Mr. GURNEY.—I cannot see how this can be evidence, until they prove the
original to be destroyed.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—This is only _a provisional_ question.
By Mr. BOLLAND.—Is that the copy?—Yes, it is an exact copy.
By Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—Did you read that copy of the letter to him?—No, my
Lord, I had not the copy at that time.
By Mr. BORLAND.—What did you state to him respecting the letter?—I told
him I wished to know what the three things were which he could deny, as
asserted by the boy?
You don’t recollect the third point?—No.
By Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—You say it is not material?—No, my Lord.
By Mr. BOLLAND.—And you say he admitted being in the room, but denied the
laying hold?—Yes.
In what terms did he admit that he was in the room?—He said, “I was in
the room; but I did not lay hold of the boy.”
By LORD ELLENBOROUGH.—Did he say why he was in the room?—No, my Lord.
What did you do with the letter of the 6th of October?—I returned it to
Mrs. Hunter.
From whom did you get it?—From Mrs. Hunter.
And to Mrs. Hunter you returned it?—Yes.
_Cross-examined by_ Mr. GURNEY.
You mean to say that he said distinctly to you that he was in the
room?—Yes.
Did you mention to any person after you had seen Mr. Church, that he was
not implicated in the affair at all?—No.—That _I_ said _he_ was not
implicated?—No! I never said any such thing.
Did you 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”?—Never.
Not to any person?—No; not to any person.
Did any person go with you to Mr. Church?—Mr. Thomas went to the door
with me.
Is he a friend of your’s?—He is no friend of mine. I had only seen him
at the door. It was _his_ wife and mine that wished me to make the
application to Mr. Church.
Then Mr. Thomas went with you as far as the door, but did not go in with
you?—No.
Do you recollect having any conversation with Mr. Thomas, in which you
told him what had taken place between you and Mr. Church?—I told him
briefly what had transpired; it was very short what did transpire.
And you told Mr. Thomas what had transpired at the interview with Mr.
Church, when you came out?—Yes.
Then did you tell Mr. Thomas that Mr. Church admitted having been in the
room?—I think I did; but I am not very positive as to that point. I know
I told him that Mr. Church said that he did not lay hold of the boy.
The question I wish to put to you is this—whether Mr. Thomas did not ask
you this question, “Well, is there any thing against Mr. Church, or
not?”—and whether you did not answer, “No, he is not at all
implicated?”—I never made any such answer to him.
Neither that, nor any thing conveying that meaning?—Never.
By LORD ELLENBOROUGH.—You never did tell him, directly or indirectly,
that there was nothing to implicate Mr. Church?—No, never.
By Mr. GURNEY.—Did you either tell Mr. Thomas, or any other person that
you would prosecute Mr. Church, because he had said disgraceful things of
your wife?—I did; but not for this crime, but for defamation of my wife’s
character.
By LORD ELLENBOROUGH.—You told Mr. Thomas that you intended to prosecute
Mr. Church for defaming your wife’s character?—I don’t know that I ever
told Mr. Thomas; but I believe I have said that, or words to that effect,
to other persons.
By Mr. GURNEY.—Did you not tell Mr. Thomas that you were determined to
prosecute Church for having said disrespectful things of your wife?—I may
have told him amongst other persons.
Did you not mention that, amongst other things, on that very morning that
you had the interview with Mr. Church?—No; certainly not. Some other
time I might.
By LORD ELLENBOROUGH.—Was it after that morning?—Yes, my Lord, it must
have been a considerable time after that.
_Re-examined by_ Mr. BOLLAND.
What did you inform him that you intended to institute a prosecution
against Church for?—For defamation of my wife’s character.
LORD ELLENBOROUGH.—That I suppose is your case?
Mr. MARRYATT.—No, my Lord, I am going to call Mrs. Hunter.
Mrs. HUNTER sworn.
_Examined by_ Mr. MARRYATT.
I believe you are an attendant amongst the congregation, and a hearer of
Mr. Church?—Yes.
Did he at any time write to you, early in the month of October last?—I
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, or any thing except the day of the
month?—No.
Did you know from whom it came?—I cannot tell.
Did you put that letter into the hands of Mr. Patrick?—I gave it to Mr.
Patrick’s daughter, who gave it to her father.
Was that letter returned to you again?—It was; but I took no farther
notice of it.
Was that letter returned to you again?—Yes.
You had a subpœna _duces tecum_ to produce it?—I had but it is impossible
to produce it.
Why is it impossible to produce it?—I will tell you why. After the
letter was returned to me, I took no further notice of it. I put it into
a drawer; but I know no more than his Lordship what is become of it; I
looked for it on the Thursday morning before I came, but I could find no
scraps of it. I was not able to find it.
Then you were wholly unable to find it?—I was.
By Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—Did you search diligently to find it?—I did,
indeed, my Lord.
By Mr. MARRYATT.—Are you convinced there was no name to it?—I am.
Are you acquainted with Mr. Church’s hand writing?—I have seen his
writing, and I have 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 you would
hardly think it was the same. I have seen it so different, at times,
that I should not at all times think it was the same.
Upon receiving the letter in question, whose hand writing did you believe
it to be, and state it to be?
Mr. GURNEY.—I submit to your Lordship, that this is not a legal question.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—It is not evidence of the fact: but it is a proper
question to refresh her recollection, as to whether she did not receive a
letter which she believed to be the hand writing of the defendant.
By Mr. MARRYATT.—Whose hand writing did you think that letter to be?—I
rather think it was Mr. Church’s, but I could not be positive, as there
was no name to it.
Do you now believe that letter to be Mr. Church’s writing.—I cannot say
whether it was or was not. It is not in my power.
By Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—You are not asked whether it was or was not: but
what your belief was then, and what it is now?—I believed at that time, I
must own, that it was his hand writing, and I still believe the same.
By Mr. MARRYATT.—Did you not then believe it to be Mr. Church’s hand
writing?—I did rather think it was.
Did you, or not, believe it was?—Is there any difference between
_thinking_ and _believing_?
That is a phrase we sometimes use in courts of justice.