The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-17 00:00:00

THAMES.

COMMITTAL OF Two SHOPLIFTERS.—Emma Smith,
aged 24, of No. 10, Butler's-buildings, Brick-lane, Spital-
fields, calling herself a willow weavereas, and Ellen Leary,
23, of No. 2, Crown-court, Upper East Smithfield, who
described herself as a servant, were brought before Mr
Paget on a charge of shoplifting.
Mr. Beard, solicitor, defended the prisoners, who were
tolerably well-dressed.
Mr. John Basden, manager to Mr. George Emery,
linendra7er, of No. 31 and 32, Sidney-place, Commercial-
road, Stepney, said the prisoners came into the shop and
asked to look at some mantles. Ho called a young man
to attend to them. He left them looking at the mantles
for 20 minutes or half an hour. They looked at a great
many mantles but did not buy any. They left the
mantle broom and went to the ribbon department. He
suspected they did not want to buy anything, and on leav-
ing the shop without making a purchase a piece of ribbon
was missed: He charged the prisoners with stealing it,
and the piece of ribbon was immediately dropped on the
goer of the shop by Emma Smith. She then took a piece
of linsey from some part of her dress, and threw it down.
The ribbon was valued at 2s 9d, and was the property of
Mr. Emery. He knew nothing of the linsey.
Charlotte Weatherfield, of No. 6, Philpot-street, Com-
mercial-road, said " these ladies" (tho prisoners) came into
the shop of Mr. Griffiths, my employer, at No. 5, Bedford-
place, Commercial-road, and said they wanted to purchase
a square mantle. They looked at many, and could not find
one to suit. We afterwards missed the piece of linsey now
produced.
Lydia Matthews said she was in the same establishment
as the last witness. She exhibited a great many mantles
to the prisoner Smith. Leary was seated the whole of the
time close to a pile of linseys.
William Pople, 288 K, said that Leary told him she was
living at 2, Butler's-builings ; that her husband was a
sailor, and that ho had been home a fortnight. She after-
wards said her husband had been living with her six weeks,
but she could not say which it was.
Mr. Beard felt that he should insult the understanding of
the Magistrate if he attempted to contest the facts. The
parents of the two young women were very respectable, and
were in attendance. The prisoners were not in poverty.
The articles they had stolen were not worth 55., and he
could not think what possessed them to steal three yards
of ribbon and a small piece of linsey. All the friends of
the young women were persons of good reputation. He
would not set up the absurd plea of kleptcmania, but he
really could not divine what two respectable young women
could be about to steal two articles of paltry value.
'lnspector Griffin, K division, said the prisoners had no
money in their pockets to pay for anything.
Mr. Beard—Ladies will go out shopping sometimes with-
out mono' in their pockets, and order things they purchase
to be sent home and pay for them on delivery.
Mr. Paget said he did not like to dispose of a case of
shoplifting in a summary manner.
Mr. Beard—There are two cases if you think you cannot
punish sufficiently in one case.
Mr. Paget—l don't think the prisoners are novices, and
I shall commit them for trial.
Mr Beard ingeniously attempted to alter the magistrate's
decision and obtain a summary conviction, but Mr. Paget
was inexorable, and the prisoners were committed for trial.

FUNERAL OF A POLICE SERGEANT.—Yesterday
afternoon the remains of Henry Joy, formerly a
sergeant of the C division of Police—and who died last
week after a lingering illness, owing its origin to injuries
he received while in execution of his duty— were deposited
in their final resting place in Highgate Cemetery. On the
funeral cortege reaching the Kentish-town Police station it
was preceded by a number of tho A Reserve, and the band
of the C division (under the direction of Mr. De Lacy, the
bandmaster), and followed by a largo body of the C divi-
sion, and a host of friends of the deceased, and inhabitants
of tho St. James's district—all anxious to pay this
tribute of respect to his memory. The procession then
wended its way to the cemetery, the band playing the
"Dead March in Saul," the "Sicilian Mariners' Hymn,"
&c. On reaching the cemetery the coffin was borne to the
grave by some of the deceased's comrades, and, after the
service for the burial of the dead had been read, the band
played a requiem over the grave as the mournful ceremony
concluded. Mr. liannant, the superintendent of the C
division, was present, as also Inspectors Walker, Silverton,
Wilson, and Draper, under whose direction the arrange-
ments were carried out,

CHAINS, CABLES, AND ANCHORS BILL.
Mr. LAIRD, in moving the second reading of this bill,
said that the object of the bill was to enable private manu-
facturers to erect testing machines, and so render them re-
sponsible for the manufacture of their own articles. The
London Society of Shipowners were in favour of the bill,
which would be of great benefit to small manufacturers.
He combated some other objections to the bill, and said it
would not come into operation until June 1865.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE seconded the motion, and ex-
pressed a hope that the bill would be allowed to go into com-
mittee when any improvement in detail could be introduced.
The expense that would result from the alteration in the law
would be insignificant when compared with the importance
of the subject to which it related, He quoted different
statistics to show that there was a great increase in the num-
ber in 1862 of the wrecks, which amounted to a loss of no
less than 325,043 tons, involving the loss of several hun-
dred lives, and jeopardising the lives of no less than 14,073
lives. Ninety-three of these disasters were occasioned by
the imperfectness of the chains and cables used.
Mr, BUTT said he would not oppose the bill, but con-
sidered that its provisions would not be adequate to prevent
fraud.
Alderman ROSE supported the bill, and remarked that
about 80 per cent. of the chains and cables manufactured
were below the proof required.
Mr. LINDECA.V. uutiehloa oat i2ao6 il/hco bill vraso glasumooodutry,
as the object it proposed was being carried out in Stafford-
shire, and other parts of the country where chains and
cables were extensively manufactured. Elie fact was,
that shipowners, for their own sake, would before long
use cables and anchors that were not properly tested.
If it were known that shipowners used chains and cables of
an inferior description it would injure their own interests.
He admitted the benevolence of the object, and if the bill
would effect only one tenth of that object it should have his
hearty support ; but he denied that it would be attended
with such a result. He deprecated the interference of Par-
liament on this subject, which, he contended, would have
the effect of relieving manufacturers from a personal
responsibiltty, which at present was imposed on them,
to produce articles of a good quality. Another
evil would be that all the small manutacturers would be
ruined and the trade thrown entirely into the hands of the
great manufacturers of iStaffordshire and Wales, which
would be a great injury to the interests of the shipowners
as well as the public generally. Moreover, by the bill no
chains and cables that were not tested were to be issued
after June, 1865, and those manufacturers whose stock
would of course be seriously depreciated, would come to the
house, and justly, for compensation. Ho would not offer
any factious cppoeition to the bill being read a second time,
but he repeated that it would defeat the object in view, as
it was founded on false principles.
Mr. CAVE said he had no doubt there was necessity for
legislation on this subject. With reference to leaving, as
had been suggested, this subject to a committee of Lloyd's,
it must be remembered that Lloyd's was a very private ,
company, whose determination one day might be cancelled
the next ; and he contended that it would be more advisable
to place on the statute book an enactment on a subject of
such importance. He agreed in the principle of the bill, but
considered that it requiredlalteration in detail, and that in any
committee, who should have to decide this question, the
Board of Trade and other public bodies should be repre-
sent° I.
Mr. BENTINCK supported the bill, and he believed
that unless they were compelled to do so, shipowners in
many cases would purchase not the best articles but the
cheapest. They had on record that a large number of
casualties had resulted from the use of bad chains and cables,
and although in some cases no human provision could pre-
vent disasters, still it was desirable that there should
be legislation in order to- prevent a recurrence of
such disasters as might be averted, He thought
that there would be no difficulty in securing efficient articles
by the means of such being properly certificated. He con-
sidered there should bo not only immediate but stringent
legislation on the subject. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HORSFALL supported the bill, and said that if the
Board of Trade were sincere in their desire to c
insuperable

difficulties in details.
Mr. LEFEVRE considered that this subject did no,
properly come within the bounds of legislation.
Mr. lIASSARD bore testimony, from his ourn expe.
rience that shipowners did not always use the most effi.
cient chains and cables, and in many instances, in connec-
tion with the coasting trade, sailors deserted their vessels
in consequence of a due care not being taken of their lives,
in whose cases magistrates refused to convict. No doubt
there were objections to some portions of the bill, but they
could be remedied by the care of the house in committee.
The bill was then read a second time and ordered to be
committed next Wednesday.
POOR' S RATE.
Mr. BERNARD moved for leave to bring in a bill for a
more equitable distribution of the charge on landed pro-
perty for the relief of the sick and destitute known by the
name of poor's rate.
Mr. GARDE seconded the motion.
Mr. COX supported the motion, because it would open
the whole question of equalising the poor rate.
Mr. WARNER would not oppose the bill, and quoted
the statements of a writer in a local newspaper, to show the
insufficient house accommodation provided in the country
for the poorer classes in which comfort and decency were
sacrificed, and which demanded great alleviation. It was
admitted by those acquainted with the subject that pa-
rochial rating failed to effect the object it proposed, and
that the area of rating should be considerably extended.
He thought legislation on this subject necessary, but
he did not feel satisfied that the present measure would
meet the evils of the existing system.
Mr. PACKE said he also would not oppose the bill at
its present stage, but trusted it would be carefully consi-
dered by the house on the second reading.
Sir B. LEIGHTON did not consider the bill would re.
dress the grievance complained of in respect to the labour
ing population.
Mr VILLIERS said that after the discussion which had
taken place it must ho evident that a further discussion on
the subject. He thought discussion at the present stage of
the bill was unnecessary, more particularly as Governu'n
did not intend to oppose the introduction of the bill ilet
thought that the object of the hon, member who brought:
forward the measure was to substitute union rating for
parochial rating. That principle had beer. discussed pre•
viously, but had not been sanctioned by the house, although
istubb
jaede ewcieuii vseudnt ho
surrounds
dp
dr owviatlho(fi
ideceurietni
etsev e
rI commissioners.owhtehll;hade
roenmtohvee d,
question,an d rie,ahtee rhmember
facilities,
affordedllereentleorreileignitsn-
alb:steitnnagtemeut to show that of late years there had been a con-
siderable improvement in regard to
uthe relief of the poor,
and he expressed a belief that ultimately the principle of
union rating would be adopted,
v
the present session or nut ho wouldNhether it would be during
diet. not undertake to pro-

Mr. HENLEY would not oppose the motion, but he be-
lieved the bill would have an effect directly opposite to that
which it proposed, At present there was no pressure in the
country in regard to the poor-rate, and there was plenty of
employment.
Mr. B ARROW said that the law of settlement was be-
coining obsolete,
be introduce gradually. lie objected to extending the area
and ho thought any further change should
of rating, as it would diminish the interest which guardians
would led in keeping down the mates.
Mr, BERN4RD said that as he uhderatood the subject

This bankrupt was described as a baker, of Camberwell
and this was a meeting far last examination and discharge.
Mr. W. R. Buchanan appeared for the bankrupt, who had
formerly been a sugar baker, but went into business on hie
own accunt as a baker, ani lost his capital, and now owes
£lB2, and no assets, the deficiency being bad debts.
There was no opposition, and the discharge was granted.