The Manawatu Times. SATURDAY, JANUARY 18, 1873.

Manawatu Times, Volume III, Issue 22, 18 January 1879, Page 2

The Manawatu Times. SATURDAY, JANUARY 18, 1873.

Thb commutation of • the sentence of death pronounced upon the murderer Walsh, will take most people by surprise, and rank amongst the many incomprehensible things done by the present Executive. Far be it from us to ca.v_i.Lal the_exercise. of the divine prerogative of mercy, or begrudge the unfortunate wretch the boon which has been granted him by his change of doom j but unless capital punisbuient is to be for ever expunged from the Statute Book, the dread sentence of the law should have been allowed to be carried into effeot, for if ever the gallows-tree groaned for a victim, that one was the murderer Wai<sh, The crime .of which he was -convicted was one of the most revolting nature, attendant with cireum, stances of the most brutal character, with evidences that even after he had wreaked his vengeance upon his young and tender helpmate, her remains, hacked and hewed, bloody and disfigured, were subjeoted to an indignity which could only have found hirth m the brain of a cold-blooded remorseless ruffian. Neither before nor after the death of his victim was there one single incident brought forward against the character of the murdered woman, or one peg upon which a suspicion could hang that Walsh had the lightest provocation for his diabolical act. On tlie* contrary, while those to whom the pair were known bore willing testimony to tbe modesty, industry, and sobriety of the young wife, they one and all denounced him as one of those lazy, grumbling loafers, who are the pests of society. The only cause which has ever beon assigned far his inhuman crime, was that lie was annoyed at a threat made by lps wife that she would leave him— a threat which was not nptde until the poor creature had found out from sad experience that he was too laay to work for his own living, and was the means of debarring her from earning hers, We do not know upon what plea the commutation haa been granted, unless it be upon the question of the insanity of the prisoner. Notwithstanding the asservations of the wretched culprit, the nature of the evidence arrayed against him too conclusively pointed to the deliberate perpetration of a foul and diabolical murder to admit of the plea as to the injuries being the result of an accident, and the jury arrived at the only possible verdict froui the evidence when finding him guilty. As we have said, we do not know upon what grounds the .Government have seen fit to interfere with the course of the law, but unfortunately of late years that dread visitation of Godinsanity—has been made the loop-hole for the escape of many an offender from the penalty of his misdeeds, for when all points of law have failed to set the prisoner at liberty, insanity is usually fallen back upon as the last resource. Some few years ago, a well-known mer T chant m Melbourne planned and exej eiited a w.elKdevised. system oE fortreryi which had been so well" arranged, that; but for the suspicion of ohe of the intended victims, if would have been the means of defrauding the public to a large extent, The plan of pperatioi) was a most ingenious one, arid' gave evU denee of a more than ordinary keen intellect, yet the perpetrator waa a m^p

of independent means, mixing m the highest commercial circle's, with credit unimpaired and affairs unembarrassed, and apparently with no possible reason for the commission of the crime witli which he was charged. The evidence adduced at the trial was most conclusive as to his actual criminality, but a ver. diet of acquittal was returned on the ground of insanity, and the prisoner was consigned to an asylum. This was a phase of the proceedings for which he had not bargained, and matters assumed a different aspeot j the restraints of the madhouse becoming irksome, the patient suddenly recovered his senses, and pe. titioned the Legislature for his release, a prayer which the Government with commendable firmness refused to listen o. On bis behalf it was argued that at the time of the commission of the deed his mind not being evenly balanced, he was not a responsible agent. In reply, we may be allowed to quote the opinion of a well-known American authority on this particular pomt — Dr. C. A. Hammond. In a paper read before the Medicolegal Society of New York, on " Morbid Impulse," that gentleman characterises what most people call "moral insanity," as a diseased impulse, and he lays down the doctrine that the man who commits a eriftie because he finds a morbid pleasure m committing if* is not to be treated as irresponsible for the deed." He further argues "that the proper exercise of the power of the will never fails m keeping back persons from the commission of evil deeds to which they feel themselves powerfully impelled. A person, therefore, afteoted with a homicidal impulse, but with reason otherwise unimpaired, who should neglect the means whereby such imfmlse might be counteracted, would, if »c took life, be fully as guilty of murder as if he killed through deliberate malice," This is a view of the case not often taken by the public, and juries m weighing evidence m cases where, blood has been unfortunately shed, seldom discriminate between an act of violence committed under the influence of some hallucination whioh m itself actually amounts to insanity, and an act perpetrated through a morbid impulse which is capable of restraint. It is to be hoped, then, that that mistaken sympathy which is too often accorded to the victim of M morbid impulse " will be totally discouraged, and that by the en. forc-ement of stringent punitive measures against those who place themselves within reach of the arm of the law, stern justice will be meted out to all transgressors, and that persons who outrage 8' c ely will be unable to shelter themselves under the convenient ploa of "emotional insanity.'.'