The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-06 00:00:00

Mr. KELLY held that they. were so, end that there
ought to have been a separate indictment for each.
. The Lone CILtNCELLOIt then left the Woolsaek, .re-
questing Mr. -I illy to suipend his, argument. for it short
es he (the Lord Chancellor) was obliged to leave
the House in consequence of a communication which he
had just received.
•
• On the Chancellor's return, _

Mr. KELLY restrned—elie said that he *as willing that
this case should be sal jee2ted to every possible test that
could be imagined, and therefore he . would venture
to remind their Lordships that the very • essence
of criminal conspiracy was the existence of one
common object—one object common to all—
one object to which all and each were party, in
which all and each were implicated. But if a
less number of those engaged in a conspiracy chose to
enter into another conspiracy, the latter object was
surely not to he made common •to both.
Directly there was a conspiracy, say by three
out of eight, and the object of the three proved to he
different to the object of the eight; it had no longer the
incidents of,thc same conspiracy, and it never, either in
law or in justice, could be dealt with .as
one conspiracy. But ho (Me. Kelly) would not
deal vaguely with abstract points, but reduce
the case to the most minute dimensions. Sup-
pose these eight persons—and he would pur-
sue the idea of the Lord Chancellor himself—suppose
these eight persons to assemble at the same
- time, and in the same room, and agree to
rob a garden—and that then three out of
of the eight—the remainder dissenting—enter into
a distinct and separate agreement to break into
the house and murder the proprietor suppose
(to put the case in the least. favourable way)
them to be actually round the same table,
was that one conspiracy—or were there two
conspiracies? The common object clearly was to
rub the garden—not an innocent object certainly—but
the atrocious object was the objt ct of the second con-
spiracy, namely, t, murder the inhabitants of the house.
If that be one conspiraey, then was he (Mr. Kelly) most
lamentably at fault in his view of the law.
-Could any one be so absurd as to suppose
that evidence against the whole three, or one of the
three, was to be evidence against those who had only
undertaken to rob a garden ? Tney must be treated as
perfectly distinct=-as separate' conspiracies—or every
rule of law, of justice, and of -common cede,
would be most grossly violated. Again, there-
fore, ho repeated that upon a count con-
taining a charge of one crime, no person whatever could.
be convicted of two. He could . not .help calling the at-
tention of their Lordships to a case which recently oc-
curred. at the Central Criminal Ceurt, and the
hearing of which was presided over by ajudge who had
the longest and the largest criminal experience of any
one upon the bench. The case was the one of larceny
at Buckingham Palace, %here a great variety of things
had been stolen. the robbery extending over a very
lengthened period of time. But that crime, thus extend-
ing over so long a period, was put into the indictment
as one act of larceny alone, and the Learned Judge very
properly instructed the jury that they must find the pri-
soner guilty of one specific act of larceny and ore only.
He would ask them whether a number of persons in-
dieted' for one crime could be convicted of three several '
and distinct offences ? The address to the jury by Mr.
Baron Rolfe on the trial of Mr. Fergus O'Connor and
others bore strongly upon this point. That Learned
Judge said, that in order to convict all or any of the
defendants,- they mnst convict them of one and the same
conspiracy. Bet if they found that some of the defen-
dants had opposed any violence, and that others had used
no violence; that one had proposed a voluntary absti-
nence from labour, they might convict them all,'
but on diffeeent counts ; those who had taken part in
the violence would be convicted on the counts re-
lating to violence ; but those who stopped short
of violence, on the other portions of the indict-
ment. He had supposed that certain parties had
entered into a plan to rob a garden, and that a
portion of them had entered into a conspiracy
to murder the inhabitants of the House. He would ask
whether that which took place on the same day is the
same place would be one conspiracy, or would it be two
conspiracies. No doubt that evidence against one
of the eight persons to whom he had alluded, as
to the conspiracy to rob the garden might
might be evidence against the whole, but could it be
contended that evidence against three of those
eight, those three having conspired to murder the
inhabitants of the house without the knowledge of the
other .five,, was evidence against the whole eight.
five of whom had agreed to rob . the garden' but had
never heard of the design. If on the trial a witness
should be called to prove that one of those eight had
committed a certain unlawful act, not at all
with reference to the object which the eight had in
view, but in reference to an act contemplated by
three only, the other five having never heard of it,
would that be evidence against all the five.?
The. judge would be bound to receive the evidence, but
he should caution the jury as to applying the evidence
to that part of the case that related to the conspiracy of
eight, because that evidence related only to another and
different conspiracy, bad a different object, and in
furtherance of that different object confined to the three.
His Learned Friend must contend that if persons are
charged in the same indictment, eight with conspiring to
do on. thing, and three with conspiring to do another thing,
in furtherance of which they were guilty of somewhat
more criminality, would the evidence against them be
admissable against the eight likewise ? It would
be right to admit it if it was one and the
samo conspiracy, but he ventured to say
it was an abuse of words to say that a conspiracy by
eight persons to cause disaffection to the Queen's Go•
vernment, was the same conspiracy as a ,conspiracy by
three out of the eight to bring the tribunals of
the country into contempt, and though he had
so far adopted the sunestion thrown out
that this might have taken place within the same cham-
ber, and at the same time, they must remember it was
perfectly consistent with the finding of the jury, that
the conspiracy of the three might have taken place on
the Ist of January, and the conspiracy of the eight had
not taken place till the lit of June probably. See then
what the consequence was, if this was treated as one
conspiracy—an act done by one of three persons
who had entered into a conspiracy in January,
that act being done in February, March, or April,
would, according- to this, be tvidenee against the eight
who had never entered into a conspiracy till January.
This was one of the many absurdities that would
follow, if this was taken as one and the
same conspiracy. A conspiracy was either an
illegal agreement to obtain some lawful object by some
unlawful means, or to obtain an unlawful object by
any means whatever ; but one common object was
still and always of the essence of conspiracy. The
he would say with all confidence that an agreement to
obtain one object was not the same thing as an agreement
to obtain another and a different object. He would not
embarrass the case by any technical illustrations, but he
would suppose an agreement entered into at the same
place, and signed at the same time by the parties in the
same sheet of parchment.
(The Learned CounSel was proceeding when our Re-
port left.) •

MOPE kr AND COMMERCIAL NEWS.
CITY, QUARTER TO THREE.
The Cotton Market was rather dull at Liverpool yesterday.
In shares a limited amount of business was done and the
market closed heavily. Taken altogether, the returns rela-
tive to the receipts of the revenue are held be satisfactory
in the mercantile circles. Indeed, for some weeks past, it was
well known that the demand for merchandise of most sorts
has been brisk. But however satisfactory the receipts
of the .customs and excise, the • time of the
" takings," under the head of " property-tax," is referred
to with disapprobation. Scarcely any one is there to be found
to approve of this item, and who does not express an -ardent
wish that it will, at the time appointed, be erased from the
quarterly returns by the receipts of the national resources.
We have the West India steamer announced. She brings
about a million and a half of dollars, besides 31,7101. in silver
coin, and articles of value. Her accounts are dated the 24th
May, from Tampico, and the 9th June, from Vera Cruz.
About 161,000 dollars are understood to be for the Mexican
dividend account.
New Zealand papers, to Feb.: 3, state that the production
of flax was increasing. Captain Fitzroy had visited Wel-
lington, and received the settlers very well, though, as is
said, with something of the " quarter deck" in his manner.
Bargains have been made to-day in Consols for next week
at 981 to- 99, the dividends being then payable. For the
Account day they are 94 to 99—the market is good. Ex-
chequer Bills realise 745. to 765. premium. Bank Stock is
worth 199 to a further rise ; and India Stock, ex dividend,
284 to 2841. The Reduced Three-and-a-Half per Cents. are
1021 to A ; and the Three per Cents. 99i to
The Foreign Market has been very dull, but nominally
Mexican •is higher, say 34 A, the news being considered
favourable. The Deferred are 15A- to Spanish Actives
are nominally 23i, and the Three per Cents. 33 to
Brazil Bonds are firm at 83. Dutch Two-and -a-half per
Cents. realise 604.t0 61.
The Railway Shares are generally firm, and the supposed
settlement of the dispute with the *Grand Junction has sent
up Birmingham to 125 and 126 premium.
BRITISH FUNDS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK.
(From the Official List.)
Bank ....... . . .... .............. 19914 199
3 per Cent.. Reduced Annuities
3 per Cent. Consols. Annuities 95% 99 99%
. 3)4 per Cent. Reduced Annuities 102%%
New 3% per Cent. Annuities...-. ..... 101%%%
Long Annuities, Expire sth Jan. 1860--
India Stock 9F4 `...8t
Bank Stock for Account
. 'Consols for Open ng........«..........„.».«,,
Exchequer Bills, I%ci. 1348
1,0001. ..... —..»,«.«..76 pm.
500'..... ......... ..... 74 pm.
Ditto Small
Dittq Advertised.... —
FOREIGN FUNDS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK.
Brazilian Bonds, 5 per Cent.
Mexican Bonds, '837.5 per Cent. ........ 7)54
Ditto Deferred Stock •1514%
Spanish Bonds. Five per Cent
Dutch 21% per Cents CON 61
Dutch 5 per Cents 100%74
PRICES OF SHARES THIB DAY AT ONE.
RAILWAYS. PAID. PER SHARE.
Birmingham and Gloucester.-- 100 97 .. to 96
Ditto New 17% ...... 24
Bristol and Exeter 7O ..... '7B
Chester and Holyhead 4% to
Chichester and Brighton
Edinburgh and Glasgow ....... 50 ..... 63
Great Western
Ditto 14 Shares
Ditto kißhs
London and Birmingham. lOO .. —256
Ditto 3( Share' •••
26% to 26%
London and Brighton 5O .... 45%
London and South Western ...... 41%
Ditto Eighths
London and Croydon
Manchester and Birmingham 40 ...... 55)4
North Midland
Ditto )4 Shares
South Eastern and Dover ......... 32%
Ditto New ......... 4
Trent Valley -. . . ......... ....... 2 ......
York and North Midland
Ditto Scarboro' Branch 2% ...... 21
MANCHESTER STOCK EXCHANGE, JULY s.—There is a
decided improvement in our market, and a good inquiry for
London and Birmingham, Grand Junction, Trent Valley, and
Liverpool and Manchester, at improved prices. London and
Birmingham, Quarters, 25 ; Manchester and Leeds, 107 ;
Huddersfield and Manchester Canal and Railway, 365. 3d.
premium ; Barnsley Junction, 2,1 ; Trent Valley, 104 ; Man-
cheater and Birmingham, Quarters, 3-i premium.