In any case, we find that on February 5, 1879, the day after Peace had

been sentenced to death for the murder of Dyson, Mrs. Thompson appealed

to the Treasury for the reward of L100 offered for Peace's conviction.

She based her application on information which she said she had supplied

to the police officers in charge of the case on November 5 in the

previous year, the very day on which Peace had first written to her from

Newgate. In reply to her letter the Treasury referred "Mrs. S. Bailey,

alias Thompson," to the Home Office, but whether she received from that

office the price of blood history does not relate.

The police scouted the idea that any revelation of hers had assisted

them to identify "John Ward" with Charles Peace. They said that it

was information given them in Peckham, no doubt by Mr. Brion, who, on

learning the deplorable character of his coadjutor, had placed himself

unreservedly in their hands, which first set them on the track. From

Peckham they went to Nottingham, where they no doubt came across Sue

Thompson, and thence to Sheffield, where on November 6 they visited

the house in Hazel Road, occupied by Mrs. Peace and her daughter, Mrs.

Bolsover. There they found two of the boxes which Mrs. Peace had brought

with her from Peckham. Besides stolen property, these boxes contained

evidence of the identity of Ward with Peace. A constable who had known

Peace well in Sheffield was sent to Newgate, and taken into the yard

where the prisoners awaiting trial were exercising. As they passed

round, the constable pointed to the fifth man: "That's Peace," he said,

"I'd know him anywhere." The man left the ranks and, coming up to the

constable, asked earnestly, "What do you want me for?" but the Governor

ordered him to go on with his walk.

It was as John Ward, alias Charles Peace, that Peace, on November 19,

1878, was put on his trial for burglary and the attempted murder of

Police Constable Robinson, at the Old Bailey before Mr. Justice Hawkins.

His age was given in the calendar as sixty, though Peace was actually

forty-six. The evidence against the prisoner was clear enough. All Mr.

Montagu Williams could urge in his defence was that Peace had never

intended to kill the officer, merely to frighten him. The jury found

Peace guilty of attempted murder. Asked if he had anything to say why

judgment should not be passed upon him, he addressed the Judge. He

protested that he had not been fairly dealt with, that he never intended

to kill the prosecutor, that the pistol was one that went off very

easily, and that the last shot had been fired by accident. "I really did

not know," he said, "that the pistol was loaded, and I hope, my lord,

that you will have mercy on me. I feel that I have disgraced myself, I

am not fit either to live or die. I am not prepared to meet my God, but

still I feel that my career has been made to appear much worse than it

really is. Oh, my lord, do have mercy on me; do give me one chance of

repenting and of preparing to meet my God. Do, my lord, have mercy on

me; and I assure you that you shall never repent it. As you hope for

mercy yourself at the hands of the great God, do have mercy on me, and

give me a chance of redeeming my character and preparing myself to meet

my God. I pray, and beseech you to have mercy upon me."

Peace's assumption of pitiable senility, sustained throughout the trial,

though it imposed on Sir Henry Hawkins, failed to melt his heart. He

told Peace that he did not believe his statement that he had fired the

pistol merely to frighten the constable; had not Robinson guarded

his head with his arm he would have been wounded fatally, and Peace

condemned to death. He did not consider it necessary, he said, to make

an inquiry into Peace's antecedents; he was a desperate burglar, and

there was an end of the matter. Notwithstanding his age, Mr. Justice

Hawkins felt it his duty to sentence him to penal servitude for life.

The severity of the sentence was undoubtedly a painful surprise

to Peace; to a man of sixty years of age it would be no doubt less

terrible, but to a man of forty-six it was crushing.

Not that Peace was fated to serve any great part of his sentence.

With as little delay as possible he was to be called on to answer to

the murder of Arthur Dyson. The buxom widow of the murdered man had been

found in America, whither she had returned after her husband's death.

She was quite ready to come to England to give evidence against

her husband's murderer. On January 17, 1879, Peace was taken from

Pentonville prison, where he was serving his sentence, and conveyed by

an early morning train to Sheffield. There at the Town Hall he appeared

before the stipendiary magistrate, and was charged with the murder of

Arthur Dyson. When he saw Mrs. Dyson enter the witness box and tell her

story of the crime, he must have realised that his case was desperate.

Her cross-examination was adjourned to the next hearing, and Peace was

taken back to London. On the 22nd, the day of the second hearing in

Sheffield, an enormous crowd had assembled outside the Town Hall. Inside

the court an anxious and expectant audiience{sic}, among them Mrs.

Dyson, in the words of a contemporary reporter, "stylish and cheerful,"

awaited the appearance of the protagonist. Great was the disappointment

and eager the excitement when the stipendiary came into the court about

a quarter past ten and stated that Peace had attempted to escape that

morning on the journey from London to Sheffield, and that in consequence

of his injuries the case would be adjourned for eight days.

What had happened was this. Peace had left King's Cross by the 5.15

train that morning, due to arrive at Sheffield at 8.45. From the very

commencement of the journey he had been wilful and troublesome. He kept

making excuses for leaving the carriage whenever the train stopped.

To obviate this nuisance the two warders, in whose charge he was, had

provided themselves with little bags which Peace could use when he

wished and then throw out of the window. Just after the train passed

Worksop, Peace asked for one of the bags. When the window was lowered

to allow the bag to be thrown away, Peace with lightning agility took a

flying leap through it. One of the warders caught him by the left foot.

Peace, hanging from the carriage, grasped the footboard with his hands

and kept kicking the warder as hard as he could with his right foot.

The other warder, unable to get to the window to help his colleague, was

making vain efforts to stop the train by pulling the communication cord.

For two miles the train ran on, Peace struggling desperately to escape.

At last he succeeded in kicking off his left shoe, and dropped on to the

line. The train ran on another mile until, with the assistance of some

gentlemen in other carriages, the warders were able to get it pulled up.

They immediately hurried back along the line, and there, near a place

called Kineton Park, they found their prisoner lying in the footway,

apparently unconscious and bleeding from a severe wound in the scalp. A

slow train from Sheffield stopped to pick up the injured man. As he was

lifted into the guard's van, he asked them to cover him up as he was

cold. On arriving at Sheffield, Peace was taken to the Police Station

and there made as comfortable as possible in one of the cells. Even then

he had energy enough to be troublesome over taking the brandy ordered

for him by the surgeon, until one of the officers told "Charley" they

would have none of his hanky-panky, and he had got to take it. "All

right," said Peace, "give me a minute," after which he swallowed

contentedly a couple of gills of the genial spirit.

Peace's daring feat was not, according to his own account, a mere

attempt to escape from the clutches of the law; it was noble and Roman

in its purpose. This is what he told his stepson, Willie Ward: "I saw

from the way I was guarded all the way down from London and all the way

back, when I came for my first trial, that I could not get away from the

warders, and I knew I could not jump from an express train without being

killed. I took a look at Darnall as I went down and as I went back, and

after I was put in my cell, I thought it all over. I felt that I could

not get away, and then I made up my mind to kill myself. I got two bits

of paper and pricked on them the words, 'Bury me at Darnall. God bless

you all!' With a bit of black dirt that I found on the floor of my cell

I wrote the same words on another piece of paper, and then I hid them in

my clothes. My hope was that, when I jumped from the train I should be

cut to pieces under the wheels. Then I should have been taken to the

Duke of York (a public-house at Darnall) and there would have been an

inquest over me. As soon as the inquest was over you would have claimed

my body, found the pieces of paper, and then you would have buried me at

Darnall."

This statement of Peace is no doubt in the main correct. But it is

difficult to believe that there was not present to his mind the sporting

chance that he might not be killed in leaping from the train, in which

event he would no doubt have done his best to get away, trusting to his

considerable powers of ingenious disguise to elude pursuit. But such a

chance was remote. Peace had faced boldly the possibility of a dreadful

death.

With that strain of domestic sentiment, which would appear to have been

a marked characteristic of his family, Peace was the more ready to

cheat the gallows in the hope of being by that means buried decently at

Darnall. It was at Darnall that he had spent some months of comparative

calm in his tempestuous career, and it was at Darnall that he had first

met Mrs. Dyson. Another and more practical motive that may have urged

Peace to attempt to injure seriously, if not kill himself, was the

hope of thereby delaying his trial. If the magisterial investigation

in Sheffield were completed before the end of January, Peace could be

committed for trial to the ensuing Leeds Assizes which commenced in the

first week in February. If he were injured too seriously, this would not

be possible. Here again he was doomed to disappointment.

Peace recovered so well from the results of his adventure on the railway

that the doctor pronounced him fit to appear for his second examination

before the magistrate on January 30. To avoid excitement, both on

the part of the prisoner and the public, the court sat in one of the

corridors of the Town Hall. The scene is described as dismal, dark and

cheerless. The proceedings took place by candlelight, and Peace, who was

seated in an armchair, complained frequently of the cold. At other times

he moaned and groaned and protested against the injustice with which

he was being treated. But the absence of any audience rather dashed the

effect of his laments.

The most interesting part of the proceedings was the cross-examination

of Mrs. Dyson by Mr. Clegg, the prisoner's solicitor.

Its purpose was to show that Mrs. Dyson had been on more intimate terms

with Peace than she was ready to admit, and that Dyson had been shot

by Peace in the course of a struggle, in which the former had been the

aggressor.

In the first part of his task Mr. Clegg met with some success. Mrs.

Dyson, whose memory was certainly eccentric--she could not, she said,

remember the year in which she had been married--was obliged to admit

that she had been in the habit of going to Peace's house, that she had

been alone with him to public-houses and places of entertainment, and

that she and Peace had been photographed together during the summer fair

at Sheffield. She could not "to her knowledge" recollect having told the

landlord of a public-house to charge her drink to Peace.

A great deal of Mrs. Dyson's cross-examination turned on a bundle of

letters that had been found near the scene of Dyson's murder on the

morning following the crime. These letters consisted for the most part

of notes, written in pencil on scraps of paper, purporting to have been

sent from Mrs. Dyson to Peace. In many of them she asks for money to get

drink, others refer to opportunities for their meetings in the absence

of Dyson; there are kind messages to members of Peace's family, his wife

and daughter, and urgent directions to Peace to hold his tongue and not

give ground for suspicion as to their relations. This bundle of letters

contained also the card which Dyson had thrown into Peace's garden

requesting him not to interfere with his family. According to the theory

of the defence, these letters had been written by Mrs. Dyson to Peace,

and went to prove the intimacy of their relations. At the inquest after

her husband's murder, Mrs. Dyson had been questioned by the coroner

about these letters. She denied that she had ever written to Peace; in

fact, she said, she "never did write." It was stated that Dyson himself

had seen the letters, and declared them to be forgeries written by Peace

or members of his family for the purpose of annoyance. Nevertheless,

before the Sheffield magistrate Mr. Clegg thought it his duty to

cross-examine Mrs. Dyson closely as to their authorship. He asked her

to write out a passage from one of them: "You can give me something as a

keepsake if you like, but I don't like to be covetous, and to take them

from your wife and daughter. Love to all!" Mrs. Dyson refused to admit

any likeness between what she had written and the handwriting of the

letter in question. Another passage ran: "Will see you as soon as I

possibly can. I think it would be easier after you move; he won't watch

so. The r--g fits the little finger. Many thanks and love to--Jennie

(Peace's daughter Jane). I will tell you what I thought of when I see

you about arranging matters. Excuse this scribbling." In answer to Mr.

Clegg, Mrs. Dyson admitted that Peace had given her a ring, which she

had worn for a short time on her little finger.

Another letter ran: "If you have a note for me, send now whilst he is

out; but you must not venture, for he is watching, and you cannot be too

careful. Hope your foot is better. I went to Sheffield yesterday, but

I could not see you anywhere. Were you out? Love to Jane." Mrs. Dyson

denied that she had known of an accident which Peace had had to his foot

at this time. In spite of the ruling of the magistrate that Mr.

Clegg had put forward quite enough, if true, to damage Mrs. Dyson's

credibility, he continued to press her as to her authorship of these

notes and letters, but Mrs. Dyson was firm in her repudiation of

them. She was equally firm in denying that anything in the nature of a

struggle had taken place between Peace and her husband previous to his

murder.

At the conclusion of Mrs. Dyson's evidence the prisoner was committed to

take his trial at the Leeds Assizes, which commenced the week following.

Peace, who had groaned and moaned and constantly interrupted the

proceedings, protested his innocence, and complained that his witnesses

had not been called. The apprehension with which this daring malefactor

was regarded by the authorities is shown by this clandestine hearing

of his case in a cold corridor of the Town Hall, and the rapidity with

which his trial followed on his committal. There is an appearance almost

of precipitation in the haste with which Peace was bustled to his doom.

After his committal he was taken to Wakefield Prison, and a few days

later to Armley Jail, there to await his trial.

This began on February 4, and lasted one day. Mr. Justice Lopes, who had

tried vainly to persuade the Manchester Grand Jury to throw out the

bill in the case of the brothers Habron, was the presiding judge. Mr.

Campbell Foster, Q.C., led for the prosecution. Peace was defended by

Mr. Frank Lockwood, then rising into that popular success at the bar

which some fifteen years later made him Solicitor-General, and but for

his premature death would have raised him to even higher honours in his

profession.

In addressing the jury, both Mr. Campbell Foster and Mr. Lockwood took

occasion to protest against the recklessness with which the press of

the day, both high and low, had circulated stories and rumours about

the interesting convict. As early as November in 1878 one leading London

daily newspaper had said that "it was now established beyond doubt that

the burglar captured by Police Constable Robinson was one and the same

as the Banner Cross murderer." Since then, as the public excitement grew

and the facts of Peace's extraordinary career came to light, the press

had responded loyally to the demands of the greedy lovers of sensation,

and piled fiction on fact with generous profusion. "Never," said Mr.

Lockwood, "in the whole course of his experience--and he defied any

of his learned friends to quote an experience--had there been such an

attempt made on the part of those who should be most careful of all

others to preserve the liberties of their fellowmen and to preserve the

dignity of the tribunals of justice to determine the guilt of a man."

Peace exclaimed "Hear, hear!" as Mr. Lockwood went on to say that "for

the sake of snatching paltry pence from the public, these persons had

wickedly sought to prejudice the prisoner's life." Allowing for Mr.

Lockwood's zeal as an advocate, there can be no question that, had

Peace chosen or been in a position to take proceedings, more than one

newspaper had at this time laid itself open to prosecution for contempt

of Court. The Times was not far wrong in saying that, since Muller

murdered Mr. Briggs on the North London Railway and the poisonings of

William Palmer, no criminal case had created such excitement as that of

Charles Peace. The fact that property seemed to be no more sacred to him

than life aggravated in a singular degree the resentment of a commercial

people.

The first witness called by the prosecution was Mrs. Dyson. She

described how on the night of November 29, 1876, she had come out of

the outhouse in the yard at the back of her house, and found herself

confronted by Peace holding a revolver; how he said: "Speak, or I'll

fire!" and the sequence of events already related up to the moment when

Dyson fell, shot in the temple.

Mr. Lockwood commenced his cross-examination of Mrs. Dyson by

endeavouring to get from her an admission; the most important to the

defence, that Dyson had caught hold of Peace after the first shot had

been fired, and that in the struggle which ensued, the revolver had gone

off by accident. But he was not very successful. He put it to Mrs. Dyson

that before the magistrate at Sheffield she had said: "I can't say

my husband did not get hold of the prisoner." "Put in the little

word 'try,' please," answered Mrs. Dyson. In spite of Mr. Lockwood's

questions, she maintained that, though her husband may have attempted to

get hold of Peace, he did not succeed in doing so. As she was the only

witness to the shooting there was no one to contradict her statement.

Mr. Lockwood fared better when he came to deal with the relations of

Mrs. Dyson with Peace previous to the crime. Mrs. Dyson admitted that

in the spring of 1876 her husband had objected to her friendship with

Peace, and that nevertheless, in the following summer, she and Peace

had been photographed together at the Sheffield fair. She made a vain

attempt to escape from such an admission by trying to shift the occasion

of the summer fair to the previous year, 1875, but Mr. Lockwood put

it to her that she had not come to Darnall, where she first met Peace,

until the end of that year. Finally he drove her to say that she could

not remember when she came to Darnall, whether in 1873, 1874, 1875, or

1876. She admitted that she had accepted a ring from Peace, but could

not remember whether she had shown it to her husband. She had been

perhaps twice with Peace to the Marquis of Waterford public-house, and

once to the Star Music Hall. She could not swear one way or the other

whether she had charged to Peace's account drink consumed by her at an

inn in Darnall called the Half-way House. Confronted with a little girl

and a man, whom Mr. Lockwood suggested she had employed to carry notes

to Peace, Mrs. Dyson said that these were merely receipts for pictures

which he had framed for her. On the day before her husband's murder,

Mrs. Dyson was at the Stag Hotel at Sharrow with a little boy belonging

to a neighbour. A man followed her in and sat beside her, and afterwards

followed her out. In answer to Mr. Lockwood, Mrs. Dyson would "almost

swear" the man was not Peace; he had spoken to her, but she could not

remember whether she had spoken to him or not. She denied that this man

had said to her that he would come and see her the next night. As

the result of a parting shot Mr. Lockwood obtained from Mrs. Dyson a

reluctant admission that she had been "slightly inebriated" at the

Half-way House in Darnall, but had not to her knowledge been turned

out of the house on that account. "You may not have known you were

inebriated?" suggested Mr. Lockwood. "I always know what I am doing,"

was Mrs. Dyson's reply, to which an unfriendly critic might have replied

that she did not apparently know with anything like certainty what she

had been doing during the last three or four years. In commenting on

the trial the following day, the Times stigmatised as "feeble" the

prevarications by which Mrs. Dyson tried to explain away her intimacy

with Peace. In this part of his cross-examination Mr. Lockwood had made

it appear at least highly probable that there had been a much closer

relationship between Mrs. Dyson and Peace than the former was willing to

acknowledge.

The evidence of Mrs. Dyson was followed by that of five persons who had

either seen Peace in the neighbourhood of Banner Cross Terrace on the

night of the murder, or heard the screams and shots that accompanied it.

A woman, Mrs. Gregory, whose house was between that of the Dysons and

the passage in which Dyson was shot, said that she had heard the noise

of the clogs Mrs. Dyson was wearing as she went across the yard. A

minute later she heard a scream. She opened her back door and saw Dyson

standing by his own. She told him to go to his wife. She then went back

into her house, and almost directly after heard two shots, followed by

another scream, but no sound as of any scuffling.

Another witness was a labourer named Brassington. He was a stranger to

Peace, but stated that about eight o'clock on the night of the murder

a man came up to him outside the Banner Cross Hotel, a few yards from

Dyson's house. He was standing under a gas lamp, and it was a bright

moonlight night. The man asked him if he knew of any strange people who

had come to live in the neighbourhood. Brassington answered that he

did not. The man then produced a bundle of letters which he asked

Brassington to read. But Brassington declined, as reading was not one of

his accomplishments. The man then said that "he would make it a warm 'un

for those strange folks before morning--he would shoot both of them,"

and went off in the direction of Dyson's house. Brassington swore

positively that Peace was the stranger who had accosted him that night,

and Mr. Lockwood failed to shake him in his evidence. Nor could Mr.

Lockwood persuade the surgeon who was called to Dyson at the time of his

death to admit that the marks on the nose and chin of the dead man

could have been caused by a blow; they were merely abrasions of the skin

caused by the wounded man falling to the ground.

Evidence was then given as to threats uttered by Peace against the

Dysons in the July of 1876, and as to his arrest at Blackheath in the

October of 1878. The revolver taken from Peace that night was produced,

and it was shown that the rifling of the bullet extracted from Dyson's

head was the same as that of the bullet fired from the revolver carried

by Peace at the time of his capture.

Mr. Campbell Foster wanted to put in as evidence the card that Dyson

had flung into Peace's garden at Darnall requesting him not to interfere

with his family. This card had been found among the bundle of letters

dropped by Peace near the scene of the murder. Mr. Lockwood objected to

the admission of the card unless all the letters were admitted at the

same time. The Judge ruled that both the card and the letters were

inadmissible, as irrelevant to the issue; Mr. Lockwood had, he said,

very properly cross-examined Mrs. Dyson on these letters to test her

credibility, but he was bound by her answers and could not contradict

her by introducing them as evidence in the case.

A Book of Remarkable Criminals · 第 4 / 21 段