The Sun. — 1826-01-05 (London, England)

HULLOCK. The Grand Jury having ignored a bill of indictment against Lieut. MILLET T of his Majesty's ship Ramillies, for the wilful murder of Robert Carpenter, at Lydd, on the 11th of August, by shooting him with a pistol, the Lieutenant (who had been admitted to bail, and now surrendered) remained to be tried upon the Coroner's inquisition. Mr. Baron Ilut.t.ocK intimated that he had great diffuulty in putting the defendant upon his trial, in consequence' of so objection apparent on the face of the Coßener's The inquisition alleged that the deceased came by his death consequence of the act of " Millet!, Lieutenant on board his Majesty's ship Ramillies," without giving the Lieutenant his Christian name, or even averrieng that the Ramillies was within the body of the county. Unless this objection could be removed, he thought he ought not to array the defendant. Mr. ADOLPHUS and Mr. 14 arISHAM, for the prosecution, submitted that there was sufficient certainty in the description of the defendant to put him on his trial. Every intendment must be made in favour of the Coroner's inquisition, Whicb, though traversable, was in the nature of judicial record. It was impossible for the Coroner, perhaps, to ascertain the Christian name of the party accused. Here was certainly enough; and it was for the defendant to show that he was not the party Intended. Suppose a prisoner, upon being examined before the Coroner, or a Magistrate, refused to give his Christian name, it would be sufficient to describe him as a person whose name was unknown. Suppose the defendant to be tried and acquitted on, this inquisition, and should afterwards be indicted, he luilfhl plead such acquittal in bar of indictment. Mr. Sergeant ONSLOW and Mr. Kl•rox, for the defendant, were stopped by Mr. Baron 11 ULLocK., who was clearly of opinion, that the description of the prisoner was too uncertain to justify him permitting the trial to proceed. It would have been vertessl to ascertain the defendant's Christian name. This was not like the case where a party refuses to give his name ; for fn sack. cases the refusal and the identity of the accused might be MAO matter of averninent and evidence. Litre there was no refit's' : of that kind suggested, and therefore there was no satisfacterf answer to the objection ; without adverting to any other obje Lions pttiauoriu:gni owttaltisoe record,ordered re(ttrieder ed i ontt o wbtaheskastuitriu:eiesani:tioton.say, that the.. The ur:d the defend• ant was discharged. Before Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE Win. Russell was indicted for stealing, at Teston, on ohe Ilth Nov., a pint of ale, value twopence, the pro:petty ot Right lion. Lord Barham, a Nobleman distinguished ill "" zeal in the propagation of Christian knowledge. Thoprisoner had been occasionally employed to brew beet. Lord Barhum's house. He had been intrusted with the key the cellar. Suspicion being entertained that he made free the beer, he was watched by his Lordship's butler on the 11th November, and was taken in the act of drawing a pint of ale.'"'After this he was allowed to remain in the house until the 14th when he went away. lie was taken up on the 17th, and on Of: 28th he was committed for trial. On cross-ezarnination, it appeared that the Noble proseettat had been described by a wrong Christian name ; wheel: the Learned Judge directed an acquittal. Verdict-1 "• Guilt J. Cornelius Fitzgerald was indicted for stealing the dead bat_ of Elizabeth Kaye from the church.yard of East Grinstead,"" the tint of December. The prisoner being also indicted for a felony, in see:llo44, coffin from the same church-yard, he, by the advice of hisCo6°:, sel, pleaded guilty to the misdemeanour, and no evidence v.!. offered in support of the charge of felony. lie was sentenced'', six months' imprisonment. [The Calendar contains about 190 commitments.]