Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating
new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help
the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm
to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.
Marguerite DIXBLANC
The Park Lane murder
Classification: Murderer
Characteristics:
Argument - Robbery
Number of victims: 1
Date of murder:
April 7, 1872
Date of arrest:
7 days after
Date of birth: 1842
Victim profile:
Marie Caroline Besant Riel, 46 (her employer)
Method of murder:
Strangulation
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
Status:
Sentenced to death. Reprieved
and sentenced to penal servitude for life
Marguerite Dixblanc was
29-year-old Belgian and, in January 1872, she was taken on as a cook
to the Park Lane household of 46-year-old widow Mme Marie Caroline
Besant Riel. Mme Riel had a quick temper and there were occasional
quarrels, always in French, between to two women. Dixblanc was given
her notice around 20th March. Even during this period the two of them
argued, always in French.
On Sunday 7th April 1872 Mme Riel
said she was going for a walk in Green Park around midday but failed
to return for an appointment that she had at 4pm. Around 8pm Dixblanc
said she was going to church but took a taxi to Victoria Station and
the boat train for Paris.
The staff assumed that Mme Riel
had gone to visit friends and it was not until the next day that
anything was thought to be amiss. On opening a locked pantry door Mme
Riel's body was found on the floor. Her neck and face were covered
with bruises. It was soon discovered that not only was there a sum of
money and property missing from the house, so was Marguerite Dixblanc.
Detectives followed her trail to
France and arrested her in a coal-merchant's in St Denis in Paris just
as Dixblanc was confessing to the shopkeeper. The missing property was
found in her possession and she was returned to England on 20th April.
At her trial at the Old Bailey on
14th June she pleaded to she had been provoked and the defence tried,
unsuccessfully, to get the charge reduced to manslaughter. Dixblanc's
story was that when she had been in the kitchen when her employer had
become abusive over her not having started to make the soup for
dinner. This had led to a fight in which Dixblanc, described as a
'coarse, muscular type', had got the better of her employer. The judge
ruled that verbal abuse was insufficient cause for provocation and
Dixblanc was found guilty and sentenced to hang. She was, however,
reprieved and sentenced to penal servitude for life.
Murder-Uk.com
MURDER IN PARK-LANE
The Times
Tuesday, Apr 09, 1872
Yesterday a most atrocious murder was discovered to
have been perpetrated in Park-lane, Piccadilly, the victim being a
French lady, and the perpetrator of the crime, there is little room
for doubt, her own domestic and fellow-countrywoman.
The murder was discovered under circumstances which
give an additional horror to the crime itself. Mademoiselle Riel, who
is a member of the French company now performing under M.Felix, at the
St. James's Theatre, returned from Paris by yesterday's mail, and
arrived at her mother's residence, 13, Park-lane, at about 8 o'clock
in the morning. She was informed that Madame Riel, who was a widow,
was not at home, and at first it was thought that she had gone to meet
her daughter. But subsequently it was found that certain doors were
locked, and that the cook and the keys were also missing. This led to
an examination of the dressing-room, and Madame's outer garments being
there ready for her to put on showed that she had not left the house.
One of the places locked up was the pantry, and it was opened with
duplicate keys in the possession of the young lady. On the floor lay
the dead body of Madame Riel. Her death appeared to have been caused
by strangulation, for the tightened rope was about her neck, and marks
of violence upon her body left no doubt as to her having been
murdered.
The murder was evidently committed in some other
place than the pantry. It is probable that the body was first placed
in the coal cellar, and thence dragged or carried to the pantry, for
Elizabeth Watts, the housemaid, on being interrogated about a
conversation she had with the cook, mentioned that she had spoken
about fetching up coals after her mistress was thought to have gone
out, and that the cook desired that she should not do so. The danger
of the body being seen while it was in the coal cellar must have
struck the murderess, and she took an opportunity of removing it to
the pantry, as a place over which she had direct control. In the coal
cellar were found little articles, such as a hair-pin and a key the
deceased lady always kept, and there were marks on the body as if it
had been lying on the coals. The hair was full of cinders, and the
appearances show that death had not been caused without a struggle,
for there were many violent marks besides the deep indentation caused
by the tightness with which the rope, which was in a slip knot, had
been pulled, and this indentation was particularly deep beneath the
ear where the knot itself came.
Suspicion, and something more than suspicion, at
once rested on Marguerite Dixblanc, the cook, whose conduct on the
previous day was thought to be occasioned by the crime, especially
when taken in connexion with her disappearance. . . .
An inspection of the safe showed the inducement for
the murder. All the valuables except jewelry, which it was perhaps
thought might lead to detection, were taken. Bank-notes, French bonds,
and railway shares are believed to have been stolen; the jewelry left
behind was not left by any oversight, the articles being place on one
side as of no account. . . .
Dixblanc is said to have been in Paris during the
seige, and to have been associated with the Communists in their
struggle after the German occupation. She is described as being a very
powerful woman. The police describe her as 28 years of age, 5ft, 5in.
in height, and stout with a fresh complexion, red face, dark hair, and
brown eyes. She is believed to have had on at the time she left
Park-lane a green dress, waterproof cloak, and brown bonnet.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
GIBBONS, MAYOR. EIGHTH SESSION.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES
OLD COURT.—Monday, June 10th, and Tuesday, June 11th,
1872.
Before Mr. Recorder
471. MARGUERITE DIXBLANC (29), was indicted for the wilful murder of
Marie Caroline
Besant Riel. She was also charged, on the Coroner's Inquisition, with
the like murder.
MR. ATTORNEY-GENERAL,
withMESSRS. POLAND, ARCHIBALD,
andBESLEY, conducted the
Prosecution; andMR. POWELL, Q.C.,
withMESSRS. GOUGH, W. WRIGHT,
andMIREHOUSE, the Defence.
The prisoner being a Belgian, and not
understanding English, the evidence was interpreted to her by Mr.
Charles Albert.
ELIZA WATTS
. I was formerly in the service of Madame Riel, as housemaid,
and had been so for about four months before this matter occurred—the
household consisted of Madame Riel, her daughter, the prisoner, and
myself; the prisoner was the cook; she came into Madame Riel's service
in January last—on Easter Sunday, 31st March, Mademoiselle Riel went
to Paris—the prisoner cannot speak English; I was able to understand
her, by motions—she told me that she was going to leave on 21st
April—on Saturday, 6th April, Madame Riel dined at home; a friend
dined with her in the evening—after dinner the food was placed in the
pantry on the ground floor, on the same floor as the dining-room and
parlour—Madame kept the key of that pantry—after I had placed the food
there, Madame locked the door and put the key in her pocket—it was her
practice always to keep that door locked—there was an iron safe in
that pantry—before dinner was over, on this Saturday, Madame told me
to go down and tell the prisoner to come up, she wanted to speak to
her—I told her, and she went up and saw Madame—afterwards, the
prisoner had her dinner and went out; I think that was at 9
o'clock—she did not tell me what she went out for—she returned just
before 12 o'clock—at that time Madame's friend had gone, and she had
gone to bed; I was sitting up in the kitchen for the prisoner—she let
herself in with the area key—she brought in with her some articles of
food for the next day—shortly after she came in, she and I went up
stairs to bed—my bedroom was on the third floor, and she occupied a
separate room on the same floor; Madame's bedroom was the front room
on the second floor, and on the first floor was the drawing-room and
Mademoiselle Riel's bedroom—Madame, the prisoner, and I were the only
three persons who slept in the house that night—on the following
morning, Sunday, the 7th, I got up at 7.30, and went down stairs into
the kitchen; the prisoner was there—about 8 o'clock I went up to
Madame's bedroom, to take up her breakfast, some tea and bread and
butter—she was in bed—I lighted the fire in her bedroom and afterwards
went down stairs—the prisoner and I were together in the kitchen—I
went up stairs again about 9.30, I did not go into Madame's room then,
not until about 10 o'clock—I went in once or twice—at two or three
minutes past 11 o'clock her bell rang, I went up to her bedroom, and
she was then up and dressed—she told me that I might do her bedroom—I
proceeded to do it—Madame put on her bonnet and cloak, and said she
was going out into the Green Park for a quarter of an hour, and she
told me if a lady called I was to tell her she would be back in a
quarter of an hour—she then went down stairs—she had a little dog
which followed after her—I should think it was about 11.20 when she
went down stairs—I remained up stairs doing the room; I went down just
before 12 o'clock—while I was up stairs nothing attracted my
attention, I never heard the least noise—when I came down to the
ground floor I saw the dog in the hall—I went down into the kitchen,
and on my way down I called out twice "Marguerite, where are you?"—the
prisoner made me no answer—I went into the kitchen and saw the
prisoner at the kitchen window; out-side; the window opens on to the
front area—it is about a yard or more from the floor; it is a very
narrow area—the area railings in the street are boarded up—when I got
into the kitchen Marguerite told me that Madame came and shut the door
as she was out in the area, and locked it and took the key, and had
gone out—Marguerite then came into the kitchen with some coals—she
came in through the window, and brought some coals with her—I looked
at the kitchen door leading to the area and to the coal cellar, it was
locked and the key taken away—I said to the prisoner "Madame has not
taken the dog," she made no answer—Madame's regular breakfast time was
1 o'clock, at 8 o'clock it was merely tea and bread and butter—the
prisoner said that Madame had ordered no breakfast, and she had gone
out—about 12.20 or 12.25 the prisoner wished me to go and fetch some
beer—I told her I could not get it before 1 o'clock, because on the
Sunday the publicans were shut up—she made no answer to that—she asked
me once or twice before 1 o'clock to fetch the beer, and I told her I
could not get it before 1 o'clock—about 1.5 or 1.10 she got the jug
and gave it to me—I went up stairs, and she followed after me to see
whether the publican's was open—I went out at the front street
door—the prisoner looked out at the door in the direction of the
public-house, and said "The public-house is open"—it is on the same
side of the way as No. 13, next door but one, in the direction of
Piccadilly—I went there and got the beer—I was absent five
minutes—when I got back to the door it was shut—I rang the bell, and
could get no answer; I rang and knocked again two or three times—I
should think I was outside a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes—the
prisoner then came to the door and let me in—I asked her why she did
not come to answer the door—she said she thought it was Madame—I said
if I had not been in the way she would have had to answer the door if
Madame came to the door—she said nothing to that—we then went into the
kitchen and had some beer—it was usual for me to fetch the beer on
Sunday, I have to go for the beer—I did not notice anything in the
kitchen, everything was in its place—I did not notice any difference
from when I went out—I then went up stairs to dress—the prisoner
followed me soon after to her bedroom—she remained upstairs a long
time, an hour and a half—I went to the kitchen stairs, and called out
and asked her what she was doing, why did not she come down?—she made
no answer, she came down soon after—I asked her what she stayed up
stairs so long for—she made no answer—in the afternoon, after she had
come down stairs, a French lady, a friend of Madame Riel's called; it
was not the same lady who was there on the Saturday—she came before 4
o'clock; she came to dinner—she remained till about 7 o'clock in
Madame's bedroom, and then left—the prisoner had not prepared anything
for dinner, only the soup—I did not notice anything about the prisoner
in the afternoon—she said that she should go out to church—there was a
pair of gloves lying on the table, I picked them up, and said "Madame
has not taken her gloves," but there was no answer—that was in the
course of the afternoon—the gloves were lying on the kitchen
table—when she said she should go to church I told her she had better
not go out, because Madame would be very angry if she came in and
wanted anything—she did not say anything to that—she had changed her
dress before that—I should think she changed it between 5 and 6
o'clock; it must have been about 6 o'clock, I think—she changed it in
the pantry; that is a pantry on the same floor as the kitchen, in the
basement, next to the kitchen—she put on a green dress, and hung up
the old one in the kitchen—the green dress was a satin cloth—I
afterwards saw it before the Magistrate—after she changed her dress
she and I went up into the dining-room, and sat down—later in the
evening she went out, about 8 o'clock, or a few minutes past 8
o'clock—she then had on a waterproof, the green satin cloth dress, and
a bonnet—she said she was going to church, and she should not be late,
she should be in by 10 o'clock—I did not let her out; I sat in the
kitchen—I afterwards heard the door go—I don't know whether she took
any luggage; I can't say—I did not see anything wrapped up anywhere—I
know that her box was left behind—she did not return—I remained up
till 12 o'clock, and then went to bed—next morning (Monday) I got up
just after 6 o'clock—I went into Madame's bedroom on the second floor
on my way down—Madame was not there, and everything in the room was
undisturbed—I did not go into the kitchen—I went into the drawing-room
to move the things, and saw Mademoiselle coming—she returned from
Paris that morning with a lady friend of hers—I expected her to return
that morning; Madame had told me—the prisoner knew it—when
Mademoiselle came I told her what had occurred—she was alarmed, and
sent me out to get assistance, and shortly afterwards the police
came—I did not see Mademoiselle open the pantry; it was opened while I
had gone for assistance—Mademoiselle had a duplicate key of that
pantry; Madame had one key and Mademoiselle the other—I afterwards
went into the pantry, and saw Madame lying there—I did not disturb the
body at all—Dr. Wadham came—I saw the body afterwards carried out into
the back parlour.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. I had lived with Madame Riel five months—she had
three servants during that time, one previous to the prisoner, no
other—the other servant remained three weeks—No. 13, is in the narrow
part of Park Lane, as you enter from Piccadilly—there are houses on
each side, and opposite, and a public-house next door but one—the area
of the houses is very narrow—the kitchen window looks out on the area,
the cellar is under the pavement of the street—the area railings were
boarded up before I went to live there—I remember the prisoner coming
into Madame Riel's service—I was almost constantly with her when not
engaged up stairs—I had not remarked anything particular, or out of
the common, in her manner and demeanour, we got on pretty well
together—Madame Riel was a lady of rather quick temper, a passionate
person—she never used strong language I could not understand, she
would speak very loud—she usually spoke in French—I do not understand
French—her manner and gestures were that of an angry and passionate
person—I have not been present when she has addressed the prisoner in
an angry and passionate manner—it always appeared as if they were
angry words, French people always do speak so in talking—the previous
cook left because she did not understand French cooking—she did not
complain of Madame's temper—the prisoner has complained of it to me,
and I have complained to the prisoner that Madame was of very bad
temper—I did not complain without supposing that I had a cause—Madame
was sometimes ill-tempered to me, very seldom—it was without a
cause—men occasionally came to work at the house—I think Madame was
once out of temper with a workman; I think that was on the Thursday
previous to this occurrence, or about that time; she seemed very angry
on that occasion—I only knew the man by sight, he was a painter,
working for a Mr. Bernard—I do not know where Bernard's place of
business is—I have seen the man since, he came to work on the Monday
morning that Madame was found dead, he was going to paint the front of
the house; I have seen him since this, I think he has called once
since—I do not know where he is to be found, or anything about him—I
don't understand French at all, whatever words passed between Madame
and the prisoner I did not know what they were—the prisoner speaks
very little English, only a few words—we communicated more by motions,
by signs—I can't say whether on more than one occasion Madame and the
prisoner had high words, I could not tell what was said—it appeared to
me that Madame and the prisoner on more than one occasion had high
words together; Madame was rather of a suspicious disposition; she
suspected things that never occurred, and blamed persons unjustly in
consequence, myself amongst others—when she was excited she was in the
habit of gesticulating a good deal, she would throw her head up, and
throw out her hands—I have observed that that was a habit of hers—she
was rather short—I never noticed that when so excited, and throwing
her head back, the muscles of the throat were very plainly
discernible, and the working of them—on the Sunday morning I had been
with the prisoner for some time in the kitchen, before I went up to
Madame—I should think I had been with her twenty minutes or a quarter
of an hour before Madame rang her bell; we breakfasted together—there
was very little conversation between us—I did not notice anything
remarkable in her manner or demeanour—Madame was not in the habit of
going out very frequently in the morning—she would go out sometimes—I
did not know that she was going out that morning, before she said she
was going to the Green Park, and so far as I knew, the prisoner could
not know it—I often fetched the beer on the week days as well as on
the Sunday, not always at the same time, sometimes earlier and
sometimes later, according to the exigencies of the house—the lady
visitor came about 4 o'clock in the afternoon—about 6.30 in the
evening I was in the dining-room with the prisoner—the lady was in the
house at that time, she was sitting in Madame's bedroom, up stairs—I
did not see the prisoner writing a letter in the course of that
afternoon or evening, nor during any part of that day; I never saw her
writing—the post-office is just at the corner, not very far off—the
prisoner was out until nearly 12 o'clock on the Saturday night—there
used to be a cord in the kitchen, over the hot-plate—I very seldom
went into the prisoner's bedroom—I never saw any cord in her room—I
don't remember whether she was out on the Friday night at all, she
might have gone out, she could not have been out for half an hour
without my knowing it—I went out sometimes, and sometimes for soma
time, it all depended upon what I had to do—I have been to church—I
did not go on that Sunday—I did not leave the house that Sunday,
except for the beer—on previous Sunday. I had gone out, either for a
walk or to church, and remained out some times.
Re-examined. The Duke of Cambridge's stables
are below No. 13—the houses opposite are inhabited—French people speak
very loud, they always talk like as if they were having angry words;
it sounds like it—that is what I mean by saying that Madame Kiel was
passionate; she spoke in a high tone—the painter, from Mr. Bernard's,
was cleaning the windows—he had been there three or four times to
clean them—I have only seen him once since; he came fur some things he
had left; that was the week before this happened—he was there on the
Saturday—the rope that used to be over the hot-plate in the kitchen
has not been there since the kitchen was cleaned—the kitchen had been
whitewashed, and the rope was taken away at that time, and I never saw
it after; I don't know what became of it—I saw the cord that was found
about the body of Madame—I can't say whether it was the cord that had
been in the kitchen—I should think it was five or six weeks before,
since I had last seen that cord—I never noticed any cord in the
prisoner's bed-room—we occupied separate rooms on the same floor—I
have often seen the prisoner write—she could not have been out an hour
or half an hour, on the Friday, without ray knowing it, but I don't
remember whether she went out or not—the dinner hour was 7 or 7.30—she
was at home with me at dinner that Friday—I did not sit in the kitchen
very long after that meal; I went to bed very early, at 9.30,
sometimes—the prisoner went to bed at the same time, I think, on the
Friday.
JURY. Q. Was
the prisoner a passionate woman, or not? A. Yes, she was a very
passionate woman, and a woman who acted on the impulse of the moment;
I have seen her put out, sometimes, very much, and throw herself
back—I say she was passionate because she spoke loud, as her mistress
did.
MR. POWELL. Q.
Do you remember that Madame was out on the Friday, and remained out
until 8 o'clock, or nearly so? A. 7.30, I believe it was—the
prisoner and I had been working together the whole of that afternoon—I
remember the day before, Thursday, dinner being ordered at 7
o'clock—the prisoner was not sent to get the provisions for that
dinner till rather late—she used to go to Leicester Square, of that
neighbourhood, to purchase French provisions—I can't say how long
before 7 o'clock she came back with those provisions, it could not be
long before 7 o'clock—I don't remember that Madame was very angry that
dinner was not ready; I have no recollection about it—I don't remember
that high words passed between them on that occasion; I might have
been up stairs—when Madame returned, on the Friday, about 7.30 or 8
o'clock, she brought some mutton with her—we had had something to eat
since breakfast; we had bread and cheese, and some beer, no regular
meal—it was known that a lady was coming to dine with Madame on the
Sunday—I did not know it before Sunday morning; I don't know when
Marguerite knew—Madame told me, as she was going out, that a lady was
coming, as she was going down into the kitchen.
MR. ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
Q. I do not understand about these high words; were they on the
Thursday? A. Yes—the last time I had heard high words between
Madame and the prisoner was once during the week, I think in the early
part of the week—that was the last time I heard it.
MADLLE. JULE RIEL
(Interpreted). I am the daughter of the late Madame
Riel—I lived with her at 13, Park Lane—the household consisted of my
mother, myself, and two servants, Eliza Watts and the prisoner—I can't
say exactly the date when the prisoner came into our service, but
about two months before my mother's death—about 20th March I gave her
notice to leave; it was one week's notice, like in France—she said she
wanted to stay the month, or to be paid at once—on 31st March I left
London for Paris—on 8th April, I returned to London, and arrived in
Park Lane about 7 o'clock in the morning—Eliza Watts opened the door
to me—I asked her whether the prisoner was there, she said No, she had
gone out the night before, and that probably she would return on that
morning—she told me that mamma had said on the Sunday morning, at
11.30, that she was going out to the Green Park for a walk, and that
since that time she had not seen her, and that she was in very much
trouble about her—I fancied perhaps that she had gone to meet me some
part of the way—I sent Eliza Watts out at once to fetch somebody to
me—while she was out, I looked about the house to see whether mamma
had left a letter for me—I first went up stairs, then I came down to
the kitchen and the coal cellar, and at last the small place called
the pantry, on the same floor as the dining-room; that pantry was
always kept locked—there were two keys to it, one mamma had, and I had
one—I had my key with me that morning; I always had it—I found the
pantry door locked; I opened it with my key—there was an iron safe
kept in that pantry; there were two keys to that, one I had, and one
my mother had—she was also in the habit of carrying other keys about
with her, on a keyring that she always wore—when I went to Paris, I
took my key of the pantry with me; I always had it with me, and I had
also a bunch of keys on a ring—when I opened the pantry door, the
first thing I saw was the cloak of my mother, I lifted the cloak up,
and then I saw mamma—I saw that the safe was open—I became very much
alarmed, and ran out into the street, and then I recollected that 'Dr.
Wadham was living next door, and I went to him—I had not disturbed
anything in the pantry; I did nothing else but lift the cloak up, I
did not move the body at all—Dr. Wadham did not come back to the house
with me, but he came a very little time after—when I returned to the
house, I heard that the police were there, but I did not go to see—I
was sent for into the kitchen for the purpose of seeing whether I knew
a dress that was there—I did know it; it was the prisoner's dress; it
was shown to me by one of the police constables; it was a maroon brown
dress, which the prisoner used to wear—before I left for Paris, I had
given my mother some bank notes, about 30l.—I don't know
whether they were 5l. notes; I did not look at them; I gave
them to her either on the Thursday, Friday, or Saturday, I can't say
the exact day—my mother kept her money in the safe—I had got the bank
notes from Lord Lucan, perhaps only ten minutes before I gave them to
my mother—after the body was removed to another room, I saw that the
safe was open, and there was no money in it—there was no key in the
safe, there remained in it a little box containing jewels, some gloves
and shares—my mother always carried a porte-monnaie—she sometimes wore
rings, not generally—on Friday, 12th April, I again went to Paris to
accompany the body over there—whilst I was in Paris, I was shown by
the French police a porte-monnaie and also some other things—the
little box that contained the jewels was locked, I had one key of it;
I am not certain whether I did not have both of them, there were two
keys; the key I had I took to Paris—besides the porte-monnaie, the
French police also showed me some keys, a ring, and some gold, which
they said had been found in the porte-monnaie, the porte-monnaie, the
keys, and the ring belonged to my mother—the porte-monnaie was empty
when I saw it—I was also shown the pantry key, and a key belonging to
a little room up stairs—nothing was kept in that room but dresses—I
also saw another key, which I at first supposed was the key of the
railings gate, but which I found out was the one belonging to the
kitchen-door—the key of the little room up stairs was one that my
mother was in the habit of carrying—I had not a second one of that—Mr.
Raviart and Mr. Hintschbeoger, of the French police, were present when
these things were shown to me—Mr. Massey, the Commissary of Police in
Paris, produced the keys to me—my mother's full name was Marie
Caroline Besant Kiel—she was 46 years of age.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. I have been in England several times, not
consecutively, sometimes six months at a. time—I have been here since
the war, September—I have resided in Park Lane since January, at the
time of the war last year, since January, 1871—I am not residing there
now—my servant, Eliza Watts, resides there, and I go there
sometimes—it is always the custom in France to give a week's notice
only, to domestic servants—I know that perfectly well—the prisoner was
willing to go when we gave her notice, if we paid her her wages—she
was paid her wages by the month, and sometimes she asked for Borne
money in advance—she required a month's wages or a month's notice—this
pantry or closet contained a safe, in which the jewel-box was kept—I
was in the habit of wearing valuable jewels and keeping them in that
box—the box is not here—my mamma always carried the porte-monnaie
about with her—she sometimes wore a ring of value—I do not know
whether she sometimes carried a ring or rings in her portemonnaie—I
received the notes either on Thursday, Friday, or Saturday, I cannot
say which, before I left for Paris—I gave them to my mamma
immediately—she was in the house when I received them—I do not know
whether she had a key of the jewel-box, she had it sometimes and that
is the reason I state that I do not know whether at that time she had
it—I cannot tell whether I had two keys at Paris, I did not pay
attention to that—if my mamma had the key she would carry it on the
ring on which she kept her keys—I have not looked, and for that reason
I cannot say how many keys of the jewel-box I have now—I have several
keys coming from the same warehouse, and I cannot say—one key I always
had, and have now, but whether I have a second one I do not know; both
keys resemble each other—I cannot say whether I had both keys, because
mamma was in the habit very often to return me the other key back—I
cannot say whether I have more than one key to that box now, but if I
saw the box I could tell you by trying the keys—since my return from
Paris I have not seen the keys which my mamma used to carry.
Re-examined. The house still belongs to my
deceased mother—I put a married policeman with his wife in there to
keep it—I have not resided there—numbers of people came there, which
made it difficult to live there—nobody can go in or out on account of
them—the jewel-box is at home in my possession, it is a heavy iron
box, about 12 in. by 8 in.—I will take care that it is here to-morrow.
COURT. Q. Did
you keep any money, or jewels, or ornaments in that little box, or was
it kept entirely for your mother's use? A. No, only for my use,
only for jewels—I put them in—my mother did not put what money she had
into the small box—in the small box I put only my jewels, and my mamma
put her money in the safe—I had one key of the safe, one of the
pantry, and one of the small safe—I call that little box a small
safe—I perform at St. James's Theatre, and the articles I used there
were usually kept in that box for my use.
WILLIAM PEEK
(Policeman C 194). On Monday morning, 8th April, about
7.45, I was on duty in Park Lane—I was called to No. 13—I saw a lady
standing at the door, a friend of Madlle. Kiel's, who was with her—in
consequence of what was said to me I went into a room at the end of
the passage leading from the front door, and saw the dead body of a
woman, dressed—her face was on the floor, her knees on the ground, and
her legs sticking upwards so that you could see the soles of her
boots—her head was against an iron safe fixed to the wall in one
corner of the room, in the right-hand corner as you went in—I did not
measure the room, but it was about 12 ft. by 6 ft., I believe—the feet
were towards the door, as you went in—I removed the body about 18 in.,
as near as I can say, from the safe out towards the middle of the
room—a rope was once round the neck, with a slip noose under the left
cheek, the end round the neck was not loose, but there was about 6 ft.
to spare, and the other part was hanging loose over the body, and the
other end was twisted twice round the handle of the door of the safe,
which was I suppose about a foot from the floor—the rope was tight
round the neck, and was just put slack round the handle of the door,
it would slip round—it was loose round the handle—I was there when Dr.
Wadham came—I was sent to the station for the Inspector, and Sergeant
Butcher came—we then, by Dr. Wadham's direction, removed the body into
the back parlour—I had lifted the face off the ground before that to
recognise who it was, and found it was the lady of the house.
CHARLES BUTCHER
(Detective Officer C). On 8th April I went to 13, Park
Lane, and found Dr. Wadham there—I saw Peek remove the body into the
small parlour—when I got there the rope was still on the body—I have
heard what Peek has said, it is correct—she was lying on her face, her
feet were straight up, and you could see the bottoms of her boots
plainly—I examined the pocket of her dress, there was nothing in
it—she had one gold ring set with a diamond on this finger of her left
hand—I do not mean two rings, she had not a wedding-ring on—I found
some false hair in a bonnet, which is here, lying between her and the
sofa—I took the rope off the neck, and then examined the safe, which
was open, and there was a little iron cashbox in it—for a cash-box it
was a large one, but it was a solid iron box and heavy—it would be a
very heavy cash-box, but they call it a cash-box—it was about 8 in. or
10 in. long, and about as wide as this book—when I lifted it up I
found it heavy—a key was produced—I did not find it there, but at the
time I was there it was found—Madlle. Kiel had it—there were also in
the safe besides the little box some papers, French bonds, or
something like that, but no money, only the jewellery—that was in the
small box—after the little box had been found Madlle. Riel produced a
key which opened it, and some jewels were found in it—the key of the
safe was found—I do not know whether Madlle. Riel had one—she produced
a key of the pantry—there was no key but her, s—I was not present when
the bunch of keys was found.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. There was not a gold wedding ring on the finger, as
well as the ring which had a diamond in it—if I have said "On the
third finger of the left hand were a wedding ring, and a ring with a
stone," that is evidently a mistake—my evidence was read over to me
before I signed it, and I explained that there was only one ring—there
was only a gold ring with one stone, no wedding ring—I do not think I
signed that statement; if I did, it was an oversight at the time, an
error, but I don't think I said it—I have a distinct recollection of
explaining that there was only one ring—I have not got the diamond
ring, it was left there—it is not customary to take possession of
anything found on a body, unless it shows marks of violence—I left it
on the finger—Dr. Wadham was in the room, and Peek, and Inspector
Hambling, and Madlle. Riel—I did not see the body again till the day
of the inquest—I do not know whether the ring was on then; she was
then in the coffin, I have never seen the ring since—I saw the jewel
box, I did not take an inventory of its contents—the minute it was
discovered I went away to make enquiries out of the house, and left
Hambling and another sergeant in charge of the case—I do not think it
is the practice of the police in such cases to take a note of what is
found, but only of property which is missing, things which are right
in the house we should leave there—no inventory was taken of the
jewel-case, to my knowledge—I can form no idea of the value of the
jewellery—there was no sign of a struggle in the pantry—every thing
was in perfect order, as far as I could judge.
Re-examined. I have been in the police
fourteen years, and never heard of taking an inventory of things in
the house, only of what is missing; I have never been present in a
house where a jewel-box was found, where there had been a murder, but
where robberies have been committed, I have—under the circumstances it
did not occur to me to take an inventory—we should take it for granted
that the jewel-box was safe, and everything in it, they were things
that would speak for themselves.
HENRY HAMBLING
(Police Inspector). On Monday morning, 8th April, about
9 o'clock, I went to 13, Park Lane—the body of Madame Riel had then
been removed into the back parlour—I proceeded to make a search, and
on a shelf in the pantry, near the safe, found some false hair and a
bonnet—I examined the hair and found in it some cinders and small
chips of wood, and a small fish bone—there was a fire-place in the
pantry, but the fire had not been lighted—some small pieces of charred
paper were in the grate, paper which had been burnt and thrown into
the fire-place—I found a hair-pin on the mat in the coal cellar, and
another on the stairs leading to the kitchen—when I got into the
kitchen, I saw the kitchen door which leads to the coal-cellar, it was
locked, and there was no key there; it locks from the inside, you
cannot lock it from the outside—I unscrewed the lock, removed it, and
opened the door; it leads into the area or the cellar—when I got into
the cellar, I found a hair-pin on the mat—I was present when a lady's
comb was picked up by Inspector Pay—the mat is just at the entrance of
the coal-cellar—there is a dusthole there and cinders and chips—it is
the ordinary dust-hole of the house—the chips were small pieces of
wood, such as arise from wood, they were not burnt—I afterwards on
that day received from the witness Watts, this 1 pair of gloves (produced)
and I found in the kitchen this dress hanging up—I examined it at the
time; it was not torn, it was in good repair, but I found on the
left-hand sleeve a spot which I believe to be blood—it was just inside
the cuff, other spots have been cut out by Dr. Letheby but I observed
them—I examined the safe, and saw a railway bond found there—I
searched to see if I could find any keys, but found none at that
time—I was examined as a witness at the Police Court—after the first
day's examination, Inspector Druscovitch made a communication to me in
consequence of which I went to the pantry where the body was found,
and behind a beer-barrel, on a shelf, I found eight keys on one ring
and two on another—I find that one of them fits the iron safe, and two
are latch-keys of the street door—I also on that occasion tried four
keys in the presence of Inspector Pay, which were produced by the
French police, and found that one was the key of the pantry, in which
the body was found, and the other, the key of the kitchen leading from
the coalcellar, the door from which I removed the lock; another was
the key of a sort of press up stairs, where Madlle. Riel kept her
dresses, and which I found locked, and the fourth key fits the padlock
on the prisoner's box—on the Monday morning I went to the prisoner's
box, in her room on the third floor; it is an ordinary servant's box—I
forced it open, and found several pieces of her dresses and boots and
paper, and a book with her name in it—there was no rope in her box, or
in her room—I saw no appearance of any struggle in the kitchen or
pantry—the prisoner's box was not packed at all, her things were lying
in different parts of the room, such as under linen, and dresses were
hanging on the door.
Cross-examined by Mr.
POWELL. I have had sixteen years'
experience in the police—I applied that experience, and I found no
trace whatever of any struggle—the floor of the pantry is stone, and
of the kitchen brick—I only saw one ring on the deceased's
finger—there might have been more, but I only noticet a diamond ring,
which, at Madlle. Riel's suggestion, was removed from the finger by
the Coroner's officer, and handed to her—I am not positive whether
ther was any other ring—I think Madlle. has it still—I saw several
letters in it, and some railway bonds Riel opened it—I saw the
jewell-box open when I arrived—I think Madlle. and jewellery—I did not
take a note of the contents—it was handed to her, and I have not seen
it since—it was not produced at the Inquest, nor any of its contents.
JOHN TURNER
. I am a cab driver and proprietor—about 8 o'clock on sunday
evening, 7th April, I was with my cab at the corner of Park Lane, and
a woman stopped my cab, and got on to the foot-board—she had no
luggage whatever—she told me to drive to Victoria Station—she was a
foreigner, and spoke English very badly—my impression is that the
prisoner is the woman—I asked her, for lshortness, "Chatham and
Dover?"—she had then got into the cab, and she spoke through the tra
"Victoria Station"—I drove to the Brighton Terminus of the Voctoria
Station—she got out there, and handed me a sixpenny and a threepenny
pience—I had some difficulty lin making her understand and a fate was
ls.—eventually she took the sixpence back, and gave me a shilling, and
let me keep the threepenny piece—she asked me a question which I—I
pointed in that direction.; and then she ran off—I got another fare
from the station, land drove away—her dress was dark—I gave
information on the Tuesday morning, form what I read in the
newspapers.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. She did appear to know lthe value of English;
money, but she appeared to make a mistake, and I had a difficulty in
making her understand that she had given me 6d. and not 1s.
there was no rope in her box, or in her room—I saw no appearance of
any struggle in the kitchen or pantry—the prisoner's box was not
packed at all, her things were lying in different parts of the room,
such as under linen, and dresses were hanging on the door.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. I have had sixteen years' experience in the
police—I applied that experience, and I found no trace whatever of any
struggle—the floor of the pantry is stone, and of the kitchen brick—I
only saw one ring on the deceased's finger—there might have been more,
but I only noticed a diamond ring, which, at Madlle. Riel's
suggestion, was removed from the finger by the Coroner's officer, and
handed to her—I am not positive whether there was any other ring—I
presume she has it still—I saw the jewel-box open when I arrived—I
think Madlle. Riel opened it—I saw several letters in it, and some
railway bonds and jewellery—I did not take a note of the contents—it
was handed to her, and I have not seen it since—it was not produced at
the Inquest, nor any of its contents.
JOHN TURNER
. I am a cab driver and proprietor—about 8 o'clock on Sunday
evening, 7th April, I was out with my cab at the corner of Park Lane
and a woman stopped my cab, and got on to the foot-board—she had no
luggage whatever—she told me to drive to Victoria Station—she was a
foreigner, and spoke English very badly—my impression is that the
prisoner is the woman—I asked her, for shortness, "Chatham and
Dover?"—she had then got into the cab, and she spoke through the trap
"Victoria Station"—I drove to the Brighton Terminus of the Victoria
Station—she got out there, and handed me a sixpenny and a threepenny
piece—I had some difficulty in making her understand that the fare was
1s.—eventually she took the sixpence back, and gave me a
shilling, and let me keep the threepenny piece—she asked me a question
which I understood to mean "Is this the way to the Chatham and Dover
Station?"—I pointed in that direction, and then she ran off—I got
another fare from the station, and drove away—her dress was dark—I
gave information on the Tuesday morning, from what I read in the
newspapers.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. She did appear to know the value of English money,
but she appeared to make a mistake, and I had a difficulty in making
her understand that she had given me 6d. and not 1s.
Re-examined. The difficulty was her not
understanding me, and my not understanding her.
RICHARD WERNER
. I live at 2, Lansdown Terrace, Brixton—I am a clerk at the
Victoria Station, and act as interpreter there—on Sunday evening, 7th
April, about 8.20, someone tapped at the window of my office in the
station; I opened it, and saw the prisoner there—she had dark clothes
on, but it was evening, and I cannot say what colour—she spoke in
French, and asked me when the next train was going to start for
Paris—I told her the cheap service train had started before at
6.25—she asked when the next cheap service train would start, and I
said "At 6.25 p.m."—there is only one daily—that was 6.25 on Monday
evening—she asked whether a train would start before—I said "There is
one in a quarter of an hour's time, but it is an express train, first
class only; it goes at 8.35"—she said she should reach Paris sooner by
that than by the cheap service—I said "Yes," and she said she would go
by the 8.35—I accompanied her to the booking office, and asked for a
first-class ticket for Paris, single; she paid with a 5l. note,
and received two sovereigns in change, the fare being 3l.—I
asked her whether she had luggage—she said "No"—I took her to the
platform; the guard put her in a compartment, and I saw the train
start—I saw something in the newspapers on 9th April, and gave
information to the police.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. There are three trains to Paris, from Victoria,
daily, two express, and one cheap service train—the morning express
leaves at 7.40, the cheap service train at 6.25, and the night express
at 8.35—I am the only person employed as interpreter, and am the only
person to whom foreigners would be referred; except in my, absence
there might be a clerk who knows French.
JACQUES BOUILLION
(Through an interpreter). I am a silver-plater and
burnisher, and live, with my wife, at 3, Passage St. Maurice,
Paris—about two years ago, I was house-porter at 192, Rue St. Denis. (MR.
POWELLobjected to the reception of this witness's evidence,
he not having been examined before, and no copy of his evidence having
been delivered.THE ATTORNEY-GENERALreplied that the witness had come over from Paris, instead of his
wife, who had recently been confined, and was unable to come.MR. POWELLstated that his objection
was not that the husband came instead of the wife, but that neither
husband nor wife had been examined before, and no notice had been
given of the evidence of either of them; a letter, dated 11th June,
had been sent to the prisoner's attorney, but it had only come to his
hands that morning.THE ATTORNEY GENERALstated that the Crown always carefully declined to give a copy of
the evidence, and he would never be a party to anything else, Out a
letter had been sent, giving the heads of what the proofs would be.MR. POWELLreplied that he had not
had time to read the document.THE COURTofferedMR. POWELLthe
opportunity of deferring his cross-examination of the witness till
to-morrow, if he wished it; and stated that in "Reg. v.
Palmer" the Lord Chief Justice had said that when a witness could
give important evidence, and was not on the back of the bill, he
thought it was proper to furnish the evidence to the other side; yet
it had not been decided that a witness could not be examined because a
copy of his evidence had not been given.
MR. POWELLstated that he would defer his cross-examination
till to-morrow, if it became necessary for the prisoner's attorney to
confer with her.) The first time the prisoner came to see us, she
came to the Boulevard de la Garde, where we were living—my wife and
the prisoner are natives of the same village in Belgium—from 1868 down
to September, 1870, I had seen her only once or twice—in September,
1870, she came and stayed with us some time, she being out of place—I
cannot say the exact time she stayed—she paid nothing to me, at that
time, for her board and keep, and after a time I told my wife to tell
her I could not afford it, as I was out of work at the time, and she
went to her cousin, No. 9, Rue d'ltalie—between the time she went away
and April, 1872, I saw her sometimes, but not often—on 8th April, this
year, about 10 o'clock at night, she came, alone; she had no luggage,
only an umbrella in her hand—I did not expect her, and had not heard
from her—she slept that night at my house—I had received a letter from
her on 4th April—I cannot say what has become of it; it has been
mislaid somewhere in the house—I have tried to find it—I last saw it
on the Saturday before the prisoner arrived—I heard it read by some
man employed by Mr. Gerling—I can't say what has become of it, I was
taken into custody at the time when the house was searched, and
therefore I don't know what became of it—before coming to England to
give evidence, the letter was searched for at home, but could not be
found—I looked for it personally; she stated in that letter that she
was coming to Paris, in the first days of May, and would pay me what
she owed me; she also said in it "If you want to be paid before that
time, write to me and I will send you the money by post, and answer me
the letter, "—knowing that she was coming in the first days of May, I
did not think it necessary to answer that letter, and I did not answer
it—when she came on 8th April, she said "Good evening," and sat down
after a few minutes—she asked me whether I had answered her letter—I
said "No"—I don't recollect telling her why—when this passed I was
alone with her—my wife came into the room a few minutes afterwards, I
called her; we then had some conversation together, and the prisoner
said "I am going to pay you what I owe you"—I asked her how it was
that she came so early, as she said her intention was to come in the
first days of May—she replied that her master and mistress had decided
to come at once, and that they lived at the Boulevard de Mazas—she
paid Madame Bouillion, in my presence, 125 francs, in English gold—she
asked my wife whether she preferred to take it in gold, or have a bank
note—I saw a paper resembling a bank note in her hand—my wife said
that she preferred gold, as she did not know whether the note was of
value in France, and she said to her "Pay me the sixty-five francs
which I lent you, and as to the board and lodging, I won't charge you
anything for it"—Marguerite said "Take this, I know it is not all I
owe you, but I will pay you the remainder at some future time"—she
wore a green dress the first time she came—I saw that dress hanging up
at the door of my room next day—I went to bed that evening, and left
my wife and the prisoner sitting up together, also an employe, a young
man—I saw her next day for a little time—she then wore a grey
dress—she slept there two nights, on the 8th and 9th—I did not see her
again after the 9th—besides the letter of the 4th, I saw another
letter of the prisoner's in the hands of the police—this (produced)
is it, it is her writing; my wife's name is Victoire—(Translation
of letter read:—"London, 6th April. My dear Victoire. If you have
not written, do not write, I leave this evening for Paris. Your
devoted friend, Dixblanc Marguerite. No, do not expect me, perhaps I
shall never see Paris again, nor even my parents; I shall try to leave
for America, and if I arrive there I will give you my address; so good
bye, my dear Victoire, and think frequently of me. I conclude by
kissing you with all my heart. Dixblanc Marguerite"). When she paid my
wife the English gold, I saw her take it out from her
porte-monnaie—the green dress remained there till the day she left, I
did not know it was there afterwards, I only saw it afterwards at the
prefecture of police; my wife handed it over to the police, I did not
know that such an article was left behind—it was on the Sunday
following that I saw it at the prefecture—I was arrested on the
Friday, and my wife the Sunday following—I was detained in custody for
several weeks—my wife and I were then examined, and discharged on 30th
May—my wife was confined in St. Lazare Prison, on 21st May—she had a
very bad time and is hardly up out of bed now.
LOUIS JULE
FERDINAND RAVIART . I am an Inspector of Municipal Police at
Paris—the first information that I had about this matter was from Mr.
Druscovitch, the English Inspector of Police, who came over to
Paris—on 11th April, at 3 o'clock in the afternoon, I went to 192, Rue
St. Denis, where Bouillion was then living—that was the first time—I
then saw Madame Bouillion—I took possession of this letter and
envelope, the letter was in a little box which women use to put their
thimble and cotton in, and the box was on a table in the lodging—I
went there again the same evening, and then saw both Mr. and Madame
Bouillion, and had a very long conversation with them—I did not take
possession of anything then—at 7 o'clock next morning I went there
again, and saw Mr. Bouillion, and arrested him, and an hour afterwards
I went there again and took possession of a green dress—I did not take
it, I received it from Madame Bouillion, and also a cloak and jacket,
brown colour, maroon—I at once examined the pocket of the green dress,
this (produced)is it—Mr. Massey, the Police Magistrate in
Paris, bad it after me, and it was made up into a parcel, sealed up,
and given to the Embassy—in the pocket of that green dress I found
this portemonnaie and a book, or livret—the name of Margnerite
Dixblanc is in the book—the porte-monnaie contained these eight
English bank notes, I marked them—I at first thought they were all 5l.
notes, but when we came before the Magistrate who had the matter in
hand, there was one of 20l. and one of 10l.; however, I
don't even know it now very well—I marked the notes and took them to
Mr. Massey, the Instruction Magistrate—in the same portemonnaie I
found an English pawn ticket, here it is, attached to the bank notes,
with my mark—I also found this ring in the porte-monnaie—upon this I
took Madame Bouillion into custody—that was on the 12th, in the
morning, the same day as Mr. Bouillion—he had been arrested an hour
before her—it was on account of finding these things that I arrested
Madame Bouillion an hour afterwards—when I took her she handed me this
little box, containing 125 francs in English gold, three sovereigns,
and four half-sovereigns.
(At the request of
MR. POWELL, the following translation of an entry in the
livret was read:—"I the undersigned recognise that the named
Marguerite Dixblanc has served me with honesty, entered on 8th June,
left on 16th August, 1870—Paris." Signed "Wilhelm 54, Faubourg, St.
Honore—I say she entered on 8th June 1870. Wilhelm.")
Gross-examined by
MR. POWELL. I first saw the green dress on the morning of 12th
April, it was then in the hands of Madame Bouillion, who was going to
give it to me; the prisoner was not there then—I had been to Madame
Bouillion's twenty or thirty times before I arrested her—I knew that
she had a green dress in her possession before she showed it to me—I
did not know it from her, she had not told me—I had had a telegraphic
description of the prisoner, and also of the dress she wore, and it
was impossible to mistake it—I had seen Madame Bouillion twenty times
before she handed me the dress; every time I saw her it was on this
affair; when she handed me the dress, it had in the pocket the
porte-monnaie and the pawn ticket, and also a pocket-handkerchief not
belonging to Marguerite Dixblanc—it was Madame Bouillion's, she told
me so herself, and it was given to her as her property—the ring was in
the first compartment of the porte-monnaie in the first fold (replacing
it there)—I discovered that the notes were not 5l. notes at
the Judge of Instruction's, Monsieur Massey, that was I think on the
Saturday, the day after—I had marked the notes immediately after
taking them, but did not discover it then—I last saw Madame Bouillion
on the Monday following 11th April—that is since she was discharged,
it was when there was a question about Monsieur Bouillion coming to
London—that was last Saturday—when you asked me the question before, I
said that I had seen her some early day in April—I thought you meant
while in durance vile, not when she had her liberty—when I saw her
last Saturday she was at Passage Maurice, at her own house, or it may
be her sister's—I do not know whether it was on the first or second
floor—I am in the habit of seeing houses of six or seven stories high,
and I do not count—she was sitting up, and dressed as women usually
are—I saw nothing about her which looked as if she could not go out
for a walk—her husband was present, I cannot say whether he lives
there—that was not the house where I had gone to see her before—I
brought the prisoner over to England; we talked about different
subjects on the voyage, and occasionally the conversation turned upon
Madame Riel, and she told me how the matter happened, and complained
of Madame Kiel's conduct towards her—(THE
COURTconsidered that Mr. Powell ought not to ask the effect
of the conversation, because the prisoner's statement was not
receivable in her own favour, although it would be evidence for the
Crown)—I made no statement to her about Madame Riel—I did not tell
her that I knew Madame Riel's antecedents; I want to explain, what I
told her was when she complained of the treatment she had received
from Madame Kiel, I said "It is very probable, if you were tried in
France, there would be extenuating circumstances found," upon which
she replied, "Yes, but unfortunately in England, one who has given
death, dies"—I said nothing of the cause of death of Madame Kiel's
husband—I did not tell her I knew he had died of grief at her
conduct,—I swear I said nothing of the kind—I had not known Madame
Kiel previously, and had never seen her—I have not made enquiries
about her antecedents, nor was I ordered to do so—I belong to the
detective part of the Municipal police.
Re-examined. Till this matter occurred, I
never saw or heard of the deceased; the only thing I knew was the name
of Madlle. Kiel as an artiste at the theatre—during the time I
paid these visits to the Bouillions, I was always on the look out for
the prisoner, and other French officers were engaged in the same
business, nine of us—I was not present when she was taken in custody—I
cannot say in whose house it was that I last saw Madame Bouillion, I
know that her sister lives in the same house—I saw them both there,
and I cannot say what storey belongs to either—I know that Madame
Bouillion has been recently confined, and I do not think she could
undertake such a voyage.
MR. POWELL. Q.
You did not trouble yourself about the value of the bank notes, you
only marked them? A. That was all, I simply marked them: I did
not know the value—the Prefect of Police sent an Englishman before the
Magistrate, and when he had the notes handed to him, he said "They are
not all 5l. notes, there is a 20l. and a 10l.
note"—after I once heard that from the Englishman, I knew it.
JACQUES BOUILLION
(re-called.)
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. My wife had known the prisoner from her childhood—I
had not seen her before she came to my house in 1868—she remained
about five or six weeks with us at that time, and during that time she
conducted herself in a perfectly proper manner—she seemed to be kindly
disposed to those who treated her well—I always believed her to be of
an amiable temper and candid—I had not the slightest reason to suspect
her honesty—when thwarted she was of a passionate disposition, a
person liable to strong and sudden impulses, but she had a good heart
for all that—my wife was confined on the 21st May—she is not able to
come herself to give evidence; she only just began to get up a
little—the prisoner only stayed two nights when she came in April
last—I did not see her after that till I saw her in this Court—I have
heard where she was arrested—it was about two leagues or seven or
eight miles from where I was residing in April—I was not aware that
she had left anything in my house—I heard nothing of her from the time
she left until I heard of this crime—I had no communication with her—I
had been arrested when the green dress was given to the police.
THOMAS GERARD
(Interpreted). I live at 18, Rue de Porte St. Denis—I am
a coal dealer—I only know the prisoner since 13th April—I had seen her
once last year, about June or July—I had not seen her again until I
saw her on 13th April—I then saw her at our own door—she had arrived
there whilst I was serving customers with coal—it was about 10.30 in
the morning—I did not recognise her at first—after I had served two
customers in the shop, I called to her and said "And you, Madame, what
is your pleasure?—she answered me in patois, "So you don't recognise
me; so you don't know me"—I recognised her then by her talk and the
voice—I asked her how she was and what she came for to St. Denis—she
said "Pretty well, and you?"—I said our house matters did not go very
well as my wife was ill—she asked whether it was a long time since I
had seen her father—she told me afterwards she had been looking for
him, but she said first "Have you seen my father?—I told her I had
seen her father between Christmas and New Year, that I knew he was
looking after her and would like to see her—I asked her afterwards
about Victoire Bouillion, but before that she told me she had been
looking all over Paris for her father and could not find him—I asked
her whether it was a long time since she saw Victoire—she said that
she had seen her on the Monday and had taken some money to her that
she owed her—by Victoire I meant Madame Bouillion—she said she had
seen Victoire Bouillion on Monday, the 8th—the conversation about
Victoire took place after dinner on the Saturday—she asked me whether
I did not know of a servant's place in St. Denis—I asked her where she
came from—she said she came from the Faubourg St. Honore without
mentioning any address—I told her that at St. Denis there were no
aristocratic people, and that she had much better have remained at the
Rue St. Honore, as there the aristocracy lived, and I asked her the
reason why she left—she told me she had had a quarrel with her
mistress—I told her that that was no reason to leave a neighbourhood,
simply on account of a quarrel with her mistress—some more
conversation ensued—during this time I had to serve some more
customers, after which she said she had had a fight with her
mistress—I said even that was not a motive for running away, because
it depended who was in the wrong—some more conversation took place—I
was always serving persons during this time, when she said "I have
given her a good hiding; perhaps she is dead"—I asked her for what
reason she had the fight in this way—she said her mistress wanted to
send her away without paying her her month's wages—up to this time I
understood her to be speaking of the mistress in the Faubourg St.
Honore—after she had admitted everything to me she said it had taken
place in London—she told me how it had happened with her mistress, and
the details of it—I asked her how she had managed it and why it had
happened—she said her mistress wanted to dismiss her, send her away,
and would not pay her; that on Sunday at 11 o'clock her mistress came
down into the kitchen and said "You must leave," to which the accused
said that she would leave provided she paid her, otherwise she would
not leave—to which her mistress said "If you like to stop you shall
stop, or may stop, but I will make you suffer for it," at which the
prisoner became angry and caught hold of her mistress by the throat
and had thrown her down on the ground, but the mistress got up again
and was going to take hold of some article in the kitchen; that she,
the prisoner, seeing that, struck her a blow underneath the chin; that
she fell down backwards and gasped twice; when she saw that she
dragged her into the coal cellar; that when she was in the coal cellar
the lady's maid came down stairs, and that hearing her come down she
locked the door of the cellar and put her back against it; that the
lady's maid came into the kitchen and asked her where her mistress
was, to which she replied that the mistress had gone out for a little
while; that then the lady's maid asked her for some coals, upon which
she said there were none—I think she said after that the lady's maid
had gone up stairs to a higher storey, and that whilst she was up
stairs she, the prisoner, had taken the body and put it on her back,
but that she could not do so as her strength began to fail; and as she
could not put the body on her back, she had put a cord round the neck
and dragged it into the pantry—I omitted to state that she told me
that she had locked all the kitchen doors—she told me where it had all
happened before this—after she told me she had killed her mistress she
said it was not in Paris but in London—I asked her how she could have
managed to escape from England, and whether she had her papers, to
which she said "Yes"—she told me she was going to take the 6 o'clock
train, but that she was too late, and that she was obliged to take the
8 o'clock train, and there was only first class—I asked her how she
could have waited so long, and how she had passed her afternoon—and
she said she had taken two bottles of wine, and also some beer with
the lady's maid—I asked what it cost to come from London, and she said
3l.—and as I did not know the value of a pound, I asked her how
much it was—she said "25 francs"—I said "So you have paid 75 francs to
come from London?"—she said "Yes"—she told me that when she was
crossing over from England to France her young mistress was coming the
other way back, they were crossing each other by boat, the two
steamers met—after she had admitted the crime she showed me some
newspapers—neither I nor my wife could or would believe her story, and
then she took from her pocket a newspaper, which I believe was the
Petite Presse, and said "Look at this column"—the police came just
at the moment, at the end of her story where she admitted the crime,
they arrested her and took her away in a cab.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. I knew her father—I know nothing of his family—I
don't know anything about his conduct or character—I don't know where
he liven now—at the time of her arrest he lived at the Garde Matelst,
between Versailles and St. Cyr—she spoke to me nearly all in French,
and some of it in Patois—she told me many words in Patois—the
statement about giving her a good hiding and perhaps she was dead, was
in Patois—when she said her mistress was about to sieze something in
the kitchen, I understood that it was to give her a blow with, and it
was then she struck her under the chin, at once—she did not say
anything about the general conduct of Madame Riel towards her—the
police interrupted me from saying any more to her.
EMILE
HINSCHEERGER (Interpreted). I am an inspector of police
in Paris—I assisted Mons. Raviart in making enquiries about this case,
it was on a Saturday, whether it was 13th April I can't say, I think
it was—I went to 18, Rue de Porte, St. Denis—I had been there before
several times that day—that was where Gerard, the last witness,
lived—it is a coal and charcoal shop—the last time I went there that
day was in the evening—I saw someone sitting on the door-step of the
shop—I did not know then it was the prisoner, but afterwards I knew
it—I had seen her photograph on that very day—I had not seen her
before—I first spoke to Mr. Gerard—he came out to me—about half a
minute afterwards I spoke to the prisoner—I asked her whether her name
was Marguerite Dixblanc—she said "Yes, sir"—she did not know me—I did
not tell her who I was, I was in plain clothes—I told her I would take
her with me, that I was going to take her to her father—she said she
did not know me—I said "That does not matter, I know you well"—she
said "Where does my father live?—I said "At Versailles'—she said "I
have here a parcel which. I want to take with me"—I went into the
coal-shop with her and asked for the parcel, and I received one from
Madame Gerard—I opened it and it contained a mass-book, a silk
handkerchief, and a waterproof—this (produced) is the book—I
then took her to Paris in a carriage; on the way a conversation took
place about her father and Madame Riel; it was not a consecutive
conversation on one subject only, she talked about her father, and I
interrupted at times, talking about the other affair—I asked her
whether she had been in London—she said "Yes," and commenced crying—I
said "Why are you crying, there is no cause for it?—she said "I know
what you came to fetch me for"—I said "It is to take you to your
father's that I come to fetch you"—she said "Do you promise me that
you are going to take me to him I"—I said "Yes," and then it was that
she told me the story about Madame Riel, upon questions which I put to
her—she said that she had stayed in London and had quarrelled with her
mistress—I said "What I you have killed her I you have assassinated
her! you have murdered her!"—she replied "They say more about the
matter than really is the fact; if you knew how it had happened you
could not condemn me"—I then said "Tell me how it happened"—she said
"I had a quarrel with my mistress in London, who was a very bad
person, and it very often happened that we quarrelled; she always
called me abusive words, and particularly so on that day"—I think she
said that on Sunday Madame Riel came down stairs in the kitchen about
11 o'clock, asking her why the soup was not on the fire, to which she
replied as the dinner was only to be ready by 7 o'clock there was
plenty of time—then Madame Riel got angry, and was going to put the
soup on the fire herself, and then she, the mistress, called her a
dirty bitch, and that she, the prisoner, at that moment seized her by
the throat, and held her very tight; that she cried out "Let me go"
and she did so; that her mistress said "Now, you must leave my house
at once;" to which the prisoner said "Very well, I will leave,
provided you pay me what you owe me;" that Madame Riel replied "No,
you shall remain your time, and leave afterwards, "saying "Where could
you go to when you leave this house, you are going on the streets,
like others;" and that the prisoner then replied "Perhaps you have
walked the streets longer than I have," and high words again
recommenced: it was to the same effect as before; that then the
prisoner gave her a sudden, quick blow on the throat; that Madame Riel
fell down on the ground from this, and that she looked at her and
found she was dead; on seeing that she was dead she dragged her to a
room adjoining; I think, from what she said, it was the coal-cellar,
and then I don't know what happened, but she wanted to carry it up
stairs; that she took a rope from the kitchen, which she placed round
her waist, dragging her up to the staircase; that, having arrived
there she could not get it up the stairs, because the body was
doubling in two, and then she took off the cord from the waist and
placed it round the neck, and that in this manner she pulled it up
stairs, and put it into another room, which she shut—that was all that
passed—she illustrated by my neck how she did it—she showed me to my
own neck how she had given the blow—that was how she showed it, twice
(describing it) a blow twice—I then took her to the
Prefecture—before arriving there I searched her, and took from her
three French newspapers, and a French bank-note of 25 francs—these (produced)
are the newspapers, there are two Petite Presse, and one
Petite Journal.
NATHANIEL
DRUSCOVITCH . I am a chief inspector of the Metropolitan
Police—on 10th April, I went with Inspector Pay, to Paris—and amongst
other places I went to Madame Bouillion's—I was present there when
four keys were found in a small box by Monsieur Massey, the
Commissionary of Police, they are in the possession of Inspector Pay (produced)—I
believe the prisoner was then in custody, but I did not know it—after
we had finished the search at 2 o'clock in the morning, on Sunday 14th
April, I went to the Prefecture, and there I found the prisoner—I
asked her name—she said "Marguerite Dixblanc"—I had heard that there
were some scratches on her hands, and I was examining them—on her
right hand I saw three scratches;-while I was doing this, she said
"Those occurred in the affair"—I had already informed her that she was
charged with the murder of Madame Riel—I afterwards came over to
England and went back again, and received the prisoner from the French
police, at Calais—I brought her to Newgate—on the second day of the
examination at Bow Street, while waiting for the Magistrate she
commenced commenting upon the proceedings of the previous day—she said
"Madame Riel has made a mistake about the keys, the key which she says
belongs to the gate, actually belongs to the door leading to the
kitchen; as to the other keys I threw them behind a beer barrel in the
pantry"—I told Inspector Hambling to search, and they were found
there.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. I have not got that bunch of keys—I was not the
person who found them—I did not see them after they were found—during
the time the prisoner was with me, she conducted, herself quite
properly.
JOHN MILTON
. I am postmaster at the Western district, Vere Street, Park
Lane is in that district—" No. 7 "on the envelope denotes that the
letter was cleared from some post-office receptacle in the Western
district, at 4 a.m. on Monday morning, 8th April—it is London "W. 7."
and the date follows—"Ap." stands for April, and there is a figure
"8"—that stamp would be used either for a pillar post, or wherever it
was cleared from—the next clearing hour before that was 9 p.m. on
Saturday, the 6th—there is no clearing on Sunday—a letter posted after
9 o'clock on Saturday would not be cleared till 4 o'clock, the Monday
morning after.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. In like manner if it was posted at any time on
Sunday, it would be cleared at the same time—from anything there was
on the letter, it might have been posted on Sunday afternoon, or at
any time between 9 o'clock on Saturday and 4 o'clock on Monday
morning.
JOHN WILLIAM
BARTON . I am a cashier at Messrs. Cox & Company's bank—Lord
Lucan keeps an account there—this (produced) is a cheque of his
for 80l., it is dated 30th March, I filled it up, he signed it
and I gave him the cash, sixteen 5l. Bank of England notes,
01066 to 01081 inclusive—these are a portion of them (produced)—I
gave them to him personally.
THE EARL OF LUCAN
. I keep an account at Cox & Company's—on 30th March I went
there—the clerk filled up a cheque, I signed it and got in return for
it sixteen 5l. Bank of England notes—on the same day I gave to
Mdlle. Riel six of the 5l. notes to hand over to her
mother—that is the last I heard of them.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. I have had occasion to see Madame Reil
occasionally, and have had opportunities of observing her manner and
demeanour towards other people, but not particularly—she was like a
good many French ladies, a little vive, that is all; I do not
know an English word to describe it better—she was hasty, perhaps you
would say—I never was a witness to any outburst of her temper—I have
had no opportunity of observing her demeanour towards her servants.
MR. ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
Q. We were told yesterday that all French people were
passionate; do you mean she was a person of ungovernable temper? A.
I have had no opportunity of judging—I do not even mean that she was a
person who used more gesticulation than our colder English people are
in the habit of using—if she was an Englishwoman I should say she was
hasty and vive—I should not go beyond that—I did not observe
anything in her which in the society of French people would have been
observable—I only speak as far as I have had an opportunity of
judging.
MR. POWELL. Q.
The opportunities you have had of judging have been when she was in
the presence of her equals? A. Yes—I have had opportunities of
seeing her both with her equals and with her servants.
ELIZA WATTS
(re-examined). This dress belongs to the prisoner (The
green one found in Paris)—she had it on on the Sunday evening when
she went out—this brown dress also belongs to the prisoner, it is the
one that was left when she went away.
Cross-examined. Q. The prisoner desires me
to ask you whether you knew her, while she was in the situation, buy
anything or spend anything upon herself, of your own knowledge? A.
No; not a great deal.
COURT. Do you
remember going from the public-house, and being kept at the door?
A. Yes; after that the prisoner and I sat down to eat bread and
cheese—we had no wine then—I had no wine with the prisoner at any part
of the day—we partook of the beer together, which she brought from the
public-house—I did not drink a glass of wine all that Sunday.
JULIE RIEL
(re-examined). I have brought the jewel-case—this is it (produced)—I
have only one key to it—I am sure there were two—I think the other is
on my mamma's ring—this bunch of keys (Those found behind the
barrel) on this ring belong to her; I cannot say without trying
it, whether one key is a duplicate key of the jewel-case—yes, there is
(Opening the case with one)—this porte-monnaie belonged to my
mamma, and so did this ring—I said yesterday that my mamma used to
wear some rings in a porte-monnaie—I made a mistake—I do not know, but
the particular ring I think, was kept in a little box which was on a
marble console, a marble corner table—this brown dress and this green
dress belong to the prisoner—my mother was a person of hasty quick
temper, but she was very good, and she never made use of abusive
words.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. I saw that ring nearly every day, but I cannot give
precisely the date when I last saw it before I went to Paris—there is
no jewellery in the box now, it is still in my possession; those which
were there before—I cannot say how many articles of jewellery there
were; there were five bracelets, three or four pairs of ear-rings, but
I cannot say, because some of them I had taken to Paris, when I went
there; I took half the articles over there—my bracelets were valuable,
but not of very large value.
Re-examined. The prisoner has no doubt seen
those jewels when I was wearing them in the theatre, but she never saw
them out of the theatre—I do not know whether she was aware where they
were kept, unless she watched mamma when she went to the box.
DR. WILLIAM
WADHAM . I am Fellow of a College, and Physician to St.
Georges' Hospital—I live at 12, Park Lane—on 8th April, about 8 a.m.,
I was called to No. 13, Park Lane—I did not know Madame Riel at
all—when I got there, I went into the pantry and found her body on the
floor; her face and knees were on the ground and her legs so turned
up, that you saw the heels and soles of her boots; her hands were
placed under her body, a rope was placed round her neck, the knot of
it was under her left jaw—the rest of the rope was twisted twice round
the knob of the door of an iron safe, and the remainder was thrown
over the deceased's body—it was just strained from the door to the
neck, but not tight, no force; not enough to have resisted any effort
to disentangle it, besides which the free end of the rope was
loose—the room was perfectly undisturbed; there was no carpet in it,
and not the slightest appearance of a struggle, as far as I could
see—I waited, leaving things exactly as I found them till Butcher
arrived, after which the body was removed by him into the next room, a
parlour that is there—I first examined the body before it was removed,
and took the rope off—I made no detailed examination, but merely to
look for marks of injury on the body—when it was moved into the
parlour, I examined it again; no change whatever could have happened
between the first examination and the second—I made a few notes, it is
scarcely necessary to look at them—I found the dress open in front, it
buttoned in front, but no buttons were torn off; I looked to see—I
found a reddish brown mark nearly all round the throat, with a reddish
brown depression where the knot had been under the left jaw—there was
a bruise over the right eye, and an abrasion under each eye—the eyes
and mouth were firmly closed; I tried them—the right-hand was firmly
closed, and the nail of the ring finger, the third finger, was broken
back; there was no ring on that finger—a slight scratch under the
right knee was the only other injury I observed—the third finger nail
being bent back resulted, I suppose, from some struggle which she had
made—I did not draw any conclusion from that—the dress was not torn,
only open in front—I saw no other signs of tearing—the pocket was
examined in my presence, and nothing found in it—a little blood was
coming from the mouth, very slight—the body was quite stiff and
cold—it is very difficult to say how long a body has been dead, but
there was nothing incompatible with the notion that she had been dead
twenty hours—the safe was examined in my presence, and something was
found in it, but no money—this examination was on Monday, and I made a
post-mortem examination on the Wednesday, and found a bruise on
the left-cheek bone, which I had not observed on the Monday; I ought
to say on the angle of the lower jaw on the left side—two front teeth
of the upper jaw were rather loose—I also found some slight scratches
on the nose, which I had not observed before, and in the neighbourhood
of the mark of the cord there were some reddish scratches, which I had
not observed—the mark on the lower jaw was higher than the place where
the rope was on the Monday; the rope was below the jaw—the membranes
of the brain were healthy, but gorged with blood—the brain was
healthy, except that it was greatly congested—the lungs were gorged
with blood, but perfectly healthy, except a little empyema at
the tips—that is a little rupture of the air cells, nearly everybody
has it—the valves of the heart were perfect, and the structure of the
heart was perfectly healthy, but it was nearly empty of blood because
the blood was so unusually fluid that it ran out when the heart was
removed from the body—the liver and kidneys were both gorged with
blood, but healthy—the lungs, liver, and all the important parts of
the body were gorged with blood—I naturally examined the throat and
wind pipe, and found two fractures of the hyoid bone, also a
fracture of the hyoid cartilage, and one of the cracoid
cartilage, just at the left of the medium line—I should also say that
there was blood poured out under the mucous membrane of the right
vocal cord—that is what we use in articulation—these different bones
and cartilages which I have described, are parts of the structure of
the throat through which the voice passes, and the blood—they showed
that some very great violence must have been applied to the throat—it
comes to this, that the architecture, the frame of the throat was
broken; the fracture of the frame-work of the throat, and the blood
which I saw gorging the different organs, made me consider that she
had been killed either by strangulation or throttling, the effect of
which would be to gorge all those organs—strangulation would cause
that flow of blood to the internal organs—the destruction of the
throat which I have described would be the result of throttling, and
throttling would also produce the gorging of the various organs which
I have described—the mark by the neck, and the injuries to the neck,
might have been made during life or after death, but the blood poured
out under the mucous membrane of the vocal chord, showed that some
injury must have been done during life—it might not have been
aggravated afterwards, it must have been before death—in the healthy
patient, when strangulation takes place, it would so interfere with
the system that congestion would ensue—I do not think congestion would
increase after life had ceased—I think the pouring out of the blood
under the vocal chord must have been done during life; I should think
it was probably done by the violence which caused the breaking of the
part—in my opinion a single blow on the jaw would not produce the
injuries—it requires very great force and strength to produce the
breaking of the framework of the neck which I saw—I have made
experiments two or three times to see whether it could be done, and it
requires very great force indeed—a rope might possibly have caused the
two fractures of the hyoid bone, but not the others, for the
mark of the rope was above those injuries—there was only one mark;
such a mark could be made by a rope after death, but this was so very
regular that I should hardly think it could be made by a rope dragging
a body—still there was only one mark—looking at all the circumstances,
my opinion is that she either died from being strangled or from being
throttled; strangling with a rope or throttling with your hand—whether
one or the other the gorging of the vessels would equally have taken
place.
Cross-examined by
MR. POWELL. It is consistent with my examination that the
deceased might have been killed by grasping the throat, by
throttling—cases have occurred where the throat has been grasped so
suddenly and strongly that the windpipe was closed, and death followed
almost immediately—I discovered on the Wednesday a fracture of the
hyoid bone, and an injury to the cartilage of the throat—the
fracture of the bone was not caused by the rope after death—my opinion
is that the injury to the cartilage was caused during life, it might
have been caused by a powerful grasp of the hand—I give it as my
opinion that a blow could not have caused the injury to the
cartilage—I have met with no case on record, and I think it would be
an accident happening in prize fights, if possible, but it is matter
of opinion—in the experiments I have made since I have fractured the
bone—that was after the death of the subject—I succeeded in producing
similar injuries to the cartilage, twelve or fourteen hours after
death—I can give no opinion whether injuries to the bone and cartilage
might be more easily produced during life than after death—I am not
aware that injuries to the structure of the bone may be produced much
more easily on the living than on the dead subject—I am aware that the
German surgeons have experimented largely in that way, and Mr. Casper
says that he has failed to break this thing—he was a very high
authority—he is not living—his works are a very high authority—he says
that he never could produce those injuries after death—it is very
improbable that the injuries I discovered on this body might have been
produced by a blow given under what for medical purposes might be
called favourable circumstances—I have not made the experiment, and
therefore I cannot say that it is impossible.
Re-examined. In the living subject there is
power of resistance, but in the dead subject none whatever—in the
experiments I made I chose my opportunity and carefully searched for
the right place to put my fingers—I hardly think the hand could grasp
all the parts at once, so that the various injuries could be the
result of a single sudden act—in my opinion it is impossible for a
blow to have produced all those injuries.
MR. POWELLhaving
intimated that he did not intend to call witnesses, submitted that the
Attorney-General was now bound in the ordinary course to sum up his
evidence, and was notentitled to a general reply: Mr. Baron Martin had
ruled in "Reg. v. Cox," 7 (Cox C.C. p. 506) with
respect to the Attorney-General of the County Palatine, that he had no
such right, but that it was confined to the Attorney-General of
England in person, and that the practice was a bad one. Since that
ruling the 28 Vict, c. 18 had been passed, which he
contended expressly took away the right which before that the
Attorney-General was supposed to possess, and placed him in the
position of any ordinary Counsel conducting a Prosecution.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERALwas not aware that the right of reply had ever been seriously
disputed; the opinion of Mr. Baron Martin had been set aside by the
observations of the present Lord Chief Baron, in the case of "The
Queen v. Waters," see "Central Criminal Court Sessions
Paper," vol. 72, page 566, and by Mr. Justice Hannen,
in the case of the Welsh Fasting Girl, and in 7 "Carrington and
Payne," p. 676, and the Statute re/erred to stated "that the
practice, except as hereby expressly altered, shall remain as at
present" it was in fact an immemorial privilege which had never been
interfered with.
MR. BARON
CHANNELL . "It appears to me that the Attorney-General's
right to reply is in the nature of a prerogative right; it is a right
on the part of the Crown, exercised by the officer of the Crown, the
Attorney-General, and I do not see that that prerogative right is
taken away at all by this Act of Parliament; whenever the
Attorney-General not only appears in person, but makes a statement
that he appears really on behalf of the Crown, he has a right to
reply, and that right is not affected by the question of whether or no
the Defendant's Counsel calls witnesses; he has the right if he
chooses to exercise it.
EUGENE DUMAS
, a French provision merchant, of Princes Street, Leicester
Square, andISABELLA EVANS, of
the Bazaar Coffee-house, King Street, Baker Street, gave the prisoner
a good character.
GUILTY—Strongly
recommended to mercy by the. Jury, considering that the case, so far
as regards premeditation, had not been made out.
Prisoner. I never had the intention of causing
the death.