The Sun. — 1865-11-16 (London, England)

THE, QUEEN V. IVINSOR.  This was the case of the woman who was convicted of murder at the last assizes at Exeter, and on whose case a writ of error is pending on the ground that the prisoner had already been tried and the jury wrongly discharged from giving a verdict. It is necessary to recall to the recollection of our readers that Winsor and another and a younger woman, named Harris, were put upon their trial in March last for the murder of an infant child of the latter. The trial began on Friday, the 17th of March, and was continued by adjournment to the Saturday. The evidence in the case was closed, and the summing up was concluded late on Saturday 'evening, and the jury retired at about a quarter to seven. They were absent until nearly twelve o'clock, and then being called into Court stated that they had not agreed and were not likely to agree, and thereupon the learned Judge (Mr. Baron Channel') said thetas the next day was Sunday he should discharge them, and they were accordingly discharged. The assizes for the next county were appointed to be opened on Monday. In our report of the case at the time there was no statement of any illness or faintness among the jury, or any actual impossibility of their continuing their deliberations, and it did not now appar that there was. They were, however, discharged, and the prisoners were remanded into custody until the next assizes, the last summer assizes, when they were again put to the bar before Mr. Justice Keating ; but the counsel for the prosecution called Harris as a witness, and the result was to convict Winsor. The counsel for Winsor objected to the continuance of the trial, urging that it had been begun at the last assizes, had been unlawfully interrupted by the discharge of the jury, and had been unlawfully put off or adjourned. The learned Judge, however, overruled the objections, and continued the trial to verdict and judgment, saying that the question must be raised by writ of error. The prisoner was sentenced to death, but, in deference to some doubt entertained by an eminent person, the Attorney General had granted his fiat for a writ of error, and accordingly a writ of error has within the last fow days been issued by leave of the Attorney General to bring the case into this court, which is the Court of Error in Crown cases from the assizes, and it is about to come on to bo argued. The Court of Error requires that the record of the proceedings at the first and second trial be returned or sent by the judges of assize to this court for the purpose of review, and, of course, the case must turn upon the terms in which the proceedings are en tered on the record.  The record having been drawn up, Mr. Folliari yesterday, on the part of the prisoner, made an application to correct the record, which he said was not correctly made up in certain particulars. One great omission was the grounds upon whichthe first jury was discharged. Their lordships consulted together, and informed the learned gentleman that he could renew the application at the next sitting of the the Court. This he accordingly did this morning, the result being that the decision in the matter was postponed until Mr. Baron Channel had been consulted.