The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-19 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT—MAIDSTONE, March 18.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr, Justice Wightman.)
THE CHATHAM MURDER.

Robert Alexander Burton, 18, described as a carpenter,
was charged with the wilful murder of Thomas Frederick
Houghton at Chatham on the 23d of .'uly, 18G2.
Mr. Barrow and Mr. Marsham conducted the prosecu-
tion. The prisoner was defended by ➢lr, Ribtor, and Mr.
Willoughby.

The case stood over from the summer assizes, and the
circumstances under which the crime was committed were
very extraordinary. The deceased was stated to be a nice
little intelligent lad, about 9 years and a half old ; and it
seemed that on the 23d of July last he was walking with his
mother in the town of Chatham, and the prisoner was ob-
served to notice them, and after the poor lad had parted
from his mother, which he did shortly afterwards, the pri-
soner appeared to have decoyed him to Chatham Lines, and
when they were close to a :arge heap of chalk, he attacked
him, and forced him to the ground, and stat bed him in the
throat with a knife, and thus caused his death. The strange
part of the transaction was, that the prisoner did not seem
to have ever quarrelled with the deceased, or to have borne
him any ill will, and on the day following the murder he
went to one of the county constabulary stationed at Chat-
ham, and voluntarily admitted that he had murdered the
boy whose body had been found on the Lines, and he gave a
circums' antialaccount of every circumstance connected with
the horrid act. After he was committed for trial he never
seemed desirous to screen himself for a moment from the con-
sequences of his crime, but, on the contrary, ho continually
stated that he was the person who had killed the boy, and
that he wished to be hung. Under ordinary circumstances
he would have been tried at the winter gaol delivery of last
year, but, it appeared, that at this time he had expressed a
positive determination to plead guilty, and Mr. Ribton, who
had been retained to defend him, applied to the Court to
postpone the trial to these assizes, in order that an oppor-
tunity might be afforded for bringing forward evidence as
to the state of the prisoner's mind. It seems from inquiries
that have been made that ever since he has been in custody,
however, he has never exhibited the slightest symptom of
want of intellect, and so far es outward appearances go, he
has always seemed to be fully aware of the character of his
offence, and to desire to suffer the last penalty of the law
for it.

The prisoner, who is a rather intelligent and good• look-
ing lad, was placed at the bar at the sitting of the Court,
when Mr. Avery, the deputy clerk of assize, read the in-
dictment which charged him, in the usual form, with hav-
ing, of his malice aforethought, killed and murdered the
deceased, and asked him whether he pleaded guilty to that
charge, he smiled, and in a distinct tone of voice said " I
am guilty,"
Mr. Avory inquired whether he understoood that he was
accused of having purposely and wilfully killed the deceased.
The prisoner said he understood this perfectly well.
Mr. Avery—And you plead guilty to it?
Mr. Ribton observed that the prisoner had always ex-
pressed his determination to plead guilty, and, so far as his
own feelings went, all he seemed to desire was that he
should be hanged.
Mr. Justice Wightman said he was aware of that, and he
then addressed the prisoner, and said it appeared to him
that it would be much better for the interests of justice, and
that it would also be better for all purposes, that he should
plead not guilty, and he at the same time told the prisoner
that by bim so pleading, it would not be understood that
he denied having committed the act, but merely that he
wished to be tried.

The prisoner then pleaded not guilty, and the trial pro-
ceeded. He seemed to pay great attention to the evidence,
and repeatedly gave a vacant smile while the witnesses
were giving their testimony.
The main facts of the case, as above narrated, were, of
course, not disputed, and several witnesses wereexamined,
who deposed to the finding of the body, &c. It also ap •
peared that when Mr. Locke, the surgeon, was examined
before the magistrates he expressed an opini,in that, in ad-
dition to the wound that was discovered on the neck, the
neckerchief round the throat of the deceased had been drawn
very tight, and so as nearly to cause suffocation, and that
when the prisoner heard him say this he interrupted him,
and said he was wrong, and that he had clenched the throat
of the deceased with his hands only.
The following are the more material portions of the addi-
tional evidence that was adduced :

Stephen Hibburd, one of the Kent county constabulary,
said—On Thursday night, the 24th July, between 11 and 12
o'clock, I was in Superintendent Everest's stable, at Chat-
ham, when the prisoner came down the yard and looked
into the stable. I asked him what he wanted, and he replied,
" I murdered that boy on the Lines," I saw that he was
dirty, and his sleeves were turned up. I took the prisoner to
Alma-terrace, where Superintendent Everest lives, and
where the mother of the deceased boy also resides, and just
before we arrived there the prisoner said, "You are not
going to take me to the boy's mother, are you ?" I told him
I was not, and I then went with him to the sul erintendent,
and he came downstairs from his bedroom, and I told him
what the prisoner had said, and he went away to finish
dressing himself. While he was gone the prisoner said to
me, " I struck him in the neck with my knifo, and when he
was down I trod on his face and neck, and then kneeled
down on his belly and put my hands on his neck and pressed
it till the blood gushed from his nose and mouth." The pri-
soner appeared quite cool and collected when he made this
statement.

Some other witnesses were then examined,whose testimony
went to show that the statement of the prisoner, with regard
to his proceedings after the dreadful affair, was eorrect in

every particular, and it was slso proved that the knife with

which the act was committed had been made a present to
the prisoner about a fortnight before, but that at that time
it was not sharp at the point, as it now appeared.
This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Ribton then made a most able address to the jury
on behalf of the prisoner. He said that of course it would
be idle for him to attempt to deny that the prisoner's was
the hand by whom the unhappy deceased lad had met his
death, but he urged that all the facts of the case, according
to his view of the evidence, tended to show almost conclu-
sively that the prisoner was not in such a state of mind at
the time as to be criminally responsible for his actions. He
called the attention of the jury to the opinions of several
eminent medical authorities in reference to the subject, and
reminded them that the total absence of motive for the com-
mission of such a dreadful crime was always considered a
strong proof of insanity, particularly when this was coupled
with the fact that the person committing the act made no
attempt to conceal it, but, on the contrary, voluntarily came
forward, and admitted it, and entered into a minute and
circumstantial detail of all the horrible circumstances con-
nected with the crime. This was the course that had been
taken by the prisoner, and he said it was very doubtful
whether, if he had not gone to the constable and made the

statements that had been given in evidence, he would have
been suspected. The learned counsel concluded an eloquent
speech by stating that if the jury should feel themselves
compelled to return a verdict the effect of which would un-
doubtedly be to consign the miserable youth at the bar to
the scaffold, he would not meet that fate with terror
and dismay, as was the case with ordinary criminals under
similar circumstances, but that he would rush into the pre-
sence of his maker smiling as he did at that moment (the
prisoner had been observed just before laughing at the ob-
servations of the learned counsel), and exulting at hay ing
achieved the only result he appeared to have in view when
he committed this dreadful crime.

Witnesses were then called for the defence, among whom
was Mr. Andrews, a tradesman, at Chatham, to whom the
prisoner had been apprenticed, and he stated that his con-
duct had upon several occasions been very extraordinary,
and that at times he exhibited the appearance of a maniac,
and he was in consequence compelled to discharge him. It
was also proved that at another time a cat had been killed,
and that the prisoner ate a portion of it, and that the re-
mainder was baked in a pie, and he ate that also. Dr. Fayel,
a medical gentleman at Chatham, was also examined, and
he proved that the mother of the prisoner had been confined
in a lunatic asylum, and he also expressed an opinion that
at the time the prisoner committed the act he was suffering
from homicidal mania, which he could not control, and that
he was consequently not responsible for his actions. In or-
der to rebut this testimony Dr. Joy and Dr. Harold, the
medical officers of the gaol, were examined, and they stated
that in consequence of what occurred at the last assizes,
when the trial was postponed to afford an Opportunity for
evidence being brought forward as to the state of his mind,
they had paid particular attention to the prisoner, and they
had not observed the slightest circumstance to lead them to
the conclusion that there was anything like insanity about,
him, or that he was not perfectly conscious of the position in
which he stood and the nature of the crime he had committed.

The learned Judge, in summing up the case to the jury,
said that before they would be justified in coming to the
conclusion that the prisoner was not a responsible agent they
must be satisfied that at the time the act was committed his
mind was in such a state as to render him unable to distin-
guish between right and wrong, or to be aware that what he
was doing was an offence againet the law. It had been said
that he had acted under the impulse of what was called ho-
micidal mania, which meant a tendency to kill, but he must
observe that if a defence of this kind were allowed to prevail
it would certainly tend to the most dangerous consequences
so far as the safety of human life and the security of the pub-
lic were concerned. The object of the prisoner undoubtedly
appeared to be to cause the destruction of his own life, by
the commission of the crime of murder upon another. This
was no doubt a most strange and extraordinary motive on
his part ; but at the same time it showed that at the time he
committed the act he was perfectly well aware of its nature
and of the consequences that would result from it, and it
was perfectly clear also that he was not labouring under
anything like a delusion in the proper sense of the term
when he committed the offence. His lordship then called
the attention of the jury to all the material points in the
evidence, and concluded by repeating that unless they were
perfectly satisfied that at the time the act was committed
the prisoner was not aware what he was doing, or of the na-
ture and character of that act and its consequences, they
would not be justified in giving effect to the defence of in-
sanity that had been sot up in his behalf.
The jury retired to deliberate upon their verdict, and in
about a quarter of an hour they returned into court, and
found the prisoner guilty of wilful murder.
Mr. Avory then asked the prisoner, in the usual tams,

whether he had anything to urge why sentence of death
sh'uld not be passed upon him, and he laughed, and in the
coolest possible manner replied, " No, sir."
Mr. Justice Wightman then put on the black cap, and
addressing the prisoner, said that the jury; who were the
proper judges of the facts, after a most careful considera-
tion of his case, had found him guilty of the crime of wil-
ful murder, and he could not help observing that it was
one of the most barbarous and irhuroan murders that had
ever come under his cognisance during a judicial experience
of 20 years. His victim was a poor little boy, not ten years
of age, who was described as an intelligent, harmless boy,
who had never given him the slightest offence, and whom
he had murdered under circumstances so cruel that he
would forbear from making any further allusion to them.
It was said that he a as labouring under amorbid desire and
anxiety to die by the hands of justice, and that he com-
mitted the murder with that object. This morbid desire to
part with his own life could hardly be called a delusion, but
it showed that he was perfectly well able to appreciate the
consequences of his act, and that he was committing a crime
that was punishable by law with death, and this as it ap-
peared to him was an aggravation of his offence. For such
a crime there could be no hope of mercy for him in this
world, and he must therefore entreat him to cast his thoughts
beyond the grave, and endeavour by sincere repentance to
obtain that mercy from Heaven which he could not expect
here. His lordship concluded by passing sentence of death
in the usual form.

The prisoner heard the sentence of death, which was given
in the most impressive and earnest manner by the learned
judge, with the utmost indifference. He was laughing
nearly the whole time his lordship was addressing him, and
when he concluded he put his finger up to his forehead and
called out " Thank you, my lord," and then stepped down
the stairs leading from the dock, apparently in a state of
perfect unconcern.

MIDLAND CIRCUIT.—LINcoLN, March 17.
(Before Mr. Justice Willes.)
THE MAREHAM-LE••FEN MURDERS.

John Garner, 48, farmer and coaldealer, was charged
with the murder of Hannah Garner, his wife, on March 28,
1861, and with the murder of Jemima Garner, his mother,
on Dec. 20, 1861. Elizabeth Garner, his second wife (for-
merly his servant), was arraigned on similar charges.
Mr. Stephen, the Hon. C. Leigh, and Mr. Mellor were
for the prosecution ; Mr. Sergeant O'Brien, Mr. Flowers,
and Mr. Huish were for the defence.

The case, which has occupied almost two days, may in its
facts be very briefly stated. The female prisoner was in the
service of the male prisoner and his wife. John Garner, the
husband, was generally an affectionate man to his family
when sober, but behaved very badly to his wife and mother
at other times, so much so as to beat and kick them. The
wife died, and Whitaker (the servant) having had words
with her master, quitted the service, but was often heard
to say " She could hang him any day if people only knew
what messes he gave his wife." Subsequently the mother
died under very suspicious circumstances, Garner having
in the meantime married Whitaker. The body of the
mother was exhumed after the funeral, and found to con-
tain arsenic sufficient to cause death. The body of the
wife was then taken from its grave after an interment of
nearly a year, and upon examination of the viscera of
the stomach the same appearance presented themselves. It
was shown there was abundance of arsenic on the premises
for agricultural purposes. The male prisoner alone was
charged with the murder of the wife, but both were indicted
for the murder of ill.) mother. The male prisoner attended
on his wife in her illness, and gave her the food of which
she principally partook, but the female prisoner did the
same for the mother ; and all persons who had partaken of
the gruel or broth she prepared for the mother were seri-
ously affected in health.
These facts having been proved in evidence, the jury,
after a lengthened consultation, returned a verdict of Man-
slaughter against both prisoners, when the learned judge
pronounced a sentence of penal servitude for life on each
prisoner.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

- -- - - ----- v-

NEWARK—WEDNESDAY.
White wheat new, 50s to 53s ; Barley, grinding.. 28s to 308
Red do. 445 to 518 i Oats, old, .. 26, to 29s
Old white s9s to 62s 1 New do 208 to 268
Red do.. 53s to 57s Beans.. 435 to 465
Barley, malting.... 38s to 435 i Beans, new.. 38s to 40s
Yeas, 35s to 38s.