FOR THE ATTEMPTED ASSASSINATION OF THE PRINCE. O'FARRELL CONDEMNED TO DEATH. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.—March 26. (FROM THE SYDNEY 'EMPIRE.') TRIAL OF H. J. O'FARRELL

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXIV, Issue 3351, 13 April 1868, Page 4

FOR THE ATTEMPTED ASSASSINATION OF THE PRINCE. O'FARRELL CONDEMNED TO DEATH. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.— March 26. (FROM THE SYDNEY 'EMPIRE.')

TRIAL OF H. J. O'FARRELL

Yistkhdjly the special sittings of the Central Criminal Court, appointed for the trial of Henry James O'Farrell, charged with the attempted murder of his Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh, were commenced. Ai early as 9 o'clock a great crowd assembled in the enclosure fronting the Court-house. Owing to the excellent arrangements made, however, there was little confusion. Those who had obtained tickets were admitted by the side entry, the general public having to wait until the doors opened. This it did patiently, contrary to general expectation ; for the desire to be present during the trial was very natural on the part of those who had assembled. At 10 o'clock precisely, his Honor Judge Cheeke, before whom, and a special jury, the prisoner will be tried, entered the Court, and. took his seat, Lord Newry and the Hob. Elliot Yorke being seated besidt him. Lieutenant Haig, Captain Nelson, 8.N.; the Hon. J. Docker, M.L.C. ; Hon. J. B. Wilson, M.L.A. ; William Macleay, Esq., M.L.A. ; Claude Farie, Esq., Sheriff of Victoria, and several other gentlemen, occupied seats to the right and left of the Bench. The body of the court was densely crowded. The Hon. the Attorney-General, with the SolicitorGeneral, instructed by the Crown Solicitor, appeared to prosecute on behalf of the Crown. Mr. Aspinall (of Melbourne) and Mr. Dalley, instructed by Mr. Pavey (of Melbourne), appeared in defence of the Erisoner, who, on the opening of the Court, was rought into the dock. He looked pale and somewhtt nervous, and the bruises which he bad sustained at Olontarf were yet perceptible upon his face. He was well dressed in a tweed suit, and altogether presented a rather prepossessing appearance. The jury having answered to their names, the prisoner was arraigned for that, on 'I hursday, the 12th March, he did, wilfully and of malice aforethought, feloniously wound Alfred Ernest Albert, Duke of Edinburgh, with intent to kill him. The prisoner, on being asked how he pleaded, made some inaudible statement, waving his hand as though to imply that his pleading was a matter of little moment. His counsel, however, promptly replied for him, " Not guilty." Mr. Aspinall then made an application for the postponement of the trial, on an affidavit of Thomas Pavey, solicitor, Melbourne, setting forth that he had been instructed in Melbonrne, on Friday, to defend the prisoner ; that on Saturday last he had proceeded to Ballarat to procure evidence, and had returned to Melbourne on Sunday, sailing thence for Sydney on Monday, and had arrived last night. That three witnesses had been obtained, and one, a moat important witness, would leave Melbourne by the next boat. That it was necessary to ascertain if there be other witnesses in Sydney who would promote the defence ; and that it was material and necessary that a consultation should take place of the prisoner's oounsel. The defence to be raised on behalf of the prisoner would be that he is, and was at the time of the commission of the act with which he was charged, of unsound mind ; and it was requisite that some time should be given for the procurement of evidence to that effect. Mr. Aspinall laid he did not think the law officers of the Crown would press on the case. All that was asked was that twenty-four hours' time should be given, 'or until Monday morning next. If the prisoner had raised any other defence, or had had means to do no, he might hare prepared it ; but until a week back hi* relations had not become convinced of the identity of the prisoner. When that was settled, they considered it their duty to strife to place the case in its entirety before the Court. He asked for them and for the i risoner that the trial should be co ducted with all pos*iole coolness and deliberation, and with a due rega>d to mercy. If no time were allowed for the obtaining of all evidence in d-fence, justice could not be done. He begged that his Honor would take this view, and that bin learned friends would accede.to the application. It would involve but little more expense, and, if need be, a postponement until to-morrow would suffice. Otherwise, however, he would repeat, justice could not be done. But if every facility were given for the procurement of evidence in defence, no complaint could be raised by the prisoner. The time which had been at their command for the defence had been very limited, and it was obvious that to meet the ends of justice it should be extended. He submitted that the application was just and equitable. The Attorney-General said that, the defence of insanity being that proposed, his learned friend should have produced affidavits to that effect, in order to warrant the Court to accede to the request. It would be justified in resisting the application in the absence of such affidavits. As for the matter of expense alluded to, that would be no consideration where justice was concerned. As the delay asked fcr was so short, he thought that the proper course for the Court would be to comply with the application for a delay of the proceedings until the following day. On behalf of the Crown he acceded to his learned friend's request. Mr. Aspinall thanked the Hon the AttorneyGeneral for his concession ; but pointed out that, as a matter of convenience to the jury, it should be considered that in all probability the trial would extend over Sunday. It seemed to him, therefore, that the best course would be to postpone the pro* ceedings until Monday. His Honor observed that, as there were only four witnesses for the defence, it was not likely the trial would extend over Sunday. The Attorney- General said that he thought an adjournment until to-morrow would meet the justice of the case. Mr. Aspinall pointed out that the object of the delay was to ascertain what witnesses were to be procured in Sydney. It would be better to save the risk of the prolongment of the trial over Sunday, by postponement ef the trial to Monday. It was necessary to trace his client's life here, and, though it might be that there were no witnesses, there might be some very material to the defence. His Honor observed that the prisoner had had ten days' notice of trial. Mr. Aspinall pointed out that the defence had been undertaken in Victoria, and that the sisters of the prisoner had only arrived last night, and were now engaged making inquiries for the defence. The Attorney-General said that if it would be more convenient for the jury, and far the prosecution of the case, he would not oppose its postponement until Monday. His Honor observed that bis knowledge of juries told him that they did not like sitting on Saturdays. The Attorney-Ueneral said that he consented to the postponement till Monday. His Honor then adjourned the Court till Monday at 10 o'clock, and the prisoner was removed. [The following account of O'Farrell's . trial is abridged from the Sydney Morning Herald.]