Saturday 09 Aug 1845 (p. 2, col. 4 - p. 3, col. 2) Part 1 CUMBERLAND ASSIZES. ----- CROWN COURT.-(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.) [CONTINUED FROM OUR FIRST PAGE.] KIRKANDREWS POISONING CASE. Soon after eight o'clock on Wednesday morning the area between the Court Houses was crowded with persons of both sexes; and at half-past, when they were opened, there was a general rush into the Criminal Court, which was soon crowded to inconvenience. BARON ROLFE entered the Court precisely at nine o'clock. APPLICATION FOR THE POSTPONEMENT OF JOHN GRAHAM'S TRIAL. Mr. WILKINS, counsel for John GRAHAM, charged with the murder of his wife and father, said he would invite his lordship's attention to the case of John GRAHAM, against whom a true bill had been returned by the grand jury. His object was humbly to apply to have the case postponed till next assizes; and he grounded his application on the extreme prejudice created in the public mind, either designedly or undesignedly. He did not attribute this to an improper conduct on the part of the attorney for the prosecution; but he found that in three of the principal London papers, the Times, the Chronicle, and the Post, there had appeared a paragraph setting out in detail that GRAHAM had made an ample confession of the offence charged against him; and the belief universally entertained was that such was the fact. Moreover he found that two of the most important provincial papers, the Leeds Mercury and the Liverpool Mercury, stated not only that he had confessed, but that he had been tried and convicted. Under these circumstances trial at the present moment could not be entered upon in the calm and deliberate spirit necessary for the ends of justice; and he apprehended his application to postpone it till public feeling had subsided would not be considered an unreasonable one. It was not unprecedented, for an application to Chief Baron POLLOCK, similar to the present, at the Liverpool Assizes, had been granted, and the trial of BOLAM, at Newcastle, was postponed by Baron ALDERSON on similar grounds-namely the excited state of the public mind. Here the affidavit of Mr. J. MOUNSEY was handed to his lordship, setting forth that the paragraphs above alluded to had appeared in some of the London and provincial newspapers, that they were believed by many persons in the county, and that from the first commencement of proceedings against GRAHAM up to the present time, statements had appeared in the Carlisle newspapers in reference to the matter with which the prisoner was charged, and placards had been issued on several occasions, announcing that the newspapers would contain such statements, therely [sic] tending to keep up the excitement in the public mind and preventing the same from subsiding; and that the said paragraphs had been inserted in the London newspapers. The affidavit was read by the Clerk of Arraigns, and Mr. James MOUNSEY was sworn upon it in court. The newspapers referred to, except the Carlisle Journal, were submitted to his Lordship. Mr. TEMPLE, as counsel for the prosecution, could not feel justified in acquiescing in the request made by his learned friend; and he submitted that there were not sufficient facts stated on affidavit to induce his lordship to accede to it. With regard to the newspapers of the county, the particular paragraphs were not brought under the attention of the Court. It must be well known that when an offence of this kind was charged against an individual, the particulars must necessarily find their way into the newspapers, being vehicles of news, and consequently organs through which information was conveyed to the public. And unless it were shown that it was commented in strong, unfair, and partial terms, calculated to excite prejudice, the fact of there having been information in the newspapers did not, he submitted, afford sufficient ground for the postponement of the trial: for the same ground might be alleged in every case of serious accusation brought into Court. Mr. RAMSHAY, who was also retained for the prosecution, would just add one word. The affidavit stated that there had been weekly paragraphs in the Carlisle newspapers: it was curious that not one of them was produced before his Lordship. He rather apprehended that if they were produced, they would be found not to justify the ground taken in the affidavit, but that their object was to explain away the errors which had appeared in the other newspapers of which complaint had been made. I believe if the fact were brought out, it would appear that the two Carlisle newspapers had behaved with the greatest possible forbearance, and the greatest possible propriety, with regard to the matter. As to the excitement, it was impossible that in any case of trial for murder there could be the absence of excitement, and if they were to wait till it died away, the prisoner would never be tried at all. Mr. WILKINS said he confessed this resistance was as surprising as it was unusual. His learned friend, not content with his fair reasoning, had tortured his ingenuity to resist the application; and Mr. RAMSHAY had volunteered an opinion as to the facts. Notwithstanding the ability with which the objections had been urged, he did not think the precedent had charms enough to be imitated by any other member of the bar. Far from agreeing with Mr. RAMSHAY that the newspapers had conducted themselves with the greatest moderation; he thought the editors, like those of most papers, had pandered to a vitiated taste, a stimulated and depraved appetite, by week after week supplying statements in reference to the case. He attached more importance to the London papers than to ten thousand papers such as the Journal and Patriot. They had inserted a statement emanating from this district, which was false, and calculated to mislead the public, containing assertions which, if believed, would justify the jury in coming to the conclusion that the party accused is guilty, without hearing the evidence; and these assertions had been repeated in the Leeds Mercury and the Liverpool Mercury, papers of far more importance than those existing in Carlisle; and when he found it added that he had been tried and convicted, it looked, he must say, as though some enemy had been doing the mischief. But, whether or not, it was quite clear that the statements were likely to be baneful to the prisoner. His object was not to defeat justice, but to ensure for his client a dispassionate trial, by postponing it till the excitement in the public mind had subsided. The JUDGE said he confessed he saw no grounds for complying with the application at present. BOLAM's was the first case in which the course applied for had been taken, and its propriety had since been extremely doubted. What were the grounds on which the application was rested? First, that in the Journal and Patriot papers published in Carlisle, and having extensive circulation, from week to week, had placards issued, tending to keep up public excitement. Now, all that it meant, was that the subject had been alluded to in the newspapers, and that it was stated in placards that the newspapers would publish intelligence on the subject. He did not see there was anything in that to keep up excitement. If dreadful crimes were perpetrated and suspicions existed, excitement was necessarily kept up. He had not seen what the paragraphs were. His lordship then referring to the paragraphs in the London papers, said nobody could be influenced by them, as they were manifestly untrue and absurd. Mr. WILKINS-But they may show to a certain extent the state of the public mind. The JUDGE-Only that the public mind is ill-informed. Mr. WILKINS-Not only ill-informed, but ill-inclined, I should submit. By the JUDGE-It does not appear but that the paragraph may have been put in by some one connected with the prisoner. As at present advised, I don't think there is sufficient ground for granting the application, but I shall consider the matter. Mr. WILKINS-It may not be fair to volunteer one's own knowledge; but, from what he knew, he trembled for the trial. The state of public feeling was quite shocking. Even bets had been made on the result of the trial. The JUDGE said he would allow every facility for stating any other facts upon affidavit, and in the mean time should consider the application. His LORDSHIP eventually refused the application. JOHN GRAHAM, (aged 44-reads and writes well,) was charged with the wilful murder of Margaret GRAHAM, his wife, at the parish of Kirkandrews. Mr. TEMPLE, with whom were Mr. RAMSHAY and Mr. LAWRIE, appeared for the prosecution; Mr. WILKINS, with whom was Mr. ATHERTON, defended the prisoner. The following is a list of the jury:- Thomas ARMSTRONG, Graham's Onset, farmer. William GOLDING, Great Salkeld, farmer. William HODGSON, Edenhall, yeoman. Henry HOODLESS, High Street, Wigton, bookseller. John LAMB, Great Salkeld, yeoman. Thomas MOSES, Bascodyke, farmer. George RAYSON, Highgate Head, Ivegill, yeoman. Samuel RELPH, Fog Close, Kirkoswald, farmer. Nesfield ROBINSON, Burrowgate, Penrith, ironmonger. William STAGG, Raughtonhead, Castle Sowerby, farmer. William THRELKELD, Staffield, farmer. Isaac YOUNG, Southernby, Castle Sowerby, farmer. Several objections were made to other names called previous to the above being sworn. The prisoner, whilst they were being called into the box, leaned over the dock, covering his face with his handkerchief. The Judge, at the request of Mr. WILKINS, allowed him to be accommodated with a chair. Mr. BIRD of Catterlen, begged to be permitted to retire from the jury, as he and the prisoner were particularly acquainted. Mr. W. HODGSON, of Endenhall, was substituted for him. At the request of Mr. WILKINS, all the witnesses were ordered out of court. Mr. TEMPLE, stated with great moderation and fairness, the facts he intended to submit to the Jury, and which are detailed in the following evidence. Mr. WILKINS here rose and took a legal objection to the form of the indictment. His LORDSHIP said he should not stop the trial, as the objection, if it was one, was one to be moved in arrest of judgment. Richard HIND (examined by Mr. LAWRIE)-I am an iron founder in Carlisle. The deceased, Mrs. Margaret GRAHAM, was my sister, and the prisoner's late wife. I remember her death on the 27th of November last, and her being interred in Kirkandrews church yard. I attended the funeral. The JUDGE-Whereabouts is that? Mr. LAWRIE-About three miles from Carlisle. Witness-I saw the body of my sister in Thomas NORMAN's barn in the beginning of June; and recognized the coffin as that in which she was buried, and also the corpse. Mr. WILKINS did not cross-examine this witness. [to be continued]