38

DIFFERENCE AMONG THE JURY.

pression on my own mind is, that the jury were not justified in bringing in a verdict of guilty. They evidently acted under great excitement and the fear of being locked up for the night.

The jury then (seven o'clock) retired to their room, and their lordships left the bench.

At twenty minutes before eight their lordships resumed their seats, when Mr. Justice Crampton directed the sheriff to summon the jury. Having made their appearance in court, Mr. Justice Crampton, addressing the foreman, asked him if they were likely to agree?

The foreman "I don't think we are likely to agree."

A second juror-"There is not the most remote chance of our agreeing."

A third juror "There is not the slightest chance of an agreement."

Mr. Justice Crampton-" It will be necessary for you in that case, gentlemen, to remain in your room during the night."

ADJOURNMENT OF THE COURT.

39

The foreman inquired what would be the latest hour at which his lordship would receive a verdict, in the event of an agreement?

Mr. Justice Crampton, after a brief conversation with some of the jury, said he would return to court at eleven o'clock for the purpose of ascertaining if they had come to an agreement.

The jury then retired, and special constables having been sworn to prevent any communication with the jury-room, the court adjourned till eleven o'clock.

Eleven o'clock came, and the jury are called into court, when Mr. Justice Crampton asks"Are you likely to agree?"

Foreman-" Upon my word, my lord, I don't think we are."

"Is there any use in my remaining?"

"I don't know, my lord. I will take the opinion of the jury again."

He does so, and informs the judge "there is not any likelihood of our agreeing."

But to be locked up all night in an empty room, without refreshment, has made many a jury agree that would not have done so under different cir

cumstances.

A juror said "We want chairs, my lord, we have only forms, and some of us have to walk about while others sit."

The learned judge-learned in more ways than one-desired the sheriff to provide "every accommodation for the jury, except refreshment, which the law did not allow."

Fifteen minutes after this, and before the judge retired-who was about to lock them up for the night-the jury brought in a verdict of "guilty," and Kirwan was sentenced to be hanged.

After this there were petitions, praying that the sentence might not be executed, and after the petitions, an order of the Executive Government commuting the sentence to "transportation for life," which looks very like proportioning the punishment to the degree of evidence, and not to the degree of guilt.

ANOMALIES OF CRIMINAL LAW.

41

If William Burke Kirwan was really guilty, he deserved hanging, if ever any man deserved hanging; and if he was not guilty, why transport him for life?

But, on the other hand, we imprison men before trial, though the evidence is generally incomplete. Why not, therefore, it may be asked, continue that imprisonment after a trial which has increased the evidence, without producing certainty?

The Scotch verdict of "not proven," allows the prisoner to go at large, though it subjects him to a new arrest and trial, on the production of new evidence.

This affords a guilty party the means of escape.

The law or practice now adopted in England, is for the Home Secretary to review all doubtful verdicts; a power which the judge does not possess.

Report says, Kirwan, in other respects, was a very bad man, who deserved what he got.

Mr. Smyly, who stated the case for the Crown, proved that he spent his time, not in the society

42

MARIA THERESA KENNY.

of his wife, but in the company of the woman, Maria Theresa Kenny, by whom he had a family of not less than eight children.

Joseph Sherwood, a sergeant of constabulary, testified on oath-"I went to the house, 11, Upper Merrion Street, after the inquest. I called there the 7th October, after his arrest. I saw a woman on the second-pair lobby; she was a Mrs. or Miss Kenny, I do not know which. I saw two children in the house; one of them was a boy, about ten years of age, the other was two or three years of age. I could not say whether it was a boy or girl. I was in all the rooms of Mr. Kirwan's house; the children were in a room-the small one in bed, the boy standing beside it.”

This woman Kenny afterwards attempted to prove that she was the lawful wife of Kirwan, and that his marriage with the lady whom he was convicted of murdering, on Ireland's Eye, was an act of bigamy; but her evidence broke down.

A person, who had been a fellow-prisoner with Kirwan, in Richmond Gaol, who had most of his