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

THE KINGSWOOD MURDER.  The trial of Johann Charles Franz, 24, the German who was charged with the wilful murder of Martha Halliday, was resumed at 9 o'clock yesterday morning. Mr. Sergeant Ballantine, specially retained, with Mr. Robinson, again appeared for the prosecution ; the Hon. G. Denman, Q.C., with Mr. W. Best, was counsel for the prisoner. Mr. Denman proceeded to address the jury for the defence in a most powerful and eloquent speech, which occupied. rather more than four hours in.the delivery. He said that it had been truly stated by his learned friend Sergeant Ballantine that the case against the prisoner rested entirely upon what was called circumstantial evidence ; but, while he should not attempt to deny that in many cases evidence of this character was the most satisfactory that could be laid before a jury, still he could not subscribe to theobservation of his learned friend that it was sufficient to show that all the facts which were brought forward were consistent with the guilt of the prisoner, but thought that it was necessary also to show that they were inconsistent with his innocence—and he believed he should be able to satisfy them that this was not the case in reference to the present charge. He then observed that it appeared the prisoner had endeavoured to gain a livelihood by his labour, that he was not a man of bad character, and he did not therefore appear to be the sort of a man who was likely to commit a crime of this dreadful description, and the principal evidence against him appeared to be that he was seen in the neighbourhood of the place where the crime was committed in company with another man ; but there was nothing whatever to show that he was ever in the house or near it, except from the pocketbook and the papers that were contained in it, and he submitted that there was nothing in the case to show that the statement of the prisoner that he had been robbed of this pocketbook was not true, and it appeared to him that there were many facts in the case which tended to show that it was so. The learned counsel then proceeded with great feeling and earnestness to call the attention of the jury to the destitute and helpless condition of the prisoner, who, he said, was not only deeply steeped in poverty, but entirely ignorant of our language, and consequently unable to give any of the necessary instructions for his defence, and who, but for the humanity of the Saxon Embassy, would have been altogether without legal assistance to answer the dreadful charge made against him. He then went on to comment upon the evidence which had been adduced in support of the prosecution, and concluded by stating that although sus. picion might be created by that evidence, still it was not sufficiently cogent to justify the jury in saying upon their oaths that the prisoner was guilty of a crime for which his life must undoubtedly be forfeited.  Mr Justice Blackburn then 'proceeded to sum up the case to the jury, and went very carefully through the whole of the evidence. He observed that it certainly was a very material question for them whether it had been satisfactorily established that the prisoner was one of the men who was seen near the scene of the murder shortly before it was committed ; and, if they believed that this had been made out, they would then have to take into consideration the other circumstances of the case, and say by their verdict whether the evidence satisfied them that the prisoner was one of the parties concerned in the murder. His lordship then read through the evidence, and concluded by leaving the case in the hands of the jury. The juryretired at 5 o'clock to consider their verdict, and were absent about an hour, and upon their return into court they found the prisoner Not Guilty. It was said that when the jury retired ten of them had made up their minds to return a verdict of guilty.  The prisoner was immediately discharged from custody, and it was stated that means were afforded him by the Saxon Embassy to return at once to his native couz.t ry.  (Before \lr. justice Williams and Special Juries.) SMITH v.