The Blandford and Wimbourne Telegram. — 1882-06-30 (Blandford, Dorset, England)

FIRST COURT-WEDNESDAY.  Befo e J. Floyer, Eery., M.P. (Depaty-Chairman), aud other niazistrates. .  The following gentlemen were sworn on the Grand Jury :—Messre. 11. Fook+, Winterbolne Whitchurch (foreman) ;J. Barnes, jun., J. Bradford (Code Castle), J. H. Dalwood (Sto,rb,rne), M. Dunning, \V. F. Giffin], (Stratton), F. Hellier (Bridp‘wl), J. Hansford (Bridp )rt), F. Jacob ( Dorchester), A. Knight (Dorches'er), S. Lawrence, J. Liddon (Yetminbter), C. Lanning, C. Pope, A. Purkiss, W. Porter (Blandford), J. H. ityle (Melcomhe llegis), J. Swaffield, S. Seymour, It Spriggs, Andrew Tuffin, A. T. TippeV, K. Tuffin, T. H. Wiliarns, Willistu Wareham.  One of the jurymen, a Mr. Read, of Bridp irt, objected to be sworn. The difficulty, however, was easily surmounted by discharging that gentleman. The CHAIRMNN, in charging the grand jury, said the calendar contained the names of 18 prisoners for their censideration—a larger number than they gene) ally had at the sessions at this period of the year. Last year at this periol they only had four cases. It was true two years ago, in 1880, they had a considerable increase, but, as their foreman would no cleuht remember, this was caused by their having to deal with a peculiar class of offence, which they did not very if en see in this court—viz., a large number of rioters at the electims of Dorchester and Shaftesburv, which increased and added to the offences very much. With that exception the number of prisoners now for trial was an unusually large one for the Midsummer Sessions. The Chief C rust &Ede in his report yesterday informed the Court that the number of prisoners apprehended for offences in the past quarter was about the same as in the c rresponding period of last year; but he retuarke I very justly that although the number of offences committed in the quarter had not been larger, their character was of a much more serious description than they usually found committed in this county. They had not those more serious offences to deal with to-day—they stood over for trial by Her Majesty's judges at the coming Assizes, and probably, as many of them were aware, there were two prisoners for trial upon the most serious of all offences—namely, that of murder. Happily, they had not to denl with that ti-day, but it gave rather an unfavourable view of the state of crime in the county. Having remarked on the arrangement of the calendar, which was an improvement on the last, but which, even now omitted the information they used to be afforded ai to the locality of the prisoner, the Deputy-Chairman proceeded t 3 remark on several of the cases, more particularly the obtaining meney by false pretences at Weymouth. He explained that although the p:isouer was to be tried there, he had never been in the county. Still, it had been decided upon appeal thet the delivery of a letter containing the fal,.e pretences by the Post-office authorities was a delivery by the p isener, the Post-office being considered the agent of the pis tier for that purpose, therefore the deliverance of the letter by the Postoffice on b,•half of the prisoner to the trAdesinan at _Weymouth, which induced them to part with their money, was a delivery and an act done by the prisoner. Agnin, he pointed out it made no m derid ifference whether the intent t ) def awl or the actual fraud was carried ont noon the debtor, or upon the tradesmen, who sh null hwe received the money. After a few other remarks, the Deputy-Chairman dismissed the Grand Joy to their room.