The Sun.
London, England, 1864-05-19 00:00:00

The late Execution in Glasgow.

(From the Edinburgh Correspondent of the Telegraph).
The unlucky Irishman Reilly, or Bryans (he went by
both names), who was convicted at the late Glasgow circuit
of the murder of a Mrs. Laffy on a cold, stormy night in
December, was executed at Glasgow yesterday morning, In
the whole annals of hanging it is doubtful if there ever were
death-struggles like his. He was violently convulsed for
about three minutes, and there were muscular twitchings of
his body for nine minutes. And the city magistrates had the
full benefit of his death agonies. When the drop fell the
body spun round from the rope untwisting itself, until it was
stopped by Calcraft, with the face to the portico of the
Justiciary Court-room, under which the m gistrates stood,
and the white cap being partially pulled off by the rope,
those who could look saw with terrible distinctness all the
contortions of that blackening and dying face. Much
good may this horrible execution do the people of Glasgow,
If it moderate the unthinking self-conceit and rashness of
the classes out of which jurymen are drawn in the west of
Scotland, it will be of some value in its effect. They decide
on the life or liberty of a human being in the same way
that they speculate upon a rise or fall of stocks and ruin
themselves or make fortunes, and with them a
very slight degree of probability is complete proof.
Their zeal for convicting all who cannot prove their
innocence is a subject for jesting among .lawyers,
both on the bench and at the bar. Whether that man
whose life was choked out of him in the course of
nine minutes yesterday morning was guilty or not, it is
difficult to say with confidence. But I have a strong con-
viction that, had he been tried out of Glasgow, and had he
not been a friendless Irishman and Roman Catholic, of
rather repulsive, reckless aspect, he would have escaped. The
evidence against him was what is called circumstantial, or
indirect. It did not point to his guilt, except afar off, and
it was perfectly compatible with his innocence. No one saw
hlm in the woman's company, no footmark of his showed
that he had taken part in "the protracted struggle" which
she had maintained with her assailant or her own drunken
incapacity. The evidence rather showed that he had not
time to hold any protracted struggle with her, and there
was no mark of violence upon him. Very little public in-
terest was taken in the case. The Roman Catholics of Glas-
gow signed a petition in his behalf, but they were too late
with their sympathy. Lord Dees' opinion was very evi-
dent from his charge, and he reported against a com-
mutation of the sentence to technical Sir George Grey,
as did also the Lord Justice Clerk, who would of
course be guided solely by the notes of evidence taken
by Lord Dees. Supposing the woman to have died
from violence, and not from drink and cold, he may
have been guilty of the whole of the violence or of part
of it. That is all I could, on oath, say against him,
and I know more than was proved. For one thing, I
know that when he was fleeing from justice or from suspi
cion on the first evening of his flight, he sought lodgings in
a house in Biggar, being apparently very weary, and hav-
ing, it is believed, walked from the place from which he
absconded, about 35 miles, on that day, He obtained the
promise of lodgings, but in two or three minutes after he
sat down in the house he happened to catch a glimpse of
a young woman who also saw and recognised him. He
made some excuse, and left the house and never returned.
This young woman upon whom he had come in his
flight stated to the Crown authorities, that about
two years ago, on a lonely road, about eleven miles from
Carlisle, where he was captured, and where he used to
work as a navvy, she was assaulted by an Irishman, who
attempted to ravish her; that she had never seen him
again until that night, when he came in asking lodgings,
and that Riley was this man who criminally assaulted her,
She was not examined at the trial. Evidence of a fact of
this kind could not be competently adduced in Scotland,
It could be and would have been in France, and it would
have had some weight either in connecting him with the
murder or in explaining why he should be conscious of a
crime, or attempted crime, which was not murder, and in
his panic think it safest to flee, which it certainly was not.
Had he not absconded he would have been quite safe.