same year, and acquitted. The trial was a very remarkable one. Facts
were proved with unusual clearness and precision, which put it beyond
the bounds of physical possibility that he could have murdered Mary
Ashford. Those facts hinged on the time shown by several different
clocks, compared with the standard time kept at Birmingham. But the
public feeling on the matter was intense. An engraving of the scene of
the alleged murder, with a stimulating letter-press description, was
published at the time, and the general sense undoubtedly was, that the
perpetrator of a very foul murder had escaped his just doom. Hoping to
do away with this impression, a well-known local lawyer bethought
himself of the long-forgotten "Appeal of Murder," trusting that by a
second acquittal Thornton's innocence would be acknowledged by all.
Though the condition of all the parties was but humble, friends soon
came forward with funds and good advice, so that within the year and a
day which the law allowed, proceedings were taken in the name of William
Ashford (Mary's brother, who, as next heir, according to the old law,
had the sole power of pardon in such a case) for an "Appeal of Murder"
against Abraham Thornton. What followed is here given in Mr. Toulmin
Smith's own words:--"I have seen it stated, hot indignation colouring
imagination, that here was a weak stripling nobly aroused to avenge the
death of his sister, by tendering himself to do battle against the tall
strong man who was charged with her murder. The facts, as they stand are
truly striking enough; but this melodramatic spectacle does not formally
true part of them." A writ of "Appeal of Murder" was soon issued. It
bears the date of 1st October, 1817. Under that writ Thornton was again
arrested by the Sheriff of Warwick. On the first day of Michaelmas Term,
in the same year, William Ashford appeared in the Court of King's Bench
at Westminster, as _appellant_, and Abraham Thornton, brought up on writ
of _habeas corpus_, appeared as _appellee_. The charge of murder was
formally made by the appellant; and time to plead to this charge was