“Your lordship,” he said, “I must respectfully submit that the question as to whether Mr. Fensden cohabited with the deceased is not relevant to the case. We are trying the prisoner at the Bar and not Mr. Fensden.”
His opponent took up the challenge.
“I respectfully submit that I am in the right,” said Rolland. “In eliciting this information I am leading up to the question of motive, and I am sure my learned friend will admit that that is an all-important point.
“I am afraid I must rule against you,” said the judge, addressing the Prosecuting counsel. “Anything that tends to throw a light upon the proceedings of the deceased so short a time prior to the murder can scarcely fail to be relevant.”
Once more readjusting his gown, Mr. Rolland invited Burrell to proceed.
“How long did witness and the deceased occupy the house at Laleham?”
“For more than a fortnight. Then Fensden left her in a strange place without a penny in the world.” (Here a murmur of indignation ran through the Court, which, by the judge’s orders, was instantly suppressed.)
“That will do,” said Mr. Rolland. “Call Elizabeth Raikes.”
The owner of Laburnum Cottage next entered the box, and, though much flurried by the novel position in which she found herself, gave evidence to the effect that the deceased and Fensden had occupied apartments at her house for the period mentioned by the previous witness. She was quite sure, from things she had overheard, that they were not happy together, and she knew that the man treated the woman cruelly. Sometimes he was away for a couple of days, and one day he disappeared altogether without paying for anything they had had while in the house, and leaving his wife totally unprovided for. She had heard the present case talked about, but had not associated the victim with the Mrs. Onslow who had occupied rooms at her cottage.
“I have two more witnesses to call,” said Mr. Rolland, when Mrs. Raikes had stepped down. “Then, my lord, I shall have completed my case. Call Mrs. Wilhelmina Montgomery.”