The Express.
London, England, 1856-10-23 00:00:00

THE POLICE COURTS.

MANSION-BOUBE.
John Locket, porter in the service of Mr. Williams, a
wine-merchant, carrying on busbies' in Bash-lane, wu
batmen before the Lord !layer, charged with haviog robbed
We employer of 301.
The prisoner wu folly committed for trial to the Central
CrimloalConvt._

Mr. Edward Bark*, of 47, Ludgate-hill, attended in
ta""rwe a to
titargiAt elhow.h.rbi....l,:titier.,..w" having cc-
& Hoare, a conductor in the service of the London Ge-
neral Omnibus Company, said—About 10 o'clock on Sunday
night lest the defendant rode by the omnibus of which I am
the conductor from Islington to the Bank, and on alighting
from it offend me 3d. I refused to take this sum, the fare
being 6d. on a Sunday night after eight o'clock. It is so
painted on the door of the omnibus.
The Lord htayor—l do not at all understand this system
of double charge. Is it painted inside or outside the door
of the omnibus ? _ _

Complainant—lnside.
The Lord Mayor—l should like to see it.
Complainant—l Clll show it to your lordship, certainly ;
bat I should have to take the door off the omnibus and
being it hem.
The Lord Mayor—l think It better that you should.
The defendant, in answer to the complaiat, said that he

wee in the frequent habit of riding in the company's
omnibuses the distance that he came on Sunday evening
last, and of paying 3d. as the legal fare, and that he con-
sidered the demand of 6d. an attempt at extortion. He knew
nothing about the extra charge after 8 o'clock on a Bunday
evening. as having ridden on the top of the omnibus and
not having been inside, he had not noticed the alteration of
the figure which had been alluded to by the complainant.
The Lord Mayor-11pm referring to the Aot of Parlia-
ment I find that the notice is whey* it ought to be.
Defendant—l consider that I ought not to *entrapped in
that way. I was unaware of the alteration, and I submit
that it ought to be painted outaide as well u inside.
The Lord Mayor.—Yon must go and tell parliament that;
it is their doing, not mine. A great many awkward things
are done by Parliament.
Complainant—The defendant called us a d—d set of
humbugs and thieve., my lord. (Langlvar )
Defandant—That's not true. A cabman or an omnibus
conductor will swear anything.
The Lord Mayor—No, no; you have no right whatever
to make that observation, which had Uttar have been
spend. The complainant appears to be a well-conductad

Complainant—My lord, I have just had one of our omni-
bus,. stopped at the Mansion-house door, and perhaps you
would like to seethe braids of the door.
The Lord Mayor—l should, very much.
His lordship, the complainant, and several other person
interested In the matter, left the court for the purpose of in.'
Blunting the door of the omnibus.
The Lord Mayor, upon his return Into court, fihd
there is written on the door, "After eight o'clock on Sunday
night, 6d." 1 eufess the words us not as legible so they
might be.
Defendant—lt's very clear, my lord.
The Lord Mayor—l believe what you ray, but I believe
my own eyes better. All places and distances, as well u
fans should be most distinctly written, and written, too, at
fulaength,eepecially the words having reference to the
lousiness the amount of the fare one Sunday evenitg. I
think that notice should be given to everybody that the
farce ate then inereued. I( this be not dose I think it
not unlikely that disputes, and possibly breaches of the
peace, may occur. It I. my duty to order the defendant to
pay 6d., the amount of the fare, and 2#. oats.
The defendant paid the 29. 64.
Complainant—With regard to my espouser, my lord ; I
loot half a day in taking out the summons, and I
have been here two or three Noun to day ?

The Lord Mayor—l shall not allosiyou any expenses.
If you take passengers by your omnibuses after eight
o'cicck on Sunday night, I think you are bound to tell
them that the tare is 6d. I should say that ninety-nine
persons out of • bandied looking at the label afield to the
door would not ma that the fora -at airpand. and it
ought to be put up in the most conspicuous put of the
=tabu.

BOW-STREET.
Mr. Maw the chief tuber, informed the magistrate that
the statement made the previous shy of the death of the
young man Cops, from the injuries inflicted on him by
Joseph Jennings, tumid out to be untrue. Cope was still
living, and bad undergone an operation late at night. Tee
pretended communication from the hospital was brought
to the coast by a young man, who represented himself as
one of the dispensers there, inquired for the inspector, and
said he was sent by the house surgeon to stets that Cope
wee dead. The story was credited by the inspector and by
everybody, the more readily as some of the Micas remem-
bered to have seen the young men at the hospital, and rt.
lieu& him to be a medial student.
Mr. Judine—Of coarse ft would be believed; nobody bad
any reason to doubt it. Who would have inspected each a
foolish hoar ?
Hie worship afterwards &voted that inquiries should he
made is to the man's condition, as it might be deeirsble that,
if conscious, he should be examined.
In the course of the day Inspector Bradstock attended,
and informed his worship that the man won conscious, but
continued unable tn speak. He might be ezamised if his
answers could be taken in signs. For instasce, be might be
confronted with the prisoner and asked if that was the man
who had injured him. He was in great danger.
Mr. Jardine said that such a question could not be put to
the man. Besides, an examination by signs would be un-
satisfactoey, as it would be impossible to tell whether he
understood what was said to him.
The matter then dropped.
WESTMINSTER.
Charles Paillak, a costamonger, was charged with bru-
tally assaulting and wounding Elise, his wife.
Complainant's fete was much set Alen, and her herd
enveloped in surgical bandsges. She stated that she hod
been married to the prisoner nearly fire years, bat had no
children. At half peat nine on Tuesday night he came
home to 10, Perkin's-rents, Westminster, intoxicated, sod
because he wee unable to draw the barrow upon whisk he
carried his groats, into the house, became very angry, and
raping into the room, abused her without any provocation.
Words then ensued between them, when he commencid
ill-using her, and treated her in a moat brutal manner. He
cut her head open with a poker, kicked her ev aural times
about thy stomach and body, and than beat her with the
poker across her loins. She became insensible, ad could
not then tell what he did to her, but had heard that he R-
etested her afterwards. She, however, did not wish to
press the charm) spinet him, if the =enlistees would hold
him to bail to keep the peace towards her.
Mr. Arnold inquired whether he was in the habit of M-
ingling her?
The poor woman replied that be wee antinuelly doing
so, and had severely beaten her only the night before. She
further complainea that he had outraged her feelings by
bringing • loam woman home, and had been guilty of adul-
tery in her very presence.
Mn Humphreys, a women living in the neighbourhood,
proved that cries of "Murder" were heard from defend-
ant's room at half-put nine, and were continued until
twenty minutes past ten. During that interval no one had
liked to interfere, but she at last did, and, on going to the
prisoner's apartment, found him standiog over hie wife,who
was lying insensible on the bed, bleeding from a wetted in
the head. She entreated him to leave his wife alone, in
Guido( which he took one of his thick nailed shoes a and
struck her three blows oa the head with it. The police then
strived and rescued bar from farther violence. Complainant
said nothing, sad was a?parently insensible when he attack
her with the shoe.
William Myer, 214 B, said that he toned a large crowd
assembled, and heard cries of Murder." He went to
defendant's room and found his wife lying on the floor,
with blood streaming from her head and face. She could
sanely speak, but said he bad been kicking her about, and
had Misled the injuries she then bore. She was imme-
diately masa the hospital, and he was conveyed to the

rib)* awes of brutality that could be emeteived ; for, putting
@Melees wife's evidence, ft had ben distinctly proved by the
testimony (Cho woman Humphreys, that after the length-
ened time cries of °Murder'. had proceeded from the room,
defendant had struck his wife on the bead while in en in-
sensible state three times with his heavy nailed shoe. It was
another of the frequent caste of a woman being brutally M-
used by a ruffien, and resembled others that came beton
him in the fact that the injured potion was cot disposed to
press the charge, bat merely asked that the assailant might
be bound over to keep the peace. Defendant, Instead of
expensing contrition or regret, appeared content to allege
something against his unfortunate wife, which she denied.
He (the magistrate) had a public duty to perform, and,
feeling that the case was one of the most aggravated
description, should visit it with the fall penalty of the law.
Notwithstanding the punishments that had been inflicted,
horrible outrages upon women still continued to be peep-
tested, sad unless the legislature gave some power to ma-
nta the parties in humble life, where nth brutality was
being committed, he feared that swarths of that description
would continue until they were attended with fetal cones-
gamic's. lie then sentenced defendant to six months'
bard labour in the House of Correction, and required him at
the respiration of that time to find two auretieo In 20i. each
for hie good behavioar for a lila period.