No. 71, NEW SERIES.-Vol. II. No. 1010, OLD SERIES.-Vol. XX. SPECIAL NOTICE. MAY 17, 1856. CLERICAL, MEDICAL, AND GENERAL LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY. 99, Great Russell-street, Bloomsbury, London, SIXTH DIVISION OF PROFITS. All Persons who assure on the Participating Scale before the 30th June will be entitled to a SHARE of the SIXTH BONUS, which will be declared in January, 1857. Proposals should be forwarded to the Office before the 1st June next. The Thirty-first Annual Report can now be obtained (free) of the Society's Agents, or of GEO. H. PINCKARD, Resident Secretary. The usual commission allowed to Solicitors. THE RUGELEY POISONING CASES. The fallest and most authentic REPORT of the TRIAL of WILLIAM PRICE 18. SCOTT'S COSTS IN COMMON LAW, CONVEYANCING, &c. BILLS of COSTS in the SUPERIOR COURTS of COMMON LAW, also in the Crown Office and the Queen's Remembrancer's Office, and in Bankruptcy, Insolvency, Conveyancing, Criminal Prosecutions on Circuit and at Sessions, &c.; including Costs of Interlocutory Rules and Orders under the Common-law Procedure Acts, 1852 and 1854, and Bills of Exchange Act, 1855. By JOHN SCOTT, Esq., Barrister at Law. Stevens & Norton, 26, Bell-yard, Lincoln's-inn. New Edition. This day, Tenth Edition, 328., Re-written, ABBOTT'S LAW of MERCHANT SHIPS and SEA By WILLIAM SHEE, Serjeant at Law. London: Shaw & Sons, Fetter-lane; Benning & Co., Fleet-street. THE NEWS OF THE WORLD, Weekly Newspaper. CHANCERY FOR M S.-Prepared and sold by Price-Unstamped, 2d.; Stamped for Post, 3d. Sale, upwards of 155,000 Copies weekly. Its circulation is the largest in the world, and being read by all classes, it offers immense advantages to Advertisers. The unprecedented success of the NEWS OF THE WORLD is proved from its maintaining so long its high character for literary excellence, and the best and latest intelligence of every important event during the week. Offices, 19, Exeter-street, Strand. In a few days, in 1 vol. cloth, JAMES SULLIVAN, 22, CHANCERY LANE. AFFIDAVIT. Of Creditor's Claim Of Service of Interrogatories Of Service of Petition Of Service of Spa. to hear Judg ment PETITION AND ORDER (continued). To Remove Distringas on Stock To Set Down Cause for Further To Set Down Demurrer DART'S VENDORS AND PURCHASERS. To obtain Distringas to Restrain To Tax a Conveyancing Bill Third Edition. Stevens & Norton. This day is published, in 12mo., price 10s. 6d. cloth, the Sale of Stock Of Service of Administration Sum mons Of Service of Bill or Claim TREVOR on the TAXES on SUCCESSION. A Digest Of Service of Summons originating of the Statutes and Cases relating to the Probate, Legacy, and Succession Duties. With Practical Observations and Official Forms. By C. C. TREVOR, Esq., Barrister at Law. A SUMMARY of the LAW relating to PLEADING and FOURTH EDITION OF PALEY ON SUMMARY CONVICTIONS. PALEY on the LAW and PRACTICE of SUMMARY CONVICTIONS by JUSTICES of the PEACE. Including Proceedings preliminary and subsequent to Convictions, and under the 18 & 19 Vict. c. 126, relating to Larceny, &c. With Practical Forms and Precedents of Convictions. The Fourth Edition. By H. T. J. MACNAMARA, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn, Barrister at Law. H. Sweet, 3 Chancery-lane; V. & R. Stevens & G. S. Norton, 26, Bellyard; W. Maxwell, 32, Bell-yard; Butterworths, 7, Fleet-street. Just published, in 1 thick vol. 12mo., price 17. 10s., Executors' Account Sheets Notice to attend Examiner PETITION AND ORDER. ARCHBOLD'S BANKRUPT LAW, by FLATHER. To be at Liberty to Attend THE METROPOLIS LOCAL MANAGEMENT ACT, To Dismiss Bill 1855.-A complete Edition of this Act; with an Introduction, copious Practical Notes, and a full Double Index. Also, a Table of Qualifications for Voters, Vestrymen, Auditors, &c. By TOULMIN SMITH, of Lincoln's-inn, Esq., Barrister at Law, Author of "The Parish: its Obligations and Powers; its Officers and their Duties." London: Henry Sweet, 3, Chancery-lane; V. & R. Stevens & G. S. Norton, and W. Maxwell, Bell-yard, Lincoln's-inn, No. 71, VOL. II., NEW SERIES. To Enter Nunc pro Tune By Plaintiff to take Answer with- To Prove Documents To Refer Exceptions To Tax and Prevent Proceedings. Practice Cases, 1s. Receiver's Recognisance and Ac- Register of Lis Pendens and Copy SUMMONS AND ORDER. For Administration of an Estate To Bring in Accounts To Produce Documents on Oath For Defendant to Produce Docu- For Plaintiff to Produce Documents To Inspect To Enlarge Time for closing Evi dence To Enlarge Time to File Affidavits For further Time to Answer To Proceed with Accounts and By Purchaser for Payment of Pur. For Maintenance To Approve Purchase by Private To Confirm Sale by Private Contract To Appoint Receiver Examiner To consider sufficiency of Affidavits Request to furnish Copies Sheriff's Warrant on Attachment, &c. Sittings Papers Spa. ad Test Spa. ad Test and duees tecum Spa. ad Test and viva voce Spa. for Costs Spa. to hear Judgment Warrants to Settle Minutes SOLD BY J. SULLIVAN, 22, CHANCERY LANE. GAZETTES.-FRIDAY, May 9. BANKRUPTS. WILLIAM FORD, Chipping Lambourne, Berkshire, inn- Off. Ass. Graham; Sols. Astley, Hungerford, Berkshire; GEORGE FREDERICK OWEN, Lewisham, Kent, butcher, MEETINGS. Louis Birnstingl, Broad-street-buildings, merchant, May 20 at 1, London, last ex.-Frederick Chaffers, Old Broad-street, colonial broker, May 21 at 11, London, aud. ac.-C. Ford, Great Marlborough-street, Westminster, tailor, May 21 at 11, London, aud. ac.-David Deacon, Kilburn, butcher, May 29 at 12, London, aud. ac.-Eliza Gorton, Cleveland-st., Fitzroy-square, music smith, May 29 at half-past 12, London, aud. ac.-T. Masters, Norwood, hotel keeper, May 21 at 12, London, aud. ac.-George Dewing, Bath-street, Newgate-street, printer, May 20 at half-past 2, London, aud. ac.-G. Hamlin, Leadenhall-street, ship broker, May 20 at 2, London, aud.ac. -Frederick Fredericks, Crickhowell, Breconshire, banker, May 22 at 11, Bristol, aud. ac.; June 19 at 11, div.-Benj. Cooper, Frome Selwood, Somersetshire, clothier, May 22 at 11, Bristol, aud. ac.-Wm. Oates, Ashton-under-Lyne, Lancashire, May 20 at 12, Manchester, aud. ac.-John Moon, Manchester, cotton merchant, June 12 at 12, Manchester, aud. ac.-Wm. Randall, Manchester, calico printer, June 12 at 12, Manchester, aud. ac.-James Higham, Kearsley, Lancashire, victualler, June 12 at 12, Manchester, aud. ac. Robert Clark, Liverpool, miller, May 29 at 11, Liverpool, aud. ac.; May 30 at 11, div.-Thomas Ramsden and William Bradford Baxter, Bailiffe-bridge, Yorkshire, worsted spinners, June 9 at 11, Leeds, aud. ac. and div.-Edward Ludd, Cambridge, draper, May 30 at 11, London, div.William Thomas, Catherine-street, Strand, publisher, May 30 17 at 1, London, div.-Thomas Briggs, North Shields, Northumberland, grocer, June 4 at 12, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, fin. div.-Richard Greene, Lichfield, banker, May 31 at halfpast 11, Birmingham, div. George Newey, Birmingham, grocer, June 2 at half-past 10, Birmingham, div.—G. Kay, York, boot maker, May 30 at 11, Leeds, div. CERTIFICATES. To be allowed, unless Cause be shewn to the contrary on or before the Day of Meeting. Robert Blore, Great Russell-street, Bloomsbury, picture dealer, May 29 at 11, London.-Leonard Laidman, Chancery-lane, and Wentworth Lodge, Coborn New-road, Bow, Middlesex, stationer, May 29 at 2, London.-George Pell, Welford, Northamptonshire, scrivener, May 30 at half-past 1, London.-Henry Martin and Samuel Foot, Battersea Park Brewery, Battersea-fields, Surrey, brewers, May 30 at halfpast 1, London.-John Searle, March, Isle of Ely, Cambridgeshire, builder, May 30 at 11, London.-Mark Boyd, New Bank-buildings, London, sharebroker, June 2 at 12, London.-Benjamin Cooper, Frome Selwood, Somersetshire, clothier, June 2 at 11, Bristol.-Thomas Burnet, Blaydon, Durham, glass bottle manufacturer, June 4 at 11, Newcastle. upon-Tyne.-Wm. M'Cormick, Manchester, builder, May 30 at 1, Manchester.-John Richardson, Liverpool, timber merchant, June 2 at 12, Liverpool.-Wm. Clews, Wednesbury, Staffordshire, baker, June 12 at half-past 10, Birmingham.Morton Muir and John Whitcomb, Kidderminster, carpet manufacturers, June 12 at half-past 10, Birmingham.-John Allen Jones, Birmingham, tailor, June 12 at half-past 10, Birmingham.-Benjamin Wood, Sheffield, boiler maker, May 31 at 10, Sheffield.—Nahum Salamon, Sheffield, merchant, May 31 at 10, Sheffield. To be granted, unless an Appeal be duly entered. John Dalby, Knight's-hill, Norwood, carpenter.-William Elsam, Heyford and Bugbrook, Northamptonshire, ironstone master.-Benjamin Richardson Lawrence, Carshalton, Surrey, apothecary.-Wm. Bell Rogerson, Redcross-square, Cripplegate, mourning hatband manufacturer.-John Bennett, Hart street, Bloomsbury, artists' brush manufacturer. — George Davis, Wigmore-street, Cavendish-square, cabinet maker.— Sophia Wightwick, widow, Town Malling, Kent, carpenter.Thomas Amor, Connaught-terrace, Edgware-road, auctioneer. -Edward Charles Curtis, Stratford, West Ham, Essex, builder.-Jacob William Henry Schafer and William Henry Brown, Fenchurch-street, merchants.-Jonathan Cruse, Stapleton, Gloucestershire, victualler.-George Goodrich, Durs ley, Gloucestershire, chemist.-Henry Andrew, Tyldesley, Lancashire, licensed victualler.-William Mitchell, Henry worsted spinners.-Samuel Howarth and Noah Howarth, Mitchell, and John Mitchell, Hoarstones, Pendle, Lancashire, Radcliffe, Lancashire, dyers.-Henry Coop, Chequerbent, near West Houghton, Lancashire, silk manufacturer.-Thomas Falkingham, Knaresborough, Yorkshire, coach builder.-James Mitchell, Lane-ends, Keighley, Yorkshire, worsted spinner.George Thomas Bate, West Bromwich, Staffordshire, grocer. TUESDAY, May 13. GEORGE GREGORY, Whitechapel-road, and Church. EDWARD KEMP, Abingdon, Berkshire, grocer, May 19 Sols. at 11, and June 19 at 1, London: Off. Ass. Johnson: Ford & Lloyd, 5, Bloomsbury-square.-Pet. f. May 9. JOHN BEARNE WALKE, Newton Abbott, Devonshire, draper, May 26 and June 18 at 2, London: Off. Ass. Stansfeld; Sols. Mason & Sturt, 7, Gresham-street.-Pet. f. May 7. FREDERICK M'KINNELL and GEORGE SMITH, Liverpool and Huyton Quarry, Lancashire, manufacturers of waterproof fabrics, May 22 and June 12 at 11, Liverpool: Off. Ass. Turner; Sols. Norris & Son, Liverpool.-Pet. f. May 5. [For continuation of Gazette, see p. 227] THE JURIST. LONDON, MAY 17, 1856. COURT OF ADMIRALTY. The Queen v. Ewen.-(Merchant ship carrying illegal colours) 454 any suit, action, or proceeding, whether civil or criminal, to which he is not a party, be permitted to refuse to answer any question which is relevant and material to the matter in issue, on the ground that the answer may expose him to any penalty or forfeiture, or may otherwise criminate himself, unless the judge or other presiding officer shall be of opinion that the answer will tend to subject such witness to punishment for a felony." (Sect. 11). This section involves a question which has not yet been settled, namely, whether a witness is to be the sole judge of the criminating tendency of an answer, or whether he must SIR FITZROY KELLY has stepped into the arena, not for the first time, as a law reformer, and as a reformer in earnest, whose plans are likely to work well, and to be productive of real benefit to the community at large. Putting aside for the present his scheme for consolidating the statutes, which is the most feasible of all the suggestions yet made upon the subject, we turn to the bill introduced by him into the House of Commons for the purpose of "further amending the law touch-satisfy the judge presiding at the trial that it will have ing evidence and procedure." If this measure pass into a law, it will effect very important changes in matters of legal principle, as well as of legal practice. Thus we find that the rule of law which presumes that a wife, who commits offences in the presence of her husband, acts under his coercion, is to be repealed. (Sect. 43). It is a humane notion, though perhaps scarcely consistent with public good, that allowance should be made for the evil influence of one who stands in so near and so dominant a relation as that of husband to wife. We are not aware that it has been found to operate unduly in the administration of justice; and limited as the rule now is, we should have thought that it did not require alteration. that effect. In the former case the witness may evade inquiries which ought to be answered; in the latter he may be compelled to criminate himself in stating to the judge how the answer will have that result. We incline to the opinion that it would be more conducive to the ends of justice if the protection were altogether abolished. Important alterations are proposed as to the admissibility in evidence of confessions and statements of a privileged character. It is to be no longer necessary for a magistrate to give warning to a person charged with an indictable offence, before he makes his statement, that he has nothing to hope from any promise of favour, and nothing to fear from any threat, The bill further provides that "no witness shall, in which may have been holden out to him to induce him 3 1856. to make any admission of guilt; and no confession ten-which had escaped our notice, furnishes a direct answer dered in evidence on any trial is to be rejected on the to the question considered in our leading article of last ground that a promise or threat has been held out to week, so far as relates to the claim of a widow to take the person confessing, unless the judge is of opinion under a limitation to "heirs," and is opposed to the that the inducement was really calculated to cause an view we supported. It is impossible not to feel the untrue admission of guilt to be made. (Sects. 12, 13). greatest doubt as to the soundness of any view which is We shall not, therefore, have material statements shut opposed to that taken by so learned, able, and careful out from the consideration of a jury because the prose- a judge on a point on which express authority is concutor or a policeman may have suggested to the ac- fessedly wanting. We cannot, however, say that the cused that it will be better for him to tell the truth, or judgment in question appears to us satisfactory. The the like. It is further provided that confessions pur- attention of the Court appears to have been mainly porting to have been made upon oath are to be ad- directed to the question whether the legatee's daughter mitted, if proof can be given to the judge that in fact took the whole fund, as answering strictly the descripthey were not so made. (Sect. 14). tion of "heiress-at-law;" and so far as can be judged from the character of the cases cited, the question, whether the widow could take anything if "heirs-at-law" were construed "next of kin," does not appear to have been very fully considered. It may well be that a limitation of personalty to the "heirs" of A. B. ought to be construed in the same way as a limitation "to such person or persons as would, under and by virtue of the Statutes of Distribution of Intestates' Estates, have been entitled to his personal estate in case he had died intestate," which would include a widow; (Jenkins v. Gower, 2 Coll. 537); and, as will be seen in our article above referred to, there is much in the language of the judgments to support that view. We do not think, however, that a decision proceeding upon that principle can be considered to be placed on a sound footing, idea of consanguinity, which both by popular usage and if made without adverting to the question whether the by law is involved in the term " heirs," does not bring the case within the authority of Garrick v. Lord Camden (14 Ves. 372) and Cholmondeley v. Lord Ashburton, (6 Beav. 86). The doctrine of privileged communications is extended to clergymen and doctors. Thus, by sect. 15, "no clergyman shall, without the consent of the person making the confession, divulge, in any suit, action, or proceeding, whether civil or criminal, any confession made to him in his professional character, according to the usage of the church to which he belongs." And by sect. 16, 66 no physician, surgeon, or apothecary shall, without the consent of his patient, divulge, in any civil suit, action, or proceeding, unless the sanity of the patient be the matter in dispute, any information which he may have acquired in attending the patient, and which was necessary to enable him to prescribe or act for the patient." Depositions taken upon charges of indictable offences, and purporting to be duly signed by the justice, may he read at the trial, if it be proved that the deponent is dead, or out of the United Kingdom, or unable from permanent sickness or infirmity to attend, or fraudulently or forcibly kept out of the way by the accused; and the onus of shewing that the depositions were not properly taken is cast upon the accused, instead of the prosecutor having to shew that they were properly taken. (Sects. 17, 18). If a bill be ignored, or a person prosecuted for an indictable offence be acquitted, the Court may order the payment of expenses to the prisoner's witnesses. (Sect. 19). It will be remembered that several witnesses before the committee upon the bill relating to public prosecutors advocated this change. Prisoners charged with felony are to be entitled to a copy of the indictment, free of all expense. (Sect. 20). The right to begin and the right to reply are to be the same to the Crown as to the subject in all cases, whether civil or criminal. (Sect. 21). A single witness is to be sufficient to prove any fact, except in cases of high treason and orders of affiliation. (Sect. 4). Perjury, therefore, may be established by a single oath. Minute local description of offences is rendered unnecessary, except in prosecutions for the non-repair of a road or bridge, or where the penalty is to go to the poor of a local district. (Sect. 22). We must defer until our next article a consideration of the provisions in the bill which relate merely to civil procedure. SINCE Our last number went to press, our attention has been called to the recent case of Low v. Smith, (2 Jur., N. S., part 1, p. 344), on the construction of the word "heirs" when referred to personalty. This case, Reviews. Costs in the Superior Courts of Common Law and in Con- THE great changes which have taken place in the law during the last few years have not left untouched with truth, that "costs" have been more or less affected the subject of costs; on the contrary, it may be said by every change and modification of our laws. Some years, however, have elapsed since the publication of any work upon the subject exhibiting scales and tables of costs in the various proceedings which are instituted in our courts of justice, for Mr. Gray's excellent book upon this fruitful theme does not profess to go into such practical details as these. Under such circumstances it is that Mr. Scott, known as the careful and industrious reporter in the Court of Common Pleas, comes forward to supply the want, which has been for some time generally experienced. After giving a list of taxing officers and taxing offices, together with the days and times of attendance, he presents a table of fees in the superior courts of common law, directions to Taxcosts in error, bankruptcy, insolvency, conveyancing, on ing Masters, plaintiffs' and defendants' costs on posteas, obtaining letters-patent, parliamentary costs, criminal proceedings, and at the Queen's Remembrancer's Office, 4 May 17, 1856. To these are added forms of affidavits of increase, a full table of contents, and a copious index. "The costs on posteas, miscellaneous bills, costs in bankruptcy, &c., are all taken from bills which have actually passed through the ordeal of the Master's office. The costs of proceedings in the Crown Office are, in like manner, selections from taxed bills." We can recommend Mr. Scott's book as a very useful manual upon a subject of practical interest to every attorney. lation of Buildings and Party Walls, and for the more effectually preventing Mischiefs by Fire, and for the Indemnity of Builders under certain Circumstances'— a statute which, although classed in the public acts, is for the most part local and personal. This act, which was not very intelligible to the learned judges, who did not hesitate to express their disapprobation of its obscurities, incorporated the leading principles of the law concerning these matters, and embraced all the material provisions of the former statutes. The judges seem never to have missed an opportunity of censuring its provisions; they even advised parties The Metropolitan Building Act, 18 & 19 Vict. c. 122, to avoid so intricate an act; and had parties rightly together with such Clauses of the 18 & 19 Vict. c. 20, understood their own interests, it is probable that many the Metropolis Local Management Act, as more parti-harassing law-suits would have been saved. There was, cularly relate to the Building Act; with Notes, a in particular, one clause which abounded in litigation, Glossary of Architectural Terms, and full Index. By the 41st section. . . . . Taking, therefore, this conHUMPHRY WILLIAM WOOLRYCH, Serjeant-at-Law. stant theme of dispute into our consideration, together Pp. 173. [Stevens & Norton, Sweet, and Maxwell.] with other difficulties of a less important nature, it is THIS will be a useful handbook to lawyers engaged not surprising that the Legislature should have resolved in administering and advising upon the effect of the upon introducing an entirely new act upon the subject, new Building Act. The learned author, in his Preface, and this new law has in its turn yielded to the statute thus describes the scope and object of the work:- which is now under discussion." "The Metropolitan Building Act, with notes illustrative and explanatory, is here offered to the attention of the Profession. It has been thought useful upon some occasions to give a general view of the law of building, independently of the act, as tending to throw light upon the statute itself, and likewise to furnish analogous decisions; and the cases decided upon the old acts of Parliament upon this subject have also been supplied." In a short Introduction a general view is given of the provisions of the act, and the changes it effects. The statute then follows, being itself, as observed by the learned Serjeant, "arranged and issued after the manner of a treatise." By the 5th section of the act it is enacted that it shall be divided into five parts:"1. The first part relating to the regulation and supervision of buildings. 2. The second part relating to dangerous structures. 3. The third part relating to party structures. 4. The fourth part relating to miscellaneous provisions. 5. The fifth part relating to the repeal of former acts, and to temporary provisions." The history of this and the former acts is thus narrated in the first note to the statute:"The chief principle of the Building Acts seems to have been the preservation of dwellings from fire; and the main cause of them arose most probably from the great fire of London in 1666; for in 1667 (19 Car. 2) we find an act for rebuilding the city of London, (19 Car. 2, c. 3); and again, in 1670, (22 Car. 2), another act, intituled 'An additional Act for the rebuilding of the City of London, uniting of Parishes, and rebuilding of the Cathedral and Parochial Churches within the said City.' (22 Car. 2, c. 11). Again, in 1707, (6 Ann.), we have an act to prevent mischiefs that may happen by fire. (6 Ann. c. 31; see likewise 7 Ann. c. 17). In 1724, party walls in particular had given rise to so much inquiry, and to such litigation, that the mode of reimbursement came to be a matter of more accurate legislation. (11 Geo. 1, c. 28). In 1759 the widening of streets attracted attention, and an act was passed which made regulations for this purpose. (33 Geo. 2, c. 30). In this statute also, party walls, the ruinous condition of buildings, and the state of pavements, were subjects of attention. (See sects. 24 et seq.) Another act, giving still more extensive powers, passed in 1763, (14 Geo. 3, c. 14); and one other, to amend and make more effectual the 33 Geo. 2, c. 30, succeeded three years afterwards, (6 Geo. 3, c. 27). A more general act now engrossed the attention of the Legislature, repealing some of the earlier statutes upon the subject, (12 Geo. 3, c. 73), till at length the whole ripened into the 14 Geo. 3, c. 78, 'An Act for the further and better Regu The present act seems not altogether free from defects and difficulties; and on that account, as well as others, the cross references to different parts of the statute, and to other acts which are contained in the notes, will be found especially serviceable. The glossary of architectural terms is a move in the right direction, but we wish that the learned writer had more extensively compensated us for the shortcomings of the act in the way of interpretation, and had illuminated his readers as to the meaning of "return walls," off-sets," ""attached building," "close fires," "tie of the roof," "bearing," and "wood-plate," which are to be found in the act; and also as to "tenanting," "courses," "transums," and other terms terrible to the uninitiated. 66 The unrepealed sections of the 14 Geo. 3, c. 78, and of the 7 & 8 Vict. c. 84, appear in the notes, which suggest the wish that those acts had been wholly repealed, and that the above clauses had been re-enacted in the present statute, thus making it a consolidation act "totus, tenes, atque rotundus," instead of adhering to the old-fashioned plan of piecemeal legislation. Some of the clauses of the Metropolitan Local Management Act, judiciously selected, conclude the book, and perhaps some more of them might advantageously have been added; but such abstinence is a fault on the right side, and the work, as it stands, is a very welcome manual on a complicated and intricate subject. NOTES OF THE WEEK. HOUSE OF LORDS. Lord Lyndhurst presented a petition on the part of Thomas Dunne, who was convicted at the recent special commission at Cavan for the murder of Miss Hinds, complaining of the illegality of the trial, and of the refusal of the Irish Attorney-General to grant a fiat for the purpose of enabling the party to appeal against the conviction. It appeared that after the Attorney-General's opening statement of the case, one of the jurors became unwell, and was allowed to withdraw; and the prisoner applied for the fiat on the ground that eleven of the jurors were re-sworn, (when a new juror was substituted for the sick man), without the prisoner being informed that he had the right to challenge them. Lord Campbell was of opinion that there was no ground for their Lordships' interference in this case. It appeared that the application was made without any clear right, and that the Attorney-General was bound on his responsibility to refuse the writ. |