The Express.
London, England, 1866-09-11 00:00:00

THE POLICE COURT&

MANSION-HOT:TM

Maroon, • well dressed young man, described on
the charge sheet as being a compositor, was charged before
Mr. Alderman Dakin with being in unlawful possession of
an electroplated biscuit box, value Si., and other articles,
without gtvin4 a satisfactory excuse or explanation.
From the evidence of John Davies, an active and intel-
ligent officer of the City police force, 721, it ap
that on Saturday afternoon last about five o'clock ressrreal
on duty in plain clothes in Bishopi!gate-strvet Within
when he saw the prisoner coming in the direetion of
Threadneedle-street, carrying a brown paper parcel effec-
trally covered with • table napkin. Suspecting him, be
wa,ched the prisoner into • covered court in the street
where witness followed him. The prisoner opened • con-
versation on the state of the weather, and proceeded to
wrap up the brown paper parcel more carefully in the nap-
kin, upon which the witness asked him what he bad got.
The prisoner gave evasive answers, upon which the wit- I
nese told him that he was • police officer, and must have I
• more satisfactory account of himself or ho must take
him into custody. He made no reply, but uncovered
the parcel and displayed jhe biscuit box now pro-
duced which he said was sifter, and had been left to him
by his great grandfather. He added that his was taking
it home, but he refused to say where his home was,
and was at once conveyed to the police-station. On being
searched there was found upon the prisoner a small chisel,
• pair of scissors, a crystal mustard-pot with plated top, a
silver tea-spoon, two plated mustard spoons, • bouquet
bolder, and a second napkin marked like that which had
covered the parcel containing the biscuit-box. The witness
set about inquiries, and the result was that he had dis-
covered the owner of the whole of the property, and the
gentlemen was new in attendance.
Mr. John Clerk Manhmam, was then called, and proved
that he resided at Beckley-park, Surrey, and the whole of
the articles produced by the officer were his property.
The buiscuit-box was safe in his residence at 10 o'clock on
the night of Thursday last, and it was missed the followin;
morning at breakfast time. There was a considerable
amount of other property, which might have been carried
away, but was left undisturbed. On a future day his
servants could attend and speak to the identity of the two
napkins found upon the prisoner.
Mr. Alderman Dakin accordingly remanded the prisoner

until Thursday next.
In the course of the proceedings Sergeant James Hain,
the well-known and zealous detective officer attached to
the P division of the Metropolitan police, who was in
attendance to watch the case, expressed his belief that the
prisoner has already been convicted of felony, but at pre-
sent be was not prepared with positive proof.
The prisoner, who had nothing to say, was then removed
to the cells.
GUILDHALL.

William Lee, a powerful, ruffianly-looking fellow, was
charged with committing a violent and unprovoked assault
upon Jcsie .`Stewart.
The complainant, a respectable-looking young woman,
stepped into the witness-box, and presented a shocking
appearance, her eyes being terribly blackened, and the
bridge of her nose broken. She said she lived at
No. 8, Blue Heart-court, Coleman-street. She did
not know the prisoner, and had never spoken
to him before. She went into the Shepherd
and Flock public-house with a friend of hers anti her
mother to have some ale, and while leaving it the
prisoner, who was in Ciere at the time, commenced
lark' ts with her frier cis, at which they were much
annoyed, and they remonstrated with him about it. He
told the complainant that he would give her the privilege
of baying more crow's pecks in her face twenty times over
than he bad in his. She was going out of the door when
he pushed her up against it, and when she t timed round
to threaten him with the police for his violence, he struck
her brutally in her face three times with his fist, causing
the injuries shown,
Mrs. Emily Hopkins, one of the last witness's friends,
corroborated all the complainant had stated, adding that
his language to them all was most disgusting.
The prisoner said he did not do it. She fell against the
door.
Aideeman Dakin was not surprised at his disclaiming it,
because it was the most cowardly and unmanly assault he
bad ever heard of, and one that he ought to be ashamed
of. The sentence of the court was that he should have two
calendar months' imprisonment in the House of Correction
with hard labour.
Charles Mayhew, an elderly man, described on the
charge-sheet as an agent, residing at No. 2. Vernon-place,
Bloomsbury-square, was charged with having on the 23rd
of November, committed wilful and corrupt perjury in an
affidavit made before the deputy registrar of the Court of
the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of the said City.
Mr. Nelson, the city solicitor, prosecuted; and Mr.
Sorrell appeared for the prisoner.
Mr. Nelson said he appeared to prosecute the prisoner
on a charge of perjury under the following circumstances:
—When gentlemen were summoned on the juryor grand
jury at the Lord Mayor's Court and did not attend they
were fined. The prisoner seemed to make it a prac-
tice to ascertain who the gentlemen were who
TY are fined for non-attendance, and then come forward
and make a false affidavit, in order to get them excused
from the fine. This had been reduced to such a system,
that it was found bat some gentlemen never appeared
in the jury box at all, while others who did
attend to their duties, were continually complaining that
they were taken away from their business much more fre-
quently than they ought to be, in consequence of the nor-
a,tendance of others. In the
.present case he was prose-
cuting the prisoner for having committed perjury in
making an affidavit which was false, in order to get the
fine which had been inflicted on the juror for not attend.
ing remitted. He had several cases against him • indeed
so many, that they showed a regular system had been
carried on in this way. The case he should first proceed
with would be that which concerned Mr. Robert Alexander
Bentham, the manager of the Imperial Bank, in Lothbury.
He was duly summoned to attend as a juror in the Lord
Mayor's Court, and was fined 101. for non-attendance Sub-
sequently the defendant made an affidavit, in which he
swore as follows :-1. That the said Robert Alexander
Bentham left London for the Christmas holidays on the
12th day of December last, and did not return until the
lit day of January instant. 2. That it was not brought to
the knowledge of the said Robert Alexander Bentham that
he had been summoned to attend this honourable court as
• juror on the 23rd day of December last, owing to his ab-
sence as aforesaid." Circumstances came to the knowledge
of the City authorities that these practices were systemati-
Ally carried on, and they at once commenced proceedings
to put a stop to them. The prisoner heard of it, and sent
a letter of excuse to the Lord Mayor's Court-office, in
which he stated that affidavit had been sworn by him in
mistake, believing the facts as stated to be true.
The prisoner was reminded, but bail accepted for his ap-
pearance, himself in 3001. and one surety in 3001.
BOW-STREET.