THE public gallery murmur gradually subsided as Janet Traill, ashen faced and weeping, slowly mounted the stairs from the cells to step into the dock. Ordinarily, she would have been the most reviled woman in Southampton after her two children had horrifically burnt to death but friends and acquaintances were deeply sympathetic, knowing the catalyst for the tragedy sat amongst them - her husband for once a figure of sobriety.

The mood was reflected by the eminent prosecutor Mr Bullen who began his remarks as though mitigating for the defence, imploring Lord Justice Fry to be merciful.

"I think I am justified in asking Your Lordship to take into consideration the many painful circumstances of the case before you pass sentence. There is no doubt these two children lost their lives through an assault which the prisoner intended to commit or did commit on her husband, provoked as she was by his conduct towards her, not only on this night in particular but generally throughout her married life.

"She was formerly a nurse and very much against the wishes of her employer, she married a man of dissolute habits who made her life wretched and her home perfectly miserable."

Traill, a 31-year-old former nurse, had originally been accused of murdering five-year-old John and two-year-old William who were engulfed by fire at their home in Chichester Terrace but it was withdrawn in favour of the lesser charge of manslaughter which she admitted.

Bullen told Hampshire Summer Assizes of 1883 her husband, also called William, had again returned home inebriated. Inevitably, a row erupted and "provoked beyond measure," she grabbed the first item at hand, an oil lamp, which she hurled at him but missed and it landed on the children's bed, immediately igniting after the contents saturated the blanket.

The two children were engulfed by flames and burnt to death.

Among the testimonials relating to her good character and kindness to children, Bullen handed in a letter from the Rev. J McEwen whose two children Traill looked after.

He wrote: "She was one of the most gentle and affectionate women I had known. Meeting her after her marriage, I asked her how she was getting on. Her eyes filled with tears and stated she was very unhappy because of her husband being addicted to drink."

The prosecutor concluded his opening statement with a written confession from her husband in which he took full responsibility for the tragedy. "He simply and solely blames himself as his wife never gave way to drink but was a kind mother to his children and the moment she threw the lamp, all her anxiety seemed to be to save the children."

The judge then called her husband into the witness box, denouncing his drinking habit but then offering him a unique opportunity to mend his ways. "You see to what you have brought your wife by your conduct. Will you give me a solemn promise that if I pass a light sentence on your wife, you will entirely reform?"

He simply replied: "Yes."

Mr Stonehouse-Vigor, defending, said that from their own inquiries, he totally concurred with the prosecutor's remarks the defendant had not succumbed to the evil of drink and there were no grounds to support her husband's accusations, when drunk, she was immoral.

The judge then asked Traill if she wished to say anything and she replied: "Unless my husband is willing to reform, I would rather be separated from him for he has been very cruel to me."

When the judge told her he had no power to arrange a separation, she said she would happily live apart if her husband agreed. "I am very sorry but I cannot be ruined through his folly."

Jailing her for three weeks without hard labour, the judge told her he bore in mind the appalling provocation she had received from her husband. "I have no doubt you have suffered terribly from this catastrophe which resulted from your act. It is an awful picture of what a husband and wife may come to from the drunkenness of one and the passion of the other. I shall sentence you to the lightest sentence I can find in my conscience to award you."