MURDER OF A CLERGYMAN BY HIS WIFE.

North Otago Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 2404, 22 January 1880, Page 2

MURDER OF A CLERGYMAN BY HIS WIFE.

(AimiDUKl) mOM TUB PHILADELPHIA I'OBLIC LEDGER, NOV. 1.) Tlio trial of Mrs Mary E. Lounibury for the murder of her husband, tho Rev. Dexter L. Lounsbury, at Stratford, on September 24, commenced in the Superior Court this morning before Judges Martin and Culver. Mrs Lounsbury came into court leaning upon the arm of a relative, and she reclined upon a lounge during tho session of court. She was placed near her counsol. .Slio was drossod in doop mourning, with a long widow's voil drawn over her features. To the indictment she pleaded in a scarcely audible voice, "Not guilty." Mary On mm ings, a servant in tho Lounsbury family, testified that she was awakened just after daylight by what soundod like a full ; hoard Mrs Lounsbury rap on tho door calling on hor to open ; on opening the door, Mrs Lounsbury placed her hands on the witness' shoulder, and said — " I have killed my husband," and ropoatod the tamo, her eyes all tho tune rolling wildly. 1 went down and shook Mr Lounsbury, and then went for tho doctor, who camo in two or throe minutes, and, upon examination, pronounced Mr Lounsbury dead. The accused wns walking back and forth orying and shouting that sho was willing to go to her death, and did not want to live. Saw a pistol on the bureau, which Mrs Lounsbury said sho had bought for protection against burglars. Mr Lounsbury lay as if asloep, the bedclothes being undisturbed. Aunio May Lounsbury, a daughter of tho prisoner, aged 11, testified that sho was awakoned by the roport of a pistol, and wont downstairs. When Mary said, " He is not dead," hor mother replied, " Yos, ho is ; I killed him first, and then I saw it flash." About sor G o'clook the previous ovening I hoard father say he wanted mother to wear a supporter. She replied sho would not, and ho replied if she did not ho would turn hor out of house and homo. Mrs Lorando Porter testified as follows; I have been in attendance upon Mrs Lounsbury sinoe the day after the murder. Tho accused had made numerous statements of tho affair, all of whioh agreed that the first she rocolleoted was the flash of tho pistol. Sho had asked for water during tho night, and her husband had arisen, and prooured some. Tho cross-examination brought out the faot that Mrs Lounsbnry had beon more or loss of a physioal sufferer for IB years. During the past five or six years she had beon much of tho time confined to hor bed. Hor mind had been affeotod by physical suffering. At one time she had contemplated suicide but had not tho courage to do it, knowing that as a consequence she would bo lost. Mrs Lounsbury had stated that there was some unploa•antneis between herself and husband, but there was no cause therefor oxoept hor own imaginings. Dr A, S, Allen testified that he saw the victim soon after death, The wound waa an inch below and to tho left of the occipital protuberanoe. Death was instantaneous. A probe five or six inches in length did not reach the ball. Mr Olmstoad stated that it was only necessary for tho prosocution to prove tho fact of tho killing. Several physicians had visited tho prisoner at hit request, and were at tho aervioe of the defenoe. Mr StoJdard then called Dr C, E. Sanford. He had visitod tho patient daily ainco the 20 ch inst. Found her suffering from general debility, Had a peculiar disposition, He described tho results of certain physical troubles on the mind producing insanity, hysterioal spasms, unconsciousness, and mania. He believed Mrs Lounsbury to have beon unoonsoioui at the time tho shot was fired, Dr Robert Hubbard had examined Mm Lounsbury. Insanity frequently resulted from tho disoasos from which the prisoner was suffering. In reply to a hypothetical question, he said he should judge the prisoner irresponsible. State-Attorney Olmstoad said ho had visited Mrs Lounsbnry at tho request of her relatives. In reply to the dofenco, he stated that Mrs Lounsbury, in conversation, had given the samo ncoount of the affair to him that «ho had to other witnesses. The Connecticut law provides that where prisoners are acquitted on the ground of insanity, they shall be sentenced to confinement in the insane asy-t lum uqtil pronounced cured. Tho case was submittod without argument after a brief charge by Judge Culver, and after a short Absence the jury rendered the verdict, "Not guilty because insane." Sentence was not pronounced to-day, but t,ho prisoner will be committed to the State Asylum At Middlttown,