The morning after the trial was concluded the following article in reference to the matter appeared in the Argus —

“During the past three months we have frequently in our columns commented on the extraordinary case which is now so widely known as ‘The Hansom Cab Tragedy.’ We can safely say that it is the most remarkable¹ case which has ever come under the notice of our Criminal Court, and the verdict given by the jury yesterday has enveloped² the matter in a still deeper mystery. By a train of strange coincidences, Mr. Brian Fitzgerald, a young squatter⁴, was suspected of having murdered Whyte, and had it not been for the timely appearance of the woman Rawlins who turned up at the eleventh hour, we feel sure that a verdict of guilty would have been given, and an innocent man would have suffered punishment for the crime of another. Fortunately for the prisoner, and for the interests of justice, his counsel, Mr. Calton, by unwearied diligence, was able to discover the last witness, and prove an alibi⁶. Had it not been for this, in spite of the remarks made by the learned counsel in his brilliant speech yesterday, which resulted in the acquittal of the prisoner, we question very much if the rest of the evidence in favour of the accused would have been sufficient to persuade the jury that he was an innocent man. The only points in favour of Mr. Fitzgerald were the inability of the cabman Royston to swear to him as the man who had got into the cab with Whyte, the wearing of a diamond ring on the forefinger⁷ of the right hand (whereas Mr. Fitzgerald wears no rings), and the difference in time sworn to by the cabman Rankin and the landlady⁸. Against these points, however, the prosecution⁹ placed a mass of evidence, which seemed conclusively¹⁰ to prove the

分享到：