The Sun. — 1838-01-01 (London, England)

CRIMINAL COURT-(TIIIS DAY.)  This morning these sessions commenced before the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor, the Recorder, Alderman Sir C. Marshall, Mr. Alderman Harmer, and the Sheriffs, &c.  The Grand Jury, whose foreman was Mr. Richirds, late M.P. for Kuaresborough, has e been impannelled, the Recorder addressed them as follows :—Gentlemen, the in'erval which has occurred between the late and present se?sions has been so short, not exceed;ng a fortnight, that the calendar presents only a proportionably small number of prio.iCrB—about 150; but that number will, in all probability, be increased, before your labours are concluded, to 200. Tee calendar, however, contains several offences of great magnitude. There is one charge of murder, four of manslaughter, and many cases of larceny, and stealing by servants. As far as I can collect from the depositions there is nothing in these eases involving difficulty, in matters of law, except the charge of murder, upon which I will make a few observations. As a general proposition of law, malice is inferred on the rat- y who has occasioned the death of another from the very fact of the killing, and, in sirictness, the law expects the alleged necessity, accidents, or infirmity, which justify, excuse, or extenuate the act of killing, to be proved by the prisoner, unless they arc proved by the evidence adduced on the part of prosecution. But in the present case you will have to consider whether the prisoner did or did not earnmil the ,ct of killing with a premed:tatel purpose of mischief against the deceased. It would not be right to go minutely into all the circumstances disclosed by the depositions. I may, however, generally advertise you of the fact that the death is represented to have occurred from the use of a knife; and that when the prisoner occasioned the death, he had received from the deceased a previous provocation. It  also appears that he deceased striking a female in his company was the immediate provocation which induced the prisoner to commit the act. If you shall find that the prisoner uttered vindictive expressions against the deceased before the quarrel occurred in which the death took place, and that he carried the knife about his person for some time previous, it will be for you to say, whether the weapon was so retained for the purpose Of using it, and whether the quarrel was of his seeking, as a pretence for thus using it. If it should appear on the other hand, that the blow was inflicted through the infirmity of human nature, with no previous intention to use the deadly weapon suddenly, and without premeditation, the crime will then be reduced to manslaughter. Should the facts, however, on which you would feel inclined to come to this decision be surrounded with difficulty and doubt, it will be your duty to put the case in a train of inquiry before the higher Court. After cautioning the Grand Jury, as he had done on former occasions,against too hastiliy ignoring bills because the first two or three witnesses for the prosecution did not fully prove the case, the Learned Recorder dismissed them to the discharge of their important duties, which he was sure would be equally beneficial to the country and honourable to themselves.  The Petit Jury was then called over. One individual, who stated himself to be a licensed Dissenting preacher, begged to be excused from serving. The RECORDER asked him if he was in business, and he redlied in the negative. He had sold his house and shop, but worked a little in private to supyort hiinself, as he had no stipend. he RECORDER feared that his case did not come within the rule of exceptions ; hut if they could dipense with him, they would, as a favour, but not a matter of right, discharge him from attendance.