Report of the trial of Daniel M’Naughton at the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey (on Friday, the 3rd, and Saturday, the 4th of March, 1843) for the wilful murder of Edward Drummond, Esq / by Richard M. Bousfield and Richard Merrett.
- Date:
- 1843
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Report of the trial of Daniel M’Naughton at the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey (on Friday, the 3rd, and Saturday, the 4th of March, 1843) for the wilful murder of Edward Drummond, Esq / by Richard M. Bousfield and Richard Merrett. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. The original may be consulted at the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh.
23/89 (page 13)
![other occasions, when he said ] acted fairly towards him, and that fair play was the English character. I then asked him where he came from, and he replied from Glasgow. He said that he had left Glasgow about three months; that he stayed at Liverpool seven days, and then came to London, where he had remained ever since ; he then said that he was in busi- ness at Glasgow us a turner, but left that and was going into another business, but was pre- vented. I observed that he had a good share of money, to which he replied that he had wrought hard for it, and that he generally did the work of three ordinary men daily. I told him I had been in Glasgow three or four weeks before, and brought a prisoner, named Ellis, from there, who was charged with the Staffordshire riots. Pie then asked the name of the ship I went in. I said I had forgotten, but thought it was the British Queen. He said I must have been mistaken, it must have been the Princess Royal, and I then recollected that was the name of the vessel. I then asked him whether he knew Mr. Richardson, the super- intendent of the Gorbals police? He said he did,and added that he was considered a more clever man than Miller (another police officer). I then asked him whether he came over in the Princess Royal ? He said he did not; lie came over in the Fire King. I asked him whether there was a railway from Edinburgh to Glasgow ? He told me there was, and, as far as I recollect, said they were thirty or forty miles apart. He also mentioned the fares, and I think he said the fare was 6s. in the second class carriage. I told him that when I was going to Glasgow, I went on shore at Greenock, and thence by rail to Glasgow ; that I went through Paisley, and described the situation of the town to him, and then asked him whether he had ever been there? He said lie had. I remarked that it was a great place for shawls. He admitted that it was; that nearly all the inhabitants were weavers, but he was sorry to say there were a great many of them out of employ. I then asked him whether he would take any refreshment, when he expressed a wish to have some coffee, with which he was supplied. In the course of conversation, I asked him whether Drummond was a Scotch name ? He answered that it was; that it was the family name of the Earl of Perth, but the title had become extinct. I do not recollect that anything further took place that night. On the following morning I again saw the prisoner, between eight and nine o’clock. On entering his cell, I asked him whether he had had his breakfast? He replied in the affirmative, and asked to have some water to wash himself with. I then sent the constable, who had been sitting up with him, for some water, and when he had left the cell, I said to the prisoner—“ I suppose you will assign some reason to the magistrate this morning for the crime you have committed?” He said, “I shall give a reason—a short one.” I then said, “ You might have stated anything you thought proper to me last night, after the cau- tion I gave you.” He then told me that he was an object of persecution by the Tories, that they followed him from place to place with their persecution. He seemed inclined to go oil with his statement, when I said, “ I suppose you are aware who the gentleman is you shot at?” He said, “ It is Sir Robert Peel, is it not?’’ I at first said “ No,” but in a moment recollecting myself, said, “We don’t exactly know who the gentleman is yet.” Then turning round, I said, “Recollect the caution I gave you last night, not to say anything to criminate yourself, as it may be used in evidence against you;” to which he immediately replied, “ But you wont use this against me?’’ I said, “ I make you no promise; I gave you the caution.’’ I then left the cell, and in the course of the same day took him to the police- court, Bow-street. Cross-examined by Mr. Cockburn.—It was my duty to visit all the cells in the course of the night. Mr. Cockburn.—Is it your duty to put questions to the prisoners ? Witness.—As long as I do not interfere with the case in point I do not see any harm in putting questions to prisoners. Mr. Cockburn.—Did any one direct you to put such questions ? Witness.—Certainly not. Mr. Cockburn.—What was your object in putting them ? Witness.—I wanted to get all the information I could about his former life. Mr. Cockburn.—In order to give it in evidence against him 1 Witness.—I never intended to give in evidence ugainst him anything lie told me till lie mentioned the name of Sir Robert Peel. Mr. Cockburn.—What was your motive for wishing to get information respecting his former life? ° . Witness.—Nothing that I know of but the anxiety of human nature, under such revolt- ing circumstances, to know who and what he was. Mr. Cockburn.— Now, do you mean to swear that you ever intended to suppress the evidence you have given ? V\ itness.— Not to suppress it, but I had no intention to mention it till he mentioned the name of Sir Robert Peel. I cannot give you the precise conversation which took place](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b21971304_0023.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
