The Staffordshire and Potteries Examiner. — 1880-11-13 (Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, England)

THE STAFFORDSHIRE AND POTTERIES EXAMINER, NOVEMBER 13, 1880.  copy of the indictment se they had a technical difficulty. —The learned Judge You had better consult me, I think, with regard to that difficulty.—A. Juryman There is • doubt in the minde of the jory as to whether they can find him guilty on more than one count, my lord.— The learned Jadge Yes, you can do that.—After poresing the indictment for some time, the jury again proceeded to consider their verdict, and at length found the prisoner guilty on the second count of the indictment, the Foreman saying, "We find him !realty on the count of shooting to do grievous bodily harm, in order to effect hie escape from lawful apprehension.--The prisoner wee then called upon in the usual manner by the Clerk of Arraigns (Hr. Matthews), but he made no answer.— The learned Judge, addressing the prisoner, eaid : Now, I think, Charles Hand, that the jary have given a right verdict in this case. Ido not think there was not sufficient evidence to show that you intended to kill this man. I dare my you did not intend to kill him. I do not see why you should, became it would have been a nations crime, but that you would have killed him if it had been necessary for your purposes, you know I have not the elightee doubt; but that you intended to do it, I any, I doubt. To kill him would have been • wanton crime on your part. However, in this case the jury have very properly refused to find you vilify of shooting with intent to murder; but you fired at the man—you might have murdered him—and it is a piece of good fortune for yon that you have not been tried for your life. It often terminates in menslaughter where there has been a fair fight between two men, and death liss ensued: In those cases I have frequently thought it right to inflict such punishment as would only have been inflicted if the unfortunate accidents in those mans had not happened—for instance, where a man is thrown down and his skall fracturedlagainst a atone ; but I think the right punishment to be inflicted upon you should be as near as would be infl clod upon you had you been tried for your life—because you would have been hung had you killed the man, and the punishment to be inflicted on a man like you ought to be calculated on the footing that you were indifferent as to whether you took the man's life or not. Thongh yea did not take it, your intentions were those of a murderer; and it seems to me, therefore, that I am bound to inflict upon you the highest panishment the law affords—that of penal servitude for the term of your netters' life.—As the last words were uttered by the learned Judge there was considerable seileation iu Court, and the prisoner, who bore • ghastly pale and anxious look throughout, seemed quite bewildered; and having east his eyes for a moment towards towards in the galleries at the rear of the Court he was removed.—The learned Judge subsequently called Mrs. Cook before him, and, addressing her, said that for her gallant conduct in holding the prisoner by the hair of the head and assisting the policeman, he thought she, as well as Connolly and Kelsall, should have a reward of .210, and he should order that accordingly. "You did," mid his Lordship, " what you ought to do, and what every loyal sabject is bound to do— ' t the law."—Mrs. Kent afterwards reminded his Lordship that "she fetched all who were fetched" to Connolly's assistance. He remarked that if that were the case he thought he woald be justified in giving her some reward. The learned dodge ordered that she should receive a reward of £2. The woman thanked his Lordship and retired. The Court was crowded during the whole of the hearing, and great interest was mend  it;;ted in the case.