The Sun. — 1866-06-11 (London, England)

OLD COURT. The June Sessions of the Central Criminal Court commenced this morning.  The calendar contains 111 cases for trial, and amongst the offences charged there are 7 for murder, manslaughter 4, burglary 16, forgery 4, wounding with intent to murder 8, the rest being of the orderly description. The Recorder, in addressing the Grand Jury, said he regretted that the offences which would be brought before them in the discharge of their duty would be'of a more than usually serious nature, as there were no less than seven charges of murder and four of manslaughter. Amongst the first mentioned there was the case of William Smith, who stood charged with the wilful murder of Sarah Milsom, a person who, prior to her decease, occupied the position of housekeeper to the Messrs. Bevington, wholesale leather dealers, No. 2, Cannon-street, West. The circumstances of the case are somewhat peculiar, and in order to arrive at a result they would have to be taken into consideration, mad judged of as to whether sufficient to bring home the capital charge to the prisoner. The unfortunate woman, it would be found, met with her death very shortly after 9 o'clock in the evening, when a ring was heard at the areet door bell, and the deceased went to answer it; and remaining away from her apartment a longer time than was usual, her fellow-servant went to ascertain the cause of her absence, and then discovered the unfortunate woman lying dead at the foot of the stairs. Tho learned judge then went through the circumstances of the case which led to the apprehensban of the prisoner, who was a person residing at Eton, and from a letter that was discovered amongst the papers of the deceased, it was supposed that he was the person who had the interview with the woman on the night of the murder. There were other circumstances which increased the suspicion against the prisoner, as one of the witnesses deposed to the fact that he had said to a person in Eton, on the evening of the murder, and in time to enable him to carry out his intention, that ho had forty miles to go before 11 o'clock. It also was shown in evidence that the prisoner was seen proceeding from Eton after this, so that it was probable that he was carrying out his assertion about travelling the forty miles. The next important piece of evidence was that of a person who lived next door to the Messrs. Bevington's warehouse, who, being in the street, had her attention called to Bevington's premises by the slamming' of their street-door at 10 minutes after 10 o'clock on the night of the murder, and to seeing a person walk off at a very rapid pace. Subsequently the witness picked out the prisoner from amongst a great many others, and positively identified him as the man she had seen in Cannon-street on the night of the murder. If the grand jury entertained any doubt on the evidence it would be better for them to throw out the bill ; the more particularly as the prisoner could be brought up again if additional evidence should-at any future time be discovered against him, which could not be the case supposing he stood his trial and was acquitted, as no man, by the law of England, could be placed twice 'in peril for the same offence. The next indictment adverted to was the case of Stephens, charged with the murder of his wife at Edmonton. The prisoner in this instance admitted the charge, stating it was caused through jealousy, so there would be no difficulty in the case. There were two females, named Pratt and Bennett, charged with child murder, and here the question in each case would be whether the children had been born alive, and whether the death had been caused by violence. The cases of manslaughter arose from the carelessness of those driving vehicles through the metropolis ; and with respect to the other charges they were of such a nature that no difficulty could be met with in their disposal.  The grand jury then returned to their room, and the trials in a short time commenced, the first case being devoid of interest.