Denton Examiner, Audenshaw, Hooley Hill and Dukinfield Advertiser. — 1878-02-23 (Denton, Greater Manchester, England)

THE EXAMINER SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1878.  EEOUTION A,T NINCTIESTER. Jamen Ciaryn, the navvy Who Was convicted of the murder of Maria Barber, at Elinfield, near Hyde, wim executed in the county prison at Winchester. The murder was one of great brutality. The prisoner and deceased had lived together. The woman met the prisoner in the Kentish hopflelds, and they went to the deceased's father'. house. She wished to leave the prisoner, who resisted the Reparation, and finding Barber woo determined he killed her with three blows from an age, and made scarcely any attempt to escape. At the trial before Mr. Justice , Mellor the demeanour of the prisoner was stolid and , indifferent, and he has remained unmoved since his I condemnation. He has been twice visited by his , brother, and has been most attentive to the ministrations of the chaplain, the Rev. A. J. Ladbrooke. The under-sheriff arrived at a few minutes before eight o'clock, the condemned inan having previously eaten a hearty breakfast. He submitted with the utmost indifference to the process of pinion. ing at the hands of Marwood, and, as the clock struck eight, the procession passed along the gallery and down the step. to the outer court, the prisoner walking firmly. On reaching the step of the scaffold the chaplain read extracts from the Burial Service, and Marwood drew the bolt, the con vict dying after some struggles. Muscular action and that of the heart lasted ten minutes nearly, the pri• soner being a mall wan, but of much physical de. velliment. There were five representatives of the press prepent in addition to the officials. A black flag hoisted on the prison showed the timed the execution. and later in the day a coroner's inquest was held nocording to law.  BtADLAZGar4IIISAITP. V 44 The Court Of APpeal at Weetminsler, 4B compoied of LosdasTasticeo-Bramwell...Brett,and.Onktog, ticliverciL an unanimous judgment in the case of Mr. Charles! Bradlaugh and Mee. Annie Bennet, whé appealed froas a judgment of the Lord Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Mellor affirming their conviction, for the publication of an illegal work, and for whets they were sentenced, after a trial before the Lord Chief Juttice and a eptcial Middlesex jury. to six month.' imprisonment ouch in llolloway Gaol, to pay a line of .1:200, and, further, to find sechrities for their good' behaviour for two years after, the expiration of their sentence. The Court below having refused to erred judgment on the objection taken by the defendantu that the indictment was bad , in law, as it did not net out the words rehed upon as indecent, they appealed by way of error to the, oourt., and again conducted their own case when the matter came on for argument during the lest three days of January, when judgment was reserved. Lord Justice Bramwell cited a number of decisions bearing on the law of the awe, which the Court had alone to determine, and not the inerits. Re was of opinion that it was necessary to have set out in the indictment the words relied upon as indecent, and that the onniseion to do se was fatal, and was not cured, as contended for, hr the verdict. The judgment of the Court below must' therefore be set aside and given for the defendants. Lord Justice Brett took a similar view, and having expressed his regret that such a subject should have been discussed in this court in the presence of the female defendant, added that if the defendants again eonsmilted the offence of publishing such a work, no doubt another prosecution would he instituted', and if the indictment were not again defective they would receive even a severer punishment. Lord Justice Cotton concurred.  At Bow-street Police-court, Mr. Collette, the eolicitor of the Society for the Suppression of Vice, asked for the decieion of the Court upon an adjourned summons, requiring Edward Truelove, publieher, to show cause why 667 copie• of the Bradlaugh pamphlet, seiced on his premises, ahoulrl not be destroyed. Mr. Collette urged that, although Mr. Bradleugh had to. coped the penalty of the law on a technical ground, a jury had declared the publication to be illegal, and consequently he listed for the Adtority of the Court to destroy the pamphlets, which bad been impounaed. I Mr. 13radlaugh, as the owner of the property, reeisteo the application, Oil the ground that the Lord Chief Justice had pronounced the publication to be free from impurity. Mr. Vaughan eventually decided to examine e report of the trial before ItiTiON hie judgment.