The Sun.
London, England, 1863-10-29 00:00:00

going on for three or four years past, andif the grandmother
with whom the girl had lived since her infancy, had not
thought Ponntney a young man of position and character,
would she for a moment have allowed him to have paid his
addresses at all. It was obvious to every right minded-man
that she not only connived at this marriage, but that she had
actually given them the money to come to London and get
married. She must have been the best judge of defendant's
conduct, Did he look like a young man who would bring
evil on any girl—and did not his conduct in London look
like honesty and integrity. He had at once procured a licence
and married his young fiancee without allowing a single day
to pass. With regard to the sum of money which the prose-
cution alleged was the true reason of the marriage, did it
seem likely to them that a young manlike the prisoner would
sell himself for such a paltry sum as £133 6s Bd. No; it must
be as plain as daylight to them that he married from love and
love alone; and had not the father been so opposed to the
match the present proceedings would never have taken
place. In conclusion, the learned gentleman asked the jury
to return the defendant back to the arms of her who was so
anxiously awaiting the result of the trial, by giving a ver-
dict in his favour.
Mr. Commissioner Kerr then proceeded to sum up, point-
ing out the law in the case, and observed that whatever
might be the feelings of the jury they must do their !duty
in the matter. Until a child had reached full age there
could be no doubt that her.father alone had the disposal of
her, and paternal authority must always be respected. He
did not see how they could well acquit the prisoner, unless
they believed he did not know the purport of the affidavit at
the time he signed it.
After half an hour's deliberation the jury returned a vete.
diet of Not Guilty.
The verdict was received with loud cheers, which were
speedily repressed, and the defendant quitted the dock amid
the congratulation of his friends.
(Before Mr. Justice Willes.)
In the case of Samuel Sobey, who was charged with ac-
cusing Andrew Cunningham of a certain heinous crime,
with intent to extort money,
Mr. Ribton said he felt somewhat in a dilemma, as the
prisoner in this case was prosecutor in another in which
Cunningham was prisoner on a charge of unlawfully as-
saulting Sobey, with intent, &c. The learned gentleman
said he was somewhat in a difficulty as to which case
ought to be tried first: They could not both be tried
together, that was evident, as in the one case he prosecuted
and in the other he defended. The one was a felony, and
the other only a misdemeanour, therefore he asked his
lordship's advice.
The learned Judge, after an interview with Baron Martin,
in the Old Court, decided to try the misdemeanour first.
Andrew Cunningham, 61, coffee-house keeper, was then
placed at the bar, while Sobey quitted the dock, and took up
his position in the witness-box.
Mr. Ribton, Mr. Kemp, and Mr. Collins prosecuted, and
Mr. Metcalfe defended the prisoner Cunningham.
This charge was one of a very remarkable character, both
Sobey and Cunningham being respectively prosecutors and
prisoners. The facts have been fully before the public, but
it may be as well to give a brief recapitulation. Acccrding
to Sobey's evidence he was, on the 15th of October last,
ir. Little Bridge-street, when the prisoner Cunningham as-
saulted him in the manner described, and afterwards left
him. Sobey, however, followed him as far as Ludgate lin
and along Cheapside, when he gave him into custody for the
assault. Sobey admitted that he had afterwards gone to
the prisoner's house, and had taken a sovereign from him,
but this was not, he said, to hush up the matter.
A number of witnesses were called, and ultimately the
jury acquitted the prisoner.
Sobey and Cunningham now changed places,Sobey, whose
age is 22, being placed in the dock, and Cunningham going
into the witness box.
Mr. Metcalfe now prosecuted, while Mr. Ribton, Mr.
Collins, and Mr. Kemp defended.
Cunningham was then sworn, when he stated that on the
evening of the 15th of October he was passing along Lud-
gate-hill, when the prisoner Sobey cause up to him and
tried to get his watch, and, on the prosecutor laying hold
of him, ho stated that unless he let go and gave him some
money he would charge him with a certain offence.
Witness, having been convicted some time ago, and hav-
ing Buffeted two months' imprisonment, on a charge of
having indecently assaulted a young man, and not wishing
to be again publicly charged, although innocent, gave
him ls. ; but they had not proceeded far together before
Sobey spoke to an officer, and he (witness) was taken
into custody. After the examination at the police-court
he was bailed out, when the prisoner went to him and
asked him to settle it. Witness having received his instruc-
tions, appeared to acquiesce, when the prisoner said he
must have £lOO. Witness said he could not give him so
much as that. Sobey then asked for £75, but ultimately
agreed to take £5O. Cunningham, acting under advice, then
produced a sovereign, which had been previously marked,
and tendered him that on account. Sobey took it and left,
promising to call again and receive the remainder the next
day. He was then apprehended, and the marked money
was found upon him.
In cross-examination, Cunningham denied that he had
ever been near the place mentioned. He supposed the pri-
soner must have heard of his former conviction, and thus
though to frighten him.
A number of witnesses were then called, whose examina-
tion lasted several hours, after which
Mr. Ribton addressed the jury at considerable length on
behalf of Sobey.
Mr. Justice Willes then summed up, leaving the case in
the hands of the jury.
After about half an hour's deliberation a verdict of guilty
was returned, with a strong recommendation to mercy.
Mr. Justice Willes, addressing the prisoner, told him he
had been convicted after a most patient hearing, and he
must say he entirely agreed with the verdict as returned by
the jury. Had it not been for the recommendation of the
jury the sentence would have been much more severe than
the one he was about to pass. Still the crime was of such
a serious nature that the punishment must of necessity be
heavy. The learned Judge then sentenced him to be kept
in penal servitude for the period of eight years.
The prisoner, who seemed appalled at this sentence, co-
vered his face with his hands, and moaned aloud, while his
mother, who was within hearing, fainted away, and had to
be led into the lobby.

Foreign Mail. Packet List.