Alston Herald, and East Cumberland Advertiser. — 1875-12-04 (Alston, Cumbria, England)

SATURDAY, DECEMB  NEWCASTLE AND NORTHUMBERLAND ASSIZES.  NORTHUMBERLAND.  The business of the Assizes for the county of Northumberland was commenced at eleven o'clock on Tuesday morning, at the Moot Hall, Newcastle, before Mr Justice Denman, who was attended by the High Sheriff (J. T. Leather, Esq.) and the Under Sheriff (E. Leadbitter, Esq.) The following were sworn on the Grand Jury :—Lord Eslington, M.P., Ravensworth Castle; Sir Matthew White Ridley, Bart., Blagdon ; John Cookson, Esq., Meldon Park; Watson Askew, Esq., Pallinsburn ; S. F. Widdrington, Esq., Newton Hall; R. B. Sanderson, Esq., West Otterburn ; J. P. Osbaldeston Mitford, Esq., Mitford ; John Straker, Esq., Strigshaw Close Roue J. M. Ridley, Esq., Walwick Hull; J. G. Riddig. Esq., Felton Park; G. D. Atkinson Clark, Esq., Belford Hall; Joseph Snowball, Esq., Seaton Burn House; Joseph Laycock, Esq., Low Gosforth ; L. W. Atkinson, Esq, Newbiggen House; and Addison Potter, Esq., Heaton Hall. His Lordship said he was quite sure that the small attendance of Grand Jurymen he saw before him was not due to any slackness at all on the part of the gentry of Northumberland to discharge their duties as they ought to be discharged, but simply owing to the fact that the business to be disposed of was very small; and he might say, for himself, that the attendance he saw was sufficient for the occasion. There was, IA believed, but one bill to come before them; and it was a simple case which illustrated, as almost every case illustrated, the truth that threefourths, he supposed, of the crimes tried a:, assizee reiulted from drink. Having stated the facv of the robbery alleged to have been committed by two men named Bushby and Martin at Hexham, he said it was a small case, but it illustrated over and over again that drink win; that which furnished grand juries, judges, and petty juries with the business they had to do, so far, at all events, as crimes of violence win concerned. Having referred to the fact that ttli great changes made in the judicature of the county did not affect the criminal system, he went on to that he had been misinformed when he told them t there was only one case to come before them. II / found now that there was a ease of murder standing for inquiry, and he had understood that the bill in that case had been found at the last assizes. It was a very painful case. It was a charge of wife murder, which, of course, rendered :t still more painful. The depositions which he had before him were, so far as the details of the case were concerned, necessarily somewhat bare. At the time at which the investigation took place the prisoner (Richard Charlton) was lying wounded from a pistol shot, which he had apparently inflicted upon himself, after having shot his wife, and fired at, at. least, two other persons. That the cause of death was a pistol shot or wound, fired from a revolver held by the prisoner, he apprehended that there could be no doubt, and he thought they would consider there was a prima facie case; and whatever might be the ultimate result of such a case, it was not for them to consider, but to leave it to himself and the petty jury. He had imagined the bill was found at the last assizes. It was a mere accident, owing to the prisoner having injured himself so that he could not stand his trial at the last assizes, that this case came for trial at these assizes, and therefore this case did not detract from the observations he had made. It was a creditable thing to think that in this county only one case had occurred between the last and the present assizes, and that was the case of highway robbery to which he had alluded; and, but for that case, there would have been a total blank of offence committed from the summer assizes up to the present assizes.