The Ex-convict Butler.

Hastings Standard, Issue 34, 5 June 1896, Page 4

The Ex-convict Butler.

[N.Z. Times.]

Butler's arrest for a robbery in Melbourne, and his behaviour in custody revive the memory of one of the most celebrated crimes in the New Zealand calendar. One Saturday night about sixteen years ago a young butcher named Dewar and his wife were murdered in their 'in>l, hacked to pieces by some desperate, cruel rutiian. Butler was arrested. A man of brilliant talents, with a rooted predilection for vagabondage and roguery, he was duly placed in the dock to answer a charge of murder, grounded, of cour-e, entirely on circumstantial avid.-nce. lbwas cool, cunning, able and plausible, and he defended' himself, with, if we remember right, hints about law points from Sir Robert Stout, who had been retained as solicitor for the defence. Butler began by depriving the Crown Prosecutor of his brief—virtually. Inspector Mallard, who hail got up the case for the Crown, was advising him, and the inspector having to be called as a witness, Butler took prompt advantage of the fact by having all witnesses/) rde red out of Court. He then proceeded to light the unprovided Prosecuter in the most ar 1 t I ion. Ho cross-examin- d his w with the most ingenious ability 1 i the chain of evidence till it j 1 1 lin. He called no witnesses to oe served the same way : he simply made one of the most brilliant and powerful orations ever heard in that Court of justice. He pointed out, int- r (t?< ft, that in a case like his of circumstantial evidence the theory of guilt must be provided to be the only possible one to fit the facts, and he propounded a theory of innocence which fitted them passably well; entirely and completely in the opinio it <„.f u-:iuy, provided his we:. The jury was I'l'ie*: i-ipr • dramatic features '„-f »'•<• i • in of brilliant i. iility on trial in- j-- i- iis own defence isliibltiui.* « -..-i defence, a re-A.-.I ;'K-n -A au unshaken constancy worthy of the greatest minds. The -Jndge—Mr Justice Williams—summed up in a way to which exception was taken at the time. But the truth is, and it was seen by the judicious few at the time, that it was one of the most luminous, fair, inflexibly Jus pronouncements ever heard in that place or any other. It confined itself with scrupulous closeness within the four corners of the case as present, d to the Court, it gave every point its due weight, it placed tho vlioio matter before the jury evenly balanced, no extenuation, no slurring, no exaggeration in either scale of justice. It is, we dare say, not improb»Me that Mr Justice Williams had his own view of the prisoner's guilt. Ymt his duty was to prepare give their new on the Without any admixture . g J on the most perfect - ntnlcnt of thc f ;ic t s a pre- n j e j t k e Court. This did in the most perfect fashion. The jury, left to themselves and to the magic of the dramatic situation, gave a verdict of acquittal. Fortunately for society there was a charge of burglary and arson over the head of the acquitted murderer. He was brought at once to trial, convicted and sentenced to a long term of penal servitude —IS years if we remember rightly. Arson and burglary, it was remarked at the time, are both grave crimes. The public seized the conclusion that when combined the combination is more than grave. Public opinion decided promptly that the Judge's sentence was just. As a matter of fact it was as just as his summing up in the murder case. While Butler was iu prison he was true to himself, as depicted by the actions of his past life. His talents, his determination, and his ruthless ferocity made people fear his return to civil life. He returned in due course, and those fears have been justified by his arrest on a charge of highway robbery. True to himself once more, he curries favour by beating his head against the walls of his cell. In view of this interesting and not attractive human document, who shall say that our prison system is remarkable for its reformatory effects ?