§ MR. CONYBEAREI wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary whether he can now oblige me by giving an answer to the question which I put to him last night? It was as to whether, in the statement of Eggleton, who has been hanged this morning—which has been referred to in this House—Eggleton stated that he had himself been struck senseless to the ground, and that he remembered nothing that took place after having been struck senseless?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI am sorry that the hon. Member did not inform me that he was going to put that question, so that I might refer to the document in order to see whether it contains this statement. But perhaps I may be able sufficiently to answer it by saying that in all the previous statements sent to me by the prisoners each of the men disclaimed any participation in the death of either of the keepers.
§ MR. CONYBEAREWith all respect that answer does not meet the question which I put to the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman referred yesterday to a statement which he said was the only material statement except the Judge's; and I want to know whether in that statement Eggleton did make the statement, and reiterated the statement, that he was senseless from the moment that he had been struck by the keeper and knew nothing about what subsequently passed, because it will be observed this has a very important bearing upon the question. ("Order, order!") I want further to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in considering all the matters relating to the death of these men, he had regard to the case in which the late Lord Chief Justice Cockburn gave his decision upon facts almost similar to those in this case—("Order, order!")—and which decision was practically diametrically opposite to that given by the Judge in this case. I took the trouble myself—("Order, order!") I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he had that case under his revision, a matter which I took the trouble to bring under his notice myself personally after this House rose last night, and I wish to know whether the right hon. 1075 Gentleman referred to that case before he decided upon the fate of these men?
§ MR. MATTHEWSWith regard to the first part of the hon. Member's question, the hon. Member desires me to state precisely what are the contents of a long written document. After such short notice I am unable to answer it fully. My clear general impression is that the statement of Eggleton, like the statements of the other two men, disclaimed all participation in either of the deaths. Whether the particular statement that he was knocked senseless is repeated in the second letter to me or not I will not assert positively; but, certainly, there is nothing in the letter inconsistent with the inclusion of that statement. With regard to the latter part of the statement of the hon. Member, the hon. Member did me the honour to write me a note last night, in which he alluded to a case which he gave me no means of identifying, and which he said was tried by Lord Chief Justice Cockburn; but I was unable to find the case.
§ MR. CONYBEAREDid the right hon. Gentleman take the trouble to look for the case? ("Order, order!") If he did not, I think this was a judicial murder.
§ MR. HUNTER (Aberdeen, N.)I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary, with a view to prevent the constant recurrence of judicial scandals, whether he will bring in a Bill to amend the legal definition of murder, so as to bring it more into harmony with the moral sentiment of the community?
§ MR. MATTHEWSI really must have notice before I could answer that question. The hon. Member asks me without notice whether I will introduce a Bill to alter what has been the law for centuries in this country. I think the hon. Member must feel that that is a case which requires consideration.