The Sun.
London, England, 1854-02-02 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.—Feb. I.

OLD COURT.
•
(Before Mr. Justice Wightman.)
Wna. _Entwistle Willis, 61, law writer, was charged
with the capital offence of maliciously wounding Mary
Willis, with intent to murder her.
The prosecutrix deposed that the prisoner was her hus-
band, and they lived together in Lee's-buildings, Chan
cery-lane, at the time the occurrence took place. She
and the prisoner had latterly not been on good terms,
and occupied separate beds. On the night of Christmas
Eve, she went home about 12 o'clock, and at that time
the prisoner appeared to be preparing to go to bed, and
she proceeded to her own room, and had been in bed
about two hours, when the prisoner came into her room
and awoke her, and said, " Oh, Poll, I am so cold." She
asked him why he came to her if he was so cold, and the
prisoner without making any reply, got into her bed,
and almost at the same instant she felt herself cut upon
the ear and neck with some sharp instrument, and on
her putting up her hand to save herself from further
injury one of her fingers was nearly cut off. She screamed
for assistance, and the prisoner went away, and a person
named Hyatt, another lodger, came into the room, and
a surgeon was sent for, and it was discovered that her
ear and neck had been cut very severely.
The prisoner, who had no counsel, put several ques-
tions to his wife, apparently with the object of showing
that she was drunk on the night in question, and also
that she had been unfaithful to him. The prosecutrix,
however, indignantly denied th'it there was any founda-
tion for either of the accnsations made against her
character.

In answer to a question put by the learned judge,
the prosecutrix said that she had been married to the
prisoner for 22 years, and they had five grown up
children.

Thomas Hyatt deposed that upon hearing the screams
of the prosecutrix he went into her room, and found her
leaning out of bed, bleeding profusely from wounds upon
her neck. After the surgeon had arrived, he went into
another bedroom, where he found the prisoner, and upon
his asking him what he had been doing, he replied that
if his wife was not dead his hand must have been nervous.
The prisoner was covered by the bed clothes when he
went into the room, but on his raising himself up he ob-
served that his throat was also cut, and he appeared to
have lost a great deal of blood.
William Cheddeman, a police-constable, deposed that
he was sent for on the night in question, and, in conse-
quence of what he was told, he went into the bedroom
where the prisoner was, and found him with his throat
cut, as described by the last witness. He inquired of
him what was the matter, and what he had been doing,
and he replied, " I am only sorry that I did not do it
effectually." He saw the prisoner on his way home,
about an hour before the transaction took place, and at
that time he appeared to be drunk. The witness added,
that upon examining the bed of the prisoner, he found a
razor covered with blood.
Mary Willis, a daughter of the prisoner, proved that
she assisted to remove her mother from the bed, after
she had received the injury, and that she found a carving
knife, very bloody, in the bed.
Mr. Joues, a surgeon, residing in Fetter-lane, deposed
that he examined the prosecutrix and the prisoner
shortly after the occurrence. The former had received
a very severe cut upon the ear, and also upon the neck,
and one of her fingers was likewise wounded. None of
the injuries received by the prosecutrix were in them-
selves dangerous, but the wound upon the neck was very
close to the carotid artery, and if that had been divided
the result would in all probability have been fatal. He
subsequently discovered that the prisoner had also re-
ceived a wound on the throat, but although it had caused
the loss of a great deal of blood, the injury he had in-
flicted upon his person was not in itself of a very dan-
gerous character.
The prisoner, upon being called upon to address the
jury in answer to the charge, replied that he had nothing
to say, and he must leave his case to the mercy of the
court and jury.
Mr. Justice Wightman having summed up, the jury,
after deliberating a short time, found the prisoner guilty
of maliciously wounding the prosecutrix with intent to
do her grievous bodily harm.
The learned judge, in passing sentence, said that the
jury, who were the proper judges to decide upon the
intent of an accused person, had acquitted the prisoner
of the intention to destroy deliberately the life of
his wife, but undoubtedly if death had been the
result of the act committed by him, the offence
would have amounted to the crime of wilful
murder. His lordship then adverted to the facts
of the case, and said that although the life of the pro-
secutrix had not bean sacrificed, yet, taking into con-
sideration the nature of the injury that was inflicted,
and the instrument made use of, it appeared to him that
the prisoner was Morally as guilty as if that fatal re-
sult had taken place. He, therefore, felt it to be his
duty, as a warning to others, to pass upon him a severe
sentence, which was that he be transported beyond the
seas for the term of his natural life.
Mary Chapman, 30, and Thomas Higgins, 45, were
indicted for feloniously forging and uttering a will and
testament of John Reader, deceased.
Mr. Bodkin, in opening the case, said the prisoners
were charged with an offence which was regarded by
the law as one of a most serious character, and it ap-
peared to have been committed under rather singular
Circumstances. The prosecution was instituted by the
daughter of the deceased man, who was a person in very
humble circumstances, and 'who had with great difficulty
obtained the necessary means to enable her to bring the
case before a jury ; but when they had heard all the
facts he should lay before them, he did not think they
would entertain any doubt that the prisoners had fraudu-
lently concocted the instrument which was the subject
of inquiry, in order to deprive the relatives of the de-
ceased of the little property of which he was possessed
at the time of his death. The learned counsel then proceeded
to, state that the deceased had formerly kept a lodging-
house at Woolwich but for the last few years he had given
it up, and resided with the prisoner Chapman, who,
with her husband, kept a place of the same descrip-
time in that town, and at the time of his death, which
took place on the 13th October, he was possessed of a
sum of about 120/., which was placed in the Woolwich
Savings Bank. It would seem that at the old man's death
the prisoner Chapman put forth a will, by which this
money, and evertything else of which the deceased was
possessed, was bequeathed to her, but he said the evi-
dence would leave no doubt that this will was a forgery,
and that it had been got up by the two prisoners with
the assistance of another man, named Fitzgerald, who,
he said, the interests of justice required to be made a
witness for the Crown. Mr. Bodkin then proceeded to
narrate some other facts connected with the charge,
after which the witnesses were called to substantiate his
statement.