John Ardley was convicted of a burglary in the house of Francis Ruffle, at Earls Colne, and stealing a pocket book, containing bank notes and silver, to a considerable amount, and other property.

HANNAH RUFFLE, daughter of the prosecutor, deposed: that she lived with her father in a small farmhouse between Coggeshall and Earls Colne; he is between 80 and 90 years old, and is unable to attend, on account of his infirmities. On the 10th of October, between one and two o'clock in the morning, she was disturbed by hearing a slight noise below, followed by a crash; she thought her father was taken ill, and she got out of bed; on going to open her door, she perceived a glimmer of a light through the cracks, and instantly two men rushed in upon her; one had a lighted candle in his hand, who told her if she went to bed and lay quiet they would not harm her; she then got into bed, and the man with the candle retired to the door, which was ajar, whilst the other advanced to her bedside with a pistol in one hand and a bludgeon in the other, and demanded the keys of the old man's money . She said he had no keys. Prisoner replied "if he had no keys, you have - its money we want, and money we will have". He then presented the pistol to her head; she immediately gave him three pounds in bank notes, of the Mill's Colchester Bank, from her pocket under the pillow. The man was not satisfied, and said he would ransack the old man's bedroom, and blow his brains out; she entreated him not to molest or hurt her father, for he had got no money; the fellow replied, if he had none, she had, it was money he wanted and money he would have; and added, with dreadful oath "If you don't give me more money, I'll blow your brains out in a moment:". Terrified at his horrible threats, she turned to take her money from under her head, and whilst doing so, he said, still presenting the pistol, "Be quick, or I'll blow your brains out;" and she gave him a red morocco pocket book containing five pounds, a five-pound note of the Braintree Bank, five-pounds ten-shillings in sovereigns and half sovereigns, one pound in crowns and half-crowns, and one shilling; on receiving it, he said there was no money in it, but she told him it was every shilling she had in the world, and they then left her chamber; the money she gave was the property of her father. The man at her bedside was dressed in a short light jacket, buttoned close round his waist, with a striped worsted or cotton cap; the one who stood against the door, with a candle in his hand, wore a dark or blue coat, and an old black hat. After the men had left the room, she listened till she heard them depart through the garden-gate, and then walked down stairs, where she found a candle burning on the table, and the front door wide open; the thieves had entered by taking down a sufficient number of laths to admit a person; from thence a door had been broken open, which led to the kitchen, and another door leading to the parlour had been forced open, and the papers strewed upon the floor and against the front door; she missed a silver thimble from her work basket, which was on the bureau; it had a rim round it traversely cut, and an indentation in the middle, the mark of her tooth. The prisoner at the bar she solemnly believed to be the person who held the candle; (the Judge and the Counsel for the prisoner expressed their satisfaction the prisoner was not the person who had the pistol, a fact which had not before transpired); he had no weapon in his hand; she remarked the colour of his hair, and she remembered his voice. On the afternoon of the robbery, Prior, the constable, brought the prisoner to her father's house; he was not dressed as in the morning; before he was brought, foot marks had been discovered under the pantry window, at the end of the house, and at the back door, all in the direction of the pantry; she found no impression in the front of the house, the ground being dry; a shoe was compared with the impressions, some of which plainly corresponded, others were partly obliterated. Witness had never seen the prisoner before the robbery; she was very much alarmed at the time, but particularly remarked the prisoner’s voice, and before she saw him again, she mentioned that he rather lisped, or had lost a tooth; the latter proved to be the case.

NATHANIEL PRIOR, constable of Great Coggeshall, took the prisoner into custody on the 10th, about two o’clock, in one of the streets of Coggeshall, there was none of the stolen property on his person, or in his house, which he searched.

THOMAS QUILTER, farmer, of Terling, was one of the neighbours aroused on the morning of the robbery; between six and seven he was at Mr Ruffle’s, and observed foot marks under the pantry window; there were two particularly large nails in the heel, rather apart, and on the ground the dirt rose between them; the shoe produced would make such an impression; he did not compare it.

GEORGE WRIGHT, keeper of Halsted House of Correction, received the prisoner in custody on the 11th of October; Johnson, the constable, took his shoes off in his presence; on the Sunday following they went to Mr Ruffle’s, and compared the impression on the ground with the shoes, and they corresponded exactly; there were a few foot marks, here and there, in front of the house.

JOHN JOHNSON corroborated this evidence, and also said that when he took the prisoner to Halsted, having acquainted him with the charge against him, he denied having left the house that night, which the persons living with him could swear to.

MARIA EVERETT, of Coggeshall, said the prisoner was her lodger; on the night of the 9th she went to bed between eight and nine o’clock; the prisoner supped between seven and eight; he afterwards went out and was absent at the time when she went to bed; she awoke between three and four, and perceived a light in her sitting room; she got out of bed, and observed the prisoner his shirt sleeves and small clothes, with a light; she never knew him to rise so early before.

HANNAH MARSHALL searched the prisoner’s wife on the 12th, by direction of the constable; she found a silver thimble and 4 or 5 half-crowns in her possession; it was a large deep thimble, with a rim round it, and battered about the middle, like a dot.

THE PRISONER made no defence.

THE LEARNED JUDGE, in summing up, said he was happy to find that the prisoner was not the man who committed the greatest outrage; had that person appeared at the bar, and been convicted, his life would most probably have been forfeited. At the same time, if it proved that the prisoner had been present, aiding and abetting, in point of law he would be equally guilty. The case was one entirely of circumstances, for the evidence of Miss Ruffle, seeing the man was nothing of itself, her mind being so intensely agitated at the time; therefore the Jury must examine the various evidence, some of which, he believed, tended strongly to confirm Miss Ruffle’s; they must be satisfied of the guilt of the prisoner before they pronounced a verdict against him. Death recorded. It was intimated by the Learned Judge that he would be sent out of the country for life.