Frederick James Jacobs (41), a clicker, was charged that at Rushden, on September 27th, he did feloniously attempt to kill and murder Elizabeth Jacobs.—Prisoner pleaded not guilty. Mr. Keep prosecuted, and Mr. W. R. D. Adkins defended.—Elizabeth Jacobs, wife of the prisoner, said she lived at Rushden. In August last they agreed to separate, and did so on August 19th. her husband leaving Rushden next morning. He returned to Rushden the following Thursday, and came to see her. From that time to the occurrence she saw him frequently, and he followed her about wherever she went. Prisoner desired to come back to her house, but she would not agree to that. Prisoner said it would be all the worse for her. On the 27th, between two and quarter-past, her husband again visited her, coming in by the back door. He latched the door, and bolted the top bolt. She told him had no right to do that for her son, and two nieces who were outside would want to come in. Prisoner said, "Let them round." The front door was locked. Her son shook the back door and called to be admitted. Prisoner stooped down and fastened the bottom bolt, and while he was doing this witness escaped into the front room. She held the door of that room against him. Prisoner followed her some time about the house until she unlocked the door and was passing out, when he caught her and pushed her against the hedge by the side of the path. They both fell, and prisoner produced the razor. She could not identify the razor; she only saw the flash. He was very desperate and began to cut her throat, and said something about severing her head. She struggled; her hand was cut, she felt the razor on her neck. She was wearing dress with high collar, which was trimmed with beads. Her husband had had some drink. She thought he was often not responsible for what he did.—Cross-examined: The prisoner was very anxious for them to come together, and had sent Mr. Sillett as a peacemaker to make up. The loss of the beads from the trimming was caused by the razor. She did not think they could be off the hand. It was because she did not think him responsible for his actions that she felt afraid to live with him. He was worse when he had had drink. He pretended to her that he was a teetotaller, but she suspected him. Prisoner was not an habitual drunkard. William Chambers, shoe finisher, Rushden, said he lived close by the Jacobs, and on September 27th saw Mrs. Jacobs lying on her back and Mr. Jacobs kneeling on her. Mrs. Jacobs said, "Pray don't Fred." and prisoner said, "I'll settle you." Witness caught the prisoner, who had open razor in his hand, struggling for her throat. He forced open prisoner's hand, and the razor was taken from prisoner by a man named Ellis.—Cross-examined Prisoner smelt strongly of liquor.—George Ellis, shoe rivetter, Rushden, corroborated, and identified the razor.—ln reply to Mr. Adkins, witness said prisoner had had drink, and was very violent.—William Jacobs, son of the prosecutrix and prisoner, gave evidence, and was followed by Mr. C. R. Owen, surgeon, Rushden, who said he found the skin on the left side of the cut from behind the left ear to the medium line of the neck. The neck was covered with blood. He found two other cuts on the little and ring fingers. The cut on the neck would be made a sharp instrument, such as the razor (produced). The neck cut was just over a dangerous part, the external jugular vein, but it was superficial wound, only just going through the skin. The cuts on the hand were not dangerous.—P.C. Ottley, Rushden, said he apprehended prisoner and charged him with the attempted murder. Prisoner made reply then. The edge of the razor was turned as if it had cut some hard thing. At Wellingborough Police-station prisoner answered to the charge, I know all about it. It has been playing on mind this last six weeks."—By Mr. Adkins: Prisoner smelt very strongly of liquor.—Mr. Adkins: Did he seem as if he hardly knew what he was about?—Witness: First he was very stupid. I could do nothing with him. We had to lift him in order to move him. Witness should say he had been drinking heavily that day.—Mr. Keep said it was for jury to say with what intent prisoner committed the act.—Mr. Adkins, in defence, pointed out that prisoner, alter the separation, was very desirous of renewing his former relation with his wife. He submitted there was no malicious intent. Prisoner had used every legitimate means try and put an end to the separation, and so far from showing any signs of getting rid of his wife he showed every sign of wishing to become practically her husband again. If Mrs. Jacob thought she was going to murdered, it was curious that she, as she admitted, did not scream. Mr. Adkins also pointed out that the evidence of all the witnesses prisoner was the worse for drink. If they believed prisoner was so much under the influence of drink, and so far beside himself would ask the jury to say the prisoner was not guilty of even wounding his wife with intent to do her grievous bodily harm. He asked them to say that prisoner did unlawfully wound her with the idea dim and stupid in his muddled brain of inducing her that unlawful means to come back to be his wife.—His Lordship summed up the case to the jury, who retired, and the Court adjourned for luncheon. On resuming, the jury returned a verdict of Guilty of wounding, with intent to do grievous bodily harm.— His Lordship said he must deal severely with persons who used these deadly weapons, and he sentenced the prisoner to Eighteen Calendar Months' Imprisonment, with Hard Labour.
|
|
