
told him that Mr. Church said he did not lay hold of the boy. Did not
answer, on Mr. Thomas asking, “Well, is there any thing against Mr.
Church, or not.”—“No; he is not at all implicated.” Never told him,
directly or indirectly, that there was nothing to implicate Mr. Church.
Witness did say he would prosecute Mr. Church because he had said
disgraceful things of witness’s wife, but not for this crime, but for
defamation of his wife’s character. Don’t know that he ever told Mr.
Thomas so, but believes he said that, or words to that effect, to other
persons. Did not mention that, amongst other things, on that very
morning that he had the interview with Mr. Church; some other time he
might.
MRS. HUNTER _sworn_.
_Examined by Mr. Marryatt_.
Is an attendant amongst the congregation, and a hearer of Mr. Church.
Received a letter in the beginning of the month of October, but there was
no name to it. There was no place of abode given, nor any thing except
the day of the month; could not tell from whom it came; gave it to Mr.
Patrick’s daughter, who gave it to her father; it was returned to witness
again, who took no further notice of it. Witness had a subpœna _duces
tecum_ so produce it, but was impossible to produce it. After the letter
was returned witness took no further notice of it, but put it into a
drawer; knows no more than his Lordship what is become of it; looked for
it on the Thursday morning before she came, but could find no scraps of
it; was not able to find it; was wholly unable to find it; witness
searched diligently to find it; is convinced there was no name to it.
Has seen Mr. Church’s hand-writing, and has seen it written in a
different hand, not always alike, but sometimes very different; not to
say exactly two different hands, but such a difference in the same
hand-writing that she would hardly think it the same; has seen it so
different, at times, that she should not at all times, think, it was the
same; thinks it was Church’s hand-writing, but could not be positive, as
there was no name to it; cannot say whether it was or was not; it is not
in witness’s power. Witness believed, at that time, that it was his
hand-writing, and believes it still. When she opened it she was very
much struck with the similarity, for it had very much the appearance of
his hand-writing; but, as their was not a signature, could not be
certain. It had the appearance of his handwriting. Witness’s belief
now, whether it was or was not his hand-writing, is exactly this same now
as it was then. Cannot say. She firmly believes it was his
hand-writing, because it was not signed. Did not communicate it to any
body but Mr. Patrick. Communicated to Mr. Patrick that she had received
a letter from Mr. Church.
_Cross-examined by the Common Serjeant_. The search which witness made
for this letter was not until last Thursday. Witness has no reason to
believe that it is in her house, for she did not leave a draw or place
unsearched.
_Lord Ellenborough_.—As far as evidence can go of the loss of an original
letter, to let in the copy, we have it in this case; for I asked her
whether she made diligent search after the original, and she says, she
has made diligent search.
_Mr. Patrick examined again by Mr. Marryatt_.—Was acquainted in October
last with the hand-writing of Mr. Church. The letter from which he made
this copy, and which he returned to Mrs. Hunter, was, in his belief, the
handwriting of Mr. Church.
_Mr. Marryatt_.—Now, my Lord, I propose reading this copy of the letter
in question.