A MERCIFUL VERDICT

Hokitika Guardian, 16 April 1929, Page 6

A MERCIFUL VERDICT

WIFE FOUND IN CASK

FIFTEEN YEARS FOR HUSBAND

There was a tense interplay of emotion in the little Assize Court at Carmarthen during the closing act of a three-days’ drama a few week's ago. Jn tht* dock stood a bald-headed man with a square jaw and determined face. He was Henry Davies, aged 59, a, local preacher, who was arraigned on the charge of murdering his wife—the woman to whom at the altar nearly 40 years ago he vowed lifelong fealty. \\ non the jury, after 25 minutes’ absence from court, found a verdict of “ Manslaughter,” Davies received it in silenco.

A few minutes later he looked in a dazed, bewildered sort of way, words still refusing to come, when he heard Mr Justice Humphrey's pronounce what is almost ft life sentence —15 yea is penal servitude. Davies winced also when the judge reminded him of what tho penalty would have been if the verdict had gone the other way.

In reply to the formal question whether iie had anything to sav, Davies rasied his hand above his head and said: “Before Almighty God I am not guilty. I have a clear conscience. The story was not true. The story about- my hoy and the horse is true. My wife had money in the Post Office —for herself.”

Mr Justice Humphreys, in passing sentence, said:-“ You are a fortunate man. The jury has expressed the merciful view upon the facts of the case. .1 do not at all dissent from that view, hut on the evidence before it no one would have been surprised i' had found you guilty of murder, and you know what the result of that Would have been. “ This was a brutal assault, and after that brutal assault, which killed your wife, you proceeded to try to cover yourself up by making ' pse elaborate arrangements of setting her in the cask. This is one of those cases of manslaughter which very nearly amount to murder. You will he sent to penal servitude for 15 years.

A SUGGESTED MOTIVE,

The woman was found head downwards in a cask in which there were about 43 Ballons of u-utor. Medioal evidence, liowovcr, showed that she died from shock, and not drounmg. She had suffered 'from muscular degeneration of tne heait. The fact that Davies would benefit from insurance policies by £2150 m the event of his wife’s death was suggested l,v the Crown as a motive lor the crime ‘For the defence, it was put-lorwaid that Mrs Davies, when washing hei dogs in the cask, standing at the time on a wheelbarrow at the side had slipped into the barrel, and the shock had caused her death. \s Davies rose from the seat m tin* dock and walked briskly to the witnessstand in charge of a warder, holding his left hand behind his hack, lie < • a glance at the judge, and then tuk. up the Testament in his right hand, took the oath in n clear voice Then lie faced his counsel. Mi D.ini Johns, who had risen to question him now holding both his hands behind his hack He answered the questions pu to him in a clear voi<*>. He appeared quite composed in the witness-box, and gave his evidence in a clear, eonfiden manner. . Davies said he had been married • years and had four children. He s m he increased the joint insurance polio because his wife asked him to do s-’ several times. She was- afraid sonw thing would happen to him because li drove a lorry in which he had had tw-o accidents. The scratches on his hand were due to handling, boxes. On De oemher 19. the day of his wife’s death he went to his fruit stall after tea. leaving his wife indoors.

“ I WAS TOO NERVOUS.”

Lord Halshury, K.C. (cross-examin-ing'): Did you tell Annie Phillips, the nmid-servaut at the house in Spilman street, when you asked ii there was any blood on your face. “ Somehod'might, think I have been doing something ?”—No, I did not. That is not true. Did you use a lantern when-loadin'-up the lorry—l never used a lantern at all. , Could you sec the cask when loading the lorry—No. Why did you turn the lights of tiplorry out when you saw our wife?—l was very nervous.

Wily turn the lights out when it was the only light that showed where your wife was and how she was lying, was so nervous. Ddin’t you make any attempt to tak< your wife out of the cask? —I was tor nervous.

And you saw your wife in such a plight when she might not have been was too frightened. Frightened of what ?—I was too neivous. and I thought I wanted somebody to see her with me.

Replying to the judge, prisoner said he felt his wife’s legs before running down the drive and she was dead. Lord Halshury: Did you suggest there had been Imil play ?—Prisoner ; I don’t understand you.

Tlie judge: Did you think somebody hud attacked her?—l did not.

l.ord Halshurv: Then why did you wont to have somebody there to see her?— For giving evidence.

Evidence of w!mt ?—That they had seen her.

ll' it had been an accident why bother about getting evidence bolero getting your wile out of the'cask? I could not tell you. 1 was too nervous. When you touched her legs "but made you think site was dead? Sho was still.

QUESTIONS TO A DOCTOR

Dr Sladden , senior pathologist at Swansea Hospital, said tlio marks on tlic woman’s face and l>ody could have been caused by Iter strap;piles to tree herself from the cask. Lord Halslmry: Do you hold ;t qualification as an expert as to how people can get into a barrel?—l hold such a position that I deal with dead bodies. In this matter T apply my common sense and knowledge.

Are you an expert as to what •happens to ladies’ skirts when they struggle in a barrel?-—No. Supposing, in fact, a man had been attacking her for some 10 minutes whilst she was screaming “Murder” and “ Help,” and supposing, in fact, he dug his nails into her cheeks and hit her severely in the mouth so as to break two teeth, loosen one broken one, would it not, in the condition of her heart, be sufficient to account 'lor her death?—lt might.

Would it?—lt might. 1 had no opportunity of examining her heart. But you are quite certain about a fall into the cask being the cause of her death. Would not the position of her skirt and waistband be consistent with her having been dragged along the ground by the skirt?—lf she was dragged along, as alleged, the waistband would have burst and the skirt torn. Martial tjnh appinlsx

The judge: Rut you don’t know what skirt she was wearing or the quality of the waistband?—l am using my com

mon sense. The judge said the jury should- also use its common sense in that matter. Davies received the verdict in silence. The judge (to Lord Halsbury): What is his reputation in regard to his wife ? A police officer stated that prisoner and his late wife had lived very unhappily together, and at intervals he had assaulted her. His wife, 59 years of age, was a hard-working, good woman, and highly respected, hut she was absolutely subdued by him. He did not allow anyone to see her and gave her no money to handle.