The Express.
London, England, 1868-08-15 00:00:00

THE POLICE .O'OURT&

MANSION-HOUt3R.
A young person aged 16, named Dormer, was brough
before the Lord. Mayor, charged with robbing hierinployer,
Mr. Thomas Oockayne, jeweller, 1313 liter-square.
The prosecutor stated that the prisoner had been in his
service for eight menthe as errand boy, End received 7s.
per week. On the 30th of July he spoke to him about
some pieces of gold chain which he missed from a biz
behind the counter, and said things mold not go on in
that way. The prisoner suggested that the char-
woman might have taken diem, but this turned
out not to have been the case, nee t prose-
cutor having learned that the prisoner had been
seen about a refinery in Clerkenwell moused him of
stealing the Meow of chain some lockets, and other
articles. He then admitted gis guilt, and said he had
cold come of the articles to Mr. Ooltintrridge, a refiner.
The chains were worth about 121., and two lockets, 35e.
A detective was called in, and an enamelled and gold
Cross and a gold swivel were found upon the prisoner.
As far as the prosecutor bad discovered, be heel lad
property to the extent of 301.
Alexr Monet, lately manager to Mr. Rowley,
jeweller, Alderegate-streett deposed to buying two pieces
of gold chain from the prisoner about two months ego,
and paying him 12s. 6d. The value of the gold was We.
to 40a per ounce. He weighed the piecee of chain, and
gave him their value as old gold. prisoner gave his
name and address, and said his reason for parting with the
jewellery was because be was out of a situation and was
in want of money. Witness also bought two gold studs,
and, he thought, a scarf pin from him.
A pawnbroker produced two rings pledged by the pri-
soner on the 26th June and the 29th July, and the prose-
cutor stated hie belief that they were both his property.
James Edward Collingridge, jeweller and refiner, Wil-
derness-row, Clarkenwell, dated that on the 16th June be
bought some little bits of gold chain, weighing twopmny-
weights and six grains, from the prisoner, for 4a. ; and
a week afterwards, a piu for 7e. Subsoquently, witness
purchased from him a swivel and a bit of a locket for
es. 6d., and a wielding-ring, much worn, for 4e. Witness
only entered the first transaction on the 16th June in the
books. The prisoner wished to purchase a watch value
36e. from him, and witness marked the value of old gold
he received from the prisoner to his credit, the understand-
ing being that the prisoner should get the watch when the
sum standing to his credit amounted to 355. Witness gave
him the loan of a watch of the value of 12e.
In cross-examination the witness said he did not know
the prisoner worked with Mr. Cocknyne and that he
did not ask his address, as he looked so respectable.
On the application of Mr. Lindus, the solicitor for the
prosecution, the prisoner was remanded to Tuesday, when
the case will bedisposed of summarily. Mr. liickhn ap-
peared for the defence.

Edward &lby, a carpenter, who said be had no home,
was
whereby on a warrant with deserting his wife and one
child, they had beooine chargeable to the parish
of St Pancras.
Mr. Ricketts, solicitor, prosecuted on behalf of the
guardians of St. Pancras, and said that the frequency of
those cases was a source of much trouble to the of
and the cause of a great increase in the rates, many of the
persona who had to pay the rates being in poorer circum-
stances than those who deserted their wives and families.
The defendant had bad two years' imprisonment for utter-
ing base coin, and during that time his wife and children
bad been kept by the St. Pancras authorities. For some
time past, and, in fact, since the defendant had been
out of prison, because his wife would not go out with
him to utter base coin, he said he would not support her.
for he was not made to work. The wife was now ill, and
with her child were admitted to the workhouse by. Mr.
Chapple, one of the relieving overseers, and a warrant
was issued for the defendant's apprehension. On Thurs-
day night, when the defendant was apprehended by
Mason the warrant officer, he was with a female ; and
when Mason said to him, " Are you aware that your wife
and child are in the St. Pancras Workhouse r he said.
" Oh, yea, I am," and ran away. He was pursued and
apprehended, and then be was kissed by the woman, and
conveyed to the police-station, when he said he had been
at work for a boot-closer.
The defendant said that his wife left him, and he had
no means of providing for her support.
Mr. Barker asked how it was proved that the defendant
was wholly or in part able to sunport his wife.
Mr. Ricketts said that the defendant had been at work,
and admitted the fact U a remand were granted, he
would summon the party that bad employed the defen-
dant
Mr. Barker remanded the defendant, and told him that
if he did not settle with the parish, and it was afterwards
proved that he had been at work, he might depend on it
that he would be severely dealt with. The defendant
would now be bound over m the sum of 10/. to appear at
this court to answer the charge that day fortnight

Tompb Appleby, 11, was chargedbefore Mr. Woolrych
with stealing from St. John's School-house, Canterbury-
road, Brixton, two bracelets, gold earrings, two goldrings,
and the oontents of some missionary boxes.
Mr. Daniel Smith, master of the school, said he went
out of town for a few days, and on returning found that
a cupboard in the school-room had been broken open and
two missionary boxes, with contents amounting to about
Ifs.. taken away, From his bed-room he also mimed
another box containing money, two bracelets, gold ear-
rings, and two gold finger-rings. He gave information to
the police which led to the prisoner being taken into
custody.
The prisoner's mother, a native of the Cape of Good
Hope, and wife of a seaman pensioned from the Royal
Navy, said the prisoner had for a long time been the
source of a deal of trouble, although she and her husband
bad done all they could to reclaim him. On one occasion
in the night be entered her bed-room and stole her purse.
The prisoner made no defence to the charge, and
Mr. Woolrych, after severely. commenting upon his con-
duct, ordered him to be imprisoned for two months, and
at the expiration of that period detained in a reformatory
for five years.
- --- • --