The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1824-01-08 00:00:00

murder, it did not follow, as a necessary connequenee, that Hunt
was to be declared in aiding and comforting him. The
two charger, were entirely distinct and se state. Before he entered
upon the evidence, which, notwithstanding its length, ee would
do most minutely, he must make a few comments on the defeat
of the prisoner Jahn Thurtell. The commencement and conch'.
sion 0 t his document, if it ware his own composition—and he would
give him the credit of the supposition-edict him honour : they
were manly, energetic, and proper. He trusted he was one of these
who would never travel out of the line of his duty to sae a mute
thing of any person ; but he must say that he could rot admire that
Mtleneent which advised the middle portions of the production,
Ile muse regret that the entire should be weakened by such beg
quotations from works which, for aught he knew, were mere ro.
mances such as the " Newgate Calendar." and the " Percy Ana_
dotes"—works possessing no authority—of which he knew nothing,
and by these means losing the effects of the precepts of the immur.
tad Sir Matthew Hale, upon which he had at all times acted, and
more particularly since he saw tnem last, in the county of ounces.
It was the opinion of this great authority, u it was well known to
every Judge who knew his duty, that no trial of murder could be
proceeded in until the body of the dead man wen identified. This
authority, he must repeat, received no weight fiom the fee
rap which was mixed up with it. lie did not lay this peg of
the defence to the charge of the prisoner; lie gave him credit fir
the other parts. With regard to the emfidence which was to be
reposed in circumstantial evidence, dwelt upon by Thurtell, if the
lengths which he wished were to be gene to, there would be at
once an end to all the judicature of man ; for though nothing es.
cape the eye of Omniscience, how can we, clothed in infirmity arel
frailty, come to a discovery of the truth, except by a uneaten:Eton
of circumstances? And although from the frailty incident to hat.
man tribunals, in the lapse of centuries a mistake or two miget
have occurred, yet circumstantial evidence is considered by those
who are in the least conversant with the administration of jus.
tire, as the surest test of truth ; and in the case Whore the
Court. he would not hesitate to say at once, that it was its.
possible for the button mind to imagine a person of greater in-
famy appearing in any Court than Probert, on whose direct •Ti.
deice the case depended. The respectable individual, Me. W.
son (whom he had long known) could not make him blacker dui
he had made himself. Thin wieless had deposed that he would sc
believe Probert on his oath, if he were not confirmed by other ca.
cumstances. He knew hint to be a perjurer; he knew that he had
perjured himself before the Commissioners of Bankruptcy, when
he (31r. AVadeson) was solicitor to the commission; though he
would ask, how could say perjurer be possibly more wicked the
he who concealed the murder of his friend ? lie would assume,
with Thurtell, that bad motives had operated on the mind of P.o.
beet; he affirmed he was a conspirator against the prisoners. Whet
evidence was there that Probert enis a conspirator aireinat the pre
son ers ? "Though," said his Lordship, " what are we seki ng about?
Are we to believe that the fifty .three witnesses who have been tl.
'mined, who are nut even acquainted with Thurtell, are also con.
spirators with Probert against him ? Circumstantial evidence (the
prisoner says) is to be teceived with hesitation and doubt; so is all
human testimony whatever; if not, said his Lordship, why are rot
in that box? lefty am I and such as I here? It is that we shduld
exert every faculty of the mind with which God has blessed us, for
the purpose of investigating and sifting testimony by every test, of
punishing guilt and protecting innocence. If, therefore, to use the
words of the prisoner in his defence, such a reasonable doubt of his
guilt occurs to you, as may suggest itself to the minds of honest, bee
nourable, and conscientious men, give him the advantage ofthie
doubt. There is, with respect to the two prisoners, a distressing
circumstance, which cannot be gainsaid by any person whatever.
both the prisoners meet us with it ; and, for myself, I trust, that
in the opinion of every person who knows me, I am sot GOO
who would use a harsh or severe expression of any man living ; but
I do think that I would be open to impeachment. if I did not do
my duty when called on, fearlessly and resolved. This duty I will
perform, though I may be attacked with the whole artillery of
I trust that I fear the face of no man, either high or low. Both
these prisoners have commenced their defence by warning, praying,
imploring, beseeching you, that if you have heard anything of
the evidence to be given on this trial, you would drive it as it a
pestilence from your minds. And if the publication of evidence
given before trial continue, I tremble for the fate of my country—that
country which has made it its boast to entrust its justice to lands
Eke yours. You arc to decide as God shall help you. How can.you
to decide, if your minds are previously poisoned by statemetts,
which, if true, are not offered in evidence at all ? The confession
of Hunt has been read in newspapers, pamphlets,'and every de.
scription of writing. A confession is in general read as canine
from the mouth of the prisoner : it has not been tendered to the
Court; and, if tendered, it would be rejected, if contrary to kr.
It was upon this principle, and from my regard to justice, that when
the affidavit which was read in the Court, and contained all the
statements given to the public against the prisoners was published,
he thought rt proper, under the fermentation of the public mind, to
put off the trial, and come a second time; and, in this course of pew
exuding, I am gratified by the approval of my consciencesad that
of those most conversant with such matters. But why, I weld
ask, were the prisoners compelled to make those complaints? Why
were the labour and anxiety of mind thrown on me of coming a se-
cond time, though I do not or ought not to value labour, if theends et
justice be answered ? But lam sure, that notwithstanding ousel.
pert, pamphlets, and libel s,t he Jury will do their duty, as they ougat,
to God, their country, and their oaths." His Lordship said, that as
to the application made in the outset by the other prisoner, It was
fitter to be discussed by himself than the Jury. It was argued on
the die before, that the trial of that prisoner sbould be postmen&
to enable him, under the eirenumeresses, to apply to the Crowe.
But no argument, however ably conducted, ouglet, tn his espiews.
to cause the trial to be postponed. Was not the argument allemid,
the very reason for which the trial ought not to be put off? The
reason of the postponement was, to give time to apply to the
Crown; that is, be makes application yesterday to do what be had
two months time to perform. With respect to the confession. if it
was made by the prisoner, and tendered as evidence, it is probable
that it would be rejected ; and he regretted that some statements
respecting it should be made • part of his defence ; if had the as-
' /distance of persons conversant in the law (and he knew that he hail
the advice of learned individuals, both above and below the beef,
they would tell him that if a confession was extorted from a im-
sooer, it would not be received as evidence against him. He would
instance the case of a yicraon saying where stolen goods were, or,
SIX in the present came, to ing where a dead body was concealed: the
finding of these in the place described proves that he is not
fiuenced to state a falsehood by fear alone, foe his account is found.
ed to a certain extent upon truth. A circumstance similar to this,
it is well known to myself and the respectable gentlemen at the
bar, is extremely common in our criminal Judicature ; so far, there-
fore, this young man has not to complain of any inconvenience to
which others are not exposed. As to the other considerations at-
tendant on the question, it was not for the .lury to decide on then:
they were merely to try facts on their oaths. Neither was it for
him ; for, high as his powers were in that ('ourt, there were still
higher powers, whose duties he was not to dispense. As to the {le
dente given on die prosecution and the defence, he would state it
with the greatest accuracy of which his judgment was capable,
making such comments on it as he went along as occutrtd to hies,
and the Jury would reject or adopt his comments, as it appeared
fit to them. It would appear to the Jury that the body of de
crime rested on the direct evidence of Probert and his wife • it au
the clear and distinct law of England, that when an accomplice
came into Court as a witness, lie comes loaded with the guilt of the
person against whom he appears ; his character becomes the chw
racier of the accused; it cannot be more blackened than by himadf:
whatever the nature of the crime be, he is to that extent a aiming/
He was a competent witness. In cases of this kind it was for the
Judge to decide whether such a witness as Prober was a comm.
tent one, "And," said his Lordship. " 1 think him a competent wit-
ness." • After such evidence was admitted by the Judge, the Jul
were to decide as to its credibility. If Probert was not supported
in his testimony, he ought to have stood in the dock, and tee* 4,
tried by his peers. But if he was corroborated in par 'mar pane
they were bound to take the whole, however wicked the person
might be in other transactions out of the case. A great deal Ins
been said about admitting accomplices; but it was every day done.
and it was of the deepest importance that it should be done, he'
cause it was oftentimes the only means of bringing offenders of the •
worst description against the laws of their country to justice. Met
Noel had taken a most unwarrantable part in recommending Hu*
to disclose all he knew respecting the murder, and in holding 00
hopes to him, that by so doing he might be admitted an evideee
for the Crown. Ile had run as soon as he could, lest some one
else should make the disclosure. But the fact was, that MAO*
traces themselves had no power to grant such indemnity ; all inert
could be done by them was, to recommend it to the Counsel le I
the prosecution, to make an application to the Court to admits
accomplice as an evidence for the Crown; and the Counsel,*
moving the Court on the subject, pledged their profession al charades
that it was necessary. Hunt was certainly not accepted as swami
for the Crown. Ha Lordship then commenced the recaphulnise
of the ekidence. In going over the testimony of Hexwerthy sea
eare, the deceased's brother, he remarked that Lord Hale hadmo* -
wisely held, that it WWI necessary to prove the identity of the body
of a person murdered. " I think," said his Lordship, " that gee*
man's words are these, although it is many years since I reel
it, hoed Hale save, I never have, as a Judge, allowed a pelo'
to be convicted -of murder, unless the fatal blow was seen sr"°
on the body, or the body could be recognised.'" Ilia Lordship rr
(erred to a case tried in the county of Sussex, at which heprueled-
where a woman was arraigned for the munkr of her duke The
body, when found, was an such a state of petridity, that the ..'
even could not be known. His leardship continued, " I stoppol
that prosecution as all former Judges had; whether with the err
probation of every one I know net: therefore, gendtmen, firs"
the evidence of He:worthy and Weare, we may make ourseene
perfectly satisfied that we are inquiring into the murder of We
Hain A% care." The Learned Judge. in proceeding to the eve:race
of Mr. Ward, the surgeon, obetrod, that in the whole coots 1
his practice lie had ncser met with a mom sensible surgeon ths.-.
Mr. 'Ward, or ole who eaves better evidcace. Ile had proved t
either the wound in the jugular vein, or that made by the pie,e•
would have caused death ; therefore it was immaterial to ireue:
further what caused ike.:ll. The two great points were thcrea
ptmed. vie. .
the identity of the deceased, and that the viols:
named in the ineictuent was the cause of his death. In
tfcastieLrisnt:gi,,rzatcotift?hniur.o;wpe3dricergyee,. ofj utsihtikiecte rtehe.capapireriii,uwiloantbse4ffionneduton,
tyhaiumntairint'ins part
they had not beet guilty of a
itchievous notiwi, if two or mom pie:lteias.alpiotartbF„,:eite,,riposec--,thtwgultihluLiolerarti:oo.fddaori;::,:.property who was shale guilty ; ... •
therefore,purpose of coinnnitting s foamy,
it was in vain for Hunt to lay the " fiatterarg," and
env • wenn to la. soul." "Of the character of Probers.. .
id hs hor,l,hi`', •no titan can doubt: I hale expressed n"
before as tniutg yasl am able; i wish tuna to be cooaahr"
th'e case in Lynn:eft:lg Thurtell and together its this fret'

I 1

,1