case watts against brain No word or gesture however provoke will justify  homicide from the crime of murder and if a jury give a verdict without be  agree they shall he fine Ant Noy side lev hob Jones r Kely cro James   saint  Tr saint Tr style foster hawk hale Cowp juror fine for give a collusive  verdict Noy Bulst Vau gh roll Abr hale dyer I burr strange term Rep b r r the  plaintiff bring a appeal of murder for the death of her husband to which the  defendant plead not guilty upon evidence at the bar it appear that two day  before her husband death he and the defendant fight upon a quarrel then  betwixt they the defendant be hurt in that fray and the three day after the  plaintiff husband pass by the defendant shop the defendant pursue he sudden  and the husband back be towards he so as he perceive he not the defendant  strike he upon the calf of his leg whereof he instant die the defendant to  excuse himself affirm that he who be slay when he come by his shop smile upon  he and wry his mouth at he and therefore for this mock of he he pursue he it  be much enforce by the defendant counsel that it be a new croak Elizabeth  cause of quarrel and so the stroke be not upon any precedent malice and  therefore it be not murder but all the court several deliver their opinion  that if one make a wry or distort mouth or the like countenance up another and  the other immediate pursue and kill he it be murder for it shall he presume to  he malice precedent and that such a slight provocation be not sufficient  ground or pretence for a quarrel and so deliver the law to the jury that it be  murder although what the defendant pretend haid be true whereupon the jury go  from the bar notwithstanding the evidence be pregnant against the defendant  eight of they agree to find he not guilty but the other four withstand they  and will not find it but to he murder on the next day morning two of the four  agree with the eight to find he not guilty and afterward the other two consent  in this manner that they shall bring in and offer their verdict not guilty and  if the court dislike thereof that then they all shall change the verdict and  find he guilty upon this agreement they come to the bar and the foreman  pronounce the verdict that the defendant be not guilty the court much mislike  thereof be contrary to their direction examine ever one of they by the poll  whether that be his verdict and ten of the first part of the pannel several  affirm their verdict that the defendant be not guilty but the two last affirm  how they agree and discover the whole manner of their agreement whereupon they  be send back again and return and find the defendant guilty for this practice  Harris the foreman be afterward fine mark and the b see will mary c and Carth  Mod ante croak Elizabeth er p other seven who agree with he at the first every  of they be fine the other two who agree with the eight although they affirm  that it be because they can not endure or hold out any long yet because they  do not discover the practice be examine by poll but affirm the verdict they be  fine each of they at and all of they imprison the other two be dismiss yet  blame for such a manner of consentin in abuse of the court and afterward the  defendant be adjudge to he hang