The Sun. — 1822-08-06 (London, England)

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—EXETER, AUGUST 2. CROWN SIDE—MURDER. John Chapman," one who loved not wisely, but too well," stood charged with the murder of Sarah Chapman, his wife, at Week, St. Pancras, on the 20th of May last. It was a case of as deep interest as was ever heard in any Court of Justice, and one in which an unusual degree of pity and commiseration was manifested for the unhappy being about to be tried. We lament that the limits of our paper prevent the possibility of going into a lengthened detail of the evidence, and therefore we can only give the heads of this and the other cases of the day. It appeared that this unhappy man had been married to the deceased only nine months, when he had but too much reason to doubt her fidelity to him. The sequel proved his suspicion to be well founded, as her partiality for other men became indisputable, particularly to a person of the name of W. Robinson, with whom she had gone so far as to have the ceremony of a sham marriage performed over a broomstick and a prayer book at apublic house, on the very morning of the day on which she lost her life. The prisoner was told by a person, that his wife was seen walking in a field not far off with this man, and intending only (as he said in a written defence put into the Court) to frighten Robinson, he went for a gun, which he did not know to be loaded, and which it was sworn to have been done by a person to whom it belonged, to kill crows in March last. • On his overtaking them, he desired the wife to go back, and on her refusing to au so, he lost all recollection of himself, and in a state oimind bordering on madness, fired the piece, which was loaded with small shot; she instantly fell dead. Several witnesses swore to the subsequent agony of his mind. He had been a most kind and affectionate husband, and treated his wife in the tenderest manner ; at the hearing of which scarcely a dry eye was to be seen. The Learned Judge charged the Jury on the law of the case. There were two questions, said his Lordship, for the consideration of the Jury. Was he (the prisoner) at the time he committed the act, in such a state of mind as to know what he did ? for, if he were, then he was guilty of murder ; for the conduct of his wife, however bad it might have been, could not justify the act ; nor could passion, put in the scale, weigh in his favour. The law presumes a mad man to be a person not capable of judging what he said or did, and in such cases it did not amount to murder ; but if the prisoner was at the time in his right reason, and knew the gun to be loaded, then it amounted to that crime ; on the contrary, if he did not it would only amount to manslaughter. It was, therefore, for the Jury to consider this in their minds, and if any doubt existed, the prisoner would be entitled to that doubt, and he wished no misunderstanding of the law to go to the public—the case was left to them and the life of the prisoner depended on their verdict, which lie had no doubt would be founded on a right view of the case. The Jury consulted for a short time, and brought the unhappy man iu Guilty of Manslaughter, to the high satisfaction of every person in court. The Judge, in the most feeling manner, sentenced him to one year's imprisonmelt and hard labour in the House of Correction.