"The Horse on the _Coin_ is more fit for a Waggon, Than meet for _St. George_ to encounter the _Dragon_! And, as for the _Effigy_, meant for the _Saint_, He appears like a _Sans Culotte_, ready to faint; With his head hanging down o'er a lean hungry paunch, He has struck, with his spear, his poor horse, on the haunch; While the _Dragon_ in pity, looks at the incision, And cocks up his nose, at _St. George_ in derision!!!" One of the most famous Criminal Cases of modern times occurred this year--singular for the fact that it revived the old Ordeal, "Appeal by battle," which had been in obeyance since 1771, and which no one ever dreamed would be revived. One Abraham Thornton had been accused of murdering Mary Ashford by drowning her on the 27th of May. He was tried, and acquitted, but was subsequently arrested in October on an appeal. This was heard in the King's Bench on the 17th of November, and both Appellant and Appellee answered to their names. The first, William Ashford, brother of the deceased, is described as being a slight made lad, about seventeen years of age, and short in stature. Thornton stood about five feet four inches high, very stout and robust. After the preliminary formalities were over, Mr. Leblanc, clerk to the Crown, read over the record against him, and asked him whether he was guilty or not." "His Counsel, Mr. Reader, then put a piece of paper in his hand from which the prisoner read: "'NOT GUILTY; AND I AM READY TO DEFEND THE SAME WITH MY BODY.' "Mr. Reader had likewise handed a pair of large gauntlets, or gloves, to the prisoner, one of which he put on, and the other, in pursuance of the old form, he threw down for the appellant to take up. It was not taken up, and "Mr. Reader moved that it should be kept in the custody of the officer of the Court. Mr. Leblanc: Your plea is that you are not Guilty, and that you are ready to defend the said plea with your body? "The Prisoner: It is. "Lord Ellenborough: Is the Appellant in Court? "Mr. Clarke (his Counsel): He is, my Lord." He appeared, but said nothing, and then Mr. Clarke addressed the Court with a counter plea for the Appellant. In the course of his speech, he said, "It would appear to me extraordinary indeed, if the person who murdered the sister, should, as the law exists in these enlightened times, be allowed to prove his innocence by murdering the brother also, or at least, by an attempt to do so. "Lord Ellenborough: It is the law of England, Mr. Clarke. We must not call it murder." Mr. Clarke then went on arguing that, surely the appeal must be discretionary with the Court, and urged the inferiority of his client's physique. The Case was adjourned until the 22nd of November, when the Appellant pleaded that Thornton ought not to be admitted to wage battle with him, because both before and after the appeal there had been, and still were, proofs that he had murdered the Appellant's sister. Case adjourned.