Sir Lewis, where are you?' but, finding he had mistaken the room, he went into the right chamber, and said, 'Damn you, Sir Lewis, pay me four guineas you owe me.' Soon after this the cry of murder was heard ; when a number of people, repairing to the place, found Pleura weltering in his blood on the floor, and Parkhurst over him with his sword, who had stabbed him in nearly twenty places. A surgeon was immediately sent for, who dressed the deceased, and put him to bed; and, as soon as he recovered the use of his speech, he declared that Parkhurst had assassinated him. Parkhurst, being taken out of the room, went back again to it, and said, 'Damn you, Pleura, are you not dead yet?' In answer to this evidence against him, he said that he was ignorant of having committed the crime, and for two years and a half past had been in a very unhappy state of mind; and several witnesses were called to prove that he had done many things which seemed to intimate that he was a lunatic; but, on the contrary, other evidence deposed that, not long before the murder happened, he had taken such steps towards obtaining his liberty as proved that he was in the full use of his intellectual faculties. Upon the whole, therefore, the jury found him guilty. Soon after this offender had received sentence of death, he began to see the error of those opinions he had imbibed, and acknowledged the truth of that religion he had ridiculed, and felt the force of its divine precepts. He confessed that the dissolute course of life which he had led had wasted his substance, weakened his intellectual faculties, and disturbed his mind to such a degree, that, before he committed the murder for which he suffered, he had resolved to kill some person or other, and make his escape from the Fleet prison; or, if he should be unable to effect this, he intended to have been guilty of suicide. It is very remarkable of this malefactor, that, on the morning of execution, he ordered a fowl to be prepared for his breakfast, of which he seemed to eat with a good appetite, and drank a pint of liquor with it. How men can indulge even the idea of feasting, a moment, as it were, before they know a disgraceful death must happen, is truly astonishing! Lord Lovat, as we shall hereafter show, ordered his favorite dish to be cooked, and thereof cat greedily, just before his head was severed from his body. At the place of execution he addressed himself to the populace, intimating that, since he had been ill of the small-pox, about twenty years before, his head had been affected to such a degree that he was never able to speak long at a time: wherefore he said no more, only earnestly requested their prayers for his departing soul. He was executed at Tyburn on the 20th of May, 1715, in the thirty-ninth year of his age. Mr. Parkhurst seems to have owed his destruction to his association with men of libertine principles-men who derided religion, and scoffed at holy things. We may safely conclude that there is not such a being in the world as an atheist who can be happy. The man who denies the existence of that God in whom he lives, moves, and has his being, must be extremely wretched in this world, while he is preparing for an eternity of wretchedness in the next. On the contrary, the man who has a firm faith in the important and all-cheering doctrines of Chris tianity will go through the various scenes of this life with a serene composure of mind; he will, as far as lies within his power, discharge his duty to God and man, and meet the moment of his dissolution in the fullest confidence that his final salvation will be perfected through the merits of that Saviour in whom he has trusted. After the expulsion of Adam from Paradise, Cain stands the first notorious example on record of the sin of murder; a crime of so enormous a magnitude, that no language can be found in which to express its malignity. The murderer assumes to himself the privilege of Heaven, and presumes to stop the breath of his fellow-creature at his own pleasure, and to hurry him into eternity with all his imperfections on his head.' Let those whom the turbulence of their passions may tempt only to think of committing murder reflect that there is a just God who judgeth the earth, and that all our most secret actions will be brought to light. Spurling, a Turnkey, shot by Johnson, in the Old Bailey. WILLIAM JOHNSON AND JANE HOUSDEN, EXECUTED FOR THE MURDER OF MR. SPURLING. THROUGHOUT the whole annals of our Criminal Chronology, though the denial of culprits condemned on the clearest evidence of their guilt is by far too frequently recorded, we cannot adduce an instance similar to the following dying declarations of innocence: William Johnson, one of these VOL. 1. unrelenting sinners, was a native of Northamptonshire, where he served his time to a butcher, and, removing to London, opened a shop in Newport Market; but, business not succeeding to his expectation, he took a house in Long Acre, and commenced corn-chandler: in this business he was likewise unsuccessful, 6 on which he sold his stock in trade, and took a public house near Christ Church, in Surrey. Being equally unsuccessful as a victualler, he sailed to Gibraltar, where he was appointed a mate to one of the surgeons of the garrison; in short, he appears to have possessed a genius suited to a variety of employments. Having saved some money at Gibraltar, he came back to his native country, where he soon spent it, and then had recourse to the highway for a supply. Being apprehended in consequence of one of his robberies, he was convicted, but received a pardon. Previous to this he had been acquainted with one Jane Housden, the other hardened wretch, who had been tried and convicted of coining, but also obtained a pardon. It was not long after this pardon (which was procured by great interest) before Housden was again in custody for a similar offence. On the day that she was to be tried, and just as she was brought down to the bar of the Old Bailey, Johnson called to see her; but Mr. Spurling, the head turnkey, telling him that he could not speak to her till her trial was ended, he instantly drew a pistol, and shot Spurling dead on the spot, in the presence of the court, and all the persons attending to hear the trials; Mrs. Housden at the same time encouraging him in the perpetration of this singular murder. The event had no sooner happened than the judges, thinking it unnecessary to proceed on the trial of the woman for coining, ordered both the parties to be tried for the murder; and there being such a number of witnesses to the deed, they were almost immediately convicted, and received sentence of death. From this time to that of their execution, which took place September 19th, 1712, and even at the place of their death, they behaved as if they were wholly insensible of the enormity of the crime which they had committed; and, notwithstanding the publicity of their offence, to which there were so many witnesses, they had the confidence to deny it to the last moment of their lives: nor did they show any signs of compunction for their former sins.-After hanging the usual time, Johnson was hung in chains near Holloway, between Islington and Highgate. HENRY PLUNKET, EXECUTED FOR THE MURDER OF THOMAS BROWN. In the case of this gentleman we have a shocking instance of the danger into which our passions lead us. Mr. Plunkett was a foreigner, born at Saar-Lewis, in the duchy of Lorraine, and was the son of an Irish gentleman, who held the rank of colonel in the French service, and was related to father Plunket, a priest, who was called the Primate of Ireland, and came to a fatal end in the year 1679. Young Plunket was made a lieutenant when he was only ten years of age, and served under his father in Flanders, Ger many, and Italy. He was remarkably distinguished for his courage, having never exhibited the least sign of fear in all the engagements in which he was concerned. Having been a while at Ostend, he came over to England with a gentleman named Reynard, having fled from that place on account of having murdered a man. He was indicted at the Old Bailey for the murder of Thomas Brown, by cutting his throat with a razor, on the 30th of August, 1714. It appeared, in the course of the evidence, that the prisoner lodged in the parish of St. Anne, Soho, in the same house with the deceased, who being a peruke-maker by trade, Plunket bespoke a wig of him, which Brown finished, and asked seven pounds for it, but at length lowered his demand to six: Plunket bid him four pounds for it; but was so enraged at what he thought an exorbitant price, that he took up a razor, cut his throat, and then made his escape; but was apprehended on the following day. As soon as the horrid deed was perpetrated Brown came down stairs in a bloody condition, holding his hands to his throat, on which a surgeon was sent for, who dressed his wounds, and gave him some cordials; by which he was so far recovered as to be able to describe the prisoner, who, he said, stood behind him, pulled back his head, and cut him twice on the throat. It was proved that a sword and a pair of gloves belonging to the prisoner were found on a bed in the room where Brown was murdered:" and Plunket, having nothing material to urge in his defence, was found guilty, received sentence of death, and was executed at Tyburn, on the 22d of September, 1714. He professed to die a Roman Catholic; and it was with the utmost difficulty he was brought to confess the justice of the sentence in consequence of which he suffered. This was one of the most unprovoked murders of which we ever remember to have read. Plunket bespoke a wig of Brown, and, because the latter asked more for it than the other supposed it to be worth, he is irritated to such a degree of passion as to cut his throat! The short and serious lesson to be learnt from this shocking narrative is, to guard carefully against the first impulse of sudden passion; and to remember that, without a constant guard of this kind is kept on ourselves, the human heart is corrupt above all things, and desperately wicked.' JOHN BIGG, CONVICTED OF ALTERING A BANK NOTE. On the 2d of June, 1715, John Bigg was indicted at the Old Bailey, on two indictments, the one for erasing, and the other for altering, a bank note of 100%. On the trial it appeared that the bill in question was drawn in favour of James White or bearer, and had been signed by Joseph Odam, for the governor and company of the Bank of England: that this bill having been brought to the bank, 901. was paid and endorsed on it: that it was afterwards brought again, when 251. was paid and endorsed as before; and the clerks finding that this bill, among others, had been overpaid, were surprised to think how it could have happened, till one Mr. Collins informed them that the prisoner had tempted him to be concerned with him in taking out the letters of the red ink on the notes, by means of a certain liquid; and had even shown him in what manner it was to be done. It appeared likewise that the prisoner had discovered this secret to Mars, who had seen him make the experiment, had received money for him on the altered notes, and was promised a third part of the profit for his share in the iniquity. The prisoner did not deny the charge; but his counsel pleaded that Mr. Odam was not a servant properly qualified to make out such bills, unless he had been authorized under the seal of the corporation. They likewise insisted that writing with red ink on the inside of the bill could not be deemed an indorsement; and even if it were so accounted, the fact with which the prisoner was charged could not be called an altering or erasing. After some altercation between the king's counsel and those of the prisoner, the opinion of the court was that Mr. Odam was a person properly qualified to make out such bills; but a doubt arising respecting the other articles, the jury gave a special verdict. The judges meeting on this occasion at Sergeants'-inn Hall, Fleet Street, the case was solemnly argued; after which the unanimous opinion of the reverend sages of the law was given, that the prisoner was guilty, within the meaning of the act of parliament; in consequence of which he received sen tence of death in December, 1715, but afterwards obtained a free pardon. From the case of this malefactor we may see the tenderness with which Englishmen are treated in matters which concern their lives. In cases of special verdicts prisoners have the advantage of the opinions of two juries: the first not knowing in what light to consider the crime, the learned bench of judges form a kind of second jury, where, all partialitiy being set aside, the supposed criminal is judged according to the strict meaning of the law; and, even after conviction, has a chance of obtaining the royal mercy, as happened in the case of the offender in question. Hence, then, let Englishmen learn the value of those laws by which they are protected, and be devoutly thankful to that Providence which hath cast their lot in a country, the wisdom of whose legislature is the envy and admiration of the universe. HENRY POWEL, HIGHWAYMAN. AT nine years of age Powel was placed at Merchant Tailors' school, whence he was removed to the care of Dr. Shorter, under whom he obtained a tolerable proficiency in the Latin and Greek languages. Having made choice of the profession of a surgeon, he was bound at Surgeons' Hall to a gentleman equally eminent for his skill and piety; but, giving early proofs of the wildness of his disposition, his master predicted that some fatal consequence would ensue. Powel's father and mother dying soon after he was bound, and his master when he had served six years of his time, he was wholly at his own disposal-a circumstance that led to his ruin. He was at this time only eighteen years of age, and hitherto had not kept any company that was notoriously wicked. Going now to see a young woman who was related to him, she fancied a ring which he had on his finger, and wished he would exchange it for hers, which he did; but it appearing to be of less value than she had imagined, she was base enough, on the following morning, to have him seized in his bed, as a person proper to serve the king; and, without being permitted to send for any friend, he was sent into Flanders as a foot soldier. He twice deserted from the regi |