during the subsistence of another in
which the crime laid was the same.

"The judgment of the court was, that the whole of the cases previous to
the passing of the act 6 Geo. IV., cap. 51, were against the case made
on behalf of Mr. Duffy, and that there was nothing in the act to take it
out of the operation of those decisions. The act did not directly apply
to the present case at all, and the court could not imply anything to
disqualify the crown from taking whatever course it should think fit to
take in furtherance of the administration of justice.

"The counsel for the prisoner, however, had not stated all their
objections; and on Mr. Duffy being called on to plead to the indictment,
his counsel handed in on his behalf a plea of abatement, on the ground
of the disqualification (by reason of non-residence, or not being
householders) of two of the grand jury who found the bill. The counsel
for the crown retired, and, ultimately, the further consideration of the
plea was postponed to the next day.

"The court intimated that in the decision they had come to on the motion
before them in the morning, they by no means desired or intended to
leave Mr. Duffy open to the indictment found in the county along with
that found in the city. Before he pleaded to the latter, the crown
should declare what course would be adopted--whether a _nolle prosequi_
should not be entered on the other.

"Application having been made to rescind the order of the court made on
Saturday, prohibiting the proceedings at the trial to be published in
the newspapers until the trial had been concluded, the court refused to
accede to the request.

"On Tuesday, the arguments on the plea, handed in on the previous day,
engaged the court the whole day. Their lordships took time to consult
the various authorities cited, before giving judgment. Before rising,
the court refused to hear Mr. Duffy, who applied to have the order
against the publication of the proceedings at the trial in the
newspapers rescinded, and directed the application to be made by
counsel; stating at the same time that the order must remain in force,
unless it could be shown that the prisoner would sustain damage from the
non-publication.

"On Thursday morning, Mr. Holmes inquired at what time their lordships
would deliver judgment as to the validity of the plea in abatement?
Mr. Justice Perrin replied that they hoped to be able to give judgment
tomorrow (Friday). It was clear that,