Thornton answered this
plea by another, in which all the facts that had been proved on the
trial at Warwick were set forth at great length. And then the case was
very elaborately argued, for three days, by two eminent and able
counsel, one of whom will be well remembered by most readers as the late
Chief-Justice Tindal. Tindal was Thornton's counsel. Of course I cannot
go here into the argument. The result was, that, on 16th April, 1881,
the full Court (Lord Ellenborough, and Justices Bayley, Abbott, and
Holroyd) declared themselves _unanimously_ of opinion that the appellee
(Thornton) was entitled to, wage his battel, no presumptions of guilt
having been shown clear enough or strong enough to deprive him of that
right. Upon this, Ashford, not having accepted the wager of battel, the
"appeal" was stayed, and Thornton was discharged. Thus no reversal took
place of the previous acquittal of Thornton by the Jury at Warwick
Assizes. But that acquittal had nothing whatever to do with any "trial
by battel;" for I have shown that the "wager of battel" arose out of a
proceeding later than and consequent upon that acquittal, and that this
"wager of battel" never reached the stage of a "trial by battel.
Pages:
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48