The Sun.
London, England, 1855-04-04 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.-(THIS DAY.)

(Before Mr. Serjeant Adams, Assistant-Judge.)
CHARGE OF CRUELTY TO AN AFPRENTCE.
lan Manley was indicted for unlawfully committing
an aggravated assault upon George Clements, his appren-
tice.

Mr. Parry prosecuted, and Mr. Ribton defended the

prisoner.

It appeared from the evidence of the boy Clements
(who seemed to be a healthy stout lad), that be was 13
years of age, and was apprenticed to the prisoner in July
last year by the guardians of Shoreditch pari lb, in the
workhouse connected with which he bad previously been
an inmate. Previously to his apprenticeship he was
with Manley for five months on trial, during which pe-
riod his master behaved kindly to him, but no sooner
had he been bound than his conduct altogether changed,
and he frequently beat the boy with a leathern strap,
knotted in one or two pales, because he would
not get on with his work, and kept him wit'iout his
victuals. According to the boy's statement he was
beaten several times a day ; and his meals were but ir-
regularly suppliel to him. Within the last four months
he became very idle and had a cough. He complained
to his master that he was very unwell, but his master
told him that he must get on with his work.
In cross-examination, the boy admitted having asked
his master for money, a penny or a halfpenny a week,
but he denied that lie had ever refused to work unless
his master gave him money. He told his master that
if he thought shoemaking was like that he would never
have come to him.
Mrs. Child and Mrs. Crowhurst, two lodgers in the
prisoner's house,' were afterwards called, and deposed to
having heard the boy beaten•as much as four times a
day, and hearing him cry out, "Oh my back ! oh my
back !" The last-named witness spoke to observing a
great cl ange in the boy for some time before he was
removed. He had become quite thin and ill-looking,
and she told Manley that she thought the boy had not
enough to eat, to which the prisoner replied that " he had
as much to eat as he (Manley) had, but he was an idle
boy, and sulked at his food."
John Meadows, a beadle of Shoreditch parish, who
was next called, stated that, in consequence of what he
had heard, he went to Manley's house and found the
boy at work. He asked the latter if he had enough to
eat, and he replied "No." Witness then asked
him if he bad been beaten much by his mas-
ter, and he said he had. The boy was dreadfully
thin and emaciated, and his back was bruised from
shoulder to shoulder. The left shoulder bore the marks
of two wounds, with scabs on them. Whilst the boy
was at work he did not appear to have strength to pull
the thread through the leather. When the boy com-
plained of having been 'beaten, Manley admitted beating
him, because he bad not done his work in time. Wit-
ness took the boy before the guardians, who, in con-
quence of his report, deemed it their duty
to give the prisoner into custody. The boy
was a healthy one before he was apprenticed.
In reply to questions from the learned judge, the wit-
ness said be occasionally called to inquire after boys
who had been apprenticed from the workhouse, but it
was not part of his duty, nor was it the duty of any
person connected with the parish to look after the
manner in which parish apprentices were treated by
their masters.
Mr. George Boss, relieving officer, spoke to the
healthy appearance of the boy before he went to Manley,
and his sadly altered appearance when before the

guardians.
Mr. James Clarke, surgeon to the workhouse, stated
that he examined the boy after he was taken from the
prisoner on the 9th March. He found black and blue
stripes on his back, some of the marks answering to such
1%3 would be made by the knots upon the leather strap
produced. His chest was attenuated and contracted,
there was congestion of both lungs, and ho had a cough,
having also suffered from diarrhoea for a fortnight pre-
viously. The boy was much emaciated in all respects.
The majority of the marks on the boys back were appa-
rently some days old. The appearances he described
might have been caused by overwork and insufficient
food.

In cross-examination, the witness said the congestion
of the lungs might have arisen from natural causes, or
have been induced by the severity of the weather. In
some degree the nature of the trade might have tended
to produce contraction of the chest. The cough was a
natural result of the congestion.
This being the case for the prosecution,
Mr. Ribton made a powerful address to the jury on
behalf of the prisoner, contending that the evidence ad-
duced was insufficient to support the charge, and relying
upon the inedicar testimony, combined with other cir-
cumstances, as being of it4elf sufficient to a3count for the
emaciated appearance ascribed to the boy when before
the guardians. He also argued that the boy, as was
clear from the evidence, had a dislike to his work, and
was lazy and sulky, and that his master was justified.in
making use of a proper degree of correction.
The learned judge having summed up the evidence,
the jury returned a verdict of guilty.
The prisoner was then sentenced to three months'
imprisonment.

MARKET NE WS-(THIS DAY.)