The Sun.
London, England, 1852-08-17 00:00:00

Tt/ESDAN

EVENING, AUGUST 171 1852,

shop in the Commercial road East, and whe, it ap-
peared, also holds a licence for the sale of beer, but
who has no taproom or other ordinary place for beer
to he drunk upon his premises. Holding a beershop
licence, however, he was amenable to the police regu-
lations having reference to such establishments, one
of which was, in this district, that all the beershops
should be closed at 12 o'clock at night, and not be
opened before five o'clock in the morning, and it ap-
peared that on the 1611 of June the prosecutor was
summoned, at the instance of the present defendant,
before Mr. Yardley, at the Thames Police-court, to
answer a charge of having kept his house open after
12 o'clock at night on the 7th- of June. Upon that
occasion the defendant was examined as a witness
in support of the charge, and it appeared that he
stated that he went into the house at 20 minutes past
12 o'clock on the morning of the Bth of June, and
that he saw five persons drinking and smoking in
front of the bar. Evidence was afterwards adduced
on behalf of the defendant, and in the result the
information was dismissed by the magistrate. A
summons was then obtained against the defendant,
calling upon him to answer the present charge, and
he appeared before the magistrate for that purpose ;
but owing, as it was stated, to the counsel for the pro-
secution being prevented from attending to support
the charge, no evidence was offered, and the ?resent
indictment was subsequently preferred before the
grand jury. A great number of witnesses were now
examined on behalf of the prosecution, and from their
evidence it appeared that upon the night in question
several persons had been in the house drinking and
smoking, but they all swore positively that the house
was cleared before 12 o'clock, and that at the time
the policeman went in no person was inside the house.
It was admitted, however, that close to the hour of
12 persons answering the description of those spoken
to by the defendant were in the house or close to it.
Mr. I3ALLXNTINE, in his address to the jury for the
defendant, commented, in the first place, upon the
absence of any motive on the part of the constable to
prefer a false charge of this description, and also upon
the improbability that he should have deliberately
made such an accusation if there were really no
grounds to support it. He then commented upon the
character of some of the witnesses who had been exa-
mined on behalf of the prosecution, and said that it
appeared to him the probability was that the de-
fendant had told the truth of the transaction, and that
the utmost that could be alleged against him was that
he might have made a slight mistake with regard to
he time. _ _

Thomas Johnson, who was formerly a constable
belonging to the same division as the defendant, was
called as a witness in his behalf, and he deposed that
he was on duty upon a beat adjoining that of the de-
fendant on the night in question, and he joined him
soon after twelve o'clock. It was their duty to watch
the beershops, and see that they were closed at twelve
o'clock, and, in consequence of something the defen-
dant said to him, he looked at his watch, snd saw that
it was twenty minutes past twelve o'clock. After
this he saw five men and two women come out of the
house of the prosecutor, and the defendant went
across and knocked at the door, and in about two
minutes the door was opened and he went in.
In cross-examination this witness said that since the
time in question he had been dismissed from the po-
lice for being out, contrary to the regulations of the
force, during the period when he was off duty on ac-
count of sickness.
James Mclntosh, a sergeant in the prisoner's di-
vision, proved that on the morning of the Bth of June
he made a report to him in reference to the house
of the prosecutor. He also said that the defendant
had been in the force for two years and a half, and
had always behaved very well, and was a very good
°facer.
Inspector Kendall likewise spoke favourably of the
character of the defendant.
The RECORDER, summed up ; and
The jury, after very little deliberation, returned a
verdict of Not Guilty.
Mr. DUNCAN applied for the expenses of the prose-
cution.
The RECORDER said he was not satisfied that he
ought to allow them. He was anxious to discourage
the proceeding of parties going before the grand jury,
instead of having a charge investigated by a magistrate.
In this case also it appeared that an appointment was
made to have the case investigated by a magistrate,
but the prosecutor did not think proper to offer any
evidence.

Mr. DUNCAN assured the court that the reason for
this was that he was detained in the Court of Exche-
quer, and was consequently unable to appear before
the magistrate to conduct the prosecution.
The RECORDER said he thought this was not a sa-
tisfactory explanation. It was a very simple case, and
might have been inquired into without the assistance
of counsel. If such an inquiry had been gone into,
he thought it very probable the case would never
have come to this court, and at present be should
make no order with regard to the expenses.

NEW COURT.
(Before Mr. RUSSELL GURNEY, Q.C.)
John Carthy, 26, labourer, was indicted for the
manslaughter of Joseph Dunmore, jun.
The charge arose out of a fight, which took place
in July, 1849, at Plumstead, when Dunmore received
injuries that resulted in his death. The prisoner had
acted as second at the fight.
The jury found him Guilty, and he was sentenced
to one month's imprisonment.
James Wilson, 32, victualler, surrendered to take
his trial for felony.
Mr. Parry defended.
It appeared that the prisoner assisted his brother,
who keeps the King's Arms, Bishopsgate, and on the
17th of June the prosecutor, Mr. Mark Sanders, was
there playing
at bagatelle. Prisoner was in the room,
as also %Nere two police officers, all joining in the
game. One of the constables was in uniform. In
the course of the game the prosecutor said to prisoner
that all the money he had was a fourpenny-piece.
Upon this they began larking with each other, and
prisoner took from prosecutor's pocket his gold watch
and chain, valued at 171. Prosecutor, thinking it was
but a joke, merely told the prisoner to take care and
not break the chain. Directly after prisoner had taken
the watch he went away, lout prosecutor, thinking
that he would bring it back, did not either follow
him or ask to have it returned until he was leaving
the house at night. Prisoner not c oming back, pro-
secutor gave information to Hall, a constable of the
City, and he went to prisoner's lodgings, in Hoxton,
the next day, and saw prisoner, who at once admitted
that he had pawned the watch and chain, and spent
the money, but that prosecutor had told him he might
use it for that purpose, as he had once owed him 2101.
The prosecutor denied this.

Several witnesses having given prisoner a good
character, the j ury, after some deli! aeration, Acquitted
him.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
CLERKENWEL L.
John Knight, aged 45, a pain ter, residing at 2,
Brook's-gardens, Bagnigge-wells-lroad, Clerkenwell,
was charged with having stabbed Idary Ann Knight.
Edward Green said that he watt a lodger in the
prisoner's house, 2, Brook's-gar3ens. Yesterday
morning, at half-past five o'clock, Ito was awoke out
of his sleep by loud screams and c/ies of " Murder !"
from the prisoner's wife, which Ind iced him to get
up to her assistance. On entering. her apartment he
found the prisoner over his wife, kneeling upon her
her and ill-treating her in a brutal manner, and on
seeing him (witness) he seized a knife, rushed at him
for the purpose of stabbing him, a nd, had he not re-
treated as fast as possible, he must have been mur-
dered. The prisoner then returned and assailedagainith
partthe
his wife. He seized her by the hair at the back w
of her head, and stabbed her repeatedly
knife, which bent. He then seized.
The
second knife,
and stabbed her with that also.
layit
udeer,b,laoloadrinspeudrtthede
w
hohuonudrsh,
ohoedr,crie
ands esfhe upon the ground
arrived fromh ol apparently n
til
eae
niwgd lifeless.
took
the
prisoner
thestation-house Sparkley, 2O l :
while Mr. Brown, the parish surge, )o, was sent for,
and dressed the wounds of the injur ed woman.
John
nehnntwo
oßantr,toehwnedni Brown, surge an, of IV ilmi 13 g - Mr. Henry
htoenw-sacisunaarlel,edCluenr
Brook's-gardens.
dressedsaturated
them.
at
otandN.
sot.aHee,,
severe wounds onherwiherth e
in prisoner,
a very
sideth blood.d S be had numerous
stoa state
that
tf Hann
eoonthlder.apoatrtssayofpohseirtipveelry-
niee swlfvoiout ,
of deposed that
yet whether her lungs had been penetrated. She
smooniveudchto the worschkoeillloawupassese
was in a a
,noarohttdhfieht ehraotlsipt, e was in danger,
Mr. 0 ,present to be re-
sARRIE—Are they such wounds as might be
inflicted with a knife ? Mr. Brown answered in the
affirmative.
Porter and Sparkley, the officers, produced the
shift of the injured woman, which was covered with
blood ; also two table knives with blood upon them.
One of them was bent in consequence of the force
with which the blade went against the ribs.
Mr. Coaarn (to the pr;:soner)—Do you wish to
say anything to the charge ? Prisoner (looking
fiercely at the witness Green)—Yes, Str (pointing at
Green) ; that man has been the cause of all this.
Mr. COIt.RIE.--I must remand you for a week, in
prisopna.inter, of
order to ascertain the fate of your wife.
bay E.liza Jer-
vis,
He was remanded, and
wdoc,inssevereilylhaeerddgetodas
appeared that at half-past three o'clock yesterday
4vi,BlJ James
hE 130 I 1 ;jCi Oef
erU:r Jervis,
tHolborn,hil oa
vwi
having
her, with intent to
the prisoner quarrelled with his wife, when
knife and stabbwl her oti the face, thereby
milieuoirsrtendiieznreg.d a
inflicting a severe wound, we rich she now
Her screams end cries of " Murder" brought assist-
ance,he now exhibited.
caln h when Hook theerprisoner,l2s
G ,
who w
lac, into custody by
i;ekeadehiin up. The pro-
secatrix went to a surgeon Wad was attended to.