THE JEALOUS WIFE.

TRAGIC STORY AT THE OLD BAILEY.

The Old Bailey was the scene of another murder trial yesterday, Mr. Justice Shearman and a jury having before them Ellen Jones, a married woman, aged 45, charged with the murder of Florence Stevens, a widow.

Sir Richard Muir, who described the case as a sad and painful one, prosecuted. Mrs. Jones, he said, lived with her husband in Wheatstone-road, North Kensington, and according to her statements there had been trouble between them for a number of years because of his relations with Mrs. Stevens. If the jury believed that, it would be a motive for the crime. Mrs. Stevens, whose husband died in 1917, had been employed at Marylebone Infirmary, where prisoner’s husband also worked.

On Nov. 17 Mrs. Jones went to the house of Mrs. Stevens in Wheatstone-road, and the two women had a conversation lasting half an hour. The talk seemed to be perfectly friendly. By way of a joke, Mrs. Stevens’s son, a boy of 14, was sent to his mother to say, “Dad is waiting for his tea.” Mrs. Stevens laughingly replied, “I’ll give him tea.” A minute or two later she came staggering into the room bleeding from the left breast. A policeman named Marsh, who was in the house, helped her to a chair, and, going to the door, saw Mrs. Jones running away. She was seen to throw away a knife. He went after her and she said, “You don’t know the worry she has caused me.” To another constable she said: “I am the woman who did it. There has been trouble between this woman and my husband for years. My husband drove me to it.”

When charged she said, “Have I murdered the woman?” and burst into tears. The injured woman was taken to hospital in a collapsed condition, and died the same night from the effects of the stab she received in the left breast.

“If one human being kills another,” added Sir Richard Muir, “the law says that is murder unless there is some explanation which either justifies or minimises it. No provocation which consists in a grievance against a person for having had immoral relations with the spouse of the person who inflicts the wound is regarded in law as provocation which would reduce the charge of murder to manslaughter. The facts at present seem to point to this as a deliberate crime, an intention to inflict; grievous bodily harm, which resulted in death, and that is murder.”

Prisoner cried continuously during counsel’s speech.

Mrs. Jones gave evidence, and replying to Mr. Ivan Snell, who was defending her, said she had been married for eighteen years. There were three children of the marriage. Her husband was an attendant at Marylebone Infirmary. About twelve years ago he made the acquaintance of Mrs. Stevens, and Mrs. Stevens had accused him of being the father of her child. In consequence of his behaviour witness had left him three times. She had found a photograph of Mrs. Stevens’s child, and a letter addressed to Mrs. Stevens in her husband’s pocket. Counsel: Had you any intention when you went there of doing Mrs. Stevens any harm? – No.

Replying to Sir Richard Muir, witness said the knife was closed when she went to the house. She did not remember opening it. She remembered running away, and she told the policeman she only struck one blow.

The husband was called, and said he was not a willing witness, although he was willing to answer a few questions.

Mr. Justice Shearman: I don’t think the situation has ever arisen before, but he cannot give some evidence and object to giving other.

Mr. Snell: He says he is willing to answer some questions.

Mr. Justice Shearman: He wants to be partly a witness and partly not. (To witness): Are you willing to give evidence in favour of your wife?

The Husband: So far as I have done in my statement to the police.

Mr. Snell decided that he would not call the husband.

The jury, on which there were four women, found the prisoner guilty of murder with a very strong recommendation to mercy. Mr. Justice Shearman, in passing sentence of death, said the recommendation would be forwarded to the Home Secretary that evening.