The Sun. — 1866-12-17 (London, England)

OLD COURT.  The December sessions of the Central Criminal Court commenced this morning, before the Lord Mayor, the Sheriffs, and Aldermen. The calendar contains the names of 80 prisoners for trial. There is one charge of murder; feloniously wound ing, three ; feloniously administering poison, one ; arson, ono ; burglary, four ; forgery, three ; perjury, one ; the other cases consisting of the usual description of offences. The Recorder, in charging the grand jury, referred to the case of Emily Morris, who was charged with the murder of her newly-born infant. The law, ho said, with respect to infanticide, was in a very unsatisfactory state, and in this case he did not think there would be a conviction, as the evidence was of a very weak description, the medical man's testimony only going the length that he child had met with a very hard death. This he thought was a very odd opinion, but the reason given for it was that he found an indentation round the throat, but not of such a description as would be caused by a rope, added to which the woman had never been examined to ascertain whether she had had a child. There were two charges of manslaughter, one of which was against a son, who struck his father, who, in falling, received such injuries that his death occurred afterwards. The other was against Elizabeth Easter, for causing the death of her husband. Both had been drinking, and a quarrel ensuing the deceased received a push which caused a fall, and death followed. There was some other evidence which went to prove a fight ; but after they had examined it, it would be for them. to say whether there was a prima facie case against the prisoner. There were other cases involving the loss of life, one of wounding and the other of administering poison; in ono case a woman who had been asleep,in her son's room, who was awoke in the night by some injury,boing.inflicted on her throat, and the other was that of a woman compelling her child to swallow poison. The only other charge that he felt it necessary to refer to was the indictment against James Freeling Wilkinson, under the act of Parliament passed some years ago, wherein it was provided that whoever, being an officer of auy company, shall appropriate to his own use any of the property of the company should be guilty of misdemeanour. The prisoner was the manager of the Joint-Stock Discount Company, and he was indicted for appropriating two cheques, one for £4,000 and another for £BOO, which he reported as having been lent to Messrs. Gaffer. Messrs. Gaffer denied this, and affirmed that they were given in payment for certain shares which they had purchased from him. On giving the cheque for £4,000 prisoner stated the money wou Id be paid to him by a person who was to supply the funds for the shares, and by his direction no interest was charged, as was always done in the case of loans. The simple question for them would be whether these cheques were loans to Messrs. Gaffer ; if so, whether it was a proper application of the funds of the company; but if they were given in payment of a debt, he (the prisoner) had rendered himself amenable under the act of Parliament.