The Express. — 1866-01-08 (London, England)

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.  (THIS DAY.)  •...-..  The January Milian, of this court were opened Wore the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor (Mr. Alderman Phillip!), the Common Serpent, Mr. Alderman 3. C. Lawmen, Mr. Alderman Lusk, M.P., Mr. Alderman and Sheriff Gibbons, Mr. Sheriff Figgie', the Under... Sheriffs, and the usual civic authorities. The calendar °cuisine the names of 50 prisoners, of whom 43 are males and 7 females. Of three prisoner, 13 were committed by the magistrates of the City of London, 18 from Middlesex, 1 from Fawn, 6 from Kent, and 12 from Surrey. The various offences with which the prisooers stand charged may thus be summarised :—Barglary, 5 ; uttering counterfeit coin, 11; emberelement, 1 ; forgery, 3 ; shopbreaking and larceny, 4 ; lemony as a earvent, 5 ; larceny from the person, 2 ; manslaughter, 2 ; minders's, nour, 3 ; feloniously receiving stolen goods, 1 ; robbery, 2 feloniously shooting at with intent to murder, 1; and feloniously wounding, 3. The grand jury (of whom George Lewis, Esq., was chosen foreman), having been sworn, The Common Swim* as Deputy-Recorder (eating in the absence of Russell Gurney, Esq., the Recorder being shame on a special mission to Jamaica), proceeded to charge them. The learned Common Salami congratulated the gentlemen he addressed on the comparative lightness of the oileeder. Only three weeks bad elapsed since the last sessions of the court, but still the number of cams to be disposed of was comparatively Ins than at the corresponding amnion of the past year, and these included several which had been re. mended from the lest sitting of the court. He was happy to state that there were only two cases involving the lose of human life, but these did not present any feature of malice prpmes, or in other words to amount to the crime of wilful murder. but to the lease: crime of manslaughter. The first of thee* was the case of a parson of the name of Moss, which unhappily appeared to have originated in a yobbo-house row, in which the prisoner sod the deceased were both the worse for liquor. A fall ensued, and the cause of death was attibuted to extrwvasation of blood on the brain, caused by the violence used towards the deceased by the prisoner. If the grand jury were of opinion that in the absence of any justification there was a prima facie case for further investigation they would return a true bill. The next Me was that of a son charged with the manslaughter of his father, and this arose also from the indulgence in drink. Both father and eon cense home the worse for liquor, a quarrel mined, in which the father struck the son several times, and at last the accused struck the deceased, who fall with his side against a table, and died from the injuries he thus sustained, It would be for the grand jury to say whether the provoostion the II& cased had received formed a legal justification for his acting in his self-defence. The next case to which he (the Common fierjeent) thought it necessary to advert was that of a foreigner named Elie Feriae, charged with feloniously wounding a foreign gentleman of the name of Dornbusch, with intent to murder him. It would appear that the Crter had been wlaid by the prisoner, while the was progressing along a dark passage to his office* in Gresham House, City, when the prisoners, who had several spears secured round his body, inflicted on the prosecutor no less than twelve fearful stabs in different parts of the body, the point being turned by a diary and some papers which the prosecutor was carrying in the breast pocket of his overeat. When apprehended on the charge the prisoner declared that his intent was to murder the prosecutor. Under these circumstances the grand jury would be of opinion that this ease should undergo further investigation. There was no other use to which he thought it n to advert, and therefore he dismissed the grand jury to the discharge of their duties. The grand jury then withdrew.