The Sun. — 1839-04-13 (London, England)

CRIMINAL COURT-CCHIS DAY.)  I his morning being affixed for the trial of Mr. Medhurst, the avenues to the Court were crowded at an early hour I Admission to the Court was only to be obtained through the medium of tickets from the Sheriffs. The Court was crammed to suffocation immediately after the doors were opened. Mr. Justice COLERIDGE and Mr. Justice COLTMAN took their seats on the Bench at ten o'clock. . Several ladies were on the Bench. Shortly afterwards Francis Hastings Medhurst was placed at the bar, and arraigned on the Coroner's Inquisition for the wilful murder of Joseph Alsop, and also on an indictment for the crime of manslaughter. He pleaded 1 N.ot Guilty, and afterwards sat down in a chair provided for him in the dock. Sir F. Pollock and Mr. Bodkin appeared for the prosecution, and the Attorney-General and Mr. C. Phillips conducted the defence. Sir F. POLLOCK said it was his painful duty to state to the Jury briefly and fairly the circumstances which had placed the prisoner in his present unfortunate situation. He requested the Jury to pay their serious attention to the statement he was about to make. The Learned Gentle;flan then stated the facts of the case at considerable length, and took that opportunity of expressing the regret he felt that the Rev. Mr. Sturmer had not interfered to prevent the quarrel between prisoner and the deceased, by interposing his authority as tutor between those gentle'nen. Deeply lamenting that a gentleman of the prisoner's station and family should have adopted the un-English practice of stabbing—a practice which had recently increased to such an extent as to demand Legislative inafteerrence—in justice to the prisoner he would state, that the occurrence he had shown every contrition, and endeavoured by every means in his power, to alleviate the sufferings of the deceased. The Jury had heard the Coroller's inquiaition, charging the prisoner with Murder, and ttlihlieemintud.icsat, mv ent with Manslaughter, and it would be for of which offence the prisoner had been guilty. ue relatives of the deceased had instituted the prosecution for manslaughter, not from any vindictive feelings, but in the discharge of a most painful duty, they were the desirous of performing their duty to the memory of t deceased, and at the same time of doing justice °„ 11,g_ dying Opinion of the condct the prisoner is most p melancholy of occasion. He felt it it his duty to state that in his ( Sir F. Pollock's) opinion, bthe prisoner's offence amounted to manslaughter only, and Tan ad come to this opinion after a perusal of the deposiand an attentive consideration of all the circumstances _Ol the case ; and he trusted the Jury would not suffer their natural feelings of abhorrence at the use of such a weapon as that by which the deceased's death was occasioned, to induce them to enter a verdict which was not fully warranted by the evidence. He felt assured that the Jury Would give their utmost attention to the evidence on both sides, and return such a verdict as would give satisfaction to the countyy. eutiTuhne:f....ollovving witnesses were then called for the proseRdward Wm. Bunney examined by Mr.