Denton and Haughton Examiner, etc. — 1880-12-04 (Denton, Greater Manchester, England)

THE FINSBURY PARK TRAGEDY. SPNTENCE OP DOLPH.  At the Central Criminal Court, before Mr. Justice Hawkins, William Herbert, a respectably - dressed man, 44 years of age, described as haying no occupation, was indicted for the wilful murder of Jane Messenger, in Finsbury-park, on the 23rd of October last. The coron-er'a inquisition charged him with the same offence. He pleaded not guilty. Mt. Poland and Mr. Montagu Williams were counael for the prosecution, at the instance of the Treasury; Mr. C. F. Gill appeared for the defence. Mr. Justice Hawkins, in summing up the case to the jury, observed that everything that could have been said on the prisoner's behalf had been ably mid by his counsel. By the law of this country, if any person took the life of another he was guilty Of the crime of murder, unless there were eircumstancee in toe cam which would reduce it to manslaughter. But if that which would otherwise be the cnme of murder or manslaughter was shown to hove been committed by a person of diseased salad, by which he had been reduced to such a conditi on that be did not know the nature and character of the act be did, or if he did know them, but was unaware that the act was wrong, he would in that case only be excused from a conviction of murder upon the ground of insanity. By the law, also, every pennon was supposed to be of sound mind until the contrary was proved, and the cam of proof of ion-oily was cast upon the person accused. It was a very ead case, but the facts appeared to be of remarkable clearness, and there was not a possibility of a doubt that the prisoner committed the act. The counsel for the defence had not alienated it, but had appealed to the jury to my that, though the unfortunate woman came to her death by the prisoner'n hand, he was to be excused from the consequences of hi. net because his mind was reduced to such a state that he was not aware of the nature and character of what he did. If the prisoner was not insane, there were no circumstances of provocation in the ease which would reduce the crime to that of manslaughter. His lordship then proceeded to analyse the evidence given in the case, commenting upon the salient points, and left it to the jury to say whether or not the prisoner had been proved guilty of the charge made against him. The jury, after a short deliberation and without leaving their box, found the prisoner guilty of wilful murder.  The prisoner, being asked if he had anything to say, replied in the negative. Mr. Justice Hawkins. having assumed the black cap, and addressing the prisoner, said that, upon the most conclusive evidence, the jury had found him guilty of the crime of wilful murder—s crime committed, as far as he could see, without a single extenuating circumstance. There was a great deal too much reason to suppose that the suggestion made on the part of the prosecution was true—that the prisoner was endeavouring to persuade the Jeoemed to leave her home and live with him. What could have possessed him to take her life in the cruel way in which he did, and to fire at her three shots after she had met him confiding in his pretended affection for her, he did not know and he could not conceive. God alone knew what could ',Lye possessed him at that moment to do as he did. The prisoner had committed that dreadful act without justification or palliation, and the jury had therefore very properly convicted him of the crime of wilful murder. For that crime it was his duty to sentence him to die, and his lordship then paused sentence of death upon the prisoner in the usual form. The prisoner left the dock without displaying the least emotion.  "is. do you get this splendid Tea from r " I bothered my grocer till be got me BRZWERTON'e T., in packets. It's the best Tea by far that I seer tasted. I shall drink nothing in future but 1311111.16