THE CHILD MURDER CASE.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2169, 28 February 1891, Page 3

THE CHILD MURDER CASE.

At the Supreme Court, Christchurch, on Wednesday last, the charge of child murder against Sarah Jane and Anna Flanagan was heard. Mr Martin prosecuted, and Mr Stringer and Sir Robert Stout appeared for the prisoners, who pleaded “ Not guilty in a firm tone.

Mr Martin, in opening the case, detailed the circumstances briefly as follows The daughter was delivered of a child, which was put out to nurse. Mrs Flanagan said she felt inclined to murder it. On the sth January the prisoners went to the nurse’s house and took the baby away. Next day the head of a child was found, terribly mutilated, near an unoccupied house. The body was not found. A quantity of clothing found *near the head was proved to have been taken away with the baby, A day or two later Mrs Flanagan called on the nurse and told her that some men had assaulted her daughter, and taken away the child and cut off its head, and the police were making inquiries. She also said the face of the child was battered out of recognition, and the body never would be found. After this the daughter left for Wellington, where she was arrested. The evidence given was similar to that given in the R.M. Court, and of which we have already given a pretty full summary. It was concluded at about 3 o’clock, when Mr Stringer addressed the Court for Mrs Flanagan. Mr Martin followed for the prosecution, and Sir Robert Stout made a pathetic appeal on behalf of Mias Flanagan. He concluded : Their first duty was to save life. He begged ahem to look at that old woman, against whom nothing had been before this heard. Was it likely that she would take the life ot a babe ? Then as to the younger prisoner, he asked them to believe that this girl was of a hysterical temperament, and that in a sudden outburst of fury sue had killed her child, a homicidal passion fostered by that which had slain thousands of their fellow-countrymen and countrywomen—drink. He urged them, as an act which they would never regret, .Dm country would never regret, their

fellow-citizens would never regret, to acquit these poor women. His Honor summed up at great length. Counsel had reminded the jury of the great responsibility that rested upon them, and he would point out that tbs case was one the result of which would influence the life of one or both of the women, to show them the extreme care they would have to exercise. The case was peculiar, in that there was what was very unusual, hardly any dispute as to the main facts. The question was as to what inference the jury would draw from these undisputed facts- The question for them was not the possibility of the case, as set out by the Crown, but whether that inference was the only one which, as reasonable men, they could draw from the circumstances. It the circumstances left any reasonable inference that the prisoners were not guilty, then the benefit of that doubt must be given. They must be satisfied that the evidence was conclusive that the accused, one or both, murdered the child. His Honor summed up minutely, detailing the whole of the evidence and setting the defence ®f the prisoners before the jury. The plea of mania had been unsupported by any evidence, and the jury should devote the most careful consideration before attaching weight to it. If the mere suggestion of mania were allowed the murder of infants might take place with impunity, and the jury should be very careful in deciding this point. If they thought there was anything inconsistent with the guilt of either or both the accused it was their duty to give them the benefit of the doubt. If, on the other hand, they thought that either or both had taken part in the murder, their duty was equally plain. They must not’be carried away by the suggestion that they would never regret it if they followed what would be pleasant to their feelings and acquitted the accused. Their duty was to give a verdict on the evidence. If they weighed the evidence carefully they would have no reason at any time to regret their verdict, whatever happened. The jury retired at 6.85 p.m. to consider their verdict, and at 7.35 returned with a verdict of guilty, recommending the elder prisoner to mercy on account of her age. A moat painful scene took place, the prisoners screaming at the top of their voices, and protesting their innocence amidst shrieks. His Honor then assumed the black cap, and passed sentence of death. The prisoners were removed, screaming fearfully, and protesting before God their innocence of the crime.

The court was crowded during the hearing of the case, among those present being Mr Flanagan and a number of women.

The Lyttelton Times gives the following incidents of the case, among others: arguing that the known facts were inconsistent with Mr Stringer’s theory that the two women had separated before the child was killed, Sarah Flanagan rose to her feet and shrieked * Oh, my mother! my mother! I can’t stand it no longer.’ 'the elder prisoner and the warder strove to soothe her, while the spectators in the gallery craned over the railings, eager to see all they could of the first really , sensational incident of the day. The cries of ‘ Sit down ’ from the constables soon restored order, but the excited woman in the dock was not calmed so easily. ‘ Let me speak ! let me speak !’ she screamed. 1 Oh, my poor mother; I neyer did no murder! I am going to be put to death! Oh, I’ll tell the Judge! Before Q-od, and before everybody. I’ve done nothing !’ Mr Stringer went t© the dock to endeavor to pacify her, and a glass of water was offered to her. She, however, refused to be calmed for several moments, and attempted to leave the dock, crying out, ‘ Ob, I won’t stop here ! Let me go—l wouldn’t kill a baby for the world !’ She then grew calmer, drank some of the water, sat down groaning, and in a few minutes was quiet, After the verdict of guilty had beeh returned the Registrar asked the prisoners the customary question if they had anything to say. They seemed stupefied, and not to realise their position, but mumbled something about their not having ‘done it.’ The Judge, pale with emotion, drew the black cap, a square of black cloth, from beneath his desk, put it on, and began to pass sentence of death. He had spoken but a few words when the wretched creatures in the dock seemed to suddenly realise their awful position. Sarah Flanagan broke out with piercing shrieks. Her mother wildly asked the female gaolor, who had entered the dock, if it was true, and then also uttered screams and lamentations. In heartrending accents the two women appealed to the Judge for pardon, wringing their hands and wailing. Hxs Honor, in as few words as possible, words which were almost' inaudible owing to the fearful cries which rang through the court, completed his painful duty; the people in court, many of whom had risen to their feet at the first shriek from the wretched women, were much excited, and several of the women were in tears. The strenuous efforts of the police, and their persistent shouts of ‘ sit down,’ restored comparative order in a few moments ; the Court was adjourned ; the prisoners, still shrieking and imploring, were hurried out of ■ the room. Thus ended a scene surely 4 painful enough to make the most

persistent horror-hunter in the gallery feel sated ” A petition for the of the sentence on the Flanagans is being prepared at Christchurch. There was a rumor on Thursday afternoon that Sarah Flanagan had confessed, but bn inquiry it was found to he incorrect. A telegram from Wellington says : —“ As soon as the papers in the infanticide cases are received the sentences will be reviewed by the Cabinet.”