The Sun. — 1851-08-07 (London, England)

JERVIS.) John Payne, 11, a led of inoffensive appearance, was indicted for the wilful murder 'of William Gibson, by stabbing him with a knife. Mr. Johnson prosecuted; Mr. Clarkson was for the defence.  The Learned COUNSEL, on opening the case for the prosecution, said it was a very painful position for him to appear as prosecutor of a lad of the tender ago of the prisoner, and especially when the charge against him was of such a very serious and dreadful character. He was fearful , however, that the evidence he should lay before them would leave no doubt that the unfortunate boy who was stated in the indictment to have been killed did in point of fact meet with his death from the act of the prisoner, and the only question for the consideration of the jury would be whether that act amounted to the crime of wilful murder, or whether it could be construed as one amounting only to manslaughter. He then proceeded to state the facts of the case, and it appeared that on the evening of the 14th of June the deceased, who was a lad about 13 years old, had been sent by his mother on an errand into the town of Horsham, and as he was going over the causeway near the church, saw the prisoner sitting upon the ground with one of his boots off, and in the act of sharpening a penknife upon the atones. What actually cccurred prior to any assault having been committed did not very clearly appear, but almost immediately the deceased exclaimed to the prisoner, " You have done it now—you have stabbed me," and began to cry. Tko prisoner upon this said, "I have nut hurt you, have I ?—don't cry." Some persons then came up, end on the deceased again saying that the prisoner had stabbed him, the latter said that the deceased boy bad struck him in the face first, before he touched him. The unfortunate deceased was taken home, and it was discovered that he had been stabbed in the chest, but the wound began to heal, and at first it was thought that nothing serious would result from it. It turned out, however, that the liver had been injured, and an abscess subsequently formed in that organ, and the deceased died on the 25th of June from the injury he had received.  ---These facts were shortly proved in evidence, and in addition a statement made by the deceased boy a couple of days before his death was put in, in which ho stated positively that he gave no provocation, but said that after he had passed the prisoner, while be was sitting in the position described, he got up and followed him, and that en his coming up to him he deliberately stabbed him with the penknife that ho had been sharpening. Mr. CLARKSON made a most feeling appeal to the jury on behalf of the prisoner, observing that he felt it would be idle to endeavour to save him from a conviction for the crime of manslaughter, and the only struggle he should make would be to endeavour to induce them to come to the charitable conclusion that there had been some struggle or scuffle between the prisoner and the unfortunate lad who had lost his life, during which the fatal injury had been inflicted. The illegal act of using a deadly instrument under such circumstances would in law undoubtedly amount to the crime of manslaughter, and of that offence ho submitted that the prisoner must, follow and considering upon hls c ot ah vei ctconviction o at all events, be convicted; but he did hope with some confidence that, looking at the tender age of the prisoner, dreadfulf the ° crimensequ eonf c ems utrdhaetr, theyght would feel that they were justified in saying that the act of the prisoner amounted only to manslaughter. The Learned JUDGE, in summing up, said that the present case was, undoubtedly, one of a most painful character to all parties, but at the same time they must take care that the law was carried out with integrity, and that a verdict in no case should be returned except in accordance with the sworn testimony in the case. It was his duty to tell them that by the law of England every act of homicide was looked upon in the light of murder unless the circumstances connected with it were such as to reduce the crime to one of lower magnitude, and the question for them to consider was whether there were any such circumstances in the present case. There certainly was no evidence to show in what manner the transaction first commenced, and it the jury should