THIRD DAY, MAY 16.

The court was quite as full at the commencement of the proceedings this

morning as it had been on either of the preceding days. The Earl of

Derby, Earl Grey, and other noble lords were again present.

The jury took their seats shortly before ten o’clock. The learned

judges, Lord Chief Justice Campbell, Mr. Baron Alderson, and Mr. Justice

Cresswell, soon afterwards entered the court, accompanied by the

Recorder and Sheriffs, and the prisoner was then placed at the bar. He

appeared rather more anxious than on the two previous days, but was

still calm and collected, and paid the greatest attention to the

evidence.

Counsel for the Crown: The Attorney-General, Mr. E. James, Q.C., Mr.

Bodkin, Mr. Welsby, and Mr. Huddleston. For the prisoner:--Mr. Serjeant

Shee, Mr. Grove, Q.C., Mr. Gray, and Mr. Kenealy.

The next witness for the prosecution was CHARLES JOSEPH ROBERTS,

examined by Mr. E. JAMES: In November last I was apprentice to Mr.

Hawkins, a druggist, at Rugeley. I know Palmer. On Tuesday, November the

20th, between eleven and twelve in the day, he came into Mr. Hawkins’s

shop. He first asked for two drachms of prussic acid, for which he had

brought a bottle. I was putting it up when Newton, the assistant of

Salt, came in. Palmer told him he wanted to speak to him, and they went

out of the shop together. I then saw Brassington, the cooper, take

Newton away from Palmer, and enter into conversation with him. Palmer

then came back into the shop and asked me for six grains of strychnine

and two drachms of Batley’s solution of opium (commonly called Batley’s

sedative). I had put up the prussic acid, which was lying upon the

counter. He stood at the counter when he ordered the things, and while I

was preparing them behind the counter he stood at the shop door, with

his back to me, looking into the street. I was about five minutes

preparing them. He stood at the door till they were ready, when I

delivered them to him--the prussic acid in the bottle he had brought,

the strychnine in a paper, and the opium in a bottle. He paid me for

them and took them away. No one else was in the shop from the time when

Palmer and Newton went out till I delivered the things to him. When

Palmer had left, Newton came in, and we had some conversation. I had at

that time been six years in Mr. Hawkins’s employment. Palmer had not

bought any drugs at the shop for about two years. I know Thirlby,

Palmer’s assistant. He had started a shop about two years before.

By Lord CAMPBELL: Thirlby was carrying on business as a druggist at the

time.

Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant SHEE.--I did not make entries of any of

these things in the books.

Re-examined: When articles are paid for across the counter I am not in

the habit of making entries of them in the books.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated that Dr. Bamford was seriously ill, and

unable to attend, but his depositions would be read.

Mr. William STEVENS, examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I have been a

merchant in the city, but am now out of business. Was stepfather to the

deceased Mr. Cook. I married his father’s widow 15 (or 18) years ago,

and have known him intimately ever since. I was made executor to his

grandfather’s will. I was always on friendly terms with him, and

constantly had the care of him. He had property worth altogether about

£12,000. He was articled to a solicitor at Worthing, in Sussex, but he

did not follow the profession. He had been connected with the turf about

three or four years--perhaps not so much. I did everything in my power

to withdraw him from that pursuit.

Lord CAMPBELL: But you still remained on friendly terms?

Witness: On affectionate terms. The last time I saw him alive was at the

station at Euston-square, about two o’clock on the afternoon of the 5th

of November. I think he told me he was going to Rugeley, but I am not

quite sure; he looked better than I had seen him for a very long time. I

was so gratified that I said, “My boy, you look very well now; you don’t

look anything of an invalid.” He said he was quite well, and struck

himself on the chest. I think he added he would be quite right if he was

happy. In point of appearance he was not a robust man. His complexion

was pale. During the previous winter he had had a sore throat for some

months. I first heard of his death on the evening of Wednesday, November

21. Mr. Jones, of Lutterworth, called at my house and informed me of it.

The next day I went down to Lutterworth with Mr. Jones for the purpose

of searching for the will and papers. The day after I went to Rugeley. I

arrived between twelve and one. I asked to see the body when I got to

the inn. I met Palmer in the passage. I had seen him once before, and

Mr. Jones introduced me to him. He followed us upstairs to see the body,

and removed the sheet from it to rather below the waist. I was much

struck with its appearance. I first noticed the tightness of the muscles

across the face. There did not appear to me to be any emaciation or

disease. We all went down stairs to one of the sitting-rooms. In a short

time I said to Palmer, “I hear from Mr. Jones that you know something of

my son’s affairs. Can you tell me anything about them?” He replied,

“Yes; there are £4,000 worth of bills out of his, and I am sorry to say

my name is to them; but I have got a paper drawn up by a lawyer, and

signed by him, to show that I never had any money from them.” I

expressed great surprise at this, and said, “I fear there won’t be 4000

shillings to pay you.” “But,” I asked, “had he no horses, no property?”

Palmer replied, “Yes, he has some horses, but they are mortgaged.” I

said, “Has he no sporting bets, nor anything of that sort?” He mentioned

one debt of £300. I would rather not state the name of the person who

owed it. It is a relation of his, not a sporting gentleman. (The witness

wrote down the name and handed it to the counsel on both sides and the

Judges).

Lord CAMPBELL: The name is immaterial.

Palmer said he did not know of any other debt. I said I thought his

sporting creditors would have to take his sporting effects, as I should

have nothing to do with them. I added, “Well, whether he has left

anything or not, poor fellow, he must be buried.” Palmer immediately

said, “Oh! I’ll bury him myself, if that’s all.” I said, “I certainly

can’t think of your doing that; I shall do it.” Cook’s brother-in-law,

who had come to meet me, was then present, and expressed a great wish to

bury him. I said, “No; as his executor, I shall take care of that. I

cannot have the funeral immediately, as I intend to bury him in London,

in his mother’s grave. I shall be sorry to inconvenience the people here

at the inn, but I will get it done as soon as possible.” Palmer said,

“Oh! that’s of no consequence, but the body ought to be fastened up at

once.” He repeated that observation--“So long as the body is fastened

up, it is of no consequence.” While I was talking to Cook’s

brother-in-law, Palmer and Jones left the room. They returned in about

half an hour. I then asked Palmer for the name of some respectable

undertaker in Rugeley, that I might at once order a coffin and give

directions. He said, “I have been and done that. I have ordered a shell

and strong oak coffin.” I expressed my surprise. I said, “I did not

give you any authority to do so, but I must see the undertaker to let

him have my instructions.” I think he told me the name of the

undertaker. I ordered dinner for myself, my son-in-law, and Jones, and I

asked Palmer to come in. We all dined together at the inn, about 3. I

was going back to London that afternoon. After dinner, Palmer being

still present, I desired Mr. Jones to be so good as to go upstairs and

get me Mr. Cook’s betting-book, or pocket-book, or books or papers that

might be there. I had seen him with a betting-book--a small one with

clasps. Mr. Jones then left the room, and Palmer followed him. They were

away 10 minutes. Mr. Jones said, on their return, “I am very sorry to

say I can’t find any betting-book or papers.” I exclaimed, “No

betting-book, Mr. Jones?” Turning towards Palmer, I said, “How is this?”

Palmer said, “Oh, it is of no manner of use if you find it.” I said, “No

use, Sir! I am the best judge of that.” He replied, “It is of no use.” I

said, “I am told it is of use. I understand my son won a great deal of

money at Shrewsbury, and I ought to know something about it.” He

replied, “It is of no use, I assure you. When a man dies his bets are

done with. Besides, Cook received the greater part of his money on the

course at Shrewsbury.” I said, “Very well, the book ought to be found,

and must be found.” Palmer then said, in a quieter tone, “It will no

doubt be found.” I again said, “Sir, it shall be found.”

I then went to the door, and calling to the housekeeper, I desired that

everything in the bedroom should be locked up, and nothing touched until

I returned or sent some one. Before leaving I went up stairs to take a

last look at the body. Some servants were in the room, turning over the

bed-clothes, and also the undertaker. I had given him instructions

before dinner to place the body in the coffin. He was standing by the

side of the shell. The body was in it, uncovered. I knelt down by the

side of the shell, and, taking the right hand of the corpse I found it

clinched. I looked across the body and saw that the left hand was

clinched in the same manner. I returned to town and communicated next

morning with my solicitor, who gave me a letter to Mr. Gardner of

Rugeley. I returned to Rugeley, where I arrived at eight o’clock next

evening (Saturday). I started from Euston square at two o’clock, and on

the platform I met Palmer. He said he had received a telegraphic message

summoning him to London after I had left Rugeley. I asked him where

Cook’s horses were kept. He told me at Eddisford, near Rugeley, and said

he would drive me out there if I wished. When I got to Wolverton, where

the train stops, I saw him again in the refreshment room. I said, “Mr.

Palmer, this is a very melancholy thing, the death of my poor son

happening so suddenly; I think for the sake of his brother and sister,

who are somewhat delicate, it might be desirable for his medical friends

to know what his complaints were.” Cook had a sister and half-brother.

Palmer replied, “That can be done very well.” The bell then rang, and we

went to our seats. He travelled in a different carriage till we reached

Rugby, where I saw him again in the refreshment-room. I said, “Mr.

Palmer, as I live at a distance I think I ought to ask a solicitor at

Rugeley to look after my interest.” He said, “Oh, yes, you might do

that.” “Do you know any solicitor?” I said, “No.” I then got some

refreshment, and went back to my carriage; I found Palmer sitting there.

I had no conversation with him before we reached Rugeley, but continued

talking to a lady and gentleman with whom I had been conversing since I

left town.

After we arrived at Rugeley, Palmer said, “Do you know any solicitor,

here?” I said, “No, I don’t, I am a perfect stranger.” He said, “I know

them all intimately, and I can introduce you to one. When I get home I

must have a cup of coffee, and I will then come over, and take you all

about.” I thanked him, as I had done once or twice before, and said I

wouldn’t trouble him. He repeated his offer. Altering my tone and

manner, I said, “Mr. Palmer, if I should call in a solicitor to give me

advice, I suppose you will have no objection to answer any question he

may put to you.” I altered my tone purposely; I looked steadily at him,

but, although the moon was shining, I could not see his features

distinctly. He said, with a spasmodic convulsion of the throat, which

was perfectly apparent, “Oh no, certainly not.” At Wolverton, I had

purposely mentioned my desire that there should be a _post-mortem_

examination, and I ought to say that he was quite calm when I mentioned

it. After I asked him that question there was a pause for three or four

minutes. He then again proposed to come over to me after he had had his

coffee, and I again begged he would not trouble himself. I went to Mr.

Gardner, and then came back to the inn. Palmer came to me, and began to

talk about the bills. He said, “It’s a very unpleasant affair for me.” I

said, “I think it right to tell you, that since I saw you I have had

rather a different account of Mr. Cook’s affairs.” He said, “Oh, indeed!

I hope, at any rate, they will be settled pleasantly.” I said, “His

affairs can only be settled in a Court of Chancery.” He asked me what

friends Mr. Cook visited in the neighbourhood of London. I said,

“Several.” The next day (Sunday) I saw him again, between five and six

in the evening. He said, “You were talking of going to Eddisford. If I

were you, I would not take a solicitor with me there.” I said, “Why not?

I shall use my own judgment.” Later in the evening he came again to my

room, holding a piece of paper, as if he wished to give it to me. I went

on with my writing, and said, “Pray, who is Mr. Smith?” He repeated,

“Mr. Smith!” two or three times, and I said, “I mean a Mr. Smith who sat

up with my son one night.” He said, “He is a solicitor in the town.” I

asked if he was in practice. He replied, “Yes.” I said, “I ask you the

question because, as the betting-book is lost, I should wish to know who

has been with the young man.” After a pause, I said, “Did you attend my

son in a medical capacity?” He said, “Oh, dear, no.” I said, “I ask you,

because I am determined to have his body examined; and if you had

attended him professionally I suppose the gentleman I shall call in

would think it proper that you should be present.” He asked who was to

perform the examination. I said, “I cannot say. I shall not know myself

until to-morrow. I think it right to tell you of it; but, whether you

are present at it or not is a matter of indifference to me.”

On the Friday, when Palmer gave orders for the shell, did you perceive

any sign of decomposition in the body, or anything which would render

its immediate enclosure necessary?--On the contrary, the body did not

look to me like a dead body. I was surprised at its appearance.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant SHEE: The last time Cook stayed at my

house was in January or February last year, for about a month. He then

had a sore throat. I do not remember that it was continually sore. He

had not the least difficulty in swallowing. I did not notice any ulcers

about his face. In the spring he complained of being an invalid, and

said his medical friends told him that if he was not better in the

winter he ought to go to a warm climate. No communication was made to me

about insuring his life. I was dissatisfied about the loss of the

betting-book. I desired that everything belonging to the deceased might

be locked up. When I returned to Rugeley with Palmer, I went to seek for

Mr. Gardner. I saw him on the following (Sunday) morning. I have once

been in communication with the policeofficer Field. That was a fortnight

or three weeks after my son’s death. Field called upon me. I never

applied to him.

By Mr. Baron ALDERSON: I never called upon Mr. Bamford, but he dined

with me at the Talbot Arms.

MARY KEELEY, examined by Mr. WELSBY: I am a widow, living at Rugeley. On

the morning of Wednesday, the 21st of November last, I was sent for to

lay out Cook’s body. My sister-in-law went with me. That was about one

o’clock in the morning. The body was still warm, but the hands and arms

were cold. The body was lying on the back. The arms were crossed upon

the chest. The head lay a little turned on one side. The body was very

stiff indeed. I have laid out many corpses. I never saw one so stiff

before. We had difficulty in straightening the arms. We could not keep

them straight down to the body. I passed a piece of tape under the back

and tied it round the wrists, to fasten the arms down. The right foot

turned, on one side, outwards. We were obliged to tie both the feet

together. The eyes were open. We were a considerable time before we

could close them, because the eyelids were very stiff. The hands were

closed, and were very stiff. Palmer was upstairs with us. He lighted me

while I took two rings off Cook’s fingers. That was off one hand. The

fingers were very stiff, and I had difficulty in getting off the rings.

I got them off, and when I had done so the hand closed again. I did not

see anything of a betting-book, nor any small book like a pocketbook.

Cross-examined by Mr. GROVE: It is not usual to tie the hands of a

corpse. I have never before used tape to tie the arms; I have used it to

tie the ankles together, and also for the toes. I have never seen it

used for the arms. It is usual to lay the arms by the sides. If the body

gets stiff the arms remain as they were at the time of death. If the

eyes are closed at the time of death there is no difficulty in keeping

them closed. It is a common thing to put penny pieces upon them to keep

them closed. That is to prevent the eyelid drawing back. The jaw is

generally tied up shortly after death.

Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I cannot say how many bodies I have

laid out, but I have laid out a great many, of all ages. I never knew of

the arms being tied before this instance. It is usual to lay the arms by

the sides within a few minutes after death. I was called up at half-past

twelve. It was half-past one when I went upstairs to the room where Cook

lay. Sometimes the feet of corpses get twisted out; it is then that they

are tied. That occurs within about half-an-hour after death. I have

never known the eyelid so stiff as in this case. I have put penny pieces

on the eyes. In those cases the lids were stiff, but not so stiff as in

this instance.

JOHN THOMAS HARLAND, examined by Mr. BODKIN: I am a physician residing

at Stafford. On the 26th of November last I went from Stafford to

Rugeley, to be present at a _post-mortem_ examination. I arrived at

Rugeley at ten o’clock in the morning. I called at the house of Mr.

Bamford, surgeon. As I went there Palmer joined me in the street. He

came from the back of his own house. I had frequently seen him and had

spoken to him before. He said, “I am glad that you are come to make a

_post-mortem_ examination. Some one might have been sent whom I did not

know.” I said, “What is this case? I hear there is a suspicion of

poisoning.” He said, “Oh, no; I think not. He had an epileptic fit on

Monday and Tuesday last, and you will find old disease in the heart and

in the head.” We then went together to Mr. Bamford’s. I had brought no

instruments with me, having only been requested to be present at the

examination. Palmer said that he had instruments, and offered to fetch

them and lend them to me. He (Palmer) said there was a very queer old

man who seemed to suspect him of something, but he did not know what he

meant or what he wanted. He also said, “He seems to suspect that I have

got the betting-book. Cook had no betting-book that would be of use to

anyone.” Mr. Bamford and I then went to the house of Mr. Frere, who is a

surgeon at Rugeley. Palmer did not go with us. Thence we went to the

Talbot Arms, where the _post-mortem_ examination was proceeded with. Mr.

Devonshire operated, and Mr. Newton assisted him. There were in the

room, besides, Mr. Bamford, Palmer, myself, and several other persons. I

stood near Mr. Devonshire. The body was very stiff.

By LORD CAMPBELL: It was much stiffer than bodies usually are five or

six days after death.

Examination resumed: The muscles were very highly developed. By that I

mean that they were strongly contracted and thrown out. I examined the

hands. They were stiff, and were firmly closed. The abdominal viscera

were first examined.

At the suggestion of LORD CAMPBELL, the witness read a report which he

prepared on the day on which this _post-mortem_ examination took place,

November 26th, 1855, and transmitted to Mr. Stevens, the step-father of

the deceased. This report described the state of the various internal

organs as being perfectly healthy and natural. The material statements

were all repeated in the subsequent examination of the witness. After

reading the report,

The witness continued: The abdominal viscera were in a perfectly healthy

state. They were taken out of the body. We examined the liver. It was

healthy. The lungs were healthy, but contained a good deal of blood. Not

more than would be accounted for by gravitation after death. We examined

the head. The brain was quite healthy. There was no extravasation of

blood, and no serum. There was nothing which, in my judgment, could

cause pressure. The heart was contracted, and contained no blood. That

was the result not of disease, but of spasmodic action. At the larger

end of the stomach there were numerous small yellowish-white spots,

about the size of mustard seeds. They would not at all account for

death. I doubt whether they would have any effect upon the health. I

think they were mucous follicles. The kidneys were full of blood, which

had gravitated there. They had no appearance of disease. The blood was

in a fluid state. That is not usual. It is found so in some cases of

sudden death, which are of rare occurrence. The lower part of the spinal

cord was not very closely examined. We examined the upper part of that

cord. It presented a perfectly natural appearance. On a subsequent day,

I think the 25th of January, it was thought right to exhume the body,

that the spinal cord might be more carefully examined. I was present at

that examination. The lower part of the spinal cord was then minutely

examined. A report was made of that examination.

This report was put in, and was read by the witness. It described

minutely the appearance and condition of the spinal cord and its

envelopes, and concluded with this statement:--“There is nothing in the

condition of the spinal cord or its envelopes to account for death;

nothing but the most normal and healthy state, allowance being made for

the lapse of time since the death of the deceased.”

Examination resumed: I am still of opinion that there was nothing in the

appearance of the spine to account for the death of the deceased, and

nothing of an unusual kind which might not be referred to changes after

death. When the stomach and the intestines were removed from the body on

the occasion of the first examination they were separately emptied into

a jar, and were afterwards placed in it. Mr. Devonshire and Mr. Newton

removed them from the body. They were the only two who operated. At that

time the prisoner was standing on the right of Mr. Newton. While Mr.

Devonshire was opening the stomach a push was given by Palmer which sent

Mr. Newton against Mr. Devonshire, and shook some of the contents of the

stomach into the body. I thought a joke was passing among them, and

said, “Don’t do that.”

By Lord CAMPBELL.--Might not Palmer have been impelled by some one

outside him?--There was no one who could have impelled him.

What did you observe Palmer do?--I saw Mr. Newton and Mr. Devonshire

pushed together, and Palmer was over them. He was smiling at the time.

Examination continued: After this interruption the opening of the

stomach was pursued. The stomach contained about three ounces of a

brownish fluid. There was nothing particular in that. Palmer was looking

on, and said, “They won’t hang us yet.” He said that to Mr. Bamford in a

loud whisper. That remark was made upon his own observation of the

stomach. The stomach, after being emptied, was put into the jar. The

intestines were then examined, but nothing particular was found in them.

They were contracted and very small. The viscera, with their contents,

as taken from the body, were placed in the jar, which was then covered

over with two bladders, which were tied and sealed. I tied and sealed

them. After I had done so I placed the jar upon the table by the body.

Palmer was then moving about the room. In a few minutes I missed the jar

from where I had placed it. During that time my attention had been

withdrawn by the examination. On missing the jar I called out, “Where’s

the jar?” and Palmer, from the other end of the room, said, “It is

here; I thought it would be more convenient for you to take away.” There

was a door at the end of the room where he was. He was within a yard or

two of that door, and about 24 feet from the table on which the body was

lying. [Before making this last statement the witness referred to a plan

of the room which was put in by the Attorney-General.] The door near

which Palmer was standing was not the one by which he had entered the

room. I called to Palmer, “Will you bring it here?” I went from the

table and met Palmer half way coming with the jar. The jar had, since I

last saw it, been cut through both bladders. The cut was hardly an inch

long. It had been done with a sharp instrument. I examined the cut. The

edges were quite clean. No part of the contents of the jar could have

passed through it. Finding this cut, I said, “Here is a cut; who has

done this?” Palmer, and Mr. Devonshire, and Mr. Newton all said that

they had not done it, and nothing more was said about it. When I was

about to remove the jar from the room, the prisoner asked me what I was

going to do with it. I said I should take it to Mr. Frere’s. He said, “I

had rather you would take it to Stafford than take it there.” I made no

answer that I remember. I took it to Mr. Frere’s house. After doing so,

I returned to the Talbot Arms. I left the jar in Mr. Frere’s hall, tied

and sealed. Immediately upon finding the slit in the cover, I cut the

strings and altered the bladders, so that the slits were not over the

top of the jar. I resealed them. After going to Mr. Frere’s I went to

the Talbot Arms. I went into the yard to order my carriage, and while I

was waiting for it the prisoner came across to me. He asked me what I

had done with the jar. I told him that I had left it at Mr. Frere’s. He

inquired what would be done with it, and I said it would go either to

Birmingham or London that night for examination. I do not recollect that

he made any reply. When I re-covered the jar, I tied each cover

separately, and sealed it with my own seal. During the first

_post-mortem_ examination there were several Rugeley persons present,

but I believe no one on behalf of the prisoner. At the second

examination there was some one there on behalf of Palmer.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant SHEE: In the course of the _post-mortem_

examination Palmer said, “They won’t hang us yet.” I am not sure whether

that observation was addressed to Dr. Bamford, or whether he prefaced it

by the word “Doctor.” I think that he first said it to Dr. Bamford in a

loud whisper, and afterwards repeated it to several persons. I had said

to him that I had heard that there was a suspicion of poisoning. I made

notes in pencil at the time of the _post-mortem_, and I wrote a more

formal report from those notes as soon as I got home. The original

pencil notes are destroyed. I sent the fair copy to Mr. Stevens, Cook’s

father-in-law, the same evening. They were not produced before the

coroner. At the base of the tongue of the deceased I observed some

enlarged mucous follicles; they were not pustules containing matter, but

enlarged mucous follicles of long standing. There were a good many of

them, but I do not suppose that they would occasion much inconvenience.

They might cause some degree of pain, but I think that it would be

slight. I do not believe that they were enlarged glands. I should not

say that deceased’s lungs were diseased, though they were not in their

normal state. The lungs were full of blood and the heart empty. I had no

lens at the _post-mortem_, but I made an examination which was

satisfactory to me, without one. The brain was carefully taken out; the

membranes and external parts were first examined, and thin slices of

about a quarter of an inch in thickness were taken off and subjected to

separate examination. I think by that means we should have discovered

disease if any had existed; and if there had been any indication of

disease, I should have examined it more carefully. I examined the spinal

cord as far down as possible, and if there had been any appearance of

disease I should have opened the canal. There was no appearance of

disease, however. We opened down to the first vertebra. If we had found

a softening of the spinal cord, I do not think that it would have been

sufficient to have caused Cook’s death; certainly not. A softening of

the spinal cord would not produce tetanus--it might produce paralysis. I

do not think, as a medical man investigating the cause of death, that it

was necessary carefully to examine the spinal cord. I do not know who

suggested that there should be an examination of the spinal cord two

months after death. There were some appearances of decomposition when we

examined the spinal cord, but I do not think that there was sufficient

to interfere with our examination. I examined the body to ascertain if

there was any trace of venereal disease. I did find certain indications

of that description, and the marks of an old excoriation, which were

cicatriced over.

Re-examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL: There were no indications of wounds

or sores such as could by possibility produce _tetanus_. There was no

disease of the lungs to account for death. The heart was healthy, and

its emptiness I attribute to spasmodic action. The heart being empty, of

course death ensued. The convulsive spasmodic action of the muscles of

the body, which was deposed to yesterday by Mr. Jones, would, in my

judgment, occasion the emptiness of the heart. There was nothing

whatever in the brain to indicate the presence of any disease of any

sort; but if there had been, I never heard or read of any disease of the

brain ever producing tetanus. There was no relaxation of the spinal

cord which would account for the symptoms accompanying Mr. Cook’s death,

as they have been described. In fact, there was no relaxation of the

spinal cord at all, and there is no disease of the spinal cord with

which I am acquainted, that would produce tetanus.

Mr. CHARLES JAMES DEVONSHIRE, undergraduate of University of London,

late assistant to Dr. Monckton, examined by Mr. HUDDLESTON: I made the

first _post-mortem_ examination of the body of Mr. Cook in November

last. The body was pale and stiff; the hands were clinched, and the

mouth was contorted. I opened the body. The liver was very healthy. The

heart also seemed healthy, but it was perfectly empty. The lungs

contained a considerable quantity of dark fluid blood. The blood was

perfectly fluid. The brain was healthy throughout. I examined the

_medulla oblongata_, and about a quarter or half an inch of the spinal

cord. It was perfectly sound. I took out the stomach, and opened it with

a pair of scissors. I put the contents in a jar, which was taken to Mr.

Frere’s, the surgeon. I obtained the jar from Mr. Frere’s on Monday, in

the same state as it was before, and I gave it Mr. Boycott, clerk to Mr.

Gardner, the attorney. I examined the body again on the 29th, and took

out the liver, kidneys, spleen, and some blood. I put them in a stone

jar, which I covered with washleather and brown paper, and sealed up. I

delivered that jar also to Boycott. Palmer said at the examination that

we should find syphilis upon the deceased. I therefore examined the

parts carefully, and found no indications of the sort. I also took out

the throat. The _papillæ_ were slightly enlarged, but they were natural,

and one of the tonsils was shrunk.

Cross-examined by Mr. GROVE, Q.C.--Tetanic convulsions are considered to

proceed from derangement of the spine, and from complaints that affect

the spine. These derangements are not always capable of being detected

by examination. In examining the body of a person supposed to have died

from tetanus, the spinal cord would be the first organ looked to. About

half an inch of the spinal cord, exterior to the aperture of the

cranium, was examined on the first occasion. I was not present when the

granules were discovered on the second examination. The learned counsel

was proceeding to cross-examine this witness upon some minute points of

a scientific nature, when

Baron ALDERSON, interposing, said,--When you have all the medical men in

London here, you had better not examine an undergraduate of the

University of London upon such points, I should think.

Dr. MONCKTON, examined by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I am a physician in

practice, and reside at Rugeley. On the 28th of January I made a

_post-mortem_ examination of the spinal cord and marrow of the deceased,

J. P. Cook. I found the muscles of the trunk in a state of laxity, which

I should attribute to the decay of the body which had set in; but that

laxity would not be at all inconsistent, in my opinion, with a great

rigidity of those muscles at the time of death. The muscles of the arms

and legs were in a state of rigidity, but they were not more rigid than

usual in dead bodies. The muscles of the arms had partially flexed the

fingers of the hand. The feet were turned inwards to a much greater

extent than usual. I carefully examined the spinal cord. The body was

then in such a condition as to enable me to make a satisfactory

examination of it; and if prior to death there had been any disease of a

normal character on the spinal cord and marrow, I should have had no

difficulty in detecting it. There was no disease. I discovered certain

granules upon it. It is difficult to account for their origin, but they

are frequently found in persons of advanced age. I never knew them to

occasion sudden death. I agree entirely with the evidence which has been

given by Dr. Harland.

This witness was not cross-examined.

Mr. JOHN BOYCOTT, examined by Mr. WELSBY: I am clerk to Messrs. Landor,

Gardner, and Landor, attorneys at Rugeley. On the 26th of last November,

I received a jar from Mr. Devonshire, covered with leather and brown

paper, and sealed up. I took it to London, and delivered it on the next

day to Dr. Taylor, at Guy’s Hospital. On a subsequent day I received

another jar, similarly secured, from Mr. Devonshire, and I also brought

that to London and delivered it to Dr. Taylor. I was not present at the

inquest on Cook’s body, and did not fetch Newton to be examined there.

On Tuesday last, when at the Rugeley station, previous to my departure

for London, Newton came and made a communication to me. He knew that Mr.

Gardner was not there; and when we reached London I took him to Mr.

Gardner, and heard him make the same communication to Mr. Gardner which

he had made before to me.

This witness was not cross-examined.

JAMES MYATT, examined by Mr. JAMES: In November last I was postboy at

the Talbot Arms at Rugeley. I know Palmer, the prisoner, and I remember

Monday, the 26th of November last. I was ordered on that night, a little

after five o’clock, to take Mr. Stevens to the Stafford station in a

fly. Before I started I went home to get my tea, and on returning from

my tea to the Talbot Arms I met the prisoner. He asked me if I was going

to drive Mr. Stevens to Stafford. I told him I was.

What did he say to you then?--He asked me if I would upset them.

“Them?” Had anything been said about a jar?--He said he supposed I was

going to take the jar.

What did you say then?--I said I believed I was.

What did he say after that?--He said, “Do you think you could upset

them?”

What answer did you make?--I told him “No.”

Did he say anything more?--He said, “If you could, there’s a £10 note

for you.” (Sensation.)

What did you say to that?--I told him I could not. I then said, “I must

go, the horses are in the fly ready for us to start.” I do not recollect

that he said anything more about the jar. I said, that if I didn’t go,

somebody else would go. He told me not to be in a hurry, for if anybody

else went he would pay me. I saw him again next morning, when I was

going to breakfast. He asked me then who went with the fly. I told him

Mr. Stevens, and, I believed, one of Mr. Gardner’s clerks.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant SHEE: Were not the words that Palmer

used, “I wouldn’t mind giving £10 to break Stevens’s neck.” I don’t

recollect the words “break his neck.”

Well, “upset him.” Did he say, “I wouldn’t mind giving £10 to upset

him?”--Yes; I believe those were the words. I do not know that Palmer

appeared to have been drinking. I don’t recollect that he had. I can’t

say that he used any epithet, applied to Stevens: he said it was a

humbugging concern altogether, or something of that. I don’t recollect

that he said Stevens was a troublesome fellow, and very inquisitive. I

don’t remember anything more than I have said. I do not know whether

there was more than one jar.

SAMUEL CHESHIRE, formerly postmaster at Rugeley, who has been sentenced

to two years’ imprisonment for tampering with letters in connexion with

this affair, was brought up in custody, and examined by Mr. JAMES. He is

an extremely respectable looking man, above the middle age, and was

dressed in black. He deposed as follows:--I was for upward of eight

years postmaster at Rugeley. I come now from Newgate, where I am under

sentence for having “read” a letter. [The question was “opened” a

letter.] I “confessed” to having done so. [The question was, “Did you

plead guilty to that charge?”] I knew the prisoner William Palmer very

well--we were schoolfellows together; and I have been three or four

times in my life at races with him. I never made a bet but once in my

life; but I was very intimate with Palmer. I accompanied him to

Shrewsbury Races in November, 1855. I returned to Rugeley on Tuesday,

the 13th, the same day on which Polestar won the handicap. On Saturday,

the 17th, I went to see Mr. Cook, who was in bed at the Talbot Arms, at

Rugeley. I lived at the post-office, which was 300 or 400 yards from

Palmer’s house. On the Tuesday evening, the 20th, I received a message

from Palmer, asking me to go over to him, and to take a receipt stamp

with me. In consequence of that message, I went to Palmer’s house, and

took a receipt stamp, as requested. When I reached Palmer’s, I found him

in his sitting-room. He said that he wanted me to write out a cheque,

and he produced a copy, from which he said I was to write. I copied the

document which he produced. He said that it related to money which Mr.

Cook owed him; and he asked me to write it, because, he said, Cook was

too ill to do it, and Weatherby would know his (Palmer’s) handwriting.

He said that when I had written it he would take it over to Mr. Cook to

sign. I then wrote as he requested me, and I left the paper with Palmer.

Mr. WEATHERBY was here called, in order to trace this document. In

answer to Mr. JAMES, he said: I am secretary to the Jockey Club, and my

establishment is at Birmingham. I keep a sort of banking account, and

receive stakes for gentlemen who own racers and bet. I knew the

deceased, John Parsons Cook, who had an account of that nature with me.

I knew Palmer slightly; he had no such account with me. On the 21st of

November I received a cheque or order upon our house for £350. It came

by post. I sent it back two days afterwards--on Friday, the 23rd. I sent

it back by post to Palmer, the prisoner, at Rugeley.

BOYCOTT was recalled, and proved that he had served notices upon the

prisoner, and upon Mr. Smith, his attorney, to produce the “cheque or

order” referred to; and that it had not been produced in pursuance of

those notices.

Prisoner’s counsel did not now produce it.

Examination of Samuel Cheshire continued: As far as I can remember, what

I wrote was, “Pay to Mr. William Palmer the sum of £350, and place it to

my account.” I do not remember whether I put any date to it. I left it

with Palmer, and went away. That was on Tuesday. On the Thursday or

Friday following Palmer sent again for me. I do not remember what day it

was, but it was after I had heard of the death of Mr. Cook at the Talbot

Arms. I went to Palmer in the evening, between six and seven o’clock, in

consequence of his having sent for me. When I arrived I found him in the

kitchen, and he immediately went out, and shortly after returned with a

quarto sheet of paper in his hand. He gave me a pen, and asked me to

sign something. I asked what it was, and he replied, “You know that Cook

and I have had dealings together; and this is a document which he gave

me some days ago, and I want you to witness it.” I said, “What is it

about?” He said, “Some business that I have joined him in, and which was

all for Mr. Cook’s benefit; and this is the document stating so.” I just

cast my eye over the paper. It was a quarto post paper of a yellow

description. I looked at the writing, and I believed that it was Mr.

Palmer’s. When he asked me to sign it I told him that I could not, as I

might perhaps be called upon to give evidence on the matter at some

future day. I told him that I had not seen Mr. Cook sign it, and I also

said that I thought the Post-office authorities would not approve my

mixing myself up in a matter which might occasion my absence from my

duties to give evidence. In fact, I did not give any exact reasons for

refusing to sign it. Palmer said it did not much matter, as he dared say

they would not object to Mr. Cook’s signature. I left the paper with

Palmer, and went away. I believe there was a stamp upon it. I did not

read it all, but I cast my eye down it. [Notices had also been served

upon the prisoner and his attorney to produce this document, but it had

not been produced.]

Witness continued: I remember the effect of it--it was that certain

bills--the dates and amounts of which were quoted, although I cannot

recollect them now--were all for Mr. Cook’s benefit and not for Mr.

Palmer’s. Those were not the exact words, but that was the purport of

them. I know that the amounts were large, although I do not remember

them all. I remember, however, that one was for £1,000 and another for

£500. There was a signature to that document. It was either “I. P.” or

“J. P. Cook.” I don’t think the word “Parsons” was written, but either

“I. P.” or “J. P. Cook.” Palmer was in the habit of calling at the

post-office for letters addressed to his mother, who resided at Rugeley.

I cannot remember that during the months of October and November, 1855,

I gave him any letters addressed to his mother; nor can I say whether in

those months I gave him any letters addressed to Mr. Cook; but Cook has

taken Palmer’s letters, and Palmer has taken Cook’s letters. I remember

the inquest upon Cook. I saw Palmer frequently while that inquest was

going on. He came down to me on the Sunday evening previous to the 5th

of December--the date to which the inquest was adjourned--and asked me

if I saw or heard of anything fresh to let him know. I guessed what he

wanted, and thought that he wanted to tempt me to open a letter. I

therefore told him that I could not open a letter. He said that he did

not want me to do anything to injure myself. I believe that was all that

passed on that occasion. The letter for reading which I am now under

sentence of punishment was from Dr. Alfred Taylor, of London, to Mr.

Gardner, the solicitor of Rugeley. I read part of the letter, and told

Palmer as much as I remembered of it. This took place on the morning of

the 5th of December. I told Palmer that the letter mentioned that no

traces of strychnine were to be found. I can’t call to mind what else I

told him. He said he knew there would be no traces of poison, for he was

perfectly innocent. The letter I hold in hand, signed “W. P.” and

addressed to “W. Ward, Esq., Coroner,” I believe to be in the prisoner’s

handwriting.

Captain HATTON, examined by Mr. JAMES: I am chief constable of Stafford.

The letter now produced I obtained from the coroner.

The Clerk of Arraigns read the letter in question. It bore no date, and

was to the following effect:--

“My dear Sir,--I am sorry to tell you that I am still confined to

my bed. I don’t think it was mentioned at the inquest yesterday

that Cook was taken ill on Sunday and Monday night, in the same way

as he was on the Tuesday, when he died. The chambermaid at the

Crown Hotel (Masters’s) can prove this. I also believe that a man

by the name of Fisher is coming down to prove he received some

money at Shrewsbury. Now, here he could only pay Smith £10 out of

£41 he owed him. Had you not better call Smith to prove this? And

again, whatever Professor Taylor may say to-morrow, he wrote from

London last Tuesday night to Gardner to say, ‘We (and Dr. Rees)

have this day finished our analysis, and find no traces of either

strychnia, prussic acid, or opium.’ What can beat this from a man

like Taylor, if he says what he has already said, and Dr. Harland’s

evidence? Mind you, I know and saw it in black and white what

Taylor said to Gardner; but this is strictly private and

confidential, but it is true. As regards his betting-book, I know

nothing of it, and it is of no good to any one. I hope the verdict

to-morrow will be that he died of natural causes, and thus end it.

“Ever yours,

“W.P.”

The witness Cheshire was then cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant SHEE: I

knew Cook very well. I did not know his handwriting. I have seen it, but

am not sufficiently familiar with it to be able to identify it. I have

seen him write. When I refused to sign the document which Palmer

presented to me for signature he observed, “Oh, it is no matter, I

daresay they will not call in question Mr. Cook’s signature.” What

Palmer asked me was, “whether I had seen or heard anything?” I said that

I had seen something, but that it would be wrong for me to tell him

what. He then inquired what I had seen. I think the phrase he used in

speaking of his own innocence was that he was “as innocent as a baby.” I

remember having been told by Palmer, the Saturday before Cook died, that

the latter was very ill. On that day I saw Cook. He was ill and in bed.

I saw Palmer about midday of Wednesday, the second day of the Shrewsbury

races. I saw him at Rugeley on that day.

To Mr. JAMES: The duration of the journey from Stafford to Shrewsbury is

upwards of an hour.

ELLIS CRISP, examined by Mr. JAMES: I am inspector of police at Rugeley.

On the 17th of December I assisted in searching the prisoner’s house.

There was a sale of his furniture, &c., on the 5th of January. The book

now produced I found in his house, and took it away. It was being sold,

and I took it away. (A laugh.)

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant SHEE: It was brought out at the sale with

a lot of other books. There were several medical books in the house.

There was no attempt to conceal the volume I seized.

The Clerk of Arraigns read from the book referred to this sentence,

proved by the witness Boycott to be in Palmer’s writing--“Strychnia

kills by causing tetanic fixing of the respiratory muscles.”

J. BURDON, examined by Mr. JAMES: This manuscript book I found in the

prisoner’s house on the 16th or 17th of December. I am an inspector of

police in Staffordshire.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL read an extract from the book in question. It

related to strychnine, and alluded to the mode of its operation.

Lord CAMPBELL: That may be merely a passage extracted from an article on

“Strychnine” in some encyclopædia.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: No doubt it may. I put it in for what it is worth.

ELIZABETH HAWKES, examined by Mr. HUDDLESTON: I keep a boarding-house at

7, Beaufort-buildings, Strand. I know Palmer. He was at my house on the

1st December last. He asked my porter to buy some game and fish for him.

I purchased some fowls for him on the 1st of December. They consisted of

a turkey and a brace of pheasants. The porter purchased the fish. I

packed these things up in a hamper. I had no conversation with Palmer

about these things. I bought them by Palmer’s order, conveyed through

the porter. I sent them somewhere. I directed them myself, and gave them

to the porter, who carried them to the railway station. I have never

been paid for them. Palmer came to my house on the evening of that day,

but I did not see him. The direction on the hamper was “W. W. Ward,

Esq., Stoke-upon-Trent, Staffordshire.”

GEORGE HERRING, examined by Mr. WELSBY: I live near New Cross, and am

independent. I knew Cook, and met him at the Shrewsbury races last

November. I put up at the Raven. He appeared in his usual health. I saw

him between six and seven on Wednesday, the second day of the races. I

had a private room, with Mr. Fisher, Mr. Reed, and Mr. T. Jones. It was

next the room occupied by Cook and Palmer. On Thursday (the following

day) I saw Cook. I do not know that at that time he had any money with

him, but I saw him with Bank of England and provincial bank notes on

Wednesday. He unfolded them on his knees in twos and threes. There was a

considerable number of notes. He showed me at Shrewsbury his

betting-book. It contained entries of bets made on the Shrewsbury races.

On Monday, the 19th of November, I received a letter from Palmer. I have

it here.

The Clerk of Arraigns read the letter, of which the following is a

copy:--

Dear Sir,--I shall feel much obliged if you will give me a call at

7, Beaufort-buildings, Strand, on Monday, about half-past two.

“I am, dear Sir, very truly yours,

“W. PALMER.”

Examination continued: I received this letter on Monday, and called at

Beaufort-buildings that same day, at half-past two exactly. I found

Palmer there. He asked me what I would take? I declined to take

anything. I then asked him how Mr. Cook was? He said, “He’s all right;

his physician gave him a dose of calomel, and advised him not to come

out, it being a damp day.” I don’t know which term he used, “damp” or

“wet.” He then went on to say, in the same sentence, “What I want to see

you about is settling his account.” While he was speaking he took out

half a sheet of note paper from his pocket, and it was open when he had

finished the sentence. He held it up, and said, “This is it.” I rose to

take it. He said, “You had better take its contents down; this will be a

check against you.” At the same time he pointed to some paper lying on

the table. I wrote on that paper from his dictation. I have here the

paper which I so wrote. [The witness read the document in question,

which contained instructions as to certain payments he should pay out of

moneys to be received by him at Tattersall’s, on account of the

Shrewsbury races.] Palmer then said, that I had better write out a

cheque for Pratt and Padwick--for the former £450, and for the latter

£350, and send them at once. I told him I had only one form of cheque in

my pocket. He said I could easily fill up a draught on half a sheet of

paper. I refused to comply with his request, as I had not as yet

received the money. He replied that it would be all right, for that Cook

would not deceive me. He wished me particularly to pay Mr. Pratt the

£450. His words, as nearly as I can remember them were, “You must pay

Pratt, as it is for a bill of sale on the mare.” I don’t know whether he

said “a bill of sale,” or “a joint bill of sale.” He told me he was

going to see both Pratt and Padwick, to tell them that I would send on

the money. Previous to his saying this, I told him that if he would give

me the address of Pratt and Padwick, I would call on them, after I had

got the money from Tattersall’s, and give it to them. He then asked me

what was between us. There was only a few pounds between us, and after

we had had some conversation on the point he took out of his pocket a

£50 Bank of England note. He required £29 out of the note; and I was not

able to give it; but he said that if I gave him a cheque it would answer

as well. I gave him a cheque for £20, and nine sovereigns.

When I was going away I do not remember that he said anything about my

paying the money to Pratt and Padwick. He said on parting, “When you

have settled this account write down word to either me or Cook.” I

turned round and said, “I shall certainly write to Mr. Cook.” I said so

because I thought I was settling Mr. Cook’s account. He said, “It don’t

much matter which you write to.” I said, “If I address ‘Mr. Cook,

Rugeley, Stafford,’ it will be correct, will it not?” He said, “Yes.”

After leaving Beaufort Buildings I went to Tattersall’s. I then received

all the money I expected, except £110 from Mr. Morris, who paid me £90

instead of £200. I sent from Tattersall’s a cheque for £450 to Mr.

Pratt. I posted a letter to Cook from Tattersall’s, and directed it to

Rugeley. On Tuesday the 20th, next day, I received a telegraphic

message. I have not got it here. I gave it to Captain Hatton, at the

coroner’s inquest at Rugeley. In consequence of receiving that message I

wrote again to Cook that day. I addressed my letter as before, but I

believe the letter was not posted till the Wednesday. I had three bills

of exchange with me. I know Palmer’s handwriting, but never saw him

write. I cannot prove his writing; but I knew Cook’s writing, and I

believe the drawing of two and the accepting of the three bills to be in

his writing. I got them from Fisher, and gave him cash for them. [The

witness Boycott was recalled, and identified the signatures on the bills

as those of Palmer and Cook.] Examination continued: The bills are each

for £200. One of them was payable in a month, and when it fell due, on

October 18, Cook paid the £100 on account. He paid me the remaining £100

at Shrewsbury, but I cannot tell with certainty on what day. I did not

pay the £350 to Mr. Padwick. I hold another bill for £500. [Thomas

Strawbridge, manager of the bank at Rugeley, identified the drawing and

endorsing as in the handwriting of Palmer. The acceptance, purporting to

be in the writing of Mrs. Sarah Palmer, he did not believe to have been

written by her.] Examination continued: I am sure that the endorsement

on the £500 bill is in Cook’s writing. I got the bill from Mr. Fisher. I

paid £200 on account of it to Palmer, and £275 to Mr. Fisher. The

balance was discount. It was not paid at maturity. I have taken

proceedings against Palmer to recover the amount.

Cross-examined by Mr. GROVE: Several people were ill at Shrewsbury on

the second day of the races. They suffered from a kind of diarrhœa. I

was one of those so affected. I had my meals at the Raven, where I put

up, as also had my companions. They were not ill, but a gentleman who

dined with us one day at the inn was. Palmer did not dine with me any

day at the Raven. I saw Cook several times on the racecourse. The ground

was wet. I remonstrated with him on Thursday for standing on it. That

was after he had been taken ill on Wednesday. I was with Palmer for

about an hour at Beaufort-buildings.

Frederick SLACK, examined by Mr. HUDDLESTON: I am the porter at Mrs.

Hawkes’s boarding-house at Beaufort-buildings. On the 1st of December I

saw Palmer there, and he gave me the direction to put on a hamper

containing game. It was “W. W. Ward, Esq., Stoke-upon-Trent,

Staffordshire.” He told me to buy a turkey, a brace of pheasants, a

codfish, and a barrel of oysters; and to buy them wherever I pleased. He

said he did not wish the gentleman for whom they were intended to know

from whom they came. I saw him write the direction in the coffee-room. I

got the hamper and put all the things in it. I sewed it up and took it

to the railway. Mrs. Hawkes bought the fowl, and I the other articles.

It being now within five minutes of 6 o’clock the Court intimated its

intention not to proceed further with the case that evening.

Lord CAMPBELL suggested that some facility of breathing fresh air should

be afforded to the jury before the sitting of the Court on the following

morning. Were it not that he made it a practice to take a walk early in

the morning in Kensington-gardens, he should himself find it impossible

to endure the fatigue of so arduous a trial. An omnibus, or a couple of

them, ought to be engaged for the accommodation of the jury that they,

too, might enjoy similar recreation.

Mr. Baron ALDERSON: Why should they not take a walk in the

Temple-gardens? There could be no more tranquil spot. (A laugh.)

The Sheriffs intimated that they would attend to the recommendations of

the learned judges.

The Court then adjourned at 6 o’clock until 10 o’clock Monday.

The Most Extraordinary Trial of William Palmer, for the Rugeley Poisonings, which lasted Twelve Days · 第 23 / 54 题