The Sun. — 1858-11-22 (London, England)

SUIT. • The Recorder said, in charging the grand jury, A considerable number of cases would be brought before them, but, when the length of time since they had last met was considered, there was not any extraordinary increase. There was one case of wilful murder to be tried, but, as the grand jury of last sessions had returned a true bill in that case, the present jury would not be troubled with it ; and it was matter of gratification that the present calendar did not contain a single charge of wilful murder. There was a charge of manslaughter against a person named William Brown, who, according to the evidence to be laid before them, had, after some difference with a fellow-workman taken up an iron instrument and struck him a blow, shortly affer which he died. It appears that the prisoner, previous to striking the blow, had been subjected to great provocation, and tbis circumstance reduced the charge to one of manslaughter, so it would be for the grand jury to say whether the blow caused the death of the unfortunate man, and whether the prisoner struck that blow. If they were satisfied that such was the case, then it would be their duty to return a true bill against him. There were two other cases of offences against the person ; one was a charge of shooting, and the other stabbing with intent, &c. It was much to be regretted that this kind of offence prevailed even to the slightest extent ; but it was satisfactory to find that these cases were .on the decrease. These were the worst charges in the calendar, and the evidence that would be laid before them would enable them to form a clear opinion as to the intention of the persons inflicting the injuries. There were other indictments of great importance in this commercial country, one of which was that against a person named Goltz, who was charged with appropriating to his own purposes certain bills of lading, which had been entrusted to him for the purpose of sale, and two others against a William Oliver for forgery and for appropriating certain shares sent to him to invest. There wore other cases to which ho thought it his duty to refer, as they wore not common here, namely the procuring the engraving of a certain plate representing a note current in a foreign country, and they would have to say whether the evidence that would be laid before them was sufficient to put the parties so charged on their trial. The last case he need refer to was that of William Roper, who was indicted for arson, and also for attempting to obtain money from a fire office by false pretences. The evidence was to the effect that after a fire had occurred at the premises occupied by the prisoner at Greenwich, during which two of his children lost their lives, ho sent in his claim to the office in which his property was insured, for the value of his policy. In the claim so sent in, it would be proved that many articles wore there charged for which were not destroyed, which the prisoner well knew, and others enumerated which wore not on the premises. It ought to be generally known that a person making a false representation to a Are office not only voided all benefits to be derived, but rendered himself subject to the criminal law With respect to the charge of arson the Grand Jury would have to determine whether the fire was accidentally caused or not, and if they were satisfied there was evidence enough to put the prisoner on his trial, it would be their duty to return a true bill against him. He did not know that there was anything which would occasion the slightest difficulty, but in the event of the assistance of the court being required, it would be most willingly given. Tho grand jury then retired to their room.