The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-19 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, Nov, 17,

(Before the Assistant-Judge.)
Philip Beeson, 22, and John Unwin, who pleaded guilty
on Monday to as indictment on which they were charged
with stealing three jugs and other articles, the property of
G. R. Cheshire, their master, was brought up for judgment.
Although the amount of property laid in the indictment
was small, yet a robbery to a great amount had been com-
mitted. The prosecutor is a glass and earthenware mer-
chant, his depot being at 3, Wharf, York-road, City-road,
and on Monday, Dot. 19, he told the prisoner Unwin to
pack up an order that was going to Camberwell, and to put
the goods into a Van. The van was driven away in the
charge of Beeson snd Unwin, but they were accompanied
by a man named Larry. When they got to the Angel Berry
went away, and tha van was watched to Bagnigge-w ells-

road, where the prisoners pulled up at a brushmaker's shop;
Beeson got down aid took three jugs from a cart, and took
them into the shop, After the van was gone Mr. Cheshire
went to the brush shop, when Mr. Birbeck, who kept the
shop, handed to his' three jugs which had been left by
Beeson, and they km his private mark. Beeson was taken
into custody, and afterwards on going to his lodgings, No.
20, Lever street, tw) hampers full of china and glass were
found, which he identified as his property. The prisoner
Unwin was subsequently taken into custody, and a quantity
of property belonging to the prosecutor was found in his
possession. _ .

Mr. F. H. Lewis having been heard on behalf of the
prisoners,

Mr. Metcalfe said this was a most extensive robbery, and
the prosecutor hardy knew the amount of which he had

been robbed.

The Assistant-Judge sentenced Be6son to be imprisoned
and kept to hard latour for 12 months, and Unwin for nine

months.

Henry Wrench, 21, who was convicted on Tuesday of
embezzling divers same of money received by him for and
on account of Steveas's Patent Bread Machinery Company
(limited), was bron;ht up for judgment.
The prisoner at tae time of the trial stated that Mrs.
Riley, wife of the manager of the company, was in the habit
of helping herself cut of the till for the purpose of meeting
the expenses of housekeeping, and she was ordered to be this
day in attendance to answer such questions as might be put
to her.

Boners.

This day Mrs. Riley accordingly attended, and she posi-
tively denied all thtt the prisoner had alleged.
The Assistant-Jidge sentenced the prisoner to be im-
prisoned and kept to hard labour for 12 months.
George Gibbs, 22, late a police-constable in the S division
stationed at Hamps;ead, and Mary Gibbs, 21, his wife, were
indicted for stealing a gun, value 205., the property of Wil-
liam Hodge. There were further indictments against them
for stealing 12 blankets, two table covers, and one counter-
pane, value £6, the property of George Stinton, and with
stealing a lamp, value 58., the property of Maurice Drum.
mond, the Receiver-General of the Metropolitan Police.
Mr. Lowden and Mr. F. a Lewis prosecuted ; Mr. Met-
calfe (instructed by Mr. Charles Young) defended the pri-
soners.

Mr, Inspector Webb, of the S division, was in attendance
to watch the case on behalf of the Commissioners of the
Metropolitan Police.

Mr. Rowden having briefly opened the case, called the
following witnesses :

Thomas Foster, police-constable 28 S, said he knew the
male prisoner, who was formerly a constable in the metro-
rpaah
eb
onoar
al
ddi
ute
taamthlnstebownek
roroeoelyui
de
tneot
monthsd, h
g the
ohneedr a
goo
pntu
round
ee.t
dmafemalejoining
p premises,
senmsmi rniirssg. oe Mills,;inetear w
showed
nHhdaaame
its
he
`Vest-end.
a roundi
et awes
at w-dhe
his
ndfmiedi
sv. t
beat,
we
eiHHiaectnee:
on his beat in a night.
William Hodge said he was gardener to Mr. Mills, of
West-end, Hampstead, and had been so for five years. The
gun produced he brought withhim to Hampstead five years
ago last Jane. Ho knew it by the ramrod, which ha made
himself. The gun was kept in a toolhouse in the kitchen
garden. He had also a saw there. The saw produced be-
longed to him, and it was with the gun in the same shed.
He saw them last about the Bth of October, when they were
safe in the shed. The police made a communication to him,
and he went to the prisoner's house on the 29th of October
in company with a man named Castle. Castle said to the
female prisoner, " What about that gun ?" She said she
knew nothing about any gun, and that she had never had
a gun in her hands in her life.
In cross-examination by Mr. Metcalfe, he said he had
the gun in his possession for the purpose of keeping birds
off the crops. The gun and saw were locked up in the tool-
house, of which he kept the key. The lock of the toolhouse
had nut been forced. He had not lent the gun to any ono.
He had used the gun in September. He was passing Mr.
Castle's shop, and he saw his gun in the window.
In answer to questions by the Assistant-Judge, he said
there were windows in the toolhouse, but there were no
fastenings to the windows, The windows were two feet
wide, and a man could get through them.
Isaac Castle said he lived at No. 7, Flask-walk, Hamp-
stead, and was a marine store dealer. He bought a gun of
Mrs. Gibbs on the Bth of October, and gave her 8s for it.
On the 29th of October he went to the prisoner's house and
saw the female prisoner. He said to her, " 'What about that
gun ?" She replied she knew nothing about any gun, and
had never had one in her possession. She went away, and
witness waited outside the house. The female prisoner went
away and up to the town, and was absent about 10 minutes,
and when she returned he again asked ,her what was to be
done about the gun. She said she wished him to see her
husband, who came home some time afterwards. He then
told witness that he had better come up with him to his
room. Witness went, when the male prisoner said he had
had the gun in his possession for three or four years. He
said that it was his gun, and that he could bring witnesses
to prove that it was his. He said he would take back the
gun if they would give him the 8s he had got for it.
Mrs. Castle, wife of the last witness, said she bought the
saw produced by Mrs. Gibbs, and gave her 6d for it. That
was on the 10th of October. Her husband had bought a gun
of her on the same day.
Charles Kemp, police constable 22 S, eaid the male pri-
soner was a constable under him. He saw him on Friday
morning, the 30th October. He said to him, " Gibbs, did
you see a man last night respecting a gun 2" and he said he
did. Witness told him that he should detain him until the
question as to the property was cleared up. He said it was
his gun, and he had had it for five years. Witness showed
him a gun, and he said it was like it, and that he had offered
on the night before, to give the man the money back that it
was sold for. At 6 o'clock the same morning witness waited
upon Hodge, and received the gun from him. He after-
wards went to a man named Garrett and got the saw, which
had been sold to him by Castle, in Flask-walk.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Metcalfe asked his lordship if he thought there was
any case against the woman.
After a short discussion, the Assistant-Judge directed
the learned counsel for the defence to confine his observa-
tions to the male prisoner only,
behalfMr of thec a.
M eeloquent
that
the
identity address on
f
the gun had not been clearly established, and called upon
the jury, as it was a most doubtful case, to give him the
tlmalefe madeprisoner, a
mostcontending ablead
benefit of the doubt and acquit him.
The Assistant-Judge very carefully summed up the evi-

dente, and
The jury found the male prisoner guilty and the woman
not guilty.
Mr. Rowden said there were two other indictments
against the prisoners, and one of them was for breaking into
a house on Haverstock-hill, and taking therefrom twelve
blankets, two tablecovers, a counterpane, and various other
articles. Some of the articles had been recovered, but a
large quantity was still missing.
Mr. F. H. Lewis said this was really a weak case, and
rested on a counterpane which had been pawned ; but the.
woman who was said to have washed it did not identify it.
Mr. Rowden said the woman was seen on the night near
to the place where the robbery was committed with a largo
bundle in her possession, which she did not have when she
went there.
The Assistant-Judg3 said there was, no doubt, a good
deal of suspicion about it.
Mr. Rowden said there was some of this property thrown
over a hedge, and a good deal more had not been found.
Mr. F. H. Lewis remarked that there was no evidence
whatever that the woman had acted independently of her
husband in the commission of the robbery.
Mr. Rowden said he was informed by Mr. Inspector
Webb that this man had only been 7 months in the force,
and during that time he had been thrice reported for being
drunk, once being taken before a magistrate and fined 10s.
•The Assistant-Judge said the prisoner had been convicted
on the clearest evidence,and his offence was so much greater
as he was an officer of the police, to whom the protection of
the property and lives of the Queen's subjects was in-
trusted, and it was the duty of the Court when such
things occurred to make an example of the offender, so that
others might be taught that if they were convicted such
matters would not be lightly passed over. Notwithstanding
the able defence which had been made for him by the
learned counsel, it seemed that he not only stole these
things, but he used his wife as the instrument of getting rid
of them. He would be separated from her for a considerable
period, and the sentence of the Court upon him was that ho
be kept in penal servitude for three years.
The female prisoner was then charged on the other two

indictments, and no other evidence being offered, the jury
in each case returned a verdict of not guilty.
The Assistant-Judge, addressing the woman, who had a
very young child in her arms, said—You will be now for a
considerable time left alone in the world, but I advise you
to be very careful what you do, for if you come here again

you will be very severely dealt with.
Julia Elizabeth Graham and Catherine Holmes were in-
dicted for attempting to steal from the persons of divers
women, whose names are unknown, certain goods and chat-

tels, their property.
Mr. Gresham prosecuted; Mr. Pater defended the pri-

Vv
Edward James Langley, a detective sergeant of police,
said, on the 26th of October he was in company of Edwin

Coathupe, another sergeant, in Oxford-street, and saw the
prisoners there. He saw Graham place herself on the right
hand side of a lady, while Holmes walked on in front of
her. He saw Graham place her left hand in the pocket of
the lady, but he did not see anything taken. They then
left the lady and walked side by side, He afterwards saw
Graham attempt to pick several ladies' pockets at a bazaar
in Oxford-street, to which he followed them. They left the
bazaar together and went down Regent-street. He saw
Graham attempt to pick a lady's pocket at the corner of
Argyll-place. He watched them for an hour and a half. In

New Oxford-street he took Holmes into custody, telling

her that it was for attempting to pick ladies' pockets in Ox-
ford-street, Regent-street, and the Crystal Palace Bazaar,
They denied all knowledge of each other, and said they had
only just met at the corner of Tottenham-court-road.
Edwin Coathupe, a detectiv3 sergeant of police, said he
was with the last witness on the 28;h October, and saw the
two prisoners near the corner of Great Portland-street, in
Oxtord-street. He saw Graham place herself on the right

hand side of a lady, and put her left hand into the lady's
pocket, Holmes being in front of her. They then went up
Oxford-street, and he saw them attempt the pockets of two
or three ladies who were standing outside shops. The pri•
goners then went to the Crystal Palace Bazaar, and he saW

them try four or five ladies' pockets as they were standing
at the stalls. They left the bazaar, crossed Oxford-street,
and went down Regent-street. He spoke to two ladies dur-
ing the time he was following them, but they said they had
not lost anything. After they had gone down Regent-street
they went to New Oxford-street, where he took Graham.
He told her he was a police-officer, and that he should take
her into custody for attempting to pick pockets in Regent-
street and Oxford-street, and she said she had not been
near Oxford-street nor Regent-street.

Mr. Pater addressed the jury for Holmes, contending
that, as they sometimes saw policemen placed in the dock for
grave offences, their evidence ought to be received with more
than ordinary caution, and condemned the way in which
they had acted on this occasion. _ _

The jury found both prisoners guilty, expressing their
entire approbation of the way in which the police officers
had acted.
Several convictions were put in against the prisoner
Holmes, among them being one of penal servitude passed
on her at the Surrey Sessions, in 1857, for picking pockets,
after previous convictions. There were several convictions
since then. No conviction was put in against the other
prisoner.
The Assistant-Judge expressed his regret that he could
not send Holmes again to penal servitude, and sentenced
her to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two years,
and Graham to be imprisoned for 12 months.
.

say,.
George Trotman surrendered in discharge of his bail,
charged with cutting open and stealing frotu certain bags
91b. of coffee, the property of the St. Katherine Dock Com-
pany, his masters.
Mr. Sleigh (instructed by Messrs. Tooke, Hallowes, and
Price, on behalf of the St. Katherine Dock Company) pro-
secuted ; Mr. Metcalfe defended the prisoner. _ _

It appeared from the evidence of Mr. Walker that the
prisoner had been in the employ of the c anpany 88 a sampler
for 21 years, and that he was employed on No. 2 floor, and
on Nov. 2 he had occasion to go on that floor, and noticing
the trapdoor was closed, and hearing a peculiar noise, it
caused him to look behind the coffee bags, and he there saw
the prisoner crouching behind them. He also found one of
the bage cut and saw the prisoner drop his apron. He asked
the prisoner what he wanted, and he said he was looking
for some box tracks ; but on Mr. Walker looking further
he found a bag containing about 61b. of coffee.
Mr. Mumford, superintendent of police at the St. Kathe-
rine Dock, said he took the prisoner into custody, and he
said he went to look for some box trucks, and he hoped he
should not be taken into custody, as he was putting the
coffee back into the bag. His house had been searched, but
nothing had been found relating to the charge.
Mr, Metcalfe addressed the jury for the prisoner, and
afterwards called several witnesses, who gave him a charac-
ter extending over many years for honesty and integrity.
The Assistant-Judge summed up the evidence, and
The jury found him Guilty.
The learned Judge observed that it was truly pitiable to
see a man forfeit a 23 years' character and his situation in
such a way, and sentenced him to be imprisoned and kept to
hard labour for six months.
Ellen Murphy, 20, and Ann Murphy, 18, were indicted
for stealing a gold watch, value £l5, the property of Thos.
Dawes Harris, from his person.
Mr. F. H. Lewis prosecuted ; Mr. Ribton defended.
From the evidence it appeared that early on the morning
of the 29th ult. the prosecutor was going home drunk, and
while in the Hampstead-road he was beset by the two pri-
soners. Ryan, a policeman, who was on duty near the place,
heard cries of " Police," and on going to the place found
the prosecutor held by two gentlemen, and he said he had
lost his watch. He went into Ilubert•street, close by, where
he saw Ellen Murphy in front of him, and when he got
within about 20 yards of her, she said, " Policeman, I did
not take the watch." A young man named William Paul,
who was there, after seeing Ellen Murphy taken into cus •
tody, saw Ann Murphy at the corner of Hammond-street,
and he told her that her sister was taken into custody for
stealing a watch. She replied, " I know she is, you fool,"
and produced the watch from her bosom and asked him to
open it. He did so, when she snatched it from his hand,
and it had not since been found,
The witness Paul was severely cross-examined by Mr.
Ribton as to his having been convicted of felony, which he
positively denied. He said he had seen Ann Murphy before,
but had not spoken to her. The watch was not in his hand
for more than a second. He knew that it was stolen, and
he went and told the police about it.
Brown, 308 S, proved apprehending Ann Murphy in bed
at her father's house.
Mr. Ribton addressed the jury for the prisoners,
The Assistant-Judge summed up the evidence with great
care.

The jury found both the prisoners guilty.
Brown, a police-constable, said he knew both the prisoners,
who were prostitutes, living in the house with their father,
who is a costermonger. Ann Murphy only came out of
prison on the 26th of last month, having been committed for
an assault.
The Assistant-Judge sentenced each of the prisoners to
be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for 12 months. He
said he should order the witness Paul to receive a reward
of £1 for his conduct, and should refuse the prosecutor his
expenses.