The Sun. — 1864-07-20 (London, England)

CROIVN COURT. (Before Mr Baron Bramwell.)  "Wm, John Stevens was indicted for the wilful murder of Annie Leeson, at Buckingham, on the 27th February. Mr Keane, Q.C., and Mr Markby were counsel for the prosecution—the prisoner being defended by Mr Payne.  From the opening statement of the learned Counsel for the prosecution it appeared that the prisoner and the poor girl whose death was the subject of the present inquiry, and who was a servant in the employ of a butcher at Buckingham, were not only near neighbours but were lovers—at least there was sufficient proof on the prisoner's side of a very strong affection. They both used to meet once a week at Buckingham where her patents lived,and where he lodged with her parents. On Saturday, Feb. 27, she having then gone home as usual, went out with a pail to the pump near her parents' house, and before she could be aware of what was about to happen the prisoter, whose step had been heard in the house, was seen to run out after her, say something to her, and immediately clasp her round the neck, And draw something across her throat. The poor creature got away from him and staggered into her master's shop, who to his horror found her throat cut, atd in whose arms she died in a few minutes, the prisoner having in the meanwhile cut his own throat so severely as nearly to die himself. The learned Counsel for the defence examined the charge and the evidence in support ofit, and after a careful investigation, urged the main—nay, the only point in behalf of the prisoner—viz., that the state of frenzy he was in from jealousy drove him beside himself and into the commission of the dreadful act.  His Lordship then proceeded to sum up the evidence, and said—" Gentlemen, this is a very sad case. You have a young girl of good character losing her life through the act of one who otherwise has been a well-conducted young man, and who, had his feelings been under proper control, might have passed the remainder of a respectable life. The learned judge then told the jury that there were three questions for them to consider—first, how did the girl's death happen ? secondly, by whose hand was her death inficted ? and, thirdly, if by the prisoner's hand, what was the nature of the crime ? As to the first and second, after the incontestable evidence that had been adduced, the jury could have but little doubt. As to the third, said his lordship, if a man wilfully inflicts a wound calculated to cause death, and death ensues, it matters not that he had in his mind no wish or intention to take life, he must be held responsible for the consequences of his act, and his crime is murder, and the good sense of this is obvious; for what does it matter to society whether the man intended to kill or not if he does take life ? lam bound to tell you, gentlemen, that there is no evidence that this crime is other than murder if you think the prisoner did the act." The jury, after a short deliberation, returned into court with a verdict of Guilty, and, after the prisoner had been called upon in the usual way, His Lordship sentenced him to death. (Before Baron Channel')  Thomas Price, aged 17, pleaded Guilty to the manslaughter of Wm. Dale at Beaconsfield, at the 12th June. In passing sentence, his Lordship said—You have pleaded guilty to this very seriouscharge. I have looked through the depositions in order to see what are the real circumstances connected with it, and I gather from them that you caused the death of the deceased under the influence of great provocation on his part towards yourself. This unfortunate event began in what is called a " lark," and I see that the first act of violence, after the " lark" assumed a different appearance, proceeded fro= the deceased. In return for the blow you received you threw a stick, which hit hiui on the back of the head, whet he rose as if for the purpose of hitting you again, staggered towards you, and fell. I am sure when you come to thin'c of and reflect upon this sad termination of your dispute, you will feel acutely for having been the cause of tho dealt of a fellow-creature, and I therefore think it unneeetpary t) say anything to increase your grief, nor do 1 think this mischance calls for a very severe punishment—l therefore sentence you to three weeks' imprisonment.  With this case the business of the circuit for the county of Bucks ended.