The Express.
London, England, 1862-11-25 00:00:00

WEENIER V. WIZBNTSR AND NITVORD.

Dr. Tristram appeared for the petitioner, Captain
Webster, late of the 19th Regiment, who had ob-
tained a divorce on account of his wife's adultery,
in India, with Captain Ilitford, of the same regi-
ment. The learned counsel applied to the court to make
an order for the benefit of the daughter of the marriage out
of the blooms of the mother under the marriage settlement.
The affidavits showed that the petitiocer was a person of
very small means, and that the amount of the settlement
was only about 85!. a year.
Dr. Spicks resisted the motion, and reminded the judge
that whereas the petitioner had demanded 5,0001. of the co-
respondent as damages, the jury had only given him rl.
The court ordered the trustees to pay 201. to the grand-
father of the child towards her maintenance.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
(THIS DAY.)

(Before the Reconier.)

George Pinks, Joseph Tacker, sad Jerernioh Neale were
Indicted for stealing three auks of flour, the property of
William Archer.

Mr. Pater .prosecuted, and Mr. Ribton defended the
prisoners.
The prosecutors, it appeared, are flour factors, carrying
on business in Upper Thames-street, and they also had
some steam flour mill. in Park-street, Southwark. On the
evening of the 6th instant Walter Betts, a City detective,
was in Union-street, Borough, and saw the three
prisoners with a truck ; Pinks and Neale were I
pulling it, and Tucker was pushing behind. They
were going very fast, and he noticed three men fol-
lowing behind. His suspicions being aroused, he followed
them u far as Union-street, Spitalfields, when be met
another constable, named Hawker, and they stopped the
prisoners. and asked them what they bad in the truck, and
Neale said he did not know, it was given them on the
City side of the river to take to the Great Eastern Railway
Station, and he got a shilling for doing so. The prisoner
Neale, however, it appeared, got away, but was appre-
hended the next day, and he said he was asked by the
other men to give it a push behind. Upon the truck being
examined it was found to contain three sacks. containing
14.10 lbs. of flour, the sacks being blended with the name of
Archer. The flour was identified by the prosecutor as it
was of a peculiar description, having been imported from
Adelaide, in Australia, and was very much finer than
English flour.
Mr. Hibton contended that the defence of the prisoners—
that they were employed to take the flour—was a very
probable one, and that the three men, who were remaining
behind, were the men who employed them.
The jury found Pinks and Neale Guilty of receiving the
property knowing it to have been stolen, and Acquitted
Tucker.

The Recorder sentenced the prisoners to nine months'
imprisonment with hanl labour.
Gpmje Wilson, 35, was indicted for a burglary, accom-
panied with violence, in the dwelling-house of Wilhelm
Ott.

Cooper prosecuted.
The prosecutor in this cue is a plumber and glazier, in
York-plane, Walworth-n ad, and on the night of the 20th
of ktober, be went to bed at 8 o'clock, and his wife also
went to bed at 11 o'clock. About three hours afterwards,
it appeared that the wife of the prosecutor happened by acci-
dent to put her hand out of bed and she felt the body of
man in a stooping position. She shrieked out and her bus-
tend got up and procured a light and went into an adjoin-
ing room, where he saw the prisoner with a life pre.
server in his hand, and upon his going towards him he
struck him a tremendous blow on the heed with the life
preserver, and then jumped out of the window. The pro-
secutor was so much injured he was unable to give an alarm,
but the prisoner was fortunately intercepted by a police.
constable named Henry Moore, who secured him, and found
part of the property that had been stolen from the prose-
cutor's house in his possession, and near the spot where he
was taken a life-preserver was picked up. The prosecutor
was very severely injured by the blow be receive and the
moment be saw the prisoner he at once identified him as
the man by whom the outrage was committed.
The prisoner, in his defence, merely denied he wu the
man who was in the prosecutor's house.
The jury, without any hesitation, returned a verdict of
Gamy,
The prisoner, who was convicted at the last session of
another burglary, was sentenced to be kept in penal servi-
tude fur 15 years.