The Sun.
London, England, 1858-04-05 00:00:00

OLD COURT.

The April session of this Court commenced this morn-
ing at the Old Bailey, before the Lord Mayor (Sir R.
W. Carden, Knt., M.P.), Sir C. Marshall, Alderman
Farocombe, Alderman Sir F. G. Moon, Bart., Alder-
man and Sheriff Allen, Mr. Under-Sheriff Millard, and
Mr. Under-Sheriff Parker.

The calendar contains the names of 148 prisoners for
trial, embracing one charge of murder ; one as accessory
before the fact of murder ; one for bigamy, three for
forgery ; thirteen for burglary, and three for maliciously
wounding. The remaining cases are of the ordinary
character.

The grand jury having been sworn, •
The learned Recorder charged them with reference to
the cases in the calendar, He explained thelarge num-
ber of prisoners for trial as arising more from the
lengthened period that elapsed between this and the
last session, than from an increase of crime, and said the
cases generally were not of a very serious character. He
was, however, sorry to say there was one charger f
wilful murder, viz., that of Giovanni Lani, for the wilful
mu-der of Heleise Taubin. The general evidence against
him from the depositions that had been returned was
that the woman was found dead in the evening and bad not
been seen by any one since the previous night. The
prisoner spent that evening in her company, and was
seen to leave the house about 7 o'clock in the morning
of the day on which the woman was found dead. He
was shortly after taken into custody, when property was
found in his possession which the murdered woman had
in her possession immediately before she was seen in the
prisoner's company. There were three charges of man•
slaughter, but by some accident or other he had only
before him the deposition in one case—that of the man-
slaughter
el a lad on board ship. There could be no
doubt that the cause of death in point of law came under
that of manslaughter, but he thought it would be
found to be a case differing in degree to that
which ordinarily ranked under that name. The next
case of a serious description was a charge of arson with
intent to defraud an insurance office. The evidence, as
was usual in such cases, was of a circumstantial character,
but it would be their duty narrowly to watch the
evidence to see that it led to the conclusion that the pri-
soner set fire to the premises with the intention laid in
the indictment. The next case to which be then directed
their attention was one, happily, not of an ordinary
description. Simon Bernard was charged with conspiracy
with other persons to assassinate the Emperor of the
French. It was not necessary for him to call
their attention minutely to the facts of the case,
and still less to call their attention to the law of
the case. Supposing there should be any doubts as to
whether the English law was applicable to cases of this
kind, he cauld scarcely imagine they could rea-onably
entertain it, but leave it to be discussed at another time
and before another tribunal. Their duty would be to
ascertain whether the facts proved before them were
sufficient, in their judgment, to call on the prisoner to
anew- r the charge of conspiring with others to effect the ,
°eject cl arged in the indictment. In such a case they
must not expect to have direct evidence of the charge,
because persons engaged in the perbrenance of wicked
action., did not openly engage in them or in the presence
of good ;nen, and therefore the only direct evidence they
would obtain WAS that of an accomplice. Supposing such
to be laid before them, it would be their duty to ascertain
whether there was any confirmatory evidence, from
purer sources than that of the accomplice, so as to lead
them to believe him, notwithstanding the suspicion his
participation in the Res had cast on him. No such
person was examined before the committing magistrate,
and he (the recorder) was not aware if such would he
produced before them. Supposing the same evidence was
laid before them as was taken by the magistrate, it would
appear that on the 14th January last, an attempt was
made to assassinate the Emperor of the French, in which
two persons named Orsini and Rudio were engaged, but
they were unknown to many of the witnesses by those
names, hut Orsini as Allsep, and Rudio as Da Silva.
The evidence would go to show that the attempt to
assassinate the Emperor of the French was to be made
by the use of grenades, and that the prisoner dealt with
the particular ones used. Evidence would he adduced
to show that the prisoner sent the grenades to Brussels,
and was there in company with Orsini, and, in connec-
tion with him, for warded them by a person to Paris ;
that he purchased materials for making fulminating
powder, with which the grenades were charged ; and
that one of the persons engaged in the attempt was em-
ployed by the prisoner, provided with money and
clothes, and his wife maintained by the pr.,-
soner during her hesband's absence in Paris, upon th
prisoner's business. Most of the evidence would be
given by foreigners, and as it was necessary they ehould
have a knowledge of the case to elicit the necessary facts
from the witnesses, if they wished it an officer of the
court should attend, acquainted with the facts of the
case, and assist them iu examining the witnesses, and
eliciting the necessary evidence. The other oases, to
which he now called their attention, were those of True-
love and Tcherzevvski, charged wi h having pubFshed a
defamatory and malicious libel, concerning the Emperor
of the French, with intent to incite others to assassinate
the Emperor of the French. There was no
question that by the law of this country it was are
indictable offence to publ,sh a libel on the head of a
foreign Government in amity with this country
with intent to defame and vilify him, but, at the
same time, in applying that law it was necessary to
consider it with caution, lest in any way they interfered
with the right of free discussion, which we in this
country possessed, because the same law that applied to
the head of a foreign Government in amity with our
own, applied to the heads of our own Government, whose
' conduct, and the character, tendency, and motives of
e-
-1 their acts, we claim a right freely to discuss. It was ea-
ceedingly difficult to define the exact boundary between
what consteuted libel, and the right of exercising free
discussion, and in all cases of the kind it was necessary
to trust to the good sense and intelligence of grand
juries, before whom such charges were preferred, to
draw the boundary line, and it would be for them to say,
looking at the whole character of the publicati in, and
judging of the intention of the party by the tendency of
the language used, whether the object of the writer was
, to vilify and defame, and go beyond that free discussion
_ _ . _

to which he had alluded. In the present cases
the charges were not only for publishing false
and defamatory libels, but with intent to incite
persons to assassinate the Emperor of the French.
In the indictment passages from the alleged libels were
inserted, but it was not his intention to direct their at-
tention to them because the whole of the publication
would be laid before them. It, no doubt, sometimes
occurred that particular passages were greatly controlled
by the context, and it would be for them to say, looking
fairly at the whcle of the publication, whether its natural
t.‘ndency was to incite other parties to assassinate the
individual he had named. Supposing they were of
that opinioc, they would be bound i❑ law as well as
common sense to presume it was the intention
of the party by whom the language was used to return a
true bill against the parties charged. By so doing they
did not decide the case, the party charged could not
offer an explanation of his conluct before them ; but if
they thought the case required further investigation, an
opportunity was then given to the parties charged of
explaining their language and its tendency, and it waq
the duty of another tribunal to decide as to the guilt or
innocence of the party charged in the indictment,
The grand jury then retired.

EARLY MARRIAGIREL—There was much more chance
of early marriages, and happy ones too, whsn neigh-
bours of that large clang who hays children at their
desire, but little substance to leavo them, met as
neighbours : when personal intercourse was more Imre-
strailled ; when a lad could grow up in intimacy with
another family, and learn to call the girls by their
Christian names, without any fear of being asked his
intentions ; when there were ouch things as fishing
parties, and lounging in gardens, and country rides and
rambles on long summer mornings, and family °inners
and round games on winter's nights ; not to speak of
extempore dances, to which no one minded going and
returning eight or ten miles, packed into any kind of
conveyance, six inside, or, well wrapped up, three in a
gig—"the more the merri-r." Those were the days,
not exactly when we were young, for they were rather
before our time, but of wnich our fathers have told us ;
those were the days to live in ! when it a-as not con-
sidered " ui,g,ntee.'—that was the old word—or incor-
rect to walk home, if need were, two or three miles on
a clear frosty night ; or if the roads were muddy, it was
only a splashed ankle ; there were ankles then ; flounces
had not yet grown down t,n the toes, Men felt in love
in those days—they couldn't help themselves ; walking
into it deliberately, aft, :r debate duly held pro and con.,
is a much slower process. Suppose there was a stolen
kiss now and then : bless us, don't be shocked, my dear
young ladles—it don't hurt nobody—it was not a whit
more improper, and much more pleasant, you may take
my word for it, than your present waltz and polka,
which we, remember, not so many years ago ei.nt',
eer,;
felt our propriety hocked. at. Oh I if you only k
the golden opportunities of thloadseieps,actrriva.racdhmea,l
tires, }ou
would be the first to head a
,to rescue
hese it,tdlei con„
thus volunteer the part of Peter the Lief.
youth at lea ..t out of the
F grade
orui
tionalitie., whose god is , Fashion
ofautd is pro-
OA( t ?-,-Blwkwoocr4 Kagazine.