[List-Cumbria] Carlisle Patriot, 15 Mar 1823 - Cumberland Spring Assizes (1)

[Petra Mitchinson]

Saturday 15 Mar 1823   (p. 3, col. 2 - p. 4, col. 4)

 

CUMBERLAND SPRING ASSIZES. 

 

Mr. Justice HOLROYD arrived in Carlisle, on Saturday night, so late as half-past eight, and opened the Commission; having been
detained at Appleby longer than his Lordship expected by a pressure of business. 

 

On Sunday, Mr. Justice HOLROYD, attended by the High Sheriff, the Under Sheriff, &c. proceeded to the Cathedral, where an excellent
sermon was preached by the Rev. Mr. MORLEY. 

 

The Mayor and Corporation also attended in their robes, with their insignia of office. 

 

The Sheriff's equipage did honour to his taste and liberality. 

 

The Court was opened on Monday at eleven. The Grand Jury consisted of the following gentlemen:-Sir Philip MUSGRAVE, Bart. M. P. of
Eden Hall, Foreman; 2, Sir J. D. A. GILPIN, of Carlisle; 3, J. R. G. GRAHAM, Esq. of Crofthead; 4, Humphrey SENHOUSE, Esq. of
Nether-Hall; 5, J. D. B. DYKES, Esq. of Dovenby Hall; 6, E. HASELL, Esq. of Dalemain; 7, A. F. HUDDLESTON, Esq. of Hutton John; 8,
Wm. CRACKENTHORP, Esq. of Newbiggin Hall; 9, Milham HARTLEY, Esq. of Rose Hill; 10, John CHRISTIAN, Esq. of Unerigg Hall; 11, T. H.
GRAHAM, Esq. of Edmond Castle; 12, John PONSONBY, Esq. of Whitehaven; 13, Edw. Williams HASELL, Esq. of Dalemain; 14, Frechfield
DYKES, Esq. of Dovenby Hall; 15, Charles PARKER, Esq. of Gosforth; 16, Richard FERGUSON, Esq. of Harker Lodge; 17, James FORSTER,
Esq. of Carlisle; 18, Rowland FAWCETT, Esq. of Scaleby Castle; 19, Thomas SCOTT, Esq. of Penrith; 20, Thomas BLAMIRE, Esq. of
Carlisle; 21, G. TROUTBECK, Esq. of Blencow; 22, G. S. MOUNSEY, Esq. of Carlisle; 23. Quintin BLACKBURN, Esq. of Knorren Lodge. 

 

The King's proclamation for the discouragement of vice and immorality having been read, his Lordship charged the Grand Jury. He had
no doubt, he said, that the gentlemen to whom he had the honour of addressing himself, were fully aware of the importance of
carrying his Majesty's proclamation into effect. Gentlemen of their rank and experience could not fail of seeing the necessity of
exertion, not only for the detection, but also for the prevention of crime. The state of the calendar, indeed, shewed that this was
the fact, for there were but a few prisoners for trial. Among the cases to come before them, there were only two which required
particular notice. The principal of these was a woman charged with the murder of her child. On this charge she would most probably
he indicted; but some evidence had been given before the Coroner, which could not, in point of law, be received either by the grand
jury or in Court; he meant the declarations or observations of one person heard by another, during the absence of the prisoner. If
any such evidence were offered, it should be rejected; even the declarations of the child could not be received, unless the prisoner
was present when they were made. His Lordship mentioned this to put them on their guard, because, as he had hinted, such testimony
had been already received in this case. If it should appear that the child came to its death by ill-treatment, then they would have
to consider the nature of that treatment. If it was not a case of ill-treatment, no bill could be found. But if its death should
have arisen out of correction, the crime would assume a new character. All parents have a right to correct a child, and a master
might correct an apprentice, within the bounds of moderation; and should death be the result of this, such death was what the law
termed misadventure, and not murder; for though the consequence of the correction, yet, as there was no malice aforethought, no
original evil intention, the highest possible complexion of the offence was manslaughter. The other case was that of a man charged
with wilfully and maliciously cutting and stabbing a man with a knife; a crime that had been rendered capital by an Act of
Parliament introduced by an illustrious and very learned person now no more. But that act contained an excepting clause, by which
certain offences of this kind were excluded from the operation of the act. It perhaps would appear in the instance under
consideration, that the parties had quarrelled, that they had a conflict, and that the resort to a deadly weapon was made in the
heat of blood: should this be the fact, the case was one of manslaughter, and no bill could be found under the act alluded to; for
here also, as in the other case, malice aforethought was requisite to constitute the crime of felony. The Grand Jury would judge how
far the evidence in both instances applied to what he had said. Nothing else required remark. 

 

His Lordship invited all the gentlemen on the commission who answered to their names, to dine with him after the rising of the
Court.-The Grand Jury was discharged on Tuesday afternoon.-The assizes did not terminate till yesterday, within a few minutes of
three. Mr. Justice Holroyd will leave Carlisle for York this day. 

 

 

[to be continued] 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.cumbriafhs.com/mailman/private/list-cumbria/attachments/20230629/bd4d887f/attachment.htm>