The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-07 00:00:00

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD CO URY:

The sixth session of the present mayoralty commenced this
morning, at the Old Bailey, before the Lord Mayor, the Re-
corder, Mr. Alderman and Sheriff Sidney, and Mr. Alderman
Hughes.
The calendar is unusually heavy, there being no less than
224 i.ames down for trial. Two of these cases are for mur-
der : one of them being Thomas Henry Hocker, who is doubly
indicted—first, " for the wilful murder of James Delarue ;"
and secondly, for " a robbery on James Delarue, and steal-
ing one watch, one ring, and 12 sovereigns, his goods and
moneys, and immediately before said robbery wounding said
James Delarue." The second murder is that of an infant
child by its mother, Ann Pendry. There are two cases of
bigamy, five of burglary, two of cutting and wounding, thil e
of forging and uttering forged instruments, seven of house-
breaking and larceny, two of sheep-stealing, and one of rob-
bery from the Post-office. Robert Bannister, the draper of
Portsea, who, it will be remembered, was brought in custody
from the island of Madeira, stands indicted for unlawfully,
obtaining goods with intent to cheat certain of his cre-
ditors. The remaining offences are of a minor charac-
ter. Of the total calendar London furnishes 57 prisoners,
Middlesex 108, Essex 8, and Kent 22. A considerable addi
tion will no doubt be made before the end of the week, and
among the names added will be that of Joseph Connor, com-
mitted on Saturday from Bow-street, for the wilful murder of
Mary Brothers, in George-street, St. Giles's.
The Grand Jury having been sworn,
The REconnsetl proceeded to charge them as follows :
Gentlemen of the Grand Jury,—Something more than the
ordinary interval that generally prevails between these ses-
sions having occurred, we have in consequence an increased
number of charges in the pre. cut calendar. It contains 224
indictments; but I understand that 16 additional prisoners
have been committed since that calendar was printed, thus
making a total of 240 indictments. You are not, however,
to suppose that there are 240 prisoners; there are, probably,
not more than 172 ; several of them have been committed for
the same alleged offence, but charged on different counts. The
number of prisoners on the calendar will, no doubt, receive
some addition in the progress of your labours throughout the
week. A great number of cases of minor importance have
been transferred to the jurisdiction of the Middlesex magis-
trates, under the direction of the functionary nominated As-
sistant-Judge of the Session, but as these ,cases are of the
least complex character their withdrawal from the face of the
calendar will not, in any great degree, lighten your labours,
or shorten the term of your attendance to these duties. lam
sorry to say that there is nothing very encouraging in the
general aspect of this calendar. Crimes of the greatest
enormity are presented, and among others there are two cases
of murder, which have already attracted but too much of the
public notice, through the medium of the press. lam most
anxious that your minds should be divested of all prejudices
imbibed from anything heard or read without these walls, and
that your attention should be strictly directed to the facts of
the cases as they shall be laid before you. Ido net mean to
say that the publication of these cases should have the effect
of-pre.ndicing your minds, but you have to ascertain, without
reference to anything that may have passed elsewhere,
whether them is sufficient-evidence to constitute a charge
against the parties. The cases to which I advert are so no-
torious as to render any particular allusion to them wholly
unnecessary. I mean the case of murder committed at
Hampstead, and that more recently perpetrated in the
patish of St. Giles's, in which latter case the prisoner was
only committed on Saturday. Gentlemen, I do
not think I should be advancing the interests of public jus
tice were I to refer to the evidence, or to make any com-
ment upon the evidence taken in either of those cases. The
facts will appear before you, and you will have to judge ac-
cording to the evidence; at the same time I feel it is my
duty to say, that as regards your peculiar province I can en-
tertain no doubt that you will come to the proper conclusion
in both these cases. As soon as it shall be proved to your
satisfaction that the murder has been committed by some one,
and the facts lead you to infer that the accused is the party, then
it is incumbent upon him to prove his innocence. The law
upon the subject is very brief and pointed. The fact of the
commission of the offence by some one having been first
proved, the question of his innocence must be satisfactorily
proved by the prisoner. The law presumes that murder is
founded in malice unless the contrary appears in the facts of
the case. Now, the rule as laid down by the law and prac-
tice in reference to malice is this. The law by the term
malice holds that the effect had been intended of w!ckedlyde-
priving a fellow-creature of life, and the fact that such killing
has taken place under certain circumstances carries a plain
indication of a heart regardless of social duties and indifferent
to the commands of all law. If, therefore, you find that the
party charged in the indictment destroys life under peculiar
circumstances, it is perfectly reasonable that the proof of jus-
tification should rest with the same individual. You will rea-
dily understand that cases may occur where death may arise
from violence, in which no higher verdict than that of man-
slaughter or justifiable homicide can be recorded. I mention
that merely to explain my argument, and not because it has
any applicability to these cases. There is also a case of
infanticide, where a young woman is charged with destroy-
ing her infant at the time of birth. On this subject there is
annexed a condition by Act of Parliament applicable I think
to this case. It orders an inquiry as to whether there are
circumstances indicative of a determination to destroylife, or
whether the purpose has been that only of concealment of
birth. There may be circumstances which indicate in some
measure that the woman charged is the cause of the death
of the child by some act of hers, but in order to bring her
under the operation of the law on the charge of murder, it
must be proved that that death was wilfully intended, and
caused by some wilful mt. If a woman delivers herself of a
child, and by secret burying endeavours to conceal the fact of
the birth, she is liable to imprisonment, with or without
hard labour, in any of her Majesty's gaols, for
a term not exceeding two years, and thus you
will be enabled by the discretionary powers allowed
you, where the party is indicted for murder, and
where the evidence will not carry that indictment out, to re-
turn a true bill for the concealment of the birth. I think
that that discretion may be wisely exercised in this case, for
with the exception of a trifling mark upon the bead, there is
nothing to indicate that any violence .has been used to the
infant. That mark is also simply accounted for by the :very
peculiar circumstances attending the birth; and on looking
at the depositions, it does appear to me to be the most slender
'case possible to support a charge of murder. There are also
charges in the calendar of child-stealing ; of attempts
to rob from the person ; of receiving stolen goods ; of
housebreaking ; of forgery ; of uttering counterfeit coin ;
and, in fact, crimes of all shades and character, and with
which criminal courts are but too conversant. Let us, then,
rest entirely on matters of fact. I do not think that you
require to be particularly instructed upon them. Gentlemen,
I am sure, in dismissing you to your duties, that you will
allow no unnecessary delay, at the same thee that you give
every case that grave and earnest attention it merits.
The grand jury was then dismissed, and the petit jury
sworn in.

CLERKEN WELL.-(THIS DAY.)
Mr. GREENWOOD observed, in relation to a case connected
with Spa-fields burial-ground, which was dismissed at this
CoUrt on Saturday, and which appeared in The Sun of this
morning, from a legal informality, that the technical fault
was not attributable to that Court, nor to any person con-
nected with it. The complaining parties brought the docu-
ments before the magistrate, whose duts it was to sign them,
and the parties must stand or fall by their validity or inva-
lidity. Sometimes he (the magistrate) signed some hun-
dreds of documents in a day, and it was manifestly impos-
sible that he could revise ezch, even if such were his pro-
vince, which he denied.