Page 5 of 5
THE WORKINGTON MURDER
EXAMINATION OF HARRISON
By Mr. PAISLEY: What age are you?
Witness: I don't know that that has anything to do with it but I will answer the question.
Mr. PAISLEY: It is not for you to judge.
Witness: I am 42 years of age.
Mr. PAISLEY: Is your sight as good as it ever was?
Witness: I don't think it has failed any.
Mr. PAISLEY: Do you wear spectacles?
Witness: I wear them in gaslight to preserve the eyes.
Mr. PAISLEY: Do you find it is failing I suppose?
Witness: No, I don't.
Mr. PAISLEY: May I consider you have as good sight as anybody?
Witness: I believe I have.
Mr. PAISLEY: Was there any mist on the night you were at the North-side?
Mr. PAISLEY: A bright clear moonlight night?
Mr. PAISLEY: Was it as bright as you ever saw?
Witness: It was that night.
In answer to further questions the witness said he could not see any person at the end of the row from the garden gate. The distances were measured with a tape line.
Superintendent BIRD said : I was at the Petty Sessions at Workington on the 1st of March. I received information of finding the body. I went to the place. It would be about five o'clock when I arrived at Workington Bridge station where the body was lying. I saw the prisoner. He told me that on the night that Lucy SANDS was missing she and two girls, CRANNIE and SHANNON, came to the North-side cottages, where he met them, and went with them to his father's garden; that they were there for some time when Lucy SANDS said she had an appointment to meet Billy WILSON at eight o'clock; that she had then left the garden, and he did not see her again. On Thursday the 9th of March, I visited the West Cumberland Iron and Steel Works in company with Superintendent TAYLOR, and apprehended the prisoner. I charged him with having murdered Lucy SANDS on the North-side road on or about the first December last. He made no reply, and I told him it was my duty to remove him to the lock-up at Workington. He then began crying, and said, "I want to go and see my mother." I afterwards visited the prisoner's parents in company with Superintendent TAYLOR and Inspectors DODD and SMITH. I examined the prisoner's bed room, and found in a drawer a small six chambered revolver. I saw a pair of blue serge trousers in the bedroom in a box. They had the appearance of having been carefully washed. The trousers had wringing marks on them; they had been twisted. They were a pair of old trousers which evidently had been worn very much. I did not bring them away at the time. I think they had not been worn since they were washed.
On the 28th of March I visited the house again, and on that occasion I received a pair of trousers from Mr. HARRISON. They were evidently the same trousers which I saw locked up in the room, but they were not so clean as when I previously saw them. There were some lime marks, or what appeared to me to be lime marks, on them. I also received from Mr. HARRISON a dagger and a sheath produced. I asked Mr. HARRISON if there was a dagger in the house and a pair of knuckle dusters. He said there was a dagger, but he did not know anything about it.
Mr. PAISLEY: When you got the dagger did you ask who it belonged to?
Witness: Yes I did.
Mr. PAISLEY: Did he tell you?
Witness: He did
Mr. PAISLEY: Did he go with you to the owner?
Mr. PAISLEY: Did the owner acknowledge it?
Witness: He did.
Mr. PAISLEY: What was his name?
Witness: Mr. BURROWS.
Mr. PAISLEY: When you saw the trousers upon the 9th of March you subjected them to a pretty close inspection?
Witness: I did.
Mr. PAISLEY: And so far as you could see there was nothing special about them?
Witness: Nothing that I saw.
Mr. PAISLEY: You have never had a search warrant, but he has allowed you to search the house freely?
In answer to further questions by Mr. PAISLEY, the witness said he did not give instructions to Inspector DODD to bring Mrs. GRANT to the police station to see the prisoner. Gave no instructions to have the prisoner brought to the police station on the 3rd of March. He had examined the revolver carefully, and it seemed to be a perfect instrument.
Sergeant ST. JOHN, recruiting sergeant for the army deposed: In December I was at Whitehaven engaged in my duties. There was a young man offered himself for enlistment in the army who gave the name HARRISON, and said he worked at the Steel Works at Workington. To the best of my opinion the prisoner is the man. I rejected him for bad eyesight or under chest measurement.
The Court was then adjourned till Tuesday next, when the reading of the depositions will be proceeded with, and any further evidence that the police have to offer will be given on that day.
Mr. PAISLEY applied for a private interview with the prisoner. The Clerk pointed out that the magistrates had no authority in the matter; they could only recommend.
The Bench recommended that Mr. PAISLEY should have a private interview with his client.
The Court then rose.
We are informed on good authority that about one o'clock on the morning of the 1st of April, the prisoner HARRISON rang his cell bell violently, and when the attendant went to see what he wanted he requested to be supplied with pen, ink, and paper, as he intended making a statement. Inspector DODD was roused from his slumber, and when he proceeded to the prisoner's cell with the writing materials the prisoner cooly informed him that he was a "bloody April gowk."