THE GIBSON SHOOTING CASE.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2220, 7 April 1881, Page 3

THE GIBSON SHOOTING CASE.

Wednesday, Aphid 6. WIX.POT. mdedeb. Walter Pringle Gibson was indicted for having, on the 25th December, wilfully and malioiouoly killed one William Kerrison. The prisoner was defended by Mr Holmes, Mr Duncan prosecuted on behalf of the Crown.

The following evidence was taken after wo went to press yesterday : The cross-examination of Charles Kerison was continued by Mr Holmes —The men at Balmoral did not treat prisoner as a lunatic, nor did my brothers. They used jokingly to call him a looney, but only in fun. Prisoner never had a word with Murdoch respecting mo. Prisoner told Murdoch to go out of the house, and then went and asked him to come back. Up to the Sunday before Christmas, when I told my brother, I had not said to anyone that I was not married to the prisoner. I had threatened to leave Gibson at the Waikari. Prisoner’s brother told Murdoch that he was loafing about prisoner’s place, and should go away. I never took Murdoch’s

part. I did not tell prisoner that Murdoch was a better man than ho was. About the 17th December prisoner got £62. He gave me £3O, and told mo that I could clear out. Prisoner put the money in the savings bank, in the name of Mrs Gibson. I took it out, and put it in again in the name of Charlotte Harrison. He never gave me the money under the condition that I would marry him. When my brother came down and I was leaving him ho wanted to marry me. On the Monday night previous to my leaving him the prisoner told Murdoch to leave the house, and ho did. On the same night my brother Henry had a row with the prisoner. Murdoch fell over the stump of a tree in the dark, and was taken to the hospital. I wont to see him in the Hospital. Murdoch had no row with prisoner. Prisoner was very excited. Murdoch hod never been too intimate with me. Murdoch and I did not go out alone. Prisoner told Mrs Paynter, I believe, that Murdoch was a cousin of his, or something of the kind. I never told Mr Wilson that Murdoch was a brother of prisoner. The prisoner was never jealous of me. I never told David Gibson that I treated prisoner as one of unsound mind.

Hie Honor, addressing Mr Duncan, said that Mr Holmes had asked him to reserve the point that the question might bo asked of witnesses as to their opinion on prisoner’s sanity, it was for Mr Duncan to decide whether he would not waive the objection ho had made. They had it in evidence that the man was not treated as a lunatic.

Mr Duncan, after some consideration, and his Honor announcing that probably he would reserve the point raised, declined to waive his objection.

His Honor pointed out that there was no case in the books which decided this absolutely. If the experts were examined he should coniine the testimony strictly to the point whether the medical witnesses could ■ay from the facts put before them, that the prisoner did not know he was committing a wrong act.

Mr Duncan said under this ruling of bis Honor ho would waive his objection.

Cross-examination continued—l did not consider the prisoner mad. When he took drink ho was a little silly. I never told Mr Anderson that the prisoner was mad. I was at Anderson’s place within three months of my leaving prisoner. I did not tell my mother in Anderson’s presence that the prisoner was a lunatic and 1 should leave him. I never told Anderson that Murdoch was a fine fellow. On the Sunday prior to my leaving Gibson I went to West Melton with my uncle and Murdoch. On that Sunday I told my brother that I was going to leave Gibson, On the day I loft I told prisoner I would leave him. I told him so several times before I left him. I got the money in the week prior to the Sunday. It was not quite a week after I got the money that 1 left prisoner. I have not been living with Murdoch at the Ashburton. I did uot arrange with Murdoch that after I got the money out of this silly man I should go away with Murdoch. I never heard Murdoch ask whether my baby was like him, or saying that at any rate the next one would be.

His Honor said that this was not relevant. Mr Holmes submitted that it was most important to the defence to show that the prisoner was excited by these causes to such a state as not to be responsible. His Honor said that the questions were not relevant.

After some very close cross-questioning as to the relations existing between the witness and Murdoch, the witness said—l have been living with Murdoch since my brother’s death. I do not know whether I told Mrs Kinloy that prisoner wanted to kiss the child. I might have done so. The prisoner was very quiet when he came up to me on Christmas Day. Ho was sober. I never spoke at all to him. I took away some articles of furniture with me, and prisoner also told me to go to the store when 1 was leaving him and get a box in his name. He was not fond of the child, and never took ony notice of the child—or of me.

80-examined by Mr Duncan—Any eccentricity of character displayed by the prisoner was noticeable when be had been drinking.

His Honor oskod the witness whether before Kerrison’s death she could swear that she had not had any connection with Murdoch. The witness made no reply. Thomas Niol—From information I received I went in search of the prisoner, and found him in the Popanui Hotel on the 26th December. 1 asked him his name, and he said “ Why, what do you want to know my name for?” I said, “Is your name Gibson?” and he, after a little hesitation, said “ Tes” I said, “ I am Detective Niel, and I arrest you for shooting at William Korriaon, at West Melton, with intent to kill him.” He said that he supposed it was serious, and that anyhow be would have bis say. I searched him, and found five bullets and cartridges ia_ his left hand trousers’ pocket, and in his right hand vest pocket a key, also a receipt from Mr Garrard for the revolver. I brought him to the Depot, and on the Monday prisoner saw mo in the Hospital grounds. He said, “ Have you found the revolver ? ” I said, “ No.” He said, “ It is just inside the two panels, as you go down to the bed of the river.” I went there, and found this case and revolver at the • spot indicated by prisoner. The key found in his vest pocket opened the case. The revolver was loaded in five chambers. The balls in the pistol were exactly like those I found on the prisoner. Cross-examined by Mr Holmes The prisoner, unsolicited, told me of the position of the revolver. I did not attempt to handcuff the prisoner. The other detective who was with me wished to put the handcuffs on, but I said it was not necessary. By his Honor—The prisoner betrayed no symptoms either when I arrested him or afterwards of not knowing what he was saying or doing. Ho was not at all incoherent in his language. This closed the case for the Crown.

Mr Holmes proceeded to open the case for the prisoner, and called the following evidence :

Edwin Maxey—l am a schoolmaster. I have known the prisoner since 1859. Ho was then fifteen years old, and came to my school in Launceston, Tasmania. When he first came to the school I tried to get into convoreation with him as to his knowledge. I found him Tery backward for his age, and not able to converse. His intellectual capacity was very low indeed. I should compare it with that of an ordinary child of six or seven years old. Ho did not join in ploy with his schoolfellows, but swung on the children’s ■swing as a child. I made efforts to teach him, but failed. He was exceedingly taciturn, and I was surprised to find that ho was so low in intellect. Ho showed absence of independence of action, depending as it were upon his elder brother. In trying to urge him to do a simple task I lost my temper with him, and I noticed a malicious glint in his eye, which at once put mo on my guard. He was with mo for throe quarters of a year. He seemed to have a very weak appreciation of morality. Ho was told not to uae a catapult, and did 00. Ho was then twenty or twontyone years of ago, and ho was attempting to nay his addreaaes to my daughter, who was eleven years of ago. I thought he was an idiot, and told my wife so. I consider him as such. His Honor oaid that ho should havo thought that any schoolmaster discovering that a boy was an idiot would have got his parents to remove him and place him in the Asylum. Elizabeth Griffiths deposed to having been at Mr Tosswill’s farm at Courtenay, where the prisoner was a servant. _ I found a knife under the pillow of the prisoner’s bed once or twice. It was a large-Waded clasp knife, open. I told prisoner that I had found a knife under his pillow. Ho said ho only kept it there for fun. I told Mrs Pearce about the matter. The knife was an ordinary onebluded knife,

Felix Ellery deposed to haring been engaged at Mr Tosawill's when prisoner was there. He did nothing which induced me to leave the room, but Elizabeth Griffiths having found a knife under his pillow. I felt alarmed. I was frightened that, having a knife under hia pillow, ho might do one harm. By his Honor—l never saw the knife. William Browning Tosswill deposed that the prisoner was in his employ some four years ago at Courtenay. A complaint was made to him of the prisoner keeping a knife under his pillow. Witness asked him why he did it, and prisoner, after some muttering to himself, raised his eyes suddenly to his and said—“ They are trying to kill me. There is a conspiracy against mo ; they are all in it j and I take the knife to protect myself.” Witness thought that prisoner was either mad or in a way of becoming mad. When witness lived at Templeton two of his neighbors became insane.

His Honor thought that this was inadmia-

Examination continued —Prisoner having jold witness that there was a conspiracy against him, ho told him it was better he should leave, which he did. Thomas Dowling deposed to having known the prisoner since 1878, when he was in witness’ service. He seemed in a very melancholy and dejected state when ho first came to witness. Snowing his 'family in Tasmania, he asked for witness. After a day or so, witness endeavored to enter into conversation with prisoner, but could get nothing reasonable from him, nor any coherent remarks. Witness gave him employment, but he used to conduct himself in a very strange manner. He was sent for horses and came back without them, giving no explanation why he had done so. Afterwards, when he was engaged in wool-pressing, the prisoner left his work and went away, leaning over a gate by himself. Prisoner also stuck up a lot of standards in a paddock without any apparent reason. One day, whilst the Hakaia was heavy in flood, witness could hardly restrain him from going into the river and risking his life. His general demeanor was quiet and dejected, never giving an intelligent reply. He was sent one day with a dray to fetch shearers from a neighboring station, but came away without them, and gave no explanation of his conduct. Witness could do nothing with him, and ha left soon after the shearing season of 1879. Hugh Paterson deposed to knowing the prisoner, who was working with him some four years ago at Templeton. Prisoner was very often excitable, and at other times sullen and sulky in his temperament. At meal times the prisoner would talk to himself and make rambling statements as if no one was there. Whilst drafting sheep the prisoner would jump out of the yard and run away to bis where without a word being spoken to him. On one occasion witness saw prisoner running round the house cracking a whip after all had gone to bed. He had only a night shirt on. Prisoner on being spoken to said he always did that at night. He could get no drink on the farm, and wee only under the influence of drink once when be had been to town. He was on that occasion quieter than when sober.

Gilbert M'Oandlish deposed to the prisoner being in his employ at West Oxford. The prisoner was peculiar. Once he rushed up to witness in a paddock, and looking down on the ground, said “ My mother is a devil of a woman to me. I have been thinking that if I coaid train her and run her in men's clothes I could make a fine thing of it. She could lick creation at running.” Witness said nothing, and prisoner wheeled round and went away. Ho was perfectly sober. Prisoner was not fit to work some times, he had not mind enough to attend to it. Prisoner said once that his brothers ought to be shot, because they would not allow him to marry. Witness told him that he thought his mind was wrong, and that if he did not take care ho might get himself in trouble. When spoken to in his saxer moments about his peculiarities, he said he had no more judgment than God had given him ; the want was in his head, and he could not account for his actions at some times. One day prisoner took the turnips which were put down to feed some of the cows, and gave them to one. Witness asked him what he did this for. Prisoner said that the cow was the same name as his first sweetheart, and that was his reason for giving her the turnips. Gilbert M'Oandlish, junior, deposed to knowing the prisoner. He used always at breakfast time to ha talking and mumbling to himself. Some mornings he would not answer when spoken to. One day when prisoner was cutting a gorse fence, witness saw him stop and lean on his gorse knife chuckling and laughing and muttering to himself. Witness spoke twice to him and got no answer. Witness was then of opinion that be was not of sound mind. Sometimes the prisoner was very melancholy, and at other times he would speak to himself. Charles Spalding, a shepherd at Balmoral, gave evidence as to the prisoner beinz on the station. His manners were very peculiar and eccentric. Prisoner said he was a clockmaker, and had a lot of clocks there that ho had doctored. The result was that the clocks would not go. Prisoner was easily excited, particularly after he had drink. He was generally called the “looney,” and treated always as a person of weak mind. Witness never saw Murdoch and the so-called Mrs Gibson out together alone. Witness thought that prisoner was a shingle short. William Payne deposed to knowing the prisoner at Prebbleton. He had worked with witness about two years ago. Prisoner seemed very peculiar in his ways. When he was at work he would put down his shovel, kick the ground, and mutter to himself. Witness had seen prisoner walking along the road muttering, laughing, and up. The people in the district were of the opinion that prisoner was mad. George Eosterbrook gave evidence as to the weak state of prisoner’s mind during the latter part of 1879. The opinion of witness regarding the prisoner was that he was a man not fit to bo trusted alone. William Bosser corroborated the evidence of the two preceding witnesses, deposing to the prisoner putting his shovel down and chattering to himself. Annie Sherwood deposed that Gibson and the so-called Mrs Gibson lived near her. The prisoner’s manner seemed to be very kind towards the woman and the child. Witness had seen Murdoch and the so-called Mrs Gibson walking alone together. They were familiar together. Murdoch lodged with Gibson at the time. Emma Paynter, residing at Yaldhurst, deposed to knowing the prisoner, who came with Charlotte Kerrison to them. He was very liberal to her. Prisoner at one time wanted witness to buy a pistol for him, but on consultation with her husband she refused. Witness thought prisoner very strange and very peculiar in his manner. He used to walk along the road in a very peculiar manner with his head down, and looking behind him.

Isaac Harding gave evidence generally corroborative of the testimony as to the peculiar conduct of the prisoner. Witness, from the conversation of the prisoner, believed he was not right in bis mind. Bather Harding also gave testimony as to the weakness of intellect displayed by the prisoner. Witness saw prisoner and Charlotte Kerrison going along the road and he embracing her. Prisoner was not drinking at that time.

John Sherwood deposed to having worked with prisoner harvesting, and also to the apparently insane conduct indulged in by the prisoner. On the Tuesday morning before Christmas witness saw prisoner between 2 30 and 3 a.m. He came to ask for assistance to get Murdoch out of his house. The prisoner seemed very excited, and walked up and down in front of witness’ house. He wanted witness to go down with him to eject Murdoch out of his house, but witness declined. On prisoner hearing that witness would not go he became very much more excited, and began to talk on different subjects, such as scenes in Tasmania, pictures in papers he had at home, and other things. Prisoner seemed in an incoherent rambling condition. Prisoner’s eyes sparkled and glared very fierce looking. Prisoner told witness that ho had got Murdoch out once, and that he had got in again and locked prisoner out. Witness at the time was afraid of prisoner, on account of his fierce looks and excited manner. He was not drunk, ns he walked steady enough when pacing baciw rde and forwards. James Wilson deposed to knowing the prisoner for some time. He considered the prisoner not sharp. Witness had seen Murdoch and Charlotte Kerrison together, and had observed familiarities between them. Witness did not take notice of this, as Charlotte Kerrison had said that Murdoch was prisoner’s brother. At one time prisoner wanted to buy witness’s property, and when he declined, told witness that he considered it 1 was not his. On Tuesday, December 21st,

a- I witness saw prisoner, and the latter told hi: as I that Kerrison had been there and cleared a io 1 out of the place but a bedstead, and that g he had a pistol he would shoot himself. Wi It ness remonstrated with him on the subjeo a Prisoner said he did not know what to d 10 with himself, as he had token £3O in mono and everything in the house. Prisoner was s all times very kind to Charlotte Korrisor t He told me he had good reason to suppos r that Murdoch was too familiar with her. H s said he had given Murdoch £2 to clear oui 0 and that Charlotte Kerrison had inducei e Murdoch to come back. Prisoner asked witnes 3 three or four times to come and help him tun 1 out Murdoch, as he could not get rid of him i but witness declined. At that time prisone: i was more like a madman than a sane person On the morning following the leaving bj • Charlotte Kerrison prisoner was in a verj i excited state. David Clark Gibson, a brother of the prisoner, deposed that as a child ho was subjeol to violent paroxysms of passion, turning black in the face. When not in these paroxysms he was gloomy and sad. As he grew older he would mix only with younger children than himself. When witness left Tasmania prisoner was about nineteen years of ago. Prom his childhood ho was gloomy and reserved. Witness was at prisoner's house before Christmas. Murdoch and Charlotte Kerrison were present. Prisoner raved about Murdoch being a fancy man of Charlotte Kerrison’s. She said, when witness told her, that there was nothing in it. Witness always considered that prisoner was weak of mind. After Charlotte Kerrison had left prisoner told witness that if he had a pistol he would blow his head off. A first cousin of prisoner’s is of unsound mind. His Honor said that there could be no dispute as to the facts of the case as proved by the defence, viz,, that the prisoner was given to muttering, &c , and was of weak intellect. The Crown had not cross-examined, so that they could not dispute the evidence left. Richard Hankins gave evidence as to the mental condition of the prisoner. He thought he was an idiot, because he did not know whether ho had a vote or not; whether he paid rates or not; and put his hands in his pockets and walked away. David Anderson deposed to knowing the prisoner, and seeing him on December 21st. Prisoner came to see witness that night, and slept at the house. He was up and down the staircase the whole night, and on the next day, when witness questioned him, ho gave no answer. Witness thought that prisoner was completely out of his mind. He complained that Charlotte Kerrison had left him, and he was in trouble. On the Friday the prisoner came to witness' house and danced and sang in the most excited manner. Fart of the time he sat dowa and moaned, and then would jump up and laugh. About 4.30 a.m. on the morning when Kerrison was shot, prisoner came to witness’ house, danced about the place, and asked for his breakfast. Prisoner never said a word of what had happened. Prisoner went outside the house, ran up and down the stairs, and when asked what was the matter with him, he would not reply. Witness had considered the prisoner perfectly mad for the past six years. Charlotte Kerrison told witness that she would leave prisoner, as ho was a “looney,” and could not work for her, and she would go with Alick Murdoch. Charlotte Kerrison also spoke very affectionately of Alick Murdoch. John Southern deposed to seeing prisoner on Christmas Day at his house, about 2.30 p.m. Prisoner called to witness and asked him to have a drink, and he declined. Prisoner looked up and looked down for some time, and scraped his feet along in the road. Witness could not speak as to the condition of prisoner’s mind, but prisoner, when picking up potatoes, first divided the small and large potatoes, and then mixed them up again. Alex. Macdonald and Stephen Southern were examined, and then Mr Holmes announced that his case had closed, except the medical evidence. Mr Holmes said that just as he was going out of Court the man Murdoch, about whom they had heard so muoh, informed him that he could give very important evidence in respect to the insanity of the prisoner. His Honor directed the man to be called. This was done, and the witness was sworn. Alexander Murdoch—l know the prisoner. I lived with Gibson before Christmas for two weeks, I think. I was living on Balmoral station with Gibson, and was more intimate with him than any of the other men. I remember last year. I think at the end of February Gibson came and spoke to me quite rationally. He was biting his fingers, and suddenly he took out a stone from his pocket and threw it at my head, followed by another one. I tried to catch him, and he ran away from me. I asked him afterwards what he meant by throwing stones at mo. He said, “ Forgive me; I don’t know what I was doing. There is something wrong here” (pointing to his head). He made me promise not to tell any one what he had done. He had been drinking just before, but seemed to be cool and collected. He did not seem to know what he had been doing. A short time before I saw him last he asked me if I would go bushranging with him. I asked him if he was trying to make a fool of me, and he said no, I thought he was a poor, mean-spirited man in his normal state. He also asked me if I would go halves with him in buying a revolver. This was about five or six days before Christmas. Walter Edward Hacon—l am a Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians of London, M.R 0.5., L.S.A., and physician of the Asylum of Sunny side. I am also practising as_ a consuiting physician. I was specially trained by Dr. Parsey, of the Warwick County Asylum for Insane and Idiots, where there are 500 or 600 patients and three surgeons. I have been present during the hearing of the evidence in this case. I have heard the evidence with regard to the mental condition and habits of the prisoner, want of sequence in his conversation, &o. I am able to say from that evidence that I am of opinion that the intellect of the prisoner is weak—decidedly weak. I wish to know— His Honor—You must form your opinion whether when he fired the pistol he was in his right mind from the evidence you have heard. Dr. Hacon—lf the prisoner was sober when he fired the shot I cannot swear that he did not know that the act he was committing was wrong. Many lunatics confined in asylums do know the acts that they do are wrong. His Honor said he should now put the very terms used in Macnaughten’s case. Mr Holmes would not object to the question being put to his own medical witness, but should do so to the others. His Honor said that the prosecution had proved incontestably that the prisoner fired the shot. But the defence had proved most incontestably that the prisoner was not an ordinary man. It was not a question of sane or insane, because the line between the two was a vanishing one, and no expert would pronounce upon this. Under Maonaughten’s case what he ought to ask Dr Hacon was, whether at the time the prisoner fired the pistol he was aware of the wrongfulness of the act. Mr Holmes with the greatest respect submitted that the question could not be put. [Case cited, the Queen v Francis, 4 Cox 57.] The case went on to quote the case of Macnaughten, and it was there ruled that the question now proposed could not be put. His Honor said that the question had been put since that ruling. He put the question thus, “ Supposing the facts you have heard in evidence are true, can you give an opinion as to the sanity of the man at the time of the commission of the deed.” This was just what Baron Alderson laid down in the Queen v Francis. He should now put the question to the witness whether, on the facts in evidence he could give an opinion as to his responsibility at the time of the deed ? Dr. Hacon—l can say no more, your Honor, than I have done, but I want to add this, that I should have been far better able to judge of the sanity of Gibson had I had an opportunity of examining the prisoner privately. His Honor —I quite agree with you Dr, Hacon. I may say that I think that the prosecution and defence should have done a great deal more in getting medical evidence than appears to have been done. M r Holmes said that he should like to ask Dr. Hacon what were the symptoms ol insanity, and whether the symptoms displayed by Gibson, as sworn to, were nol indicative of insanity. Dr. Hacon—l was particularly struck wit! ; the evidence of Mr Tosswill about the knife i and I should have deemed it my duty as i , medical man, if I had been called in, to havi had a second one with me, to consult as t< whether he should not be deprived of hii I liberty. I think that the legal test is de ■ cidedl’y theoretical. i His Honor—And the medical one more so. t Dr, Hacon—There is ample evidence tha 1 , the man was subject to sudden impulses, ant

many oases hare been sent to the Asylums on slighter evidence. I cannot say anything as to the responsibility or irresponsibility of the prisoner. His Honor—Would you as a medical man, on the facts you have heard, consider yourself as being justified in giving a certificate for the prisoner to bo sent to the asylum ? Dr. Hacon—l should like to hear the evidence read over again before X could answer that.

His Honor—We can’t do that. Dr. Haoon—Well, I will try and recollect the evidence, but the witnesses may have exaggerated. His Honor—But you must take the evidence as correct. Dr. Hacon—Then, your Honor, I must say that dancing about the house after the murder was not the act of a sane man. X think that it was a decided proof of insanity. Cross-examined by Mr Duncan —Premeditation does not in any way do away with the supposition of insanity. Homicidal mania might show premeditation or delusion, or it

might not. Mr Duncan—Take the case of the prisoner speaking to the woman and saying, “Jane, I don’t want to shoot you.’’ Would you consider a man that said that a sane or insane man ?

His Honor—You must not take one detached part of the evidence, Mr Duncan. Dr. Hacon—Take the case of his going in to buy the pistol. He might not have intended to shoot the man Kerrison, particularly as ho said he intended to shoot himself. I cannot say that he was not sane when he fired the shot. There is no one invariable symptom by which I can say that a case is one of homicidal mania or not. Bach case must be taken on its merits. I cannot deny, as an expert, that the act is not taken at some time as a symptom. Of course, hereditary taint is a great point. I must say that to-day some of the evidence I have heard was very ludicrous, such as calling a cow by the name of his sweetheart, or a dog running away with his dinner, but a great deal must be laid to the ignorance of the witnesses. At the same time, I have heard some very strong evidence indeed, and many cases have been sent to the asylum for far less. William Henry Byrnes deposed that he was a duly qualified medioil man. Had heard part of the evidence, and read part of it. His Honor—Brom what source did yon read ? The Witness—l read some notes— His Honor told witness in effect be must not speak of what he had read of the trial. Examination continued —If it were proved by incontrovertible evidence that the symptoms previously spoken of as peculiar to srisoner in his youth were in fact exhibited jy him, and considering what was known of his character since, witness should say he was born with great weakness of mind, and with such weakness he might be quite unable to control a momentary impulse to an act of violence. He thought the evidence showed that he (prisoner) was a person likely to have such impulses. His Honor —Taking these things together, have you decided on the probability or otherwise of the p r isoner knowing at the time that ho was doing wrong ? Witness - I think he had some knowledge of the fact that he was doing wrong, but not the same as a sane man would have.

His Honor—Then yon do not think he was a sane man then ?

Witness—No, your Honor. I have known many persons sent to the Asylum on less grounds than the evidence produced in this case.

Mr Duncan said in face of the medical evidence there was not likely to be a verdict of guilty. His Honor—No; if you got a verdict it would not very likely be acted on. Counsel for the defence said he was pro* pared to accept an acquittal on the ground of insanity. His Honor then summed up, directing the jury to bring in a verdict of not guilty, on the ground of insanity. The jury, without rising, returned a verdict of “ Not guilty,” on the ground of insanity.

His Honor then directed that the prisoner be kept in strict custody in the Addington Gaol, and that the Registrar of the Court communicate to the Colonial Secretary the result of the trial.