postponed until to-morrow, Friday, (this-day). plaintiff's case is not yet closed.-Hurk. April 6.

FRIDAY, APRIL 6.

The tion to Dr. Mercer's certificate, that I also should see him. When I first saw him he was free of fever, but he appeared sullen and reserved. I saw him merely for the purpose of satisfying Mr. Beardsmore that the man was not sent to his house unnecessarily. I was told that

Sreemutty Sibboosvondery Dosse v. Sreemutty Comul- his madness was caused by a domestic affliction, the in

monee Dosesee.

constancy of his wife.

Dr. Mercer sworn.- First attended the lunatic at his The Court was occupied the whole day in the further hearing of this issue. The plaintiff's case was closed, house in Hautcollah, on the 21st July, 1837. He was and the Advocate General addressed the Court for the low, sullen, and not disposed to answer questions. Had defence, but the defendant's case had not been far pro-nauth Mullick went with me. I believe the conversaconversation with him. The first time I saw him Lokeceeded with, when the Court adjourned the further hear-tion was in English; the lunatic speaks English. I ing until to-morrow, Saturday (this-day). thought him from the first very unsound in his mind.

The report will be given, in continuation of yester-Saw him on the 2d of December last; he was improved, day's, when the trial is terminated.-Hurkaru, April 7. more conversable, more ready to answer questions, but

MONDAY APRIL, 9.

Seeboosoondery Dossee v. Comulmoney Dossee. This was an issue out of equity to try whether a clause allowing a maintenance of 60 rupees per month, under certain prescribed circumstances to the defendant, form ed part of the original will of her deceased husband. The plaintiff was directed by the Court to support the affirmative; the defendant alleging that the clause of main tenance to herself was an interpolation, introduced into a fresh copy of the will drawn up subsequently to the testator's death.

The trial has occupied the Court for several days. The evidence for the defence having been concluded this morning, Mr. Clarke, on behalf of the plaintiff, made an eloqueut speech of three hours length in reply.

certainly not capable of managing his own affairs. When I saw him last he probably might have been having lucid intervals. I visited him four times, ten minutes may have been the duration of each interview. The last time I saw him he appeared improved, and now his appearance is much improved. The three first visits were all in July, I believe Lokenauth Mullick is a connexion of the lunatic's. I prescribed medicine for him, but he never would take any. Though lucid and conversable at the time, I believed him to be insane on Mr. Beardsmore's statement to me.

Soodasun Sein is asked if he had any question to ask this witness. He answers, I was taken to Dr. Beardsmore's by force, I was taken by force of four or five peons. The Dr. went to see me,- he came to make faces; and to make fun, and went away. What have I to say to the Doctor? You may ask him if you want to know.

his mind had improved. He was at first sullen and reDr. Raleigh-again called by a juror.-I should say served, and latterly conversable. There is something in his countenance indicating insanity. (Reads date of certificate). Now I should say he is improved in appearance.

The Chief Justice.-This case has occupied four whole days, and the witnesses have been examined at great length. During the whole period of my having sat on this bench I hardly know any case, in which more fraud and more perjury have been exhibited on both sides. The onus of proving the particular clause of the will set forth in the issue rests with the plaintiff. The evidence Mr. Isaac Beardsmore.-Soondasun Sein came on the proves the greatest affection between the mother and the son. It is improbable that the testator under such cir-2d of December; that was not the first time I saw him. cumstances would have made such a provision for her. I do not know how he came. He was brought by his The Court can only disinherit on clear and satisfactory connexion. I believe Gore Tagore and Nilmoney were evidence. The case being tainted with perjury on both two persons who brought him to my house. When I sides, we cannot find for the plaintiff; we, therefore, find examined him at his house, I saw him about fifteen mi a verdict for the defendant. nutes. I believed him to be in a state of imbecility. The date of the first visit was about ten or a dozen days

Counsel for the plaintiff, Messrs. Clarke, Nott

Grant.

and

before the 24 December. I saw him in the evening. I

conversed with him. I asked him to take medicine. He said he would not take any. I had no more conversation with him. I have seen him fify or sixty times since he has been in the asylum. I think he could not conduct his own affairs. I believe he was aware why he was confined, but I never told him there is some sort of delusion on his mind. He wishes to sell his house and

In the matter of Soodasun Sein, a lunatic. In pursuance of a writ de lunatico inquirendo, Soodaget Rs 10,000; he says he could live well with it. I do sun Sein was on Thursday, the 5th of April, brought up before the Commissioners, T. Dickens and C. A. Nott, Esqrs.

The commission sat at the Insolvent Court, and a jury of fourteen, including two native gentlemen, having been sworn,

Mr. Dickens, briefly opened the commission.

Mr. Cochrane, on behalf of the lunacy, stated that the supposed lunatic was possessed of considerable property, and that he laboured under peculiar delusions, one of the prevalent ideas of his mind being that persons are coming to pay him large sums of money.

Dr. Raleigh sworn.-The lunatic is in charge of Mr. Beardsmore, at whose request I occasionally visited bim; my first visit was about three or four months ago

not know who his attornies are. He is never violent. He refuses to take medicine. I do not think that at any time during his continuance in the asylum he has been capable of taking care of his own affairs. His reply as to the application of the money was that he would eat and drink well, take steamer, and go to England. I am not aware whether Gore Tagore is in Mr. Homfray's service. Doctors Raleigh and Mercer saw him on different occasions. Dr. Raleigh saw him on the followtng day after Dr. Mercer. The attendants say he is satisfied with his confinement, and thinks himself better off than if he was out.

Mr. Beardsmore's examination continued. He ex

Doctor when he is well. He was taken charge of when evidence during his previous examination. One Sam he arrived, by Fyzoo, my native doctor. Having been chund Seal, standing near the jury, was pointed out as informed that he had arrived, I asked him no further the person who had given a clue by which the informaMr. Nott ordered questions. I had an understanding with Gore Tagore tion was elicited from the witness. and Nilmoney, I had been informed, that Dr. Merce was his ordinary family medical attendant. I made out the bill in the wife's name for Rs 500, which I have been paid. I do not know her name.

Illness first commenc

Nilmoney Addy examined. Sondasun Sein married my brother's daughter. In Pous 1243, he became ill, when living near Burra Bazaar. el with a palpitation of the heart, and afterwards insan ily. In the course of a month I saw him ten or twelve times. It was when he returned from Benares that he became insane; he used to throw himself about, and one

him to remain in Court for the purpose of being examined.]

Shaik Bachoo-1 am a khitmutghar at Beardsmore's, and attended Soodasun for the last five months. His

wife sent him some sweetmeats; the Baboo's servants brought them. Soodasun told me to eat some, I said I am a Mossulman. Have you eat any?" He said he had eaten one of the balls, and it had made him sick and confused. I went and took them to Mr. Beardsmore, who a-ked me if Soodasun had eaten them with rice, I He said, he dare say it was on account of his day he threw himself into the water: he would eat nothing of them home. My wife told me she had eaten some of having eaten them on an empty stomach. I took some and flog the servants. His wife sent for native doctors.

the medicine. Dr. Mercer recommended Mr. Beards.

said no.

I asked Dinoo where

He required force to take him to bathe. His wife sent the sweetmeats, and had a burning in the throat all for Dr. Mercer, who prescribed, but he would not take night in consequence. I eat some, and we were both sick. When I was looking at the balls, I found they more's, and Gore Tagore took him there in a palanquin looked quite saffron. I managed to go to the asylum on the 7th Augon. Two days afterwards he went home next morning with difficulty, I did not go to the Baboo. but saw Dinoo, his servant there. I had taken one of again; five or six days after he was again taken to the the balls with ine. At the time that I spoke to him, I asylum. There was no quarrel in the family. He was married about thirteen years before he went to Benares; was in a confused state of mind. at the latter time his wife was five months with child, he got the sweetmeats; he said of the confectioners, but Soodasun Sein managed his father's affairs during his when I threatened him, he said a maid servant to the life his property is considerable: there is a house in Baboo's family called Luckey, bought them. She was Cossitollah, one in Mirzapore, one at Molungha, one at servant of that witness Nilmoney. When I made a noise Nilmoney came running and said to me, 'what is Bysack Street, all worth about Rs 50,000. When we were returning from Benares he jumpt into the water, the matter? You are mad.' I said, it is this sweetmeat. the manjees picked him up, and I put a guard upon I went away with the sweetmeat to show it to Mr. him. He was a man very sensible and capable of doing Beardsmore. He was not at home, I showed them to business when he conducted his father's affair's. His Mrs. Beardsmore, and detailed the circumstances. wife now pays his expenses at Beardsmore's. Gore servant only, Dinoo was dismissed; there were five altogether; who as well as Nilmoney remained Tagore is on friendly terms with Soodasun and with me Beardsmore's. There alsd. Soodasun had a child, but it is dead. His wife was no enquiry made among sends me to see him every three or four days. When we the servants. Nilmoney resided upstairs. This took About ten or twelve days took him to Beardsmore's we put him in a palanquin, place about five months ago. shut it up, and placed two men to guard it on each side. after Soodasun became ill from purging and vomiting and took medicine. He was not attended by Dr. Raleigh at all from the time he was taken ill by taking sweetmeats to the time he was taken ill by vomiting. He is considerably better from the time he was taken ill.

One

at

The hurkarus forced him out of his house. I did not think it necessary to go to the police first. His wife ordered it. She did not take any pains to apprize his reJations Joynarain and Marcon that it was necessary to send him to Beardsinore, nor did she direct me to do so. Samchund Seal examined.-Soodasun told me that He remained in his palanquin two days after we took on his way to Benares in the boat he became sick, and him to Beardsmore, without food; he always said take had trembling in the limbs. After he came back he had me back to my house.' I heard that Mr. Beardsmore six annas' worth of brain,' and was not capable of ma took him out of his palanquin by force. His tenants naging his affairs. Formerly, he was a very intelligent will not pay their rents only one tenant has paid since Soodasun never eat any thing touched by his last Pous twelve month. The rent of the house in wife. He told me his wife's ways are not as they ought Chitpore Road has been collected by me. to be. I had a power of attorney to act for him; now his wife has a seal for which she gives a receipt for the rents. Nilmoney is managing this business. Soodasun had desired me to burn and sell five lacs of bricks, which I burnt, but Nilmoney sold them.

man.

Mr. Beardsmore re-examined. The evidence as to his being in a palkee for two days without food is true; I did not say anything about this during my examination, because I was not asked. Drs. Mercer and Raleigh saw him in the palkee on the 2d of December Soosadun questioned by the jury-Nilmoney. Fyzoo, He was taken out of the palkee by force at my request. and a native doctor put a mustard poultice across my Some sweetmeats were brought to him; I sent them to bowels. I do not know what I am here for. I see Dr. Raleigh who analyzed them, and sent them to Drs. what you are all about. I have understood what is now O'Shaughnessy and Goodeve for examination. Sooda- being done: as I cannot go about my own business, I sun and one of my servants ate of the sweetmeats; my require a person from the court here to conduct my servant became sick, so did Soodasun. Arsenic was affairs. There are houses left me by my father, I can detected on analyzing the sweetmeats. Soodasun feeling form no opinion of the value of the property. About himself sick, gave some to Bachoo, the servant, I put Rs 30,000 or 40,000 may be the value of it. I did not over him, and to Bachoos' wife. They were sick in receive rents on my return, because persons used to sit consequence. All my inquiry was, who brought the round and confuse me. They brought me rotton things sweetmeats, and Bachoo gave me to understand he to eat. I deputed Samchund before I went to the upper supposed them to have been sent by Soodasun's wife. provinces to collect rent while I was away. It may be that I did not take any precautions to ascertain who were his servants, or to learn to recognize them by their countenance. I have not taken any precautions to ascertain what persons are about him,

Mr. Dickens charged the jury, and particularly commented on the fact that Dr. Raleigh had not mentioned anything in his examination regarding the poisoned sweetmeats, nor had Mr. Beardsmore until re examined. [Much surprise was expressed by the jury that the The jury retired, and after half an hour returned with

ing his own affairs, and that he has been so for the last

sixteen months.

The Court met again on Saturday last for the purpose of formally taking the signature of the jury to the engrossed inquest.-Hurkaru, April 10.

APRIL 6TH, AND TWO FOLLOWING DAYS.

(Before Sir E. Ryan and Sir J. P. Grant.)

Sittings after 2d term.—plea side.

Sreemutty Siboosoondery Dosse v. Sreemutty Comulmoney

Even if

Soodasun is of unsound mind, and incapable of manag- solemnity, and embellished by dramatic incident, in order to give plausibility to a falsehood and éclat to a forgery. There was certainly a considerable amount of testimony on both sides; but the plaintiff's witnesses were chiefly servants, who are generally ready to swear anything, or to do any thing at the hookum of their masters. the testimony had been nicely balanced, the scale would be turned in favour of the defendant by the probabilities of the case. For the defence, relations of the family would be called who were present, and if subordinate servants were allowed to remain, it was extraordinary indeed that no relations should be permitted to be present on so solemn and important an occasion. The testimony of two of the chief witnesses was directly contradicted by persons, utterly disinterested, who had heard them make a totatly different statement on a former occasion. It would be proved by unanswerable evidence that the genuine will was written on a smaller and narrower paper, and only on one side; that it contained no bequest Other witnesses were called for the plaintiff, and to the widow, and that this circumstance was remarked among the rest, Rajkissen Bysack, the alleged finder of upon, and explained by the testator, who said that his son the will. This witness deposed, that about a month or six was living and no special provision was required; and weeks after the death of Hurrakissen, the son of the testa- it would be further proved that when only one son is left, tor, five or six persons being present in the family house it is not usual to provide specially for a widow; but began to search the boxes, in which deeds and papers otherwise when there are two sons or more. Lastly, were usually kept, and at last discovered the present document; that this was the identical will formerly made, nearly the same persons being present at the making and at finding.

Dossee.

The trial of this issue, which was commenced on Thursday, lasted during the whole of that and the three succeeding days.

certain letters, written by the attorney in the cause. would be put in, which would shew clearly that the party giving the instructions, must have been then ignorant of the existence of such a will as the present; from which it might be inferred that the forgery took place, or the intention to forge was first suggested, at some subsequent period.

Mr. Clarke proposed to put in as evidence, the bill and answer and the decree in the original suit, for the purpose of shewing that the present defendant and all the other parties interested under the will, acquiesced in Witnesses were then sworn, who deposed to the its genuineness at that time. He also wished to lay the above facts, and were cross-examined with great minutefoundation for reading the deposition taken before the ness. The plaintiff's counsel put in the depositions taken examiner, of one of his own witnesses, since deceased, in the Examiner's office, for the purpose of shewing a and also the former depositions of defendant's witnesses variance between their former and present testimony. for the purpose of contradicting their present testimony. The Advocate-General endeavoured to give evidence of The Court said, that it would be quite idle to treat the conversation between the father of the plaintiff (since pleadings in the former suit as evidence, independently deceased), and other parties, from which it would appear of the circumstance that it was not between the same that the father either forged the will himself, or caused it parties. Nothing could possibly be implied, which could to be forged. Mr. Clarke objected that this evidence have the effect of concluding the defendant in the was not admissible. sent issue, since the very point had been referred from the suit itself, and it must be considered open. But it was regular to put in the pleadings, or the decretal order reciting them, for the purpose of making the depositions

evidence.

pre

The pleadings and depositions were then put in, and this closed the plaintiff's case.

The Advocate General addressed the Court for the defence, and first pointed out certain contradictions and discrepancies in the evidence. The defendant did not deny that a will or a hookumnamah had been in fact made, and made to a certain extent under the very circumstances set forth on the other side; but the defence was that the will now in Court was not the same instrument. It would not be attempted to be established that the disputed clauses and bequests had been interpolated, but that a different paper had since been drawn up, and as the writing was not the testator's, as there was no signature either of the testator, or of a single subscribing wilness, what could be easier than for the same person who wrote the first paper, to forge another? This view of the case entirely destroyed one of the chief arguments relied on by the other side. Then as to the story about the subsequent discovery of the instrument no doubt such a scene might have been gone through, and the precious document now produced might have been found in the box as described; for it would be easy for the person who had placed the thing in its hiding-place to find it again. It was rather remarkable that the very same individuals, were alleged to be present at the making of the will, as at the finding. The whole of

The Court said that they were satisfied that the father was sufficiently proved to be the authorized agent of the plaintiff, and yet they were of opinion that this evidence could not be received, because it clearly was not within the scope of his authority to bind her by a forgery. They reserved leave, however, to the defendant's counsel, to move the point, if a verdict should be found for the plaintiff.

Certain documentary evidence was then put in, consisting of the letters of the attorney in the cause, and the deposition of Gourmoney, a purdah female, daughter of the testator. By this lady's evidence, it appeared that four females of the family were present, and that she herself remarked, "My father has done something for every body, but what has he done for my mother?" which was repeated to the testator, who answered " Hurrakissen, my son, is living, and he will make provision for his mother."

adduced by the plaintiff in contradiction.
The Advocate General was heard upon the evidence

Mr. Clarke then addressed the Court in reply, in a very ingenious and able speech of nearly three hours' duration, (to which we regret that our limits will not allow us to attempt doing justice.) He said that these clauses were treated as interpolations in the genuine will, when the original suit was instituted, and the present story that a second and different document had been forged, was a story trumped up at the eleventh hour for the purposes of this trial. It this instrument was really forged, it was singular that the alterations should

another.

In this suit an application was made to the Court by the counsel for the complainant, that the cause might be referred to the Mas er to inquire and report, upon a suggestion that the complainant had become a lunatic since the filing of the bill.

nothing but absolute fatuity could explain it. Two of Ramanauth Mookerjee v. Sreenauth Mookerjee and the defendant's chief witnesses, Radicamohun and Gourmoney, members of the family, were collaterally interested in impeaching this will. The amount of their interest did not indeed affect their competency, but it very materially affected their credibility. Nothing could be deduced from the letters written by the attorney in the cause. They were written with a pacific intention, and before hostile proceedings were instituted. The probabilities were on the side of the plaintiff; and the evidence of the defendant's witnesses exhibited far more of contradiction and repugnancy than could be pointed out in the evidence which supported the plaintiff's case.

case.

Sir E. Ryan. This trial has now occupied the Court four entire days, and it certainly is altogether a most extraordinary case. Since I have sat on the bench, I have never witnessed such a vast amount of perjury and directly conflicting evidence. The onus, however, of establishing this will, is on the plaintiff, and we cannot say that she has succeeded in making out her It seems to us that the probabilities prima facie are against the insertion of such a clause as the present in the will of this wealthy Hindoo. The mother (defendant) and her son are admitted to have ever been on affectionate terms, and it is not likely, therefore, that the father would have gratuitously anticipated a quarrel between them, or provided for so mprobable an event. It can only be on strong, clear, and satisfactory grounds that the Court can disinherit the testator's widow. We are of opinion, therefore, that the will has not been established, and that our verdict must be for the defendant. Verdict for the defendant.

The Court said, that this mode of application was not regular, and that the cause might stand over in the meantime.-Hurkaru, April 11.

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 1838.

(Before Sir E. Ryan, and Sir J. P. Grant.)

Sittings after 2d term.-In Equity.

Rajkristno Bonnerjee v. Tuiraneychurn Bonnerjee. This cause being called upon Mr. Clarke rose and said that he had been instructed yesterday that the parties had cane to a settlement, and that he had accordingly applied to the Court to call the case pro forma, He had just understood that the cause was not settled, and he was not prepared, therefore, to argue it now.

The Advocate General, admitted that his learned friend had certainly made a statement to the Court yesterday, from which he inferred that the cause was settled. But for his own part he had received an intimation in the course of the evening that this was not the case.

The Court recollected that Mr. Clarke had mentioned Mr. Clarke, Mr. Nott and Mr. Grant for the the matter yesterday, and they that now directed under these circumstances the cause should stan over. plaintiff. Stood over.

The Advocate General, Mr. Lieth, and Mr. Morton for the defendant.

TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 1838.

(Before Sir E. Ryan and Sir J. P. Grant.)

Sittings after 2d term,-equity side.

Sreemutty Suttobhomah Dossee v. Baujpaye Rajah, Sree
Bejoychunder Deb.

This was a bill for an account, and was heard ex-parte. The Advocate General and Mr. Prinsep for the complainant.

Maha Rajah Sibkistno Behadoor v. Kistnochunder Ghose, and others.

The original bill was filed by one of the executors, and prayed an account of the real and personal estate of Maha Rajah Rajkristo Behadoor, deceased, against the real and personal representatives of the said Rajah. A cross-bill was filed by the representatives, and the original and cross-cause now come on for hearing.

The Court decreed that the causes should be consoli

dated, that a partition should be made of the real state, and an account taken of the personal estate, and that the general costs should await the final decree.

The Advocate General applied to the court to direct the costs of the commission of partition to be paid out of the estate immediately. If this was not done, the parties would be compelled to borrow money on personal security at exorbitant rates. Even in England, money was often directed to be advanced.

The Court said, that their was no instance, except under very special circumstances, of the costs being directed to

Sreemutty Nibbunmoney Dabee v. Shamloll Tagore. This was beard on argument on exceptions taken to the Master's report, and was the last cause on the Equity Board.

The sittings terminated this day. The sessions begin on Tuesday the 17th instant.

After the Grand Jury had been duly sworn, the learned Chief Justice thus addressed them. He commenced by remarking to them that he was happy to inform them that their duties during the present sessions would nei ther be very protracted nor arduous. There were only three cases to which he would direct his observations on their nature minutely to them. Two of these he was sorry to inform them were of murders, and the other of highway robbery, -a crime which has hitherto, ever since he had the honor of sitting on this bench, been one of very rare occurrence; but he regretted to find that there were no less than four cases of that nature sent up

but if the deceased was in a condition which made him sufficiently conscious that he had but a short time to live, and made a declaration as to the manner of his death, hat declaration is held voted in the eye of the law. It s for the jurymen to satisfy themselves whether the deceased, at the time he made these declaration, was in that state. In conclusion, the judge said, that the deceased's depositions as they were on oath could be read as evidence before the jurymen.

The first case to which he begged to draw their parti cular attention, was that of Hurree Mug, for the murde of his infant child, John Pereira. The particulars of it, from the depositions before him, appear to be these Lydia Francisca, the mother of the child, appears to have been the mistress of the prisoner, who resided a Sibtollah Lane, and was at the time the crime is alleged to have been committed by the prisoner, an ayah in the employ of a lady, named Ogilvie, who resided at Chow ringhee, where the prisoner was likewise entertained a The third case was that in which a person was charg short time previous to this murder as a cook. For some ed with highway robbery, for taking from the person of reasons unknown, he became dissatisfied with his service. E. W. Bowbear, a gold watch. It appears that whilst and wished Lydia Francisca to quit the employ an Mr. Bowbear was watching in the streets for a friend return to live with him. This she refused to do untiat night, the prisoner came up to him and snatched out she had earned a sufficient sum to enable her to liquidate of his watch-fob a gold watch, and in doing so also tore some debts which she then owed. This refusal enraged the prosecutor's fob. The question it will be for the jury the prisoner, who, on the 27th of March, returned to determine is, whether that force which the law requires home, and on leaving the premises was heard to declare to constitute a high-way robbery which should be attend"very well, there are two lives, one here and the othered with violence and fear, was exemplified on this occa with me." He was then followed to his house by the sion. In the case of the King versus Morne, it was decid police peons, where the infant was shortly afterwarded by twelve judges, that when a person has a guard chain discovered murdered. It is for the grand jurymen under round his neck and violence is used to that degree as by these circumstances to consider who had murdered the two or three jerks to break this guard-chain, it constitutes a highway robbery ; but where no such chain is worn or violence is used, the crime is one simply of taking from the person, and this, like picking pockets, is not a capital offence. Therefore it will be very material for the jury to determine whether in this case, which is about to be submitted to them, that violence had been used which would legally constitute it a capital offence or not. With regard to the other three cases, the proofs of violence having been used are more clear, particularly in one of them. In conclusion, the judge informed the

deceased.

Prisoner pleaded not guilty.

The other case of murder, was one of more difficulty it was that of Prosper Milliner, a Frenchman, who was accused of the murder of a syce named Buckaollah. The statement, as gleaned by Judge from the depositions of the witnesses in this case, which he remarked are very confused, are these. Two French sailors were on the night of the 4th of March last, met on the Chitpoor road by the deceased, and another syce between the hours of 8 and 9 o'clock P. M. and without any cause or provocation, as deposed to by the witnesses for the prosecution, Jurymen that if they required his aid in elucidating any one of these sailors wounded Buckaollah, the deceased, to them, he would be must happy to offer them all the legal points in any of the cases which would be submitted with a knife, which he then held in his grasp, from the aid in his power. These were, he said all the cases to effects of which wound he lingered till the 5th of March which he would beg to draw their particular attention at at the Native Hospital in the Dhurrumtollah road present; perhaps there may be more sent in during this and then died. It will be for the gentlemen of the jury sessions' which may require his observations to them, to decide primarily whether the prisoner was the person and if so he would do so. who had wounded the deceased; and secondly, whether Mahomed Ruffick was tried for stealing, on the 30th at the time the prisoner, if they are, satisfiei he is the man who had wounded the deceased, there was not any of March last, several crockery plates, &c. from the -affray, and whether the prisoner had not been struck by premises of T. Barfoot. any person before he wounded the deceased; and if so, whether the deceased was a party concerned in this affray T. Barfoot deposed, that he lived in No. 2, China or not. It has been proved, that the prisoner had bought Bazar-Street, the prisoner, previous to his confinement, these knives for his professional purpose. Now it has was a khansama in deponent's service for one year. been provided by the law, that if any person has at the Deponent, in consequence of some suspicions, accom time any deadly weapons in his hand which he happened panied by to police peons and a servant of his named to have by him without any avowed purpose of wound. Ameer Khan, searched the prisoner's house near the ing or injuring any person, and he happens to be struck Hindoo College. Prisoner was at the deponents house. by any person in an affray and retaliates with this One of his servan's pointed out the prisoner's house to weapon, and thus causes the death of the person who him. Then Mr. McCann produced the articles, and Mr. had struck him, the crime which he in that case is guilty Barfoot identified them to be his property, because they of, is only manslaughter; for to constitute the crime of matched with his set, a portion of which he produced murder, it is requisite that a degree of malice and pre-n the Court, and he identified likewise a work box to meditation on the part of the criminal must be proved. be his daughter's property. But though this is a fundamental principal to constitute Honeeskhan being dead, the thanadar who accompathe crime of murder, yet it is not absolutely requisite in nied Mr. Barfoot in the search corroborated his evidence every case; for example, when a man has been proved regarding this search. to be what the law terms the general enemy of mankind, in a case where a person shoots with a gun indiscrimi The prisoner said, that the property was his for a nately into a crowd and wounds and kills some person or long time, and that he had purchased them and brought persons in it, he is guilty of the crime of murder. There hem from China. He further said that Mrs. Barfoot are besides the evidence already alluded to, the dying was in the habits of sending out her ayah's with goods depositions of the deceased, taken by Mr. C. K. Robison, o conceal, and charging servants to whom arrears of one of the Magistrates of the Police office, in the priso-vages were due, with having taken them, and that he ner's presence, and explained to him by Mr. P. Delmar, had adopted such a course against 25 persons in order the interpreter. This the grand jurymen can have read o get rid of them, and their wages, and the ayah had before them, because the law provides that whenever any n one instance been detected in thus conveying some deponent in a criminal case dies before the trial of the poons away for that purpose, which she confessed. He case at the sessions, that depositions taken on oath, may ikewise added, toat Mr. Barfoot was a person who was be read as evidence during the trial. Besides this, there capable of swearing to anything, because he quarrelled are the dying declarations of the deceased, as declared daily twenty times with Mrs. Barfoot, and then broke

This closed the case for the prosecution.