The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-08-30 00:00:00

TRIAL OP BEAN, FOR THE ASSAULT ON HER
MAJESTY.

•
At the Criminal Court, on,ThursdaY, before LOrd Abinger,
Mr. Justice Williams, and Mr. Baron Rolfe, John William
Bean, 17, was indicted for a misdenieanor in assaulting the
Queen. Before the commencement of the trial, all the wit-
nesses were ordered out of court.
The Attorney-General briefly addressed the Jury, and
Atated the nature of the offence with which the defendant
was charged. On the 3d of July, as her Majesty was pro-
ceeding from the Palace to the Chapel Royal, the prisoner
was observed to draw a pistol and to aim it at the carriage,
and discharge it. These were the circumstances under which
the charge was made, and be apprehended that, after the
witnesses were examined, they could have very little doubt
that the prisoner was guilty of assaulting her Majesty. The
Attorney-General then went on to explain the law upon the
subject of assaults, and concluded by calling witnesses to
support the charge.
Charles Edward Dasset saw the prisoner come from the
crowd on the morning of Sunday, tbe3d of July, and present
a pistol at the carriage in which the Queea was seated, and
seized him. The brother of the last witness, Frederick
Augustus Dassett, and several other witnesses who were -at
the Mall on the occasion in question, were examined, hut
their evidence differed in no respect from the facts which
transpired on the prisoner's apprehension with which every
one is familiar.

Mr. Horry, for the prisoner, took several objections to
the wording of the indictment. The learned counsel con-
tended that if the tobacco pipe with which the pistol was
loaded was capable of doing an injury to her Majesty, the
prisoner ought to have been indicted for high treason. The
offence could not be considered legally as a mere misdemean-
our. An assault on the reigning Sovereign was always con-
sidered to amount to the crime of high treason. Her Ma-
jesty was not aware of the assault, and. therefore, he
submitted no common assault could be substantiated. He
submitted that the charge was one of high treason and not
misdemeanour ; and that, as no assault had been proved,
the prisoner was entitled to an acquittal.
The Attorney-General was about to reply, when Lord
Abinger said, the prisoner firing, or attempting to fire, a
pistol at the royal carriage, must be for the purpose of alarm-
ing and frighteninc, her Majesty, and, therefore, amounted
to an assault. The offence of high treason could not be sup-
ported, unless it was shown that the party intended or com-
passed the death of the Sovereign. He considered the in-
dictment sufficient in all respects to support the charge
against the prisoner, and, therefore, the legal objections
must be overruled. _ _ _

Mr. Horry addressed the jury for the prisoner, ridiculing
the idea that he intended any injury to the Queen, as he was
one of the most mild and least offensive of her Majesty's
subjects. He contended, that the evidence did not substan-
tiate the charge, and called two or three witnesses, one of
whom swore that the prisoner did not aim the pistol at the
carriage. Other witnesses gave the prisoner a good charac-
ter as being a mild, peaceable, and inoffensive youth.
John William Bean, the father of the prisoner, stated that
he was unable to employ an attorney to defend his son. (The
prisoner here wept bitterly.) The habits of his son were
peculiarly mild : he had never heard him express any harsh
language or expression towards the Queen, but quite the
reverse.
The Attorney-General replied. A great deal had been
said about the prisoner being a cripple, of diminutive size,
and extreme weakness. Now, he admitted all that ; but it
was proved in evidence, that he had sufficient strength to
pull a trigger, which, had the pistol exploded, might have
proved fatal. From the conduct of the prisoner himself,
both before and after the attempt, it was evident he meditated
some attack upon her Majesty. He said in his letter to his
father, that he should do something desperate, perhaps,' led
away with the idea that he should be provided for in some
such way as another individual had been.
The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, and Lord Abinger
sentenced him to eighteen months' imprisonment.
The trial lasted six hours, during which the court was ex-
cessively crowded.