The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-04-28 00:00:00

BRISTOL GENERAL SESSIONS.

The business commencedhere on 31onday morning, before Chief
Baron litrronn, the Recorder.
There were only four canes to come behre the Grand Jury;
when Thomas Woodland, for housebreaking, and Robert Lake, for
highway robbery, had sentence of death reanded against them, but
which was afterwards commuted into transportation for life.
Jorids Slade, indicted on the Coroner's Inquest fw killing and
slaying John Scott; and George Karoo, tried for maliciously
stabbing Jane flddoek, being previously found "mute by the vitt-
tat ion of (lod," were both acquitted.
The Court then waited a considerable time for the Grand Jury,
who bad a bill before them, when the folhrwing singular circutu.
stance occurred:—

THE NINON ON THE PROSECUTION or JOHN VALDION,

AGAINST' NAIL 1111,11SLI. AND DAVID I.I.IIMtLLIW, TOll

Tr11.11:1111%
Two bilk of indictment warerient up to the Grand Jury against
these defendants. The (hand Jury however, ignored both bills.
When the (band Jury returned the bill Into Court against David
Lkwcllis, and whilst the Clerk of the Arraigns was looking into
the indictment for the name of the defendant, the Foreman said,

" It is against Mark Howell."
The Clerk of the Arraigns answered, "David Llewellio, gentle.'
men."
A tired Juror.—" The bill is against them jointly."
Mr. Burgess then appealed to Mr. Walker, the prosecutor's
Solicitor, to know against whom the indictment in reality was.
Mr. Welke —" It appears the Brand Jury do not Redeemed
the indictment ; it is most David Liewellin alone."
His Lordship called Tor the indictment, and atter ascertaining
against whom it had been preferred, said, " Liendttuen, this in-
dictment is against David Llewellin singly. Would you wish to
revise your derision ?"
The Jury declined the proposed revision, and the indictment was
as receivedignored. After this,
Mr. Srucmiwo, as Counsel for the prosecution. stated to the
Recorder that he had a motion to make of rather an extraordinary
nature. In making it he felt that much difficulty arose net of its
r.ovelty : he felt also considerable pain in submitting it to his Lord-
ship, bectuse the motion might splicer to be grounded on an assump-
tion that the Brand Jury had nut discharged their duty.
Lord Girroan.—Mr. Stocking, 1 cannot sit here to try the
Grand Jury. What is the nature of your motion ?
Mr. STOCKINC..—My lord, I conceive.—
Lord irroun.—Nay, but what is your motion? Tell me
what is the nature of she motion you intend to make.
Mr. tiroe x o.—My Lord, I will state to your Lordship the
substance of the affidavit on which my notice b grounded. The
afildsvit sets forth that the indictment against Howell was sent to
the Grand Jury with the names of twelve witnesses on the back 01
it ; the the Brand Jury have ignored the bill, leaving six of those
witnewes unexamined, which witnesses are sworn to be material
ones; toy motion, therefore, is, that your lordship will send the
bill for reconsideration to the Grand Jury.
Lord lit oromn—Mr. Smiling, did you ever hear of such a
motion me this ? Have you any precedent ?
Mr. STOCK I NO.—My Lord, 1 never heard of an occasion re-
quiring such a motion.
Lord titrroso--I am clearly of opinion that I cannot grant
your motion. I cannot sit here toter whether the Brand Jury h.ve
done their duty or not. Iput it to your own good sense whether
I can entertain such a motion as this.
Mr. Sr nun xu—My Lord, when my client first consulted me
on the subject of this motion, I certainly was embarrassed by its
novelly. I had moth doubt what was the proper =Me of pro-
Medina— but after the best consideration that I can give the sub.
ject, I feel fortified In the conviction that I am not taking an ion.'
proper course. I win not, my Lord, impute to the Grand Jury cor-
rupt motives. for I am Loth to cast on a body of respectable Midi.
viduals an imputation which would accuse them not only of a breach
of duty, but of a violation of their oaths. But I submit to your
lordship, that through existent or mistake the timid Jury may
hare omitted to examine those six witnesses who have remained
without examinatitiv, and that on this ground your Lordship may
request them to re.conritler their Bill.
lord Otorone—l am .clearly of opinion that I can do no such
thing.
Mr. Srocatno—Then. my Lord, my client is left without a
remedy.
1401 d 011IPTORD—Nn, not without a remedy ; you may prefer
your bill at the next tiessiona. . . .

Mr. STOCI I X —Of such &remedy, lay Lord, I may say S 4 way
once said on another occa►ion, that it is,,worNe than the disease.
Slippage It possible, that from prejudice, arising front local eircain-
'tilers, or otherwise, (hand Jarrell may be unwilling to discharge
their ditties, it would only be fur Ilmod Juries to do *a has been
&we this day, and se may prefer bills of intlictinstit fee ever. The
present Grand Jury have omitted to examine six •witnesses, whom
my client swears are material witnesses; the Grand Juty at the
SCsakins may du the same thing; an that we may be handed over
from Session to Sessions, ad tinitrus.
Loril am quite clear that I am hound to refuse
your motion. As I have said before, I cannot sit here to try the
Grand Jury. You call ahew no precedent ; and you are cot with-
out a remedy for any injury you may hare susta!ned. If you choose
you may prefer your bill again.
Mr. Isrocansu.—Then, my Lord, I will advise my client to.
take a second Hill before the Grand Jury.
Lord Ilia Evonn.-1 shall nol keep the Grand Jury w.titing for
your client's bill. His Lordship, *cur a pause, thanked the Grand
Jury for their valuable services, and discharged them.

-- -
CORONER'S INQUEST.—Yestertlav afternoon an inquisi-
tion was taken before Mr. Unwiii, the lcanner, at the acrd Cage,
Bethnal•grten, on the body of James ITIMen. It respectable was-
ter silk-weaver, staid 2ti, who destroyed !sinned( by tying a silk,
handkerchief round his neck, and surpending finis& from tl'iP !op
of a loom in his workshop. Vadiat—Lwaitv.