The Sun. — 1849-11-30 (London, England)

MURDER AT MILBANK PENITENTIARY. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Mr. BALLAIiTINE, en the return of thejury, addressed them on the part of the prisoner, observing that he was afrail, trader the circumstances, they could come to no other conclusion than that he inflicted the fatal blows upon the deceased Hall; but what he wished to submit to their consideration was, that at the time of the lamentable occurrence he was not under the control of his reason, and was irresponsible for his actions. He had inherited lunacy from his family, and though he had lucid intervals, the disease, like paralysis or apoplexy, would return in a moment without the slightest nv,arning, arid was it not likely that, worked upon' long confinement and the ti rror of being sent to the Model Prison, a fit of madness might not have burst upon him when he struck his untortunate victim? lie should show that the prisoner two sisters, both of whom were lunatics, and also an aunt, who was afflicted with the same disease, and locking at the who'e evidencf,, ho thought they would conclude that he was a person more to ho pitted then convicted. At the conclusion of his address the Learned Counsel called the following witnesses:— Mr. Nathan Constadt, a surgeon, iu St. Marj Axe, said he had known the family of the prisoner for many years, and had attended them professionally. Knew his sitter Amelia, who died two or three years no. He knew her from her biith; she was mad two or thrie years before her death. The disease was hysterical madness. I know that his aunt is in confinement. The whole family are of weak minds. A cousin of the prisoner wtvmpted to c)mnait suicide by throwing herself  into the river. Cross-examined by Mr. Bomar; —I know nothing o the aunt hut what I have beeu told. The sister was about 25 years old when she died. She was suffering crom hysterical monomania, and had to be confined, and was sometimes so bad as to be held down in her bed. She was at one time an inmate of the workhouse. She was sometimes ill for months together, and was never well. She died of insanity. Mr. Blyth, resident medical officer on board the hospital-ship the Unity, at Woolwich, said, in March, 1846, the prisoner came on board, and I attended him, and both Mr. Bossey and myself were of opinion that he was insane. He laboured under a delusion that some one intended to hurt him, and at night he used to shout out that some one was murdering him. He remained several weeks insane, but gradually recovered. He was received on other occasions at the hospital when he was suffering from dyspepsia and an ulcerated sore, which he thought might turn into an abcess. Hereditary insanity is very seldom cured. Mr. BODKIN then called the following witnesses:— Dr. Sutherland, jun., said I am a physician, confining my practice and attention to diseases of the mind. By the direction of the governor, I visited the prisoner on two occasions in Newgate, when I had conversations with him. I formed an opinion en the state of his mind. I asked him if he recollected when the murder was committed, and he said he did. I spoke to him about his history, and he said he was out of his mind in 1846, and that the convicts said if it had not been fur the officers in the ship he would have thrown himself overboard. This he said he did not recollect. If the prisoner was insane, or really mad in 1646 from terror, I should think it very probable that the same cause would produce temporary insanity again. Mr. M'Murdo, surgeon of Newgate, said he bad seen no symptoms of insanity exhibited by the prisoner while in the prison. If a person in the early part of 1846 was seized with temporary insanity from terror, and was sane for two years afterwards, but was subsequently atf, cted by terror, I think insanity might again return. Mr. BODKIN then made a few observations in reply, but was interrupted by Mr. Baron ALDERSON, who said there was really no question in the case, for although there could be no doubt about the guilt of the prisoner, it was equally clear, from the evidence which had been given, that ho was a person of weak intellect who had been once mad, and who at the time of the murder might have been seized with a return of his madness by circumstances acting upon his mind, and thus become a creature irresponsible for his actions. If the jury thought he was sane they would find him guilty, and if not they would return a verdict of insanity. The jury, without leaving the box, returned a yerdict of Not Guilty, and found that he was insane. The prisoner was then removed.