The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1861-02-05 00:00:00

Legal.

THE ROAD MURDER.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, ha. 3011).
THE uegeti C. ISTLVESTra.
The interest in the mystery in which the Road Mur-
der is enveloped has not abated. Toiday having been api
pointed for showing cause against the rule obtained in
Michaeloda term last, by the Attorney-General (with
whom was the Solicitor General and Mr. Welsby) for
• writ of oil whats impirenileui tube directed to Special
Cemmissioneni, to be named therein, to proceed and
make by the esaniination of witnesses, all such inqui-
I ies touching the death of Francis Saville Kent, as the
coroner it was alleged ought tabors made upon the vie w
of the body of the deceased child upon the discovery of
the murder. A large number of perions &rambled at an
early part of the g to hear the elements of the
learned anutowl. The avenues of the court were
thronged with persons eager to gain admission, whilst
the court throughout the day was crowded by thom
who appeared to take a deep interest in the proceed-
ings.
In moving the rule, the learned Attorney General
urged various reason for the bailing of the writ, and
Lord Chief Justice Cockburn in groiting it said he
thou rht there should be • rule to show cause, and not
a rule absolute in the first inetanoe. He was satisfied
thej,llUiltiihll WAS lAA, as beiidg returned 011 paper and
not 00 varchment. That would sot at all interfere with
the ends of jut ice. and at the same time give the coro-
ner en opportuoity of atom. ring the grave charges that
Iliad been alleged against hini.
Sir F. Kelly. with whom was Mr. H. T. Cole. showed
cause against the rule. The Solicitor-General as-I Mr.
Welsby acre in support of the rule.
Sir F. Kelly in showing cause against the rule, said
lie need loudly say that this Os, a ease of very deep in-
terest and iinvortance, espeeddly for the corona.... for
whom he alone appeared. After he had, as he trusted
the coroner would, t effectively clear 1, i 11l aelf from
the personal imputation that hail been thrown upon
1• by the &Hides it in *upped of the rule, he would be
1151 1/ to assiat in any manner thdt could be anggested
for the discovery of the truth atet. the advancement of
justice. lu showing cause Against the rule, which he
contended could not he made alasoliste, it would be micas-
mry for him to refer to the particular* et the Cray. The
rule lied been obt.inetl oil very distinct grounds. The
point was, that the inquisiii ~,, was void by reason, he
would not say the mieconduct of the coroner. bet hy
reawin of a failure of justice, in rinarium e of the
extriordinary ignorince incompetency of the COW
11 1 , manifested in the discharge of his duties in thia
ca e. The Ilecto•Id was a riparaie and distinct ground,
which lie should deal with aeparately hereafter, via.,
that the inquisition was taken upon paver and nos main
prreliment. Ile (Sir F. Kelly) trusted he al Id he
side to satisfy their tonight'.a that there 1144 hot the
slightest ground, in trait or in feet, for either one or
the other of these imputations. Mr. hy•Viaitvr. ill his
affi i.sit. etaterl this he was 72 years of age, and that he
hail been in practice us • surgeon for lifts years, when
he retired about two yedra Mime. Ile had filled the
office of coroner far 19 jests, and hail hail large espe-
rielice in the duties thereof, having held upwards of
7,4 0 inquests without the slightest cossopluint having
I.mai tnaile at the Ulan ,Pr in which lie had discharged
them duties till now. He hail hail no connention with
Mr. Keine* 1m:oily, mid was unly once called in
by Mr. Stiarland profeesior.ally to me Mrs. Kent. It
was • remarkable circumstance that Bennett's affidavit
charging the coroner with mimonduct in withholding
evident', and alm Cie pa:tial manner in which lie sum-
med up, was directly contrary to his report of the pro- •
ceedirip, which, in his capacity of reporter. he for.
warded to and was published in the Bulls Chronicle.
Ile ash 'tteil that the coroner hail not expoired himself
to censure in not permitting the two children (who
were 1101,110• Cd lq niany of the jurymen to have been
guilty ef the murder) to be brought before them and
laird Chi
Th. ef Justice : I believe it is not the
practice for a C.trolirr to 4,1111110rl ilefiSooll IlOtoriOnly
suspected of the crime uf murder fur slam:dilation by the

jury.
Sir F. Kelly said, it was itupossible to throw the
slightest imputation on the coroner. He had ezomined
every person who had offered himself. and those who it
ase auggested ahould he examin.i. To have auttituoned
. Mr. Kent fur examination, without his having tendered
himself for examitiatiots, would really have been to have
I o gilt fora ant a person for compulsory elimination,
a hoot many of the jurymen and bystanders at that time
believed to be guilty of murder. The learned counsel
red allldavits from Inn. Fleming and the Rev. Hr.
Peacock as to the manner in which the coroner conduc-
ted his inquiry, and the escited state of the byetan-
dere.
The Lord Chief Justice : Has the verdict on the evi•
deuce taken been disputed
The Solicitor•Cetteral : It is imenmible to deny that,
heard as it is upon the evidence taken by the coroner,
that the verdict can be questioned. -
Sir F. Kelly : I ant glad to her it.
The Lord Chief Justice: Tlisu the verdict has never
been disputed ?
The Soli7itor-General: No, Da on the evidence

taken.
The Lord Chief Justice : The way the case is put is
this —the jury were desirous of getting further evidence
in order to II: on the proper terson the crime of mur-
der, on whieh the coroner said it was not their business
to do no. but it Imo. • question for the magistrates-11ot
all the jury had to inquire woe whether or not it was •
moonier.
Sir. F. Kelly said if that were true it would have
been a very grave et rot on the tiArt of the coroner, but
, there was not • word of t uth in it. The coroner said
nothing of the kind, and positively denies it iu his affi-
davit.
Sir V Kelly then proceeded to remark moon the charges
of withholding evidenos and parti..lity in 111111114414 Up
be the coroner. observiog that the jurymen had shown ,
themselves not to he men of education aed intelligence '
like their foreman (the Rev. Mr. Peacock) novl the
CiltUlll r. They were at the time in a kind of mad frettay
and ilatioriona exeibrine t. i.IPI were IlUt in the looms-
aim. ,d their remon and faculties.
The Lord Chief 'loathe : War there any suggestion
on the 'met of the jury for Mr. Ketitin be esstilloleil ?
Kir V. K,lle : No other than that his solicitor mid
Ihe was ready to come forward if any of the jury
wislnd it.
The role was diseliargeil. There will. therefore, be
no fresh coroner's inquiry. —Sherburne Journal.