The Sun.
London, England, 1818-04-17 00:00:00

in the counterplea, when considered with the al-
legations in the replication, do not afford such
presumption ; and 4th, That from all the atulto.
cities On the-snbject, the Judgment of the Court
ought to he, that the defendant shall be acquitted,
and allowed to go free without delay,. From de-
ference to my Learned Friend, I shall follow the-
same order of arrangement in the arguments I
have now to S'ilhtlialo your Lordships; and with
.regard to the first point, that the plea of wager-
of battle -is a riglit vested in the defendant and
not in the appellant, 1 must confess I was rather
surprised that my Learned Friend should have said
so much on the subject, because, in.. Opening the
case, I never attempted to dispute that point—a
point which I now readily concede to bias." Me.
Clitty then proceeded to argue at ninth 1-ength,',
that the plea of wager of battle -depending on a -
number of facts may be taken away, and _that titer
present case might be brought within the excep-
tions. In- support,nf his assertion that the plea -
of wager of .battlfrittight-he taken away, he re- •
lerrato a case mentioned in Fitzherbeet (4tb
Ed w. HI. p. 9.) upon which he argued much in
detail. It was a case where the defendant -was
taken with. the manour, and although there were
many considerations which might have rendered
the question of his guilt very doubtful, yet the Court
then held that as the stolen property was taken
upon hint, whets taken, he should not be allow ell
his plea of wager of battle. The Learned Counsel
next referred to another case of manour, as given.
in Brooks's Abridgment (22 Edw. IV. fol. 19.)
in order to .prove that the Court may compel a
defendant who puts himself on his plea of wager
of battle, to take issue upon the county. lie te•
ferred to a variety olother authorities and cases,
but we refrain from following the Learned Counsel
in all the minutia of detail into which he entered
in this part of his argument. The passages in
Bracton, he said, to which, on a former occasion,
he had referred, ,remained tmcontroverted ; and-
from folio 8., p. 137, of that Author, it appear,.
ed,. that an Appellee may defend himself \by
battle, unless there be a violent , presumption.
that he is-guilty. In Bracton, it was stated, that
a person having lain in a housing where murder
was committed; without his raising a hue and cry,
or being wounded by the murderers, should b,eile-
privect of his plea --of wager of battle. Staund-
forde (whose authority. the Learned Counsel
de-
fended from the objections raised against it) says,
that strong presumptions of guilt maybe a
sstiii-
cient bar to the wager of battle;. and Fleta, pages
47 and 50, lays down the same doctrine. .He
should next refer their Lordships to Haw-
kins's Pleas of the Crown, vol. ie. 416 ; front
a consideration. of which he submitted, that
though the Judges might at an early period con.
demn the accused taken " in flugrante deticto,"
without trial, yet that afterwards they might re-
fuse to do so, and refer the matter t&the county.
Reeves, in his- Hist,ory of the Luv, vol
p. 268, takes an historical-view art cases similar to
tb,..t•now before the Court, and from • his refe-
rence to Flera, '0;51 , it would appear, that where
there were strong presumptions of guilt, the Court -
immediately referred the matter to a Jury.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH.—" that were always
the case, how could there have been so general a
use of the trial by battle ?"
Mr. CHITTY next proceeded to answer the nb-
jectious which had been urgedsto the counterplea
itself, viz. " that there was nothing stated in the
counterplea as ,a fact, except such things as ap-
peared merely to others to Ise so. Facts; as al-
bided to in the counterplea, were made to depend
merely upon surmise ; upon the surmise of per-
sons whosenames were not even Mentioned."
We ate obliged to omit following
.the Learned.
Counsel through his answer to these objections,
because it was unavoidably mixed up with a recital
of circumstances, to detail which would-prove dis•
gusting. Besides, the circumstances alluded to
did not eonvey'an unanswerable presumption of
the defendant's guilt, since Mr. JuSticel3AILPY,
and with 11 hit the other Judges, thought that it
might at least be replied that Mary,Ashford had,
from perhaps remorse of conscience, thrown. bee-
self into the pit of water where she was found ;
or, having occasion to go near it, might, front
weakness, have fallen into it/ and have been
unable to extricate herself.
Their Lordships, after consulting together for
some time, gave judgment', severally, that the
presumption ,of guilt was not sufficiently strong
to come within the exceptions; and that, as the
law now stands, the appellee is entitled to his
Trial by Battle. The appellee having, in his re-
plication, prayed judgment quad sat rode sine die,
time is 'allowed till Monday- for the. Counsel of the,
appellant to apply to the Court, if they think pro•
per, for their opinion on that point.

CORN EXCHAN_OErAPRIL 8.-10 COIIECCIUCCCe
of considerable arrivals with Foreign Wneat, the
trade was dull this morning, and from Is. to 2s.
per quarter lower than on Monday ; Barley is 2s.
per quarter cheaper ; Fine Oats sold on the same
terms, as on Monday ; Peas and Beans support
their prices ; in other articles there is no altera,
tion.

Foreign Wheat -50 s. 555.
Fine ditto - -.91i. 101 s.
English Wheat -51 s. 555,
Fine ditto - -90 s. 935.
Old ditto - - -91 s. 101 s.
Rye
Fine ditto - -
Barley - - - -38 s. 375.
Fine data - - 455. —s.
New ditto - - -61 s.
Malt
Fiue ditto - - -82 s. 84s.
WhitePease (boilers),sos. 583.
Fine ditto - - 600.

Grey Pease - 345. 425.
Fine Grey Pease - 468. 50s:
Tick Beans - - - 465. 525:
Old ditto - - Os. —s.
Small Tick Beans 495. 565.
Old ditto' - - - 525. 625:
Feed Oats - -20 s. 245.
Fine ditto - 275. 325.
Poland 'ditto -21 s. ess.
Fine ditto - -30 a. 36,4
Potatoe ditto - - 355. 425.
Rape
ine Flour Seed S .5 4_ 1 . aefjsr.lBa9s
FSecouds -10 s. 768 A