case young against Slaughterford a juror have be on the grand jury or of the  coroner inquest or be uncle to the prisoner be good cause of challenge S c  ante at a trial at bar in a appeal of murder holt chief justice say to which  the rest do not dissent that it be a good cause of challenge by the appellee  to one of the jury that he be one of the grand jury who find the bill against  the appellee upon which he be indict at Kingston assize also that the be of  the coroner inquest be good cause of challenge by the appellee also be uncle  to the appellee be good cause of challenge by the appellant but the appellee  deny he to be any relation the court direct it to be try on a voir dire one be  produce to be a witness against the appellee who be under twelve year of age  the appellees counsel object to he for that reason and beside they say he have  take money holt chief justice say that if he know the danger of a oath he may  be a witness and that appear he be admit and second suppose he have take money  that be no reason why his testimony shall not be take but if it be prove the  jury may give the less credit to his evidence but suppose one give or promise  a witness money if the cause go on that side he can be admit to give evidence  modern report sir Peter king object that in a indictment evidence of discourse  precede the fact be not to be give but holt chief justice say that they may  give in evidence anything that explain the fact the appellee be find guilty of  the murder come afterward to receive the judgement of the court and be arraign  and ask what he have to say why judgement shall not be give Mr Eyre solicitor  general move in arrest of judgement that the appeal be not good and take his  exception to it first that there be two place mention in the appeal videlicet  that he be commorant at Shalford and that the fact be do at Compton afterward  it say die year horan et loco prd the same jane young percussi second there be  no venue lie to the assault for it be say that the decease be at Compton c go  for sale prd Christop Slaughterford felon voluntary et ex ill will svan  prcogitata felon dict a house Regin nunc ac contra peace c die et horan prd at  Compton proud in Com surri way et arms c ac in et super the same jane young in  pace God et dict a house Regin ut prfertur existen felon voluntary et ex ill  will svan prcogitata insultum fecit so that the venue be only lie to the go  for sale way et arms for the ac separate the sentence and if a assault be  necessary it be necessary to lie a venue for it be traversable it shall have  be tunc et ibidem insultum fecit at first holt chief justice powys and gold  justice be clear that neither exception be good but Powell justice doubt and  the matter be put off to the next day holt chief justice be of opinion that  neither exception be material as to the first when one place be the man  addition the other the fact certain die horan et loco prd shall refer to the  place of the fact and it be as well as if it have be eoden for the place of  the fact be the last before the prced as to the other exception it be not  material for the assault be not necessary for modern report er p percussi be a  sufficient assault as to near be case where percussi be omit that be modern  report show the consequence without the cause percussi imply a assault but if  it Id not here it be say go for sale way et arms to Compton ac insultum fecit  c ac cum in stick c percussi to hand over eiden I you One mortal wound de quo  indeed wound instanter to go so that if the assault be necessity in the venue  here it will be sufficient set forth Powell justice say as to the first  exception the precedent be die horan et loco prd but in a appeal there needs  no addition for it be not within the statute of addition and it be say at  Compton instanter to go tie down the stroke to the place of the death as to  the second be say that debit mortal wound will be bad but in this case there  can be a stroke without a assault the old precedent be insidiand et ex insultu  but upon the petition of the clergy because it take away the benefit of the  clergy in the time of Henry the six it be leave out and afterward it be only  ex insultu in the case of burgh v Holdcroft a coke entry a there be no assault  lie and indeed where there be percussi as in this case there needs none powys  and gold justice be of the same opinion then sir Peter king say there be a  variance between the venire and the distringa for the addition of one of the  jury be de Chiddington and it be Cheddington in the distringa and he say it be  like palus for Paulus or Constantanus for Constantine but it appear that that  man be challenge by the appellee the court disallow the exception and  judgement be give quid suspende per collum Powell justice give the sentence  and the court order a rule to the sheriff of Surre to receive the body