Blog 26: 1881 Balcombe Brighton Sussex Railway murder

Mrs Gold said farewell to her Husband as he left home for London, not knowing it would be the last time she saw him alive

Frederick Isaac Gold was born in Clerkenwell London in 1817 to Commercial Agent, Issac Gold from Shatford, Elmore in Gloucestershire,, and Hannah Browne from Norwich, Norfolk, who had met and married in London in 1814

Frederick became a Baker, eventually owning a shop in London.

On April 13th, 1845 at age 27 he married 20-year-old Lydia Matilda, Daughter of Samuel Wood, a Colourman (A man who sells and, formerly, prepares an artist's paints) at Trinity Church Stepney London

By 1871, at age 54, He had moved With his wife to 13 Clements Road Brighton Sussex and it was said he was well-known in the area. He had retired as a Baker but kept the shop in London, employing another Baker to manage the day to day running of the shop.

In 1881 they were living at ''Titchfield'' no 26 Clermont Terrace Preston Village Brighton

They never had children, and always had one live-in domestic servant.

It had been a custom for Frederick to travel to London on a Monday, to deal with business at the shop or to visit friends.

He left Preston Park station, which is a short distance from his house on the 8.19 am train to Brighton, to catch the 8.45 am express to London

Mrs Gold said goodbye, not knowing she was never to see him alive again.

It was well known to the travelers on the line, tickets were collected from passengers by the main line to Brighton and the express train leaving London Bridge at two o'clock stopped at Preston Park station.

Arthur Gibson, one of the ticket collectors upon opening the door to the first carriage, found a young man in the apartment.

He was smeared with blood and showed signs of having a struggle with someone. He had wounds on his head and asked the ticket collector if he could wash himself.

Explaining his appearance, he made a statement that implied that he had a fearful encounter on the train with a man who had succeeded in making his escape from the carriage.

The statement was to the effect that he had entered the compartment at London Bridge. Two other people shared it with him. One of the passengers was described as having the appearance of a countryman who wore whiskers and the other, a gentleman of around 50 years of age. The Gentleman sat opposite him but he did not say where the other male sat. Being an express train it didn't stop at Croydon and Preston Park.

After leaving the station and just before the train entered Merstham tunnel, which is a short distance north of Redhill, he said heard the noise of a gunshot and immediately felt a blow to his head. Here he brought to explanation to an abrupt end, with a remark that after becoming unconscious on receiving the blow he remembered nothing until the train had arrived at the station. He then stated that he had not been robbed, having his watch and money safe.

His statement was made known to the Station Master Mr. Hall and upon noticing that the exterior and interior of the compartment were marked in many places with patches of blood, suspected there was some foul play and he sent the ticket collector on to Brighton, in the company of the injured man, instructing him to immediately communicate with Mr Anscombe the Station Master there.

There was another point that aroused the suspicion of that Station Master was when the young man was asked what became of the third man, he said he had jumped out the window. The station master knew that someone couldn't do that without injury if not death. when it was traveling at 50mph. The young man gave up a first-class ticket that was mutilated and discolored.

On arrival at Brighton, they saw Mr. Anscombe and for his satisfaction, the young man wrote his details down in pencil his calligraphy being in a firm legible hand, and by direction of Mr. Anscombe, he was accompanied to the police station at the town hall where he repeated his story, then gave the police officials his card which bore the official inscription Mr Arthur Lefroy 4 Cathcart Road Carshalton, London. Author and journalist.

He also added to his statement that he was coming down to Brighton with the special object of seeing Mrs. Nye Chart, the proprietress of the Theatre Royal and Opera house about a play he had written and produced at her theatre, which later transpired to be a lie, and Mrs chart knew nothing about Lefroy or the new play.

Lefroy was searched by the detectives at the Railway station and a pocket book besides several coloured tickets and a gold watch was found on him. Lefroy raised objections to certain possessions being examined. The tickets had the appearance of cards used by betting men at races.

Lefroy did not possess much money 13s 6d, which he was known to have, when he left Wallington, the amount he had was 4s and some coppers. He refused to allow to have his pocketbook examined it was supposed that he may have had some gold concealed there.

He was taken to the Sussex County Hospital in Brighton.

He was without a collar and necktie but on the way, he was able to replace them at St James Street.

At the hospital Mr B Hall, the house Surgeon bandaged his wounds. he has several about his face and other parts of his head and said they had been inflicted with a blunt instrument.

The narrative of events was sent to the Railway company in London and instructions were asked for. the incident was shared along all stations and first reached three bridges, Balcombe, Haywards Heath and other stations north of Preston from London.

Shortly before five o'clock that evening, the village of Balcombe Haywards Heath had received news that the body of Mr Gold had been discovered in the Balcombe tunnel. His remains were about the centre of the tunnel, which is a mile northward of the station and nearly a mile in length. It was found by some platelayers before the crime had been known to the district. The body was found in a six-foot way, so it must have been thrown from a window, on the west side of the train.

The police were informed and the body was removed to a shed adjoining the Railway Arms Hotel in Balcombe (now called the Half Moon Inn) to await the inquest.

Mr Gold's face and head were very cut and bruised and his hands were also cut, looking like it was inflicted with a pen or pocket knife. His mouth was disfigured with cuts and a large wound on the right of his face is likely to have caused his death, making a downward cut as if to assassinate Mr Gold, whoever did this may have intended to cut his throat but was prevented by the struggling man. The back of his head was bruised, evidently by the fall from the carriage and there was a slight indentation in the forehead. The face that bears no whiskers was blacked and begrimed. The disfigurement could have been caused by exploding powder but was mainly caused by the face coming into contact with the dirt in the footway. Around the neck of the deceased was a gold chain, attached to that was an eyeglass and twopence. the chain was broken furnishing fresh evidence of a struggle parts of his clothing were torn and by the body was a knife with blood.

Mrs. Gold's first initiation of the death of her husband was officially received on Monday evening via the Brighton Railway Company.

She left Preston at half 10 that night accompanied by Mr Lee Hollis a gentleman residing in the neighbourhood by the fast train which was allowed to stop at Balcombe to let them both alight.

Mr. Hollis proceeded to the shed to identify the body, rather than Mrs. Gold having to do the painful task. It had been laid on a temporary Bier and respectfully covered.

Mr Hollis and Mrs Gold remained at Balcombe all night staying at the Railway Arms.

Dr Byass of Cuckfield Sussex who was proceeding to London by the train which reached Balcombe shortly before eleven and was requested to examine the body.

He immediately complied with the request and in the presence of Mr. Hollis, PS Holden and PC Lewis, he made a superficial examination of the remains.

Apart from what was given above regarding the body, he also pointed out the bruises on his legs.

When news of the murder had reached London and arrangements were made to search the line between Croydon and Preston.

A large number of labourers were on Thursday employed in this way, between the tunnel and the Ouse Valley viaduct, which stands south of Balcombe.

They found a shirt collar, presumably the property of Lefroy. Mr Gold's hat was found around 10 miles below where the body was found.

Late Tuesday the collar was found on the embankment, which is filled with a thickly overgrown embankment of common ferns and grass.

A special search was then conducted in that area, as it was thought a pistol, revolver, or any other instrument, involved in the crime, could have been thrown out of the carriage at that time but nothing had been found.

The curiosity about the crime, saw many people visiting Brighton station the following day to see the carriage in which the murder had taken place, the doors were taped up but they peered through the window, where evidence could be seen of the terrible crime.

Lefroy had given the detectives the slip, as follows:

Being in a condition to return home, he left Brighton on the 6.10 pm train on the Monday evening, in the company of Detective Sergeant Howland and Detective Holmes.

On reaching Balcombe, Howland got out to make inquiries and Holmes and Lefroy continued on to Croydon. The two alighted and caught a cab to the residence at Wallington, given by Lefroy. Having seen him into the house Holmes left and returned to Croydon, where he found a communication from Howland to say the body of Mr Gold had been found but that his watch was missing and he was requested to make inquires, as to the one that was said to be in the possession of Lefroy.

Holmes took some policemen and returned to the house he had left Lefroy at but they found he had changed his clothes and left, supposedly to seek medical attention.

Dr Hall had said that Lefroy could not stay hidden for long, as he would need to seek medical attention from a doctor or hospital, due to the injuries and inflammation of the serious wounds on his head.

It was believed that the gun had been thrown out the window into the Ouse when going over the viaduct.

It was found he had been a frequent visitor of the Carlsharton reading rooms but as he had on several occasions criticised the entertainment given there, in uncomplimentary terms, so was forbidden to enter again.

Mr. Jackson at the Kings Arms at Carlsharton said he was well known and would stand in his favourite corner. He was generally trying to borrow money and when he had succeeded, would never return it.

It was found that Frederick Gold had been robbed of a large sum of money, which he carried in the form of banknotes and gold, adding up to around £40

It was later ascertained that Mr Gold had banked the money he received in London on the Monday.

The police were unable to discover that Lefroy had any friends in Brighton and his relatives at Wallington were unaware of his intention to visit Brighton.

Mr. Gold is supposed to have had nearly £3 on him when leaving home, It was also believed he only spent a few shillings, when out. No gold was found on Lefroy, but he did not allow his pocket-book to be opened.

Increasing interest was manifested in the case, especially as Lefroy was still at large.

Several rumours of his arrest have been circulated, and at Gravesend, a man was apprehended on Thursday 30h June, as the supposed murderer, but was released upon its being ascertained he was not the criminal.

Lefroy had a wound on the top of his head, and the hair was shaved around it.

The search of Lefroy lodgings found no shirt collars were found but the article found on the railway was the same, as what was worn by the missing man.

Lefroy was said to have no firearms when he left Wallington and he had no money to buy one. This gave rise to the theory that if he was involved in the murder, he must have been assisted by an assailant and the police began directing their enquiries after another person.

The railway carriage was examined and it was found that the cushion had been cut, blood was splattered everywhere and three bullets had lodged into the woodwork. It was clear that there had been an attempt to remove one out with a sharp instrument. The outer portion of the handle and the long wooden step had been smeared with blood.

On the floor of the carriage were found two Hanoverian pocket pieces (flash sovereigns used in card playing) and some more of the same kind were found on Lefroy, although he denied all knowledge of these.

The house of Lefroy's sister, Mrs Bickwood, was thoroughly searched, but nothing has been found to throw light upon his whereabouts. Mrs. Bickwood Knew little of her brother. According to her statement, she had seen him but rarely.

She gave his real name as Percy Lefroy Mapleton, but when he visited her at Christmas, he informed her of his intention of dropping his surname and writing for the stage under the name of Lefroy.

The first, she heard that he was in trouble was when the detectives came down to search the house and said they wanted him as a witness before a Coroner's jury.

She further states that she received a telegram from Mr. Clayton, with whom Lefroy lodged at Wallington, to the effect that if Percy was with her, she was to tell him that the man who was with him on Thursday, knew of her address. The police have copied this telegram.

Mrs. Bickwood also said that her brother was a mere boy of 21, who is very eccentric, and whose ways have frequently led her to the opinion that he was not altogether responsible for his actions, his grandfather having been altogether insane, and his father at the time of Percy's birth, had suffered from the softness of the brain.

The only communication she has had with her brother since Christmas, was about two months ago, when attained his majority, and had £40 or £50, and he gave her some slight assistance.

On the morning of Wednesday 29th June at the Railway Inn, Balcombe, the inquest on Mr. Gold was opened by Mr, W. E. Baxter, the Coroner for East Sussex,

The body laid in an out-house

Mr. Brewer, a solicitor, and Inspector Turpin appeared on behalf of the Railway authorities. Mr. Terry, the chief constable of Brighton, watched the proceedings on behalf of the county constabulary, and Mr. Goodman, of Brighton, represented Mrs Gold.

The room where the inquiry was happening was said to be inadequate for the Coroner's Court, the apartment being filled by the reporters and Jury, and it was deemed necessary to adjourn to the village schoolroom.

The jury having been sworn, proceeded to view the body, and having afterward made an inspection of the carriage in which the struggle took place, then proceeded back to the schoolroom.

The Coroner said: ''I don't propose to make any remarks upon the case in prejudgment in any way whatever. as the case was presented to me in the first instance. it appeared that a man had been found dead in Balcombe tunnel, having probably strayed there and been run over. I did not anticipate that there would be any complications or any trouble in the matter, and therefore fixed the inquest at this early hour. Had I known that it was a matter of so much public interest as it has turned out to be I would have fixed it at an hour that would have been more convenient for all. However, we are now settled and can proceed with the inquiry.

Gentlemen of the Jury, you have viewed the body and have seen that the head and face had been considerably gashed, which may have been produced either by stabs or some other way.

We shall have the assistance of Dr. Byass, who is at present examining the body, and who will give us evidence, as to the probable cause of the injuries. We cannot shut our eyes to the fact that there are other circumstances almost contemporaneous with the finding of this body, but at the present moment, we have no evidence before as to connect the two facts.

I think it far better, before entering into the inquiry, that we should keep our minds clear of anything outside and put the evidence together rather than that we should come here determined in our minds that the two facts are connected.

I have received every assistance from the Railway Company, and am glad to find that they are represented by Mr. Brewer. who, I am sure, will afford as all the assistance in his power.

Mr. Brewer: ''I only wish to say on the part of the Railway Company, that as we are concerned we shall be ready in this terrible business to render every assistance in our power, whether in the shape of telegraphing or sending for witnesses, or to any other way''.

The first witness was Mr Lee Hollis living at 16, Claremont Road, Preston, a wine merchant's assistant, who identified the deceased as a friend. He said he had last seen alive on Monday week.

Next was Mrs Gold, widow of the deceased, who stated that her husband was formerly a corn dealer, but had retired from business about 18 years ago. They had resided at Preston for about ten years. He had been in the habit of going up to London every Monday for some time. He generally returned by the two p.m. by the fast train. On Monday last he left home at about five minutes past eight to go to Brighton to catch the 8.45 am express to London.

He owned a baker's shop at 135. East Street, Walworth, London and he always collected the man's takings on Monday. The shop was managed by Mr. Cross.

Mrs Gold expected her husband home at 1.30 pm, but he did not return at that time. When he did not return by the quarter-past eight train she became alarmed, and went to the Preston Station to ascertain whether there had been an accident. The station master told her there had not.

At 10.05 she received a telegram from Balcombe, ''Man found dead in tunnel. Name on papers. 'F. I Gold"

Mrs. Gold then said she immediately took the train to Balcombe accompanied by her neighbour, and there she saw some property belonging to her husband. She believed her husband was going to collect some dividends of hers and Monday was the day for him to give her the housekeeping money.

The dividends would amount to something like £40.

Her present servant had only been with her two months, and she had never been to London. Her previous servant was a native of Essex and was formerly in service in North London. She was a good girl and left through illness.

Mr Gold had a brother twelve years younger than himself, and he did not behave properly concerning money matters.

If her husband did not have time to go to the bank after collecting the money from East Street, he used to bring the money home.

Mr. Alfred Pill, the confectioner, of Cheapside, was a brother to Mrs Gold, and he lived at Wallington. That was the only relation she had near Croydon.

Mrs Gold did not know how long it was since Mr Gold was at Wallington.

He nearly always returned from London by the same train. Her Husband liked traveling in a carriage with as few passengers as possible. He had a habit of closing his eyes and putting a little silk cap over his head. When he left home he was in good health. He was a very powerful man. He never carried firearms; he was too nervous for that. He had an old blunderbuss, but it was always locked up, and it, was still under lock and key. He always brought the household money in gold. It was usually something under £10.

He always carried a gold watch and chain. It was an old-fashioned chain, and the portion produced was a part of the chain.

She said her husband was of temperate habits. He was not a retired stockbroker, as claimed.. He had a great dislike of the Stock Exchange.

All the places he would love to call on a Monday would be nearer London Bridge than Victoria. He would very often have as much as £40 or £50 in his possession whenever he returned home on Mondays. He was rather closed on money matters.

Mrs Gold said she had a deposit account at the head office of the London and Westminster Bank, in Lothbury.

She could not find her husband's brother if she wanted to. His name was Thomas Gold, and he formerly collected the profits of her husband's shops. She believed that her husband was keeping the shop at Walworth Road for the benefit of his brother's son.

Next to stand witness was Mary Susannah Pill:

Her father resided at Wallington and married Mr. Gold's sister. ''I left the home yesterday to visit Mrs. Gold's. I was at home all day on Monday last and Mr Gold did not call at their house. He was not in the habit of calling at their house. He had not been there this year''.

She said she knew of Cuthgart Road, Wallington, but knew no one in the Road by the name of Clayton, keeping a school there. She had never heard of a person by the name of Arthur Lefroy, or Mapelton, or Lee.

She said her father had nothing to do with the Croydon theatre.

Mr Gold was last at their house in September of Last year, and that was the last time he was there.

The next witness was Thomas Byass, a Surgeon, practicing at Cuckfield:

He saw the body of the deceased on Monday evening and had examined it carefully earlier. He found the face covered with dirt, and the hands likewise. The right hand was clenched and the left more relaxed. His clothes were saturated with blood; there was more blood on the right wristband of the shirt than on the left. He saw no collar, but there was a black necktie. He did not notice that any of the clothes were torn. The black coat was saturated with blood, as was also the upper part of the flannel vest and shirt. The necktie was quite soaked in blood. There was a cut on the right hand of the deceased, between the first finger and thumb. as deep as the bone, probably made by a knife. There were a few scratches on the back of the right hand.

On the left hand, there was a clean cut across the thumb on the outside which penetrated to the bone. There was a cross cut on the thumb extending to about the ball of the thumb. There were several bruises on the left arm. but not any on the right. Over both knees, there were contusions and slight abrasions. There were scratches or bruises on the back of the legs 'There were several bruises on the abdomen which might have been caused by the deceased being dragged along.

On the head, there was a wound extending from the right ear running obliquely under the chin, and extending to the opposite side of the mouth. It was a jagged wound and in his opinion, an attempt had been made to cut the throat. Only the outer skin was cut.

There was another wound extending from the corner of the mouth to the lobe of the left ear. This could not have been produced by falling against the footboard of the train in motion. There was a small cut immediately below the right corner of the mouth, and a wound in the centre of the chin about an inch in length.

On the left side of the mouth, there were two distinct wounds about two inches long and about half an inch deep. There was a deep wound extending from the left corner of the mouth near the lobe of the ear.

There were numerous other wounds on the face, all of which in his opinion were caused by a sharp instrument.

There was no bullet wound. On the back part of the head, there was a wound three inches in length cut down to the bone; that was also a clean cut. Some of the cuts were so cleanly made that they could be put together. On the top of the head, there was a contusion such as would be produced by a fall. On removing the skull to examine the brain, he found an extensive fracture going completely through the skull, extending from the centre of it, going through the orbit. The fracture corresponded with the contusion.

The loss of blood that the deceased had attained in consequence of the wounds might be sufficient to cause death without the fracture to the skull, or injury to the brain, but the latter may have been the cause of death.

He could not tell how long a man would live after receiving the injuries which he received.

In reply to a question from Mr. Brewer: ''The fracture of the skull might have been caused after the deceased was dead''.

The evidence of Mr. Ben Hall was, by request of Dr Byass, taken next, but the Coroner said it was rather informal, and would not connect with the previous evidence.

Mr. Hall deposed that he was the acting House Surgeon at the Sussex County Hospital, Brighton.

''On Monday, the 27th of June. a man calling himself Arthur Lefroy was brought to the hospital by Richard Gibson, the ticket collector at Preston Park Station.

He was tall, thin, and had a dark complexion. He was about 30 years of age. His face which was otherwise; pale, had numerous marks of blood on it, as well as on his neck. He looked languid and pale, but was perfectly composed, and answered all questions rationally. He was without a collar and wore a frock coat and grey trousers. He had a grey coat which had been taken off, and on this, there were some spots of blood. Lefroy has on the right forehead, above the eyebrow, a contused wound about the size of a shilling. At the back of the left ear was a small graze wound.

On various parts of the skull were six small semi-circular cuts, the same in shape and appearance. Blood was oozing from one or two. His hands were smeared with dry blood.

The wounds were dressed and a policeman from the railway station arrived.

Lefroy was unwilling to stay in, which for his sake I thought it would be advisable to do. he left with the constable and I advised the constable to look after Lefroy, and I said he was not in a fit state to go home alone.

He said he could not stay in the hospital during the night because he had an engagement in town which he was obliged to keep. He was quite willing that the constable should take him to the Town hall.

Mr Hall said he had never before seen any wounds like those mentioned. They would have been produced by a shot, or by gravel thrown up by the moving of the train.

Lefroy said he had been shot at but did not know how the wounds were produced. He seemed very reticent and did not like to talk. The wounds were not sufficient to account for the quantity of blood on him.

In reply to a question by the Coroner: ''I said to the Constable there must be something more in this matter than he has told us. There might be something turn up from the other end of the line which will be important."

He also said he had put questions to Lefroy to test his sanity, but he showed great firmness. The man's face and appearance led him to believe at first that he was insane.

In reply to Mr. Goodman: ''I was left in doubt by the answers of Lefroy. The wounds were sufficient to have produced faintness but I doubted whether they would have caused insensibility. None of the wounds, except a slight one behind the ear, could have been produced by a shot. I do not know what the wounds were caused by, and it was not probable that they were self-inflicted''

In reply to a question by Mr. Brewer: ''Lefroy said he was shot at and remembered nothing afterward. He said he could not account for the other wounds on his face. I thought a pistol might have produced the semi-circular wounds on the head of Lefroy''.

The Court then adjourned.

The Daily Telegraph of Thursday 30th June, published what purported to be a Facsimile of the writing of Lefroy. a causal observer would notice that the body of the document and Lefroys signature are very different, from that writing in possession of the Brighton Company. Lefroy wrote in a thin clear upright hand but the writing given in the telegraph was sloping, heavy, and barely readable.

On the inquest resuming, Ann Brown, the wife of Daniel Brown, a labourer. of Horley, took the stand

She said on Monday afternoon she was in her cottage, which faced the railway on the east side of the line. Her house was about 100 yards from the main line.

''At about '2 or 3 in the afternoon a down train passed and I observed two gentlemen in one of the carriages standing up. They were either fighting or having rough play. The train passed so quickly that I did not have time to observe more''.

She had a clear view from her cottage onto the line. The daughter of the witness also saw the occurrence as well as herself. She did not make any remark on the matter till the evening when she heard something had happened.

Next to the stand was Thomas Jennings, residing at Horley, employed by the L.B. and S.C.R Company:

On Monday afternoon, at quarter past 4, he was going through the tunnel from Three Bridges to Balcombe, when he got to the middle of the tunnel, he saw the body of a man lying in the 6 ft way of the two roads. The man was lying on his back, with his head towards the wall. He had a light with him and his nephew was with him at the time.

In reply to a question by Mr. Goodman: ''I felt the body and it was warm, but I believed he was dead.

He continued to say '' The corner of the deceased's coat was over his face. The body was covered with blood and was much cut about the face. It was flint ballast between the lines. The deceased's right leg was crossed over the other one, the right arm was on his breast, and his left arm was about half an inch from the line.

The body was quite clear of any rails. While I was examining the body, a plate layer named Stephen Williams came up. He told him what he had found and he said he would go to the tunnel signal box on the north side of the tunnel and telegraph Balcombe if I would wait with the body.

I stopped there till an engine and brake van came up to fetch the body away and I went with it to the station.

The time between when he found the body and when the engine came up was two hours and a half.

While the body was in the tunnel several people cut through. Someone, he did not know found a spot where it looked as if something had fallen, and close to this, was blood on one of the sleepers. This was about 18 yards from where the body was. The dust was disturbed as though someone had been dragged a short distance. He thought the blood was dry, but it looked fresh.

He found a shoe about seven yards south of where the body was lying. The deceased was minus a shoe. The shoe was on the ballast of the upline.

The deceased had only one cuff on, and the missing one was found between the spot where the holly was and the place where the indentation appeared in the ballast.

Before the body was removed P.C. Lewis came up and they started searching the tunnel. They found two pennies and a small bunch of keys a short distance from the entrance to the tunnel.

John Jennings was also a platelayer. residing at Balcombe:

''I was passing through the tunnel at 19 minutes to three, on Monday afternoon and I went close to the spot where the body was afterward found. I am quite sure the body was not there then.

The two o'clock express from London passed Me when I was about 200 yards from the south end of the tunnel. The body was found in the centre of the tunnel, north of the spot where the train passed me. The tunnel is not quite three-quarters of a mile in length.

When I got to Balcombe I was informed that they had received a message from the signal box saying that a man had been found dead in the tunnel.

I sent a message to the station master and then went into the tunnel again. I then saw the body and my son and brother beside it.

He corroborated the evidence as to the position in which the body was found. He measured the lot from where the deceased was to the place where the marks were on the ballast and found it to be 18 yards.

Mr. Hall was recalled and said In company with Dr. Byass, he had examined the body of the deceased, corroborated the evidence of that gentleman as to the condition of the body, and described in detail the various cuts. wounds, bruises, etc. He believed the small wound below the right ear to be a gunshot wound.

He had taken out a square inch of skin and tissue where the wound, was and would have it tested later, to prove if his belief as to the gunshot was correct.

The left shoe of the deceased was blood-stained, and the sole was also torn. Among the clothes of the deceased was a stand-up collar which was completely soaked with blood. He said he had examined the carriage that morning and then proceeded to describe the various portions of the compartment which were bloodstained.

Near the electric indicator, a bullet was found embedded in the panel

The Coroner questioned the witness at some length to the cause of death. but he refused to commit himself. It was impossible to say what time a person, suffering from wounds, such as the deceased would have lived unattended lived but no doubt the wounds in question, without having regard to the fracture of the skull, would in time cause death, if unattended to.

At this stage, the deceased's clothes were produced. among them being the collar spoken of by Mr. Hall The name of "Gold" was discovered on it sewn in. Mr. Hall recognized the collar, the coat, and the trousers belonging to the man Lefroy, which were also produced.

He was certain the coat was the same. but he could not positively swear to the trousers. Both garments were stained very much with blood.

The bandage produced was similar to the one used when Lefroys head was bandaged up at the hospital.

Dr. Byass was recalled: '' I have again examined the body in conjunction with Mr. Hall, and as regards the wound behind the right ear I concur with that gentleman as to the desirability of obtaining a further opinion as to whether it is a gunshot wound or not. as I may have been mistaken in saying positively there was no gunshot wound.

Balcombe was invaded by a whole army of reporters and others connected with the case, as the inquest continued over the days before the East Sussex Coroner (Mr. W. E. Baxter), in the school room.

For the convenience of reporters, a special telegraph office was fitted up at the Schoolroom

There had been no news of the arrest of the murderer, though a man answering Lefroy's description was arrested at Reading the night before the inquest, the result of that examination had not yet been made public.

Mr. Williams, Chief Superintendent, and Inspector Tarpin, of London Brighton and South Coast Railway Police, and Mr. Brewer (Solicitor) represented the Company, while Mr. Goodman appeared to watch the case on behalf of the relatives of the deceased.

Next Witness, Ellen Elizabeth Chart :

''I live at 9, New Road, Brighton, and am Proprietress of the Brighton theatre. I do not know anyone by the name of Lefroy. Mapleton, Lee, or Coppett, nor have I received a letter recently from such a person. No one of that name had an appointment with me on Monday last.

Next Witness, William F. Franks:

''I am a ticket collector on the Brighton and South Coast Railway. I was the ticket collector on Monday last at London Bridge for the 2 p.m., express to Brighton.

I knew Mr. Gold as a season ticket holder on the line, and have often seen him go away by the 2 o'clock express. I remember seeing him on Monday last. It was about 8 minutes to 2 when I first saw him. I spoke to him before he got on the train. He was walking up and down the platform with his hands behind him. He was dressed in a black suit and had a tall hat on. I do not remember whether he had a stick or umbrella. He had a paper in his hand.

I had been to the train examining the tickets, and at about five minutes to two I said to him, " Are you going by the three o'clock, Sir ?" He said, "Yes, my lad, I'll get on in a moment." He then turned back from where was standing and got into a first-class composite carriage. It was the third carriage from the engine. He sat down in the middle seat facing the engine. The apartment had six seats in it. I closed the door but did not lock it.

I walked away from the compartment towards the engine and stood facing the rear of the train.

About three minutes before starting a young man came up hurriedly, walked by the first-class smoking carriage, and got as far as the next carriage where two young men and two ladies were conversing. He turned round sharply and was in the act of opening the carriage in which Mr. Gold was. He could not get the door open on account of the spring, and I opened it for him. I examined his ticket which was a first-class single express to Brighton. I closed the door and stood opposite the compartment and remained there till the train started.

No other person got into that compartment.

The young man in question sat in the far corner with his back to the engine.''

The Coroner: ''Can you describe the young man?''

Mr. Goodman suggested that he should show the witness the likeness in the Telegraph, and say if it was like him.

The Coroner: ''Perhaps you will allow me, Mr. Goodman to finish first''.

William Frank replied: ''The young man was about 5ft 8 or 9 inches in height, and wore a light dust coat, and a hard-felt low hat, with a round top. I did not notice whether he had a watch and chain. He wore a black coat underneath the overcoat. I recognize the coat produced as the attire worn by the young man in question''.

The Coroner: ''I assume there are 500 such coats in existence, why should you recognize this one?''

William Frank: ''No, I can't say that. It is the same colour, texture, and make. The coat was rather threadbare and presented a somewhat shabby genteel appearance. He was a very long-featured man, and long make, and when he was opening the door, I noticed a drooping forward of his head. He was very thin, and by his complexion, I thought he had been abroad. He looked very sickly. I should imagine that he was about 24 or 26 years of age. He had a black moustache.

The sketch produced (from the Daily Telegraph) is not exactly like the young man.

The neck in the sketch is too thick and not long enough. It gave me an idea of the man. The whiskers and moustache are the same. There were not more than 14 or 15 persons in the whole of the train.

The cost of a first-class express ticket from London to Brighton was 12s. 3d.

I should know the young man in question again if I saw him. hair was rather dark and not very long.

When the train started I believe the deceased was in the act of taking his hat off.''

In reply to questioning By Mr. Goodman: ''I have seen deceased go by the 2 o'clock express, but I cannot swear to see him on Mondays.

There were lights in the carriage. The rear door of the carriage in which the deceased was, was not locked''.

In reply to a question by Mr Brewer: '' As the young man came hurriedly up the platform he seemed to be looking into all the carriages''.

In reply to a question by Mr. Goodman: ''He looked into the windows of the 2nd class carriages as well as the first''.

In reply to a question by the Coroner: ''The deceased did not appear to know the young man''.

The witness added that the young man had his hand in the left-hand pocket of his coat as he came down the platform, and did not take it out when he gave up his ticket or when he got into the carriage''.

Next to appear was Thomas Winter, an Architect, residing at Brighton:

''Since last Wednesday I have made a plan (produced) of a cottage of Mrs. Brown, one of the witnesses lived. ''I have measured the various distances from the cottage to the line and those stated on the plan are correct. I have, since Wednesday seen several trains pass the cottage and I could distinctly see everybody on the train. I am quite certain that I could see two persons standing up in a carriage of an express train''.

There was nothing to obstruct the view of the cottage on the line. He was now living at Morley and had made the plan produced as a volunteer because it was he who had introduced the witness Mrs Brown to the Coroner.

A person in Court exclaimed: ''A very good advertisement for him''. The Coroner replied that if such a thing occurred again the person would be removed.

Witness Thomas Bond, a fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, and assistant surgeon at Westminster Hospital:

''I live at 7. the Sanctuary, Westminster Abbey.

In Accordance to instructions from Supt. Williamson, of Scotland Yard, I yesterday made a post-mortem examination of the deceased. I was assisted by Dr. Byass and Mr. Hall.

The body was that of a large-framed and well-nourished man. Decomposition had badly commenced but not advanced far. The body had not been opened and had not been interfered with, except that the skull cap had been removed, and a piece of skin, of the size of a half-a-crown taken from under the right ear.

I proceeded to make an external examination. I found the knee cap of the left leg a jagged penetrating wound. It was much blackened and appeared to have grease on it. There was no effusion of blood about it. Above the wound was a large brown patch without any effusion of blood, Those appearances were either caused after death or at the time of death. On the right knee, there were two superficial abrasions, and on the inside of the right thigh, there was a bruise two inches long. attended by an elusion of blood.

On the left hand, there was a deep cut on the inside of the ball of the thumb extending down to the bone. On the inside of the last joint of the thumb, there was a jagged cut also down to the bone. On the inside of each of the forefingers. close to the last joint, there was a deep out. When the fingers were fixed the cuts all responded and appeared to have been done with one sweep of a knife. There were slight abrasions on the left wrist and contusions on the inside of the arm.

On the right hand there was a very deep cut extending nearly all round the thumb, and nearly severing it at the junction of the thumb with the wrist bones. Opposite the last joint of the thumb, there was also a jagged cut almost to the bone. There were abrasions and contusions on the back of the hand, and a severe contusion on the back of the arm.

On the face, there was a curved incision extending from the lobe of the right ear, down the lower jaw, and across the left side of the face. This cut followed the lower border of the jaw, and the upper part divided the skin only, but grazing the bone at the angle of the jaw, and underneath laying bare the muscles which formed the floor of the mouth.

On the right side of the neck, below the last-mentioned cut was a superficial incision an inch long. On the point of the chin was a similar cut.

On the left side of the face was a cut two inches long, extending from the angle of the mouth across the cheek to within an inch of the ear. This cut divided all the tissues down to the mucus membrane of the mouth. A quarter of an inch below and parallel to the above cut was a deep incision about an inch and a half long, also dividing the tissues down the mucus membrane. Just above these two cuts was an abrasion extending to the left ear and slightly wounding it.

On the nose, there was a contusion. On the inner side of the left orbit, there was a jagged wound a quarter of an inch deep, and large enough to allow for the insertion of a finger.

There was an extensive effusion of blood in and around the eyes. On the right side, there was a contusion on the eyebrow, and half an inch above it, on the inside, there was an oblique incision half an inch long, and nearly down to the bone. Just above this, towards the left temple, there was a severe contusion, about 2 inches long and 1 inch wide, with a good deal of effusion of blood.

On the right ear, there was a superficial cut. Dr. Byass had divided the scalp on the tip of the head in the usual way to remove the skull cap. On turning up the scalp and removing the skull cap I found a fracture of the bone. This injury, I think happened after, or at the moment of death.

In the base of the skull, there was considerable discoloration of the lining of the membrane: I examined the brain, which had been removed by Dr. Byass and replaced.

There was no indication in the train by which I could form an opinion as to whether it had received an injury during life. On examining the wound made by Mr. Hall in his removal of the skin before described, I found a fracture of the body of the second vertebrae of the neck. There was a good deal of effusion of blood around the fracture, which extended downwards through the body of the vertebra to its articulation with the third chipping off the lower half of the anterior part of the second vertebra.

Just in front of this injury, and embedded in the muscle of the gullet, I found the bullet that I produced. The gunshot wound was made during life. I have examined the skin that Mr. Hall removed and found the usual abdications of a bullet wound. The wound is very small and slightly discoloured with powder, and there was a trail of blood with the skin tissue.

On opening the body I found the right lung healthy, the left lung collapsed and adhered to the chest wall. The bag of the heart was also adherent, and the apex of the heart was adherent to the bag. The heart was large and flabby, Neither of the cavities contained any blood.

The bowels were all healthy. but there was a little degeneration of the artery just above the valves. The abdomen contained a good deal of fat. The stomach was healthy but beginning to decompose.

The liver was somewhat fatty and much decomposed. The kidneys were rather small but not diseased. All the other organs were healthy.

I think the gunshot wound must have caused temporary insensibility, but in all probability, recovery would soon take place.

I think the wounds on the face must have been inflicted by an assailant, attacking from the front. I say this because the wounds appear to have been made by a knife drawn from right to left. The cuts shown, in my opinion, are evidence of being aimed at the throat, I judge that by their direction. They were not at all likely to be suicidal indicted wounds. They all had the appearance of having been inflicted during life.

The injuries on the left knee, on the back of the head, and the fracture of the skull, in my opinion, would have been caused by the falling out of the carriage, either after death or at the time of death.

The immediate cause of death I believe is syncope. Apart from the disease of the heart, the other injuries would have caused death. The gun shut alone might have caused death, but possibly a person might have lived for some days''.

Mr. Hall, House Surgeon, at the Sussex County Hospital, corroborated the evidence of Dr. Bond about the post-mortem examination. Concerning the bullet wound, in his opinion, the pistol must have been held close to the deceased when it was fired.

Dr. Bond added that the shot must have been fired from a breech-loading revolver.

Mr Hall, in answer to the Coroner, said the wounds on Lefroy's head might have been inflicted with a key similar to the one produced. but it was not likely.

He was then handed the photograph of the sketch of Lefroy in the Daily Telegraph, and asked by the Coroner if it resembled Lefroy. The witness replied that he did not think it did. He could not recognize any likeness.

In reply to a question by a Juror: ''Had the deceased been rendered insensible and afterward recovered consciousness, he would be able to use his voice'' He thought it probable that the wounds on Lefroy's head were inflicted with the muzzle end of a pistol rather than by the keys produced. Lefroy had no wounds on his face, so had he had his hat on, no one could recognize him by his wounds.

Mrs Gold was then recalled, and in answer to the Coroner, said, that when her husband left home on Monday he had an umbrella. She recognized the hat (produced) as that of her husband. She knew it by the size, shape, and name of the maker. The collar produced, which was saturated with blood, had not a particle of white to be seen. She recognized it as the one belonging to her husband. She stuck the name " Gold" on it. The boots produced were also her husband's. The umbrella in question was a sort of alpaca one and had a crooked handle. (This has not been found yet).

Witness Rosa. Lucas Bown:

''I live at Morley, and I am the daughter of the witness Anne Brown. On Monday last between between two and three o'clock, I was in my mother's cottage. I saw a train pass shortly before three o'clock, coming from the direction of Three Bridges, I saw two men standing up in one of the carriages either fighting or playing. I did not speak about it at the time, but in the evening my brother came home and said there had been a murder on the line.

My mother said she saw two men fighting, and I said I saw it too. I don't know in what part of the train the carriage in which I saw the men was situated''.

Witness Thomas Watson:

''I am a guard in the employ of the London Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company. On Monday I was a guard on the express train, which leaves London at 2 o'clock. There were two guards on the train. My place was in the van next to the engine. The train was made up as follows:

First was a third-class break carriage, next to the engine; two composite carriages, one first class, one second, one break van, one first-class break carriage, and one composite. The train started from London one minute late and arrived at Croydon two minutes late, but time was generally very good. There were not more than 20 passengers on it. The train started from Croydon at 2.22. It passed through Redhill at 2.37; Three Bridges at 246; Hayward's Heath at 2.49; and arrived at Preston at 3.20, and left at 3.23.''

The Coroner: ''I find by the timetables that this train does not stop at Preston''.

The witness replied ''This train did not stop at Preston until last month''.

The Coroner produced an official timetable which did not indicate that the train stopped at Preston.

The witness produced a private book to show that the train did not go out of its usual way in stopping at Preston.

The witness then continued '' I think we entered Merstham Tunnel at about 2.31 pm passed Morley at about 2.41 pm and entered Balcombe Tunnel at 2.52 pm

The total distance from London to Preston is 49 1/4 miles.

The distance from Merstham Tunnel to Horley is about 8 miles, from Morley to Balcombe Tunnel is about 6 miles, and from Balcombe to Preston 17 miles.

The train nearly pulled up at Hassock's Gate. I was on the lookout. I don't think anyone could have left the train without my seeing them.

I knew Mr. Gold.

When we slackened pace we only went about four miles an hour. I don't think it possible to get out of one of the carriages when the train was only running four miles an hour without injuring himself.

I saw Mr. Gold on the London Bridge platform on Monday afternoon.

I got out at Croydon and passed Mr. Gold's carriage. I noticed him sitting with his face towards the engine. He had a light pocket-handkerchief over his head and appeared to be asleep.

I did not see anyone else in the carriage but them but there might have been others without my seeing them. I only noticed two ladies get into the train at Croydon. I did not notice anyone get into Mr. Gold's carriage but a person could get in without my noticing them.

There were very few people on the platform I only noticed one gentleman who came to see the two ladies into the train. I did not hear any gunshots or fog signals.

The electric apparatus was in order as I tested it myself at London Bridge.

The first time I saw Lefroy was at Preston. He was standing on the platform. I went up to him and asked him what had been the matter. He was talking to the Collector at the time. He said, "I have been cruelly treated on the way by two other passengers in the compartment who have left the train on their way down." He asked if he could have any medical attendance, and I told him he had better go into Brighton. He seemed willing to do so.

I got into the carriage myself. I cannot say if it was the compartment in which Mr. Gold was sitting. It was a first-class smoking compartment and was the third carriage from the engine. I examined the windows panel up the blinds that were on the near side and found all the windows perfect but noticed a lot of blood on the floor. I then got out again.

Lefroy got into the carriage again and then I noticed a piece of watch chain hanging out of one of his shoes, I said, "What have you got here," and at the same time took hold of it. I found it to be a gold watch. I said. " How does this get here," and he said, " I know nothing about it, they have been trying to murder and rob me on the way." My idea was that it was his watch''.

The Coroner: ''Funny way of robbing him, wasn't it''.

The Witness: ''I put the watch on the petit and told him to take care of it, at the same time the Station Master and the Ticket Collector (Gibson) were standing close to me. The station Master ordered Gibson to get into the carriage and accompany Lefroy to Brighton''

Martin spoke about paying the cabman, saying he had been engaged for two hours, and the charge would be 3s an hour. Lefroy took money out, appearing to take all he had—about 13s. ''He told us he had been robbed, and had very little money; but, was coming into some property''.

On Monday 4th July in the afternoon, the remains of the late Mr. Gold were interred in the Extra Moral Cemetery, Lewes Road in Brighton.

There was a large crowd of spectators, estimated between five to six thousand.

Long before the time fixed for the mournful ceremony, the road leading to the Cemetery was crowded with pedestrians, and even cabs and other vehicles were requisitioned to convey the curious throng to the scene.

Outside the gates of the cemetery, which were well guarded by a detachment of police, under Superintendent Carter. Several purveyors of "memorial cards " were plying a thriving business by the sale of their wares, and a little lower down two ballet singers of a type fast growing obsolete, sang in doleful unison, to the accompaniment of an concertina, a ballad setting forth in doggrel rhymes, the story of the tragedy.

The crowd that was assembled was composed principally of women and it showed a disposition to be slightly troublesome and noisy in the rush that took place after the funeral cortege had passed through the gates.

The Coffin had been lying in one of the station masters' rooms at Preston Station. It was then carried to the house without entering it, and from there, the procession started about twenty minutes past one.

The remains of the murdered man were in an inner coffin, enclosed by an outer one of polished elm, with brass mountings, and on the coffin plate was the inscription," Frederick Isaac Gold, died 27th June, 181, aged 64." on the top were placed two plain wreaths of white flowers,

It was taken in a two-horse hearse and was followed by four mourning coaches, containing Mrs Gold, Mr, Alfred Pill, Mr. Herman Fenner, Mr. Willis Clare, Mr. Thomas Hollington, Mr. Alfred Hollingtail, Mr. George Hollington, Mr. Lee Hollis, and Dr. G. A. Angier, the medical attendant of the deceased.

On arriving at the Cemetery gates. the body was met by the Rev. A. D. Freeman, the Vicar of Preston, and proceeded to the Church building.

At the grave, which is a little to the north of the chapel, and on the side of the bill, the mourners were met by the Mayor of Brighton, Councillors Mr Nell, and Mr O. Weston, Mr. Mrs. and Miss Gold (relatives of the deceased) Mr. W. Marchant, Mr. Thomas, and Mr. H. Sydney (solicitor to the brother of deceased).

The scene during the progress of the service at the side of the grave was said to be very striking. The whole of the side and brow of the bill was covered with spectators, and the detached points of vantage in the vicinity were all occupied with spectators. A large crowd had assembled in the Parochial Cemetery and viewed the proceedings from over the boundary wall.

After the internment, the crowd closed around the grave, and strenuous efforts to get a glimpse of the coffin and after a short time the spectators disappeared.

The inquest continued:

Witness William Humphrey Gibson:

''I live at 107, King's Row, Brighton, and I am a chemist. I was a passenger in the two o'clock express train from London Bridge to Brighton on Monday.

I was riding in the second-class compartment next to the first-class smoking compartment.

At Preston Station, I saw blood on the step outside awl on the off-side. I saw a man with his clothes stained with a large quantity of blood coming out of this first-class compartment at Brighton Station.

I left the carriage in which I was on, third or fourth from the engine, and that there were about six or seven carriages altogether.

I got to London Bridge by twelve minutes to two. I stood on the platform smoking a cigar for about five minutes. and then got into the carriage with my son, about three and a half years old. I do not know the deceased. I did not notice anyone get into the next compartment.

I saw an elderly gentleman with his hands behind him looking into my compartment. who passed and repassed. I believe it to have been Mr. Gold. He corresponded in every particular way, with the body I have seen today, I noticed no one else except a gentleman, who got into his compartment at London Bridge. I did not take any notice at Croydon.

The gentleman who got in with me was dressed in a dark grey tweed suit, with fresh colour, and hardly any whiskers. Altogether there were three in my compartment. After leaving Croydon, the train did not stop till we reached Preston Park. I did not notice any slackening of speed. There might have been a little. but not noticeable.

Immediately when we entered the first tunnel, which was Merstham, after passing Croydon, there were four loud reports, which I thought were fog signals, and I took my little boy by the hand, and said, " Don't be frightened, they are only fog signals''.

There might have been five reports, but I am positive there were four. Later on, in the journey after passing Preston. I thought it strange, that the fog signals should have gone off near my carriage, as the report appeared to have gone off under my carriage''.

in reply to questioning by Mr. Goodman: ''I noticed at the time the reports were close to my carriage, either under it or near it.

I was spoken to by the guard at Preston. and then put my head out of the window and I saw the blood. I told the guard I had heard fog signals on the journey. I thought, when I saw blood, that someone had been attempting, to commit suicide.

I did not see the man at Preston Park.

The ticket collector rode into Brighton with the man, and I hurried out of my carriage when we arrived, to see the man at Brighton.

About half-past six that evening. I saw Mr. Anscombe and told him I had heard the reports. No one spoke to him when the train arrived at Brighton Station''.

In reply to a question by the Jury: ''The four shots were fired within about six seconds''.

Replying to a question by Mr. Brewer: ''The man did not stagger and walked quickly down the platform, but he appeared weak from the loss of blood.''.

Witness Thomas Picknoll was called:

''I am a ganger of platelayers in the employment of the Railway Company and live at Red Bridge, Balcombe. I found the collar produced about three-quarters of a mile below Balcombe Station, towards Brighton, about a quarter to five on Monday, the 27th. It was in the same condition, and the blood was wet''.

In reply to a question by the Coroner: ''lt was wet with rain, as well as with blood''.

Witness Harry Sewell :

''l live at 55, Adolphus Street, New Cross and am a booking clerk at London-bridge.

On Monday, the 27th, there were three and only three first-class single express tickets issued from London Bridge station up to and including the time of starting of the two o'clock express.''

Mr. Brewer: ''Was there any other express train previous to this from London Bridge that day?''

Harry Sewell: ''No, sir''.

in reply to questioning by Mr. Dutton: ''l believe there were five single second express tickets issued. I am not quite certain, as I have not the book. There were no first-class express returns by the train''.

Mr. Brewer: ''To whom did you issue tickets?''

Harry Sewell: ''I issued two first returns to a lady and she afterward came back and had them changed for two first singles, as she was going to stop longer than a week. They were numbered 3,179 and 8,180. These tickets were taken about eight minutes to two.

While she was taking the tickets a man was standing behind her, waiting his turn. He was a tall thin man, he had a slight moustache and little whiskers at the side of his lace. I did not see his hat. He asked for a ticket for Brighton. I asked him which class, and he said "First." I asked him whether he wanted a single or return, and he said he wanted a single. He did not ask how much it would cost but put down a sovereign. lam quite sure it was a genuine sovereign, and I gave him 7s. 9d. change. I took notice that he was shabbily dressed for a first-class passenger''.

Witness John George Ager:

''I reside at 19 Groombedale Road, Westbourne-Park Kent, I am a clerk in the accountant's office at the railway. The tickets numbered 3,179 and 3,180 entered by the last witness have been returned in the regular course of business. No. 3.161 has not been returned''.

In reply to questioning by Mr. Brewer—''l may say all the tickets have come back except one collected from Lefroy by the collector Gibson.''

Witness Thomas Graham Clayton, the cousin of Lefroy, said he lived at 4, Cathcart Road, Wallington, and was a clerk:

Percy Lefroy Mapleton was his wife's second cousin, lodged with him. At about nine o'clock Monday evening Lefroy came home with his bead bandaged, in company with a man from Brighton Railway. (Sergeant Holmes was here and identified the man who was with Lefroy.) Lefroy said he had been shot and gave the officer a statement, which he took down in writing. Lefroy afterward let the officer out, thanking him for his attention.

Lefroy then said he would see Dr. Cressy, but Mr Clayton had left him, before he made the appointment and had not seen him since.

When Clayton returned soon after 10 o'clock and was told Lefroy had not come in.

Shortly afterward Mr. Turpin came and asked for him, and, was told he was not there, Mr. Turpin said they must search the house. There was no means of exit in the rear without climbing over the fence, and there was no side entrance to the garden.

Similar evidence was given by a general servant employed by Mr Clayton

Mr Ellis, a stationer at Wallington, stood witness that Lefroy had on Monday morning paid an account with two sham sovereigns, similar to those found in the train.

It was further proved that Mr Gold had banked the money he received Monday, while in London.

The last witness was a lawyer's clerk, named Francis Walter Stuart Seale, Mr Clayton's brother-in-law and 2nd Cousin to Lefroy:

He stated that Lefroy used to sleep in the room with him. They were on very affectionate terms and always kissed each other morning. They used one another’s collars, but he could not say whether the bloodstained collar produced was one of them. Their collars varied from 141/2 to 16 inches, according to the weather.

Lefroy had a watch and chain, but the witness could not say that the chain produced was the one.

Lefroy arranged to meet him on Monday evening in The Strand, but the stress of business prevented the witness from going there.

He confirmed the overcoat and trousers produced belonged to Lefroy.

The inquest on the body was concluded on Thursday 7th July

The Coroner then summed up the evidence to the jury. He referred to the finding of the body, which had no doubt fallen or been thrown from the train. The face showed signs of an attempt to commit suicide or pointed to an atrocious murder. In addition to cuts on the face, a bullet wound was discovered and the bullet found. The skull was fractured as well.

He then went on to say:

''Now, gentlemen, you are in a position to ask yourselves the first important question. Were these injuries self-inflicted, or were they by the hands of another? Were they done accidentally or purposely? On this subject, we have the expressed views of Mr. Bond, in which the other surgeons coincided. Mr. Bond says "I think the wounds on the face must have been inflicted by an assailant. I say this because the wounds appear to have been made by a knife or sharp cutting instrument. from right to left. The cuts showed in my opinion evidence of having been aimed at the throat. I judge that by their direction. There were not like suicidal inflicted wounds, and the wounds on the hands with those on the face and head I believed to, be incompatible with a suicidal attempt

If you agree with Mr. Bond's carefully considered opinion, I think you will negative the possibility of accident or suicide and come to the conclusion that the deceased has been shot and gashed by some assailant probably after a desperate encounter, and flung from the carriage either dead or dying; that by the fall from the train his skull was fractured and as life was not previously instinct this last of a series of outrages too horrible to dwell upon must have despatched unbidden the soul to another world. In a word, if you agree with Mr. Bond's reasoning you will come to no other conclusion than that the deceased has been fouly murdered''.

The coroner next directed the attention of the jury to ascertaining if possible who were respectively the murderer and the murdered.

He first described the deceased, his general habits, and the circumstances connected with his journey to London on the 27th of June, his entry of the two o'clock express to return home, together with the condition in which the compartment in which Mr. Gold rode was subsequently found.

As to the finding of Lefroy in Mr. Gold's compartment (said the coroner) he was the fellow passenger of the deceased at least from Croydon. Without further corroboration, the description given of the young man who entered the same carriage at London Bridge as that given of Lefroy. Together with the fact that he was found to possess a first-class ticket from London Bridge, makes it more than probable that they were fellow passengers the whole journey; but the fact of their having journeyed from Croydon together is conclusively shown by Lefroy's presence in Mr. Gold's carriage at the Preston-park Station, the station at which the train next stopped

But we have already ascertained that Mr. Gold was murdered between Croydon to Balcombe, and his body cast sway at Balcombe. Even without corroboration, it seems almost impossible to escape from the conclusion that in Lefroy we have the murderer of Mr. Gold.

Mr. Gold had been robbed of his watch and also money if he had any with him. Robbery was the object of the murder. No one in their senses would have attempted such a thing in the presence of a third person.

Again this was an express train and it was probable that the train would make its journey without a check, in which case an attempt to leave the train would result in injuries preventing escape, if not death.

Concerning the tale told to the ticket collector Gibson by Lefroy, the Coroner said ''Assuming for the sake of argument that his tale told so far is correct, that there were two travelers besides himself, what could he have been robbed of? He was without means; his pocket contained pawn tickets for a few shillings each, which he had that very morning obtained 18s under fraudulant pretenses with Hanoverian sovereigns; he had no jewelry about him. The clothes he wore did not suggest anything worth stealing Then again he says both his fellow travelers left. If he means by that, that he saw them leave ordinarily, that was also incorrect, for we know too well how poor Mr. Gold left the train.

Why was he riding first class by an express train? What was he doing at Brighton at all?

It is for you, gentlemen, to say whether it is possible that these questions can be answered satisfactorily.

There is another important point that we must not lose sight of. While Lefroy was on the platform at Preston Park, Watson, the guard, saw a gold watch in his shoe, with a small piece of watch chain attached. How does he explain this? " I know nothing about it. They have been trying to murder me and rob me on the way." The chain was a piece of chain that went around a neck. Where was the other part? In some way, he managed to get rid of this without attracting the attention of the police, for at the search in the evening at Mr. Anscombe's office the watch told more tales than one.

We know that it is not true that he had bullet wounds, much less bullets in his head. But in all his statements there was a certain amount of truth mixed up with lies consequently we have the place where the shots were fired described, the number of shots correctly given, and in one account he seemed to me to have pretty accurately described himself as the third passenger.

I have carefully looked through the depositions but without success to see if I could find anything in the slightest, disproving the fact that it was the hand of Lefroy that committed the foul deed.

Gentlemen. if I have fairly given you the effect of the evidence and I have endeavoured to do so, it seems impossible to avoid the conclusion that the deceased was murdered. and that Percy Lefroy Mapleton, alias, Alfred Lefroy, was the murderer.

There remains but one other point. Is Lefroy insane when he did it? I think you will agree that there is nothing at all in the evidence to support that theory.

Finding himself in a dilemma when it was impossible to suppose he had anticipated and from which it was far beyond the ingenuity of an ordinary mortal not to say a lunatic. to escape from. He hit upon the only possible device. and carried it successfully through. There is no evidence, to induce you to hesitate in pronouncing him insane.

It must, however, be a satisfaction to you to know that you are here only to say how the deceased came by his death, although you will be expected to say. it is as definitely as you can.

You are not trying anyone, so if you say by your verdict that Gold was murdered by Lefroy, that will not prevent the latter from securing a fair and impartial trial if he should not elude the vigilance of the police''.

The room was then cleared for the jury to consider their verdict. At the end of about twenty minutes, it was announced that they had agreed. In answer to the Coroner, The Foreman of the Jury stated their verdict to be as follows:

"On the 27th of June, in Balcombe railway tunnel, in the parish of Balcombe, the said Frederick Isaac Gold was found dead, and that one Percy Lefroy Mapleton did feloniously, wilfully, and of malice aforethought kill and murder the said Frederick Isaac Gold."

The warrant for the apprehension and committal of Lefroy was then made out by the Coroner and handed to Superintendent Berry, of East Sussex Constabulary, stationed at East Grinstead, where Lefroy, should he be caught, will be brought up. The inquiry was then terminated.

Immediately upon the receipt of the telegram at Scotland-yard announcing the finding of the jury, the Home Secretary was authorized to offer £100 for his apprehension, and the Brighton Railway Directors resolved to also offer £100.

It was also understood that the conduct of the police in not detaining Lefroy would be made the subject of a special inquiry.

Inspector Turpin, in the detective force of the Brighton Railway, and Superintendent Berry of East Grinstead, in which district the crime was committed, conferred on Thursday with the chief of the Criminal Investigation Department, Scotland Yard.

Lefroy is still at large. Arrests on suspicion continued to be made, but nothing has come of them.

A full description was given together with a sketch portrait. These bills will be sent to every town and village in the United Kingdom.

A wanted article was circulated via the Daily Telegraph, on 1 July 1881 in London to capture Lefroy:

''The attention of licensed victuallers, tobacconists, railway officials, stage carriage conductors, and cabmen is particularly directed to this matter

Percy Lefroy Mapleton, whose apprehension is sought for murder on the Brighton Railway, left the Fever Hospital at Islington at 9:30 on the morning of Tuesday, June 28.

Description: Age 22, middle height, very thin, sickly appearance, scratches on the throat, wounds on the head, probably clean shaved, low felt hat, black coat, teeth much discolored.

Information to the Director of Criminal Investigation, Great Scotland Yard, or at any Police Station. (The Fever Hospital was where his sister where his sister Julia worked as a matron.)

In the interests of justice, it is well that the public should be fully informed regarding Lefroy’s appearance. He is very round-shouldered and his thin overcoat hangs in awkward folds about his spare figure. His forehead and chin are both receding. He has a slight mustache and very small dark whiskers. His jaw bones are prominent, his cheeks sunken and sallow and his teeth fully exposed when laughing. His upper lip is thin and drawn inwards. His eyes are grey and large. His gait is singular, he is inclined to slouch and when not carrying a bag his left hand is usually in his pocket. He generally carries a crutch stick.''

Continued rumors of Mapleton's appearance in various quarters are still received, but it is thought that if he was not being kept in hiding by some of his friends or acquaintances, he must be dead.

Mr. F. A. Seudamore had forwarded to a contemporary the following particulars explaining why Percy Mapleton changed his name to Lefroy:

"In September 1878, in reply to my professional advertisement. I received a tempting offer from Mr. Percy Mapleton to join a comedy and burlesque company, he was then organizing for an autumn and winter tour in the provinces. I accepted the engagement, to commence at Ipswich, on September 9. Just before that date, I was informed by telegram that the tour would commence a week later, on September 16th instead of the 9th, and at Gloucester instead of Ipswich. In reply, I made Mr. Mapleton thoroughly understand that I should expect my salary from the 9th, even though I did not act at Ipswich. He said that I should be paid all the same and requested me to be in Gloucester for rehearsal, on Friday, the 13th. When in due time I arrived at the Theatre Royal, Gloucester, I was informed that Mr. Mapleton and his acting manager had mysteriously disappeared. and that the responsible manager was supposed to have run away to Paris.

Some of the members of the company had traveled from Dublin and others from Scotland. Some like myself, in addition to an expensive railway journey, spent money to procure suitable costumes for the parts in which they were engaged. The matter was placed in the bands of a solicitor, but Mr. Percy Mapleton could not be traced. We learn that no arrangements had been made with the proprietors of the various comedies named in our letters of engagement.

It thus became evident that Percy Mapleton had contemplated a cruel and deliberate fraud.

If the ladies and gentlemen engaged to appear at Ipswich had not informed him that they would not act in Gloucester till they had received a week's salary, no doubt he would have opened the theatre and all would have gone on well till Saturday, when we should have learned at the treasury that Percy Mapleton had disappeared with the five nights takings.''

There was a general outcry against the police.

''If the police at Brighton had been confederates of Lefroy, they could not have acted more obligingly. He was a man—certainly not of prepossessing appearance—found, under circumstances of extraordinary suspicion, in a railway carriage covered with blood. A fragment of a gold watch chain was further seen projecting, from his boot. But because he represented himself as the innocent victim of an outrage committed by another, which meant he was allowed to be at large. Some kind of surveillance was put on him, but it was of a weak nature and he had eluded them. The only comment that the police authorities volunteered was, that they saw no reason for detaining him. Most persons thought there was every reason, yet Lefroy was allowed to slip through the fingers of the law before there had been a complete examination of the scene. The circumstance in his favor was that he gave the correct address.

This man had the nerve firstly to commit a singularly abominable murder, then to mutilate himself, and finally to tell a cock and bull story to the police, is not likely to be idiot enough to spoil his chance of escape by a feeble set of lies''.

Lefroy, of course, knew perfectly well, that, unless he could bring forward some evidence of his innocence he was a dead man. Hence the presence of mind that he showed at Preston Station enabled him to lie,

The Daily Chronicle, regarding the conduct of the police in connection with the Brighton tragedy. said:

"The examination of Detective-sergeant Holmes fully discloses the blundering indecision which led to the escape of Lefroy. It would be unfair, however. to lay the whole blame upon Holmes. It is easy to conclude that at first blush the story of Lefroy, battered and blood-stained carried an air of truth with it. But the mere facts which were elicited at Brighton, the discovery of the watch in his shoe, the flash sovereign in his packet, end the extraordinary story which he told, ought to have led to his detention until some corroboration was obtained. In place of that, the Station Superintendent at Brighton permitted him to go, merely telling Holmes and Howland in general terms to search and look after him. So far the conduct of their superior was some justification for their not regarding their charge as actually in custody. But what subsequently occurred is utterly intelligible to ordinary ideas of the duties of the detective force. That he should be seen home by a detective at all is inconsistent with the supposition that the police entertained no suspicion about him. They were not sure about him, and if they suspected him at all they had clear grounds for detaining him. But no order for his detention was given, and he was permitted to escape. Whatever may be thought of the discretion of the police in permitting him to go home as a free man. there can be no doubt that they committed a serious mistake after he had started''

The Farmer also ran this piece about the shocking way in which Mrs Gold was informed:

''Mr. Gold, the corn merchant murdered in Balcombe tunnel, was well known at Mark-lane. He was a strong, stout, red-faced, convivial-looking man, but in character, he was shrewd and close, a money-getter, and a careful investor.

"Man found dead this afternoon in the tunnel here. Name on papers, F. Gold. He is now lying here. Reply quick."

This was the wording of the telegram sent by the Balcombe station master to Mrs. Gold, announcing the death of her husband.

There is no doubt that the thoughtless abruptness of the message was unintentional, but surely the railway authorities ought to guard against such dense stupidity on the part of their servants. Very different was the message sent by the Crystal Palace station master to the father of the poor boy who was killed recently in an accident near that station.''

The father of Lefroy was the late Captain Henry Mapleton, RN., from Plymouth and his mother Mary Trent Seale from St Helena was the daughter of William Henry Seale, late Colonial Secretary of St. Helena. who is talked about in Chasing the Slavers

His godfather, after whom he was named, was Sir John Henry Lefroy, late Governor of the Bermudas.

In 1839, his father Henry, wrote in a newspaper regarding receiving an appointment to sail with the Antarctic Expedition under Captain Ross, while he served on board H. M. S. Snake in the West Indies but unfortunately only two days previous, they had captured a slave vessel with the smallpox' raging. The ship was placed in fifty days' quarantine. Immediately he could he left her and proceeded to England, where he arrived on Sunday evening, it was three days too late, the Terror having passed down the Channel on the Friday. His vacancy was not filled up until the day previous to her sailing.

Percy was born in 1860 and grew up in the care of his Mother and her family. In the 1861 census, he was down as living at 21 Alpha Place Deptford Greenwich with his mother and siblings, with his Mother's relative Archibald Alexander Seale, (Father of Mrs Clayton)

His Mother died on 5th June 1866 from Carditis at Brighton Terrace New Cross London and Lefroy remained there according to the 1871 census with Archibald's widowed wife, having lost her Husband on 1st August 1866 to a rupture of the heart.

His Father died with his Daughter Julia present from Cirrhosis, Jaundice and exhaustion on 5th August 1879.

It would seem he never lived with his father, and he didn't follow in the family's tradition and go into the Royal Navy.

In 1881 he was living with Cousins, the Claytons, who were running a lady's day & boarding school, his occupation was Journalist.

On the night of Friday 8th July, the police succeeded in tracing Lefroy, who had eluded their pursuit for nearly a fortnight, and finally arrested him in a house in Stepney, London, where he had been hiding since three days after the murder.

About seven o'clock on Friday evening information was conveyed to the police that a person resembling Lefroy, of mysterious habits, was lodging at No. 32, Smith Street, Stepney, under the name of Clark.

Inspectors Jervis and Swanton proceeded to the house, which is kept by Mrs. Bickers, who lets out rooms to single men.

On entering the house, and coming into the presence of the lodger " Clark," the officers at once saw that they had at last got the right man.

Lefroy, on the inspectors entering the room, said, ' I expected you." Swanston replied, ''Yes, l am a police officer, " and Lefroy answered, " Yes, I expect so." Swanton Informed him that he was charged with the murder of Mr. Gold in a railway carriage, and Lefroy, turning round, said, " I am not compelled to answer, am I?'' and then added, " I suppose I must say, I am not guilty."

His behaviour was described as very calm and collected and he did not attempt to resist.

On being searched nothing of importance was found upon him. He denied knowing anything of a gold watch or revolver.

He was taken to Arbor Square Police Station, then on to Scotland Yard, and finally to King Street Police Station, Westminster, where he was further identified by a constable from Wallington, and formally charged with the murder of Mr. Gold.

He did not attempt to deny his identity but said he was not guilty of the crime imputed to him.

He also complained of being hungry, and a meal was supplied to him, which he ate like a man who had been wanting food for some long time. He had no bandage on the head, and the wounds which were dressed on the day of the murder at Brighton have almost disappeared.

It was said he had much altered since he left Wallington on that Monday morning, his appearance now being thin and emaciated.

The only attempt at disguise that is noticeable is that he has shaved off his slight mustache and whiskers.

It appears from Mrs. Bickers, that Lefroy came to her house on Thursday June 30th and inquired about a bedroom to let, a notice of which was in the window, stating that it had been recommended by a neighbour on the other side of the road and that he had just come from Liverpool.

Mrs. Bickers agreed to accommodate him for 6s a week, and he had paid 33. 6d. in advance, saying that his box of clothes would follow.

He presented himself as an engraver. For the first few days, the suspicions of Mrs. Bickers were not aroused, and he paid the 2s. 6d. balance of the rent on Sunday but as the box of clothes that had been spoken of did not arrive, and the new lodger kept himself strictly secluded, never leaving the house except once, and keeping himself shut up in his room, with the blinds down, she began to think all was not as it ought to be.

She had not the slightest conception that he was the man who the police were searching for far and wide. Her ideas did not go beyond a suspicion that he was a swindler and her rent was not safe.

He had also studiously kept himself out of the way of her other lodgers.

On one occasion she spoke to him about the Brighton murder and the escape of Lefroy, but she did not observe that he displayed any contusion or agitation.

The circumstance that caused her to communicate with the police was that on Friday evening when he came down from his room and told her he had no money, and asked her whether she would mind getting into a cab and going into the City to draw his wages. She, however, was afraid to leave the house alone and asked him why he could not go himself. He replied that he had sprained his ankle, and suggested that she might find a young man who would go for him. Subsequently, however, he decided to send a telegram for his wages, and Mrs. Bickers got a friend of hers to take the copy of it to the telegraph office.

The telegram was as follows :

"From G. Clark, 32, Smith-street, Stepney, to S. Seale, at G. T. Hutchinson's, 56, Gresham-street, London, EC. Please bring me my wages this evening, about eight, without fail. Flour tomorrow, not 33."

Mrs. Bickers also noticed on this occasion that he was wearing a coat belonging to another young man who lodged with her, and which he must have got from the other's bedroom. She did not, however, like to mention the matter to him, but resolved upon communicating with the police.

Before doing so, however, she sent her daughter to Mr. Hutchinson's to make inquiries and then learned that no such person as G. Clark working there and that no telegram had been received for anyone of the name of Seale.

Mrs Bickers then went to the Thames Police Station and relayed the above facts to the authorities, and after inquiries had been made his arrest followed as stated above.

Authorities at the Criminal Investigation Department have handed over all the papers in the Brighton murder case to the Treasury, who would be prosecuting Lefroy. Mr. Pollard, solicitor to the Treasury, had the case in his hands

Lefroy spent the night in one of the ordinary cells at the King Street Police Station, under the watchful eyes of two policemen who never left his side. He was awakened about six o'clock and It was stated he slept well and awoke much refreshed. The rest he had taken showed a marked change for the better in his appearance, and his features had not the pinched and worn look he had worn when arrested. He seemed also to be much more cheerful, and he greeted the detectives who took him into custody with a pleasant "Good morning." and, after having a good breakfast, was accompanied to the Victoria station in a cab by the two detectives who had arrested him.

A small crowd had assembled outside the station, and there was some hooting and hissing as the cab drove off, via Scotland Yard, to pick up Superintendent Williamson.

As the news that Lefroy was in the cab was spread, the passer-by strove to get a glimpse of the prisoner, and some followed to the station, where a considerable crowd had gathered. A rush was made to get near the party, and it required a strong force of police to keep the people off.

The train left Victoria Station at 7.35am and at the various stations, on route much excitement manifested, and great efforts were made to get a peep at the prisoner but the blinds of the carriage were kept down.

Lefroy was said to have been cool and collected, almost cheerful, and gladly smoked some cigarettes with which he was supplied, chatting with the officers.

At Three Bridges, the train stopped for several minutes, and the crowd on the platform tried to pull the blinds aside to see the prisoner. Lefroy was seen by the station master, who said he was little if at all, changed from the day when he saw him last in the train returning to London on the evening of the murder.

The next stoppage was made at Hayward's Heath, where the party changed from the Brighton to Lewes line, it having been determined to take Lefroy to the latter place instead of East Grinstead, as first intended.

As he walked quickly along, he was at once recognized by those on the platform and in the crowded Brighton train.

A roar of cursing towards him, him as he passed the carriages and entered the Lewes train, which stood waiting on the opposite side of the platform.

Lefroy became livid at the shouts and abuse which he received and hastened to escape from them. It was nearly an hour before the Lewes train left Haywaid's Heath, and whilst it stood waiting the crowd lingered around Lefroy's carriage, discussing his capture and crime, and indulging in occasional jeering at him.

On the way down it had been noticed that Lefroy appeared somewhat excited at the Merstham and Balcombe tunnels. The crime was begun In the former and completed in the latter tunnel by the throwing out of Mr. Gold's body.

Lewes was reached at 10.:10 cm. News of his expected arrival seemed to precede Lefroy all along the line, for at his destination as elsewhere, the crowd stood waiting to see the prisoner.

Lefroy was taken to a cab which was there in readiness. and accompanied by Inspectors Jarvis, Swanson, and Robson. the latter having got in on the way down and they drove to Lewes Gaol, which is situated about one mile from the railway station, they were followed by a crowd of people.

Since he had been in Lewes Gaol, Lefroy had preserved the even behaviour, even since the murder of Mr. Gold was committed.

After his examination on Saturday, he had a very fair meal, served out to him out of the prison kitchen, which it was said he seemed to enjoy, .

He was lodged in the East wing of the gaol, where prisoners awaiting trial are usually located, and showed no inclination to make any admission. concerning his charge of crime.

He, however, exhibited every wish to convey with the warders in attendance upon him but they of course, under the prison regulations, were unable to 'hold lengthy conversations with him.

Lefroy was informed by the Chief Warder, (Captain Crickitt), that with the governor of the gaol, being absent, he could be supplied with any extra food which he or his friends might be able to pay for, and he immediately communicated by letter this fact, to several of his most intimate acquaintances. After that, he sat quietly down in his cell and read for some time the books that had been placed at his disposal, exhibiting the utmost composure.

He was visited by Mr. Richard Turner, the surgeon of the prison, with whom he spoke freely, and in such a manner as altogether to dismiss the theory of insanity. Mr. Turner, who has for many years been the regular medical attendant at the prison, saw no ground, at the present moment. to propose that there is the slightest indication of insanity.

He slept well throughout the night and exhibited no signs of sleeplessness. The only difference made in the usual regulations for the night watch was that an extra warder was placed in the corridor, in which the cell occupied by Lefroy was situated.

On Sunday morning the prisoner woke early and ate hearty breakfast. He was said to appear to be in good spirits and attended the signal service in the chapel of the prison.

The service was conducted by the chaplain, the Rev. H. Cole, and at its conclusion Lefroy was conducted back to his cell, where the ordinary midday meal was supplied to him.

The prisoner still had not alluded to the crime with which he was charged, except to repeat the story that' ' there was a third person in the train, who was the assailant''.

The wounds upon his head, which were superficial, had healed, and no traces of rough handling were apparent.

After his midday meal, he again devoted himself to reading and seemed quite unconcerned as to the charge against him.

A special reporter of the Press Association had gone to Wallington and had an interview, at 4, Cathcart-road, with Mr. Seale, who was the fellow lodger of Lefroy. Mr. Seale was most willing to give information, and he said:,

" I have not the slightest idea where Lefroy was, from the time he left the Fever Hospital on the Tuesday morning after the murder, until the Thursday morning on which was at the lodgings at 32, Smith Street, Stepney.

I have never been there. I knew nothing of his movement after he left the house. When I had the telegram from Clark at my place of business, 56, Gresham-street, I regarded it as a hoax. My reason for so doing was that at Cathcart-road we have received many anonymous letters addressed to me and Mrs. Clayton.

From the time I left the lodgings on the morning of the day on which the murder was committed, I will swear I never had any communication with Lefroy.

Lefroy's family had no idea where he hiding. His cousin, Mrs. Clayton was confined three days before the murder, and Lefroy's absence and the suspicion cast on him have had a serious effect upon her. She is prostrate and still keeps her bed."

Q.: 'How did the family first hear of the prisoner's capture?''

A.: "Through the medium of the public press."

Q.: " Was Lefroy in the habit of carrying a revolver?''

A.-: " Never, to my knowledge; I never saw such a thing."

Q.: " A white-handled knife has been picked up; did Lefroy have such a one in his possession?''

A.:" I believe he had not one. I never saw it. Both and Mr. Clayton have had a request from him for the loan of a knife. I never heard from Lefroy at all after the murder."

Q.: " What is his age?"

A.:" Twenty-one. He was born in February 1860."

Q.:'' Are you any relation to him?"

A.:Yes lam his second cousin. He was born in my sister's house in the neighbourhood of London."

Q.: ''Had you known that Lefroy was passing as Clark, what would you have done on the receipt of the telegram?"

A.: "Had I known or had I any inkling that the telegram came from Lefroy I would have gone to Smith Steet at all risks and hazards. I have been very fond of him, and we are now anxious as to his fate."

Q.: " I suppose he will be well-defended?"

A. : " As well as we can afford. We shall do our best. He always has been a part of the family."

The East Sussex Constabulary, under Superintendent Berry and the men of the Brighton Railway Company, were still making a diligent search for the missing pistol, which forms an important link in the chain of circumstantial evidence. Their work, however, was very difficult for the reason that on the London side of the Three Bridges, there extends a long lake immediately beside the railway line, and beyond that both on the north and south sides of Balcombe tunnel is a thick woody growth, and a revolver thrown from the carriage window might remain undiscovered for a long time but the search continued with every belief that the weapon would be found.

On the morning of Saturday 9th July at about one o'clock, a white-handled dinner knife, somewhat worn, corroded with rust, and stained with what might be blood, was found near the line at Three Bridges Station. The knife was sent to Wallington, so that it might be submitted to the examination of the persons with whom Lefroy resided.

A letter from 4, Cathbcart-road, Wallington, addressed to Mr. Cowan, MP., the proprietor of a Newcastle paper, has had been published by it:—

Dear Sir,

Might I ask you as a great favour whether or not you could find me employment at the Newcastle Chronicles?

I have considerable experience on considerable experience on several of the Colonial papers and United States Radical journals. I am a brilliant leader writer and a good hand at satirical papers, and In addition, I am thoroughly well acquainted with all dramatic doings of the day, being a member of some of the leading literary and dramatic clubs. I Should be glad to arrange on very moderate terms and ask only for a trial for the sake of good services my uncle, the late Richard Cobden, rendered to liberalism.—l am, dear sir, yours faithfully, ARTHUR LEFROY.

On Saturday 9th July, soon after ten o'clock, the train arrived bringing Lefroy, but there were not many people at the station, as his arrival was unexpected, the newspapers of that morning concurring in the statement that he would be taken to East Grinstead. He was placed in a fly, seen by the few on-lookers in the High-street, as the vehicle made its way to the gaol, that Lefroy was in it, and there was a flutter of excitement indicated by the formation of groups in the line of the tracks.

About twenty reporters from the London journals, who had come in with the train, followed in the wake of Lefroy's cab, and clustered together in the lodge of the prison, while the officials were securing the attendance of a Magistrate.

George Molineux Esq. arrived, and the Chief Warder, in the absence of the Governor, having refused to admit the reporters into the prison, they appealed to him and Mr. Molineux said that he would be most willing to admit them, but the Chief Warder said that it was contrary to the prison regulations to admit reporters into the prison, and Mr. Molineux said he was bound to stand by the regulations.

At the same time, a copy of the depositions taken would be supplied to them by the Clerk to the Magistrates.

Lefroy was brought before Mr. Molineux, and the following is a cut-down version of the official proceedings:

Donald Sutherland Swanson deposed:

''l am Inspector for of the Criminal Investigation Department, Scotland Yard. At a quarter to eight last night, in company with Inspector Jarvis and P.C. Hopkins, I went to 32. Smith-street, Stepney''.

He then explained, what I have recorded above on Lefroys capture and arrest and that he had brought him down to Lewes on this morning and handed him over to Superintendent Berry.

Prisoner: ''Did I not offer you every facility to search the room''

Swanson: ''Yes''.

Prisoner: ''Did I in any way attempt to get away''

Swanson: ''No''.

In reply to the Magistrate, Swanson said that on the way to Scotland Yard, he heard the prisoner speaking to Jarvis, but the noise was so great that I could not catch all he said.

''I cautioned the prisoner in the house as to any statement he might make being used in evidence against him''.

Frederick Smith Jarvis deposed:

''l am an inspector of police at Scotland Yard''.

He went through the capture of Lefroy and the search of him and his room

amongst the items was a waistcoat with blood marks upon it, inside and out, mostly on the right breast. One of the rollers had also blood upon it. Soma of the cuttings of materials similar to the shirt are also bloodstained.

Jarvis then said ''On the way to Scotland Yard, Lefroy said "I am glad you have found me. I am sick of it. I should have given myself up in a day or two. I have regretted it ever since I ran away but I could not bear the exposure. I fear certain matters in connection with my family would be made public. I suppose I shall be allowed a lawyer?''' I replied, "Certainly." Lefroy then said, "I am glad you did not bring any of my so-called friends from Wallington with you."

The above statement was made quite voluntarily. Swanson had cautioned the prisoner in the room in my presence about saying anything before we left''.

No other evidence was taken on this occasion and Superintendent Berry, who has charge of the case, then applied for a remand until Wednesday. Lefroy then requested that the remand be made until Friday, which was granted that Lefroy would be brought up at the County Hall, on Friday next, at ten o'clock.

The Magistrates at Cuckfield claimed Lefroy should be brought up there on that day But owing to the poor accommodation and the distance from any railway station, there are great objections to this motion.

The Treasury were the prosecutors, and on Monday 11th July, the Chief Constable of East Sussex (Capt. Luxford) proceeded to London to have an interview with the authorities at the Treasury, and also at the Criminal Investigation Department, and upon the result of them will depend on a decision on which court Lefroy will be tried. Nothing, however, was done before and it is thought very probable that the Home Office would make strong representations to the Cuckfield Bench, that it is desirable for the public convenience, that the prisoner be tired at the larger County Hall in Lewes

On the evening of Monday 18th July, there were several arrivals at Cuckfield among others.

Mr. Poland, barrister. Mr. Brewer, solicitor for the Railway Company, and Mr. T. D. Dutton, solicitor for the prisoner.

On Tuesday 19th July, the Magisterial court proceedings were resumed at Cuckfield.

Lefroy was woken about five o 'clock, and after a light breakfast, was taken to the prison yard about half past five and entered the covered carriage drawn by two horses which was waiting, was left for Cuckfield. On the road it was said he was quiet and composed, chatting with the police about the warmth of the weather, and remarking that it would be as hot and trying in Court as the time before.

The carriage was driven to the police station at Cuckfield, where Lefroy alighted the presence of a small group of spectators, at about eight, There was no hissing or hooting of any kind, and there were no demonstrations along the way.

At the station, Lefroy was placed its one of the three cells at the back of the little station and was given some sandwiches and refreshments.

Mr. Dutton walked down to the Police Station shortly before nine and had a long conference with his client about the case.

A parcel containing a change of clothes was left at the police station for Lefroy by one of his friends, which, after being examined, was sent to Lefroy's cell.

Cuckfield remained quiet until about nine o'clock when the arrivals from London and Brighton began to pour in, as people rushed to get a seat with a view.

The proceedings commenced, as before, at ten o'clock, and the prisoner was brought from the police station to the hotel in a cab.

The court was crowded, with much interest in the case.

The Magistrates present were J. M. Norman. Esq. (chairman). Admiral the Hon. T. Pakenham, Col. Holden-Rose, Capt. Dearden, Capt. Sergison, Mr C. Lennox Peel Esq., Mr T. T. C. Lister Esq.and Mr W. H. Loder Esq..

Mr. Poland counsel to the Treasury, attended in the place of Mr. Pollard to prosecute, and the prisoner was represented by Mr. Dutton. Mr. Brewer watched the case on behalf of the Railway Company, and Capt. Luxford (East Seems Constabulary), and Chief-Supt. Williamson (Scotland Yard) also attended.

The prisoner having been brought in and the proceeding commenced with the cross-examination of Detective Holmes:

In reply to Mr. Dutton, He said: ''When I searched the prisoner at the train station, he placed no obstacle in the way whatever. Had he asked me not to search him I would still have done so. My object was to see whether he had any firearms, as I thought he was likely to commit suicide. He looked strange about the eyes. I did not consider that I had him in custody. I simply accompanied him home, to ensure he got there safely.

At Croydon, I received a telegram to the effect that I had to ascertain the number of the prisoner's watch and the maker's name and address. The telegram also stated that a man had been found dead in the Balcombe tunnel and that no watch was upon the body.

The prisoner at the time was walking up and down the platform. I did not immediately ask the prisoner for the number of his watch. I did not consider it my duty to do so. I asked him when we arrived at Cathcart Road. At the time I opened the watch I did know that the number of Mr Gold's watch was 16,261 and that the maker was "Griffith, Mile End-road."

Mr Dutton: ''You knew that the body had been found sad that the watch was missing''

Det. Holmes: ''No, I did not, The telegram said that a man had been found and that he had no watch,. I did not know that a watch was missing. On Tuesday morning, I heard that the guard had found a watch in the prisoner's boot with a portion of the chain attached to it.

When I went into the room at Wallington Mr Clayton and the prisoner were there. I cannot say whether Mr Clayton was in the room when I read out the prisoner's statement. When I left the house, the prisoner showed me out.

At Wallington station, I found the telegram awaiting me. it said:

From Browne, Three Bridges to Kedges, station master at Wallington Ascertain for certain what watch, if any this man had on him when he went home. Remain with a view of the house., Don't lose sight of him until Holland comes. This is for Holmes. I went straight back to Cathcart Road.

The second telegram: Instruct Holmes to keep the man Lefroy in safe custody until I arrive. By no means lose sight of him."

I was absent from the house for about six or seven minutes.

I believe I showed the statement to Mr. Brewer, the solicitor, at about noon on Tuesday. I then heard all the particulars as to the finding of the body and was told that a watch with a white face was missing. I did not notice any difference between the watch I found on the prisoner and the description of the missing watch given to me. If I had said the watch was described to me as a gold one with a white face, I was mistaken.

I made inquiries on Wednesday at Mile End Road and found that Mr. Griffith, the maker of the watch, was dead''.

Re-examined: ''The telegram I received at Croydon, asking me to ascertain the number of the watch, I put in my pocket. I did not allow it to be seen by the prisoner. It was in consequence of telegrams that I asked for the number of the watch.

When the prisoner gave me the number of the watch I had the statement before me. He told me the number of the watch was 65,312, and I wrote it down on the statement. I afterward found the number was 16,261. I wrote that down at the time with the maker's details''.

Thomas Watson, the guard, recalled by Mr. Poland:

''When I saw a piece of chain outside the chain I pulled it out and found a gold watch attached to it. Before doing no I took particular notice of it. The piece of chain that was found on Mr. Gold was the same

Cross-examined by Mr. Dutton: To the best of my recollection I took it from the outside of the prisoner's left shoe. It seemed to me that his shoe fitted loosely. I am sure first-class passengers got on at Croydon for Brighton. I have a particular recollection of two or three ladies. I spoke to a gentleman who accompanied them. I did not notice anyone getting into a first-class carriage. It is possible to walk from one compartment to another, but a person who did so would run a great risk. I could do it myself, but an inexperienced person could not do it safely.''

Witness Kate Bolvin:

''I am the daughter of Joseph Bolvin who keeps a Watchmaker's shop at 2, Market Street. I assist him in managing the business. I knew Mr. Gold. He had a customer of ours for about two or three years. In the day-book produced, there is my handwriting under the date 31st May, this entry—" Mr. Gold Preston., Gold English Patent lever watch to be adjusted and cleaned 3s 6d; 16,261." I believe the maker of the watch was Griffith

Joseph Bolvin had cleaned the watch. He could not be positive in the makers' name but he was positive as to the number''.

Next was William Howland:

''I am the detective officer for the London, Brighton, and South-coast Railway Company. I was in the chief constable's office at Brighton, at about five o'clock on the Monday afternoon.

I saw the prisoner and heard what passed. He had said there were two men in the carriage besides him and I asked him to give me a description of them.

He added, that both men were in the carriage when the train left Three Bridges. As they entered the first tunnel he heard a report and saw a flash and something struck his head. he did not recover until the train got to Preston Park.

l asked him whether he had any firearms and he said "No, you can search me if you like'' Holmes searched him and I saw a watch taken out of his left-hand pocket. He said, " That's mine," adding, "They have taken the chain and 25s in money. I recovered the watch, which was lying on the floor''.

I asked for a description of the chain and he said it was a metal cable chain."

James Terry Chief constable of the Brighton Police, then took the stand and repeated the evidence he gave at the inquest

James Martin, Police-Constable was the next witness.

Cross-examined: ''If the prisoner bad disposed of anything as they were going the cab to and from the hospital, I must have seen it''.

Next was Henry Anscombe:

''I am the superintendent at the Brighton Railway Station.

He then relayed the story Lefroy had told him, which was the same told to everyone else. ''I asked him whether he was Injured much and he said, "I should think I am, having four or five bullets in my head" I asked the officers to search him and they found 12s to 14s. this was returned to him. I also saw three Hanoverian medals taken from him and I said ''This looks queer'' as some had been found on the carriage. He replied ''I know nothing about them, I must have got them at whist'' He left the office at six, and quarter to seven I heard about the body of Mr Gold and I telegraphed the station masters at Balcombe and Three Bridges''.

Cross-examined: ''When I first saw Lefroy he looked vacant and ghastly. I will swear that he said bullets and not wounds to his head.

I have inspected the carriage and under the footboard are finger marks of blood as though someone had grasped it. If a person was leaving the train, while in motion, would naturally grasp the footboard with his right hand and with the left hold the rod.

A person might get from one compartment to another, while the train was moving but it would be dangerous''.

Re-examined: ''If the window of the carriage was closed, it would be still more dangerous and risk being pitched out headforemost''.

Next was Joseph Park, the Ticket inspector at Preston Park who gave the same evidence as he had at the inquest.

Alfred Joseph Hall Station Superintendent at Preston Park who had been examined stood again for more questioning and went over his evidence again.

Cross-examined: ''I thought the prisoner was not quite right. I believed he had attempted to commit suicide. He walked along the platform firmly. I asked him where was the passenger who assaulted him and he replied ''well he must have got out at another stop''

Mrs Ellen Elizabeth Chart from the theatre was examined and again stated she did not know Lefroy and had never met him.

Cross-examined: ''I frequently receive letters from people I don't know. If the prisoner had come to me, I would have seen him''.

Edwin Gardener, the booking clerk, and James Wood, the Porter both at East Croydon were examined for their information, which they gave at the inquest

John George Ager, Clerk in the Accountant office at Three Bridges, also repeated his evidence as in the inquest.

The court then adjourned at half past five.

Throughout the inquiry, Lefroy sat beside his counsel, closely watching all that took place. It was reported he grew nervous at times, putting his fingers through his hair and going ghastly pale, once or twice but did at times faintly smile when the witnesses made blunders. He had disregarded the pencil and note-taking, those taken by him being little or of no importance.

He was marched back to the Police station cells and given supper.

Mr. Seale and Mr. Clayton tried to get in to see him but were turned away, so they spoke to Mr Dutton, who spoke to Mr Poland about the warders and Police refusing them access. He then gave instructions for them to be allowed access and they were let in to visit Lefroy, who was said to be pleased for their visit. He asked about Mrs Clayton and her family but never mentioned his sister. He said he was doing well and was by no means despondent.

Another piece of evidence came to light. The umbrella which Mr Gold was seen carrying had been found. It appears that shortly after the murder a plate layer had found the umbrella in Clayton Tunnel and took it to Hassock Gate station and the station master forwarded it to lost property in London.

Someone thought it may be the umbrella, linked with the murder, and contacted the Detective department. The umbrella was then shown to Mrs Gold, who immediately confirmed, that it had belonged to her husband.

This was important as it proved the murderer hadn't left the train three and a half miles from Preston Park.

They had also discovered some pawn tickets in Lefroy's coat when searching his room at Cathcart Road, issued by the firm, which Creek who was examined had been employed. This proved that his evidence was correct and Lefroy was a customer there. The tickets were issued in the name of Leigh and Lee.

On the morning of Wednesday 20th July, Lefroy saw his solicitor after breakfast and Mr Clayton and Mr Seale also visited him. He was said to be cheerful and still maintaining his innocence and adhering to his statement.

Shortly before ten, he was transported to the court house and the case resumed.

Mr Gibson the chemist from Brighton was examined, giving the same statement as the inquest.

Thomas Jennings the Platelayer who found the body of Mr gold and some of his belongings, was also examined giving evidence as in the inquest.

PC Lewis gave evidence. He took charge of the body at Balcombe and described the condition of the body, explaining that he also found a piece of eyeglass, that matched the portion found on the body

Mr Brown the Station master at Three Bridges explained how he went down with an engine to recover the body and that he had returned to the carriage with Holmes and the prisoner and told Holmes there had been a murder there and that he believed Lefroy had done it. Holmes stated that Lefroy was the complainant and he was taking him home.

Holmes went over to him and said ''don't talk too loud he (Lefroy) is listening''

Mr Brown said he advised Holmes to sit back down next to Lefroy, as there was a tunnel coming up and he might try and jump out, as he looked crestfallen. Holmes did as he requested.

Cross-examined: ''He had blood about him and his head was bandaged. He did not look wild at the time, just excited. He looks much better now than he did then''

The chairman paid a high compliment to Mr Brown for the foresight he had shown in this matter and said if his advice had been followed, much unnecessary delay and trouble could have been prevented.

Thomas Picknell and Edward Tullett gave evidence about finding the collar and hat

Kate Greenfield living in Balcombe gave evidence about finding the purse (produced) on the 3rd of July in the grass on the west side of the line.

She was followed by the examination of Henry Waller a Ganger who found the umbrella.

Mrs Gold the widow was examined, going over the same as she did at the inquest, and discussed the gold watch and that she had known Mr Griffith, the Watchmaker personally for six or seven years.

Thomas Bond of 7 the Sanctuary Westminster, a lecturer of forensic science was examined. He had examined the body with Dr Byass and Mr Hall and they went through that, as in the inquest.

Dr. Byass stood and confirmed what Mr Bond had stated, along with Mr Hall, the House Surgeon at Brighton also described Lefroys wounds.

Albert Gilbert who lived in Woodford Essex, was one of the cashiers at the London and Westminster Bank in Whitechapel, where Mr Gold had an account. stating that Mr Gold had deposited £38 in gold at about one o'clock and took no withdrawals

They then adjourned again for the day

As the days went on, Lefroy was said to grow less interested in the case and would yawn wearily

Thursday was the final day, fewer people were attending, possibly due to the heat they were experiencing and the dragging on of the event. There was a large number of ladies in the reserved part of the room, while the public gallery was still crowded.

Lefroy maintained his calmness throughout, handing his solicitor sundry notes from time to time.

Ann Brown and her Daughter Rhoda, (who was in the cottage and saw two men fighting in a train) were examined, giving the same evidence as the inquest

Robert Peel, the engine driver of the train was examined and stated there were no fog signals fired off and the slowest speed he did was around 30 mph. From the Clayton tunnel, there is an incline, so the speed would have been between 45-50 mph. He stated that the guard Watson was incorrect in saying the train had slowed to 4 mph

Alfred Aylwin the train stoker was examined and backed up the statement given by Peel, along with the rear guard Henry Nye, confirming the speed

George Ellis a Bookseller and stationer at Wallington was examined:

He said he had known the prisoner for around eighteen months, under the name Lefroy. he had been in the habit of dealing with the witness.

''On the morning of the 27th of June, I had a letter produced to me by one of Mrs Clayton's children, which was in the handwriting of the prisoner, asking for my attendance. I went to 4 Cathcart Road. After waiting for a few minutes a little girl brought me a paper containing an order of books, around a dozen copies. Whilst I was there, I noticed the prisoner going in the direction of my shop. When I returned my errand boy (Pink) gave me a sealed envelope containing two Hanoverian Medals, a shilling, and a blank piece of paper. I then learned from Pink, that this was the payment for the prisoner's account. at the time he owed me £1 7s 2d, which he had promised to pay me the previous Saturday''.

The errand boy Frederick Pink was examined and said the prisoner came to the shop and said he was there to pay his bill. he said there were 2 sovereigns in the envelope and would need 19s in change. Frederick looked in the till but there were only 13s, the prisoner said that would do and took the money, adding that Mr Ellis could send the rest along with the receipt. when he explained this to Mr Ellis, he was sent back to the house but the prisoner was not at home.

Johanna Chamberlain was a domestic servant for Mrs Clayton for about three months and said she saw Mr Ellis at the house. She saw the prisoner when he came back home bandaged up and asked him what had happened he said he had been ''insulted on the train''. she asked if anyone else was injured and he said ''yes 5 or 6''

Thomas Clayton was examined, giving the same details as in the inquest, adding that he had not paid any lodging money for three or four weeks

When cross-examined he said he was not aware that before the prisoner had gone to Australia, a summons was written against him for obtaining pictures under false pretences, and in consequence of not appearing in court, the magistrates issued a warrant, which was in force on the 27th June, the day of the murder (this explains why he told his sister, he was dropping his surname)

He also stated he was always eccentric in his habits and the prisoner was always weak, he had sunstroke the previous year in May He had continually complained of pains in his head and gone to lie down. If he walked a short distance, he would complain of feeling tired and looked exhausted.

Before going to Australia he was confined to his bed for a month to six weeks.

He had always known him to be kind and gentle in his manner and disposition and that he had never hurt a living creature. He was of an exceeding good temper.

He had not given into acts of card playing, betting, or anything like that.

He had never seen him with a firearm or a knife and never seen him with Hanoverian coins. He had seen him with several watches and about three of four weeks before the murder, he had a white-faced watch and had seen Lefroy with an Albert chain of Gold or Aluminium.

He also informed the court, he had heard Lefroys grandfather had died in a lunatic Asylum. He said Lefroy had been back from Australia about 18 months and had been employed doing literary work.

He also knew that Lefroy had pawned various items.

This was the case for the prosecution

The charge was then read out to Lefroy and he was asked if he had anything to say, in answer to the charge.

Lefroy replied in a Haughty and offhand manner ''No, I reserve my defence''

The bench then formally committed him to take his trial before the next assizes.

Lefroy was then removed for the court and that evening removed via cab to Lewes Gaol

On Friday 4th November, The precincts of the Kent Sessions House Maidstone Assize week saw the opening of the trial of Percy Lefroy Mapleton.

A detachment of police was marched up to the Sessions House, as early as a quarter-past eight, under the superintendence of the Deputy Chief Constable, and by a quarter to ten the seats allotted to the public were all occupied such a way to prevent any crowding

The uniformed custodians of the various doors had real grounds for their refusal and the repeated requests for admission. Tickets, representing every inch of the room, had been exhausted a fortnight beforehand.

The Clerk of Arraigns (the Hon. Mr. Denman), called out the names of the jurors, but a few minutes passed before Mr. William Hoar answered to his name. Eleven other Maidstone gentlemen followed and among them Mr. Alexander Hobbs, but upon the application of his brother, Mr. John Hobbs, he was excused, as was also another brother (Mr. Albert Hobbs). The jury was then sworn as follows:—Mr W. Hodge, Mr T. G. Hills, Mr W. Hoar, Mr J Hobbs, Mr R. Hales, Mr J. Harpur. Mr A. P. Harris, Mr J. Harris, Mr J. L. Harrison, Mr W. J. Haffenden, Mr W. O. Hall, and Mr J. W. Harrison.

The Attorney-General entered the court at ten o'clock, and just after Mr. Montagu Williams. Mr. Poland, and Mr. A. L. Smith, for the prosecution, then seated themselves beside Sir Henry James, and Mr. Forest Foulton, and Mr. Henry Kisch (for the defence) beside Mr. Montagu Williams.

The jury was without exception inhabitants of Maidstone, unbiased and prepared to bring to its consideration the perfect coolness and judgment that might be expected from people residing in another county, from that in which the tragedy under investigation took place.

The Lord Chief Justice, with the High Sheriff, the Sheriff, and Chaplin, then arrived. The Governor of Lewes Caol (Captain Crickett) occupied a seat beside the Governor of Maidstone Gaol (Mr. Green).

The Clerk of the Arraigns then called for Percy Lefroy Mapleton. A minute afterward the accused arrived in the dock.

Within the Court, the scene was described as impressive, The array of judges, officials, council, solicitors, jury, and press reporters seemed immense for the occasion and the least imposing figure of all, was probably that of the unhappy Lefroy at the bar.

The Clerk of the Arraigns then spoke: ''Percy Lefroy Mapleton, otherwise called Arthur Lefroy, you are charged on indictment and inquisition that you, on the 27th of June, you feloniously, wilfully, and with your malice and forethought, did kill and murder Isaac Gold, How do you plead'' Lefroy placed his hand on the rail and answered ''l plead what I am, Not Guilty''.

Lefroy was then told that if he objected to any of the jurors he must do so as they were sworn but he said nothing as the various gentlemen took the oath. They were then informed of the indictment against the prisoner, and the trial was proceeded with.

Lefroy surveyed the crowded court with a half-nervous and half-anxious look, which showed how strange and perplexing it all was, after the stillness of the prison call and corridors he had just left, after months locked inside.

The Grand Jury galleries, overhead to the right and left were grouped the numerous London and provincial reporters, busily observing the proceedings, and preparing their story to share throughout the country.

In the well of the Court, between the prisoner's bar and the Bench, sat the barristers at their table, fringed by the outer circle of solicitors, and on either side, to the prisoner's right and left respectively, were the Jury in their not too comfortable or conveniently placed box, and some other officials of the Court, with witnesses in due course in theirs. Up behind the prisoner (near whom sat the Governor of the gaol and warders) was the gradually rising platform gallery, with its stone floor and wooden forms, for the general body of spectators.]

The trial of Lefroy commenced punctually at ten this morning.

The Attorney-General commenced his opening speech for the prosecution, a voice, at times, almost inaudible those stationed anywhere the rear.

Shortly after the speech, the prisoner was accommodated with a chair, and remained, as he had done from the first moment of anxious survey of the Court, with his eyes cast down on either the rails of the docks or the solicitors and barristers seated below.

He said the charge against the prisoner at the bar was that of murder, and the sentence following such a charge was death. No doubt the jury would give their very fullest attention to their responsible office during this trial.

They were probably well acquainted with many of the circumstances of the case, but he had earnestly asked them not to allow any impression they might have already formed to possess the slightest weight in their minds.

He would now proceed, without further preface, to state the facts of the case without advancing any argument of his own Sir Henry James then recapitulated the prominent points of the case for the prosecution.

In closing, said he had only referred general terms to those matters which he thought were uncontradicted:

They showed that the prisoner was in the carriage with Mr. Gold without doubt.

That a deadly struggle took place and that the prisoner was Provided with the means of causing the death of Mr. Gold.

From the other inquiries, it appeared that the defence would try to show that some third person was in that carriage and that the person struck down the prisoner and left him insensible.

He would not anticipate the defence. They would have the opportunity of listening to all his learned friend had to say. There were one or two matters, however, to which he would draw their attention. If the prisoner was but a passively present person, how was it that the property of the murdered man was found in his shoe.

What had since become of the property, the Prisoner took it with him on the 27th of July, where was it now?

Could the defence say that was not the property of Mr. Gold ? And if not, why should the prisoner have had it at all.

If the prisoner alleged someone attacked him, why was it that the property of the murdered man was his possession, and why did he not prosecute an inquiry instead of taking flight?

The Attorney-General believed some attempts would be made to show that there were other causes for his flight.

He could only say that he had willingly given every assistance in placing before the defence the facts of the case.

If the prisoner was not the guilty person, there was no reasonable excuse for him to have flown from his friends.

He the (Attorney-General) had now to ask the jury to judge these matters, as men of common sense, and, as he believed, nothing should be pressed unduly against the prisoner. He was entitled, any accused person was, to the benefit of the doubt. the facts he had mentioned, although no one saw the murder committed, led them to the conclusion that the prisoner, and he alone, took the life of the murdered man, and then he asked them to find a verdict accordingly.

The witnesses were brought forward and then due to time, the court had to adjourn until Saturday, after another long day of hearing evidence and witnesses, The Defence pleading the case of his innocence and bringing witnesses on his character, the jury retired, and after only ten minutes they returned into court.

The Clerk of the Arraigns then spoke: ''Gentleman of the jury, are you agreed upon a verdict?

The Foreman of the Jury (Mr Hoar) ''We Are''

The Clerk ''How do you find the prisoner Percy Lefroy Mapleton, Guilty or not Guilty''

The Foreman ''We find him GUILTY''

Lefroy then stood and silence was called for

The Clerk then spoke: Percy Lefroy Mapleton. The jury has found you guilty of murder, have you anything to say to why the sentence of death should not be passed upon you, according to the law''

Lefroy: ''Only to thankyou my Lord and..'' (silence was called)

Addressing Lefroy, was his Lordship Sir John Farnaby Lennard

who then placed the sentence of death upon him and Lefroy then turned to the jury and said ''Gentleman, someday when too late, you will learn you have murdered me''

He was then removed and the court rapidly cleared

At five o'clock on Tuesday evening, Lefroy was transferred from Maidstone, back to Lewes Gaol, accompanied by four officials, two from each prison via the South East Railway Station. the crowds had gathered at both stations to see the condemned man, greeting him with groans and jeers.

Percy's family made a desperate attempt to get him a reprieve for the murder on the grounds of insanity.

His uncle, George Valtier Seale, brother of Percy’s mother, Mary Trent Seale sent letters to the Home Secretary. They claimed that Percy’s father, was mad and that he was often drunk and tried to murder Percy's mother on one occasion and also attempted suicide.

Lefroy himself said his father neglected him and wanted him out of sight and out of mind.

I have found his grandfather William David Mapleton also ended his days in 1814 at Mr. Finch's Asylum, Finch House, Laverstock, Wiltshire, England, when his father Henry was just 4 years old.

Lefroy, during his incarceration when under condemnation, was visited by Mr. and Mrs. Clayton and their little boy, and also Mr. F. W. S. Scale, another cousin.

Each time of the visit the Deputy Governor was present, and a warder was on either side of the condemned man.

Lefroy expressed himself perfectly fearless of his execution, and still maintained that he was not guilty. He was in convict dress, but otherwise, his appearance had not been interfered with, although a convict. The interviews lasted about 20 minutes, with Mrs. Clayton on Friday 25th November, being very affecting and the lady could scarcely hold up, and at the final parting, Lefroy affectionately kissed Mrs. Clayton, and caressed her little seven-year-old boy, of whom Lefroy was very fond.

Also on Friday Captain and Mrs. Symmons (the captain being Lefroy’s trustee) paid a visit to him when Lefroy begged the captain's pardon for the wrong he had done to him, the reason being, is made clear further down.

He eventually confessed to the Chaplain but he also made other startling confessions.

Not only did he admit the murder for which he was condemned to death, but he says he also murdered Lieutenant Roper at Chatham and confessed to various other crimes.

There was, however, a good deal of discrepancy in his accounts, and his conduct previous and after the confession raised some suspicion, that his object was to represent himself as the victim of homicidal mania, and escape the last penalty of the law.

The convict was visited on that Saturday by his married sister, Mrs. Bickwood, and Captain Symmons, a relative of his mother, to take a final farewell.

He told them, how he had given the chaplain “stagger” that morning, and made other statements about his future anticipations.

The confessions of the convict were once communicated to the Home Office, and it remained for Sir William Harcourt to take what action he thought fit, he having previously, in reply to a memorial for a respite, stated that he could find no sufficient ground to justify him in advising her Majesty to interfere with the due course of the law.

Some outlandish details were given about the convict’s confession, as to how he acted under the direction of the Evil One, who was in direct communication and personally conversed with him on the day of the murder of Mr. Gold.

This all led to the suspicion that Lefroy was playing a desperate game as the last resource.

Several other confessions were related to crimes, such as burglaries, including the Housebreaking of Captain Symmons (hence his apology to him Friday) which sought to connect him and throw a sensational glamour over the whole affair.

It had been asserted that Mr. Dutton taxed Lefroy on Friday on the murder of Lieutenant Roper (a blog to come regarding his murder) , then the whole story he had told after, may have no further foundation than these questions on the subject, which might have given Lefroy the idea of making himself out a greater villain than he is, perhaps with a view of temporary respite.

On Friday evening, Lefroy became fearfully agitated that it was necessary to keep a continual watch on him. The governor himself even sat up with him but was unable to pacify the convict, who rushed about his cell moaning and foaming like a madman.

The fit wore itself out, and then on early Saturday morning, Lefroy asked that the chaplain and governor might attend him.

He then confessed that he was guilty of the murder of Mr. Gold, whom he had shot much in the manner that had been surmised, and then pitched him out on the line. His story is considerably confused.

He declared that did not get into the compartment with Mr. Gold at London Bridge but changed into his compartment at Croydon.

He asserted that the struggle with Mr. Gold began with an attempt on his (Lefroy’s) part to appropriate Mr. Gold’s purse, which he accidentally let fall. Mr. Gold did not perceive his loss, but his attention was attracted by the movement that Lefroy made picking it up. Seeing what he was about, Mr. Gold started up, exclaiming “Do you want to rob me?” and thrust him back with violence.

In the scuffle, Lefroy's coat opening, showed the hidden pistol, which naturally alarmed Mr. Gold, and made him feel that he had a desperate character to deal with. exclaimed, “You villain, do you mean to murder me?'' he snatched the pistol from Lefroy, and according to the convict’s account, fired him without effect. Lefroy struggling with him, got back the pistol, and in his turn fired twice at Mr. Gold. One of these shots inflicted the wound in Mr. Gold’s neck, referred to at the trial.

Lefroy did not give a clear account of what followed, but although there were several discrepancies in his repetitions of the story, he always recurred to the fact that there was a desperate struggle.

He asserted that each of them tried to throw the other out of the carriage, and even said that he narrowly escaped.

He said at one time the wounds on Mr, Gold’s head and face were inflicted with the knife he took from him, but this he afterward denied.

He admitted he redeemed a pistol from the pawnbroker on the day of the murder, and says he threw it out of the carriage near Balcombe.

Concerning the murder of Lieutenant Roper, Chatham, in February that year, Lefroy declared that he was the person who was guilty of this crime.

The body of this officer was found in his quarters shot, and suspicion fell on several persons, but the mystery had never been cleared up. (The story of the Lieutenant Roper murder is coming in Blog 41)

On Saturday his sister, Mrs. Bickwood, visited him and was to have taken the sacrament with him, but the Chaplain had gone up to London with a written statement Lefroy, regarding the murder, which he had proposed to lay before the Home Secretary.

It was to Mrs. Bickwood that Lefroy subsequently made the confession concerning the Chatham murder, led on, it is supposed, by the questions put to him by Mr. Dutton, his solicitor, on the subject, at the instigation of Lefroy’s friends.

Mrs. Clayton said she remembered him coming home one occasion and stating had a row with an officer in Piccadilly.

Mrs. Bickwood remembered that after the murder of Lieutenant Roper, her brother came to her at Southend and remained in hiding some days. Not only this, but he had been known to be traveling on several occasions on the Chatham line.

The Claytons declare that they have before found bloodstained clothes in Lefroy’s room, but that these garments have been burnt.

The view was that in making his confession, the convict had a reprieve in prospect is supported by the fact that almost the first thing he said to Mrs. Bickwood was that he had given the chaplain a shock that morning.

He expressed an opinion that he would not be hanged, but that probably he should be confined to a lunatic asylum for the remainder of his life, and declared that he felt sometimes like two different people. He said he did not care to make any confession while there was hope for him, but that the execution was so near, he did not see the use of keeping the matter quiet any longer.

Then later on the Saturday, he sent for the Chaplain of the gaol, and formally retracted that portion of his statement relating to the murder of Lieutenant Roper.

It was known beforehand that Lefroy was preparing confession of some kind, as on Friday, when speaking to his relatives, the Claytons, he expressed his regret for all the expense he had put them to and intimated that he would write something which would enable them to pay his lawyer’s bill.

Whether to do this, he made his confession more telling, than truthful remained to be seen.

When describing Mr. Gold’s murder, he is very incoherent and contradictory. But in reading his confession, his relatives all admit him to be an arrant liar.

Mrs. Brickwood, after her interview with Lefroy Saturday, visited Mr. Dutton, his office, with Mr. and Mrs. Clayton, and Mr. Dutton then communicated the facts of Lefroy’s confession as officially advised.

The relatives at the same time mentioned those mysterious hints which had been suppressed before, and upon this structure, a lengthy and sensational narrative had been compiled.

The Governor of Lewes Gaol also received a letter from a lady at Boulogne stating that her husband, Mr. S. Clarke, an engineer of Liverpool, had been missing since the beginning of the year and that a convict named Foster, who was in prison with Lefroy, had been asked by him to search out Mr. Clarke’s relatives. The only' trace Mrs, Clarke has had of her husband is a collar sent to her by post, and it is suggested that this may have been posted by Lefroy.

It is a strange coincidence that while living in hiding at Stepney, he assumed the name of Clarke.

In a letter to the Daily Telegraph, titled “One Who Knows,” on Monday 28th November, gave some particulars of the convict’s confession, which, he says, have perhaps never been surpassed in the thrilling history of murder:

Lefroy said that the whole day in which the crime was perpetrated, from the time he left Wallington, the Devil was with him. The Devil helped him to rush across the fields to Wallington Station; and when he got to London Bridge assisted him to run down the steps to the pawnbroker’s shop, where he redeemed the pistol. Before the train started, loading the weapon, he was, he says, in constant argument with the Evil One. He puts the question to the Devil, which it was to be ''poverty and honour,” or “wealth and dishonour;’’ and while he was debating this choice the Devil suggested the latter, he walked up the platform, still accompanied by the fiend, and got into a carriage. This was not the compartment in which Mr. Gold was sitting, but in another first-class carriage, in which there happened to be a passenger alone. It was into this Lefroy entered, and not, as was stated the railway witness, that in which Mr. Gold was sitting.

He intended to take this gentleman’s life, but every time Lefroy looked up from his paper he found his companion, to use his own words, staring at him as much as say, I know what you are about.’ So near was this traveller to being a victim in the place of Mr. Gold!

It is not yet certainly known who was, but Lefroy believes it was Mr. W. Wood, of Hassock’s Gate, who was one of the witnesses for the prosecution. And now, continues the convict, there ensued another conversation with Satan. Lefroy told the Evil Spirit that could not do it and then the Devil replied, “But how are you going to get back from Brighton.”, and at that moment the train drew into Croydon Station. ''I argued with myself,” Lefroy said ''whether I should get out or continue in the same carriage. The Devil advised me to get out. I did so, and got into the carriage where Mr. Gold was seated alone.”

Mr. W. Wood, of Hassocks Gate, denied that he rode as far as Croydon with the convict.

Lefroy also positively contradicted the statement of the railway booking clerk that he paid for his ticket to Brighton with sovereign, but paid the fare in silver, the amount being nearly all the money he had.

Up to the eleventh hour, the friends of the condemned man neither gave up hope for a respite nor relaxed their efforts. Mr. T. Dutton, the prisoner’s solicitor, was personally convinced of his client’s insanity and made continual efforts to the last moment to stay the execution.

The papers, which he presented to the Home Secretary was signed by over 2,000 persons, amongst them being many clergymen, and upwards of 100 medical men.

Miss Violet Cameron, the actress, has written a letter, dated from the Royal Comedy Theatre, Pantonstreet, London, denying any knowledge of Lefroy.

Since his conviction, she has received a most painful and unaccountable letter from him, which is now in the possession of Dr. Forbes Winslow, the eminent physician, which, most likely, confirms the belief of that gentleman in the convict’s insanity.

In one of the Lefroys confessions, he implicated a second person, but it was impossible, however, to take any action in the matter and all the effort did not help his cause and his execution came on Tuesday 29th November.

Nine o’clock in the morning was fixed as the time of the execution.

Half an hour before that time the exterior of the gaol showed no signs, that the penalty of the law was about to be suffered by a human being.

At half-past eight no one but a sergeant police and constable or two could be seen in the vicinity of the gaol, but before fifteen minutes had elapsed a small crowd had surrounded the entrance gate, while to the right, near the road leading to the race course, were a dozen or so of curious people.

From neither standpoint could anything but the prison walls be seen, and the only satisfaction that those outside could experience was the sight of the black flag when it was hoisted after the execution, and the mournful sound of the prison bell, which commenced to toll a minute or two after a quarter to nine, and continued till the quarter after nine.

The Under-Sheriff of the County (Mr. C. Bull, the Manor-house, Lindfield), who conducted the execution, arrived at the prison shortly after eight o’clock, as did the gaol Surgeon (Mr. R. Turner), and one or two of the visiting Justices.

William Marwood, the executioner, arrived in Lewes the night before and slept at the gaol.

Fourteen representatives of the Press were admitted and were accommodated in the magistrates’ room until a few minutes before nine o’clock when they were shown into the execution yard, situated in the northeast corner of the gaol.

This same yard had for many years been used as the execution yard, and three marks on the eastern wall denote the place where the gallows were erected when the executions were public. At that time the scaffolding was visible from outside the gaol, but by the time of Lefroys execution, the gallows did not reach the top of the wall, as a pit, eleven-and-a-half feet deep, had been dug to prevent the necessity for raising the timber so high and to meet the requirements of the long draft given by the present public executioner. The gallows were about eight feet in height, the platform being almost level with the ground immediately over the pit, which had bricked sides.

At a quarter to nine the Under Sheriff, the Governor of the Gaol (Captain Crickitt), the Surgeon, the Chaplain (Rev. T. H. Cole), and Marwood, with several prison officials proceeded to the condemned cell,

Lefroy who was said to have slept well and eaten moderate breakfast, was attired in a brown coat and trousers

He was pinioned, by the executioner and while this was happening Lefroy asked Marwood: ''Do you think the rope will break?'' and on being assured that it was quite safe, submitted quietly, and without further remark.

The pinioning having been finished, a procession was formed, and headed by the Under-Sheriff and Governor, with the Chaplain, preceding Lefroy, who was surrounded by warders,

When they entered the execution yard, the Chaplain read portions of the Burial Service as the procession walked to the gallows. The distance from the door and the condemned cell to the gallows was no more than twenty-five yards.

Lefroy walked with his arms pinioned behind him erect and firm. He looked pale but showed no signs of giving way.

Lefroy took his place on the trap door on the gallows. He was 5ft. 91/2in in height, and he was given a drop of nine feet. Marwood adjusted the white cap and rope, and while yet Chaplain was reading the Burial Service, and the bell was tolling, Marwood pulled the lever connected with the trap, and two minutes to nine o’clock it was over, Lefroy had descended swiftly into the pit, and death was instantaneous.

The surgeon certified that life was extinct and the black flag was hoisted over the main gateway of the prison, and notices were affixed to the gate pillars, signed by the Under-Sheriff, the Governor, and the Surgeon, intimating that the sentence of the law had been duly carried out.

The body remained hanging for an hour and was then cut down and placed in a coffin.

At a quarter past ten, the East Sussex Coroner (Mr. Wynne E. Baxter) opened the inquest, Mr. G. Laugridge being sworn as foreman of the jury. The jury having been sworn, proceeded to view the body, and on their return, the Governor gave evidence of identity, and the Surgeon was called to prove the cause of death. These were the only witnesses, and the jury returned a formal verdict that death had been caused by hanging, and the sentence of the law carried out within the walls of the prison.

The deceased’s body was buried in the execution yard, the grave having been dug about ten yards from the gallows.

Life after for Mrs Gold

Fredericks's Personal Estate was settled on 30th July and she received £1,670 9s 11d which is equivalent in purchasing power to about £254,475.01 in today's money.

In 1891 her address was 4 Claremont Terrace, living with one young female domestic servant

In 1901 at age 76, she was still in 4 Claremont Terrace but alone on the census night

On 27th February 1910 at age 85, she was finally reunited with Frederick when she passed away.

There is a plaque in St Peters Church in Preston Park to commemorate then both as dedicated worshippers at the church.

SOURCES

1. General Register Office (no date) General Register Office - Online Ordering Service - Login. Available at: https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/ (Accessed: 16 MAY 2024).

2. Bring your backstory to lifeTM (no date) Ancestry® | Genealogy, Family Trees & Family History Records. Available at: http://www.ancestry.co.uk/

3. Archive, T.B.N. (no date) History’s colourful stories in black and white, Home | Search the archive | British Newspaper Archive. Available at: https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/

4. West Sussex County Times (1881) ''Latest Particulars'' 02 July pg 6

5. West Sussex County Times (1881) ''THE DREADFUL TRAGEDY ON THE BRIGHTON LINE. INQUEST AT BALCOMBE THIS DAY BY OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT'' 02 July pg 8

6. West Sussex County Times (1881) ''The Railway Tragedy'' 09 July pg 2

7. Brighton Herald (1881) ''The Horrible Murder on the Brighton Railway'' 09 July pg 4

8. Horsham, Petworth, Midhurst and Steyning Express (1881) ''The Brighton Railway Murder'' 12 July pg 3

9. Eastbourne Chronicle (1881) ''LEFROY COMMITTED TO TRIAL'' 23 July pg 7

10. 10. Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser - (1881) ''The trail of Lefroy'' 12 November pg 3

11. 1Mid Sussex Times (1881) ''STARTLING REVELATIONS THE MURDER OF LIEUTENANT ROPER. OTHER CRIMES REVEALED. RECANTATION OF LEFROY. THE EXECUTION—TUESDAY MORNING'' 30 November pg 5

12. Pictures and historical info from Wikipedia https://www.wikipedia.org/