The bench then decided upon fully committing the prisoner for trial upon the charge of “Wilful murder.”
Mr. Slapperton would not allow the day’s proceedings to be brought to a close without making a last appeal on behalf of his client. He was perfectly aware that all he might say would not alter the decision of the stipendiary magistrates; but he had come for the purpose of making himself as conspicuous as possible, and was bent upon having his say.
“I should be sadly neglectful of my duty to my client,” said the pertinacious advocate, “if I suffered him to be committed upon this dreadful charge without offering some remarks upon the evidence we have heard. I do not for one moment impugn the veracity of the several witnesses. All I say is, that they are mistaken; they are labouring under a wrong impression, and at the same time I am under the impression that their judgment is warped by a strong amount of prejudice, which, perhaps very naturally, has influenced them in so marked a degree. It has been said by a great thinker and writer ‘that it is easier to remove a mountain than a prejudice.’ Without doubt most of the witnesses believe what they have deposed to. They are obstinate as far as their evidence is concerned, and to argue with an obstinate man is to confirm him in his opinion.”
“I think you are mistaken, Mr. Slapperton,” observed Lord Ethalwood. “I do not see that any obstinacy has been displayed by any of the witnesses. On the contrary, the witness Brickett and my footman have been very careful in giving their evidence. They neither of them would swear positively.”
“That I admit, my lord. Do not for a moment imagine I had any desire to complain of them. As far as that goes, they are without doubt truthful witnesses. So, indeed, is Miss Fulford, but, nevertheless, I find it hard to believe that she saw the prisoner through the hedge so as to recognise him; but, even assuming she had, this fact does not prove that Chudley was the murderer of Mr. Philip Jamblin. He might be lurking about the neighbourhood, waiting for one of his quondam companions. It does not necessarily follow that he is guilty of this fearful crime, because he happened to be wandering over the fields near to Dennett’s-lane. He might be out ‘sweetheart-hunting,’ watching for some rustic damsel—even as Miss Fulford was watching for her faithful swain.”
“I do not say it does,” returned Lord Ethalwood. “We none of us say so; but, nevertheless, it is one link in the chain, and it must be admitted on all hands that it is an important link.”
“I confess I do not attach that importance to it that you do,” said the lawyer, in a careless tone; “but I do say that it is a question of mistaken identity. We are all apt to believe that the difference in faces is very great, and not dependent upon accidental features; yet it is almost certain that no such difference exists—that men are as nearly alike as animals appear to be.
“Take, for instance, in evidence of both these propositions, the carelessness of our usual glance, and the similarity among men—a fact which most persons can test for themselves. Look at the conflicting evidence as to identification in the Tichborne case.
“No man on landing at an Indian or Chinese port for the first time can for a few days tell one native from another, and yet they are quite as unlike as so many Englishmen, because, in addition to every other distinction, their complexions cover a wider range of colour, but, being similarly dressed, they seem for a few days as much alike as so many sheep, who are all alike to a Londoner, but among whom a shepherd or a dog makes no mistake.
“Now, if men were much unlike—more unlike than the sheep are—no such curious haziness would be possible, nor would it be if the observer were unconsciously in the habit of studying the form and character of each face.