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 slandered him to Sir Richard Templeton, a marriage with the daughter of whom was projected in the prisoner's mind, which there was reason to suppose, might have taken place.