The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle. — 1867-03-30 (Stourbridge, West Midlands, England)

TRIAL FOR MURDER—AND SENTENCE OF DEATH. . At the assizes held at Kingston, James Longhurst, a young labourer, described in the calendar as twentyone years old, and of "no degree of instruction," WWI indicted for the wilful murder of a little girl named Jane Sax, at There, Surrey, on the 28th of June last year, and was one of the most shocking cases which ever came into a court of justice. The prisoner had been arraigned at the Summer Assizes, but, as it was sworn that there was evidence to sustain the defence of insanity, which it was intended to net up, and that there had net been time to prepare for it, the trial was put off.  An intelligent child of seven years of age had been sent by her parents on an errand, and WPA found urn field through which she had to pa, bleeding from a wound in the throat. Cries had been heard from the field. one or two pas,,ers-by rushed thither, and the poor child was found lying against a bank, rapidly bleeding to death. One of the perelon% who found her saw the prisoner crouching down under a liedM not far off, and trying to get away. lie was seiml upon the spot. Blood was found upon Ids hands (which one of the witnesses said he licked elf, and in his pocket a knife was found, marked with fresh blood. Ile was brought back to the girl, and she was asked who did it, and she said That boy !" brat, on account of her imminent danger, and the necessity for taking instant care of her, he was let go at the moment, though lie was taken soon afterwards two or three fields off. The child was carried to the house of a medical man of Shore. She was bleeding profusely from a terrible wound in her throat, caused by a deep stab of a knife. She was very taunt, though still quite sensible. When the bleeding had been arrested, the prisoner, who, it should be mentioned, is short in stature and very boy-looking, was brought in, and she was asked who had done it. She was looking towards the prisoner, and said, "That boy did it." She was asked again, and told to take care she spoke truly, and she isfain said it was he. Ile did not say a word in denial, until the surgeon asked him how he came to dolt, and he then sail that he had not done it. The poor child was carried to the hospital at Guildford. where she was carefully treated, but where, on the 25t1r of July she died. The wound she had reoeived in her throat was so deep that the knife had gone right through to the back of 'her neck, struck against the spine, and injured the spinal canal, thus cau.singhttlammation there, which resulted  In her death. Before she died she made, in the presence of the prisoner, the following deposition : " I met the prisoner on the path. He took hold of me and threw me down, Bm. He then picked me up and took me Into the path, and again threw me down, ike I cried out, and he tried to choke me. I saw a knife in his hand, and he cut me with it. I ran away and cried out, and a man came The primner is the boy who did it. lam suse the prisoner is the boy."  The evidence was concksive as to the prisoner having committed the crime.  ..... The defence consisted chiefly of a weak and hopeless attempt to throw a doubt on the evidence as to the identity, and not a word was said about the defence of insanity. There was also a weak attempt to suggest that the crime might possibly be manslaughter, and it was urged upon the jury that the penalty of manslaughter would suffice. The jury returned a verdict of Fuilty, and the sem tence of death was passed upon him; upon which the prisoner burst into a paroxysm of passion, and was removed to the cells with difficulty.