The Sun.
London, England, 1864-04-05 00:00:00

Important to the Sporting Fraternity,

At the Marylebone Police-office yesterday, before
the night charges were disposed of Mr. Pain, a
solicitor, said he wished that a case in which he had
been retained should be kept back till three o'clock,
as his witnesses could not po,nsibly be there till the
time mentioned.

Mr. Yardley, after looking at the charge-sheet,
asked Mr. Pain if he had a substantial ground of
defence if the case were adjourned till three o'clock.
Mr Pain—According to my instructions I have.
Mr. Yardley—lf the facts as set forth on the
charge-sheet are proved against your client he is
liable. I say nothing more now. You wish for
an adjournment till three o'clock.
It may be here stated, as explanatory, that the
defendant, Edward Bilbrough, alias Napper, has
been in training for the last two or three weeks at
Finchley, where his " casual locality" becoming
known, Mr. Webb. inspector at Hampstead, gave
information to Scotland-yard that defendant was on
his ground training for a fight with Hitching, for
£25 a side, to come off this day (Tuesday). Sir
Richard Mayne, after communicating with the law
officers of the Crown and the Home Office. issued
his orders for the arrest of the defendant. The case
is rather a novel one, as the police have taken upon
themselves to apprehend a man without a *arrant
who is " knowingly" and " acknowledgedly" train-
ing for a fight, likely to cause a disturbance or
breach of the peace.

At three o'clock the defend -nt surrendered to his
bail, accompanied by Mr. Pain, his solicitor.
Sergeant Thomas of Scotland-yard—From in-
formation I received I visited the Five Bells,Finch-
ley, in company with a fellow sergeant. After we
had some refreshments, and had sat there awhile,
the prisoner came in with two friends. Dinner was
brought in for them, and whilst they were par-
taking of it defendant asked one of his friends.
How is Hitching getting on ?" The answer was,
" Very well." I asked it he (defendant) was the
man going to fight him (Hitching). Defendant said,
4. yes; I am going to fight him next Tuesday."
Mr. Yardley—Going to fight next Tuesday P
Thomas—Yes, sir.
Mr.
he men Pone- Are you quite sure that was the day
Thom as—Yes.
Mr. Yardley—bid you tell him that you were a
police sergeant ?

Sergeant Thomas (who wears, as is customary
with Scotland-yard officers, a moustache, and dresses
in plain clothes), said—No, sir.
11r. Yardley—Nut when you took him into cus-
tody ?

Thomas—l did not take him into custody.
When was he taken into custody ?--On baturday
night.

By whom i—Another officer can speak to that.
Henry Beard (detective sergeant 29 A)--I went
with last witness to the Bells at Finchley. Defen-
dant and his friends came in, and after they had
bent talking a little while, I said to defendant,
suppose you have heard of the fight announced in
Dell's Bife for Z 26 a aide." He said he bad, and I

asked him if his name was Napper. He said be
knew Napper.
Mr.Yardley—Did you take him into custody then.
Beard—No, sir. He was taken the next day.
Mr. Yardley (without calling for any defence en
the part of Mr. Pain, or the witnesses he might have
in attendance) said—l am only sorry that anything
in this case should give me cause to enable this mail
to fight to-morrow, but I cannot come to any other
conclusion than that he is improperly in custody.
(His worship read the 64th clause in the Metropolis
Police Act, which says—" Be it enacted, that it
shall be lawful for any constable belonging to the
metropolitan police to take into custody without a
warrant, all loose, idle, and disorderly persons whom
he shall find disturbing the public peace, or whom
he shall have good cause to suspect to have com-
mitted, or being about to commit any felony, misde-
meanour, or breach of the peace," This means
any person or persons iu my opinion who are about
immediately to commit an offence. The person
before me is wrongly in custody now. If he had
been properly brought before me I could have
ordered him to find bail for his being of good be•
haviour, and preventing a breach of the peace. M
present he is wrongly in custody.
Inspector Williamson (chief at Scotland-yard)—"
I took him into custody non authority.
Mr. Yardley—By whose authority ?
Inspector Williamson—Sir Richard Mayne's.
Inspector Webb handed the authority for pri'
soner's apprehension to his worship.
Mr. Yardley—l can only go upon my own
opinion, and I may say upon my own judgment. In
this my opinion is that you ought to have applied
for proper process, by having a warrant, if there
were tangible grounds for it.
Inspector Williamson—l took him into eustody.
Mr. Yardley—l am not blaming you. You acted
upon orders. I am not saying you did not act with-
out instructions. I have had put into my hands
documents from the two law officers of the Crowe.
It is satisfactory, when my opinion is consistent
with theirs, but in this case my opinion differs from
theirs, His worship then again referred to that
portion of the act which says, " being about to com-
mit a breach of peace," and said it all pointed to an
immediate breaking of the peace. It don't speak
of "a" or "any" remote disturbance likely to be
caused. The law as it is enacted is for an imme-
diate and not for an impending breach. There ie
another reason in regard to this case where the
liberty of a subject should be taken into considers..
lion. This morning when application was made to
me to allow the defendant to be at large, upon his
saying that be could not have his witnesses present
till this afternoon, I am convincanow that in doing
so I was right, for when a man is taken upon a
warrant it is not absolutely so strong as being taken
into custody without process. When the defendant
was here this morning he was not properly on his
defence. (To Defendant)---Now, understand me,
if you fight this battle to-morrow you will be liable
to indictment ; so don't you go there. Mind your
also, if you are found there you can be taken into
custody. _ _

Mr. Pain. (solicitor) said they did not intend to
fight.