Every eye was now turned upon the noble, grave, and grief-worn face of the venerable judge, and every ear was strained to catch the words of his address, for every soul believed that from the spirit of his speech the jury would take its opinions, and the young prisoner receive her fate.
“Gentlemen of the jury,” began his lordship, “you have heard the charge brought against the prisoner at the bar. You have heard that charge ably expounded by the learned counsel for the Crown, and strongly supported by the witnesses he called. You have also heard the same eloquently repudiated by the distinguished advocate for the prisoner, and somewhat affected by the evidence he has presented.
“On the one hand, the case against the prisoner, as made out by the prosecution, is strong, very strong, but it is only circumstantial, and may well be fallacious. On the other hand, the explanation of those circumstances, as offered by the defence, are plausible, extremely plausible, and may easily be true; and I feel it my duty to recommend this explanation to the most serious attention of the jury.
“Of the guilt or innocence of this young girl, none but the Omniscient can judge with infallibility; but in all cases of uncertainty it is the duty of Christian jurors, as it is the spirit of civilized law, to favor the acquittal of the prisoner. Such doubtful cases are most frequently found among those sustained solely by circumstantial evidence.
“Now, circumstantial evidence is not positive testimony—far from it. Witness the recent case of Eliza Fenning, an innocent woman, convicted by an English jury upon circumstantial evidence, but whose innocence was not discovered until after her execution, when it was too late to repair the dreadful error—when no power on earth could restore the life that the law had unjustly taken.
“One such judicial murder as that should be a warning to English juries, through all future time, never, except upon the most unquestionable proof, to assume the awful responsibility of pronouncing upon a fellow-creature’s guilt, or taking that sacred life which no earthly power ever can give back. Better that some guilty homicides should be left to the sure retribution of God than that one innocent person should be consigned to the unmerited ignominy of a capital conviction and a shameful death.
“If, from the evidence before you, you feel assured of the prisoner’s guilt, it is your duty to convict her; but if any—the least degree of uncertainty disturb your judgment—it is your duty to acquit her. English law recognizes no such middle course as that taken by the jury in rendering their verdict in the celebrated case of Madeleine Smith. If the charge is considered ‘not proved,’ the prisoner is entitled to a full acquittal.”
And, finally praying that their counsels might be directed by Omniscient wisdom, he dismissed them to the deliberation upon their verdict.
The venerable chief baron resumed his seat, and the bailiffs conducted the jury from the court-room.
The spectators breathed freely again. His lordship certainly favored the prisoner. And if ever the charge of a judge could sway the minds of a jury, those twelve men must certainly bring in a verdict of acquittal.