The Sun.
London, England, 1830-01-23 00:00:00

+

PRICE 7D.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

BO W. STREET.

Yesterday Robert Ashdown, proprietor of the
Star coffee-shop, Bow-street, appeared before Sir
R. BIRNIE and Mr. MrNstm.r., to answer to infor-
mations exhibited. against him by Martin, th 4 in-
former, for selling exciseable liquors without being
duly licensed.
Before the informations were heard,
Sir R. BIRNIE observed, that he felt some re-
luctance to take a part in the proceedings, as he hap-
pened personally to know that the house of the de-
fendant was ♦ery badly conducted, and if a convic-
tion followed, it might be:inferred that he was in-
fluenced by that circumstance. A few nights ago
he happened to be up late, and had occasion ►eve-
ral times to go to the drawing-room windows, which
were nearly opposite the defendant's establishment.
From what he then occasionally saw, he was in-
duced to sit up somewhat later than he intended,
and from one o'clock in the morning until three he
observed several suspicious-looking persons passing
into and out of the defendant's premises. He might
be mistaken, but be thought he saw two of the new
police amongst the number. Indeed, he was con-
vinced of the fact, by noticing that one of the men
carried a lantern before him. However, he supposed
they had directions to go there, but he deemed it
right to mention the matter to Mr. Thomas.
The defendant said, in reply, that he called in the
policemen for the purpose of getting rid of a auspi-
cious character.

Sir R. BIRNIE, if that were the case, would only
say that no expulsion could be managed more quietly.
He saw the policemen leave the house with others
in their company, and he could only say that they
appeared to be on excellent terms with each other.
Mr. Leadley, the clerk, then read the first infor-
mation, which charged the defendant with having
retailed a certain exciseable liquor, called " gin and
water," upon his premises, on the night of the
14th instant.

Charles Dighy, the informer's witness, about
twelve o'clock on the night in question, went into
the shop of the defendant, and was served with a cup
of coffee and a main. He then called for a glass
of gin and water, which was brought to him by the
waiter in about five minutes. He paid Bd. for it.
There were at least 20 persons in the room at the
time, a great part of whom appeared to be common
prostitutes. He remained for about an hour.

A solicitor, who appeared on behalf of the de-
fendant, put several questions to the witness, with
a view to show that the gin and water had been
procured at a tavern in the neighbourhood, and he
called the waiter forward, who swore that he
fetched it from the Albion Tavern, in Russell-street.
Mr. Simpson, the proprietor of the Albion, stated
that the defendant Ashdown was certainly in the
habit of sending to his house for glasses of mixed
liquors.
Sir R. BIRNIE said that Sd. was rather a dear
price for a glass of, gin and water.
Mr. Simpson replied, that glasses of gin and water
could be had at his bar at all prices from 2d. to Is.
Sir R. BIRNIE—What ! a shilling for a glass of
gin and water ?
Mr. Simpson—Yes, Sir Richard. A measure
at that price is usually called " a thunderer."—
(Laughter.)

111tristumr, asked the witness if he had any
recollection of having served the defendant's waiter
with a glass of gin and water on the night in ques-
tion.

Mr. Simpson could not call the circumstance to
mind.

The defendant was accordingly fined in the miti-
gated penalty of 51.
He was then charged with having, under similar
circumstances, sold a glass of brandy and water to
the same witness, between the hours of one and
two o'clock on the morning of Monday last.
This case was also pro Ted to the satisfaction of
the Magistrates, and the defendant was again fined N.
_ _ _

The informer then stated that he had taken out
a summons against the defendant under the Police
Act, for having on the 14th instant kept his shop,
for the sale •f ready-made tea and coffee, open be-
yond the hour of eleven o'clock at night, contrary
to the clause by which coffee-shops are regulated,
and by which he incurred a penalty of 101., and not
less than 11.

It appeared, howel er, that the summons was
founded upon the 3d of George IV., arid as that
statute expired on the .sth of July last, although it
was continued in force by a subsequent Act, namely,
the 10th of George IV., Sir 11. BIILNIS deemed
that an objection taken by the defendant's solicitor
was good, and decided that the summons could not
be entertained.