|
[burglary - capital punishment]
R.
v. Lawrence
Supreme
Court of Van Diemen’s Land
Montagu
J., 17 August 1836
Source:
Cornwall Chronicle, 27 August 1836
Nathaniel Lawrence
stood charged with feloniously entering the dwelling-house of Matthew
Ralston, on the night of the 12th of December last, and taking therefrom
divers articles of property.
Jane Ralston,
sworn - I live at Hampden, on the Nile River, with my brother, Matthew
Ralston; I was living there before Christmas last - quite a month before;
remember two men coming into the back-room of the house; it was about
ten o’clock in the morning, the prisoner Lawrence was one of the men -
he remained outside; the other came in and said – “Stand!” I saw but little
of the prisoner; they were both armed; the prisoner walked to and fro
with two guns in his had; the other man searched and rifled the house;
he took two lbs. of tea, six lbs. sugar, twenty lbs. flour, half a ham,
half a blanket, some silk handkerchiefs, and several books - one of the
books belonged to my cousin; he took them outside, and put them in a knapsack;
they were not longer than a quarter of an hour, or twenty minutes in the
house; they had each a gun - and the one that came into the house had
a pistol; the property taken away belonged to my brother, Matthew Ralston.
I was not the least afraid of myself - they were very quiet; my Christian
name is Jane; my sister was in the house at the time; I was standing in
the back room; they were both of the armed when they came to the door;
the prisoner turned to a man (Riley) and said – “I thought you said your
master was in!” There was no threatening or violence used; they allowed
us to go where we liked; they might have been there about a quarter of
an hour; there was no other person about the premises but Riley; they
left, going up the hill at the back of the house. From first to last,
I never heard a threat used; never saw them attempt to use any violence
to Riley; they neither of them told me to be alarmed; I certainly should
have been afraid to make any attempt to interfere with them; it never
occurred to me to do so; I should have considered it useless; there was
no farm within call; Mr. Pike has a farm a quarter of a mile off; I was
much afraid my brother might return, and some act of violence ensue. The
prisoner Lawrence was outside the door; he did not speak to me - he had
a hat on.
This witness was
much affected, and almost overcome by her feelings in giving evidence.
John Riley sworn
- I am in the service of Mr. Robert Ralston, of the Logan Falls; I was
at Mr. Matthew Ralston’s, at the Nile River, in December last; I remember
two armed men coming there about that time; they had two fowling pieces
and two pistols; a man, that I supposed to be Hunt, took off his neck-kerchief,
and tied my hands behind me; the prisoner Lawrence stood over me with
his piece, and said, if I offered to stir, he would blow my brains out;
he then walked up to the door, and continued marching up and down before
it, whilst the other went in; when they came out, they put the things
they had taken into a knapsack; Lawrence then untied my hands, and told
me to put the knapsack on my back, and come with them; I remained in the
bush, about a mile and a half from the farm, from eleven that morning
until six or seven o’clock the next day. I have no doubt as to the prison
being the man.
William Jones
sworn - I am the Keeper of the Penitentiary at Launceston; I know the
prisoner Lawrence; he was confined in the Penitentiary on the 9th September
last; I saw him in the morning of that day; I missed him in the evening;
in the December following I again saw him; another man escaped at the
same time; cannot say whether he absconded from the Penitentiary or chain
gang.
John Ralston sworn
- This witness merely appeared to identify the property alleged to have
been stolen from Hampden, by the prisoner, to belong to his brother, Matthew
Ralston.
This closed the
case for the prosecution.
Upon His Honor
asking the prisoner if he had aught to urge in his defence -
He replied – “I
am innocent of the crime for which I now stand before your Honor.”
In summing-up,
Mr Justice Montagu told the Jury, that if they felt satisfied in their
own minds of the guilt of the prisoner, he should feel it his [?] duty
to tell them his life would become forfeiture; and, knowing the responsibility
they had, he was quite sure they would most carefully weigh the evidence
that had come before them, and form their decision accordingly.
The Jury returned
a verdict of Guilty.
His Honor then
told the prisoner, he could not hold the slightest hope that mercy would
be extended to him in this world, and trusted that he would not deceive
himself with such an expectation.
The Judge remanded
him, however, waiting the final determination of the Solicitor General,
who, as yet, has not decided whether he will proceed on another information
now pending against him.
|