The Sun.
London, England, 1864-03-01 00:00:00

LAMBETH-BRIDGE.

The half-yearly meeting of this company was held yester-
day at the Westminster Palace Hotel, Westminster, Tie.
count Torrington in the chair.
The report stated that the balance in hand applicable to
a dividend was £1,687 ; and the directors recommended a
dividend of £9 per cent. per annum for the six months
ending the 29th ult., payable on the 20th of March, leaving
about £350 for the next account. The capital account
showed that £14,532 had been expended.
The CHAIRMAN said he was happy to be able to propose
a dividend at the rate of 9 per cent. There were three new
works in the neighbourhood of the bridge that were likely
to bring them much traffic—namely, the south embank-
ment, which had been sanctioned by Parliament, the new
St. Thomas's Hospital now finally fixed to be erected at
Stangate, and a scheme for markets in Lambeth.
The report and statement of accounts were adopted, a
dividend at the rate of 9 per cent. per annum was declared
and the retiring directors and auditors were re-elected,

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT—Feb. 29.

(Before Mr. Commissioner Kerr.)
THE BENCH AND THE BAR-SCENE IN COURT.
Francis Jowers, a very respectable-looking young man,
surrendered to take his trial upon several indictments
charging him with embezzling different small sums of money,
amounting in all to about £8 or £9, the property of the
trustees of a benefit society called the Progress and Unity
Society, which is a branch of the Forester's Society.
Mr. Metcalfe conducted the prosecution; the prisoner
was defended by Mr. F. H. Lewis.
The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
The prisoner was then charged upon a second indictment

with an offence of the same character.
In this case the jury again returned a verdict of not
guilty.
Mr. Metcalfe said that he was instructed to proceed with
a third charge. and the prisoner was consequently put upon
hi,; trial upon another indictment which chargel him with
emberi:ling other sums, the property of the same society.
The leafPed counsel, in opening the case to the jury,
complained of the manner in which the last two cases had
been summed up by the learned judge, and said that if the
court had been differently constituted, and if the learned
judge who usually presided had been present, he should
probably not have felt himself compelled to take the course
1 he bad done in pressing so many inquiries upon the atten-

tion of the jury.
Mr. Commissioner Kerr, upon hearing this observation
of the learned counsel, interposed, and called upon him to
withdraw the observation he had made.
Mr. Metcalfe wished to know what was the observation
referred to by the learned judge which he required him to
withdraw.
Mr. Commissioner Kerr said that the observation he
required him to withdraw was that if the court had been
differently constituted and the learned judge who usually
presided had been present he should not have taken the
course he had done.
Mr. Metcalfe said he did not intend anything disrespect-
ful to the Court in what he had stated.
Mr. Commissioner Kerr said he should not argue the
matter, but if the observation was not withdrawn he should
adjourn the court and consider what further steps should be
taken in the matter.
Mr. Metcalfe repeated that he did not intend anything
disrespectful to the court.
Mr. Commissioner Kerr said he considered the observa-
tion that had been made was highly disrespectful, and he
believed that every one in court was of the same opinion.
(Here there were loud cries of " Hear, hear.") He should
insist upon an unconditional withdrawal of the observation.
Mr. Metcalfe, upon this, said that if his lordship consi-
dered the observation disrespectful, ho should of course
withdraw it.
The case then proceeded, but the evidence was pretty
much the same as upon the other two indiciments. The
prisoner was proved to have received several small sums
from different members of the society, but it appeared he
had accounted for nearly the whole of them, and upon one
occasion he had complained to the trustees that there were
so many entries to be made that it was impossible for him
to enter the whole of them, and an assistant was provided
for him.
The learned Commissioner, in summing up, said it ap-
peared to him that the statement which had been made by
the trustee as to the prisoner complaining of the amount of
duty he was required to perform, was the explanation of the
whole transaction, and that there really were no grounds
for making a charge of embezzlement against him.
The jury again returned a verdict of not guilty.
Mr. Commissioner Kerr then observed that he entertained
the same opinion he had expressed with reference to the
first case which had been tried, that the evidence was quite
insufficient to support the charge of embezzlement, and
that the proper course to have been taken was to have
applied to a magistrate under the provisions of the Friendly
Societies Act, by whom the dispute with regard to the
money could have been settled in the most satisfactory man-
ner, at the expense of a few shillings. Instead of doing this
the society had thought proper to prefer all these indict-
ments at very great cost, and, under the circumstances, he
should make no order for the payment of the expenses.
There was a fourth indictment against the prisoner, but
Mr. Metcalfe declined to offer any evidence in support of
it, and when the little scene above narrated had been
brought to a conclusion, the prisoner was ordered to be
discharged.
William Giles, 20, pleaded guilty to a charge of embezzle-
ment, and it appeared that he had been before convicted of
robbing a former master of a considerable quantity of valu-
able jewellery, and that he had also attempted to commit
another robbery in an establishment where he had obtained
employment after he came out of prison.
He was sentenced to five years' penal servitude.
Andrew MtLean, 53, pleaded guilty to a charge of unlaw-
fully endeavouring to obtain money by false pretences from
Baron Templeton. He also pleaded guilty to a charge of
obtaining a sovereign. from Alexander Maine by false pre-
tences. The prisoner is a notorious begging-letter impos-
ter, and he has been convicted at the instance of the Men-
dicity Society on a great many occasions.
He was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment upon the
first indictment, and to be kept in penal servitude for three
^ears upon the second.

ADVERTISEMENT.]—Avoid medicines: they always aggra-
vate chronic complaints, but Du Barry's Delicious Health
Restoring Revalenta Arabica Food, which saves fifty times
its cost in other remedies, invariably cures them, restoring
perfect digestion, strong nerves, sound lungs, healthy liver,
pure blood, refreshing sleep, functional regularity, and energy
to the most disordered or enfeebled. We extract a few out
of 60,000 Cures :—Cure No. 58,216 of the Marchioness de
Brehan, Paris, of a Aver complaint, wasting away for seven
years, debility, with a nervous palpitation all over, bad
digestion, constant sleeplessness, the most intolerable nervous
agitation, and dreadfully low spirited.—Cure No. 1,771. Lord
Stuart de Decies, Lord Lieut. of Waterford, of many years'
dyspepsia.—No. 49,832. "Fifty years' indescribable agony
from dyspepsia, nervousness, asthma, cough, constipation,
flatulency, spasms, sickness, and vomiting-.—Marla Jolly."
—Cure No. 46,270. Mr. James Roberts, of Frimley, Surrey, of
thirty years' diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver derange •
ment, and partial deafness.—Cure No. 47,121. Miss
Elizabeth
ow
Jacobs, of extreme nervousness, indigestion, gaherings, l
spirits, and nervous fancies.—Cure No. 54,816. The Rev. Jas,
T. Campbell, Fakenham, Norfolk, " of indigestion and torpi
dity or the liver, which had resiste i all medical treatment."
In tins, 1 lb., 2s. 9d. ; 21b., 4s. 6d ; 51b., lls. ; t2lb., 225. ; ?41b
405.—Barry Du Barry and Ca, No. 77, Regent-street, London ;
also Fortnum and Mason ; and all Grocers and Claernistsn i
very town of the United Kingdom.