STORIES OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

Western Star, Issue 1389, 14 September 1889, Page 2 (Supplement)

STORIES OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

From circumstantial evidence alone a man aocuspd of crime may be doomed to unmerited punishment. A case of this kind was that of Jonathan Bradford,, who kept an inn in Oxfordshire on the London road to Oxford. A gentleman of fortune stopped one night at this inn and supping with two gentlemen whom he met there he foolishly mentioned that he had then about him a large sum of money. Some hours after' they had retired one of the gentlemen being 1 awake thought he heard a groan in the next room, followed by another and still another. He immediately awakened his friend, who then also heard the sounds as of one dying. They at once arose and went to the adjoining room. The door was ajar and through it they saw their friend of the night before weltering in his blood and a man standing over th« bed with a knife in one hand and a dark lantern in the other. ‘ r They rushed in and having secured the murderer found to their conaternaJtion that it was none other than their host, Jonathan Bradford the keeper of’ the inn. Bradford at first seemed petrified with terror at being discovered, but he finally recovered his self-possession and proclaimed his innocence. But there was the portmanteau of the murtiered man open and ready to he rifled containing money and valuables, and the unfortunate landlord was at the bedside, with a knife in his hand. It was in vain that Bradford protest? ed his innocence affirming that hearing the noise of groaning he had got out of bed and gone to the rescue of his guest; that he had snatched up a knife the only weapon at hand, to defend himself and that he had only entered the room a few moments before the two gentlemen, and for the same purpose. His story was not bei’eved, and he was convicted and executed. But it was true, nevertheless, as was afterwards proved by the deathbed confsssion of the real murderer, the valet of thegentleman, who dying some eighteen months after the execution of Bradford confessed that he had murdered his master, and was about to rob him when he was disturbed by Bradford’s footsteps, and he had just time to escape to his own room before Bradford entered. A very singular case occurred in America at the close of the last century on tbe road between Albany and Schenectady, New York, where stood a picturesque old Dutch tavern much frequented and known as the Blue Horse. A number of young men had gathered there one afternoon, drinking together and discussing the varied gossip of the time. ■

Presently one,.Harry Blake by name a popular young fellow, became engaged in a somewhat heated conversation with an ugly-looking, short square-built man by name of Wickliff, which shortly- resulted in an open quarrel. They/were separated, and Wickliff left the tavern but noti before he had uttered threats of vengeance. Soon afterward Blake also departed. Two of his companions shortly followed, and as they were riding along, discussing the quarrel, they suddenly heard a loud cry in the distance, which was again repeated. Whipping up their horses, they rode rapidly in the direction from which the cry had come. As they rode round a copse of trees a sight met their eyes that made them shudder. There on the ground before them lay a human form, the ground covered with blood, and bending over him .was a man grasping the handle •of a knife the blade of which was plunged in the bosom of his victim. They sprang from their horses the man turned aid to their horror they recognised their companion Blake, from whom they had parted but a short time before and the man was Wickliff. Blake was accused of murde", imprisoned, and tried. The trial itself could have but one result. The quarrel the threat, the discovery of accused with the knife in his hand, its blade buried in the dead man s breast all pointed the one person as murderer. Blake however did not even claim that he committed the deed in self-defence. Had he done so he would probably have escaped. But he insisted that he was innocent, and when he was urged to confess and throw himself on the executive clemency he refused. Some months after his execution a prisoner under sentence of death confessed to have murderd Wickliff and gave a full account of how he had laid in ambush for another,'for whom he had taken Wickliff aud how, through this mistake, he had killed Wickliff instead; how he had then made his escape, leaving his knife in his victim’s heart driven away by Blake s approach He gave all details with such fulness and clearness as to leave no doubt of Blake’s innocence.