MR. ASSHETON CROSSsaid, he wished to supplement an answer he gave a few days ago to the hon. Member for Dundalk (Mr. Callan), with regard to the jury in Gerald Main waring's case. He had, on the occasion he referred to, said he had no authority for his remark, that he could not conceive the jury would have acted in the manner alleged; but he had since made inquiry, and that day he had received the following letter from the foreman of the jury:—
Sir,—In reply to your inquiry respecting the mode in which the jury in the Gerald Mainwaring case came to their decision, after the jury had retired and discussed the case, they ascertained that they were equally divided as to the verdict, six being for manslaughter, and six for wilful murder, with a strong recommendation to mercy. We had not then elected a Chairman, and I, as Foreman, declined to act as such, so we agreed to ballot for one, and that the vote of the majority should rule the verdict, and, in case of an equal vote, the Chairman should have the casting vote. There was no tossing or casting of lots, and the only balloting was for the election of a Chairman. I, and others of the jury, wish this to be made 677 public to the fullest extent, so as to contradict many untrue reports which have been circulated.He (Mr. Assheton Cross) was bound to say that he could not come to such a conclusion which the foreman appeared to have done with such complacency. When there were six on one side and six on the other, and they drew lots for a Chairman, who should have a casting vote, that seemed to him very like tossing for a verdict.
§ MR. CALLANgave Notice that tomorrow he should inquire 'Whether the capital sentence would, under the circumstances, be carried out?
MR. ASSHETON CROSSsaid, he should have thought it was absolutely unnecessary to put such a Question.