Untitled

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 72, 21 April 1909, Page 2

DlilNK X<> EXCL'SK FUlt Ml'liDEß. In view uf llic lt-teul acquittal of Dr. lioode. ill New Plymouth, on a charge of murder, on the ground of humility., interest attaches lo a recent decision in tk- Old Country, where it was held thill drink mis no excuse for murder. Justices Darling. Walton, iind Piekford sat as a Court of Criminal Appeal in London to dejkl with tile filial appeal by Tlioinas .\fcade. who was sentenced to death at Leeds Assizes for the wilful murder of Clara Howell, a woman with whom he lived for seven year*. Mr. Jurdiuc, who represented prisoner, argued that although it was admitted the man killed the woman, till' Mow was given in the course of a drunken quarrel, and lie should have been found [ guilty of manslaughter only. He further argued that .Mr. Justiee Coleridge, who tried (he ease, misdirected the jure by referring lo the fact that prisoner's mind must be dethroned by drink before I they were .instilled in reducing the crime I from murder lo manslaughter. As a 'mailer of fact, a mail's drunken condition might be lefts than thai, and yet In? such that a jury would I>c allowed [to return a verdict of manslaughter. In giving judgment dismissing Hie appeal. .Mr. Justice Darling said a complaint had been made respecting certain *-ords used bv Lord Coleridge in his fiinnimiig-itp. The original law was that althougli an insane person was not liable to the same consequence*, or to be judged by the .-anie *la;ulards, as a sane person, yet if Hie person were suM'cring from drunkenness produced by his taking intoxicating liquor, lie was not t« be excused for a crime. Alicr I Sly a certain immunity was given (o Midi pcrrtoiiH, but the Court iiid not consider it was jiurt of their duty to enlarge such rule. Jn the .words used by Lord Coleridge (here was a sullicicni warning to <hc jury, seeing dial, be used tins words, "if lie be insane, the knowledge i or intent is wit, presumed, but insanity is not ])leaded here." The man accused Of a. crime such as Hie i« ty quc,.4iu!i was taken to intend the consequences | of his act. That the defence might, re- I bill, by showing his power of will lo ' have been so allecled by the drink that he was incapable of knowing that what lie was doing was dangerous. Their lordships had carefully considered the r case and the words of Lord G'oleridoe, l i>i^l

judge could nut be condemned to the use of commonplace language. It wis said that the langmgj. was picturesque and figurative, but it was igtiite possible to express what was (rue hi such language. They were not prepared to lay down a definite rule for the proper sum-ming-up in eases such as thai. It was unnecessary to criticise the language of Lord Coleridge, and the appeal would be dismissed.