The Queen Against Owen
- -
- 100%
- +
‘The female servants followed their mistress. At half-past ten the butler fastened the front-door. He will describe the fastenings to you, and he will also tell you of a peculiarity in the latch, about which I shall have something to say presently.’
The counsel then went on to detail the events narrated in his brief, only throwing in an observation now and then as he went along. When he had described the evidence of the removal of the body by the window, he said:
‘And now we come to one of the difficulties in the case. If the prisoner lowered the body out of the window in the first instance, why did she afterwards return to the house, and take a second journey, carrying a burden of some kind? I am hardly at liberty, after what has fallen from his lordship, to suggest to you that this second exit was in order to remove something which the murderer wanted to steal, something with the object of stealing which she committed the graver crime. But, gentlemen, there is another explanation, a terrible way of accounting for that second journey, so terrible and horrible that I wish it were not my bounden duty to put it before you. And it is this:
‘Only a portion of the victim’s body has been recovered. That portion is a hand. Now, in the absence of anything to make us think that the cutting off of the hand was a solitary mutilation, we are forced to the probable conclusion that whoever killed this poor woman mutilated her in a very dreadful manner. It is possible, therefore, that after lowering one portion of her victim’s remains through the bedroom window, she returned upstairs to bring down some other part or parts of the body.’
As the counsel with evident reluctance brought out these horrid points, a shudder ran through the court. The prisoner had borne it all with tolerable firmness up to now, but she was completely overcome by this part of the speech, and cowered down into her chair, again concealing her emotions by putting her hands before her face.
If Mr. Prescott had any idea of making the jury revolt at the thought of associating such shocking brutalities with the prisoner, his speech produced the very opposite effect to what he intended. The jury saw in it nothing but the natural reluctance of a man at making such a charge, overborne by the counsel’s conviction of the prisoner’s guilt. Their faces assumed an aspect of stony horror as they turned their eyes upon the shrinking girl. A slight frown crossed Tressamer’s countenance, followed by a look of contempt.
‘The second difficulty in the case,’ resumed Prescott, ‘is as to the latchkey. As I have explained, there were only three keys in existence so far as the prosecution have been able to discover. These will all be produced before you. One was found in the pocket of the deceased’s dress, the other was never out of the possession of the witness Simons, the third was on the prisoner’s person when she was arrested. One of these keys, therefore, must have been used in the latch that night, and must have been used with such carelessness or ignorance – it is for you to say which’ – [again the jury tried to look as if they were prepared to say which, and again they broke down] – ‘that the latch was raised too high, and stuck. Now, here I must draw your attention to a very important circumstance. The person who entered the house last, whether the prisoner or anyone else, and who fastened up the front-door as it was found by the witness Lucy Jones the following morning, that person must, for some reason or other, have failed to notice the condition of the latch. She, if we assume it was the prisoner, must be supposed to have been so agitated from some cause that she failed to notice what she was doing when she raised the latch with her key, and failed again to notice how the latch was caught when she proceeded to fasten the door inside.
‘Gentlemen, it is for you to ask yourselves whether a reasonable explanation, an explanation that will justify you in coming to an adverse verdict in this case, is furnished by the suggestion that the prisoner’s mind was excited by the crime she had just committed to such an extent as to deprive her of the power of observing these things.’
At this point Mr. F. J. Pollard began to be aware that his leader was not pressing the case very vigorously. He looked round at his brother in the solicitors’ seat behind. That gentleman looked extremely angry. He had noticed something curious in his counsel’s manner from the first. He now leant over and whispered to his brother:
‘What’s the matter with Prescott? I can’t make him out. He talks as if he were the judge summing up, instead of the counsel for the prosecution.’
Mr. Pollard, the barrister, shrugged his shoulders and bit his lip. He could do nothing. It was not for him to offer advice to his leader. A man of Mr. Prescott’s standing was not likely to tolerate any interference from a young fellow just called.
But the offender proceeded to cap his misdeeds by a new suggestion, which had never occurred to either of the Pollards. It had been noted down long ago by Tressamer, though.
‘The third difficulty in this case, gentlemen, is one which has doubtless been present to your minds all the time I have been speaking.’
This time the jury made a desperate effort to conceal their astonishment, and to look as if they perfectly well knew what was coming. But no one was deceived.
‘I refer to the disposal of the body. On this point we have exactly two pieces of evidence. A young woman like the prisoner was seen walking in the direction of Newton Bay, about midnight, by the witness Evan Thomas. On the following afternoon the severed hand was discovered on the beach of Newton Bay by a visitor.
‘How did it get there? It is for you to say. On behalf of the Crown, it is my duty to suggest to you that the prisoner in the dock may have carried the result of her crime to that distant spot, in several journeys, one of which happened to be seen. I must put it to you that piece by piece she accomplished her revolting task, and that she sought to hide the traces of her guilt in the sea. If you think that a rational and likely course of circumstances, no doubt you will say so.
‘Gentlemen, I have done. I trust I have not detained you at undue length over this case, which must strike you as one of the most grave and difficult that could well come before a court of justice. I shall now, with the assistance of my learned friend, put the evidence before you. If you are left in any doubt after hearing it, and, after hearing the prisoner’s defence, if you feel that there are mysteries in the case which have not been properly explained, and difficulties which have not been fully met, then you will, I feel sure, be only too glad to acquit the prisoner of this dreadful charge. But if, on the other hand, you are fully and entirely satisfied, if you feel no doubt whatever – of course, I mean no reasonable doubt – you will, I am equally sure, do your painful duty by returning a verdict of guilty.’
The barrister sat down, and his junior, who had listened impatiently to the close of the speech, at once started up, and called out:
‘John Lewis!’
And now, for the first time, Charles Prescott ventured to look towards the dock. After the first involuntary glance at Eleanor’s entrance, he had steadily kept his eyes averted. During the whole of his address, which took up nearly an hour, he never once looked round. He was afraid to trust himself. That one brief glance had revived the memories of old with an added force which almost overwhelmed him.
Yet he was not what would be called an emotional man. His was one of those natures which maintain a seeming coldness under all circumstances, but which often conceal in their depths a strength of passion and devotion compared to which the fiery outbreaks of others are mere ‘sound and fury, signifying nothing.’ And now this hidden force was stirred. It held him in its grasp, and his whole being shook and quivered to its centre.
Not love at first sight, for he had seen her before. Yet love, awakening suddenly as he looked upon her in the full bloom of opening womanhood, surrounded by a halo of suffering, and peril, and mystery, the fated victim of an accusation which he would not believe and could not disprove. This it was that overpowered him; this it was that led to that feeble, halting advocacy which surprised all who heard it. They could not recognise the keen, trenchant Prescott who had made such a name for himself on the circuit. The Pollards were the only ones there who resented it, but they were by no means the only ones to be puzzled at the change.
But Prescott did not easily give way to his feelings. The sense of duty was sufficiently strong in him to keep him from absolute abandonment of his cause. He had gone faithfully through the case, and he was now preparing to take his part in examining the witnesses. Pride and professional training asserted themselves, and he stood firm.
At this moment, however, and when he was suffering most acutely, one of those happy accidents which men call good fortune or Providence, according to their dispositions, came to his aid. A solicitor’s clerk hurriedly came into the court and made his way to the barrister’s side. An unforeseen event had occurred. A case in the other court which had been expected to last all day had suddenly come to a settlement by agreement between the parties. The next case on the list was one in which Mr. Prescott was engaged, and engaged by himself, and his immediate presence was called for. Breathing an ejaculation of thankfulness, he got up, and quickly withdrew, leaving young Pollard to manage the witnesses as best he could.
The judge looked annoyed, and the solicitor Pollard somewhat dismayed, at this sudden disappearance of the leader for the Crown. But young Pollard himself was only too pleased. At last he was to have his chance. He was left captain of the ship. If all went well he might hope to get through the evidence, and have the concluding speech in Prescott’s absence. And his satisfaction was shared by Tressamer. Tressamer knew his man. For the first time that morning a look of satisfaction crossed his face, and he settled his wig firmly on his head as he prepared to encounter the moving spirit of the prosecution.
And Eleanor? She did not altogether understand what had happened. But she saw that the man who had put the case against her so mildly had now gone out of it altogether, and her heart gave a great beat of joy for the first time since she had parted with George Tressamer two days before the memorable first of June.
CHAPTER VI.
THE WITNESSES
‘John Lewis!’
A dark, big man stepped into the box, frowning heavily around him. The oath was administered, and then Mr. Pollard commenced in the approved style.
‘Your name is John Lewis, and you are now living at The Shrubbery, Porthstone?’
‘Yes.’
‘That’s where the murder was committed?’ interrupted the judge.
‘Yes, my lord. The witness inherited it under Miss Lewis’s will.’
The Judge: ‘Have you lived there ever since?’
Witness: ‘Yes, my lord.’
The Judge (after a pause, during which Mr. Pollard waits impatiently): ‘Go on, Mr. Pollard. What are you keeping us for?’
Mr. Pollard: ‘I beg your lordship’s pardon.’ To witness: ‘You are the nephew of the deceased, and have just returned from Australia?’
‘Yes; I came back to my aunt.’
‘After making some money out there, I believe?’
‘I object!’
This interruption, it need not be said, came from Tressamer. He had risen to his feet, and put on that scowl of scornful indignation with which an experienced counsel knows how to daunt a young beginner and make him feel he has committed himself.
‘My lord, my friend cannot prove that, and if he could it cannot possibly be evidence against the prisoner. It is a most improper question.’
The Judge looked a little puzzled.
‘It is irrelevant,’ he said, ‘and I won’t allow it if you object. In a case like this we can’t be too strict, of course.’
Mr. Pollard began to realize that greatness has its snares as well as its triumphs. He tried to get back on to the track.
‘You went to see the deceased on the first of June?’
‘I did.’
‘And you came away – ’
Here the barrister’s brother leant over and handed him a slip of paper. He took it and read it, turned red, and, trying to appear as if he had not been prompted, put the question contained in the slip of paper:
‘Was anything said about the jewels?’
The judge stared. Tressamer started to his feet in a transport of fury.
‘My lord, my friend is deliberately leading the witness. In a case of murder it is disgraceful!’
‘I agree with you, Mr. Tressamer. Don’t answer that question, sir.’
Thus the judge. Poor young Pollard turned as red as the judge’s robe, and stammered out some apology. His brother mentally swore at him, and every solicitor in court resolved never to give him another brief.
‘Go on, Mr. Pollard; you mustn’t keep us waiting.’
The wretched young man gave a last look at his brief, and closed the examination.
‘And you left about ten o’clock?’
(‘Leading again!’ ejaculated his opponent.)
‘Yes. My lord, may I say – ’
‘No!’ snapped the judge. ‘Say nothing unless you’re asked.’
The witness looked angry, and frowned savagely at his counsel. But the latter had now sat down, and the cross-examination was about to begin.
Tressamer had been studying the witness, with a view of ascertaining his weak point. This was evidently his temper. Accordingly he avoided irritating him till he had obtained as much as he could from him. He began:
‘Had you any other relatives living besides Miss Lewis?’
The witness was thoroughly thrown out. He could not see what was coming. In a sullen voice he responded:
‘Yes, I’ve a sister in the North.’
‘Did you go to see her before your aunt?’
‘No. – My lord, may I explain?’
The Judge: ‘You had better confine yourself to the questions now. You will have an opportunity of explaining afterwards.’
‘You went straight to your aunt. Was she pleased to see you?’
‘Yes, she seemed very pleased.’
‘And yet she let you stay at a hotel?’
‘That was only the first night. It was arranged that I was to occupy a bedroom in her house afterwards.’
‘Oh!’
Type cannot do justice to the peculiar intonation with which the barrister uttered this exclamation. The whole court was aroused to suspect something beneath the surface. Then he turned round to the jury with a mysterious expression, and slowly repeated the answer:
‘It was arranged that you were to occupy a room in her house after that night?’
The jury roused themselves for a grand effort, and succeeded in imparting a distinct air of suspicion to their countenances.
At last Mr. Lewis’s temper came into play. He cried out:
‘Yes; and if I had been there the first night, I might have prevented this murder.’
‘Silence, sir!’ said the Judge.
And now Tressamer brought out the question for which he had been preparing the way all along:
‘When this arrangement was made about your living in the house, did your aunt (remember you are on your oath, sir!) —did she happen—to—furnish—you—with—a– LATCHKEY?’
The effect was electrical. He had brought out the last words of the question slowly one by one, and then he suddenly hurled the final word at the witness like a weapon.
John Lewis instantly realized the situation. The question was tantamount to an accusation. The whole court took it in that sense, and gazed at him in deadly earnestness. He turned livid. For a moment he could hardly bring his lips to frame a syllable. At length he recovered his self-command, and thundered out:
‘No, sir. May God strike me dead if she did!’
The fierce earnestness of his denial produced a revulsion of feeling in the court. The jury felt that the counsel had been guilty of unfairness in making such a charge so suddenly, and, as it seemed, with such absence of grounds. The Judge was annoyed, too. Sir Daniel Buller hated sensationalism. In fact, he did not like anything which threw his own dignity into the shade. He liked to feel that he was in the star part, and that everybody else in court was merely playing up to his grand effects. He therefore refrained from rebuking the witness, and from this stage he showed himself less favourable to the counsel for the defence.
But Tressamer had anticipated something of this sort, and he had a card in reserve. He went on with his cross-examination as if nothing had happened.
‘You gave the prisoner into custody, I think?’
‘I did.’
‘You made up your mind that she was guilty, I suppose, without much thinking?’
‘I thought there was absolute proof of it.’
‘That’s what I mean. You were anxious that she should be convicted, were you not?’
‘I was anxious that she should be tried. I thought it my duty to see that this crime was punished.’
‘By the conviction of the prisoner?’
‘If she was guilty.’
‘But you felt sure she was guilty? You were the one to accuse her, you know.’
Mr. Lewis was getting irritated again. He made no answer to this suggestion, and the barrister forbore to press it, contenting himself with a meaning glance at the jury.
‘You were represented at the inquest, were you not, by Messrs. Pollard?’
‘Yes.’
‘The gentlemen who are now conducting this prosecution – nominally on behalf of the Crown?’ And with this parting shot he resumed his seat.
Young Pollard instantly rose.
‘My lord, the witness was anxious to explain one of his answers to my learned friend. Would your lordship allow him to do so now?’
‘Yes, yes,’ was his lordship’s answer.
The witness instantly took advantage of the permission.
‘I wished to say, my lord, that the reason why I went first to see my aunt, instead of going to my sister’s, was because she had befriended me when I was young. She furnished the money to start me with in Australia, and I felt it only right, in common gratitude, to come straight and thank her on my return.’
Another revulsion of feeling swept over the court. The effect of Tressamer’s last suggestion was obliterated. Lewis was once more in favour.
Pollard had scored. His brother twitched him by the gown from behind as a hint to sit down. But the unfortunate young man must needs try and improve on his lucky shot. He summoned up a very tragic demeanour, and put the fatal question:
‘And is there the smallest ground for suggesting that you were near the house or out of your hotel after ten that night?’
The witness showed confusion. Instead of answering in the prompt, decided style he had hitherto shown, he hesitated for some seconds, and then said with visible embarrassment:
‘No, there is none.’
Pollard hastily sat down. The rules which govern the production of evidence did not permit Tressamer to put a further question to the witness, but he was skilful enough to do what accomplished the same result. He called across the barristers’ table, in a perfectly audible voice:
‘Is anyone from the hotel here, Mr. Pollard?’
‘Not that I know of,’ was the sullen answer.
And now it was the judge’s turn, and he proceeded to put to the witness that question which was in the mind of every person in court, but which neither of the counsel had dared to put, each fearing the answer might be unfavourable to himself.
‘Tell me, Mr. Lewis, had you any special reasons – don’t tell me what your reasons were – but had you any reason apart from what you were told by others for accusing the prisoner of this murder?’
‘I had, my lord.’
‘Did that reason arise in your mind as a consequence of anything which you saw the prisoner do, or which took place in her presence?’
‘Not exactly, my lord. My aunt said to me – ’
The judge swiftly raised his hand with a forbidding gesture, and pursed up his lips.
‘That will do. You can go.’
Mr. Lewis retired, and the jury were left to wonder what the mysterious reason could be, the result on most of their minds being far more unfavourable to the prisoner than if the rules of evidence had allowed the witness to speak freely.
The next witness was the butler, John Simons, who deposed to having fastened up the door at half-past ten on the night in question, and to having found the latch stuck on the following day. He further described the finding of the blood-stains on the bedroom door-handle. His cross-examination was listened to with interest.
‘Has it ever occurred to you yourself to accidentally raise the latch too far in the same way?’
‘Oh yes, I’ve often done it, sir.’
‘Were you out on the evening of the first of June?’
The butler, a good-natured-looking man, with a pleasant smile, but whose mind was evidently rather unhinged by the position he found himself in, looked bewildered at this, and rather frightened. The barrister hastened to reassure him.
‘What I mean is this. If you had been out some time during the evening, before half-past ten, would it not have been possible for you to have accidentally left the latch in this position?’
The witness looked relieved, and hastened to answer.
‘Yes, of course, I might have.’
Tressamer turned round to the jury to see if they appreciated his point. Then he resumed.
‘You have known Miss Owen some time, I think. Tell me, have you ever noticed that she was liable to nervous headaches?’
‘I have heard her say she had a headache.’
‘What was the last time you heard her say so?’
The witness looked puzzled, and seemed to be trying to remember.
‘Perhaps I can help you,’ said the barrister. ‘About this very time, now; just before this happened?’
‘Ah, yes, sir, now you remind me, I remember. When she didn’t come down that morning, I said to Rebecca, “Very likely she’s had another bad night.”’
‘Another bad night? Then she was liable to insomnia?’
The witness stared.
‘I beg your pardon. I mean, she sometimes did suffer from want of sleep?’
‘She sometimes had bad nights, sir.’
‘Exactly. And you remembered she had been having them just before this?’
‘Well, no, sir; I can’t say as I do remember that.’
The barrister frowned impatiently.
‘Well, tell me this,’ he said: ‘do you know what she was in the habit of doing on these occasions, when she couldn’t get to sleep?’
‘No, sir.’
‘Did you ever hear of her going out for a walk at night?’
The whole court was eagerly following this cross-examination, as the defence now began to be visible. But the answer of the witness fell like lead:
‘No.’
Tressamer looked deeply disappointed. He had been baffled just where he had evidently built upon success.
He only put one more question.
‘You had a good many opportunities of seeing your mistress and Miss Owen together. Did they always seem to you to be on friendly, affectionate terms?’
‘Yes, sir, always.’
‘Thank you.’
This finished the butler’s evidence, as Mr. Pollard wisely abstained from any re-examination.
He next proceeded to call the parlourmaid, Rebecca Rees.
A pretty, vain, pert-looking girl stepped into the box, and took hold of the Testament.
‘Take off your glove,’ said the clerk.
She did so with some difficulty, as the thing had about half a dozen buttons to unfasten. Then she was sworn and proceeded to tell her story.
In a shrill voice, which visibly irritated the judge, she went on, and described how she had gone to bed, how she awoke at midnight and heard a sound proceeding from below.
‘What was the nature of the sound?’ asked the counsel who was examining her.
‘It was a groan,’ was the reply, ‘like as if somebody was being hurt.’
The prisoner’s counsel here hurriedly turned over the pages of his brief till he came to a certain place, where he made a note in the margin.
‘What did you hear next?’
‘I heard the prisoner going downstairs.’
The Judge: ‘What do you mean? Could you see her?’
Witness: ‘No, sir. I heard her.’
Mr. Pollard: ‘She means she recognised the footsteps, my lord.’
The Judge: ‘Don’t interrupt me, please.’ (To witness) ‘Young woman, be careful. That is not the way to give evidence, as you know perfectly well. You mustn’t tell us that you heard the prisoner. You heard footsteps; that’s all.’ (A pause.) ‘Now, Mr. Pollard, you can go on.’