SUPREME COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 1157, 16 September 1865, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSION.

(Before his Honor, Mr Justice Richmond

Fkiday, Seitemijeb I sth. His Honor took his seat at five minutes after tea o'clock.

TRIAL OF WTLLIIM ANDREW JARVEY.

The prisoner was again placed in the dock. He looked excessively pale—almost blanched; but he also appeared calmer than during "Wednesday.and Thursday. His Honor resumed his summing up; going back to the beginning of the evidence of Mr Hardy, in the course of which he was interrupted on Thursday evening, by the fainting of the prisoner. The following is the substance of the principal comments made by His Honor, in the course of his reading:— Mr Smith had asked him to shut out all the evidence as to the analysis, on the i ground that there was no evidence of the identity of the matter analysed. If he could have said, " Gentlemen, you cannot, upon the evidence adduced, found any conclusion whatever—there is, legally speaking, no evidence of the identity"—no doubt it would have been his duty to do what Mr Smith asked. But he told Mr Smith, and he would repeat, that he thought there was some—nay, a great deal of—evidence of identity. Therefore, it was for the jury alone to say whether there was full or satisfactory proof, or not.

Mr Smith: Will your Honor make any comment upon the fact, that as to the wrappers, the tapes, and the broken seals, there is an utter absence of evidence as to where they come from or in whose possession they have been ? The Judge sue! that there was that absence: but instead of his commenting upon it, he should prefer that the remark of Mr Smith should be left as a supplementary one to what had been previously said. As to the analyst, Mr John Drumrnond Kirklanel, it was not in evidence, but it might ba concluded, that he had attended by the consent of the Government of Victoria. If that were so, whatever might be the result of

this case, the Colony would again be laid under a iltbt to the Colony of Victoria. This was not the first time that Victoria

had shown towards New Zealand a liberal policy ,• and lie hoped that, at some day, New Zealand would be able to reciprocate. Meanwhile, it must be repeated—this was not the first time that we were placed under obligation by the Government of Victoria. As to the processes used in the analysis, Mr Smith had suggested that they were a kind of leading questions put to Nature: but Nature could not lie, and was not to be led from a simple straightforward answer, by any particular process. The analyst might be misled by a foregone conclusion : but in this case, such a foregone conclusion would have led to the discovery of corrosive sublimate or of arsenic, as well as strychnine. But it w<is not so: the chemist said that he found strychnine and that only. Mr Smith said that very great stress had been laid by Mr Kirklaud on the colortests. Would it not be right to draw the attention of the jury to the fact that, although that witness wore spectacles, when he came to read bh own writing, he had to hold the paper quite close to his eyes ?

The Judge thought not : no remark was made or question put, relative to the thing, while the witness was in the box. Men accustomed to minute examinations might well be short-sighted : many who so occupied themselves, might be so, but he did not know that that had ever been objected to as a disqualification of such men as witnesses. Tho witness might possibly be color-blind ; but, if he was, he had not stated " the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

Mr Smith said he did not suggest such a thing—but only that the witness might be purblind.

The Judge considered that the manner of the giving of the evidence was very creditable to Mr Kirkland—it was modestly given, but firmly at the same time. Having completed the reading of. the evidence,

The Judge sa:d: That is the case for the Crown. I must bespeak your close attention for a short time longer. I will put the case to .you in this way. Suppose that you should be convinced, on grounds independent of Mis 3 Jarvey's evidence, that strychnine was found in the body after death. What follows? Does it not follow, that Mrs Jarvey was poisoned by strychnine ? Would it not be absurd, if you are convinced on that important point which I have just mentioned, to pretend to account for Mrs Jarvey's sudden death in any other way ? I ask you this, without relying on. Miss Jarvey's evidence—put that aside for a moment—whether the circumstances proved by other witnesses do not lead plainly to the conclusion, that the poison which was found in the body was the cause of Mrs Jarvey's death ? This, then, is the first step :if poison was found in the body, Mrs Jarvey died by strychnine. Now for the second step. By whom was the strychnine administered? Again put aside Miss Jarvey, for a time. Firstly, Issacs proved the prisoner's intention to go home on the evening of the 26th September, when he called for the powders; secondly, William Sly proved ths prisoner's alighting from a car at the door of his house; thirdly, to clench the matter, Andrew Jarvey proves his father's presence at the time of his mother's seizure. It 13, then, I think, incontestible that the prisoner was present immediately before the seizure. The prisoner was then in possession of strychnine, recently purchased. The prisoner that evening obtained from Isaacs, quinine, a bitttr drug, renembling strychnine externally, and resembling it aomewnat in ta?te. He had purchased the quinine, professing an intention to administer that drug to his wife. It becomes, therefore, highly probable that the strychnine found iv the body—if found—was given by the prisoner. AH this prepares us to believe that part of Miss Jarvey's evidence which, if true, may be taken, I think, as proof positive that the prisoner administered the strychnine. This is the second step. Now for the third step. Was the administration wilful ? On the supposition I have been making, that strychnine really was found in the body of Mrs Jarvey, it follows that the piisoner had witnessed the whole force oi his wife's symptoms—that is, on the supposition I have been making, of the frightful symptoms of strychnine poisoning. He, of course, knew he had strychnine about him; yet he only fetched the doctor, who lived

close by, and who swears that be promptly attended to the call, in time to see a corpse. By applying to have Ms wife bled, the prisoner seemed to avow bis belief that the fit bad been of a usual kind. Is it possible that be did so believe ? Having been an eye-witness of her frightful spasms, is it possible that he did so believe, that prompt bleeding would save her ? Why, then, did he not send Andrew for the doctor at once? The conclusion, if yon follow that reasoning—if it commends itself to your minds—would be, that it is highly improbable that he did so believe. We ha.ru him, then, at the death-bed, declining to call for any medical witness, until all is over; we hare him, at the death-bed, acting a part and simulating a belief. This is the third step. Without recurring to the other proofs offered by the Crown, many of which depend on Miss Jarvey, this is weighty evidence of malice prepense. In all these three steps, it is ouiy necessary to recur to Miss Jarvey for the simple fact that the prisoner, on the night of the 26tb, did administer a bitter draught to his wife—a statement consistent with all the probabilities of the case. Remember the

hypothesis on which I put this view of the case—that you are thoroughly convinced strychnine was found in the body. The points in the prisoner's defence which most impressed my mind, as the best points made by Mr Smith, were—First, his criticism of Miss Jarvey'a evidence regarding the statement tint her mother's

eyes were closed during the fit—that her statement of the symptoms was inconsistent with the symptoms of strychnine poisoning, because she said her mother's eyes were closed, whereas, in all probabilit}', in ca-ea of strychnine poisoning, during the fit, the eyes are wide open, staring. The second best point made by Mr Smith, to ray mind, was what he said about the bias of the witness; and that point ia entitled to a good deal of weight It is because those points affecting Miss Jarvey's evidence are of such weight, that I have put the case to you as I have done. You will see to what degree the case as I have put it to you rests on Miss Jarvey's evidence—namely, that it is only necessary to recur to her statement that, on the night of the 26th, the prisoner did administer a bitter draught to his wife ; and, as regards that, there are various other circumstances tending to make it probable she speaks the truth about that. The next point that impressed my mind in ..he defence, was the suggestion of a possible mistake on Isaacs's part. You will consider how far the observations I have just addressed to you meet that point—how far the prisoner's demca-

nour by his wife's deathbed, as proved, not by Miss Jarvey, but by other witnesses, consists with the possibility of this theory of mistake. "Gentlemen, that prisoner at the bar must be condemned—if he be condemned—not upon any chain of artificially refined reasoning : he must be condemned upon the broad grounds of common-sense, and by the plain judgment of common men. If, after considering all that you have heard in this lengthy trial, you should have any substantial doubt as to the guilt of the prisoner at the bar, I need not say to you that it will be your duty to give the prisoner the benefit of

that doubt. I now dismiss you, gentlemen, to consider your verdict; aud I pray that you may be guided to a right determination.

The jury left the Court at 25 minutes after twelve o'clock.

About four o'clock, Mr Smith having communicated with the Judge, His Ilouor came into Court, aud directed the Foreman to be summoned.

Mr Bamford having entered, The Judge said: I am told that the packages produced by Mr Isaacs, the chemist, have been handed to the jury; and it is said, I don't know on what authority, that the jury are tasting their contents. I wish to tell you, that it is not distinctly in evidence, what the contents of those packages are. I understood them to be put in as samples of packages, not as samples of substances: therefore, you must not found any conclusion upon experiments of tasting, because the contents of the packages are not to be taken as samples of the substances supplied by Isaacs to the prisoner. The Foreman: We have not tasted them, jour Honor. The Judge: The thing was mentioned to me by one of the Counsel engaged in the case; and I thought it my duty to give you a caution. lam glad to find that it was not needed. I don't know that I could prevent your tasting the contents of the packages; but I should certainly have recommended you not to do so, seeing that you have not those contents sworn to in any way. I dan't want to interrupt your deliberations; but I may ask, is there a prospect of your agreement ? The Foreman : We have not agreed yet, your Honor. The Judge : Of course, you cannot be urged in such a matter. I am very glad to find that my remarks aa to the packages are unnecessary. The Foreman retired. Shortly after half-past four o'clock, the Jury returned into the Court, and the prisoner was fetched from the Gaol. He walked firmly, and took his place in the dock without any apparent emotion. The Foreman, in reply to the usual question, pronounced a verdict of—Guilty*. Mr James Smith: I wish to ask your Honor whether the points I raised as to the admiasibility of evidence, are of sufficient weight to induce you to reserve a case for the Court of Appeal. The Jud^e: No, Mr Smith; I have not a shadow of doubt on the matter. Being asked his age, the Prisoner replied, "Forty-two;" and being further asked, " Have you anything to fay why sentence of death should not be passed upon you," he answered, " Yes." He then with great firrnnees, except that he several times wept, and seemed much affected, addressed the Court as follows:— I have to say, in the first place, that, in the presence of my God, lam innocent. I have been convicted by the laws of man, but not by the laws of my God. lam awaTe that your Honor's sentence ■ The Judge (after a pause): Have you anything more to say, prisoner. The Prisoner: Ikaow that your Honor's sentence will soon place me in such a po-i----tion, that I will meet my wife, whose murder I am accused of.' —I know

thai your Honor's sentence -will soon scud me where I will have her for a witness;

and I do respectfully say, that that will be before a judgment seat, more seeing than yours, your xtonor, as to what is justice. 1 am not afraid of death, your Honor. My career lias been, all my ]sfe,

where I bare been in the habit of walking with only a plank between me and eternity : where I could look over my ship's side, and see death staring me in the face i I am not afraid of death.- -What I grieve for, is the unfortunate orphans that I will leave behind. However, I will die with a clear conscience, yonr Honor; and, as I said before, I know your Honor's sentence will soon place me in such a position, that I will have my wife for a witness, whether lam her murderer or not.' I suppose this is the last time I will have an opportunity of addressing my ftllowcreatures ; and, that being so, I will address them. I came to the Colonies 23 years ago. I came out ia the same ship with my wife f and when we came to the Colonies, I married her. Our first child died. That unforf nnate girl who, in that box, has sworn away my life, knows that she is not my daughter—that she is not the daughter of my wife. She h the child of a young lady in Tasmania, who had the misfortune to become pregnant by her father's assigned servant; and for the consideration of a sum of money, my poor wife and I took her, to cloak the shame of her mother's family. And I have done my duty to her, as if I had been her father.'

The Judge: Prisoner, it h idle, your going into those matters, now ? The Prisoner: Your Honor, the Registrar's books in Tasmania, will show what I have stated ; and I have no doubt some persons will be curious enough to enquire whether it is the truth. I aim not now in a position to tell a falsehood. But I wish particularly to observe, and there must be persons in this Court xvho know, that at the last trial, that girl gave a motion to her mother's arms, like this [moving them]—like pulling two paddles in a boat; this time, she gives it as up and down, like this [imitating the movement]. .As to my conduct to my wife. I have lived for 23 years, or very near it, in Tasmania. I have always endeavored to conduct myself as a man and a pentleman. As such, I came here. When I left Tasmania to come here, I was comparatively independent; but I came, thinking to do good for my family. Ever since I have been married to my wife, I have always proved myself an affectionate father to my family, and, at any rate, a loving husband. I do not for a moment pretend—l am not in a position to be hypocritical—l don't pretend to have been a saint all my life. As most sailors do, when I have been away from my wife, I have been going on free But there is one thing I feel it my duty to sry, in regard to the female on whose character a stigma is attempted to be cast: with my last breath, I say that it is a falsehood; that the stigma cast upon her—Miss Little, I mean—is not due to her. 1 again repeat, your Horor, that I am innocent of the crime of w'.iicb lam convicted. I stand convicted by the laws of man; but lam not afraid to meet my God.

The Judge : Have you anything to add prisoner ?

The Prisoner: I wish to add, that I forgive all those who have had a hand in my destruction. I forgive that unfortunate girl, and may God forgive her. May God forgive all those who have had a hand in my destruction: I forgive them. They have their end—they have what they have tried for—they have the life of a iellowcreature. 1 would, as far as I can, commend my poor orphan children —I do commend them to the sympathy of those left behind. Ido again wish, your Honor, to call the attention of the pjblic, or of those who were here at the last trial, to this—whether that girl did rot describe the motion of her mother's arms in this way [like rowing], and now she describes them as going this way £up and down]. Your Honor, I know what your sentence will be—that it will soon place me in the presence of God, where I will have my wife for a witness that I am not guilty 1 submit myself to your Honor's sentence.

The Judge put on the black cap, and said, with much emotion : Prisoner at the bar, —I should be doing an injustice to the jury who tried you, and I should be false to ray own conviction, if I were to abstain from saying, at the present moment, that my mind is entirely unmoved by anything you have addressed to the Court. I must also state that I entirely concur in the verdict which dooms you to the scaffold.

You are wrong, very wrong, in treating that verdict as if it stood wholly, or in any great part, on the testimony of the girl called Elizabeth Ann Jarvey. The verdict against you stands upon grounds almost independent of that girl's testimony. So far as, in my judgment, it stands upon her testimony, that testimony is confirmed by the indubitable testimony of facts. I balieve that you have been most righteously convicted of the crime of murder, in one of its most heinous shapes; and that you are now adding to that crime the guilt of hypocrisy. The poisoner is of all criminals the most detestable. His crime is generally most cruel, generally most treacherous. That is the character of an ordinary poisoner. But you' are no ordi- ' nary poisoner. Your victim was one whom you were not only bound to ' protect by the common ties of hu- : inanity, but to whom you were united 1 by ties of the cloyed nature, and by the most endearing solemn obligation. Your < victim was your wife—the motbir of your children—one who, as far as sppears here, 1 was a much enduring and a forgiviog one. < Such horrible wickednes-s is yours—of it < you have been righteously convicted. < Your conviction costs this country a large 1 sum of money: it is money well spent. '■ It is one of the most necessary purposes of J Government, that crimes iike yours should be detected, pursued, and finally ' punished. To satisfy the righteous de- ] sire that God himself has placed ' in every human mind, to secure 1 society against crimes like youra—these J are the proper ends of the dreadful pun- < ishment of death. It would bo well if the 1 prospect of that death worked upon you 1 in a proper way, doing what nothing else I can do so well—bringing you to a due I sense of the enormity of your crime, and i to a contrite confession of it. Should that 1 be the effect, you will not wish to lengthen i your wretched life; but you will welcorre < your most just doom for the com- 1 mission of a most cruel murder. < As the? mouth-piece of the law of ( the land, I now pronounce upon you its 1 last sentence : which i% that you, William I Andrew Jarvey, ; be taken, hence to the 1 place from whence you came, and thence c to the place of execution, and that you be < there oanged by the neck, until you are <

dead; and that your body be buried within the precincts of the Gaol within which you shall be confined after your condemnation. And may God have mercy oa your sottl. The prisoner -was removed. The Judge thanked the jury for their services, and released them from further duties.

The Court was adjourned until Monday, at ten o'clock.