The Sun.
London, England, 1830-06-02 00:00:00

LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 2, 1830.

OLD BAILEY, JUNE 1.

Thomas Crockford, aged 35, was indicted for
feloniously assaulting Elizabeth Lloyd, a child under
ten years of age, and Sarah Reed, aged 19, with
aiding and assisting in the perpetration of the felony..
The prosecutrix resided with her parents in Beth-
nal-green. She knew the prisoner Crockford ; the
other prisoner, Sarah Reed, lived in the neighbour-
hood of her parents. On Monday three weeks she
saw the prisoner, Sarah Reed, standing opposite her
residence, and she called witness over and asked her
would she take a walk with her. Witness con-
sented, and the prisoner Crockford followed them
towards the Crown and Anchor public-house. The
prisoner Crockford then took her into a house, and
offered the landlady sixpence, but she turned both
of them away. The prisoners then took her into
Lamb's-fields, a distance of about two miles, where
there were some empty houses; the prisoner Crock-
ford then threw witness down, and Reed stood by
laughing.—(The witness here detailed the particu-
lars of the assault, which are unfit for publication.)
On her cross-examination by Mr. C. PHILLIPS,
the witness contradicted herself in repeated instances,
and made several admissions, which proved that
although so young, improprieties of the grossest de-
scription had taken place between her and some
boys in the neighbourhood.
Mr. James Lake, a surgeon, examined the person
of the prosecutrix. The appearances that he found
might have been occasioned by natural causes, or by
violence.

Sarah Small, the mother of the child, stated that
the prosecutrix was ten years of age on the 24th of
May. On the day named in the indictment she
came home, but did not complain of any thing hav-
ing happened to her; but a week after, in conse-
quence of some suspicions, witness examined her
person, and she questioned her as to what had hap-
pened, when she told her that a man named Jem had
done it. Witness took her to a doctor's, and on
their return the prisoner was standing at his door,
and the prosecutrix then pointed him out as the
man who had ill-used her. Witness told him what
the prosecutrix had stated, and asked him why he
had ill-used her child, and he said he would speak to
to her about it, and he followed her into her house,
and he then begged she would say nothing about
it. They then went out and drank together, and
the prisoner slipped a rag into her hand ; she opened
it when she got home, and found it contained fire
sovereigns. The prisoner's wife then came and
pleaded very hard for him, and a feeling for her sex
induced witness to promise not to prosecute. She
took the money innocently, and not for gain. She
kept it three days and then sent for a police officer,
who took the male prisoner into custody. The pri-
soner afterwards gave her five sovereigns more.
The police-man compelled her to prosecute.
Cross-examined.—She did not tell the police-man
that he might get money too. She supped and
drank with the male prisoner, after making the
charge against him. After the male prisoner gave
her the second five sovereigns, they went to the
play together. Never said the prosecutrix had ad-
mitted the male prisoner was not the man who ill-
treated her. Witness put her mark to a paper at
the Hospital.

The paper was here put in and read. It ran as
follows :—" Mrs. Small declares that Mr. Crockford
was not the man who ruined her daughter, as she
has admitted in her own words."

Mr. BARON VAUGHAN here said, after this evi-
dence, the prosecution could not be entertained for
another moment. The evidence of both mother and
daughter was so scandalous and infamous that no
reliance could be placed on it; and under those cir-
cumstances the Jury would do be to acquit the
prisoners. The Jury accordingly returned a verdict
of Not Guilty.
The prisoners were then removed from the bar.

John Wynne, a respectable-looking young man,
was indicted for that he, being a servant to John
Andrews, did feloniously embezzle, secrete, and steal
two half-crowns, his monies and property.
The prosecutor having deposed to the fact of
some money having been marked, and that he is a
leatherseller, and the prisoner his assistant, he was
subjected to one of the most rigid cross-examina-
tions we have heard for some time, which terminated
in the eliciting some of the most extraordinary facts
we have ever heard as connected with a charge of
this description.
The witness at first denied that he had been on
terms of peculiar intimacy with the prisoner, but he
admitted that he sometimes consulted him on his
business.

Mr. C. PHILLIPS—NOW, Mr. Prosecutor, depend
upon it all the facts connected with this case shall
be developed. I ask you whether you do not owe
the prisoner 10/. ?—Witness (reluctantly) : Yes.
Counsel—And does he not hold a bill or promis-
sory note against you for 70/. ?—Witness (after
considerable mental reservation) : He does hold it.
The witness then explained that the prisoner had
previously been in business on his own account, and
when he gave up, he (prosecutor•) purchased part
of his stock, and gave the promissory note made
payable on demand for the amount. The note had
not been paid. The marked money was found in
the possession of the prisoner.
It turned out in a future stage of the inquiry, that
there was near 3/. of other silver in the till, and that
a crown had been substituted for two half-crowns
from his own pocket, as was alleged to oblige a
customer.

Mr. Se►jeant ARAMS left it to the Jury to say
whether they could believe such testimony, and if
they did, he would put the prisoner upon his defence.
The Jury expressed that they were satisfied, and
immediately returned a verdict of Acquittal.
The verdict appeared to give great satisfaction,
and the prisoner was congratulated by a number of
his friends, some of whom expressed a determination►
to bring an action for false imprisonment.
Jane Lovell, a good-looking widow, aged 30, was
indicted for stealing a watch and other articles from
the person of William Later.
The prosecutor met the prisoner in London-fields,
Hackney-road, on the 12th of May, when he was
induced to accompany her to an empty house of his
own near the spot. Previous to this, however, he
went with her to several public-houses. Having
been drinking ull day, he was rather• tipsy. He knew
where the prisoner lived, but he had never treated
her before the night in question. Is unable to say
whether he misbehaved himself towards her. lie
fell asleep, and did not awake until five o'clock, when
he found that the prisoner was gone, and his watch
was missing. Knowing where the prisoner lived, he
went and found the watch. The prisoner pointed
out _where she had deposited the watch, viz. under
the tiling of the house, whither he had adjourned to
enjoy her company.
When called upon for her defence, the prisoner
put in a paper, which we copy verbatim et literati»► :
—" My Lord and Gentlemen of the Jury, I bege
pardon for intruslen on your time that is so prishous.
My prousecutor Furst acosted me by the Cat and
Mutton. I did not speak to him till be acosted me
the second time, and I did not speak to him then,
and he went on his way, seeing I was not goen the
same way as he was goen. He crosed the fields, and
spike to me agane, and axed me to have summat to
drink, which I did nut refuse, so I drank part of two
pints of Hale, and a quarton of gin. I th,,n bid him
good night. My prousecutor then took me by the
hand, and said he was well ware I was not wanted
home so sone, so he woud not let me go till I had

been to some other public-hous, and have more to
drink. My prousecutor than said that there was a
curcus at the Mare made at Hackney. He said it
wood be to my hadvantage if I wood goe. He then
told me that his wife had bean a gal of the town,
and had committed money depretations, and had
always got throw them safe. My prousecutor wished
me to have moor to drink, and we had two glasses
of rum and water. Finding myself the wourst for
liqor, I wished to go home; but he said hif I wood
go fearther with him he wood give me three or lower
shillins ; I bean very much distressed att the time,
I whent with him, and my prousecutor said he had
no money, but gave me his watch, and I gave him
my. address. He then said he would call and take
his watch and give me some money. He was very
tipsey that evening, and when he did come he
brought an hofficer and took me up. My Lord and
gentleam I leave myself intily to your mercy.

J. LOVELL."
The COMMON-SERJEANT summed up the evi-
dence, and the Jury returned a verdict of Guilty.
We understood the Learned Judge to say, that
the prosecutor would not be allowed his expenses.