The Sun. — 1861-04-08 (London, England)

OLD COURT.  is Day)  The April sessions of the Central Criminal Court commenced this morning before the Lord Mayor, the Sheriffs, the Recorder, and the other civic authorities. Owing to the long time that has elapsed since the last sittings of the Court, the calendar of prisoners for trial is exceedingly heavy, there being no less than 136 prisoners on the list for trial. Four charges were for assault and robbery, one fraudulent bankruptcy, two bigamy, eight burglary, twenty-six for uttering counterfeit coin, embezzlement twelve, felony one, forgery five, larceny twenty-six, larceny from the person one, larceny as a servant seventeen, manslaughter two, misdemeanour eight, murder two, rape two. Of these cases forty-eight were from London, 47 from Middlesex, 6 from Essex, 15 from Kent, and 19 from Surrey.  The Recorder, in charging the grand jury, said the number of prisoners for trial was much larger than usual, but that, no doubt, was occasioned by the length of time since the court last sat for the trial of prisoners. The first charge he would refer to was that against Wm. Frederick Knighton, who was indicted for the wilful murder of Victoria Pugh, who was pulhed one morning into the Surrey Canal. The evidence was to the effect that the voice of a female was heard crying out "Oh, don't 1" and afterwards a splash was heard. This left little doubt that the death of the unfortunate woman was caused by violence. The prisoner was connected with the matter by his having been seen quarrelling with the woman at half-past one o'clock in the morning. It was for them to say whether there was sufficient evidence to justify a true bill being returned against the accused. The other charge of wilful murder was against Ann Reid. She was charged with the wilful murder of her child. She went to her lodgings, and being taken ill, something was required from her box. She said she had lost the key, when the chest was broken open, and the body of the child was discovered with its throat cut from ear to ear. The whole of the evidence would be laid before them, and in this case also they would have to say whether or not the prisoner ought to be put upon her trial for the capital offence. The next charge was of a somewhat singular nature; it was that against Sarah Terry, who was indictel for two offences ; the first was that of aiding and :abetting in the committing murder, and the other was that of attempting to murder herself. The prisoner went to a coffee-shop in Bishopsgate-street with her brother, who was a soldier, and then poison was taken by both; the brother died, but the prisoner recovered. She said her brother took the poison, and if this was the case it was very questionable whether she was amenable to one of the charges made against her of aiding in the commission of murder. There was a char ge of manslaughter against a prisoner named George Chapman. He was driving a cart at about 12 miles an hour, and whilst in a state of intoxication he drove his horse up a street in which there was no thoroughfare, and in so doing the death of a man was caused. There was also a case of a nature that had been rather numerous of late, viz., fraudulent bankruptcy. It was an indictment against Eustace Parry, who was indicted for not surrendering to the fiat in bankruptcy. There was also two charges of rape in the calendar, and he was anxious that they should pay particular attention to these cases, because there were no chances of a conviction, public injury was inflicted by the trials taking place in open court. Of course it was very difficult in cases of this nature to procure evidence, but it was always of great importance to notice the conduct of persons who made such a charge. In the first case it appeared that the female, immediately after the offence had been committed, mentioned it to some of her relatives, and the prisoner was given into custody. In the other case the offence was alleged to have been committed on a child under 10 years of age, and the assent or non-assent of a child of such tender years was of no avail, as undoubtedly under any circumstances, if the offence had been committed, it was a very serious crime. He did not think he need call their attention to any of the other eases, but if any difficulty arose assistance would most readily be granted them.