“The caution required by law as to the conduct of officers of justice in apprehending persons charged with crimes applies only to a dwelling-house whereof the doors are not open, and that caution is confined to a dwelling-house alone. All other buildings or places of meeting may be lawfully opened and entered for the apprehension of persons charged with crimes against the law, without any previous notification made. And when those officers have declared the character in which they appear, the persons within are bound to yield themselves in the same manner as if they had been met in the fields, or in the open street; and if any of these officers be killed when the arrest would have been lawful, then the party by whom the death-wound is inflicted becomes guilty of the crime of murder. The arrest of persons under the authority of a warrant from the magistrates is a lawful arrest. So also is the arrest by peace-officers, without a warrant, of persons supposed or reasonably alleged to have committed felony. So also is an arrest by peace-officers, without a warrant, of persons actually engaged in any breach of the peace, or of persons assembled and arming, or otherwise preparing for the immediate perpetration of murder; because such an assembly and such a perpetration are in themselves criminal, and the arrest is actually necessary for the prevention of the accomplishment of a still more heinous design. I mention this, because the case likely to be submitted to you may fall within these observations. The persons required to surrender to the officers of the peace, though they may not be authorized to arrest them, are not warranted in assaulting those officers with deadly weapons, without warning them to stand off; and if they do, and death ensue, they all subject themselves to punishment for the crime of murder—at all events, they would be guilty of man-slaughter.
“In speaking of those guilty of murder, you will bear in mind that all who unite in resistance, and use words manifesting that determination, are equally guilty with him who inflicts the death-wound.
“Gentlemen, having said so much upon the third head of your inquiry, very little remains to be said of the fourth. This comprises all offences committed on the person of F. Fitzclarence, and the others maimed, contrary to the 43d of the late king, the title of which is set forth. You will therefore see that the jurisdiction does not extend to all offences committed against these persons, but only such as are contrary to the statute I have just mentioned to you. That statute is the fifty-eighth chapter of the 43d of his late majesty; and as no doubt it has been brought under the view of many of you, I need not enter fully into it. The provisions of this act are—‘That it is a capital felony for any person to shoot at, or wilfully to present and point loaded fire-arms at, and attempt, by drawing the trigger, to discharge the same at any of his majesty’s subjects, and also wilfully and maliciously to stab or cut, with intent to murder, rob, maim, or disfigure any of his subjects, or to do them any grievous bodily harm.’ There is an express provision in this statute which enacts, that these offences must be committed under such circumstances as that, if the attempt succeeded in depriving a fellow-creature of life, it would be murder. Now, if such an attempt be made in the open street, which probably is a case that may be brought before you, there can be no question of a malicious design to murder, or to do some grievous bodily harm. As, however, no case is likely to come before you falling within the excepting provision of the statute, I forbear to trouble you with any further observations, being well aware, that in this case, as well as in every other, the best security for the due discharge of the important trust reposed in you will be found in your own good sense, your own sound discretion, and your own general knowledge. If, however, in the progress of your investigation any unexpected difficulty shall arise, the Court will be found ready to give you such further advice as you may require.
“Having detained you thus long, with such observations as I have thought necessary, I now dismiss you to the discharge of that important duty for the execution of which you are assembled.”
At the conclusion of his Lordship’s address, the Jury retired to their room, and proceeded to examine witnesses upon the indictments which were preferred before them. The Judges continued sitting in Court for upwards of an hour, when the foreman and a few other members of the Grand Jury returned, and an arrangement was made that their Lordships should resume their seats at twelve o’clock, and that the Grand Jury were to assemble at ten o’clock.
On this occasion, the following witnesses were in attendance:—The Right Hon. Nicholas Vansittart, R. Baker, Esq., R. Birnie, Esq., Captain Fitzclarence; Monument and Adams (in custody); Ruthven, Ellis, Westcott, Lee, Brooks, Surman, Wright, Taunton, Bishop, and Gill (officers); Serjeant Legge, John Muddock, Jonathan Curtis, Joseph Basey, Joseph Rivell, and Joseph Edgar (soldiers); Joseph Hall, Thomas Droyer, Thomas Hiden, Joseph Harry Price, Emanuel Francis, James Pocock, James Munday, Richard Munday, George Paylock, Mary Rogers, Eleanor Walker, &c.
Soon after twelve o’clock the Judges left the Court; and at half past twelve the Grand Jury, having then been a considerable time in deliberation, proceeded with the examination of witnesses.
Mr. Bouchier, one of the solicitors to the Treasury, was the first witness examined: he was only a few minutes before the Jury.
Robert Adams, the ex-Oxford Blue, and an accomplice of the conspirators, was next called. He was brought from the House of Correction, where he had been in confinement since the final examination of the conspirators before the Privy-Council, in the custody of Mr. Adkins, the Governor, and the principal turnkey. He was three hours under examination. He appeared perfectly cool and collected when he came from the Grand Jury Room. After his examination he was taken back in custody to the Cold-Bath-fields Prison.
The Right Hon. Nicholas Vansittart, Chancellor of the Exchequer, was the third witness. The Right Hon. gentleman, together with Captain Fitzclarence, and other witnesses of the superior order, was accommodated with a private room, while waiting the summons of the Grand Jury. He was not more than ten minutes under examination.