The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle. — 1884-11-29 (Stourbridge, West Midlands, England)

THE STOURBRIDGE OBSERVER.  THE MIGNONETTE CASE.  The case of "The Queisn v. Dudley and Stephers," which was an indictmant for murder tried before Baron Haddleston at the last Exeter Assizes, stood in the paper on Tuesday morning in Court No. 2 of the High Court of Justice to be mentioned. In the prosecution known as the "Mignonette Case" there was a special finding by the jury, and the learned judge adjourned the matter to the High Court of Justice, with a view to the opinion of the judges being taken as to whether the facts so found amounted or not to the crime of murder.  The Attorney-General, Mr, Charles, Q.C., and Mr. Danekwerts, and Mr. Charles Mathews appeared for the Crown; Mr. Collins, Q.C., and Mr. Henry Clark for the defendants.  The Attorney-General said his lordship had adjourned the Assizes till to-day in that court, and he had to apply for a further adjournment. A question of some aifficulty might arise as to dealing with the case there and as to the machinery for the purpose. Section 16 of the Judicature Act 1873 transferred to the High Court of Justice all the jurisdiction of the courts created by Commissions of Assize of Oyer and Terminer and of Goal Delivery, and all the judges were included. Then, under section 39, the Commissioners when engaged in the exercise of their jurisdiction were deemed to constitute a Court of the High Court of Justice, and they had power to adjourn cases to the High Court of Justice. Again the 26th section gave power to the Judges of the High Court and the Commissioners aforesaid to sit and act at any time and any place for the transactions of any business, or for the discharge of any duty within their jurisdiction. And in section 100 " cause " included any criminal proceedinc, by the Crown." Under the circumstances the question had arisen whether the procedure which had hitherto prevailed, of bringing up the indictment and special verdict of the jury by writ of certiorari should be adopted or whether there should be a sitting as an adjournment of the Assize Court. It seemed to him and his learned friends that the Assize Court held at Exeter having been adjourned to that place, he should ask his lordship to sit as a Commissioner under the original Commission for the assizes; and inasmuch as all the other judges were equally Commissioners under that Commission ,he presumed his lordship would seek the assistance of the other judges to hear the case. His lordship had , jurisdiction to adjourn the assize both as to time and place, and the Judges would be exactly in the same position as if they were sitting under a Commission of Assize of Oyer and Terminer, and of Goal Delivery, and could give judgment on the special finding of the jury. Therefore his application was that there should be a further adjournment of the assizes, and a day fixed, convenient for the judges, and notice given to the defendants to appear to r:,..eive judgment. If, however, the officers of the Crown Office thought it better to move for a certiorari, there perhaps would be no objection to that course.  Baron Huddleston, after some further discussion as to the bearing upon the case of the provision as to Crown cases reserved, said he had spoken to the Lord Chief Justice on the subject, and he thought that he (Baron Huddleston) should sit as part of his duty, and he (the Lord Chief Justice) himself would sit, and he would secure the attendance of three other judges. The Attorney-General asked for an adjournment for a week.  Mr. Collins, on the part of the defendants, asked to have a copy of the shorthand notes and a copy of the special finding. The Attorney-General said whatever was right should be done.  Mr. Collins said a week was too short a time, as he bad no materials before him.  Ultimately the case was formally adjourned until Thursday, December 4th.