A LUMINOUS SUMMING-UP.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 2659, 27 July 1889, Page 5 (Supplement)

A LUMINOUS SUMMING-UP.

Justice Cave delivered himself of one of those luminous summings-up, says the Loudon Star, for which he is so justly celebrated, at the Old Bailey, on Wednesday afternoon, It was in the case of Michael Cuelin, a labourer, lodging together with his brother, at a house in Limehouse. He went home druDk one night, and found that bis .brother with whom he slept, had got more than his fair share of the bedclothes, As the brother would not consent to redistribution, Michael set fire to the bedclothes and sat down and calmly smoked his pipe, whilst his brother began te frizzle. However, the brother woke up ; some of the neighbours came in, and the blankets and the brother were rcscued. Justice Cave squared himself up, took a long breath, looked the jury straight in the face, and said : This is a case in which the prisoner is charged with wilfully setting fire to the bedclothes. This would be felony, and I will tell you why. It is a very complicated matter. If he wilfully and maliciously set firo to the bedclothes, it would be with intent to set fire to the house. Now, the question is, did he set fire to the bedclothes with intent to set fire to the house ? If he maliciously set fire to the bedclothes and so set fire to the house, then, although be sot fire to the bedclothes without tho intentions of setting fire to the house, he would bo held to sot fire to the bedclothes with malicious intent to set fire to the house, for the law presumes that, when a man maliciously sets firo to the bedclothes, he intends the natural consequences of his act, and bo not only intends to set fire to the bedclothes, but also to set firo to the house. But if he set firo to the bedclotbeswithout intent to Bet fire to the house, he cannot be said to have set fire to the bedclothes maliciously and with intent to set fire to tho house. He might have set fire to tho bedclothes knowingly but with no intention to set fire to tho house, or intentionally with intent to set fire to tho bedclothes und not necessarily to set fire to the house, or inalioiou.-Iy with intent to set fire to tho bedclothes and P) to set fii'e to tho house. If he sec lire to the house with intent to set fire to tho bedclothes, he could not have set fire to tho hou-e clothes with intent to set fire to the bed. But he set bed to the hoin-e fire with clothes to set. fire to the intent, and not have set house to the bed fire with intent to set clothes to the fire. If he di lso ho is guilty, if he did not ho is not g-iilty. Consider your verdict.''