The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-07-03 00:00:00

TNm AIORNING.

On the opening of the Court this morning, ilfr. Crre
troop addressed the Common Sergeant, and argued on
the part of a person named Phillips, against another
named Marks, a case relating to a conspiracy to obthin
money under false pretences. Ile contended at •ome
length, that although the accused party bad been tried
on one indictment, yet he might be detained and tried
on another connected with the same offence. There
might be only conspiracy, and yet two offences. A man-
who broke into a dwelllng-house might be tried for
burglary as well as larceny, and vice versa.
Mr. We LIVID, in reply, said that it bad been held by
Lord Ellenborough, that where there were two indict-
ments fur the same offence, if the party was acquitted of
one it would be a bar to action to the other, otherwise
the accused might be in continual jeopardy.
The COMMON SCROE ANT put an end to the discussion,
by saying that he would consult the authorities cited lot
the Learned Counsel before he gave au opinion ou a sub-
ject of so much importance.

CONSPIRACY.
IN RE BAYLEY AND THATCHER,__

Mr. PLATT addressed the Court in arrest of judgment.
The defendants had been convicted on the 2nd and 4th
Counts of the indictments framed against them for car.
ryine away goods and chattels by unlawful mean., Ito
contended that although an injury bad been stistained,
the indictment was invalid. The conspiracy and combi-
nation in question hail not been clearly proved. If lice
Commission of Bankruptcy bad been issued' before. the
alleged offence was committed it would have been clearly
indictable, but the insolvency of a person did not consti-
tute an Act t,f Bankruptcy. He concluded an argument
of great length by expressing his conviction that Cie de-
cision of the Celia would he is favour of his client..
Mr. Anommui and Mr. Currry addressed the Court
on the part of the prosecution with a view to cortirin the
verdict pronounced. .
The Cosmos SfRGF.ANT said it was extremely satis-
factory to the Court to have heard this case so ably
argued. The prisoners were acquitted on two of the
Counts, and judgment hatftbeen passed on a Count of the
other two. He (the CO.MAION SERGEANT) thought that
Persons uniting with intention to defraud, was an offence
Indictable in a Court of Justice. He agreed with Mr.
Map that evidence in such a case, should be wat...ned
with jealousy anti mule out satisfactorily. When that
was done, the Court had done its duty. He. therofure
confirmed the Judgment.

It will be remembered, that on the trial of &mud Wil-
liam Miles. on Tuesday last, foe passing forged SI. Dotes,
of the Hank of England, the Jury, in recommencing the
prisoner to mercy, heeded a paper to the Recorder, con-
taining the grounds of such recommendation, end which
that Learned Judge, refused to allow being read! We
have taken some pains to obtain a copy of the paper in
question, and we believe the following will be found essras
Oily correct:—
The undersigned Jurors regret being compelled, by the
law aud their oaths, to return a verdict of guilty eireinat
Samuel William Miles; and beg leave strongly to recom-
mend the prisoner to mercy'—first, on accounr of his ex-
treme youth ; and, secondly, because they conceive the pu-
nishment more than adequate to the ollianee,—(Signed)—
James Hoare, James Clarke, William Welter, Rupert Kirk,
Richard dimes, John Billies, Jamie Graham, George Rae-
kie, Thomas Mercer, Robert Willis Hall Alex. Ottrry,
John Kent.

London : Edited, Printed, and Published. it the Office of
" THR STATiorke," !Wand. by R. W [LURIA..
to,whoin all Commuuirmtions, Orders,,St.c. in re-
quested to be addressed.