The awful formalities at the opening of the case were gone through.  The judge took his seat, and laid on the bench in front of him a small parcel wrapped up in tissue paper; the jury was sworn in, and the prisoner asked if he objected to the inclusion of any of those among the men who were going to decide whether he was worthy of life or guilty of death, and the packed court, composed about equally of men and women, most of whom would have shuddered to see a dog beaten, or a tired hare made to go an extra mile, settled themselves in their places with a rustle of satisfaction at the thought of seeing a man brought before them in the shame of suspected murder, and promised themselves an interesting and thrilling couple of days in observing the gallows march nearer him, and in watching his mental agony.  They who would, and perhaps did, subscribe to benevolent institutions for the relief of suffering among the lower animals, would willingly have paid a far higher rate to observe the suffering of a man.  He was so interesting; he was so young and good-looking; what a depraved monster he must be.  And that little package in tissue paper which the judge brought in and laid on the bench!  The black cap, was it not?  That showed what the judge thought about it all.  How thrilling!

Counsel for the Crown, opened the case, and in a speech grimly devoid of all emotional appeal, laid before the court the facts he was prepared to prove, on which they would base their verdict.

The prisoner, a young man of birth and breeding, had strong grounds for revenge on the murdered man.  The prosecution, however, was not concerned in defending what the murdered man had done, but in establishing the guilt of the man who had murdered him.  Godfrey Mills, had, as could be proved by witnesses, slandered the prisoner in an abominable manner, and the prosecution were not intending for a moment to attempt to establish the truth of his slander.  But this slander they put forward as a motive that gave rise to a murderous impulse on the part of the prisoner.  The jury would hear from one of the witnesses, an old friend of the prisoner’s, and a man who had been a sort of father to him, that a few hours only before the murder was committed the prisoner had uttered certain words which admitted only of one interpretation, namely that murder was in his mind.  That the provocation was great was not denied; it was certain however, that the provocation was sufficient.

Counsel then sketched the actual circumstances of the crime, as far as they could be constructed from what evidence there was.  This evidence was purely circumstantial, but of a sort which left no reasonable doubt that the murder had been committed by the prisoner in the manner suggested.  Mr. Godfrey Mills had gone to London on the Tuesday of the fatal week, intending to return on the Thursday.  On the Wednesday the prisoner became cognisant of the fact that Mr. Godfrey Mills had—­he would not argue over it—­wantonly