After all the witnesses were called and evidence presented, the judge or magistrate might have made a short speech instruct–ing the jury on their duties. These statements were often full of hyperbole concerning the moral depravity of the offence and commenting on the behaviour of the accused, witnesses, and lawyers. Sometimes the judges explicitly told the jury what ver–dict they ought to return.27 The jury then considered the verdict. In most cases all of this took place on the same day. Few nine–teenth-century trials took longer than a few hours.
Although the function of the jury was strictly to consider the facts presented to them and decide whether or not the pros–ecution had proven the guilt of the accused, they often disre–garded the evidence when they believed the prosecution was unjust, or if the penalties were too repugnant. Juries were espe–cially reluctant to convict on serious offences at the Assizes (it is generally believed that this was because they felt the legal punishments were too harsh). For example, in Niagara District, of eleven cases of assault on a constable tried between 1837 and 1850, only five resulted in convictions, despite credible wit–nesses to the assaults.28
Following the reading of the verdict by the jury, convicted criminals were taken into custody by the sheriff and his gaoler to await the end of the Quarter Sessions or Assizes (usually a mat–ter of a few days at most), at which time they would be brought back to court to hear the court pronounce the sentences for all the cases in sequence.
Quarter Sessions
Minor offences that were not dealt with by summary justice were tried by the Courts of General Quarter Sessions of the Peace for each District. They were called Quarter Sessions for short because they met four times a year.These courts were presided over by three local Justices of the Peace. During each session, the court travelled throughout the district, sitting for a few days in each major town so that jurors and witnesses wouldn’t have to travel great distances.
In addition to trying minor criminal and civil cases, the Court of Quarter Sessions were responsible for a wide range of administrative duties, such as appointing district officials, issuing licences of all kinds, administering the swearing of oaths, autho–rizing the building and repair of roads and bridges, and attending to social welfare.29
R vs. Charles Ragan, 15 January 1835, Minutes, Western District/Essex County Court of General Quarter Sessions of the Peace, Archives of Ontario, RG 22-103, Volume 2.
The trial of Charles Ragan, of Chatham, for larceny is a typical example. The minutes tell us that Charles Ragan was indicted for larceny on 14 January 1835, the case was heard on the following day, six witnesses testified (Francis Drake, John Jones, Almira Akerly, Carson Mosier, Caleb Akerly, and William Spakman), Ragan was found guilty and sentenced to gaol for six months.30
The case files provide a great deal more information. First, from the information of Carson Mosier we learn that early on the evening in question, Mr. Jones had given him a half dollar, some silver change, and a few coppers. These had gone missing and he suspected Charles Ragan of stealing them.31
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
