The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-30 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONAV.—May 29.

(Before Mr. Payne.)
Amelia Paddox, 24, servant, was indicted for
stealing a pair of coral earrings, and other articles
value £5, the property of Williatn Latham.
Some time ago the prisoner was in the service of
the prosecutor, a lodginghouse-keeper, in Coleshill-
street, Pimlico, and in February last she was stay-
ing at his house as a visitor until she could procure
a situation, which she did subsequently, Mrs.
Latham giving her a character for the period dur-
ing which she had been her servant. Mrs. Latham
had been confined to her bed for some weeks, and
on recovering and getting downstairs she missed
a great variety of articles, including table linen and
bed linen, and information was given to the police,
the prisoner being suspected. She was appre-
hended at her situation, and in her possession were
found Mrs Latham's earrings and brooch, and
tickets relating to tablecloths and sheets which she
had pawned. A complete pile of things was pro-
duced which the prosecutor identified as his.
The prisoner was found guilty.
The police•constable in the case, Birch 286 A,
gave a very bad account of the prisoner. She had
been discharged from several situations for dis-
honesty and drunkenness. In one place she was
left in charge of the house, and when her mistress
same home she was found lying on a bed insensibly
drunk, and she was turned out of the house. She
had been as under servant at Lord Lyndhurst's,
but was turned out in less than a month for
drunkenness.

The prisoner said that was false, she never was
in Lord Lyndhurst's service at all.
The policeman said she was an under servant in
the kitchen at Lord Lyndhurst's residence for about
a month.

The prosecutor said the reference they permitted
the prisoner to make to them applied only to the
time she was in their service ; neither he nor Mrs.
Latham knew anything of her conduct after she left
them.

Mr. Payne said it was a very bad case indeed,
and had there been a previous conviction against
her he should have sent the prisoner to penal servi.
tude. That, no doubt, would be her fate ulti-
mately if she did not mend her conduct. At present
the sentence upon her was two years' hard labour.
Robert Gardner, 22, was indicted for stealing the
sum of 16s, 6d., the moneys of James Barfield.
This case recalled to recollection an anecdote,
which the late Mr. Sergeant Adams used to tell, of
a man who, when serving on a jury, always dis-
sented from the 11 others, and the jury was inva-
riably locked up. Being once asked the reason he
said, " Why, the fact is that whenever I am on a
jury I get 11 such stupid thickh( ads with me that
J cannot beat any sense at ali into them." The evi-
dence adduced in support of this charge seemed
clear beyond all doubt or qutstion, and 11 jurors
agreed to a verdict of guilty. The twelfth declared
he would not agree to such a verdict, even were he
locked up for six months. He had made the same
declaration in another case, equally clear, on a pre-
vious day. The prosecutor was a labouring man,
and lodged at the White Lion at Acton, and on the
night of the 11th May the prisoner slept there, in
the same room with him. When Barfield went to
bed he had in his purse three half-crowns, three
florins, and 35., making 16s. 6d. Next morning
purse and money were gone, and the prisoner too.,
The prisoner was found, and accused of the theft;

he said he had only 3s. about him, and that sum
was found in his tobacco box. He was very reluc-
tant to be searched, but the policeman insisted, and
in his watch fob he found three half-crowns and

three florins, which with the 3s. made up the pre-
cise sum, and in exactly the same description of coin
which the prosecutor had lost from his pocket. The
prisoner had beer. without money just before, and
he accounted for his possession of this silver by
saying a brother of his had lent him a sovereign a
week previously, but he could not say where his
brother could he found.

When Mr. Payne had summed up the dissentient
juror said he would never agree to a verdict of guilty,
as none of the coins had been identified by marks.
Mr. Payne said that was not necessary, if they
believed upon the evidence that the money, from
the description of coin and the amount, was the
prosecutor's.
The juror said that did not matter, and he should
hold out for six months if necessary.
Mr. Payne said he had no alternative but to have
them put in charge of a bailiff and locked up, which
was accordingly done.
After the lapse of some hours they were sent for
and brought into court, when the foreman said

there was not the sligatest chance of their agree
ing, and suggested that it was the opinion of some
of the jury who were acquainted with the dissen-
tient juror that his mind was affected.
The juror indignantly denied this, and said his
constitution had suffered through calamity, but his
mind was all right ; he was there sworn to act ac-
cording to his conscience, and he should do so.
Mr. Payne asked if there was any one present
who could put the Court in possession of any pre-
cise facts upon the subject.
A juryman said he was aware of some circum-
stances in connexion with Mr. -- (the juryman),
of a very painful nature, which it was believed had
affected his mind to some extent, but which in no
way reflected upon him. He was at first sorry to
see Mr. -- on the jury, but did not, from a deli-
cate feeling of sympathy, mention the matter, or he
might have prevented him being put in the box. It
was very hard upon the eleven, who had agreed, to
be locked up as prisoners because one held out
through obstinacy.
The juror said it was nothing of the kind. His
mind was quite correct, though he might have suf-
fered misfortunes.
The other 'juror remarked that the same thing
had occurred before.
The dissentient juryman—Yes, 11 of you were
for acquitting, and I was for convicting, but as you
were on the side of mercy I gave way ; 11 of you
are now for convicting, I am for acquitting, and as
I am on the side of mercy I shall not give way.
Mr. Payne said juries must act with the view of
justice according to the evidence, and not go against
evidence out of considerations of mercy. They must
either find the man guilty or not guilty, or the in-
termediate course must be taken of discharging
them without giving a verdict at all, and that could
only be done upon proof that a longer confinement
would be injurious and dangerous to their health.
[hey must go back to their room.
Before they retired the dissentient juror protested
against one juror getting up in the box and pub-
licly stating that a fellow-juror was out of his mind.
He was not out of his mind, though his constitution
had suffered, and the assertion that he was not of
sound mind was not only untrue, but a most un-
gentlemanly one to make.
Mr. Payne said the question was not in a shape
to be dealt with by the Court then.
After the jury had been confined for eight hours
under lock and key without refreshment it was
stated that one of them was suffering from disease
of the heart and was very unwell ; Mr. Payne
thereupon sent for Mr. Lavies, the surgeon to the
Westminster Prison, who examined the juryman
in question, and stated on oath that from the symp-
toms he perceived and the statements the gentleman
made, he believed a longer confinement might re-
sult in a fit, which would place his life in imminent
peril. The excitement might bring it on.
Mr. Payne said upon this he should discharge
the jury from giving a verdict, and the prisoner
would be tried again next sessions.
This was accordingly done, and the Court ad-
"ourned.