us more of those cases than is to be found in print.]
The Lord Chief Justice then summed up the
evidence for the jury. His speech, again,
contains nothing that I find worth copying
out: but he was naturally impressed with the
singular character of the evidence, saying that
he had never heard such given in his
experience; but that there was nothing in law
to set it aside, and that the jury must
consider whether they believed these witnesses
or not.
And the jury after a very short consultation brought the prisoner in Guilty.
So he was asked whether he had anything to say in arrest of judgment, and pleaded that his name was spelt wrong in the indictment, being Martin with an I, whereas it should be with a Y. But this was overruled as not material, Mr. Attorney saying, moreover, that he could bring evidence to show that the prisoner by times wrote it as it was laid in the indictment. And, the prisoner having
