The Express. — 1861-09-30 (London, England)

CALI.EII., who was instrumental in getting him some employment. It appears, then, that SAUNIICSis entering Leg•court at about the hour when the murder was supposed to be committed, wont into the house occupied by the prisoner and the deceased woman. The parlour door was open, and the witness looked in. He saw a man strike a knife into a woman. The man had his beet towards the witness, and the woman stood facing him. Having seen this stab, which he describes as "a forward thrust with the right arm," the witness quietly walks away, and, merely remarking casually to some people who were stand. ing about the entrance to the court that " there is " murder going on in that court," he goes off, and, marvellous to relate, betakes himself to a neighbouring eating-house where he buys "Borne " pudding" and eats it. In the course of cramexamination this witness states that he can read and write very imperfectly, and that " unfortn" nately" he had not had much time for religious instruction. He professes, however, to have a distinct understanding of the importance of the evidence he has given, and to know that a life is at stake, and depending in a great degree on what he says. The solemn address of the Judge himself fails to shake the witness's statement, and the only explanation he tan give of the monstrous fact that he actually stood by and saw this murder committed without interfering in the victim's behalf, is that he was " frightened and confusA, and did not know what "he was about." The gross insensibility of this man, who could leave such a scene as this and go off immediately to an eating-house, is something which those only who are weU acquainted with the clam to which he belongs can at all comprehend. But this case of non-interference in a matter of life and death is far from being an isolated one. Any one who has had opportunities of witnessing the conduct of the mass of which an English crowd is composed will have observed how, in the presence of some scene of violence or danger, it is utterly paralysed and inactive. A few impotent exclamations of " It's a shame," or, " Why don't somebody interfere f " or " Can nobody find a policeman t " may be heard circulating among the bystanders on such occasions; but unless some educated person of more than common energy is by to take the initiative, nothing is done. When such an one comes forward, he never has to wait for backers ; but the crowd, with no one to direct it, is like JosaPn Sat•Nnsr.s, " frightened and confused, and not " knowing what it is about." We all of us re member the murder at the watchmaker's in Parliament-street, which occurred some years ago when a large collection of persons stood flattening their noses against the shop-window, witnesses of the murder which was being committed inside. The courage and energy that make a man ready to act in emergencies of this sort is, singularly enough, • rare and exceptional quality, and we think it is hardly too much to say, that if a murderer took it into his head to break open his victim's skull in the Strand at bread nointide, the neighbours would stand by and stare, much as in another cue the neighbours sat by and listened while Mr. Nosier-, in his Northumberland-street chambers, fired pistols at his cb' 7-piece for practice. The astounding weakness and stupidity of the witness J.oirrir Sirsnasa are by no means to be considered, then, as necessarily invalidating his evidence. That that evidence is difficult to receive there can be no doubt, just se there is no doubt that the jury might reasonably hesitate to give, on the strength of that evidence, • verdict of guilty. But this is no excuse for their extraordinary, and, were the use • less serious one, their ludicrous, evasion of the responsibility thrown on them. Curiously enough, too, it is not on this ground of the doubtful nature of Sirs- 1 nets's' evidence that they shrink from giving their verdict ; neither is it in consequence of the remarkable testimony of the medical witness that be thinks it "probable" that the wound received by the deceased woman was self-inflicted. Neither of these reel points of difficulty in the ease seems to affect them ; but, on the contrary, they are from the first of opinion that the prisoner was " guilty of killing his wife." That this killing was wilful murder is the conclusion from which they shrink, and ingenious indeed are the subterfuges under which they seek to shelter