this case, it is true, the life of a fellow creature is at stake, but
that consideration ought not to affect you one way or the other in
bringing to bear upon the evidence before you that impartiality and
cautious discrimination which it is the duty of a jury to apply
indifferently to every matter that may come before them.'

A slight sensation of relief in the jury-box. Among the audience an
impression that his lordship is going against the prisoner.

'The duties of a jury in a case like this are exceedingly simple, but
perhaps it may be advisable that I should briefly remind you in what
they consist. And, first of all, it is, I am sure, unnecessary for me
to insist on the absolute necessity of your resolutely putting out
of your minds every particle of knowledge, and every impression of
whatever kind, which you may have collected in regard to this case
from sources external to the inquiry conducted here to-day. It is, I
feel, equally superfluous for me to caution you against attaching the
smallest weight to any evidence which I was compelled in the course
of this case to exclude. The law of evidence is the accumulated
experience of the ablest intellects that have adorned that Bench of
which I am so unworthy an occupant.' (Strong impulse on part of jury
to murmur 'No,' manfully suppressed.) 'And in applying it I can only
say that I have never personally laboured under any hesitation as to
its general soundness, though I may occasionally doubt as to its
applicability to particular instances.

'You will remember that allusion was made by the prosecution in their
opening to the supposed existence of certain valuables, the property
of the deceased. It is my duty to tell you, speaking as judge in this
case, with all the evidence before me, that there is not sufficient
evidence that any such valuables were in the deceased's possession at
the time when she came to her unhappy end, and that in any case there
is not a particle of evidence that the prisoner had ever heard, or was
even remotely aware, of the existence of the articles in question.

'Whether they were there or no is, of course, immaterial to the case.
The jeweller, whose name, I believe, was John--Thomas--no----'

'William Williams, my lord,' called out Pollard.

'Ah, thank you, Mr. Pollard! But it is of no consequence, because, as
I am explaining to you, gentlemen, his evidence really ought not to
affect your minds one way or the other. Even if deceased bou