George secured Mr John Smith of Birmingham-the famous 'Honest John Smith of Brum'-as solicitor for the Defence, and consulted with him as to what leading Counsel should be retained. John Smith swore that the most suitable man in all England would be Mr Serjeant Wilkins, Q.C., who had enjoyed a medical education until taking to the Law, and could therefore confidently handle the abstruse evidence expected. Serjeant Wilkins agreed to act; and appeared for them in January when, in the suit brought by Padwick, Dr Palmer admitted having forged his mother's acceptances to the bills-but, three weeks before the trial, he threw up his brief, pleading ill-health. In point of fact, we understand, the duns were after him and it was with difficulty that he escaped by fishing-smack to Dieppe. This came as a great disappointment to John Smith. Having failed to secure the services of Sir Frederick Thesiger, who had been Attorney-General during the Peel administration, he fell back on an Irishman, Mr Serjeant Shee, Q.C., M.P. for Kilkenny. Serjeant Shee, though an able barrister is, however, a devout Roman Catholic.
More than a quarter of a century has elapsed since the disabilities from which Romanists suffered in Britain were removed by Act of Parliament, but a strong prejudice against them still undeniably pervades public life. Mr Smith dared not hope that the jury would remain ignorant of Serjeant Shee's faith (this anti-Catholic sentiment being particularly rife among London trades-people of the Roundhead tradition), if only because he had been prominent as an advocate of Emancipation, and had of late spoken very forcibly in Parliament on the subject of the late potato famine in Ireland and the absentee Protestant landlords. Yet this prejudice seemed unlikely to affect the Bench. True, Lord Chief Justice Campbell, a Scottish 'son of the manse', had read Divinity, rather than Law, at St Andrews University, and might well regard all Roman Catholics as eternally damned. But Mr Baron Alderson was known as a humane judge, anxious to restrict capital punishment, and Mr Smith counted on him and Mr Justice Cresswell to restrain the Lord Chief Justice if he showed undue animus towards either Serjeant Shee or the prisoner.
Nevertheless, the Usher of the Central Criminal Court assured us on the first day of the trial: 'Sir, Dr Palmer will swing, you may be bound.'
Upon our questioning him, we were told familiarly: 'I know Jack Campbell's hanging face well, and his hanging manner.'
'What is that?' we asked.
'His hanging face, Sir, is bland and benignant, and his hanging manner unctuous. As soon as the prisoner entered the dock and Lord Campbell invited him to be seated, I would have offered long odds against his chances of life.'
'But it takes twelve good and true men to hang a criminal,' we insisted, 'and there are a couple of other judges on the bench beside the Lord Chief Justice.'
He shook his head sagely. 'Sir Cresswell Cresswell is a humane and honest man,' he pronounced, 'but Alderson would as lief hang Shee as he would Palmer. Those two legal gentlemen have always been at loggerheads, I can't say why-it may be a political disagreement, it may be a personal one. Moreover, Attorney-General Cockburn is a beloved compatriot of Jack Campbell's, and he's out to destroy Palmer. Even if the pair of them weren't as thick as thieves, it would take a mighty firm Lord Chief Justice to handle a determined Attorney-General. Cocky, you know, is due for his judgeship any day now and wishes to make this a memorable farewell to the Bar-a savages' feast with fireworks, drums, bloody sacrifices and all. So that's three of them teamed together-Jack Campbell, Alderson and Cocky! They can do what they list, for the Under-Sheriffs have a hand-picked jury ready to serve them. Will you dare lay against Palmer's conviction?'
'I'm not a betting man,' was our cautious answer.
***
The twelve-day trial, which opened on May 14th, 1856, was memorable not only for brilliant forensic displays by the prosecuting and defending Counsel, but also, as we shall not hesitate to point out, for a singular conflict of evidence and surprising irregularities in judicial procedure.
On the opening day, the Attorney-General promised to show that Dr Palmer was financially interested in murdering John Parsons Cook, and that, having weakened his system with tartar emetic both at Shrewsbury and at Rugeley, he purchased strychnia at the latter town and administered it in the form of pills, substituting these for the rhubarb, calomel and morphia pills which Dr Bamford had prescribed. No strychnia had been found in Cook's body, yet the Attorney-General insisted (with leave from Professor Taylor) that strychnia, being rapidly absorbed into the system, evades detection in the tissues of its victim, and that Cook's symptoms were consistent with strychnine poisoning.
The first witness called was Mr Ishmael Fisher, the sporting wine merchant, whom we can hardly describe as unprejudiced, since Dr Palmer had defrauded him of two hundred pounds. He testified forcibly to Cook's suspicion of having been poisoned at The Raven Hotel; and was followed by other members of his sporting party, none of whom, since reading about the verdicts at the inquests on Annie and Walter Palmer, and on Cook, wished to be known as the prisoner's friends or supporters.
Next appeared Elizabeth Mills, formerly chambermaid at The Talbot Arms Hotel, Rugeley, a sharp-featured young woman, wearing a fashionable bonnet. Her account of events varied to a great extent from the depositions she had made before the Coroner. She now reported fresh and striking symptoms, hitherto undisclosed; and it came back to her that she had tasted Cook's bowl of broth and found herself severely poisoned by it. The Prosecution sought to prove that these vital matters must also have appeared in her depositions, had the Coroner's Inquest been properly conducted.
Serjeant Shee's cross-examination of this flighty miss on the second day proves, to our satisfaction at least, how successfully Mr Stevens had contrived to suborn her. She was, it seems, shown an account of the recent atrocity at Leeds (where a Mr Dove poisoned his wife with strychnine), and then asked to remember the same medical particulars in Cook's case.
The following is a somewhat abbreviated record of Elizabeth Mills's disingenuous answers to Serjeant Shee's questions:
SERJEANT SHEE: How long did you stay at The Talbot Arms Hotel after Cook's death?
MILLS: Till the day after Christmas-day. Then I went home.
SERJEANT SHEE: Where is 'home'?
MILLS: Shelton, in the Potteries.
SERJEANT SHEE: Have you been in service since?
MILLS: Yes, as chambermaid at Dolly's Hotel, Paternoster Row.
SERJEANT SHEE: Are you in service there now?
MILLS: No. I stayed only six weeks; until February.
SERJEANT SHEE: After you came to London, did you see Mr Stevens?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: Where and when did you see him?
MILLS: At Dolly's, about a week later.
SERJEANT SHEE: How many times?
MILLS: Perhaps four or five.
SERJEANT SHEE: Will you swear it was not ten times?
MILLS: It might be six or seven; that was about the outside. I cannot exactly keep account…
SERJEANT SHEE: Where at Dolly's did you see him?
MILLS: Sometimes he would speak to me while Mrs Dewhurst, the landlady, was there, in one of her sitting-rooms.
SERJEANT SHEE: But sometimes you went into a sitting-room and spoke to him alone?
MILLS: Perhaps twice or three times.
SERJEANT SHEE: Was it always about Mr Cook's death that he spoke to you?
MILLS: No, it was not. He would call to see how I liked London, and whether I was well in health, and all that.
SERJEANT SHEE: Mr Stevens is a gentleman, not in your station. Do you mean to say he called so often to inquire after your health?
MILLS: That, and to see whether I liked the place.
SERJEANT SHEE: He called six or seven times on you to see whether you liked the place: do you mean to tell that to the jury on your oath?
MILLS: I am not going to take my oath: but when he called on me he always asked how I liked London.
SERJEANT SHEE: Then what did he call about?
MILLS: Sometimes one thing, sometimes another.
SERJEANT SHEE: What else besides Mr Cook's death?
MILLS: Nothing besides that.
SERJEANT SHEE: Had you conversed with him much at The Talbot Arms while he was lodging there just before the funeral?
MILLS: Some little.
SERJEANT SHEE: Had you never been in a room with him alone at The Talbot Arms?
MILLS: No.
SERJEANT SHEE: At Dolly's Hotel he spoke to you about Mr Cook's death, and your health, and your liking for London, but nothing else; is that so? On your oath, did he speak to you about anything else?
MILLS: Yes, many more things.
SERJEANT SHEE: What else?
MILLS: I cannot remember.
SERJEANT SHEE: Tell me a single thing of importance that he spoke to you about except Mr Cook's death?
MILLS: I do not keep such things in my head for weeks or months together.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did you not say to him after he had been calling two or three times: 'Why, Mr Stevens, you have been here often enough; I have told you all I know'?
MILLS: No, I did not.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did he give you money during the time you were there?
MILLS: Never a farthing.
SERJEANT SHEE: Has he promised to get you a place?
MILLS: Not at all.
SERJEANT SHEE: When did you talk to him last?
MILLS: On Tuesday at Dolly's Hotel.
SERJEANT SHEE: Was Mr Cook's death still the subject of his talk?
MILLS: He merely said 'How do you do?' and asked me how I was; plenty more were present.
SERJEANT SHEE: Does he live at Dolly's?
MILLS: He may do, for aught I know.
SERJEANT SHEE: Where was it at Dolly's you saw him last Tuesday?
MILLS: In a sitting-room.
SERJEANT SHEE: Were you alone with him?
MILLS: No.
SERJEANT SHEE: Who else was there?
MILLS: Lavinia Barnes, of The Talbot Arms.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did she have a place at Dolly's too?
MILLS: She is working there now.
SERJEANT SHEE: So Mr Stevens had an interview with you and Lavinia Barnes?
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I beg your pardon, the witness has not said so; do not put an ambiguous phrase into her mouth.
LORD CAMPBELL: If you repeat what she says, you must repeat it correctly.
SERJEANT SHEE: What am I to call it, my Lord, but an interview? Was there a meeting between him and you and Lavinia Barnes in the same room?
MILLS: There were two other gentlemen in the room besides us three.
SERJEANT SHEE: Who?
MILLS: Captain Hatton and Mr Gardiner.
SERJEANT SHEE: On this occasion, was all the talk about Mr Cook's death?
MILLS: I cannot remember; it might be mentioned. I don't pretend to keep in my head what the conversation was.
SERJEANT SHEE: Will you undertake to say there was no single subject of conversation mooted between you and Lavinia Barnes and those gentlemen except the subject of Cook's death?
MILLS: There were many more things talked about.
SERJEANT SHEE: What?
MILLS: That I do not wish to mention.
SERJEANT SHEE: You must mention what was the subject of conversation.
MILLS: I cannot remember. They were not talking with me alone, but among themselves; I paid no attention to what they were talking about. Perhaps my thoughts were occupied about something else.
SERJEANT SHEE: They did talk about Mr Cook's death?
MILLS: They might, but I cannot remember.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did they talk about the evidence that you were to give at this trial?
MILLS: No; not that I heard.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did they read your depositions over to you, those taken before the Coroner?
MILLS: No, they did not.
SERJEANT SHEE: Was anything read to you from a newspaper?
MILLS: No.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did Mr Stevens then, or at any previous time, talk to you about the symptoms which Mr Cook exhibited shortly before his death?
MILLS: He did not.
SERJEANT SHEE: Was that the first time since Mr Cook's death that you had seen Captain Hatton?
MILLS: No, I had seen him once before. He was dining at Dolly's.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did he speak at all about Mr Cook's death to you?
MILLS: He might, but I cannot remember.
SERJEANT SHEE: Do not tell me you cannot remember: what did he speak to you about? Did he, upon your oath, speak to you about Mr Cook's death?
MILLS: I cannot remember. He might do.
SERJEANT SHEE: Do you recollect anything else he said?
MILLS: He asked me how I was, I remember.
SERJEANT SHEE: Had you seen Mr Gardiner before, since Mr Cook's death?
MILLS: Yes. Three or four times.
SERJEANT SHEE: Where?
MILLS: I have met him in the street.
SERJEANT SHEE: Spoken to him?
MILLS: Merely said 'How do you do?' or 'Good morning'.
SERJEANT SHEE: You have not been to any attorney's office with him?
MILLS: No.
SERJEANT SHEE: You left Dolly's in February. Where are you living now?
MILLS: At Rugeley, with my mother.
SERJEANT SHEE: Where were you living before that?
MILLS: Among my friends.
SERJEANT SHEE: Was that at Hitchingley?
MILLS: Yes. I have some friends there.
SERJEANT SHEE: Who are they?
MILLS: Friends are friends, I suppose.
SERJEANT SHEE: I do not mean to ask you any rude questions, but that is hardly a proper answer. Do you know a man of the name of Dutton?
MILLS: I do. He is a friend of mine.
SERJEANT SHEE: Was it with him you were living?
MILLS: I stayed at his cottage a short time.
SERJEANT SHEE: What is Mr Dutton?
MILLS: A friend of mine: a labouring man of some thirty perhaps. I have known him about two years.
SERJEANT SHEE: Is there a Mrs Dutton?
MILLS: Yes, his mother. She lives in the cottage.
SERJEANT SHEE: How many rooms?
MILLS: Two down and two up.
SERJEANT SHEE: His mother slept in one of the upstairs rooms?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: Where did you sleep?
MILLS: In the bed with her.
SERJEANT SHEE: Will you swear that you always slept in that bed?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: Why did you leave Dolly's?
MILLS: I did not like the place; it was of my own accord.
SERJEANT SHEE: You can read newspapers, I suppose?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: Have you read the case of a Mrs Dove?
MILLS: I do not remember; I may have done so.
SERJEANT SHEE: It is a case that lately occurred at Leeds, of a lady who was said to have been poisoned by her husband.
MILLS: No, I did not read it; I heard it spoken of.
SERJEANT SHEE: By whom?
MILLS: By many. I cannot mention one more than another.
SERJEANT SHEE: By Mr Stevens, or Mr Gardiner, or Captain Hatton?
MILLS: No, by no one belonging to this trial.
SERJEANT SHEE: Were you told what the symptoms of Mrs Dove were?
MILLS: I think not; I merely heard it was another strychnine case.
SERJEANT SHEE: Were the symptoms of strychnia ever mentioned to you by anyone?
MILLS: No, never.
SERJEANT SHEE: When and to whom did you first use the expression 'twitching', which, with 'jerking', occurred so repeatedly in your evidence yesterday?
MILLS: To the Coroner, I did. Or, if I did not mention 'twitching', I mentioned something to the same effect.
SERJEANT SHEE: It is fair to tell you, as I have the deposition before me, that you did not.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: If you do so, I shall show how these depositions were taken.
SERJEANT SHEE: I intend to put them in.
When did you first use the word 'twitching', which you used so frequently yesterday?
MILLS: I cannot remember when first I used the word, but I believe it was in Mother's house before I came to London.
SERJEANT SHEE: Will you swear to that?
MILLS: Yes; and I described the symptoms the young man died under.
SERJEANT SHEE: Will you swear you used the word 'twitching'?
MILLS: Yes; at Mother's.
SERJEANT SHEE: Is your mother here?
MILLS: No, she is not.
SERJEANT SHEE: Have you ever been asked by anybody if there were not 'twitchings'?
MILLS: I cannot remember.
SERJEANT SHEE: You stated yesterday on oath that on the Saturday between twelve and one o'clock some broth was brought to The Talbot Arms Hotel in a breakfast-cup; that you took it up into Cook's bedroom; that you tasted it, and drank about two tablespoons; that you were sick; that you were sick the whole afternoon, and vomited at least twenty times?
MILLS: I do not remember that I used the words 'twenty times'.
SERJEANT SHEE: Had you said one word about this sickness in your depositions before the Coroner?
MILLS: It never occurred to me then; it occurred to me three days afterwards.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did you state this before the Coroner: 'I tasted the broth on the Sunday before Cook's death; it was not made in this house; I thought the broth very good after I had tasted it; I believe some broth had been sent over on the Saturday; nothing peculiar was in the taste of the broth'?
MILLS: No, I could not taste anything peculiar.
SERJEANT SHEE: If you tasted it, and if it made you sick, and if you vomited frequently in the course of the afternoon, why did you not mention that to the Coroner?
MILLS: It never occurred to me; I did not think it was the broth at the time.
SERJEANT SHEE: You stated yesterday you saw a pill-box in the hotel on the Monday night, which was sent over there about eight o'clock, wrapped up in paper?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: And that you placed it on the dressing-table of Cook's bedroom?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: And that on that same evening you saw Palmer in Cook's room between nine and ten o'clock?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did you say a word about that before the Coroner?
MILLS: I might do.
SERJEANT SHEE: Don't you remember that you made no such statement before the Coroner?
MILLS: Perhaps I was not asked the question; I did not say anything, only when I was asked.
SERJEANT SHEE: Will you now swear he was there between nine and ten o'clock?
MILLS: Yes; he brought a jar of jelly and opened it.
SERJEANT SHEE: About how long after nine will you swear to his presence there?
MILLS: I cannot remember; I should fancy it was nearer to ten than nine.
SERJEANT SHEE: You say it was half-past ten when you left Cook, but you cannot recollect whether Palmer was still there?
MILLS: I cannot.
SERJEANT SHEE: Then you have no certain recollection of seeing him after that time?
MILLS: Not until he was fetched over about midnight.
SERJEANT SHEE: Do you know when Cook took the pills?
MILLS: I do not.
SERJEANT SHEE: You stated yesterday that you asked him on the Tuesday morning what he thought the cause of his illness was. Did he reply: 'The pills which Palmer gave me at half-past ten'?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did you tell the Coroner that?
MILLS: No.
SERJEANT SHEE: Since Mr Cook's death, have you been questioned by anyone respecting what you said about these pills before the Coroner?
MILLS: Yes, by a Dr Collier. He came to see me at Hitchingley.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did you tell Dr Collier that the gentlemen in London had altered your evidence on that point, and that it was now to be: 'Cook said the pills which Palmer gave him at half-past ten made him ill'?
MILLS: I did not tell him that the gentlemen had altered my evidence.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did you say that the evidence had since been altered by anybody?
MILLS: It had been altered by myself since; because Mr Cook's words had occurred to me.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did you say to what gentleman you had given this information?
MILLS: No, because I did not remember, except that I met him at Dolly's.
SERJEANT SHEE: So an unknown gentleman came to you at Dolly's! Did he tell you from whom he came?
MILLS: No, he asked: 'Will you answer a few questions?' I said: 'Certainly.' He did not tell me his name, neither did I ask it.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did he ask you many questions?
MILLS: Not very many.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did he write down your answers?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: But he did not tell you who he was, or whom he come from, or for what your answers were wanted?
MILLS: No.
SERJEANT SHEE: Did he mention Mr Stevens's name?
MILLS: Yes.
SERJEANT SHEE: What did he say about Mr Stevens?
MILLS: Mr Stevens was with him in the sitting-room; he called Mr Stevens by name.
SERJEANT SHEE: Why did you not tell us that before?
MILLS: I was not asked.
[Laughter in Court.]
We have heard of judges warning juries to place no reliance on witnesses whose conduct and demeanour were in every way superior to those of Elizabeth Mills; yet the Lord Chief Justice supported her with romantic fervour and characterized Serjeant Shee's suggestion that Mr Stevens paid her money as 'a most foul charge'. The Dr Collier mentioned by Elizabeth Mills had gone, at John Smith's request, to Hitchingley, where he took down her statements. When informed that he was now in Court, Baron Alderson exclaimed angrily: 'Dr Collier should be absent, if he is to be examined for facts. He is here under the false pretence of being a doctor!' Baron Alderson forgot that three doctors called by the Prosecution to be examined for facts were also in Court.
Further evidence that day came from Lavinia Barnes, who docilely supported Mills's new story of having been poisoned after tasting the broth, but otherwise added nothing to the stock of common knowledge; from Dr Jones, Cook's oldest friend, and the only medical eye-witness of his death, who kept to his view that Cook had died of natural causes; from Dr Savage, the London physician, who gave evidence that Cook was in reasonably good health, save for a weakness of the lung, up to a fortnight before his death; and finally by Charles Newton, Dr Salt's assistant.
Newton now testified to having given Dr Palmer three grains of strychnine crystals at nine o'clock on Monday night, November 19th. He also told a most improbable tale about a meeting on Sunday, November 25th, the eve of the post-mortem examination.
Cross-examined by Mr James, Q.C., for the Prosecution:
JAMES: Do you remember Sunday, the 25th of November?
NEWTON: I do.
JAMES: Where were you at about seven o'clock that evening?
NEWTON: At Dr Palmer's house.
JAMBS: What was the cause of your going there?
NEWTON: I was sent for.
JAMES: Where did you find Palmer when you went, and what was he doing?
NEWTON: He was alone, sitting by the kitchen fire, reading.
JAMES: What did he say to you?
NEWTON: He asked me how I was, and would I take a little brandy?
JAMES: Did he say anything else to you?
NEWTON: He asked me: 'What dose of strychnia would be required to kill a dog?' I told him, 'A grain.' He then asked me whether it would be found in the stomach after death.
JAMES: What did you say?
NEWTON: I told him there would be no inflammation, and that I did not think it would be found.
JAMES: Did he make any remark upon that?
NEWTON: I think he said: 'It is all right,' as if speaking to himself. Then he did that (snapping his fingers).
Newton's evidence was greeted by a loud clapping of hands in Court, as though he had delivered a telling dramatic speech at Drury Lane. Lord Chief Justice Campbell made no attempt to quell the applause.
Cross-examined by Mr Grove for the Defence:
GROVE: You were examined at the inquest, I think you have stated; did you then say anything either about your conversation with respect to the dog, or about the three grains of strychnia?
NEWTON: No, I did not.
GROVE: Did you say anything about the conversation of Cook's suffering from diseased throat-syphilis?
NEWTON: Yes, I did.
JAMES: At the inquest?
NEWTON: I was not questioned there about the post-mortem at all…
Re-examined by Mr Attorney-General Cockburn:
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: You have said that you gave information to the Crown on Tuesday about this fact of the three grains of strychnia. How was it you did not give that information before?
NEWTON: On account that Dr Palmer had not been friends with Dr Salt; they never speak to each other.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: What had that to do with it?
NEWTON: I thought Dr Salt would be displeased at my letting Dr Palmer have anything.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: You say they did not speak?
NEWTON: No; Mr Thirlby lived with Dr Salt for nineteen years…
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Was it in consequence of Mr Thirlby going to Dr Palmer's that this difference took place between Dr Palmer and Dr Salt?
NEWTON: Yes; Dr Salt did not speak to Dr Palmer, or Mr Thirlby either.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Was there any other reason besides that for your keeping it back?
NEWTON: That was my only reason.
SERJEANT SHEE: Will your Lordship ask this witness whether he has not given another reason: the reason being that he was afraid he should be indicted for perjury?
NEWTON: No, I did not give that as a reason, though I mentioned it to the gentleman sitting there [Mr Greenwood]. I stated that I had heard about a young man from Wolverhampton whom Mr George Palmer had indicted for perjury because this young man could not produce a book to show that he had sold Dr Palmer some prussic acid.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: In what case was that?
NEWTON: The inquest upon Walter Palmer.
The Defence did not challenge Newton's reliability as a witness, but it has since been revealed that he was Ben Thirlby's illegitimate son by one Dorothy Newton of Bell's Yard, Long Row, Nottingham. His half-brother John was sentenced to four years' penal servitude for picking pockets at Lincoln Races; and he himself, as a boy, had been caught breaking up a stolen silver spoon belonging to his employer Mr Crossland, a wine merchant, and thereupon spent three days in the Nottingham House of Correction. The records show that his mother, a charwoman, begged him off from the magistrates who examined the case, promising to make good Mr Grassland's losses. A second offence has been mentioned, but we lack details. Newton later, after attendance at the National School, assisted a Nottingham surgeon; and was then cunningly insinuated by Thirlby into Dr Salt's employment. Dr Salt did not know of the blood-relationship between these two.
When the trial was over, the same obliging Newton, prompted perhaps by certain insurance-company officials, called on the Attorney-General. He said that if Sir George Grey considered granting a reprieve (on the ground that Dr Palmer did not have time to make up the strychnine pills in his own surgery, and then administer them at the hour stated by the Prosecution) he would willingly swear to having given Dr Palmer the strychnine in the form of pills already made up-a fact he had hitherto forgotten! The Attorney-General undertook to bring this new evidence before his fellow-Minister, should Dr Palmer's lawyer sue for a reprieve.
聚合中文网 阅读好时光 www.juhezwn.com
小提示:漏章、缺章、错字过多试试导航栏右上角的源