The Sun.
London, England, 1856-12-30 00:00:00

THE CoNVICI7 MAC.SELL.

It seems that the execution of this prisoner, who was
convicted at the last assizes at Maidstone of the murder
of a corporal of the 49th Regiment, in wlycli he was a
private, by deliberately shooting him with a rifle, has been
respited from the let Jan. to the sth Feb., the Attorney-
General having granted his consent that a writ of error
shall issue upon the ground that the jury who tried the
prisoner wa; not legally empanelled, and that his con
viction was therefore not legal. This is a proceeding
that has very rersey taken place in the case of a capital
conviction, and as the points that are relied upon to sup-
port the writ of error are of a novel character, it may be
as well to state the circumstances under which it is
sought to set the conviction aside. It will be remem-
bered that the prisoner and the deceased had served with
the regiment airitig the campaign in the Crimea, and it
appeared that when the regimental baggage was shipped
to England there was a dispute between them relative
to a pair of boots, and the prisoner Mansell, under the
impression that the deceased was desirous to get him
into trouble, deliberately resolved to destroy hire, and
he shot him dead at the camp at Shorecllffe. He had
no counsel to defend him, but upon his expressing a de-
sire that he should have the assistance of counsel, Mr.
Baron Bramwell, who presided, requested Mr. Russell
to watch the case for him, and be consented to do so.
The facts being conclusive, the counsel for the prisoner
resolved, as the most likely course to save the life of his
client, to challenge every one of the jurors who had been
summoned to serve, with the exception of those belong-
ing to Maidstone, as it was known that a very strong
feeling against capital punishments prevails in that town,
and ace rrdingly the fall right of challenge was exercised
by the prisoner's counsel. Fifty-nine jurymen only had
been summoned, and as Mr. -Russell had challenged
twenty, and it happened that one jury were absent
considering their verdict, none but Maidstone jurymen
remained to be called, and Mr. Ribtou, the counsel for
the crown, exercised his right of directing that all these
jurymen should stand by, and three more jurors were
wanting to complete the panel. It therefore became neces-
sary to go through the list of jurors again, commencing
with those who had not been challenged by the prisoner's
counsel, and Mr. Ribton then proposed to choose from
among them those he considered to be the least objec-
tionable. It was then contended on behalf of the pri-
soner that this course ought not to be taken, but that
as the list of jurors had been gone through, the crown
had nc,ri,ght to object to anymore, and that then
thoseea of
the jurors should be called in their order, and that
who answered should go into the box, and it was argued
that if the crown were permitted to take the course sug-
gested by Mr. Ribton, it would have effectthe
ena-
bling it to obtain a jury that might be hk.eyrttyoooafictthineaccordance with its wishes, and that the lib
subject would be materially endangered by such a course
expressed his
of proceeding. Mr. Baron Bramwell
opi-
nion to be that the counsel for the
wprhouseectuhteiodnishnanslstinhne
right he, claimed to exerc se, and
was proceeding the jury that were absent came into
court, and three jurors were taken from among them to
complete the jury that was to try Mansell, Mr. Russell,
the counsel for the prisoner, protesting against such a
course being taken. The prisoner, in the result, was
found guilty, but at the conclusion of the trial Mr. Rus-
sell applied to the learned judge for his sanction to the
necessary steps being taken to test the legality of the
jury. His lordship, however, said he should not inter-
fere, as he was of opinion the course that had been
taken was legal, and in accordance wieh precedent, but
if the learned counsel thought there was anything in
the point, he must take the u•tial steps to obtain a
writ of error. The usual course in such cases is to
lay the matter before the Attorney-genera!, and if he
thinks there is any ground for it, he gives his consent
to the writ being issued, and this having been done,
the execution of the sentence is respited until the
point shall have been argued. It the court should
then be of opinion that the jury was not legally empa-
nelled, the whole proceedings of the trial will be annulled,
and the prisoner will altogether escape punishment.