The Sun.
London, England, 1852-09-14 00:00:00

LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 14 1852

Railway Company at the board of the Central Somer-
setshire Railway, said he could give a distinct assu-
rance that the strongest desire was felt by the board
that the line should, as advocated by the gentleman
who had just sat down, be continued to the city of
Wells. The question was one of pounds, shillings,
and pence, and as soon as the necessary amount was
subscribed for completing the present undertaking, it
would be for the interest of the undertaking as well
as of the public to carry on the line of railway to the
ancient and interesting city of Wells. If the line
were carried out, there could be no doubt that a large
harbour and docks would be constructed at High-
bridge, if which were dune immense advantages must
necessarily accrue to both Glastonbury and Wells. He
had himself, although a citizen of Bristol, declined to
join in a proposition for making docks at Porter-
head because he believed that Highbridge presented
more favourable features, and was more advanta-
geously situated for the accommodation of ocean-
going steamers, and was already possessed of a good
line of railway. He did hope, therefore, that the
gentlemen of Wells would regard their town interests
and would put their shoulders to the wheel and assist
in the formation of the, line to Glastonbury. Let
them do this, and they might rest assured that the
strong 3onci file desire of the directors to carry on
the works to Wells would be carried into effect, and
that city and district be supplied with railway ac-
commodation.

In reply to a question it was stated that the
company could not borrow money till all its capital
was subscribed.

Mr. R. DAVIS wished to know if the Bristol
and Exeter Company would assist in carrying the
line to Wells ?.
Mr. CASTLE, bad no doubt that they would do so.
It should be remembered too, that Captain Denham,
who was engaged by Government to survey the
Bristol Channel, had reported in favour of High-
bridge as a packet port.
Several other gentlemen addressed the meeting.
The CHAIRMAN announced his attention of in-
creasing his interest in the undertaking.
Various persons present then subscribed for shares,
and the meeting closed with a vote of thanks to the
chairman.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, Sept. 13.
GAROTTE ROBBERY.—Charles Coughlan, 25, a
tall,
man, was indicted for having
stolen powerful
a w
eproperty of Charles Faul, from
his person.
tch,
Mr. Payne appeared for the prisoner.
a lookingth
It appeared that on the evening of Sunday, the
22d of August, the prosecutor, a steam-boat engineer,
was drinking with some friends, amongst whom was
the prisoner's father, at a public-house called the
Sa-
lisbury Arms, at Limehouse. During the time they
were together the prisoner joined them and asked his
father for some money, which he refused to give, and
the prosecutor treated the prisoner to some beer.
Soon afterwards they went to another public-house
called the Cape of Good Hope, and had some more
drink ; but the prosecutor was so intoxicated while at
the Saisbury Arms that he recollected nothing that
occurred after going into the second house until the
following morning, when he found that be had been
robbed, and that his limbs were stiff and sore. In
addition to this his tongue felt as if it had been bit-
ten, and there was a considerable degree of soreness
about his chin and throat. A carpenter named Ro-
naldson, living in Duff-street, Limehouse, was crosing
Abbott's-fields, which are distant about a quarter of a
mile from the Cape of Good Hope public-house, about 6
on the evening
in question, when he saw the prosecu-
tor lying on the ground, apparently in a state of help-
less intoxication, and the prisoner kneeling by his
side. On his corning up to them the prisoner moved
away, and he then saw that the prosecutor was black
in the face, his tongue protruded, and his head was
resting on his right shoulder, and on stooping down to
ascertain what really was the matter with him, he
found that a handkerchief and a brace were twisted
as tightly as possible round his neck, and that in fact
the man was in a state of strangulation. Fearing
that he would be suffocated, Ronaldson knelt down
and endeavoured to loosen the handkerchief and brace;
but he hal great difficulty in doing so, as one of his
thumbs had been injured, so he managed as well as
he could with one hand and using his teeth. Ob-
serving that the prisoner was about to go away Ro-
naldson asked
him to stop a few minutes, so that they
might see what was the matter with the man, and in-
quired whether he knew him? He answered that he
did, and when asked if he knew whew he lived he said
at " Blukwall." After a moment's consideration he
said, "No, its Bow-common," and then went on to
say that he was a foreigner, and having had a quarrel
with his wife, he had come out to drown himself,
but had instead been drinking. Ronaldson then
expressed some doubt as to whether he knew him at
all, and remarked that it was a strange place for a
man to go to drown himself; and having by that time
removed the handkerchief and brace from the prose-
cutor's throat, he asked the prisoner to lend him a
hand in getting him np. To that the prisoner replied
that he had already carried him far enough, and
should carry him no further, and walked away to a
fence for a particular purpose, as Ronaldson thought,
but in reality to conceal the prosecutor's watch, for
shortly afterwards it was found close to where he had
stood by a labouring man, named Waters, who handed
it to the police. He was seen to secrete the watch by
that individual and a boy ; and on his person was
found some money which appeared to have been in
the prosecutor's possession, for it was covered with
whiting—a quantity of which was contained in his
pockets. A policeman having arrived at the spot, and
heard from Ronaldson what he had observed, he went
to the prisoner and took him into custody. On the
way to the station, he said, " What have you got me
for ?" The officer replied, " I'll tell you at the sta-
tion ;" and then the prisoner said, with an oath,
" You are wrong, as wrong as ever you were right.
I've not got it." " Got what ?" asked the officer;
but the prisoner returned no answer. The prosecutor
remained insensible and apparently lifeless for half an
hour afterwards.
Mr. PAYNE addressed the jury.
Mr. WITHAM was about to sum up, when
The Foreman said they were satisfied. They found
the prisoner Guilty of robbery, with violence.
A previous conviction was proved.
Mr. %%Ham said the utmost severity would be
resorted to in all cases where this horrible system of
Thuggiem was practised. The sentence was that the
prisoner be transported beyond the seas for the term
of fifteen years.
The prosecutor appealed for mercy, on account of
the prisoner's aged parents.
Mr. WITHAM said he could not listen to that ap-
peal, which was creditable to the prosecutor. A man
who tried to strangle another, for the purpose of
plunder, could not be mercifully dealt with.
William Calder, 18, pleaded guilty to having stolen
eleven pieces of calico, value 1/. 7s. 6c1., the property
of Walter Rowsell. He was shown to be an old
offender, and Mr. Witham sentenced him to be trans-
ported for seven years.
SECOND COURT.—(Before Mr. TURNER.)
William Murry, 21, and Frederick Poole, 21, were
indicted for having stolen a gold watch, value 161.,
from the person of John Cottrell.
The prosecutor stated that he is a brass-founder,
residing in Banner-street, St.. Luke's, and on the
evening of the 30th of August, about seven o'clock, he
alighted from an omnibus at the corner of Bath-street,
in the City-road, where a large crowd was assembled
to witness the ascent of a balloon from the Eagle
Tavern. He attempted to make his way through the
crowd, but he was immediately surrounded by several
persons, and near him he noticed the prisoner Murry.
A minute had scarcely elapsed when he felt a pull at
his guard chain, and on casting his eyes towards his
waistcoat pocket, he saw his watch, which had been
separated from the guard, in Murry's hand, with
which he immediately escape& With some difficulty
prosecutor at length got out of the crowd, and went
to the station-house, for the purpose of giving infor-
mation of the robbery, where he found the prisoner
Murry already in the custody of Evans, the officer.
His watch was there produced, which he at once
identified. His watch, which was worth 16/., he was
sure was safe in his possession when he entered the
crowd.
Thomas Evans, police -constable, said, on the even-
ing in question he was on duty in the City-road,
where a crowd was assembled for the purpose of
watching the ascent of a balloon. He saw both the
prisoners go into the crowd, and afterwaads they
hurriedly came out of it together. Soon after he
heard that a gentleman had been robbed of his watch,
upon which he immediately followed the prisoners.
At some distance from the place he stopped Murry,
and asked him if he had got anything about him, and
he replied that he bad not, but not being satisfied he
took hold of him, and found the watch produced in
his waistcoat pocket. He was sure the other pri-
soner went into the crowd with Murry. He took
Poole into custody two days afterwards, telling him
that he was charged with another man with stealing
a watch, when be at first said he knew nothing about
it, but afterwards on his way to the station-house he
said that he hoped witness would be as light with him
as he could.
William Kinnerley gave corroborative evidence of
the two prisoners and another person surrounding the
prosecutor, and saw his watch snatched from him.
Both prisoners denied the robbery.
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty.
Evidence was then given of a former conviction
against Murry at the Old Bailey, and both the pri-
soners were recognised as well-known thieves.
Mr. TURNER said they were evidently hardened
thieves, and sentenced each of them to be transported
for ten years.
John Rogers, alias Jeremiah MiGrath, 40, and
.Eliza Williams, 21, were indicted for having stolen
two sovereigns, the moneys-of Woolf Pleinser, from
his person. There
wasa second indictment against
Rogers, for having stolen_Smith,
a silver watch, v
from his person.alue 5°39
the property of Samuel
edlar, stated that he was a
Woolf Pleinser, a Jew P
traveller about the country,.d and sold trinkets and
other articles ; but his res.ieenroceetwtahse
female
Bristol.l Oa
the night of the sth inst. la atoeprisoner,
accompanied herlodg-
ings
and by her persuasion,
lalfields. He event her
at some court in Sp' with her
into a room on the ground ofl or, when she immediately
sh
locked the door. Shortly afterwards
nteerudnlohcked the
door and called out, when two men
Withoutethete room,
one of them being the prisone slightest
• lent blow in
prosecutor a violent provocation he atruck the hinto •s pocket
female put her and ln
the face, when the
took out his purse, and
gav cried out "Murderilt::
Wit-
ness, on discovering the robbery,e it to the prisoner. w
as lustily as he could, _
when They the prisoner Ito
subsequentlyn ge
put his hand over his mouth
took hold of him and threw him into the yard, and
afterwards they carried
him to a cellar, where they
left him. After the lapse of some considerable time
-
he got out, and made his way back to the room from
which butrum
which he had been so summarily ejected,found
no person there. He thereupon raised the cry of
" Murder" and " Police," when the prisoners and
the other man came into the room, and, after beating
him, they thrust him into the street. Ile then in-
formed a policeman of the treatment behad received,
and the woman was taken into custody the same
night. On the day he appeared against her at the
police-office he was taken to the cell where Rogers
and five or six other persons were in custody, when
he immediately recognised him, and pointed him out
to the gaolers. He would have known him again
amongst five hundred, and he could safely say that
he is the same man who received the purse from Wil-
liams, and the same man who assisted in putting him
into the yard and cellar.
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty against both
the prisoners.
The male prisoner was then arraigned, charged
with having stolen a silver watch, value 505., the pro-
perty of Samuel Smith, from his person.
From the evidence of the prosecutor, a printer,
residing at Kingsland, it appeared that on the night
of the 21st ult. he was in Shoreditch on his way home,
when he was surrounded by several men, and they
pushed him up against the wall. The prisoner was
one of the men by whom he was 611 d
rroande ,who

put his arm round prosecutor's waist, and took his
watch out of his right hand pocket. Finding the
attempt was robbery, he caught the prisoner's arm,
he having at the time the watch in his hand, and held
him by the neckcloth for a loni, time. Prisoner then
struck the prosecutor a violent blow, which compelled
him to loosen his hold, when he started " off like a
race•horse;" but he was followed, and at length cap-
tured, and handed over to a police-constable, but
nothing was found upon him.
John Wilkinson proved that he was passing along
Shoreditch on the night in question, and saw the
prosecutor struggling together, and while this was
going on he observed a silver watch fall from the
dress of the prisoner. He followed is pursuit, and
never lost sight of the prisoner until he was taken into
custody.
The prisoner denied all knowledge of the robbery,
and said that he had a tobacco-box in the form of a
watch, which had led to the belief that the watch was
in his possession.
The jury found him Guilty.
Mr. TURNER sentenced him to be transported for
ten years, and ordered the other prisoner to be re-
mand,d until the next session for inquiries to be made.
It appeared that Sergeant Money, 4 H division,
wbo apprehended Williams, has since then been way-
laid by the companions of the prisoners, and so se-
verely bitten by one of them in the hand that he is
still an inmate of S. Thormi's Hospital.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

Sambo Embo and Josh Tooferrnan, a couple of
Lascar seamen, were charged with obtaining money
under false pretences.
John James Roe, an alehouse keeper, of 47, Fetter-
lane, stated that the prisoners came to him on Thurs-
day last, and represented that they had left their ship
at Liverpool, and came to London by rail, by which
means they had missed the gentleman who held their
papers, and they had therefore neither money nor
luggage. He gave them is. each to get a lodging
with, and Sambo then called him aside, and, kissing
his hand in gratitude for the money, said he
had a young Scotch wife and two piccaninies in
Australia, where he had come from, and a large house
and plenty of money. He said he had deposited a
quantity of gold dust in the Bank of England, and
tbat he should have plenty of money on the following
day. He also said he had letters from gentlemen in
Australia, authorising him to pay large sums of
money, with which he had been entrusted, in Lyn-
don. To confirm the truth of this statement he
showed prosecutor a slip of paper containing the
words ."Bullion-office, Bank of England." Upon
these representations he advanced them 285., and sup-
plied them with food—a fish dinner on Friday, be-
cause they were Catholics, and on Saturday they
ordered a sucking pig. Oa making inquiries prose-
cutor found that they had not left any gold at the
Bank, and so far from having arrived at Liverpool as
passengers, they came from a ship in the London
Docks, where Sambo was the ship's cook, and Josh one
of the crew of another ship.
Alderman SIDNEY—HOW came you to lend them
money without knowing anything of them ? Prose-
cutor--I saw a person of the name of Sergeant in
their company, and he told me that it was all right.
In addition to which Samba turned up the whites of
his eyes so imploringly that I could not doubt his
sincerity.
Alderman SIDNEY—Did you trust him, then, on
the strength of the whites of his eyes only ?--
(Laughter.) Prosecutor—No, Sir, but he shed tears
also.
Alderman SIDNEY—I have frequently examined a
man's face well before I trusted him, but I never
placed much reliance upon the whites of any one's
e yes.— (Laughter.)
Several other witnesses were then called, and the
the prisoners were remanded for further inquiry.
WESTMINSTER.

It having been communicated to the whole of the
parties concerned that Mr. Arnold intended to give
his decision yesterday in the case of ballooning
with ponies, which was detailed at length in our im-
pression of Wednesday last, they attended to hear his
judgment.
Mr. ARNOLD said—Five summonses came on for
hearing on Tuesday last against M. and Madame
Poitevin, for having cruelly ill-treated, abused, and
tortured two horses, and against Mr Simpson for
causing them to be so ill-treated, abused, and tor-
tured. It was agreed that one case only should be
heard—that against Mr. Simpson, for an offence al-
leged to have been committed on the 23d, and that
the. result of one case should determine the whole.
Is is not necessary to recapitulate the whole of the
evidence; but it appeared that on that occasion a
balloon ascent took place from Cremorne-gardens,
when a pony having been attached by slings to the
car of the balloon it ascended with M. Poitevin on
its back, dancing during its ascent. Mr. Simp-
son was present at, and superintended the
ascent. It was alleged that the manner in
which the animal wes ettached on slings to the bal-
loon was such as necessarily to inflict great pain, and
it was proved by a witness who leas present when the
balloon descended at Wimbledon that the horse was
very hot, and that perspiration was dripping down its
shoulders; and he further stated that its eyes appeared
very wild, like those of a horse who had run away,
but that it stood perfectly quiet, and was afterwards
ridden away by a gentleman. In reply to the charge,
it was contended for the defence, that there was no
cruelty, either positive or constructive, practised upon
the animal, that there was no pain inflicted upon it,
and that it suffered in no way from fear or terror ;
that animals, and horses in particular, were constantly
slung or suspended in a less scientific manner than on
the present occasion for surgical purposes, or with the
object of putting them on board ship. It was proved
by M. Poitevin that before animals were taken up ex-
periments had been made in France before a cornanse
sion of scientific gentlemen, when a horse had been
suspended from 15 to 20 hours, and that be took his
food during the time he was so suspended ; and he
further stated that he had ascended with the identical
horso 150 times, and that it never exhibited any agita-
tion, either while being attached to the balloon, during
its ascent, or after its descent, but, on the contrary,
that if the balloon happened to descend in a field the
animal immediately began to graze, and that it never
appeared to suffer on any occasion except once, when
it bled slightly from the nose, owing to the balloon
having attained an unusually great altitude. I may
say in the outset that I must reject all these argu-
ments drawn from the fact of slinging animals either
for surgical
purposes or for being put on board ship.
In the former case the animal is slung for the purpose
o f relieving it from pain, or of preventing it from in-
juring itself; even if pain is inflicted, it is done with
a view of preventing greater pain. In the other case,
when a horse is put-on board ship, whatever is done
is done for what may fairly be termed the legitimate
use of the animal, to transport it from one place to
another, for the use of man. On such occasions no
humane persons would inflict any unnecessary or su-
perfluous pain. But there is a wide and obvious dis-
tinction between inflicting pain on such occasions,
where it may be necessary to do so, and doing it
without necessity, and for the purpose only of an
exhibition with the object of making money. All
arguments, therefore, deduced from such facts are
wholly beside the present question. It certainly
appears from the evidence that the mode of sling-
ing adopted by M. Poitevin is superior to that ordi-
narily employed, and that every endeavour is made to
avoid giving pain to the animal ; but the question is,
was there in fact any pain inflicted on the horse, or
was it placed under the influence of terror on the day
mentioned in the summons, the 23d of August. No
other act of cruelty committed, if at all, at other
times, or connected with the training of the horse,
would have been admissible upon this charge, nor
were any in point of fact tendered in evidence. Upon
the question of pain there were contradictory and con-
flicting opinions. One veterinary surgeon said that
from the manner in which the horse was suspended it
must have suffered greatly, and have been severely
injured; two others gave it as their opinion that the
animal could not have suffered the least; and as-
suredly the facts in the case bore out this latter
opinion, as after 150 ascents the horse is in perfect
health and condition. As to the influence of fear,
the evidence is more doubtful. The sweat and the
wildness of the horse, spoken to by one witness would
seem to show that he was under the influence of
great nervous excitement; but the wildness was not
noticed by another witness who saw the descent,
and the sweat seems to be explained by the fact
stated, that it was an unusually close evening, one of
the witnesses, a veterinary surgeon, stating that on
that evening several horses in his stable had broken
into a sweat without any other cause that the sultri-
ness of the weather. lam bound to say, therefore,
that it does not appear to me that the animal suffered
from either fear or pain on this occasion. I suggested,
indeed, at the close of the case, whether the placing
an animal, without any paramount
necessity, in a
situation of rick, where, in case of accident, it could not
assist itself; was not an act of cruelty. To this it
was arswered—first, that it was analagous to the
slinging of horses already mentioned, or placing them
in boxes on railways, an argument I consider I have
already disposed of; and secondly, that it could not
be cruelty if no accident happened. But this is
founded upon a misapprehension of the point sug-
gested ; for the question is, whether the putting an
animal to the risk of an accident is not an act of
cruelty ? I have no doubt myself but that such an
act is one of the most wanton cruelty, but I must also
say that I do not think it is such an act of cruelty as
is within the intention of the Act of Parliament. The
words of the Act are, " If any person shall cruelly beat,
ill-treat, overd-rive, abuse, or torture any animal," he
shall be liable to a certain penalty ; and these words,
I think, contemplate acts of cruelty of a different
character from the one I have just mentioned. I can-

not, however, refrain from. expressing my opinion, an
°Aga that would be of little value if it were not, as

I believe it to be, that of all refl,cting mer, that such
exhibitions as the one under discussion are highly In •
expedient, and any thing hut creditable either to
those who for the sake of lucre make them public, or
to those who find pleasure in witnessing them. Tnere
cannot but be great risk attenling them without any
corresponding good resulting from them, and it is
not creditable to any party to seek either profit or
pleasure from exhibitions attended with such risk.
Numbers of persons would also feel alarm and dis-
tress of mind at hearing or reading of such perilous
risks, even though they may not witness them ; and
for that reason, also, they ought not to be counte-
nanced. But however reprehensible I may consider
such proceedings, I am bound to deal with this ques-
tion upon other considerations. lam bound to deal
with it according to law, and the evidence adduced
before me, not to travel out of the facts that have
been proved, to interpret the law strictly and impar-
tially as I am best able to understand it, and to decide
whether in my opinion the defendants have committed
the offence with which they are charged. I have
come, not, I will own without reluctance, to the con-
clusion that they have not, and the summonses must
therefora be dismissed.