went very far. As to the latter, what evidence was there to show
that it had been made on the night of the murder? If it had been
made the day before, then the defence had proved that it could
not have been Habron's. He called their attention to the facts
that Habron bore a good character, that, when arrested on the
night of the murder, he was in bed, and that no firearms had been
traced to him. In spite, however, of the summing-up the jury
convicted William Habron, but recommended him to mercy. The
Judge without comment sentenced him to death. The
Manchester Guardian expressed its entire concurrence with the
verdict of the jury. "Few persons," it wrote, "will be found to
dispute the justice of the conclusions reached." However, a few
days later it opened its columns to a number of letters
protesting against the unsatisfactory nature of the conviction.
On December 6 a meeting of some forty gentlemen was held, at
which it was resolved to petition Mr. Cross, the Home Secretary,
to reconsider the sentence. Two days before the day of execution
Habron was granted a respite, and later his sentence commuted to
one of penal servitude for life. And so a tragic and irrevocable
miscarriage of justice was happily averted.

Peace liked attending trials. The fact that in Habron's case he
was the real murderer would seem to have made him the more eager
not to miss so unique an experience. Accordingly he went from
Hull to Manchester, and was present in court during the two days
that the trial lasted. No sooner had he heard the innocent man
condemned to death than he left Manchester for Sheffield--now for
all he knew a double murderer.

It is a question whether, on the night of November 28, Peace met