Volume III
|
during a Quarrel about a Cake, and was convicted of Manslaughter, October, 1743 academy in Soho Square, and at the same school was a youth named Thomas Rickets, then in the nineteenth year of his age. At the sessions held in the Old Bailey in October, 1743, the above-named William Chetwynd, who was fifteen years of age, was indicted for the murder of Thomas Rickets, and was likewise indicted on the statute of stabbing. Mr Chetwynd being in possession of a piece of cake, Rickets asked him for some of it, on which he gave him a small piece; but refusing to give him a second, which he de- sired, he cut off a piece for himself, and laid it on a bureau, while he went to lock up the chief part of the cake for his own use. In the interim Rickets took the cake which had been left on the bureau, and when Chetwynd returned and demanded it he refused to deliver it; on which a dispute arose, and Chetwynd, having still in his hand the knife with which he had cut the cake, wounded the other in the left side of the belly. Hannah Humphreys, a servant in the house, coming at that time into the room, Rickets said that he was stabbed, and complained much of the pain that he felt from the wound. On which Humphreys said to Chetwynd: " You have done very well " ; to which the latter replied: "If I have hurt him, I am very sorry for it." The wounded youth, being carried to bed, languished three days under the hands of the surgeons, and then expired. In the interim Chetwynd, terrified at what had happened, quitted the school ; but as soon as he heard of the death of Rickets he went to a magistrate, to abide the equitable decision of a verdict of his countrymen ; and he was brought to his trial at the time and place above mentioned. The counsel on behalf of the prisoner acknowledged the great candour of the gentlemen who were concerned for the prosecution, in their not endeavouring to aggravate the circumstances attending the offence. They also confessed the truth of all that had been sworn by the witnesses ; but they insisted, on behalf of the accused party, that though his hand might have made an unhappy blow, his heart was innocent. One of their arguments was urged in the following words: " Shall the young boy at the bar, who was doing a lawful act, be said to be guilty of murder? He was res- cuing what was his own : the witnesses have told you, that after he had given Rickets a piece of cake, Rickets went to him for more; he denied to give it him, he had a right to keep his cake, and the other had no right to take it : and he had a right to retake it. " There are cases in the books which make a difference between murder and manslaughter. If a man takes up a bar of iron, and throws it at another, it is murder : and the difference in the crime lies between the person's taking it up, and having it in his hand. Chetwynd had the knife in his hand, and upon that a provocation ensues, for he did not take the knife up; if he had, that would have shown an intention to do mischief. It may be doubted, whether or no when he had this knife in his hand for a lawful pur- pose, and in an instant struck the other, he considered he had the knife in his hand ; for if in his passion he intended to strike with his hand, it is not a striking with the knife. " That it was to be considered whether there was not evidence to except this case from the letter of the statute of James I." Mr Baron Reynolds and Mr Recorder, before whom the prisoner was tried, taking notice of the points of law that had arisen, the learned arguments of the counsel, and the many cases cited upon this occasion, were of opinion that it would be proper to have the facts found specially. A special verdict was accordingly agreed on by all parties, and drawn up in the usual manner -- viz. by giving a true state of the facts as they appeared in evidence, and conclud- ing thus: " We find that the deceased was about the age of nineteen, and Mr Chetwynd about the age of fifteen; and that of this wound the deceased died on the 29th of the said September; but whether, upon the whole, the prisoner is guilty of all or any of the said indictment, the jurors submit to the judgment of the Court." In consequence of this special verdict the case was argued before the twelve judges, who deemed Chetwynd to have been guilty of manslaughter only; whereupon he was set at liberty, after being burned in the hand. |