The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1878-08-10 00:00:00

TWENTY YEARS' PENAL SERVITUDE.

At the Norfolk Assizes, a man named Williamson
described Ls a dealer, 45 years of age, was indicted for
feloniously striking his wife with a poker, with intent to kill
and murder her, at Fouisham, in .Norfolk, on the 28th of
February.—Mr. Simms Reeve conducted the case for the
prosecution; the prisoner was undefended.—We take the
following report oh the case from The Times

It appeared that the prisoner had neglected and ill-
treated his wife, who at last, unable to bear his ill-
usage, had left him and taken refuge with her
mother. This incensed the man, and he followed her
to her mother's to try to force her to go back to him.
On the 28th of February last he went to the house
and saw her and pressed her for some time to go with
him, which she refused, as she was, she said, afraid to
live with him. He then pulled out his knife. She ran
to the window; he followed her and seized her, and, as
she and her mother said, tried to stab her in the neck
with the knife ; but, in the struggle it fell and was broken.
He then seized her by the hair of the head and
beat her head violently against the ground. He then
seized the poker, and began striking her with iton tho
head with all his force She fell and he kept on
ati acing her on the head as she lay on the floor, saying
as he tad so, "Will you go with me ? " "Oh, yes,"
said the woman, as the blows fell upon her. "It's
too late now," said the man, "and I may as well
finish you off ; " and he kept on striking her violently,
the last blow, as the woman was lying on the ground,
striking against the floor and breaking the poker in
half. There were, the surgeon said, seven wounds,
cut and contused, on the head, over the temples and
forehead, one of which had fractured the skull.
Blood flowed copiously from the wounds which were
inflicted. The woman was insensible, and remained
so for several days, and was in danger of her life, and
was not now quite recovered.
The man said nothing in his defence except that he
had a great deal to put up with and was in drink at
the time; but the witnesses said he did not seem to be
in drink.

The lamed Judge, in summing up the case to the
jury, said it was a very serious case, and, short of
actual murder, the attempt to kill and murder was the
most serious crime that could be committed against
the person. The only question was as to the intention
of the prisoner in inflicting the injuries, and that might
be judged of from the very nature of the injuries them-
selves. There was no provocation; the man went
to the house to look for his wife, because, he said,
"she would not go with him," and when she refused
he pulled out the knife and tried to stab her in the
neck, and then beat her on the head with the poker.
It was for the jury to consider with what intent these
injuries could have been inflicted, if not with intent to
kill, or, at all events, to do grievous bodily harm.
Did the prisoner intend to kill the woman? If they
thought that he had not that intention, then they
might find him guilty of wounding with intent to do
some grievous bodily harm.
The jury were some time in consideration, and
The learned Judge observed—You must understand
that you are not trying the prisoner for the murder.
The Foreman: No, my Lord, that we understand;
but our doubt is whether he went there originally with
the intention to kill the woman.

The learned Judge: The question is not with what
intention he went there originally, but with what
intent he inflicted these injuries.
The jury, after a few moments, returned a verdict
of-Guilty of wounding with intent to murder; but they
recommended him to mercy upon the ground that
they thought that he did not originally have that in-
tention.

It was proved, however, that the prisoner had been
already twice convicted of violent assaults.

The learned Judge, in passing sentence upon the
prisoner, said,—You have been in some respects very
fortunate—fortunate in the jury who have tried you
and who have found some reasons for recommending
you to mercy—but above all, fortunate in this, that
you did not succeed in doing that which you certainly
intended to do. It was a mere accident that you did
not succeed in killing your wife. Everything was done
by you that you could do to take her life. First you
tried to stab her with a knife, and then you took the
poker and inflicted seven wounds upon her, one of
which fractured her skull. It is, as far as you are
concerned, a case of murder and deserves the same
punishment. Ido not think I could imagine a worse
case. You had neglected and ill-treated your wife;
you had neglected to provide her with the means of
subsistence; you had driven her from your house by
ill-treatment; you pursued her in order to force her to
return and you struck her these blows, the effects of
which will leave her miserable for life; for her skull
is fractured, and she is in a state in which she can
never eiajoy health again. I should have thought it
was a case which called for the severest punishment I
could inflict; but I do not like entirely to disregard
the recommendation of the jury; and therefore in-
stead of sentencing you to penal servitude for life, I
sentence you to penal servitude for 20 years.
The prisoner was thunderstruck at his sentence
(which no one else, however seemed to regret), and was
removed whining and howling loudly.