TRIALS RETOLD.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 218, 13 September 1924, Page 19

TRIALS RETOLD.

One foggy morning in January, 1572, the first act ln a drama of specially sombre aspect unfolded Itself before Mr. Justice Byles, at the Old Bailey.

The proceedings begin ln routine enough fashion. A name Is called by the be-wlgged fignre sitting at a desk just below the bench. Barristers and spectators look up expectantly. There is a moment's pause. Then, with a couple of stalwart gaolers behind him, an elderly man shambles Into the dock. Although the protagonist, he seems less concerned than anybody else. The Clerk of Arraigns addresses him: " John Selby "Watson, you are charged on the Indictment, and also on the coroner's inquisition, with the wilful murder of Anne Watson, of Stockwell, in the county of Surrey. Are you guilty, or not guilty?" In a listless voice comes the answer: " Not guilty." Tbe plea Is recorded; the jury empanelled; and the trial of Kegina v. Watson commences. "What made this particular trial stand out among the host of others with which the Ol- Bailey Sessions of that date were surfeited "was the Unusual' circumstance that the prisoner (who happened to be nearly seventy) was a clergymnu of thu Church of England, a man of high Intellectual attainments, the author of several well-known books, and the former headmaster of a big school. Yet he stood in the dock, charged with deliberately murdering his wife, and.without any apparent motive for the act.

Tbe Rev. John Selby Watson, M.A., had been educated at Trinity College, Dublin, where he secured classical honours ami was a gold medallist. On taking Holy Orders, he was appointed curate of Langport, in Somerset. Like many ot _er clergymen without Interest or private means, he early adopted a second career. It was that of teaching. As snch, he became, in IS4T, an assistant, and subsequently headmaster, of Stockwell Grammar School, a proprietary establishment in South London. A hard worker, his hobby was literature, and he published a number of books. The majority of these were of an historical and biographical description, and he also wrote for the leading magazines and reviews.

In 1556 tbe Rev. Mr. 'Watson adventured upon marriage. His choice was a Miss Armstrong, a Dublin lady of no fortune, but of good family. There were no children. Still, so far as went outward appearances, the union wes a fairly happy one. Certainly, no sign was forthcoming of the dreadful tragedy that, sixteen years afterwards, was to send Mrs. Watson to her grave, and her husband to the felon's dock and the shadow of the rope.

The first witness was Eleanor Pyne, a servant employed by the murdered woman. The story she told was simple. October 8 was her "Sunday out." When she returned In the evening. Mr. Watson opened the door to her, and said that his wife had gone into the country, but would be back the next day. She thought this a little odd, as her mistress, whom she had left at home that afternoon, had not mentioned the matter. Another circumstance that appeared somewhat curious was that Mr. Watson remarked that a stain near the library door was caused by some wine having been spilled there. He also told ■he? not to go into the adjoining room where her mistress slept-

Mrs. Watson did not return the next day. On the following evening her master reade another peculiar observation. "If I aro taken iU." he said, "or if you find anything wrong, send for the doctor." Again, the next morning (Wednesday) he said: " If you find mc ill before dinner-time, fetch the doctor."

About mid-day the witness heard somebody groaning in Mr. Watson's bedroom. Hurrying there she found him unconscious on the bed, with a tumbler and some letters by his side. One, addressed to herself, contained a £5 note. Accompanying it, was a sUp of paper, on which was written, "Let no suspicion fall upon the servant, whom I believe to be a good girl." Dr. Kugg, whom she immediately summoned, fetched the police.

The doctor's evidence was more important. He said thnt, on being called to the house, be found Mr. Watson apparently in an epileptic fit. A letter, addressed to him in his handwriting, read:

"To the Surgeon,—l have killed my wife in a, fit of rage. Often and often she has provoked mc, and I have endeavoured to restrain myself, but rage overcame mc, and I struck her. Her body will be found in the little room off tbe library. I hope she will be buried as becomes a lady of birth and position. She is an Irish lady, and her name is Anne."

Fearing the worst. Dr. Rugg unlocked tbe door of the room. There, huddled on the carpet, he saw the body of the unfortunate Mrs. Watson. It presented a shocking spectacle. The skull had been smashed in by a heavy instrument: there were a dozen dreadful wounds on the lower limbs; and the clothes were saturated with blood.

The police having been summoned, Mr. Watson, who seemed curiously unconcerned, was taken into custody. After this evidence, which, of course, amounted to a. confession, there was only one possible verdict for the jury to return. They returned it:—"Wilful murder against John Selby Watson." On the coroner's warrant, he was then committed for trial at the next sessions of the Central Criminal Court In the meantime tho police court proceedings were resumed. On this occasion the prisoner had the services of Mr. Tbeslger aB counsel. During his examination it transpired that the day after the murder be had ordered a large packing case to be made for him by a local dealer. He •would not say for what purpose he wanted It. The fact, however, that It was to be "air-tight and water-tight" suggests a horrible one. Yet, although he paid the amount demanded, Mr. Watson did not take delivery. Counsel for the accused asked a few questions, obviously with the intention of showing that his client was insane. Dr. Rugg appeared to agree with aim. The matter, however, was one to be dealt with elsewhere. The magistrate, accordingly, signed the necessary papers, and the prisoner was committed to Newgate.

There were inevitable delays; and the trial, conducted before Mr. Justice Byles. was not held until the January sessions of the following year. A big array of counsel assembled. The Hon. George Denman, with H. B. Poland and William Beasley. conducted the prosecution, and Sergeant Parry and the Hon. Alfred Thesiger appeared for the defence.

In his opening address counsel for the Crown described Mr. Watson as " a man of education and culture," and remarked that

"it was" a satisfaction to himself to feel that the prisoner was in the hands of one of the most eloquent and powerful advocates that ever conducted a case in a Court of Justice, and was to be tried by a learned, humane, and most experienced judg-," The evidence he calleu was much

CASE OF THE REV, JOHN WATSON, CLERGYMAN WHO BECAME A CONVICT. *

(By HORACE WYNDHAM.)

the same as that already given at tho police court. The secretary of the Stockwell Grammar School, howeTer, was a fresh witness.

Mr. Watson, said this Individual, had been employed there for twenty-flve years, but his engagement had recently been terminated. This was because the number of pupils had fallen off, and it was no longer practicable to continue his salary. The decision had obviously disappointed him, and might have had some bearing on the tragic occurrence that ensued. Two brother clergymen also gave evidence on his behalf, one of them declaring that "no man could have a higher character for kindness and humanity."

A pathetic happening -was the reading o.f a faded bundle of love-letters, fastened with a riband, found In Mrs. Watson's bedroom. They had been written to her by the prisoner before her marriage. There were six of them, and each wns expressed in remarkably stilted and formal language. Thus, the first five commenced, "Madam," and ended. "Your very obedient servant. J. S. Watson." Yet, in the second (having only seen her once, and that was seven years earlier) he had proposed marriage. On the proposal being necepted, he advanced to "Dear Madam," and signed himself, "Most sincerely." It was not until he wrote the last letter, ln which he suggested going to Dublin to see her, that he displayed the smallest hint of passion. Even then he still began "Dear Madam." However, in the body of this letter he becomes mildly ardent. Thus, "it will be a happljness to mc," he declares, "to 6ee once [ more that dear face which I once so much admired. . . . Believe mc, that all the Übertles which I have taken In writing thus to you. have been taken with the warmest regard to yourself, a regard which. 11 hope, will never be diminished.—P.S. Will you accept my second offer, dearest? •With love. This riband in exchange for the other.—J." If love-letters cduld ever be comic, these, with their caution and studied restraint, might so be described. But love-letters never are comic. For twenty-eight years poor Mrs. Watson had treasured these in that dreary suburban house where she was to be so cruelly struck down by the hand that had penned them. It is to be hoped they proved some solace to her. Iv the year 1572 the now fashionable and convenient theory of "brain storms" had not been invented. Murder was invariably dubbed murder, and dealt with as such. Knowing this, Serjeant Parry adopted the only possible line of defence, that of insanity. It was pressed to the full. Experts were called. They were called on both sides. As, however, generally happens, they disagreed among themselves. Thu3, the surgeon of Horsemonger Lane gaol swore that the Rev. Mr. Watson was "perfectly sane"; and the surgeon of Newgate and the superintendent of Colney Hatch asylum were of ft similar opinion. A doctor from Hanwell asylcui, however, was equally positive that he was mad: and an alienist from Manchester said the same. A clergyman who had visited him in prison told the Court that he was received with the remark, "Here's a man j with whose Latin the Bishop of Winchester has been pleased, and they shut him up in J a place like this."

These, and other circumstances which he enumerated, proved, declared counsel, that, at the time of the murder, his client was

"neither a reasoning nor a responsiblo being." Finally, he asked the jury to remember thnt one life had already been forfeited, and solemnly warned them of the consequences of returning a verdict that would inevitably lead to the forfeiture of another."

Replying to this, the prosecution argued that the insanity theory had not been substantiated. The prisoner, it was pointed out, was sane before committing the murder, and was sane enough afterwards to write letters, to transact business, and to conduct himself in normal fashion. Hence, In law, he was fully responsible. Then, counsel for the Crown having put his views to the now thoroughly bewildered jury, the judge proceeded to sum up the evidence. The chief question for them to decide was, he pointed out, if at the time he committed the murder, the accused knew what he was doing, and also knew that it was wrong If so, they must find him guilty. That was the law. Thus instructed, the jury retired. After an absence of an hour, they came back and announced, through their foreman, the decision at which they had arrived "We find the prisoner guilty, but we wish strongly to reeomend him to the mercy and clemency of the Crown on account of his advanced age and previous good character." The Clerk of Arraigns puts tbe dread question: "Prisoner at the Bar, you stand convicted of the crime of wilful murder. Hnve you anything to say why the Court should not i give you judgment to die according to law?" "I only wish to say that the defence which has been maintained in my favour was a just and honest one,'' was the answor. The last shuddering moment in the long drawn out drama was at hand. With the "black cap" surmounting his wig, nnd an ashen-faced chaplain beside him, ready to say "Amen."' the judge turned to the figure in the dock. "John Selby Watson," be said, "nobody who has heard this trial can regard your case otherwise than with the deepest compassion. My duty is simply to pronounce the sentence of tbe law —thnt is: that you be taken from the place where you now stand to the place whence you came, and there be delivered to the custody of the Sheriff of Surrey; that you be taken thence to the place of execution and bo hanged by the neck until you be dead, and that your body be buried within the precincts of the prison. May the Lord have mercy upon your souK"

The condemned man's solicitor busied himself with getting the Jury's recommendation to mercy put into effect. Public opinion on the subject ran high. A petition, with thousands of signatures attached to It, was drawn up and presented to the proper authorities. Two days afterwards a respite was forwarded to the prison governor. It was followed by the death sentence being commuted to one of penal servitude for life.

The Rev. John Watson had escaped the rope. Still, the prerogative of mercy did not extend very far. Thus, instead of, ns was generally thought would prove tbe case of being committed to a criminal lunatic asylum "during Her Majesty's pleasure.'' he worked out his sentence as an ordinary convict. There was no remission. In those stern days "penal servitude for life" meant what it said. Twelve years afterwards, in ISS4, John Selby Watson died at Parkhurst Prison, a decrepit old man of nearly eighty. The immediate cause of death was a fall while in his ecu.