HC Deb 27 April 1869 vol 195 cc1700-1
MR. BRUCE

said, he desired to correct an involuntary omission to answer one of the Questions put to him the other day by the hon. Baronet opposite (Sir George Jenkinson) respecting the convict Wiltshire. The hon. Baronet had asked whether Wiltshire was the man of that name who, since his conviction, attempted to murder a warder in Gloucester Gaol. The best answer he could give would be to read a letter from one of the Visiting Justices of Gloucester Gaol, who was, of course, a competent authority. The justice wrote— It is my duty to communicate to you that at 2 a.m. yesterday morning Charles Wiltshire, whose sentence to death I reported on the 8th of April, committed a violent attack on the warder who was placed to watch over his safety during the night. The night patrol being within hearing, promptly gave the alarm and called assistance. When I inspected the prisoner about a quarter of an hour afterwards, he had become calm, and my believe is that the warder in attendance for the night, though a very steady and experienced man, must have fallen asleep on his seat, and the prisoner seized the opportunity to attempt to escape, believing erroneously that the warder had the keys of the prison on his person. The hon. Baronet being a magistrate would understand that a wide difference existed between an attempt to murder and a violent attack, and would appreciate the extent to which this report should have influenced his judgment. He had to decide whether, because of this occurrence, no serious consequences having ensued, the original sentence should be executed. He decided in the negative.