The Sun. — 1851-04-01 (London, England)

THE FRIMLEY MURDER. (THIS DA Y.)  RESUMPTION O 1 THE TRIAL. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)  Mr. BALLANTIN IL proceeded to address the jury. He said that whatever opinion the jury might at present entertain, with reference to the evidence which had been submitted, lthey would readily admit that he had a most difficult duty to perform. In a case like this, which had been so fully canvassed, and which had created so great a sensation throughout the country, they no doubt had frequently made remarks upon it, not knowing that they would be called upon to discharge the painful duty they had to perform. He should now proceed to direct their attention to details, and he felt convinced that he should satisfy them, that Levi Harwood, for whom he appeared, was not guilty of that crime which would call upon them to hand him over to execution. He should show in the first place generally how the evidence stood independently of that given by the accomplice, and then would show how that evidence added to the facts of the case. It was clear that on :the night in question Mr. Hollest's house was broken into, and that the burglars cruelly and barbarously murdered Mr. Holiest. He contended that Mrs. Hollest's statement that Levi Harwood was the man who attacked her and held the pistol to her head, was open to objection, inasmuch as he might have murdered her if he had pleased; but instead of that he ran away. Having gone into the details of the evidence as far as related to Levi Harwood, and contended that it was entirely insufficient to convict him, the Learned Counsel said he had no doubt of being able to prove that the approver Smith was the real murderer, and that he had committed perjury in the case now before them. He proceeded to contend that Smit'a's evidence was a tissue of falsehoods, and went through a lengthened and careful analysis of it, comparing one portion with another, and comparing his evidence with that of the other witnesses. It would be a fearful thing to save that man and to let loose so great a criminal upon the world, while punishing men who had been the unhappy victims of his suggestions. He denied that Levi Horwood was at the place at all, and even if he were there, that he was not the murderer of Mr. Holiest. eMr. CHARNOCK addressed the jury on the part of the prisoner Jones. He contended that his client had not been fairly treated by the magistrates, who, during the preliminary investigation, had been deprived of the advantage of legal advice. He questioned whether it was right to offer rewards, which made men overstep the bounds of prudence and justice. He drew attention to the circumstances which weighed against Jones, dwelling particularly on the fact of the penny tokon being found in his possession. On this point he did not think the evidence was sufficiently strong to commit the prisoner, the coin being a very common one, and the witnesses being unable to speak positively as to its identity. (The Learned Counsel had a large number of similar tokens on the table, but was prevented from handing them to the jury for inspection, inasmuch as if he had done so, he would have conceded to the counsel for the prosecution a right of reply.) Mr. Woor.Lxrr also addressed the jury on behalf of the pris ,ner Samuel Harwood, contending that there was no real evidence against him. The Learned JuDetz then proceeded to aunt up the evidence. The jury had not returned their verdict when our report left.