The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1872-12-21 00:00:00

TRIAL FOR MURDER.

At the Darkim ASO,II, John flrant, at 31, a plasterer,
was in.:if:tea for the wilful murder of his wife Mary Grant,
at the Felling, near Cateshead, on the 27th of July last
----•• • • • •

The locality of the offence, Mr. Moynell stated in
opening the case was known as Little Ireland, the place
being all but exclusively inhabited by Irish (+Mai.%
The prisoner, who 'lea furnaceman and was employed at
the Felling chemical works hal rmided fio. several
min the with his wife a wciaan about thirty.three yea, s
of age, at the place The day of the occurrence was
pay-day a: the chemical works, and the plisener, on
receiving his money, proceeded with a lodger of his,
named Macartney, to a public-house. There they re-
maieed some time, and eventual;, about five retook
in the afternoon, Grant's wife went to the public.bouse
and endeavoured to induce her husband to accompany
her home. Ile did not at once comply with her re.
queet, but soon afterwards he left, and Grant, his wife,
and the lodger proceeded Milne. On arriving home the
deceased aakaa her husband for some money, as she
wiehed to go out aml purchase some provi.ione.
Ile tendered her 7e. fid, out of his fay. Mrs.
I Grant took the money, but began to find fault with her
husband, and upbraided him with having spent his
money in the puolic-house and left her to starve. A
I quarrel ensued, and the prisoner struck and kicked his
' wife in such a brutal manner that conic of the neigh-
bours interfered and held him back, and two women
lifted up Mts. Grant and carried 11. r out of her hus-
band's reach. She was at that time quite insensib'e,
ant the neighbours did all in their power to restore
animation, but she died within five minutes from the
time she was tut assailed by her husband.
- -

His Lordship, in summing up, laid down with great
clearness the.distinction between minder and man-
slaughter, and what circumstances would reduce the
crime of murder to manslaughter, and then, summing
up the evidence, left it to the jury to say, as reasonable
men, whether there was in the present case any act of
violence on the part of his wife which might have pro-
voked the anger and hot blood of the lansteind, in which
he had struck and kicked his wife. Her threats to him to
give him six or twelve months for what he had done to
her she had a right to make, and, if she had been
able, to give him there and then into custody for it;
and it would be a most dangerous doctrine to hold that
such threats or acts would extenuate the consequences
of a blow which catn,ed death from murder to man-
slaughter. If the jury, on the evidence, thought there
bad been mere words of abuse and threats by the wife,
the blow which caused her death was murder. If they
saw anything in the circumstances which led them to
suppose that the prisoner's act was caused by hot blood,
resulting from violence used to him, they might find
him guilty of manslaughter.
The jury, after au absence of an hour, found the
prisoner Gici/ty of manslaughter.
His Lordship sentenced him to penal servitude for
life.