Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

2 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

LLANSADWRN TRAGEDY.

Newyddion
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

LLANSADWRN TRAGEDY. HARPUR FOUND GUILTY OF MURDER. SENTENCE OF DEATH PASSED. DRAMATIC SCENE. PRISONER A PITIABLE OBJECT. There was a crowded attendance outside the Guildhall, Carmarthen, on Monday last, where Harry Harpur was to be tried, before Lord Cole- ridge. at the Carmarthenshire Assizes for the mur- der of a Llansadwrn farmer. However, only those on business, and a few privileged persons were admitted, and the Crown Court-room thanks to this wise precaution, was just comfortably tilled. A dense crowd watched the arrival of the prisoner in a closed conveyance, but his pitiable appearance won for him the sympathy of all those who got a glance at him as he was practically carried out of the carriage through the corridor to the cells beneath the hall. Punctually at 10.30, the Judge, Lord Coleridge, took his seat on the bench, and the Clerk of the Assize (the Hon. Stephen Coleridge) called to the warders, "Put up Harry Harpur." A weak, miser- able, half-dead specimen of manhood then made its appearance in the dock, and a shudder passed through the Court as it beheld the wretched man who was still suffering from the shock of the terrible wounds he had infliced on himself. Harry Harpur (30), labourer, was charged that at Llansadwrn on the 2nd May, 1«13, felomously, wil- fully, and of his malice aforethought did kail and murder one James Isaac Thomas, Llwyntwyll, Llan- sadwrn. He was further charged with attempting to take his own life on tne same date by shooting him- Prisoner, who was assisted into the dock by two warders, looked very ill, and was in such a very weak condition that he seemed unable to bear up his own weight. He was supported by a burly warder, and in reply to the charge in almost inaudible tones, and With a shake of the head, pleaded "not guilty. Mr. Ivor Bowen, K.C., and Mr. Clem Edwards, (instructed by Mr. H. Alfred Thomas, solicitor, Llandovery), prosecuted, and Mr. Wilfred Lewis (instructed by Mr. John R. Williams, solicitor, Llan dilo), defended. OPENING SPEECH. ffi Afr. Ivor Bowen in opening his address for the prosecution to the jury said they had been sum- moned there, and they had taken their oaths as jurors of that county to try Harry Harpur who stood before them committed to take his trial upon t ic most serious kind of charge that any man in any county could be charged with. That was to say that having committed the crime of wilful murder, that is killing intentionally, according to the way m which it is put in law, with malice aforethought another human being, and it was not often, luckily and fortunately for that part of the world, that n the course of the duties which were imposed rightly upon jurors in that country, jurors of that Qounty are called to fulfil the serious and important duty which they had to perform that day. But he must point out to them on behalf of the prosecution, that it was necessary tnat they should listen to the evidence with the greatest care and with the greatest solemnity. He knew they would do that, and it was also necessary for them, in the interest of their own fellow beings in the discharge of their own duties and in the discharge of their duties to their country, to, say, if they thought that the prosecution had discharged the duty put upon them of proving the get of facts which point to this that the prisoner committed the crime for which he is charged, it follows that they must be courageous, firm and honest in the discharge of their duties, and having heard the whole case, after giving the prisoner the benefit of any doubt-any reasonable doubt to the man who is charged-it became their duty then to act, as he had said, courageously and honestly, and to say if they were so satisfied that prisoner is guilty of that crime. The value of human life, the value of public safety was so great that no other considera- tion-no consideration of pity should direct them from the right path, if they were satisfied that the case for the prosecution was made out. The prisoner was a young man somewhere about 29 years of age, and he appeared to have come to that country some a .r years ago, and worked in d-iffereiit farms as a tarm servant. He was charged with killing his master, named James Isaac Thomas, 61 years of age, who was living on the 1st May and had lived there for ?». long time before at the farm of Llwyntwyll, in the parish of Llansadwrn. Before the 1st May there had been some slight unpleasantness between the master and servant about money. Learned counsel then proceeded to review the evidence, and stated that he had just been told by Deputy-chief Constable Evans that one witness, Wm. James, was not forth- coming, and was not there at the moment. That was the man who went with prisoner to the Sexton Arm, but there was other evidence to show that the prisoner committed the crime with which he was charged, and which they would have to consider. At the request of his learned friend Mr. Lewis, in whose able hands he was glad to find the prisoner's interests placed, he would not open on the statements prisoner made to the police at the time he was taken into custody. There was not the slightest doubt in the world that James Isaac Thomas was killed by the shot from the gun which the prisoner used upon him on the 2nd May, and that he was killed by a man who apparently knew on the 1st of May perfectly well what he was talking about, and doing, who obtained a gun for purposes of his own, and bought a cartridge for a purpose of his own, and it was only the duty of the prosecution to set the facts before them, and was the duty of the jurors to determine whether prisoner was guilty or not. It was the duty of the defence to make out the charge anything less or other than murder., Everything that could be said to assist them would be said, and the prisoner would be assisted to make proper and lawful excuse for what he had done.. However, he had to say to them that on the evidence of the prosecution there was a clear case of the intentional taking away of the master's life on tho slightest pretext by a man who seemed to have some kind of grudge against him. It was for them to decide whether it was a case of murder after having heard the evidence for the prosecution and the defence, and in doing no they must remember that to allow a miserable dispute between master and servant to be put for- ward as a reasonable excuse for provocation suffi- cient to make a crime of that kind anything else but what it was, would be a very dangerous precedent to establish, and would render life unsafe and unpro tected in the country. A MISSING WITNESS. During the recital of the story of the crime prisoner trembled like an aspen leaf in the dock and frequently wiped tears from his eyes with a blue- bordered handkerchief. The Clerk of Arraigns then called up Wm. James, a witness in the case to surrender or forfeit h.;s recognisances.. The name was called three times inside and out- side the court,, but there was no response. The Judge considered whether he had the power to issue a bench warrant, but after consultation did not think he could do so. THE EVIDENCE. Esther Thomas, spinster, Llwyntwyll, Llansadwrn, said she was the sister of the late W. Isaac. Thomas, who was a farmer aged 61 years. On the morning of the 2nd May last about 6.30 d clock she was on the farm yard fetching the cows. Her late brother was there with a pony. While they were there, the prisoner came into the yard from his bedroom. Prisoner was a servant in her brother's employ. His bedroom was over the oowshed. Her brother asked prisoner what he wanted with a gun, and advised him to take it back to the room. In reply prisoner a-ked whether he was going to pay him the money due to him. Her brother answered, 41 Yes, as on as you bring the mole-traps back. Nothing further wa." sa.id, and prisoner then put up the gun, aimed at her brother, and shot at him. Prisoner was about ten yards away from her brother. After the shot her brother iell down and exclaimed, "Oh dear! dear! There was a pony between her brother, who was a tall man, and the prisoner. The prisoner then ran up the field behind the house, and she ran for help for her brother. Prisoner ran a few yards up the field and then he stopped. He then looked back. Witness ran to Brown's Hill and got assistance. On her return she went to her brother, and they car Tied him into the house. This was about 7 a.m. Her brother said nothing to her again. She re- mained with him until he died at 8.1b a.m. Prisoner had been in her brother's employment since October last. He was hired as a yearly servant, receiving :£12 10s. per annum with his board and lodgings. On the 2nd May there was JB1 6s. owing to prisoner. Prisoner had given notice to terminate the service on the 1st Mav. Prisoner wanted to settle on the night of the 1st May to stay on. Prisoner wanted to stay on. to the end of the year. Her brother said he would settle witn him in the morning. Cross-examined by Mr. Wilfred Lewis—About B12 £ 10s. a year was the general rate of wages to farm servants in the district. It did not strike her as a small wag-e, and prisoner himself asked for that, amount. After the death of her brother she employed another farm servant named Wm. Davies, aged about 28 years, and paid him the same amount. She never heard her brother accuse prisoner of steal- ing mole-traps. She had seen prisoner carrying a gun before, but never so early in the morning as on the 2nd May. It was the morning he was going away?—Yes. PRISONER'S PECULIARITIES. Prisoner was not well-behaved at times, and what did your brother do to him then?—Nothing. Do you suggest your brother did nothing when farm servants behaved .badly?—Nothing 1 know, only speak to them. Did prisoner have a character for throwing him- self down on the ground and bursting into tears?— Not that I know. Have you heard of him becoming depressed and not speaking to anybody for a long time?—Yes, sir. Used he to get drunk sometimes when he was with you -tie was going to Llansadwrn almost every night. Was that to get drink?—I can't say about that. Do you know he used to drink? Yes. Have you heard that one glass of beer will upset him, make him stupid and drunk?-No. Is it true you brother threatened to beat prisoner. -No. Is it true your brother used to watcn prisoner at work from behind the hedge?—No, air. Is it true that your brother used to blame him when he asked for his money for his insurance? No. He always gave him money to buy stamps. Did your brother threaten to give prisoner a thrashing because he could not manage to catch tne pony?—No, sir. Is it true that your brother, I am sorry to have to ask you this, question Miss Thomas, was a very hard master?-No, sir. There is no truth whatever in it?—No, nothing at all. Are you constantly changing your servants Miss Thomas?—No, sir. Some have been with me for seven years. Re-xamined-Sho had never seen prisoner drunk, and he appeared all right on the morning of the 2nd May. GUN TO SHOOT RABBITS. T1_1_ _1 John Morgan Thomas, spinner, juiaiisa,u>v m, wuu that on the 1st May prisoner came to his house about 9 p.m. and asked for the loan of his gun to shoot rabbits. He went and fetched the gun (pro- duced), and handed it to prisoner. Cross-examined—He was not a teetotaller, and he considered a man drunk when he had taken too much to drink. He did not think prisoner was drunk that night. He was in his usual state. He did not know whether prisoner was in Llansadwrn village every evening. He knew prisoner very well, but he was not a particular friend of his. He was no relation of the dead man. Thomas Rowland Rees Jones, Drefach, Llan- sadwrn, said that prisoner had been in his father's employ. He never asked prisoner to come up to Drefach, or jnvited him up to shoot rabbits on the 1st or 2nd of May. He did not ask him to bring up a gun there. Cros-examined-He cou!d not say the rate of wages paid to a good labourer in the district. It would be more than 5s. a week with board and lodgings. His father paid prisoner J39 a year. Mr. Lewis—Then he earned considerably less than the average farm labourer. Did you notice when ho was with you that he was strange as far as his temper was concerned No. Did you see him every day?—Yes W,ien he was working. He was perfectly rational—like any ordinary person?—Yes. Did he drink?—I never saw him drunk. Are you a teetotaller?—No, sir. I take a glass occasionally. PURCHASED ONE CARTRIDGE. Isaac Jones,, bootmaker, grocer, etc., Waterloo House, Llansadwrn, said that he held a licence for tne sale of explosives. About 10 p.m. on the let May prisoner came to his shop and bought one Ely cartride No. 4, exactly like the empty one produced. He tendered a threepenny bit, and re- ceived twopence change. He had sold cartridges to prisoner before. He had never noticed any- thing the matter with him at all. P.C. Evan J. Reynolds said that he found an Ely No. 4 cartridge case in the farm yard of Llwyn- twyll. Here Mr. Lewis raised the point as to whether certain statements made by the prisoner when the constable found him lying in the field, and at the Square and Compass, was admissible and his lord- ship ruled in his favour. The Constable said that at the Square and Com- pass the statements made by prisoner were volun- tarv. PRISONER IN GREAT PAIN. Mr. Lewis—At the time he made the statements was he in great pain?—Yes, but I could not say he was unconscious. Do you think the pain affected his consciousness? —Yes. Ho may not hawe known what he was say- ing. Have you made inquiries about prisoner?—Yes. And from an early ago has his conduct been strange?—I can't say. I have only been able to make inquiries jocally. I know him only since I have been stationed at Llansadwrn. Do you know that he has a violent temper?—No. And that he has fits of depression?— I have heard people say so. Have you heard that some people are afraid *of him, that he is queer?—Yes. Have you heard he is easily affected by drink, and that he is a person not like the ordinary man of the street; I don't mean an imbecile or lunatic, but that he is a person of weak intellect?—I have been told ro. A postcard which the prisoner had written, and of which a verbatim copy appeared in last week's CARMARTHEN JOURNAL was read to the jury by Mr. Wilfred Lewis. In this prisoner stated: "I have done it, and I am sorry. Good-bye to all, and I hope the Lord will forgive has done it.' P.C. Evans repeated the evidence he gave before the magistrates at Llandovery. and which was re ported in our last week's issue. He repeated the statement made by prisoner to him in which he said that he did not mean to shoot the deceased, but only frighten him, and that he deceased had called him a filthy rotten cockney, and that he had harshly treated him, and only gave him a penny to buy food when taking cattle to Llandovery. He would rather have killed himself than his master. Dr. Morgan, Llandovery, spoke to attending the prisoner at Llandovery, and he was quite sane then. Mr. Wilfred Lewis cross-examined to show that the prisoner was a man of weak brain, and that drink, hamh treatment, and a delusion that he was being constantly watched might bring on insanity. The doctor admitted that they might, and no doubt were contributory causes. He had read of cases where a sudden shock had restored a man's reason, but he could not say whether the shock prisoner received when he shot himself had anything to do with restoring his mind to its ordinary condition. Ho did not agree that one glass of beer might make a man of weak brain mad drunk. Ur. Hopkins, Llandovery, described he condition in which he found the prisoner at Llwyntwyll, and the wounds from which he suffered. His cross-examination was pointed in the same direction as the last witness. The fact that a man j told other people that he waa going to commit j suicide or murder might not be a sign of insanity. I THE DEFENCE. William Jones, farmer, Glangwydderig, Llan- dovery, said that the prisoner came to him in 1907, and stayed with him and came with him from Pembrokeshire to his present farm. He was with. him some eighteen months. He noticed that prisoner was very peculiar in his manner. He was childish, and given to fits of depression. Prisoner would throw himself on the ground and cry if he said anything to him, and then would not speak for some time. At times drink would make him ex. cited, and he would shout. He had not seen prisoner after drinking a lot. A glass of beer would make him half mad. He had seen defenant "looking black in his face." He never considered prisoner was in a right state of mind. He was always weak-minded. After taking drink he was half mad. or very funny for two or three days. The affect of two glasses of beer would show on him for, two or three days. Orosa-etfamijneld—He knew P.S. Deans, LJan- dovery. He had seen him drink a couple of glasses of beer on many occasions. He would stop on two, because he was told to. Priioner was a man of rather bad temper. A correct description of t'ne prisoner would be: "He was not a very good ser- vant, being very untruthful, 1Lnd bad tempered." When in a bad temper he would sulk for days. He had heard people shout when they had had drink, and they were quite sane as far as he knew. David Griffiths, London House, Llansadwrn. said that the prisoner had been in his employ for li ne months. He was very peculiar in nis nabits. He suffered from fits of depression, and was a person of weak will. A small amount of drink yvouil easily upset him. Cross-examined—He was a good man, and, under stood the orders given him. Prisoner said he was a very good shot with a gun. H.3 had had ot-i,.r servants who suffered from depression. Margaret Jones. Sexton's Arms, Llansadwrn, said that she had known the prisoner for some time. Prisoner came to her house sometim.-s, and on tne night of May 1st had a pint and a half of Ix-or In the afternoon he had a pint of boor ard some whiskey. When he came into the house in the evening he was pale and very cxc lr,d. Cross-examined—His master paid f, i- wt..it, he Lad in the afternoon. He was quite sober be "I came to the house, and qu to *,o'r>f>r wh-JU if e left. John Davies, Cwmbran, Llansadwrn, said he saw the prisoner on the night of May 1st rear a style leading to the farm. William James was with him. Prisoner had a gun in his hand, and, holding it out to James, said, "Have a pop at me now." Prisoner said, "1 am going to shoot myself to-mor- row morning." James refused, and told Harpur to go home. Prisoner then began to cry. Prisoner then offered witness tne gun, and asked him to have a pop at him. Witness told him not to talk so foolishly. Prisoner had a very violent temper. Cross-examined-He was with James and Harpur in the kitchen of the Sexton Arms, and they were all quiet and sober. PRISONER S SANITY. Dr. Evan Evans, Llanelly, said that he examined the prisoner on Friday last at H.M. Prison. He found him to be a man whose brain power was below normal. He asked defendant questions about his family history and personal history, but he failed to elicit any answers from him about a certain period of his life. Asked questions about the late master he got most excited, and said ho had been accused of stealing mole traps, and that he found fault with everything he did. He was always watching him. Drink and improper nourishment would be predisposing causes to insanity. Reading over the evidence of Miss Thomas and comparing them with prisoner's statements, it showed to him that the prisoner was suffering from hallucinations Prisoner's brain could easily be upset by harsn treatment and delusions. A sudden shock some- times restores sanity, and a man who did not know the difference between right and wrong might by a razor touching his neck, or by jumping into water, be restored to reason so as to know the difference between right and wrong. Re-examined—Every Jad who lost his parents at seven, was brought up by his grandmother, had to knefc-k about the world, get his own livelihood. and nobody to take any interest in him, was not insane. Mr. Bowen—No, I should think not, because if so every ninety-nine persons out of a thousand in this world would be insane. In answer to further questions, Dr. Evans said that prisoner had a good memory. He could ex- plain by words what he meant, and could follow a train of thought. He concluded he was insane be- fore the murder from the fact that ho attempted to commit suicide, and was suffering from delusions, and the shock had probably restored his mental balance. There was nothing indicative of insanity in aocepting a pint of beer from 'nis master, or borrowing a gun. PRISON DOCTOR CALLED. In answer to the Judge, the doctor said that when prisoner said he wanted the gun to go rabbit shooting he did know right from wrong, but later, on the impulse of the moment, he lost his reason. Dr. E. R. Williams, surgeon at H.M. Prison. Carmarthen, called by the prosecution, said' that he had had prisoner under observa- tion since ho was committed to gaol. He was of sound mind and quite sane. He knew the difference between right and wrong. He conversed well for a man of his education. Cross-examined—He bad not found out that a delusion that a man was being watched was one of the first and a common symptom of insanity. SPEECH FOR THE DEFENCE. Mr. Wilfred Lewis then addressed the jury for the defence, and said that the charge was the most terrible known to the law, and he felt the very great responsibility that had been laid on hit shoulders, because he stood between them and the prisoner to plead for his life. If they found prisoner guilty of murder, his lordship had only one duty to perform, and that was to pass upon him the sentence of death. The judge could not pass upon him any sentence he liked. His was a grave responsibility, but the jury's was graver still, because it was in their hands that the verdict rested. He asked them to be extremely careful in considering the case. Upon their judgment depended whether that unfortunate man was to be plunged into eternity. He was not so foolish as to tell them that in order to deter them from doing their duty. He knew they would do it. but he asked them to remember if their verdict was one of guilty which could never be effaced. The fact,R in the case so far as they related to the dat- cumstances under which the unfortunate man Thomas met his death were not in dispute. They knew that Thomas died as the result of a shot from a gun fired by prisoner. The Crown said that the prisoner had a grievance against his master, and that grievance because he had not had his wages paid, supplied the motive for the crime, and said the prisoner laid his plans carefully, and with premeditation. They had heard of the awful injuries which this wretched man inflicted upon himself, and how medical science nursed him back from death to life, for the purpose that he might go through the awful ordeal he was going through that day. in order that the law, if he was guilty, might wreak vengeance upon him by taking away that life which he very nearly took away by his own hand. Whatever the result of the case might be, surely it was far better that this man should have been left to die in an open field rather than he should have been saved in order to undergo an ordeal of this description. He asked them to take a merciful view, and a view which was more in accordance with the evidence, and that was that these acts were the acts of a madman. Was the man when he shot his master and himself responsible for his actions. He ventured to say that the whole circumstances point to the one fact that he was not. The sum of money due to him was very little, and would a man inflict the horrible injuries prisoner did upon himself for such a trivial amount, if he was in possession of his senses. He thought not. The lack of motive proved that the man killed his master and immediately after attempted suicide during a fit of temporary insanity. The medical evidence went to show that the prisoner suffered from delusions. These delusions and me insanity led to it, were brought on by drink, harsh treatment, and poor nourishment. Were it not for the fact that a human life depended on it. he would not have said a single word to touch the memory of the dead man Isaac Thomas, but they had heard what prisoner had said about Thomas. How he had to drive cattle Ion? distances without food. How- Isaac Thomas threatened him unless he came home from chapel early, how he never could do anything right, how he was always abusing him. and watching him from behind hedges. He thought they would agree, if they believed prisoner's statement, that Thomas was not a kind master, JJd they not think the hard life prisoner lia,. led had affected his natural weakness of mind. and led to insanity- Take what the prisoner aid when he came to the Square and Compass and in the morning cried to the constable, Oh. I have have a hard life. Ask them to put me under somebody* s care. PRISONER COLLAPSES. 'It At this juncture prisoner gave way to mucn weep- ing, and bent his head low. Wardens had to go to his assistance, take off his muffler, undo his gar- ments, give him water, and fan him. After a while calmness was restored, and he listened to the re- mainder of his counsel's speech for the defence, with his head loaning on a warder's breast. Continuing, Mr. W ilfrod Lewis made an elo- quent appeal to the jury to bring in a verdict of insanity, so that he might be put away under somebody's care where he might be brought back to a rational mind, and be prevented from doing any more harm. He asked them not to Bend the wretched man to the gallows, and to find a verdict tnat defendant when he committed this act was temporary insane. PROSECUTING COUNSEL S ADDRESS. P Mr. Ivor Bowen, in addressing the jury for the prosecution, aaid that he could not agree with his learned friend that the law nursed a man back to life to wreak vengeance. It was nothing of the kind, but it gave a man an opportunity, if he was not guilty, of being acquitted by the jury. The law was not based on such a wicked principle as vengeance, but purely justice. He only asked for justice that day. He asked the jury to give a just verdict on the evidence irrespective of the conse- quence that would follow. Then the defence had referred to Isaac Thomas as a hard master, and that was Mid in open court. The only evidence they had that that was 80 was the statement of tho man who shot him. Isaac Thomas had gone to his account with only that statement against him. He asked the jury to ask themselves whether the master who stood his servant a pint of beer was harsh and cruel. He asked them not to accept the view that Tnomas was an unkind master. This murder was deliberately planned. There was the conversation about shooting the farmer, the pur- chase of a single cartridge. People did not go out shooting rabbits with one cartridge, and ser- vants did not go out first thing in the morning shooting rabbits. Had he been insane he probably would have shot the pony, or. in his excitement, missed the man, but he was a good shot, he took deliberate aim, and put nearly the whole of the charge into his victim. In an able speech, put in absolute fairness, Mr. Bowen made out a strong case against: the prisoner, and conc'udod by saying that if they accepted the evidence of the prosecu- tion it would be their duty, painful as it would be, to bring in a verdict of guilty. The only question was his sanity, and that they must consider from the evidence before them. JUDGED SUMMING UP. The Judge, in summing *p, said that the prisoner on the 2nd May, at 6.30 a.m., shot at tho deceased, and killed him. The question they had to determine was, was the prisoner, or was he not, responsible for that act. If ho was responsible for that act morally and legally responsible, no was guilty of the crime of murder. If he was not responsible, neither legally nor morally, and never- theless his hand was the hand that shot the man and killed him, they were asked by the defence to say, although he was guilty of the act of which he was accused, he was not sane at the t.me he committed it. That he was guilty of the death of he deceased was not contested. WTiatever was the proper definition, or scientific definition of insanity, the law knew only one definition, and it was this, if a man when he was committing an act knew that the act was a wrongful act, he was responsible m the eyes of the law. But if the state of his mind was such that at the time he committed the act he did not know right from wrong, then ho was not responsible for that act in the eyes of the law. They could only determine that fact from the evi- dence and the circumstances surrounding the act. They would have to weigh all the evidence very carefully, and see whether it pointed to the fact that the man did or did not know the difference beween a rightful or a wrongful act. His lordship then reviewed the evidence, and pointed out that if prisoner had asked for a gun to shoot himself or his master he would not have been given the gun. If he did not know the difference between right and wrong why should he have asked for the gun to shoot rabbits. He must have known he would not be given the gun to shoot himself or his master. Many crimes were committed from most inade- quate motives,, and there was one here, but it is quite clear in his case hero was a difference. The prisoner wanted to stay on, and the deceased wanted him to go. Then there was a dispute about the wages and mole-traps. Then prisoner when in great pain made statements bearing upon the case and in accordance with the facts as they knjsv then. He said he did it in cold blood. He shot the man because he meant to, and shot him.v if afterwards. Did he say it because he thought his end was near? That was a question they must decide. Then they had the medical testimony to consider. An extraordinary feature in the casa was the evidence that prisoner would fall down and cry when fault was found with him, and ho a160 turned to the hedge and cried when two of li-S companions refused to have a pop at him with the gun. They had to decide whether at the Ùne he knew the difference between right and wrong. If he did, there was nothing in the evidence which could help him to escape tho consequences of that act. If they could conscientiously believe uncer the circumstances that he was not responsible tor his action they would acquit him. THE VERDICT. The Jury then retired to consider their verdict, and after an absence of about half-an-hour re- turned to Court. The prisoner was now in a state of collapse and had to be held up between two warders. The Cierk of the Arraigns asked the jury whether they had agreed upon their verdict, and in a hushed Court the foreman announced "Guiltly of murder, and we strongly recommend him to mercy." THE DEATH SENTENCE. A dramatic scene followed. The Marshall placed the dread black cap on the Judge's head, whilst all in Court stood up. Addressing the prisoner, who looked a dreadful object supported between two warders, the Judge, slowly and in solemn tones, said: "Henry Harpur, you have been found guilty by a jury of your fellow- countrymen of tho wilful murder of the deceased. Tho jury have accompanied their verdict with a strong recommendation to mercy. The jury, in my view, have tempered justice with mercy. They have vindicated the law, they have done that which, if the authorities desire, may possibly prevent the natural and otherwise necessary consequences of their verdict. At present my duty is ministerial, and ministerial only. My duty consequent upon the Verdict which has been passed is to pass upon you the sentence which the law prescribes." His Lord- ship then passed sentence of death in the usual formula, after which the prisoner lying on the arms of two warders, was immediately removed to the cells below. The hearing lasted-nearly nine hours.

CARMARTHENSHIRE ASSIZES