The Sun.
London, England, 1864-05-31 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS—May 30.

(Before Mr Payne.)
THE ALLEGED VICTIMS OF POLICE PERSECUTION.

William White, who was convicted on Thursday last of
shoplifting, and was sentenced to ten years' penal servitude,
was placed in the dock.
Mr Payne said—You were convicted before me, on
Thursday last, of the offence of stealing from a tradesman's
shop, in conjunction with two other persons, a roll of cloth,
of the value of £3. I have had you brought up to-day for
the purpose of informing you that I have, after considera-
tion and consultation with others, determined to postpone
-your sentence until next session, to enable inquiry to be
made into the truth of your assertion that you were the
victim of police persecution. But I think it my duty, in
consequence of remarks which have been publicly made
upon the case, for the sake of the administration of justice,
to say a few words about it. It has been said that the case
was a trifling one. I cannot agree with that opinion. When
a single person steals an article of small value, the case
may be said to be trifling ; but when three persons, one of
them an old offender—go out together and remove for the
purpose of stealing from a tradesman's shop an article worth
several pounds, although through the vigilance of the police
they do not carry off the article, it does not appear to me to
be at all a trifling case. It has also been said that the jury
might have acquitted you. Ido not see how, upon the evi-
dence, and using their common sense, they could have acted
otherwise than they did. If they had found you not guilty
upon the defence suggested, they would, in substance, have
declared the policeman to have committed a most wicked
offence, viz., that of having failed in one charge, and, in
consequence, entirely fabricated, or, as it is called, trumped
up another, and this only on assertion without any evidence.
lam not responsible for the verdict ; but I feel bound to say
that, both in fact and in law, I consider it was a just one.
For the sentence I alone am responsible. It was proved that
on a former occasion you had been, for a robbery of silver
plate, sentenced to five years' penal servitude, which would
have expired on the Bth of this month, You were discharged
on a ticket-of-leave at the end of 4 years, and did not produce
any evidence as to how you bad spent the past year. The
principle upon which I have acted in passing sentence is this
—as long as I can see any means of combining the reforma-
tion of the offender and the protection of the public, I always
endeavour to do so ; but when, by numerous imprisonments
and a long term of penal servitude, it appears that the
offender will not reform, then I think it right to consider
mainly the protection of the public. But you asserted that
you were the victim of police tyranny. I have always had
a strong opinion, which I have often expressed in public,
against the interference of policemen with criminals who
have got into employment, and have several times caused
investigations to be made into such matters. I did not do so
at the moment in your case because I thought that as you
had instructed your counsel to accuse the policeman of a moat
wicked charge, and which charge the jury had by their ver-
dict declared to be unfounded, I could not rely on your de-
clatation. But on the next day. and before the remarks

appeared to which I have referred, your counsel was told
that the court would do what it could to forward an inquiry
on the subject. I may further add that neither the jury nor
myself were aware before the verdict of the previous con-
victions. You will be brought up again next session, and
such sentence will then be passed upon you as any alteration
of the circumstances may require, or as after careful consi-
deration may be thought just and proper.
Mr Harwood (a magistrate on the bench)—Hear, hear.
(Some counsel laughed.) I am astonished that several
members of the bar should look at me and laugh. I dont
know for why, because I concurred in the remarks of the
judge, and I should have thought to have been borne out
by them instead of being laughed at.
In a case of a prisoner maned Henry Dixon, tried Thurs.
day last, he was brought up yesterday to receive judgment,
as a policeman stated that he knew the prisoner as a com-
panion of thieves, and had seen the prisoner frequently
within the last seven months in the company of two noted
thieves. The prisoner denied that statement, and said that
he was at that time in Feltham Reformatory. Yesterday it
appeared that what the prisoner then stated was correct, for
he was only discharged from there in March last.
Mr Payne said that the constable must attend to explain
his positive statements, and he should like to know why he
was not present now. Tnq prisonitr had ben remanded for
him to make inquiries, but he had not attended, and he
should take notice of it.
Mr Ribton, who defended the prisoner, said a strict in-
quiry ought to take place, for if gentlemen of the bar said
anything against the police he for one knew what a burst
of obloquy they had to undergo, and he did say that the
police ought to be cautious in what they swore to, as they
were mostly the principal witnesses against prisoners.
The matter was then further deferred until next session.
(Before the Assistant-Judge.)
PROSECUTION OF VENDORS OF INDECENT BOOKS AND