William Gardiner, butcher, was indicted for unlawfully and maliciously inflicting certain grevious bodily harm on Martha Arnott at Chichester on the 21st May last.
  Defendant pleaded not guilty and was defended by Mr. Janman - Mr. Malim opened the case for the prosecution describing it as one of a painful and, to a certain extent unintelligable nature. The facts have recently been fully given by us, and it will be remembered that on the afternoon of Whit Monday prisoner attacked the prosicutrix and beat her in such a manner as to cause her to be for some time in in danger of her life. At the time prisoner was in a state of perfect frenzy, caused by drink. He was passing by Orchard-garden and saw the prosecutrix standing at the door of her house. He asked her for a drink, but being deaf and dumb she did not understand him. He then beat her with a stick and also broke a toasting fork over her, inflicting wounds that caused her to bleed copiously. When apprehended prisoner was exceedingly violent, and it required four or five constables to lock him up.
  Mr. Janman addressed the jury for the defence,urging that the prisoner bore an unreproachable character, and that at the time of the assualt he was not in his own mind and that what took place was to him a perfect blank. He was a most abstentious man and his frenzy was caused not by the quantity of drink he partook of but from the effects of something which must have been put in it. - Mr. Ballard; prisoner's employer, was sworn and gve him an excellent character as a quiet,steady,and sober man as well as a good workman.
  Messrs. Gambling, Hobbs, Hurst,and Weller were severally called and bore testimony to the sobriety and good conduct of the prisoner.
  Mathew Triggs stated that he was with the prisoner, previous to the assault, at the Three Tuns Inn, and drank with him out of the same pot. He had perhaps two or three glasses, and the prisoner had no more. The last half glass stupefied him [witness] and had a peculiar effect on him but he could detect nothing peculiar in the flavour of it at the time of drinking.- Mr. Freeland, police surgeon, was called to see the prisoner in the cells on the evening of Whit Monday. He was perfectly normal but there was a peculiar expression on his countenance.

related or associated :-
William Gardiner - original article
Petworth Prison
John Mance
Petworth index
 

From the evidence he [witness] had heard he thought the case a very odd one. He knew that certain drugs and poisons would produce a state of maniacal frenzy such as that which the prisoner was described as having been in. Witness thought he must have had some spirits as he did not believe beer alone could produce such an effect on him.- Mrs.Triggs spoke as to the stupified condition of her husband and the prisoner when they arrived at her house.
  John Hodson,landlord of the Three Tuns Inn, said that when the prisoner and others went into his house they had only two quarts of fourpenny ale. He and others drank out of the same pot but no one else but Triggs and the prisoner were affected. Prisoner was pugnacious before he left, and pulled his coat off to fight Triggs. He knocked the latter's hat off, and Triggs struck a man named Parker, whom he thought had done it. A scuffle was the result, and the witness separated the parties. Prisoner afterwards took Triggs home, and appeared to be sober when he left.
  Mr. Malim having replied upon the whole case, the learned Recorder summed up, expressing his concurrence with the evidence of Mr. Freeland that it was a most un accountable case, so far as the frenzied condition of the prisoner was concerned in connection with the drink he had taken, and his general state of sobriety. If the jury found that his temporary mania was caused by having involuntarily taken a drug administered amongst his drink, unknown to him,then, and only then, would it be competent for them to find the prisoner not guilty on the grounds of insanity.
  The jury, after a brief absence found the prisoner guilty, and strongly recommended him to the merciful consideration of the Court, on account of his previous good character.
  The learned Recorder told prisoner he was liable to five years penal servitude, but the law, fortunately for him gave him [the Recorder] a wide discretion. Happily, too, for him, the poor woman had survived his violence, although he did not think there was any malice in his mind at the time, and at the moment he knew nothing about it. Giving effect to the recommendation of the jury, he should only sentence him to six month's imprisonment with hard labour.