The Sun.
London, England, 1864-10-26 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT—This Day,

OLD COURT.
(Beforo Mr Baron Martin )
CHARGE OF WOUNDING WITH INTENT, ETC.

Raymond Roderiquez, a Spaniard, was indicted for the
manslaughter of a man named De Leon.

From the evidence it appeared that the deceased and the
prisoner were in a publichouse, the Rose and Crown, St.
George's-in-the-East. A quarrel took place, when Roderi-
uez drew a knife and inflicted such injuries upon De Leon
that he died in a short time after.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty of manslaughter.
The learned Judge sentenced the prisoner to 12 months'
imprisonment with hard labour.

NEW COURT.
(Before Mr Justice Willes.)

SENDING THREATENING LETTERS TO LORD CURZON.

John Hill, about 50 years of age, described as V. farmer,
was indicted for feloniously writing and sending certain
letters to Viscount Curzon, son of Earl Howe, threatening
to kill and murder him for some fancied injury his family
had sustained through Earl Howe.
The prisoner pleaded not guilty, and conducted his own
defence.

From the statement of the learned counsel, the evidence
of Viscount Curzon and other witnesses, and the letters re-
ceived by the noble lord, those relied on, containing the
throat to kill, were received in the month of February and
August last, and stated that the prosecutor's father was
formally a tenant and occupier of a farm belonging to Earl
Howe in Leicestershire, and that for some cause he had
been refused a renewal of his tenantoy of the farm, and
being called upon to give up the farm the prisoner and the
other members of his family conceived the idea that their
father had been unjustly ejected by Earl Howe's bailiff from
the farm, and the prisoner complained that he had been
entirely thrown on the world and hie family grossly Injured.
The prisoner was charged with writing the letters in
question, and when the officers arrested him he
admitted writing the letters, and intended to carry
the threat into execution. It also appeared that
the prisoner, on the 12th of July last, was seen by a police.
sergeant walking up and down Hollis-street, and to delibe-
rately break two windows in Lord Curzon's house.
The prisoner merely contradicted all the witnesses, and
declared what they had said was false, and stated that when
he was taken into custody by Sergeant Bird, of the detec-
tive force, he was taken to Scotland-yard, and after Lord
Curzon had been sent for, he wan offered £5O to go to Aus-
tralia, which he refused.
The statement was positively denied by Sergeant Bird.
The prisoner did not address the jury, but merely stated
that he was innocent.

The Jury found the prisoner Guilty.
The learned Judge, in passing sentence, said—lt must be
clear to every person in court, as it is to myself, that you are
an exceedingly silly person—indeed I believe you-to be a
very great fool. The jury have had to consider your silly,
doltish, and foolish conduct, and they are of opinion that
you are guilty of the charge imputed to you. Fools, how-
ever, must be taught that they cannot commit clime with
impunity. Had the jury not taken a considerate view of
your case, and recommended you to mercy, the Court would
have feltit incumbent topass on you a severe sentence,because
the idea that landlords can tyrannise over their tenants in
this country is perfectly absurd, wicked, and foolish.

Prisoner—l never did it.
The kernel Judge continued—Your conduct has been
most contemptible, and the sentence of the Court is that
you be committed to the House of Correction for two years,
with hard labour.
Prisoner—Well, I didn't do it, and I'm as innocent as
you are.

THE LATE FATAL SHOOTING IN EPPING FOREST.
John Mourdant, a respectable lad, surrendered to an in-
dictment charging him with causing the death of another
lad, named Jameson.
The prisoner, it will be recollected, met the deceased and
some other boys in Epping Forest, and after some angry
words had passed between them, the defendant, having a
short Enfield rifle in his hand, threatened to shoot the de-
ceased, and placed the rifle to his shoulder, when it went
off, the contents lodging in the body of the unfortunate
boy J ameson. The defendant, when he saw Jameson
fall, exclaimed, "My gracious 1" and did all he could to
hasten medical assistance. Jameson, however, lingered
for some days, but eventually died.
After the evidence had proceeded for a short time, the
learned Judge said to prove a case of manslaughter it was
necessary to prove a case of great negligence, but the pre-
sent appeared to be purely accidental.
The jury immediately returned a verdict of acquittal.
The learned Judge said he had been considering whether
he ought to make any remarks to the prisoner, but he ap-
peared to have suffered much already, and he had no doubt
his parents had already done that in a more effectual man-
ner than he could hope to do.
The defendant was then liberated.

SENDING A THREATENING LITTER.
Daniel Christopher, 44, clerk, pleaded guilty to an indict-
ment for feloniously sending a threatening letter to Thomas
liqpper.
Mr Sleigh and Mr Orridge prosecuted, end Mr Bowden
defended.

It appeared from the statement ma'e by Mr Sleigh that
the prosecutor is a merchant, in the city, and he had
anted as the guardian of a widow lady, whose husband had
been in his service. The prisoner was her nephew, and she
leaving some property he thought he was entitled to it.
There was not the most remote reason for the supposition,
as the prisoner was not known to the proseoutor until long
after the lady's death. Ho then made a claim on the pro-
secutor with the threatening letter in question.
A sentence of eighteen months' imprisonment was passed
upon the prisoner.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—This day.

BIARLBOROUGH-ST aEET.

BRUTALITY TO A CAT.—Robert Parker, a boy, living
in Green's- court, Peter-street, St, James's, appeared before
Mr Tyrwhitt to answer the complaint of the Royal Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals of cruelly illtreat-
ing and torturing a cat.
Mrs Ann Mason, residing in Peter-street, stated that on
the 23J of September last she saw the defendant kick a cat
in the most brutal manner, causing it to scream from
agony, On expostulating with the defendant he made use
of the vilest language towards her. She:then went to the
Oleo of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals, and on one of the officers (Dobie) seeing the cat it
was still in great agony and unable to walk.
In answer to the magistrate Mrs Mason said the cat was
quietly walking across the road when the defendant kicked
it, and she had to speak to the defendant before owing to
his cruelty.
Mr Tyrwhitt fined the defendant 20s or a month, stating
that he was a cruel young fellow, and would go on till he
got illtreating human beings.