The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1861-03-12 00:00:00

A uguatus. Fot.ter,

. .
Julio F. tialwiueur, Eq.
Henry Clarks Gvudden,

. -
Esq.
.I.pitit Canary, Em.
thindrv, Eq.
Ch.rles W. °union, Egg,

His Lurthihip then delivered the following
_ CHARGE.

Gentlemen of the iiran---a- ju—ry. ,—Tho calendar to
which your attention is to be directed is, I run sorry
to say, a heavy one for this county. 1 hope, how-
ever, it will turnout that it is in oonsequenceot those
turns and falls in things which sometimes make it '
appear as if the county was more criminal than it
really is. Although there are a large number of
prisoners for trial, I ant happy to ssy that, with the
exception of ID eases, you will not find any which
might not have been disposed of at the. Quarter Ses-
sions. With respect to those 10 cams it will not be
necessary that I should direct your attention to more
than three. I particularly call your attention
to the cases No. 6 and 7 on the eaten-
ilar, in which John Williams and Robert
Clifford arc charged with highway robbery
of a most serious description, in which a
perron named Mary Arm Williams, is charged with
having harbeureil the prisoners, well knowiui them
to have committed a felony,—in fact, acting as an
accessory. I most tell you that a wife never can he
indicted as an accessory after the fact. If it should
tarn out that she is the wife of John IVilliaius, she
cannot give cm/blame° against her husband. No
persen can be convicted as an accessory after the
fact, unless lie or she knows that the felony has been
committed, and takes an active part in the harbour-
ing or favouring the escape of the prisoners. You
will have to consider these matters, and see whether
you ought to return a true bill against her or not.
It may happen that the evidence of a witness
Wm could speak either for the Crown or the
prisoner, may be excludisl by a too strict Application
of the law. With respect to accessories after the
I I must trust to your goist seam, and judgment,
met see how far this is applicable to the woman
whose evidence may either ;moist the Crown or the
primmer. A far different case is that of the prisoners
ri'm arc said to have been accessory to the rubbery
rirm binisa Haynrs, as she was going along the
in which the man Gale, and the woirran
Eiizabeth Davis, are sail to have committed an
iit:empt at robbery, whilst the other prisoners were
standing by. If in your judgment they were there
for the purpose of ailing the robbery, you ought to
I.ring a bill against them as well as against the
',cowrie who actually committed the serious violence
sadlr which they are now charged. There is one
ether case which I shall describe as No. 2
in the calendar, to which I must draw your
eirmition, for it is one of those cases which you are
well aware creates mischief in attempting to convict.
I shall any no more upon that case, but you will
hive to consider how far the evidence of one witness
ii corroborated by the evidence of the other. It
always gives me the greatest satisfaction to see so
large a number of grand juryuren as are now
present. I attach the highest value to the institn-
tbin of the Grand Jury, quite apart from its more
immediate usefulness, ripen which I need not
riLerant. I think an institution could not he more
wi wly framed for the purpose of protecting the
persona who inay come up to be tried. The presence
or such a body of men, than whom a more valuable
audience could not he selected, is a great support to
Dm judge in the ailininfstmtion of the law. It
atrenethene his lemds and protects those who may
1,-' limit:lit before him. I am glad that you have
at' ..11.1,..1 ill full numbers, and I minuet but con-
gratulate the county upon the fact that its gentle-
men take such interest in its affairs. I will now
dismiss you to your duties.
TRIAL OF PRISONERS.
aTEALING UREA') AT DLANDEORD.

Ann Ahins was charged with stealing a loaf of
bread of the value of Id., the property of James Bar-
rett, at Lllaielforil. plealeil not guiltv.---11r.
Portman prosecuted.— From the evidence of plaintira
Mall' it appealed that lie was in the limp on the 24th
of January last, anil saw the prisoner take the loaf
I the counter and put it under her shawl. She
then left the shop. He then went after her and
charged lice with stealing the bread. She dented the
charge, but on coming back to the shop the loaf was
(wind under her shawl. She then said she was sorry
for what she had done, and offered to pay for the loaf,
but the prosecutor said lie could not du so as it wan not
the first time alie had taken articles from the fhop. The
learned Judge having sumnied up, the jury returned a
venlict of "Guilty," and his Loniallip, taking into con.
ri.leratiou the time she had already been in gaol, seo•
fenced her to one week's hard labour.