Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price Id. MONDAY, MARCH 9, 1885. "Killing no Murder.”

Owe of the developments of colonisation in some parts of the United States and the European Continent is, that a man or woman may, under certain circumstances, kill one of their fellow creatures and yet escape all legal punishment. The Kallocli and De Young case in San Erancisco afforded an illustration of this Kalloch, a clergyman, denounced the Do Young family, who were proprietors of the San Francisco Chronicle, and one of the latter afterwards shot down Kalloch in the street. Kalloch nearly died of his wound, hut ultimately recovered. De Youug was tried for I the crime but escaped punishment. By and bye a son of Kalloch shot one f of the De Young family dead. Kalloch, ; junr, was tried for the murder and acquitted. It seems that the De Young family are rather unlucky, as a few weeks ago another of them was shot by an aggrieved person whom the newspaper had been attacking. It would appear that American juries are disinclined to convict a man or woman of murder in affairs of this nature, and so manslaughter and murder are rife, and often go unpunished. In France, also, “ killing” under certain circumstances, is not taken as meaning “ murder.” One of the most sensational criminal trials of the day recently took place at Paris, when Madame Cloves Hugnes was indicted for the murder of a man named Morin, who had calumniated her. The story of the case is full of dramatic interest. When a young unmarried girl, Madame Hugnes had led a pure and virtuous life, Then she was married to M. Hugnes, a member of the Chamber of Deputies, and everything presaged a happy wedded life. But there was trouble in store. A married woman named Lenormaud, who wished to obtain a separation from her husband, circulated an entirely false charge that Madame Hugnes shad been the mis tress of Mr Lenormand A spy named Morin, connected with a Private Enquiry Office, was employed to get up false evidence against Madame Hugnes, defaming her character. Madame Hugnes, who was a perfectly pure and virtuous woman, was driven to fury by those false and slanderous accusations. At length she prosecuted the spy Morin, and he was convicted and sentenced to a long term of imprisonment. He appealed to a superior court against the sentence, and, pending the result of that appeal, was allowed free on bail. Taking advantage of this, he repeated the circulation of the slanders against Madame Hugnes, and caused hundreds of open post cards, containing the most abominable accusations, to be sent to her daily. This persecution drove Madame Hugnes to such a state of mind that she determined to kill her traducer. Madame Hugnes bad to appear at the Court of Appeal. She went there with a loaded revolver in her pocket. When outside the Courthouse she met Morin, who looked at Iter sneeriugly. Thou Madame Hugnes stepped close to Morin, drew Bor revolver, and deliberately fired (he whole six shots into his body, each bullet taking effect. Morin was carried away and soon afterwards died in terrible agony. Meantime Madame Hugnes was arrested and ultimately put upon her trial for murder. Some of the incidents of the trial, as reported in the French journals, are of vivid interest. An eye witness thus describes the lady's appearance ; “ I need not say how all eyes were fixed upon the prisoners' beach. Madame Hugnes was dressed in fashionable mourning, and wove a long cloak lined with fur. As she entered, her face was covered with a white, iace veil, which, however, she immediately raised, and took off her cloak with the greatest composure and self possession. She was deadly pale, but seomed quite calm, and smiled pleasantly as she shook hands with various friends who came forward to greet her. She is a decidedly handsome womane though her face is of the sensuous typd redeemed, however, by a finely cut nose any mouth. Her eyes are smalt but remarkablrs expressive, and her entire countenance beaoe the stamp of great determination. Her voi s is musical, and her elocution and action a she rmtje her statement were so correct

that ob'-i'.mid have fancied her a dramatic artist reciting a well known part. The trial proceeded. Madame Hugnes pled “ Not Guilty," but during her examination by the judge —which is allowed under the French criminal code—frankly admitted that she had shot Morin. She alleged that she had been driven to exasperation by persistent persecution, and firmly believed that Morin had circulated the slanders. “I am now before you, gentlemen of the jury,” she cried ; you may subject my life to the closest search and scrutiny. You will find in it nothing that I have to blush for. I killed Morin because he tried to rob me, a wife and a mother, of what a woman holds to be most sacred, her honor." This outburst created a profound sensation in Court, Then the lady added :—“ Morin did me the greatest wrong that can possibly be inflicted upon an honest woman. Even after the judgment of the Correctional Court against him for slandering me, there were plenty of people to say, “ there is no smoke without, fire.” And yet you do not think my exasperation justifiable ! I have daughters some ton years old, hence they might be told, Tour mother leads a dissolute life. Life under such conditions was not endurable.” Apparently the lady considered that her act in killing Morin was absolutely justified by the circumstances of the case. When asked by the judge whether the horrible bodily sufferings of Morin, (after be had been shot) were not greater than her own moral suffering, Madame Hugnes replied: —“I suffered infinitely the worst. My moral tortures were horrible." The trial resulted in the acquittal of Madame Hugnes ou both charges of murder and premeditation, and so she went free to be enthusiastically cheered by the crowded assemblage in Court, and idiolised by all Paris. Of course the verdict was in the very teeth of the strongest and clearest evidence. The lady did kill this wretched creature Morin, deliberately and with due premeditation. Of her legal guilt there was no doubt at all. Put there was strong moral justification for Madame Hugnes in slaying the vile and infamous creature—the spy, Har, and calumniator who had been hired aad paid to defame her. It was well that the world should be rid of so vile a wretch, and though the act of Madame Hugnes cannot bo justified in a legal sense, yet the feeling will arise in many hearts that the case was one in which an infamous scoundrel was dealt with according to his desserts. At all events, a French jury have decided that the instance referred to was an illustration of “killing being: no murder."

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAIST18850309.2.6

Bibliographic details

Wairarapa Standard, Volume XVIII, Issue 1683, 9 March 1885, Page 2

Word Count
1,148

Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price 1d. MONDAY, MARCH 9, 1885. "Killing no Murder.” Wairarapa Standard, Volume XVIII, Issue 1683, 9 March 1885, Page 2

Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price 1d. MONDAY, MARCH 9, 1885. "Killing no Murder.” Wairarapa Standard, Volume XVIII, Issue 1683, 9 March 1885, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert