1 could not naturally have been expected from a man of so studious a turn, and which is the more extraordinary, as the inducement that led him to it is said to have been only gain, though he himself afterwards assigned a different motive. On the 8th of February, 1744-5, he murdered Daniel Clark, a shoemaker, in conjunction with whom, and another person, he seems before to have been concerned in some fraudulent practices. The murder, however, was concealed near fourteen years, and then was discovered by a skeleton being accidentally found, which was supposed to be that of Clark. This was a mistake; but it led to a discovery of the whole transaction, which is thus related :-A labourer was employed to dig for stone to supply a lime-kiln, at a place called Thistle-Hill, near Knaresborough, and having dug about two feet deep, he found the bones of a human body, and the bones being still joined to each other by the ligatures of the joints, the body appeared to have been buried double. This accident immediately became the subject of general curiosity and inquiry. Some hints had been formerly thrown out by Aram's wife, that Clark was murdered; and it was well remembered, that his disappearance was very sudden. This occasioned Aram's wife to be sent for, as was also the Coroner, and an inquisition was entered into; it being believed, that the skeleton found was that of Daniel Clark. Mrs. Aram declared, that she believed Clark had been murdered by her husband and Richard Houseman. The latter, when he was brought before the Coroner, appeared to be in great confusion, trembling, changing colour, and faultering in his speech during the examination. The Coroner desired him to take up one of the bones, probably to observe what further effect that might C. produce produce; and Houseman, accordingly taking up one of the bones, said, "This is no more Dan. Clark's bone than it is mine." These words were pronounced in such a manner as convinced those present, that they proceeded not from Houseman's supposition that Clark was alive, but from his certain knowledge where his bones really lay. Accordingly, after some evasions, he said that Clark was murdered by Eugene Aram, and that the body was buried in St. Robert's cave, near Knaresborough. He added further, that Clark's head lay to the right, in the turn, at the entrance of the cave; and a skeleton was accordingly found there exactly in the pos➡ ture he described. In consequence of this Aram was apprehended at Lynn, in Norfolk, being at that time usher of a school there. He was brought from thence to York castle, and on the 3d of August, 1759, was tried at the county assizes for the murder. He was found guilty on the testimony of Richard Houseman, who, being arraigned, and acquitted, became an evidence against Aram, whose testimony was corroborated by that of Aram's wife, and other circumstantial evidence. The fact seems to have been, that Houseman and Aram together murdered Clark, and jointly dragged his body into the cave, where it was found in the posture described by Houseman. It was supposed that Aram got all the money Clark had received for his wife's fortune, amounting to above 160l. The defence which he read in Court on this occasion, which is exceedingly curious, and at once an evidence of his taste and erudition, though not of his innocence, is as follows: "My Lord, "I know not whether it is of right, or through some indulgence of your lordship, that I am al lowed lowed the liberty at this bar, and at this time, to attempt a defence; incapable, and uninstructed, as I am to speak. Since, while I see so many eyes upon me, so numerous and awful a concourse, fixed with attention, and filled with I know not what expectaney, I labour not with guilt, my lord, but with perplexity. For having never seen a court but this, being wholly unacquainted with law, the customs of the bar, and all judiciary proceedings, I fear I shall be so little capable of speaking with propriety in this place, that it exceeds my hope, if I shall be able to speak at all. I have heard, my lord, the indictment read, wherein I find myself charged with the highest crime; with an enormity I am altogether incapable of; a fact, to the commission of which there goes far more insensibility of heart, more profligacy of morals, than ever fell to my lot. And nothing possibly could have admitted a presumption of this nature, but a depravity, not inferior to that imputed to me. However, as I stand indicted at your lordship's bar, and have heard what is called evidence educed in support of such a charge, I very humbly solicit your lordship's patience, and beg the hearing of this respectable audience, while 1, single and unskilful, destitute of friends, and unassisted by counsel, say something, perhaps, like argument, in my defence. I shall consume but little of your lordship's time; what I have to say will be short, and this brevity, probably, will be the best part of it: however, it is offered with all possible regard, and the greatest submission to your lordship's consideration, and that of this honourable court. First, my lord, the whole tenor of my conduct in life contradicts every particular of this indictment. Yet I had never said this, did not my present circumstances extort it from me, and seem to make it necessary. Permit me here, my lord, to call upon malignity itself, so long and cruelly busied in this prosecution, to charge upon me any immorality, of which prejudice was not the author. No, my lord, I concerted na schemes of fraud, projected no violence, injured no man's person or property. My days were honestly laborious, my nights intensely studious. And, I humbly conceive, my notice of this, especially at this time, will not be thought impertinent, or unseasonable; but, at least, deselving some attention: because, my lord, that any pers son, after a temperate use of life, a series of thinking and acting regularly, and without one single deviation from sobriety, should plunge into the very depth of profligacy, precipitately and at once, is altogether improbable and nnprecedented, and absoJutely inconsistent with the course of things Mankind is never corrupted at once; villainy is always progressive, and declines from right, step after step, till every regard of probity is lost, and ever sense of all moral obligation totally perishes. Again, my lord, a suspicion of this kind, which nothing but malevolence could entertain, and ignorance propagate, is violently opposed by my very situation at that time, with respect to health: for, but a little space before, I had been confined to my bed, and suffered under a very long and severe disorder, and was not able, for half a year together, so much as to walk. The distemper left me indeed, yet slowly and in part; but so macerated, so enfeebled, that I was reduced to crutches; and was so far from being well about the time I am charged with this fact, that I never to this day perfectly recovered. Could then a person in this condition take any thing into his head so unlikely, so extravagant? I, past the vigour of my age, feeble and valetudinary, with no induce inducement to engage, no ability to accomplish, no weapon wherewith to perpetrate such a fact; without interest, without power, without motive, without means. Besides, it must needs occur to every one, that an action of this atrocious nature is never heard of, but, when its springs are laid open, it appears that it was to support some indolence, or supply some luxury, to satisfy some avarice, or oblige some malice; to prevent some real, or some imaginary want: yet I lay not under the influence of any one of these. Surely, my lord, I may, consistent with both truth and modesty, affirm thus much; and none, who have any veracity, and knew me, will ever question this. In the second place, the disappearance of Clark is suggested as an argument of his being dead: but the uncertainty of such an inference frorn that, and the fallibility of all conclusions of such a sort from such a circumstance, are too obvious, and too notorious, to require instances: yet, superceding many, permit me to produce a very recent one, and that afforded by this castle. In June, 1757, William Thompson, for all the vigilance of this place, in open day-light, and doubleironed, made his escape; and, notwishstanding an immediate inquiry set on foot, the strictest search and all advertisement, was never seen or heard of since. If then Thompson got off unseen, through all these difficulties, how very easy was it for Clark, when none of them opposed him? But what would be thought of a prosecution commenced against any one seen last with Thompson? Permit me next, my lord, to observe a little upon the bones which have been discovered. It is said, which perhaps is say-" ing very far, that these are the skeleton of a man. It is possible indeed it may but is there any certain known criterion, which incontestably distin guishes C 3 |