The Sun.
London, England, 1864-03-04 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE,

HOME CIRCUIT.—.HERTFORD, March 3.
The business of these assizes was proceeded with
yesterday morning, the Lord Chief Baron presiding
in the Crown Court and Lord Chief Justice Erie at
nisi prius. There were only five causes entered on
the civil side, two of which were undefended, and
the others were of the most uninteresting description.
(Before the Lord Chief Baron.)
James Robinson, 40, a respectable-looking man,
surrendered to take his trial upon a charge of feloni-
ously receiving a bushel of a mixture of oats and
peas, the property of Philip Arnold, well knowing
the same to have been stolen.
Mr. Abel prosecuted, and the prisoner was de-
fended by Mr. Codd.
This case gave rise to rather an extraordinary
discussion between the jury and the learned judge.
The prisoner, it seemed, for a good many years
carried on the business of a dealer in seeds and
articles of that description at Flamstead, and bore a
very good character, and the case against him rested
almost, if not entirely, upon the evidence of a man
named Saunders, who was in the prosecutor's ser-
vice, and who admitted with the greatest effrontery
that he had stolen his master's corn, and stated that
he had sold a bushel of it to the prisoner, who, he
said, gave him Bd. for it. The prisoner did not
appear to have denied that he Lad purchased the
corn of the witness, but said tnat he told him that
he found it, and he all along disclaimed all know-
ledge of its having come improperly into his posses..
sion. The prosecutor also appeared to have stated
that he did not believe the prisoner was guilty of
the offence, and offered to become bail for him; and
it may fairly be stated that the evidence against
the prisoner consisted chiefly of the statement made
by the admitted thief.

- The Lord Chief Bar3n, before the learned counsel
for the prisoner commenced his address to the jury,
expressed his opinion that it would not be safe for
them to convict the prisoner upon the evidence that
had been adduced in support of the charge, and he
observed that if there had been no evidence et all
except that of the thief it would have been his duty
to have stopped the case. As there were, however,
one or two other circumstances that might be said
to corroborate the testimony of the man Saunders,
he was not justified in withdrawing the case from
their consideration, but it really appeared to him,
as he had before stated, that it would not be safe
for them to convict the prisoner upon the facts
before them
The Jury, after a short deliberation, said they
had ag►eed upon their verdict, and they found the
prisoner guilty.
The Lord Chief Baron said that he had anticipated
from the observations he had made to them that
they would have acquitted the prisoner, but before
they returned an adverse verdict, it was necessary
that they should hear the prisoner's counsel. He
was sorry that he had interfered, but he felt him-
self justified in doing so upon the facts before him,
but the counsel for the prisoner certainly ought to
be allowed to address them.

Mr. Codd accordingly made a speech to the jury
upon the evidence, and he urged upon them the
improbability that a man who was admitted on all
hands to have borne the highest character for re-
spectability for a great many years, should have
been guilty of an offence of this description, and
that the charge rested entirely upon the evidence
of a man who had unblushingly admitted himself
to be the thief, and whose object no doubt in fixing
this charge upon the prisoner was to escape punish•
ment altogether, or that he might be dealt with
more leniently. He then remarked upoa the good
character of the prisoner, and the fact that the pro-
secutor himself did not believe him to be guilty of
the offence, and had offered to become bail for him.
The Lord Chief Baron then briefly summed up,
repeating the opinion he had previously expressed,
that the evidence was insufficient to establish the
charge against the prisoner.
The Jury, after a short deliberation, again re-
turned a verdict of guilty.
The Lord Chief Baron said that he could not receive
this verdict, because, upon lookingat the indictment,
ho found that the charge was one of receiving felo-
niously a mixture of oats and peas, whereas the only
evidence in the cass, which was that of the thief,
was that he stole clear corn, and this was what he
sold the prisoner.

The jury said they were of opinion that the evi-
dence supported the charge, and their verdict was
that the prisoner was guilty.
The Lord Chief Baron (to the jury)—l tell you,
gentlemen, that you cannot legally convict the
prisoner upon this indictment, and that you are
bound to return a verdict of not guilty.
The jury said they were ready to leave the case
in his lordship's hands.
The Lord Chief Baron said it was they who must
return the verdict. All he had to do was to direct
them upon any point of law,
and he now told them
they were bound to return a verdict of not guilty.
One of the jury said he did not think so. They
then again deliberates for a short time, when the
foreman said that they could not deliver any other
verdict than the one they had pronounced, and they
ceuld come to no other conclusion than to leave the
matter in his lordship's hands if this verdict was not
received.
The Lord Chief Baron then again explained to
the jury how the matter stood,
remarking upon the
danger that would be created if persons were to be
convicted of an offence solely upon the evidence of a
witness who admitted himself to be the thief, and
whoa) motives for fixing the crime of receiving the
property upon another might easily be understood.
He concluded by stating that he should always up•
hold the rights and
privileges of a jury, which was
an institution for which he entertained the highest
reverence and respect, but he should at the same
time firmly uphold those of the position in which
he was placed.
The jury again deliberated, and after a short
time they gave a verdict of not guilty.
Elizabeth Walking, 24, was charged with the
manslaughter of fox illegitimate child.
Mr. Bushby prosecuted. The prisoner was unde-
fended.

The prisoner was a domestic servant, and the child
in question was an illegitimate one, about 18 mouths
old, At the time of its death the prisoner was 'iv-
inm with her mother in the neighbourhood of Hert-
ford, and it appeared that some of the neighbours
heard an outcry, and upon going into the room
where the prisoner was, they found the child insen-
sible, and the prisoner said that it had been guilty
of some dirty act, and that she had either pushed
or thrown it upon the ground, which was very hard