The Express.
London, England, 1847-02-15 00:00:00

them where he got them, who ?embed, at Fuller'shanti„ The
notes were paid. The prisoner, to the best of his tr.dief, was
the person who preselted them.—Mr. Clarkson applied for
a remand to complete the evidence.—Mr. Aldermen Gibbs
accordingly remanded him for a week.—Mr. Clarkson now
applied for the detention of 2001., which 10-4 been lodged in
the London and Westminster Bank by tfAti father of the pri-
soner, who had left the country. A gentleman from the
London and Westminster Bank guaranteed that the amount
should be detained.
M ARLBOROUG Ii•STREET.—On Saturday eight well-
dressed persons, most of them well known in the gaming
circles, who gave the names of William Wadland, John Wit-
haw, Chariot Pritchard, Daniel Roux, Richard Forbes,
George Cooper Chariot Coopor, and Edward Daly, all of
which are believed to be assumed, were brought before Mr.
Hardwick, charged by the police with having been found is a
common gaining-house, 4. Albemarle-street, Piccadilly. Mr.
Roberts attended on their behalf—Mr. Superintendent 80.
embed, C division, produced his order and author=
the Police Commissioners to enter the house and
the means by which he did so. On p robs,
be found in one of the rooms the defenders rating Or
standing round a table, but could not Awl may Naming
straits on the premises or the defendants per-
sons. Mr. Roberts said no case had been madeced against the
defendants. He did not complain of the manner in which
the duty had been done, but he would caution the officers
against taking perms into custody when they were without
evidence to retain a charge smart them. Professional
opinion had been taken on the point, and he could state that
if the matter occurred again an action would be brought in
order to try the legality of the proceedings.—Mr. Hardwick
said, the owe baled foe want of Foe l'here was no moral
doubt in his mind about the home being a gaming-house,
but ea the evidence did not go far enough he must order the
defendants to be discharged ; at the same time he must remark,
in reference to what had WEE from the solicitor, that
after a constable had taken a man into custody on soapiern
of having been found in a gamiag-house, he doubted whether
the constable would be justified in releasing hb prisoner,
bemuse the amount of evidence which might not satisfy one
magistrate might, on the other hand, satisfy another.—The
partite were discharged.
CLERKENW ELL.— ROBBERY BY A FEMALE Sze,
vrarr.—Mary Ksareeey was charged.
rings, with stealing two va-
luable diamond rings, two brilliant ngs, a gold eye-glass,
and other property, belonging to Miss Mary Kent. Two
months since Miss Kent took the prisoner into her
employ from the workhouse. The prisoner having acted
correctly the greater part of that period, Mir Kent bad
confidence in luir. and about a fortnight ago, having occa-
sion to quit the house for a few days, she left the prisoner in
charge of it. On her return she noticed a difference in the
prisoner's manner, and on questioning her on the subject,
she told Mir Kent that an elderly woman had been inquir-
ing after her (Mir Kent), and after waiting in the bed-
room some time, had left, saying she would call again. On
her going into her bed-room she missed the above and other
property, and oeaking about it to the prisoner she be-
came very ecingazi , ocatradicting herself in the statements
she made,
_and subsequently absconded, but was traced
and apprehended by the police. The prisoner was remanded
to enable the police to find the stolen property.
WORSHIP-STREET.—Mosa POLICE AOOKESSION.—
C. A. Amos a polies-constsbla of the H division, appeared
to sneerer a charge preferred against him, at the instance of
the commissionen of the police, for having greed airlifted
a young female, and then locked her up on a
in order to prevent a charge being preferred whir 1111 Z
the offence. The particulars of this ere leer *raft
appeared in our paper.—lt appeared that on ?hurley hist,
Ellen Bolton, was charged by defendant before Yr. Arnold,
the magistrate, with disorderly conduct, when the Orr
that the primer had taken liberties with her, sod as her
threatening to prefer a charge against him for is dela, he
had trumped up the charge against her to screen
Mr. Arnold asked her if she had a witness ? She said a girl
was with her at the time, and could vouch for the truth of
her statement.—The defendant denied the truth of her state-
ment in every particular, and the other girl not b2=est
Mr. Arnold adjadicated on the policeman's
ordered her to be imprisoned for seven days. After the ere
had been concluded, and the girl locked up,* wirer
alluded to came into court, and, although she tad eat seem
the prisoner after the defendant had locked hermp ommis
exactly the same statement. Mr. Arnold, on
this, ordered the prisoner to be placed at the bar,
which being done, she was discharged. The report
of the CAW having been forwarded to the commirioners of
police, they directed the present proceedings.—The first
witner called was the girl Bolton, who having deposed to
the facts already stated, went on to say that as sees se As
asked the defendant the way. out of Brick-lane, he made me
of the most filthy expressions to her, which she took no
notice of, when he proceeded to net in the vomit and most
indecent manner, and forcing her up a wart, threw her
down, where had it not been for her resistance, and the
arrival of the other girl, he would have effected his purpose.
On getting away, she proceeded towards the station-house
for the purpose of making a charge against him, when he
followed and took her into custody, afterwards telling her be
would let bee go if she would promise not to lodes a *Ma
against him ; refusing this, she was taken to the rat* mid
locked up. She did not see her companion until after her
conviction the next morning. She mentioned the way she
had bees treated to the inspector who took the charge.—
Jane Reeve, the girl alluded to, in every particular corrobo-
rated her.—lt being seven o'clock before the testimony had
concluded, Mr. Broughton adjourned the case, observing
that if the witnesses were speaking the truth, the primmer
should not have been sent before him for summary envie-
tion, but indicted for perjury.