The Sun.
London, England, 1834-07-14 00:00:00

The Assizes for the County of Hants commenced at Win.
chester on Thursday, before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN,
and Mr. Justice PATTESON. On Friday the Grand Jury
found a true bill for Manslaughter, against Owen Swift, as
principal, and Samuel Evans, James Ward, Richard Curtis,
and John Adams, as accessories in causing the death of An-
thony Noon in a prize fight, in the parish of Hurtsborne Tar-
rant, in the county of Hants.
The trial was fixed for next morning, and yesterday morn..
ing, accordingly, Swift was placed at the bar alone, it having
been advised that he should be tried first. He was reapeit.
ably dressed in a suit of black, and seemed properly sen-
sible of his situation. On the indictment being read over, she
pleaded Not Guilty.
Mr. MISSING opened the case. He observed, that the
circumstances under which this indictment had been preferred
were already sufficiently known, and had not only been talked
of, but commented on in the public press. He had only to
caution the jury, therefore, against forming an opinion on
any thing which they had heard or read out of that Court.
They should not suffer themselves to be prejudiced by exag-
gerated .statements, but form their decision on the facts
which would be brought before them. From those facts it
would appear that this was a prize fight, and that the parties
were well known in the sporting world. He had no instruc-
tion to state any thing to the prejudice of the unhappy per-
son at the bar, for as far as such a transaction could be
considered fair and honourable, such was the complexion of
his conduct ; but, nevertheless, however fairly, honourably,
and humanely he might have acted, such meetings were
illegal. He feared the jury, from the evidence it would be
his duty to lay before them, would be bound to pronounce
him guilty. He was free to admit that this conflict did not
arise from any previous quarrel. It was, in fact, a trial of
skill, to see which was the better man, influenced, he believed,
by the desire of obtaining a sum of money, for which the
battle was fought. The indictment charged that the prisoner
had given the deceased divers blows and falls, of which he
did languish and die, and it would be proved that, indepen-
dent of many severe blows, in the last round the deceased
was thrown heavily upon his head, the effect of which was to
render him insensible.
Thomas Sherman, a carpenter and builder at Andover, was
present at the fight, between Swift and Noon, on the 24th of
June ; it was a severe fight, and many severe blows and falls
were given on both sides ; the fight lasted about two hours ;
Noon received a very violent blow about half an hour before
the fight was over, and the back part of his head was driven
against the stake ; at the latter part of the fight he was
thrown heavily on the ground ; he fell on his head, and in
witness's opinion, was stupified ; he was then taken out of the
ring ; saw him afterwards dead, on the next day, at the Ca-
therine Wheel, in Andover.
Cross-examined by Mr. CROWTIIER (for the prisoner): Was
present before the fight commenced ; was on a waggon ; the
men threw their hats in the ring, and shook hands ; had seen
fights before ; saw the fight from the beginning to the end ;
did not see any foul play of any kind; the fight was conducted
fairly and honestly; the fight was doubtful from the first ;
there were several changes ; after fighting an hour, Swift
seemed to have the best of it ; still Noon rushed against him
with great force once or twice ; Swift had an opportunity of
striking and seriously injuring Noon, but he purposely refrained
from doing so ; he might have fallen on him, but did not ;
towards the latter part of the battle, he stood on the defensive,
and did not punish him as much as he might ; when the de-
ceased fell against the stake, he was retreating, and was driven
with his head against the stake ; he afterwards knocked the
prisoner down ; Swift was thrown several times ; the men were
nearly of a weight ; in the last round but one there was a
heavy fall ; Noon rushed at Swift violently, who appeared to
have the best of it, and merely shoved Noon back ; saw him
refrain from striking repeatedly ; Noon appeared very much
vexed towards the last, because his seconds wished to take him
away; Noon pushed his seconds away, and rushed upon Swift;
the seconds said it was " all up," and would not second him
any longer, but Noon would persist, in spite of them ; saw
one of the seconds throw down a sponge ; in the last round
but one. Noon rushed upon Swift, grappled with him, and
fought as well as Swift ; after Swift pushed him away, the
deceased again rushed in, when Swift threw him over; had
not he thrown Noon, Noon would have thrown him ; there
was another round, but the crowd rushed in, and prevented
witness from seeing it • the deceased fell on his, head in the
last round but one ; this was_ in the struggle, not from a blow.
Henry Wheeler confirmed this testimony.
Charles Scholey, in describing the fight, attributed the
cause of insensibility.rather to an accidental fall of the deceased
against the stake when he was not hit, than to any injury re-
ceived from the prisoner. He also spoke of the repeated de-
clarations of the deceased, of his desire to die rather than be
vanquished, and of the frequent unsuccessful efforts of the
seconds to take him out of the ring. Previous to the match
being made, he heard the deceased taunt the prisoner, and
endeavour to urge him to fight, by calling him " a coward, a
cur, and a wretch."
Robert Grace, a newsman at Andover, and Richard Pring,
the waiter at the Catherine Wheel, at Andover, were next
examined.
Mr. G. Wickham, a surgeon at Andover, said that the ves-
sels of the brain had been ruptured, which was the cause of
death. As a professional man, after viewing the state of the
deceased, he preferred saying death had been produced by the
effect of blows and falls than by excitement and exhaustion.
For the defence Mr. Lyford, a surgeon at Winchester, said
he had practised for twenty years ; had frequently seen cases
of concussion of the brain ; had seen extravasation of blood
produced by a variety of causes ' • and among others, mental
agitation—violent passion—hard drinking. Exhaustion and
excitement would decidedly predispose the vessels on the
brain to rupture ; such causes, combined with blows and falls,
might decidedly lead to extravasation of blood on the brain.
The case for the defence having been closed,
Mr. Justice PATTESON proceeded to charge the jury. He
observed that the main features of this case were that the
parties had met without a quarrel. They had fought before,
and met again to decide which was the best man. The de-
ceased was beaten in the first fight, and had on one
occasion • endeavoured to irritate the prisoner by calling
him coward ; and on another, by spitting in his face.
There were a great number of persons present, and,
although it did not appear in evidence, there was no
doubt that this was what was called a prize fight, and he
was sorry to say, from the deceased having been taken from
the ground in a post chaise and four, that some persons evi-
dently of property were concerned in its concoction, who.were
more to blame than the men. However, whoever the parties
might be, it was equally a breach of the peace, and every per-
son present, high or low, was liable to be indicted for taking
part in an unlawful assemblage, and if death ensued, were
equally liable to be indicted for manslaughter, and, according
to the circumstances, would be punished severely or other-
wise. This case certainly was not distinguished by such dis-
gusting features as one which had formerly come under his
observation, in which two men were brought up by those who
had bet their money upon them, till they were actually so ex-
hausted and so cruelly punished, that both died. One of the
persons who had been instrumental to the barbarous exhibi-
tion, and who had risked his money on the event, had been be-
fore him, and he had sentenced him to be transported for life.
This was happily not a case of that description. It appeared that
there was nothing unfair in the fight, and that the seconds had
done all in their power to put an end to it. There was really,
therefore, nothing aggravated in its character. At the same
time it was an unlawful offence, and they must regard it in that
light. If the jury believed the evidence, and that death had
been occasioned by blows or falls, the prisoner was guilty
of manslaughter. If, on the other hand, they considered
death had not been caused by blows or falls, then he must
be acquitted. Moreover, if they were satisfied that death
had been caused by falling against a stake without the instru-
mentality of the prisoner, as might be inferred from the testi-
mony of one of the witnesses, then he was equally entitled to
acquittal, because the indictment charged that the deceased
had died from blows or falls given by the prisoner; whereas
the fall against the stake had apparently arisen from a slip in
getting away when the prisoner was quiescent. With regard
to the attempt to show that the deceased had not died from
blows or falls, but from passion or excitement, he thought this
at variance with the common sense view of the question. It
was impossible for men to fight so long without being ex-
cited; and if such an argument were to be admitted, it would
be impossible ever to obtain a conviction. If, however, the
jury conscientiously thought the blows and falls had nothing to
do with the excitement, of which so much had been said, it
was still their duty to pronounce the prisoner not guilty. It
was not necessary to go over the evidence in detail. The jury
had heard the whole of the facts, and they would, no doubt,
exercise a sound and honest discretion, alike consistent with
their duty and a proper sense of humanity to the prisoner.
There were some discrepancies as to the fall against the stake
and the fall in the last round but one, which he could not re-
concile but these'were points peculiar for the province of the
jury. It was much to the credit of the prisoner that he had,
in the course of the fight, refrained from administering
punishment when the opportunity offered ; thus showing that
his only object was victory, without any hostile feeling towards
the deceased.
The jury, after deliberating for about ten minutes, agreed
upon their verdict, and pronounced the prisoner guilty ; but,
at the same time, begged most strongly to recommend him to
the merciful consideration of the Court, for his extreme for-
bearance and manly conduct throughout the fight.
Mr. Justice PATTESON, in passing judgment, said it was
clear this fight had taken place for money, and he only re-
gretted that the parties who had given such encouragement to
a violation of the law were not then before him, as he consi-
dered them more worthy of punishment than the prisoner, and
their sentence should certainly he more severe, without refe-
rence to their station in life, and perhaps the more so in pro-
portion to their rank. He was glad again to bear testimony
to the humanity of the prisoner, but still, for the sake of ex-
ample, and with a view to deter other people from the com-
mission of similar offences, he thought the justice of the case
months
icmo uplrdi
sonnt
ebnet saant ids fiheadrdul•
ai tbh., au
rl eisns
tpunishment
gat bola n. six
Sam, Ward, Curtis, and Adams, did not, under the advice
of their counsel, surrender; but are immediately to enter into
recogniz a n ees fortl
effectedie their future
n the gpoeordsoncoonfdsucwtifta,santdhethoebpjeecotpolef
example is fully
of Andover. have no vindictive- feeling towards the offenders.

ScoTert CtucutTs.—Louth : Lord Justice Clerk
and Lord Gillies ; Jedburg, Sept. 16.; Dumfries, 20 ;
25 ; J. Shaw Stewart, Esq., Advocate Depute. NVest :
Lords Meadowbank and Mackenxie; Stirling, Sept. 8 ;
verarYy, 12; Glasgow, 16 : Geo. Napier, Esq., Advocate..
Depute. North : Lords Moncreiff and Medwyn : Perth,
Sept. 16 ; Aberdeen, 20 : Inverness, 25 : Graham Speirs,
Esq., Advocate-Depute.