The Sun.
London, England, 1839-11-05 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENUE.

BOW-S7'REET.
William Frederick Box, who stands charged with steal-
ing from the shop of Messrs. Howell and James, of Re-
gent-street, a ruby pin, value eleven guineas, was yester-
day brought up for final examination.
Mr. Rickards appeared for the prisoner.
Mr. HALL said that at the last examination he had for-
gotten to ask the witness Webster, who had exhibited the
jewellery for sale to the prisoner at the time the pin was
taken, whether he would have sold the article in case the
prisoner had agreed to give a cheque for it?
Mr. Webster being sworn, said that he would have men-
tioned the circumstance to Mr. Sedgwick, one of the fi-m,
but he would not have taken upon himself to have accepted
a cheque as payment without first apprising his employer.
Mr. HALL—Do your employers hol.cl you or any person
in the department to which you belong responsible for the
loss of the article in question? Witness—l am not aware,
nor have I been given to understand that they do.
Edward James Marsh, an apprentice, recollected having
on the 18th October brought a bill of parcels to the house
of the prisoner, amounting to 19/., where he saw Mrs.
Box, t o whom he gave it, and she said she was very sorry
that Mr. Box, meaning the prisoner, was not at home.
Witness returned without the price of the articles.
In answer to Mr. Rickards, the witness said that the
order had been delivered to him by the witness Webster,
and he was not aware of the contents, but he knew a
pin was mentioued in it, the price of which he could
not tell, nor did be know if it was a chain-pin.
Mr. HALL, to the prisoner—You arc aware that you are
not bound to say anything in your defence, and should you
do so, it will be taken down for the purpose of using it
against you at the trial.
.....

—The prisoner declined, and after the witnesses were
bound over in the sum of 401. each to appear at the Ses-
sions, he was fully committed for trial.
Mr. Baley, proprietor of the Carriage and Horse Repo-
sitory, Aldersgate-street, said in coming forward he did
not intend to institute proceedings against the pri-
soner, but he considered he was bound, for the be-
nefit of the public, to state how he had been treated
by him. On the 6th of September he drove into his
yard in a cabriolet, attended by a livery servant, saying
that he wanted to purchase a cabriolet for his father. He
was accordingly shown one, the price of which was 201.,
and, upon complainant exhibiting some horses to him, he
fixed upon a spotted mare for 701. or 751. After some
conversation, the prisoner gave his address, and he got the
mare, with a set of harness, as complainant had some
knowledge of his uncle. On the following Saturday he
came again, saying that he would be obliged to get credit,
but, before a conclusion had been come to, he was asked
was be of age, and he said he had been so for the last six
months; that he held a situation in the office of his father,
who was a proctor in Doctors' Commons, at a salary of
1901. a year, and from the marriage licenses he derived an
income of about 15/. or 201. a week. He then gave a
bill upon Messrs. Stevenson and Salt, but as, upon inquiry,
no account appeared to be kept with that firm, the circum-
stance was made known to his father, to whom the bill,
which had fourteen days to run, was presented, and he
said that the prisoner had not had for some time any con-
cern with his establishment.

Mr. HALL—Then you would not have given him credit
had you known he was under age? Mr. Raley—Certainly
not, nor would I have come forward ; but it had been insi-
nuated in the newspapers that the prisoner had been harshly
treated, and it was but right that the public should know
that I have been a loser to the amount of 1001., in case he
should be acquitted of the present charge.
Mr. HALL--Have you ever been able to recover your
horse or harness? Mr. Baley—Never : but lam
given
to understand that he disposed of them the very next day.
Mr. Humphries, the solicitor, said he was instructed to
prefer a charge of forgery against the prisoner. Mr.
Nies, an attorney, discounted the bill produced for 851.,
which had been endorsed by the prisorn.r to Mr. Roche,
and it was purported to be drawn on Mr. Storey, of St.
Albans, who denied that it was in his handwriting.
Mr. Nias, solicitor, of Copthall-court, City, proved that
on the 2d of August be received the Bill of Exchange
produced from Richard Smith Roche, of Newstock,
Essex, which, becoming due on the 28th of September, and
not being paid, he issued a writ against the acceptor, Mr.
Storey, brother. in-law of the prisoner, who resides at St.
Albans, and in consequence of seeing the accounts of the
last examination in the Newspapers he gave information
of the circumstance on Friday last. .

Mr. Anthony Brown Storey, solicitor, of St. Albans,
proved that the acceptance in the bill produced was not in
his handwriting, nor did he ever authorize the prisoner or
other person t. accept it for him. He did not know the
handwriting in the body ohe bill, but he knew the ini.
tials answered to the na of the prisoner, whose father
keeps an office in Doctors' Commons. Witness was not
acquainted with the prisoner's handwriting.
Mr. Humphries said that was the case as it stood for the
present, and he hoped there would be no objection to re-
mand the prisoner for a week.
Mr. HALL said it would be desirable to produce all the
evidence that could be obtained, in order to prevent delay
at a future day.
Mr. Nias deposed that from information he had re-
ceived, he had reason to believe the prisoner was the per-
sciour:,tewho had written the signature to the bill, and he was
prepared, if necessary, to disclose to the Magistrate
itlhaevo gansroot
at hb el
is
upon which he considerea it necessary to
ezcaAhma, whoirae
examination.
centook the prisoner into d
tohne t
hu
h ocosreig
proved that he left a summons at
of 11r.
Nalr. Roche, where he was informed hceuwstooulyd
be,
ian wq
ue
rke.
inir. townti L d
if any person from Ai. in
m Southampton