The Sun. — 1858-10-25 (London, England)

CRIMINAL COURT.--(THIS DAY.)  OLD COURT.  The October sessions of the Central Criminal Court commenced this morning before the Lord Mayor, Sir R. W. Carden ; Aldermen Sir G. Carroll, Phillips, Lawrence, Hale (Sheriff), Sheriff Conder, the Undersheziffs, the Recorder, and the other civic authorities.  The Recorder, in charging the grand jury, said the cases that would come before them this session were fewer in number than was usually the case, and, generally speaking, would offer no difficulty. Isaac Harmond was indicted for the wilful murder of a woman who had been living with him as his wife, and the evidence being different from that usually given in such cases, was the reason of its being mentioned. The evidence was to the effect that the prisoner had been heard in the next room to use bad language, and in a short time after the woman was seen to fall from the window. The question the grand jury had to decide was, whether Harmond threw her therefrom. There was no person present at the time, and all they would have to rely upon was the declaration of the woman previous to her death. The law allowed such declaration to be received in evidence, supposing it was made in the contemplation and prospect of death, although it was not made under the obligation of an oath, and the jury would have to determine whether, at the time the woman made the declaration inculpating Hannond, she believed herself to be in a dying state. There was one case of manslaughter of a very painful description. It was that of a man named William Hill, and the person whose death had been occasioned was his mother. From the evidence it appeared that both parties were in a state of intoxication. It was supposed that death had not occurred from the blow that was struck, but from the injury received in a fall in consequence of it. Had he contemplated her death, he would have been liable to have been indicted for wilful murder. Another indictment to which he wished to direct their attention was that of John Owens, who stood charged with inciting and counselling his daughter to commit suicide. The evidence was not of a very strong description. The:only person who was present was in such a state of intoxication that he was totally unable to give any clear account of the case ; but persons who were in the adjoining room said they heard all that passed. One of the witnesses stated that he heard the man say that "he'd rather die than be subject to the cruelties of his daughter," and then left the house for a short time. He returned with some poison, and, on entering his apartment, told his daughter he would take it, when she replied, " You're not game enough." A struggle ensued, in the course of which the girl took up the cup, and saying " Here's luck," drank off its contents, from the effects of which sho died. The evidence, as it at present stood, seemed rather weak, but it would be for them to say whether there was sufficient to justify the returning a true bill against the man. There was another case which he would just mention—it was that of John Aimes, who was indicted for unlawfully taking away a girl under 16 years of age from the custody of her father. The question for their consideration was not whether the girl gave her consent—for the law very properly directed that where a girl of the tender ago of 16 was taken away without the consent of her father, a person committing such an offence should be subject to a severe punishment—but whether the girl was taken away without the consent of her father. There were also in .the calendar several offences against the bankruptcy laws, a crime which he thought appeared to be on the increase. One of the persons indicted, named Zoeller, was charged with en making fraudulent entries to defraud his creditors. By wtehree evidence to be given it appeared that certain mad© pbaupteronoef which filitehhe witnesses, in his i n a book relating to deposition,stated y eatrhaltBstshe; the book was made was not manufactured until 1857. Another person, named Lewis, was indicted for making away with his books for the purpose of defrauding his creditors, and he thought it of importance that it should be generally known in this commercial country, that any person convicted of such an offence was liable to three years' imprisonment. The last case to which be should allude was that charging two persons with attempting to procure a machine for the manufacture of counterfeit coin of a foreign nation. The learned Recorder having explained the law upon the point, directed the grand jury to proceed to their duties, Dad, in  the event of any unforeseen difficulty arising, the court would g,raiit its wit.ing assistance. The jury then kit the court.  N—W