Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

and did not return until some time after Mr. Blight's death.

Well, but is there any body else to be suspected? Yes, a man of the name of Clarke, and upon what ground? why, forsooth, because Mr.B.ight had a great quarrel with him about building a wharf; did the Prisoner cause information to be made against Clarke? did he put the law in motion, or do any of those things which the friend of a person who has been murdered would be prompt to do, to bring his murderer to condign punishment? None of this, and I shall, with respect to Clarke, though it does not appear to be necessary, I shall prove to your entire satisfaction that these persons, Webster and Clarke, were certainly not guilty of the murder.

We come now, Gentlemen, to consider a little the conduct of the Prisoner afterwards, and here, too, observe the motive I attribute to him.-You ask me what it is? I answer, it was to possess himself of the business of Mr. Blight, either entirely, for that ap pears sometimes to have been his object, or at least of one-third of it, without paying the remainder of the consideration, and of this, I think, out of his own mouth, I shall satisfy you beyond the possibility of doubt; then if the rest of the world had no motive→ if the rest of the world are excluded from the oppor tunity if this man has all the opportunity, and more than enough of motive to act upon a corrupt mind--have you not evidence sufficient to enable you to arrive at the conclusion?--I have much more for you to consider, when you have discussed these in your minds-you will recollect I stated that 1000l. remains still unpaid-that it stood upon a draft demandable upon the 20th of September, in substitution for the 16th, that the draft of the 20th is withdrawn by a letter written by the Prisoner to the Bankers, stating that Goom was not able to face this, but that he had given him a security as an equivalent, with which he is satisfied.-Well, then, be owes Mr. Blight 1000l. and promises to pay him by a draft upon Goom. What is his right to draw

upon Goom?-why, that he had sold his estate, received the purchase-money, and lent it to Goom.

Gentlemen, innocence and truth are always consistent; they do not go into any devious paths to fetch something that is not true, because the truth always serves them best.-Now, is there one word of truth in this representation? had he received 10007. as the produce of his estate ?—I say no-if he had, we shall hear the evidence: had he lent 1000l. to Goom? had he drawn upon Goom with his knowledge and permission? had Goom told him that he could not take up the draft due upon the 16th? had he, at Goom's request, renewed it, payable upon the 20th? had he then learned from Goom, that he could not face it upon the 20th? had he, by Goom's desire, forbid the bankers to present it? had he, from Goom, received any other security with which he was satisfied so as to justify the representation he had made?-No, not one word of truth in the whole of this representation; on the contrary, he had never lent Goom any thing, he had never had any communication with Goom upon any subject, he had not communicated to him that he had drawn upon him, he had not called upon him to pay that which he had no right to draw for, he had not learned from him that he could not face that, which by law he was not called upon to face; Goom had not given him any security in lieu of that; on the contrary, you will find Goom was acquainted indeed with the brother of the Prisoner, but for many years past had not had any intercourse or communication whatever with the Prisoner-Well, but if this is all false, why all this invention ? why, it was to lock into a state of security the unfortunate man who was the subject of his machinations, and to make him believe that the remaining 1000l. should be paid also:-but after the death of this gentleman, how does this Prisoner represent the transaction? Mrs. Blight is fetched up to town by the Assistant of the Surgeon, with considerable expedition; she knew the anxiety of her husband upon the subject of the 1000/. remaining

due to him she knew that his anxiety was increased upon his receiving the letter upon the 20th, which was silent upon the subject of that 1000/-She knew that one of the main objects of his visit to London was to procure this money to be paid, about which he had now become somewhat alarmed; and therefore, when she came to London, she asked the Prisoner, has that money, which gave my husband so much uneasiness in his later hours, been paid?—What is the answer of the Prisoner? He tells the wife that that sum of 1000l. has been paid, and that Goom had promised to come to breakfast with Mr. Blight on the morning of the Tuesday, at eight o'clock, and came within five minutes after the time appointed. Had this money been paid?—No, it had not.-Had it ever been demandable?—No.-Could the payment of it at any time have been inforced?-No.-Was there any such transaction as a real transaction?— No.-Must the Prisoner have known this?-Ianswer, yes.-Why, then, did he misrepresent the fact?

Why, but that he might possess himself of the property of the man he had murdered, and tell the world that he had paid the consideration.

But this is not all-this would have entitled him to one-third only of the property and profits in the trade, under the articles of the 31st ot August, 1805; but when Mr. Blight was now removed from this scene, the Prisoner appears to have had another purpose, and to have intended to possess himself of all, and here you will find most important obser vations indeed, growing out of that never-to-be suspected and most satisfactory source ;-what the Prisoner himself says, what he says deliberately, what he says upon consideration, what he says upon being warned, what he says, knowing that his dearest interests are at stake; and when, unless he chuses to speak, he might be silent: I spoke of three papers, a bill of parcels enumerating the property, a receipt importing a receipt from Mr. Blight, for 2065!. 4s. the consideration for that bill of parcels; and there was, in consequence of a petition presented to the City for

a renewal of the lease, a letter written from Mr. Blight to Patch, stating, that petition has gone in my name, but the lease will be renewed in your's. These papers, at the time they were framed, were deposited with Mrs. Blight. After she arrived in town, and when her husband was dead, she found them in his dressing-room, in a tin case, as they had been delivered into her possession they had been delivered to her expressly to be by her kept for a double purpose, as I stated before, that of either being withdrawn from view or presented to view, as the exigencies of Mr. Blight's affairs might render expedient. If his creditors came upon him, then they might be presented, in order to keep up the appearance of all his effects being the property of the Prisoner at the bar; and if the creditors did not come upon him, then they might be thrown into the fire.

The Prisoner was examined before the Coroner upon the death of Mr. Blight; what he said there I shall not presume to state, because his Lordship will, I apprehend, be of opinion that I could not regularly read it, inasmuch as it was taken upon oath. I shall therefore pass over that which passed before the Coroner, as I cannot make it evidence; but upon his return from the Coroner, the Prisoner stated to Mrs. Blight, that it would be necessary for him to be put into possession of those papers which her husband had formerly executed, and delivered to her to keep, and he gave this reason for it, that he had been examined before the Coroner, touching that property, and had stated that it all belonged to him. Stated it all belonged to him!Is that true? Had he every thing that had belonged to the deceased? (You will find in the course of the evidence, I believe, that he stated, to one of the witnesses, that the remains of a ship, called the Carnatic, and even the furniture of the house, to the value of 2371. was his; upon which the witness observed, that it was singular that Mrs. Blight should have parted with all her furniture). But he says, I have stated to the Coroner, that all this is my property; and therefore What? Therefore I must have my title deeds; I shall be questioned about this again. What title deeds are there about this property?

Why none which accompany a legal transaction; which you, Gentlemen, know, as to moveable property, is usually transferred by a bill of sale; certainly something of more formality than appears here. It speaks, therefore, that it was a mere colorable transaction: the Prisoner gets possession of these papers, and now he is apparently proprietor of all that there is upon the premises, and so he represents himself to be. You will be so good as to recollect, that I told you that all the money he ever paid was 2501. of the consideration of 12501. One thousand pounds still remains due; and you will find this man asserts, before the Magistrate, that he began business the 15th of July, 1805, upon his own account; that at that time he became the proprietor of all the property, that he had paid for it, (20657.) by different sums, at different times, to Mr. Blight; that the papers, had been delivered to him by Mr. Blight, contemporary with that transaction; that they had been delivered to him in the presence of Mrs. Blight, that she was perfectly acquainted with it, and that it was all a real transaction. He states, that these deeds had remained in his possession from the 15th of July; whereas, I will prove, that it was not till after the death of Mr. Blight that he obtained possession of them, and in the manner which I have stated.

He stated, that when he came to town he had 1200. in his possession; that he lent it in small sums to Mr. Blight, at different times, till the 15th of July, 1805, when they came to a final settlement, and that then this transfer of property took place.

Now, Gentlemen, have I not stated to you motives sufficient to operate, not upon a virtuous mind indeed; you might offer the wealth of the Indies to a moral virtuous man to induce him to engage in a deed of guilt; he spurns your offer, and will not embrue his hands in blood; and therefore, if we are to wait till we can produce to a Jury a consideration for murder adequate to move a moral mind to commit murder, we may shut up all our courts of justice; there is an end to all enquiry. But if you find this man, in the moment of pres sure to pay a large sum of money, totally unprovided

« AnteriorContinuar »