The Sun. — 1860-02-27 (London, England)

OLD COURT. (Before the Recorder.)  The March sessions of the Central Criminal Court commenced this morning before the Lord Mayor, Aldermen Sir R. Carden and Hale, and the Sheriffs. The grand jury having been sworn, The Recorder said ho was happy to inform them that the number of prisoners for trial this session was smaller than it had been for many previous sessions. The calendar contained the names of 48 persons, and the crimes charged against them were of the ordinary description. There was but one charge of murder, and the person charged was a female named Smith. The deceased was her illegitimate child, and if they should be of opinion that the child had been born alive and death had been occasioned by violence, the question for them to decide would be was the death occasioned by the prisoner. The evidence to prove the case would all be laid before there, and upon that evidence they would have to decide whether or not a true bill could be returned against her. There were two cases of manslaughter, the first of which was that of Thos. Barnard. The unfortunate deceased was engaged looking at an omnibus on the near side of the road when the prisoner's horse and cart came furiously up and passing between the curbstone and the omnibus, the man was knocked do-vn and killed. The prisoner was on the wrong aide of the road, and the evidence showed that previously to his coming xp he flogged the horse most violently. Barnard however said the horse had ran away, and at the time the unfortunate accident occurred he had no control over the animal. They would have to decide whether or not there was sufficient to justify the finding of a true bill against the prisoner. The next charge of a similar nature was that against John Fox, and death in this case occurred during the attempt of the unfortunate man to stop a fight in a public house. The case did not present any difficulty, and the question for them to decide was whether, in their opinion, the evidence sustained the charge against the prisoner. There was a serious charge against a prisoner named William Downes, of febniously assaulting Clara Mary Ann Langlois and carnally knowing and abusing her, and also for unlawfully taking the said Clara Langlois out of the possession of her parents, she being under the age of 16. The evidence, as was usually the case in charges of this description, rested entirely upon that of the girl herself and the medical man, and it would be for them to say whether a prima feels case had been made out arainst the prisoner. I gul alleged that the prisoner effected his purpose whilst she was in a state of insensibility, produced by some narcotic introduced into some drink the prisoner had given her. With respect to the latter part of the charge, it was not necessary, in order to enable them to return a true bill against the prisoner, that the girl should be in the actual possession of the parents ; because in this case the prisoner met the girl in the street, while she was engaged on the business of her parents, and persuaded her to accompany him to the theatre, and after that induced her to go to a place with him, where he falsely represented she would meet her uncle and aunt. If from the evidence they should be satis • fled that the girl was under the age of 16, and was induced by the prisoner to leave her home, it would be their duty to return a true bill against him. There was nothing that he thought called for any remark, but in the event of any assistance being required that aid would be most readily granted by the court. The grand jury then retired, and in a short time returned into court with several true bills, and the trials proceeded.