The Press. — 1858-04-10 (London, England)

THE PRESS, APRIL 10, 1858.  Icovery in the making of gas, I must say seems to me exceedingly improbable. But be might by possibility suppose that they were only to be used in some military enterprise ; although, looking to the small number of the grenades ( not exceeding five), and the whole history of them, with which Bernard was well acquainted, you may think that he had more reason to believe that they were instruments of assassination than munitions of war. But unless the evidence, unanswered, does in your judgment make out against Bernard a prima facie case of complicity in the plot against the life of the Emperor, I think that you ought to return the indictment which will be laid before you " not a true bill," and this will put an end to all further proceedings tinder the commission. But if the evidence does in your judgment make oat a prima-facie case of complicity, I would advise you to find a " true bill," so that the trial may proceed. Such complicity may be sufficient to make the accused an accessary before the fact to the murders which, in the event, were committed ; although the deaths of the individuals who were killed were not in the contemplation of the accused when he became a party to the plot. It is laid down in our books, that " an accessary before the fact is he who, being absent at the time of the offence committed, doth yet procure, counsel, command, or abet another to commit a felony; and it seems that those who by hire, command, counsel, or conspiracy, and those who by showing an express liking, approbation, or assent to another's felonious design of committing a felony, abet and encourage him to commit it, but are so far absent when he actually commits it, that he could not be encouraged by the hopes of any immediate help or assistance from them, are accessories before the fact." As to the objection that Bernard could have had no intention that those who were killed by the explosion of the grenades should be pot to death, it may be observed that such a clues. tion can only arise when the principal does not act in strict conformity with the plans end instructions of the accesaarv. But here, if Bernard was privy to the plot, Orsini, Pierri, Gomez, and De Rudio, in throwing the grenades as they did, must be considered as having acted strictly in conformity with his plans and instructions, and he is answerable as sect ssary for the consequences. It is even laid down that " where the principal goes beyond the terms of the solicitation, yet if, in the event, the felony committed was a probable consequence of what was ordered or advised, the person giving such orders or advice will he an accessary to that felony. As if A advice B to rob C, and in robbing him B kills him, either upon resistance ni•nle or to conceal the fact ; or if A solicit B to burn the house of C, and B does it accordingly, and the flames taking hold of the house of I), that likewise is burnt : in these cases A is accessary to B both in the murder of C and in the burning of the house of D.  The grand jury then withdrew, and shortly before four o'clock returned into court, when the foreman announced that they had found true bills against Simon Bernard for the capital offence. The trial will probably commence on Monday morning.