The Sun.
London, England, 1852-12-28 00:00:00

SOUTHWARK.—Tohn Davidson, an engine-driver
in the employment of the South-Eastern Railway Com-
pany, was brought before Mr. A'Beckett, charged with
being drunk and incapable of performing his duty, and
refusing to leave the engine when desired to do so by
the station-master.
Mr. Church, the solicitor of the company, attended for
the purpose of prosecuting the charge.
Henry Laing, inspector of trains in the employ of the
South-Eastern Railway Company at the London-bridge
terminus, stated that on Friday evening the defendant
was about to start as driver of a train to Woolwich,
when he (witness) asked him if he intended taking 14
carriages down the line to that place. There were 14
carriages attached to the engine at that time, and the
defendant replied that he did not, when witness desired
him to uncouple one of the carriages in front, and for
that purpose it was necessary for the defendant to move
into a siding. Instead, however, of doing this, when
witness called out as usual, "Alright for Woolwich,"
the meaning of which was that the defendant was name-
diately to have moved the engine to the siding, prepa-
ratory to going off, he set the engine in motion, and
started for Woolwich with only two carriages attached,
instead of eleven more. Witness was surprised at the
circumstance, but the defendant was out of sight
before he had time to prevent such an occurrence,
and he (witness)• immediately proceeded to telegraph
to the New-cross Station, in order that the de-
fendant might be sent back again. When witness
afterwards left the telegraph-office, and had re-
turned to the platform, he found the defendant
had returned on the engine with the two carriages, and
he then spoke to him on the subject of his negligence on
the occasion, and he (witness) then observed that he was
under the influence of liquor, and having represented
the fact to the station-master, the defendant was subse-
quently prevented from acting as driver to the engine
and given into custody. Witness added that he was
present and heard the defendant use language of an im-
proper description to the station-master, when the latter.
expressed his intention not to allow a man in the condi-
tion he was in to act as engine-driver to the train. De-
fendant started three minutes before his time.
By Mr. Church— Owing to the defendant having
started off with the engine in the way he did, a collision
might have taken place with the Greenwich train.
Cross-examined by defendant's solicitor —Witness did
not ring the starting bell for the Woolwich train before
the defendant went off on the engine. He appeared to
be drunk when he returned with the train, a circum-
stance which witness did not previously observe, not
having such an opportunity. Was not aware that the
defendant had come up from Stroud a short time pre-
viously, nor did he know how long defendant had been
in the company's service. The eleven carriages defen-
dant left behind him when he started off for Woolwich
had a number of passengers in them, but the two he had
with him attached to the engine had only a few pas-
, sengers.
Bainbridge, in the employ of the company, stated that
he saw the defendant on the evening in question, both
before and after his return to the platform. Witness
heard the words that passed between the defendant and
the first witness, and afterwards saw him when h. came
back on the engine. When first witness saw him he did
not appear to be drunk, but when he came back with
the engine he (witness) perceived that he wag flurried,
and heard him insist on driving the engine to Woolwich
against the orders of the station-master.
By Mr. Church—When first witness saw defendant,
he did not appear to be in liquor ; but he (witness) was
of a different opinion when he returned with the engine.
Mr. A'Beckett—You say that 20 minutes before the
defendant returned to the platform he seemed sober, and
that afterwards, when he came back with the engine, he
seemed flurried. What other symptoms did he exhibit
besides those you mention ?
Witness—l was near enough to smell his breath, "and
it smelt as if he had been drinking porter. He did not,
so far as I could judge, appear sober.
Mr. Weatherhead, the station-master, was then exa-
mined, and he stated, that on being apprised on the even-
ing in question of what had occurred, as above des-
cribed, he went on the platform, and seeing the defend-
ant on the engine, he spoke to him and called him down,
He then remarked that the defendant was not sober,
and told him that he had been drinking. Defendant,
however, denied that he had ; when witness repeated
that he was convinced he had ; and, at the same time,
expressed his determination that the defendant should
not endanger the lives of the passengers by acting as
driver of the train. Defendant said he would go, and
jumped from the platform on to the engine ; and witness
in order to prevent a man in his condition from driving
the engine, was compelled to employ force to get him
down again. When he was dragged down, the de-
fendant began to abuse him,"called him a liar, and ex-
claimed that he was as sober as he. was. The train was
detained upwards of ten minutes beyond its usual
time, and witness was compelled to procure another
engine-driver, and also another fireman for the train ;
as the one who accompanied the defidant was also in
liquor.

By Mr. Church : owing to the detention of the train,
arising from the defendant's negligence, a risk was in-
curred of a collision taking place on the line.
Mr. Church ; could the defendant have been aware
that at the time he left the terminus only two carriages
instead of thirteen were attached to the engine ?
Witness : If he was sober, as he is now at the bar, he
would have been enabled to judge whether he had only
two or thirteen, carriages attached. Any experienced
driver would have discovered it very soon by the differ-
ence in the propulsion required by an engine drawing a
heavy and a light train of carriages.
Cross-examined : Defendant had been four years in the
employ of the company.. Never saw him drunk before.
Mr. A'Beckett—What reason have you for stating
that the defendant was intoxicated ? Witness—His ap-
pearance, language, and conduct altogether led me to
believe he was drunk ; but at all events he was in that
state that I should not consider myself justified in per-
mitting him to act as driver to the train.
Mr. Church suggested that, if it met with the magis-
trates approbation, they would not press the charge of
drunkenness, but that• of interfering with, and being
insolent to, the station-master in the execution of his
duty. _ _

Defendant's solicitor said, as the charge of drunken-
ness was withdrawn, his client pleaded guilty to the
other charge, and expreSsed his contrition for it.
-Mr. A'Beckett said the charge of intoxication was not
in his estimation, satisfactoiily proved, and as it involved
a serious amount of punishment on a person holding the
responsible situation of ,the defendant, in the event of a
conviction, he (the magistrate) therefore should not,
under the circumstances, deal with him for that offence,
for, if the case =was clear on that point, he should have
no hesitation in sentencing him to the full penalty for it.
As the case at present stood, if the company wished
they might take it to the sessions ; but, on the contrary,
if they desired that he should summarily deal with the
defendant, he should at once consent to their wishes on
the subject.
Mr. Church, on the part of the company, expressed
their satisfaction at the magistrate's decision, whatever
it might be ; and added that the defendant had been dis-
missed from his situation in their employment.
Mr. A'Beckett—Then I shall inflict a penalty of 51.
on the defendant, and, in default of payment, commit
him for two months to gaol.

WESTMINSTER.—On the 30th ult. the proprietor
and corps dramatique of a " Penny Theatre, in York-
street, Westminster, were brought before Mr. Arnold to

answer for playing without a licence. The proceedings
had been taken by direction of the magistrate, owing to
it having on several occasions transpired that children
committed petty thefts in order to raise money to visit
the "gaff." Evidence having been given, showing that
a ballet of action, as it was termed, entitled The Ice Witch,
was represented, Mr. Arnold ordered a conviction to be
recorded against the parties, but, on the understanding
that the place should be closed, suspended judgment, and
the defendants were liberated upon entering into their
recognizances to come up for sentence whenever called
upon. The police had directions to keep an eye upon
the place, and having reported that the place was still
open nightly, although the " entertainment" had been
varied, so as, if possible, to avoid the statute, Mr. Ar-
nold determined upon enforcing the law, at least against
Thomas Cornelius Glover, the proprietor, and Reuben
Watts, who appeared to be taking an active part in
the concern under him. Summonses were accordingly
issued, requiring the attendance of those two, and
Reuben Watts was convicted in the penalty of 40s. ;
the other, however, was not forthcoming, and divers
dodges were resorted to, to evade the law. By dint,
however, of considerable trouble, process was personally
executed upon Glover, who now appeared before the
magistrate.

Mr. Roberts appeared on his behalf, and wanted to
show that Glover had no control over the premises, he
having let them some time before his conviction.
Mr. Arnold was not to be jockeyed in this way. Ile
could not consider how for a moment such a thing could
be, as the ownership was not disputed when Glover was
charged and convicted. On the contrary, the defence
set up was, that he thought he was justified as he had
her Majesty's trumpeters' licence, and it was on this plea
that the conviction was merely recorded, but with a
most perfect understanding that if the place were not
shut up he would be called up for judgment. The case
had been clearly proved against Glover before the con=
viction, and all he now had to do was to pass sentence.
The defendant was fined 201., to be levied by distress
warrant upon his goods, and in default three months'
imprisonment.

YORKSHIRE WINTER GAOL DELIVERY.—SIIMMARY
or THE SENTENCES.—On Wednesday night last the
business of the winter gaol delivery was brought to a
conclusion, and the trials of the several prisoners-125
in number—Presented the following results :—To be
hanged, 2 ; death recorded, 7 ; transported for 20 years,
3 ; for 15 years, 4 ; for 10 years, 10 ; for 7 years, 13 ;
imprisoned forlB months, 3 ; for 12 months, 15 ; for 9
months, 2 ' for 6 months, 5; for 4 months, 1 ; for 3
months, 4; for 2 months, 5 ; for one month 1 ; for 14
days, 1 ; for 7 days, 2 ; admitted evidence, 2 ; removed
by certiorari
quitted, 34. , 1 ; no prosecution, 4 ; no bills, 6 ; ac-
THE FLOODS.—Another life has been lost near Wind-
sor
in consequence of the floods. On Christmas-eve a
ac cuoth parents reside at Eton,
awinhtaMe, went to spend the even-
om pnaanmiededbylvia un,4;
ing
their return at the house oh
a mutual friend residing at Datchet.
On they parted not far from that village,
and Munday, contrary to the advice of his friend, pro-
ceeded by a lane which communicat with the turnpike
road near Eton College. The lane was then about twelvewas
but Munday did not return home that night. On the
following morning search was made, and he was found
up to the chest in a ditch by the side of the lane quite
dead,