The Sun. — 1849-03-14 (London, England)

WIGIITMAN.) Charles AL&ton, a boy, twelve years old, was indicted for feloniously and maliciously setting fire to a stack of straw, the property of James Russell, with intent to injure him.  The prosecutor in this case is a farmer at Horton Kirby, and it appeared that the fire in question occurred on the 6th November in last year, the day when it will be remembered, owing to the sth falling on a Sunday, the commemoration. of, the Gunpowder Plot was celebrated. The only actual evidence against the prisoner was that he was seen near the place about the time the fire broke out,  Sir Percival Dyke, the magistrate who committed the prisoner, proved his signature to the depositions, and also that be gave the prisoner the formal caution required by the late Act of Parliament before he made a statement which was then given in evidence. Mr. Russell, the prosecutor, proved that 80 loads of straw were consumed by the fire.  In cross-examination he said that, when the prisoner was under examination upon the charge, some questions were put to him by the magistrate, and among others he was asked if he had not set the stack on fire ? Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN asked the witness if he was sure the magistrate put such a question as this to the prisoner? The witness replied that he forgot whether the magistrate put the question, but he certainly was questioned while under examination. The prisoner's statement was then read. It was to the following effect :—I did it with a lucifei. I got the lucifer from home. I don't know why I did it. I am sorry I did it. I never thought of doing it before that morning. I carry lucifers because the men sometimes want one to light their pipes with. I struck the lucifer against the quick, and set fire to the stack underneath. Mr. ADDISON, in addressing the jury for the prisoner, upon the proceeding that had a child like the prisoner, proceeded which he said was quite repugnant to the spirit of English law. The Learned Counsel concluded his address by cneaeddoed adopted octom qumeeantitoning calling upon the jury, under these circumstances, to dismiss the statement in question entirely from their mind, and as their was nothing else against the prisoner, they would then feel it their duty to return a verdict of Not Guilty. Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN, in summing up, said, with regard to the observations that had been made as to the prisoner being questioned while under examination, undoubtedly if a magistrate were to put questions to such a child to induce him to make a confession, it would not only be a dereliction of duty in that capacity, but also as a man; but he must remark that there was no evidence of the magistrate having so acted, and, on the contrary, the witness said he could not recollect who put the questions. The Learned Judge then explained to the jury that a person under seven year 3 of ago was altogether irresponsible, but between that age and fourteen a person might convicted of this or any other offence, if the jury should be of opinion that he possessed what the law described as a mischievous discretion, or that he had understanding enough to be aware of the mischievous nature of the act he was committing, and its dangerous consequences. Tho jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict of Not Guilty, and the Learned Judge gave directions that the prisoner should be at once placed in the charge of his father, who was in waiting to receive him. Alfred Humphrey, 18, and Idea Ellis, 18, were convicted of feloniously setting fire to a barn, containing a large quantity of wheat, oat', and barley, amounting in value to more than 5001•, the property of Edward Monekton, and were sentenced to bo transported for fifteen years.  NORFOLK ClRCUlT:—Bedford. The assizes terminated here with the conviction of Thomas Docherill, George Clerk, and ttilliam Clerk, for a murderous assault on two policemen who endeavoured to take them on a charge of felony. Dockerill was transported for life, and the two others for fifteen years each. Mr. Baron RoLrJ directed the attention of the jury with great care to the possibility of the witnesses being deceived as to the person of the prisoner William, and as it is understood that the two others have confessed and exonerated him. his case will be further considered.