26-7-1873 Gazette The operation of the Irish Jury Act, if it is not quite satisfying the expectations of the Legislature, is at any rate relieving the monotony of the Irish Assizes and sessions with a variety of highly comic interludes, and furnishing the Bar and the public with enough "Good Stories" to last for a generation to come. The latest of these is from the quarter sessions at Thurles, where one of the jurors objected to be sworn on the plea that "he was not charged with anything". He was however, reassured, and induced to take the oath; and after the usual delay caused by changing the foreman for another juror not able to write, the trial began. It was an indictment of a man named Thomas Williamson for having robbed, or assisted another man in robbing, Thomas Hayes, a farmer, of £11. The prosecutor had, on entering a railway carriage, been seized and robbed of a bag of money by two men, who had then run out of the carriage and got into another, under the seat of which the bag was afterwards found empty. The Chairman very carefully explained to the jury, that if the believed the prisoner assisted the other man to effect the robbery, he was equally guilty. After the jurors had consulted for some time in the box, (while the spectators in Court watched their proceedings with great interest), one of the jurors informed the bench that he "had a doubt, as it was not the prisoner himself who took the money". The chairman again carefully restated the law, and drew the juror's attention to the fact that the purse was found under the seat where the prisoner and his companion were sitting. The juror replied "But the train was in motion," the remark being "received with laughter by all the court". The jury were then locked up for some time, after which they came into Court, and handed in a verdict of guilty. The Chairman was expressing his approval of their findings, when he was interrupted by a remark from one of the jurors, that he did not agree with the verdict, and that he thought the prisoner was not guilty. The issue paper was given back, and the jury, after being locked up for a considerable time, had to be discharged without agreeing to a verdict. The next case was one in which a man was indicted for stealing two rabbit traps. The case was perfectly clear against the prisoner, and the Chairman reminded the jury that the evidence was uncontradicted. They Jury immediately returned a verdict of not guilty which was received with loud laughter by the people in the Court. This was the last case for trial at the present Assizes, and accordingly, with the expression by the Chairman of the fervent hope that he would never again see any one of them on a jury again, this remarkable "Synod of Thurles" was dismissed. At another session, a woman named Ellen Moore was indicted for having stolen a shawl. Evidence having been given in support of the charge, the jury retired to consider their verdict. After a considerable lapse of time one of the jurors was observed to emerge from the room in which they were confined, and to be about to leave the Court. He was immediately stopped by the Deputy Clerk of the Peace, who asked him where he was going?. "A, begor, replied the juror, I couldn't stay there, they're all boxing and fighting in there,. Notwithstanding this painful state of affairs, the juror was ordered back into the room, and a constable placed at the door to prevent the escape of any survivors of the fray. At last the prisoner was found guilty, and the verdict being delivered, the jury was discharged, when one of them was heard to remark, "Only I threatened to "lick" (beat him up) him, he'd never agree".