The Press.
London, England, 1858-04-10 00:00:00

E RES S, APRIL 10, 1858.

largest cut was the first. When I received the blcws
closed with him, And caught him by the collar with my left
band, and his left wrist with my right. The last time I
saw Mrs. Smith, before I was attacked, she was three or
four yards off. When I closed we both fell ; he was
undermost, and I fell upon him. I kept my hold upon
him, with my left hand on his collar, and I held his left
hand out straight with my right. At that time I noticed
something in his left hand. I supposed at the time what
he held in his hand was the bludgeon I was struck
I called out " Murder," and " Help," and two or three
men came from the station. Two lights were
brought. One of the men lifted me off the prisoner.
When the man was going away the light was going away,
and my impression was that it was the same person whom
I had seen go into the waiting-room at Bristol. I cannot
tell what Mrs. Smith was doing at the time l was attacked.
I believe the man to have been the male prisoner, but I
will not swear.

.......__ _
Mr. Huddleston said there could be no question
about the identity of the prisoner.

The evidence of several witnesses was taken simply
to prove the identity of Mr. Smith, who was not de.
fended by counsel, and who, when the case for the
prosecution closed, addressed the court, and after
frankly revealing the circumstances under which he
bad met with and married Mrs. Smith, made the
following remarkable statement 1—

He had often observed that there was a melancholy
about his wife, and she would sigh on his bosom and tell
him that she was not worthy of him He had often corn-
plained of her staying so much in Kent, and that there
must be some reason for her melancholy, though he could
not tell what it was. She once told him of a letter she
had received from the man Leech, and mentioned other
circumstances which tended rather to :cite his jealousy.
But he overlooked it, as she continued to bear him children
and managed the house well. At length, on the •22nd of
January last, she told him something which made him very
unhappy, but he said he would forgive her if she would
take an oath that nothing had happened since their mar•
risge. She then knelt down and told him of the circum•
stances under which the prosecutor Leech induced her to
meet him at Canterbury and committed adultery with her,
and that Leech afterwards met her in London and pro
raised that, if sbe would go and live with him, he would
marry her in seven years. The prisoner then proceeded
to give a graphic description of his wife on her knees, with
her children round her, imploring his forgiveness. The
idea racked his mind that perhaps the children were not
his own. His wife, however, assured him that she had
never done anything wrong since she had been living with
him, and as he believed she had told him the truth, he
promised to forgive her after that discovery. He dwelt
upon the wrongs which had been done him, till he forgot
everything but himself. But he told his wife that he
would forgive her if she would bring the man to Bristol,
in order that he might retaliate. He designed, as he
( Leech) had lured his wife to Whitstable for his lust, he
( the prisoner' would lure the prosecutor to fate, and
there give him a sound thrashing. It was under his
directions his wife wrote the letters, which he dictated.
He then stated how he had insisted on his wife writing
the letters, and disguising herself, as she had done, on
the promise which he made her that he would not do
Leech any serious injury. He bought the revolver for
his own protection in case the prosecutor should draw a
knife upon him ; but he solemnly denied that he bad ever
intended to use the pistol aggressively against Leech,
for, had he done so, he would not have acted as he had,
so as to lead to his detection. His only object was to do
what he had done—viz., to give Leech a good beating, in
order to solace his outraged mind. He owned that he
could not justify his conduct, which he should always
deeply lament; but ho hoped his conduct would be justly
appreciated by the judge and jury, who could not blame
him for the burning indignation which hail overcome his
whale being. He implored the jury to put themselves in
his place, and ask themselves what redress the laws of the
land and courts of justice could have given him. He
took the law into his own hand, but who could deny that
he had sinned against human nature, or that Leech had
had more than he deserved? The jury might find him
guilty of an assault if they would, but he implored them
not to find him guilty of a felony, which would ruin his
prospects in life, and deprive his children of their bread.
Mr. Huddleston having addressed the jury in de-
fence of Mr. Smith, Mr. Baron Channell summed
up, and the jury, after a short deliberation, returned
a verdict of Guilty against both prisoners of cutting
and wounding with intent, &c., but they added that
Mrs. Smith had acted throughout under the coercion
of her husband.

Mr. Baron Channell deferred passing sentence
until the following day, when his lordship sentenced
the prisoner, Mr. Smith, to four years' penal servi-
tude ; Mrs. Smith to find sureties to appear when
called on.

THE TRIAL or Gtoverm lAN! for the murder of
an unfortunate woman in a house of ill.fame near
the Haymarket commenced on Thursday morning,
end terminated yesterday in a verdict of " Guilty." Mr.
Bodkin and Mr. Clerk conducted the prosecution on
behalf of the Treasury ; the prisoner was defended
by Mr. Tindal Atkinson and Mr. W. S. Austin. At
the conclusion of the sentence delivered by Mr. Jus-
tice Crompton, the prisoner said—l am not guilty,
and therefore I cannot be sentenced to death. I
am a minor, and not liable to the punishment of
death. Mr. Justice Crompton—Tell him that by the
laws of this country he is liable to c►pital punish-
ment in such a case as ibis whether a minor or not.