The Express.
London, England, 1858-05-13 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

(Before Mr. Baron Martin and Mr. Jostle.. Cmwder.)
We.. Seller, aged 12, and Beery Jahn Hinabrook, who
surrendered to take his Mel, were charged with the man-
slaughter of John Thomas Bolton.
Mr. Tindal Atkinson conducted the prosecution ; Mr.
Harry defended Sales ; and Mr. Sleigh appeared for the
other prisoner.
The circumetaness of this case were of a very painful and
peculiar character. It appeared that on the 17th of April
the boy Sella quarreled with the deceased, who was a boy
about his own age, upon some trifling matter, and this led to
a fight, and they bad several rounds, during which both the
boy, were knocked down. They were at length parted by a
lad, but very soon afterwards they renewed the fight,
and, accord* to the evidemos of three witnesses, the other
primer, who has been for twenty-five years attached to
the polio), and who at the time to question filled the position
of inspector, end bore a high character for good conduct and
Integrity, who was standing by watching the fight, told the
primmer to hit the other boy right and left, and to hit him
under the ear, and at the same time said that if he did so,
he would not want to fight any MUM. The boy Sidles, upon
this, ',truck the other boy under the ear. and he fell down
and screamed, and rolled himself up, and became insensible,
sad he was taken to the shop of a medical man close by, and
died very soon afterwards. Mr. Simpson, the medical gen-
tleman who made the poet MOTU= examination. stated that
the death was occidental by the rupture of a blood venal at
the brae of the brain, and in answer to questions put by the
learned counsel for the prisoner., be said that the injury was
sot likely to have been occasioned by a blow behind the ear,
and that he observed no appearance of any such blow having
bees inflicted, and that the rupture might have been occa-
sioned by a fall.
The witnesses who were exstolned on behalf of the prose-
elution mode out the above facts, end although an endeavour
was made by the counsel f - the prisoner Hambrook to show
that the rap/radon referred to war made by some other man,
they persisted in stating that be was the person who incited
the boy Mee to strike the other boy under the ear. The
constable who took Sella' into custody, however, stated that
be said that Hambrook wee not the man who told him to bit
Bolton under the ear, and that it was another man who told
him to do so. . .

767 11;;;;, In his addrew is the jury on behalf of the boy
Man urged that it was ohm be no Ides of destroying
bla companion, with when be bed previously been on the
beet of terms, end he said that be hoped the jury would con-
sider the distress of Wad that be bad euffered on account of
this wefortunate Wok al • eladent yeabaswet, sod that if
they sold see way peal for dein se, they would acquit
bin etas yearent
Hr. Bleigh, on 141.41.rdiesi the othir fryer t
_eke aged deg
it Tee evident boat ell the hob that be boa me ids of
the dee* of the unhappy bed, eat be ramatteed gas
the Witty that, in the coataire that islets& like the '
we gdag on, the Irksome sight haw be adallthea '
la @morgue( that be we thesosebe bed neede me of the
tegatiele deg bed boa rearted to. He Mt Ord Ike yet-
em a
ir had bees •mamba of Ike polite kr tereatrive yaws,
sad et the thee el Hie amlbetamet• oseenesee he bad been,
or wee shoat le Wiwi kr bit anus.
• amber al empesetlie wilisteass were them ex-
eased. who gave prhaset Naollawk a bbile eherader
=rt good oweinei, sol dee kerawity mad
Mr. Bina Martin them Isielesused weiZievidenon,
wad hay* mislaid the law to the of =a-
=tel, he rid that if they be of °photos that the
the deeseeed wee atirkatebie to soy set of the
roamer Owner, sad that he wee incited to owes& that
eat by the other primer, It would be their duty to tied lest
both guilty.
The jury, allot a short deliberation, retired • verdict of

Guilty againet both prisoners, bat at the same time strongly

recommended them to mercy. -
-
The learned judge, in passing matetce, said that he quite
concurred in the verdict, and be should have been very much
dissatiefied if the jury had retained any other, as he thought
that verdicts ought always to be given according to the
truth and to the evidence laid before a jury, and apes no
other grounds. With regard to the boy Base, thee wee no
doubt that he had only engaged in the affray as any other
boy would have done, and that be had no intention of taking
away the life of the deceased, and the jury no doubt woa
that ground had strongly recommended him to mercy. He
did not think there would be an good resulting from keeping
him in prison, and he should there a only sentence him to
the nominal punishment of one day's imprisonment, and he
hoped that what had taken place would be a warning to him
for the rest of his life. With regard to the other prisoner,
the case was very different. He did not, of course, believe
that be had the slightest intention that the boy should kill
his opponent; if he did, he should peas a very different sen-
tence to the one he was about to pronounce. He was, how-
ever a grown-up man, in the position of an officer of police,
end:instead of interfering to put a stop to the breach of the
law that was taking place, baled incited the boy Belles to
continue the contest, and there was no doubt that, owing to
his suggestion, the fatal result had taken place.
The prisoner Hambrook here asserted that he did not
make use of the expression that had been spoken to by the
witnesses.

Baron Martin said that three witnesses had spoken
positively to the fact, end he saw no reason to doubt the cor-
rectness of their testimony. The jury had strongly recom-
mended him to mercy, end he would give effect to that recom-
mendation ; but it wee impossible to pawl over such an
offence without some punishment. He then ordered the
prisoner to be kept to herd labour for three months.
The prisoner entreated his lordship not to sentence him to
hard . He said he was suffering from a dismiss of the
heart, and it was impossible for him to perform hard labour.
Mr. Baron Martin said he could not alter the sentence.

(Before Mr. Justice Crowder.)
George Hametreond, 23, stationer, and George Borrow, 28,
stationer, were indicted for forging and uttering acesptitere
to bills of exchange, with intent to defraud.
Mr. Gifford prosecuted, and Mr. Jams defended.
The prisoner Barrow pleaded guilty.
The evidence, which wee but briefly gone into, and has
been very fully reported within the bet few days, proved the
following facts :—The two prionmee emir en terms r
stationers in Basinghall attest, and bad done so for sass few
months previously to the cormision of this ollence; and
upon the 6th of February they opened an scoria at the
Union Bank, and deposited five bills se security. The bills
were drawn and purported to be accepted by different trades-
• in the country, with whom it appeared that their tra-
ilelhr bedtime some trifling business. The bills in the whole
reptessßted nearly 2001. These bills bore the signatures of the
Ppeisowr The bills in question fell due in AFtl, and upon
presentation were found to be forgeries. Upon this being
discovered, information was given to the polio', and Brett
and Spits], the City detectives, went to the coun house
of the prisoner; and there took them into custody. Barrow
was, it appeared, the only one seen to put his signature to
the bills, but in the desk belonging to Hammond, and of
which he kept the keys, was found • paper with a number
of persons' names—some of them tholes upon the bills—
written as if the writer had been copying different signatures.
The jury found Hammond Guilty.
Mr. Gifford then opened, and partly proved two other
cease of obtaining some fancy leather goods, and pawning
them as soon as obtained; but his lordship held that the
statement made by the prisoners in obtaining the goods did
not in law amount to • false pretence. These goods bad
been obtained with a view to take up the forged bills, and,
acoordlog to the statement of Mr. Gifford, but for tome
slight delay, it would have been done. They had also ob-
tained paper, which had been sold to a marine-store desk;
and sham pawned.
His lordship sentenced them each to 16 years transpor-
tation. _ _

(Before the Matador.)
John Shield, 33, seaman, pleeded guilty to forging en ac-
ceptance to • bill of exchange for 271., with intent to defraud
Henry Davis.
Mr. W. Cooper prosecuted.
The prisoner was sentenced to four year' penal servitude.
John Cbrneline, 23, tinplate worker, wee indicted for
cutting and wounding John Bridge, with intent to do bodily
harm.
- - -- •

Mr. Sleigh and Mr. fickle proseented ; and Mr. }aeon
defended. _ _

The prisoner, at the time of this assault being com-
mitted, was an inmate of Holloway Gaol, and woe under •
sentence of 12 months' imprisonment. Upon the 18th
of April, Bridp, one of the warders of the gaol, having
given the prisoner, through the door of his cell, some gruel
in a tin pannikin, and the prisoner not having put it out
again, Bridge vested the ocli door, and no sooner had he
done so than the pannikin was thrown at him with such
violence that he fell to the ground, having received a severe
out upon the temple. Some other Wirers then oeme up, and,
site, some resistance, the prisoner was secured.
The jury found the primmer &illy of unlawfully wound-
ing, and he was sentencd to twelve months' imprisonment.
/.hes Jew Roll, 40, servant, was Indicted for forging and
uttering agenda receipts for the payment of money
Mr. Gifford and Mr. F. H. Lewis prossouted i and Mr.
Bodlds &huh&

The case, whisk was but pallidly gone Into, movedto
be this. The primmer and his wile were in the terms of the
Duchess of Cleveland, he as butler, sad she as housekeeper,
having jointly a salary of 1061. a year, and the prisoner's
duty wes to make out • fist of the tradesmen's bills, sad
having received • cheque for the gross amount, pay them,
and afterwards return to a lady, the oumpanion of tier gram,
the receipts. In this instance he Lad received a cheque kr
461.75., and had returned • receipt for 271. 95., pnrpordag to
be • receipt fur the payment of 271. 9s. to Messrs. Hadgar
and Butler wine merchants.
Mr. Bodkin, after hearing the evidence of two witnesses,
said he fait he had no answer to the case, but suggested that
the court should postpone passing aenteme, In order that the
prisoner might give sums information to the prosecution
which would tend to blither the ends of justice.
ThsjuiT having returned a verdict of Guilty,
Mr. Gaird opposed the application for postponement of
sentence upon the ground that the prisoner could hive
nothing to disclose. The prosecution knew all ; from his first
takinghis present position, which he did about two yeah ago,
he had carried on this system, and his defalcatione were shoed
3004 lie had been altogether nine years in the service.
His lordship, in paring sentence, told the prisoner that
his offence was not the result of any sudden impulse, and was
an extremely bed one. He was placed above temptation by
those whom he served, and they had every right to expect
from him the utmost truthfulness and fidelity.
He was sentenced to ten years' penal servitude.
(Before the Common fierjeant.)

Louisa Mania: alias Constance Brows, pleaded guilty to
stealing a diasuond bracelet, valued at 3001., the property of
Messrs. Hunt and Roakell.

iirThard,;;;ZLTPet the tion, brie, &-
tailed the hots of the oar, a portion which appeared in ear
Impression of yesterday.
The prisoner was sentenced to six years' penal servitude.
Upon the application of Mr. GollArd, the property which
she obtained from Mr. Ray was directed to be given up to
Inspector Whicher, who, with Sergeant Smith, had been
engaged in this timarimble ease of freed.