The Sun.
London, England, 1866-11-19 00:00:00

In charging the grand jury, the Recorder said in conse-
quence of the short interval since the Court last met the
cases were not very numerous. The first case to which
he felt it his duty to refer was the indictment against
William Scott for the murder of a woman said to have been
his wife. They, lived together, and both seemed to be ad-
dicted to habits of intoxication, and the question the grand
jury would have to consider was whether the injuries
which appeared to have been inflicted were committed by
the prisoner, and that they caused the death of the woman.
The medical gentlemen had no-doubt that the death was
caused by violence, and it was impossible to keep out of
consideration the declaration made by the prisoner that he
would do for her, and that she had lived too long. The
learned gentleman then proceeded to enter into the details
of the case, and, having done so, proceeded to notice the
indictment against a parson named Young and others who
stand indicted for•causing the death of a lad named Ull-
tnott in a sparring match with- gloves at a publichouso
kept by Shaw. The law, as,laid down by act of Parlia-
ment, was that in sports unlawful or productive :of danger
a party killing another was guilty of manslaughter. Such
exercise, however, as tended to give agility in the use of
the arms were not deemed unlawful, but boxing matches,
and other sports of a similar kind, which were not got up
fcr lucre, did not come under this description. In the pre-
sent instance the patch took place in a publichouso, the
combatants were engaged by the keeper of that house, and
a sum of money was charged for admission. If the circum-
stances were such as he had stated, it would be their duty
to find a true bill. There was another case of manslaughter
caused by furious driving, and a third case of the same
kind was as follows. It appeared the deceased had
some difference with the prisoner Allen, who kept a pub-
lic-house, and on the night in question he went to the
house and forced his way into it. The prisoner ejected
him, and the charge was that in doing so he had used more
force than was necessary for the purpose, but struck him
a blow, on which the deceased fell, and in so doing re_
ceived such injuries that death ensued. If they came to
the conclusion that the blow was not struck in self-defence,
but in the moment of irritation, they would find a true
bill. There was a charge of manslaughter against a
woman named Power, of having caused the death of her
child by failing to give it proper nourishment. The next
case referred to by the learned Recorder was that made
against a person named Brookes, for misdemeanour,
the offence consisting of disobedience of an Act
of Parliament. The Act alleged to have been y iolated was
an Act relating to the proving of guns, anddfortilehe iddpirnisgontheer
use of such arms as had not been proved, any;
was said to have sold and offered for sale a number of
guns of which the barrels had not been proved. The
offnco charged was not named amongst those which con-
stituted a misdemeanour, but was classified 'with those
subject to a penalty, and the prisoner was not, therefore,
liable to be indicted for misdemeanour. The only other
charge which he thought it necessary to refer to was one
against a person named Elders for receiving into his house
a lunatic for board and hire, the prisoner not being
licensed for that purpose. It was well that the
public should know that no person could receive
into his house a lunatic for board and hire with-
out the necessary authority, and persons so doing
rendered themselves liable to punishment. The other
cases were of the ordinary description to which it was not
at all necessary for him to refer to. •
The grand jury then retiredto their, room.
THE ItOBBERIEB ON THE GREAT- EASTERN RAILWAY.

The trial of Duckle and his wife, who stood indicted
for receiving stolen property,"on the application of Mr.
Metcalf, was postponed until next session, on the ground
flint SOlhe fresh ca es were springing up.