He was totally unable to count the nails in the outside row as they were so closely together, but on the inside row they were thicker nails in one line, and the same number of indentations were visible in the footprints; and there were two middle rows of nails and two nails in the toe; the heel iron was worn, and there were three nails in it.
That Mr. Justice Lindley did not think the evidence conclusive against William Habron, the following conclusion to his summing up will testify. He said:—“With regard to William Habron, was there any evidence that he was on the spot where the murder was committed on the night in question? There was the evidence, such as it was, of the witness Simpson and Police-constable Beanland, and they had the evidence of the footprints, and he asked them to satisfy themselves that the impression was the impression of William’s left boot. If they were of opinion such impression was not that of William they would have but little difficulty in dealing with the case. If they were, on the contrary, satisfied the impression was made by William’s boot, then came the next question.—What other evidence is there to show when it was made? For that was a serious conclusion for them to make, because, according to the evidence for the defence, he could not have been there the day previously; and the question was, the print would not have been there if not made recently. He then reviewed the evidence in their favour: Firstly, they were of good character. Secondly, when arrested they were where they ought to have been—in bed. Third, no trace of firearms had been found.”
After the verdict the learned judge did not, as is usual, express his concurrence in the jury’s opinion, but simply said—
“You have been found guilty of murdering Nicholas Cock, and it is my duty to pass sentence upon you,” and again, a few moments after, “I shall simply discharge my duty by passing sentence upon you.”
Notwithstanding the doubt existing after the trial and sentence as to Habron’s guilt he had a narrow chance of being hanged, and he would certainly have been doomed to penal servitude for life had not Peace, in a fit of remorse, told the truth about the whole business while under sentence of death in Armley gaol.
Peace had the audacity and hardihood to be present at the trial of William Habron, and looked complacently on while an innocent man was being condemned to death for a crime he (Peace) had committed.
“Some time afterwards,” observed Peace, “I saw it announced in the papers that certain men had been taken into custody for the murder of the policeman Cock. That greatly interested me. I always had a liking to be present at trials, as the public no doubt know by this time, and I determined to be present at this trial. I left Hull for Manchester for two days, not telling my family where I had gone, and attended the assizes at Manchester for two days, and heard the youngest of the brothers, as I was told he was, sentenced to death. The sentence was afterwards commuted to penal servitude for life. Now some people say that I was a hardened wretch for allowing an innocent man to suffer for the crime of which I was guilty; but what man could have gone and given himself up under such circumstances, knowing as I did that I should certainly be hanged for the crime?”
CHAPTER LXXXIX.
CHARLES PEACE AND THE DYSONS.
Everybody will agree with us when we declare that Peace’s acquaintance with the Dysons is altogether incomprehensible.