The Sun.
London, England, 1862-09-08 00:00:00

BOROUGHAND SPITALFIRLD S.

-- ----
Moderate supplies of potatoes are on sale at these mar-
kets. For nearly all qualities the trade is in a sluggish
state, and prices have a downward tendency. The imports
from the continent are very small.

Yorkßegents .
Do. Slums
Do. Rocks

WOOL.

_ _...
rapid
avance in cotton,
but during the last
Tile public sales of colonial wool Were brought to a close
on Saturday, and during their progress about 108,000 bales
were disposed of. At their commencement the value of
fnearlyrtn fortnight,
ha
tl
,l qualities
inconsequence
of th
in-
creased activity was observed in the biddings, and the quo-
tationsllad an upward tendency. Low Wools, at the public
sales, held since our last. realised extreme rates. In the
private contract market English wool has been in active
request, at advancing rates. The following prices were
realised at the public sales of colonial wool lately concluded:—
Sydney—Flocks, is 4}d to Is 100 ; scoured, is 6d to 2s 9d ;
handwashed and skin, is 3d to is 9d; lambs, is 6d to is
101 d ; ditto scoured, is 7d to 2s 5d ; broken, pieces, and
locks, lid to is Sad; moo, 9d to le ld per lb, Pyrtllll.

LAW-THIS DAY.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Gibbons.)
SINGULAR DISCLOSURES ABOUT THE CHANCERY RECORD

OFFICE.--KERB V. METCALFE.

This was an action for the recovery of a certain sum for
copying a Chancery report, plaintiff being a copyist, and
defendant an attorney.

Defendant's clerk said that the copy was unfinished, and
of course was of no use to the defendant.

Plaintiff—We worked upon the report as long as we
could, and then a clerk from the Record-office took it away
and our copy with it. We had very little to do to finish it.
His Honour (Mr. Gibbons)—What had the Record-
office clerk to do with it f

Defendant's clerk—As a matter of convenience, where
the attorney is known, it is customary to allow the record
or report to be taken away to be copied.
His Honour—Why did the Record-office clerk allow the
record to be taken out of the office, and then suddenly re-
move it from defendant's custody ?
Plaintiff—l suppose the office was about to close.
Defendant's clerk said he should like to have the case
adjourned.

His Honour—Oh ! no, the clerk of the Record-office was
acting for you, and he it was who prevented plaintiff com-
pleting the work.
Verdict for plaintiff and costs.

POLICE-THIS DAY.

BOW STREET.

A SNIA.SRER.—SamueI James was placed at the bar
charred with passing counterfeit coin.

- -
Mr. John Fardon said he kept a pork-pie shop at Wolsey-
terrace, Kentish Town. On the 20th the prisoner came
in, ,and having purchased half a pork-pie, he tendered
a half-sovereign in payment. The coin was discovered to
be a counterfeit, and the prisoner was given into custody.
He was taken to the Marylebone Police-court.

Police-constable 487 S, said he took the prisoner into
custody. After being remanded by the magistrate at Mary-
lebone, he was discharged.
Mr. Charles Bailey, watchmaker, 468, Oxford-street, said
the prisoner on Tuesday last came into his shop, and hay.
ing had a glass fitted to his watch, he tendered a crown-
piece in payment. He gave him the change and he left
the shop, but very shortly after he discovered the coin was
a bad one, and after searching for him he found him in
custody at tho police-station in St. Giles's.

Mr. C. Penfound, 37, Museum-street, Bloomsbury, said
the prisoner came into his shop on Tuesday last, and pur-
chased some cooked ham. He gave a counterfeit crown
piece in payment, but on being told it was bad prisoner said
he had got it in the City-road. The prisoner paid for the
ham with a good five shilling pic,c, but from certain sus-
picions he was induced to give the prisoner into custody.
Police-constable, 68 H, said he took the prisoner to the
police-station on the above charge, when Mr. Bailey idol-
._

tified him as the man who had passed the counterfeit five
shilling piece at his shop. Prisoner gave a false address.
The prisoner was fully committed for trial.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

UNPROVOKED ASSAULT ON A FENEALE.—Margaret
Macarthy, a tall, masculine female, was charged before
Mr. Selfe with the following inprovoked assault on Mrs.
Caroline Richard. of 18A, Alfred-place, Bedford-square.
Mrs. Richards said that on Saturday evening, about 8
o'clock, she was walking in Greek-street, Soho, with her
husband, when the prisoner, without the slightest provoca-
tion, gave her a violent blow on the back of her head, fell-
ing her to the ground.

In answer to Mr. Selfe, the complainant said the prisoner
had been drinking, and was raving mad.
Mr. John Richards, husband of the complainant, said
that seeing a crowd in Greek-street, he with his wife stepped
out into the road so as to avoid it, when the prisoner
knocked his wife down by a blow on the head, and then
flew at him like a tigress, and he had the greatest difficulty
in keeping her off.

The prisoner asid she had been drinking, and did not
know what she did.

Mr. Selfe committed her for ten days, with hard labour.
SINGULAR CHARGE or ROBBERY.—Susan Smart, a
well-dressed female, was charged before Mr. Selfe with
the following robbery at Mr. Bonthron's, baker, 106,
Regent-street.

In the prisoner's possession a bank-book, showing she
had £l6 in her possession, was found.
Butcher, 137 C, said that on Saturday night he followed
the prisoner from No, 10, Lower John-street, Golden-
square, to the shop of Mr. Bonthron, baker, Regent-street.
She went to the window and took out a loaf and walked to
the counter with it, having also placed one inside her shawl.
While standing at the counter she took two tea cakes off
the counter and placed them also under her shawl. She
then went to the other window and pointed to some biscuits
to the young woman, at the same time taking a piece of
cake out of the window and put it under her shawl. She
then left the shop. He (Butcher) then went in and told
the young woman the prisoner had been robbing her, and
fetched the prisoner back, when he found all the articles
upon her with the exception of the piece of cake, which
she dropped on her way back to the shop. At her lodgings
he found a bank-book for £l6, and on her £1 Ss. was
found.

Mr. Selfe—liad you a reason for watching her.
Butcher—l had your worship, and wish for a remand.
Martha Noble, assistant to Mr. Bonthron, said the pri-
soner only paid 3d. fora loaf and 6d. for biscuits.
In answer to Mr. Edward Lewis, of Great Marlborough-
street, who appeared for the prisoner, the witness said she
knew the prisoner by sight as a customer.
A piece of paper was here handed to the magistrate by
the clerk.

Mr. Lewis said he was not acquainted with the nature
of the document handed to his worship by the clerk.
Mr. Selfe said he had no objection to Mr. Lewis seeing it.
Mr. Lewis said it would have been more just to the
accused if it had been kept back till the present case had
been adjudicated on.

Mr. Lewis having perused the document,
Mr. Selfe remanded the prisoner.

WESTMINSTER.

MURDEROUS ASSAULT.—MichaeI Boyle and Wm. Moore
were charged with the following murderous assault :
Stephen Batson, a coal porter, said that between 7 and 8
o'clock on Saturday he went into the Waterwork's Public-
house, Upper Belgrave-place, to settle with some of his
fellow-workmen, and had not been there long before a dis-
turbance took place. Moore then struck him violently,
and Boyle then seized him by the hair and pulled him
across the table, while Moore and others struck and kicked
him, He had never quarrelled with any of the men.
Wm. Beeson, who was in company with Batson, corrobo-
rated his testimony. Moore also attacked him, knocking
him down and kicking him on the temple. Boyle after-
wards struck him and dragged him out into the street,
while Moore kicked and struck him again. Both this wit-
ness and the last were completely disfigured with blows and
cuts.
Mr. Inspector Howard intimated that there was another
man who had been most seriously injured, and was now
lying dangerously ill in bed. He had several witnesses
who would prove this assault.
Thomas Dorrell and Wm. Russell were then called, andcorroborated Batson and Beeson; they also saw the assault
upon the injured man Cornelius Bryan, whom Moore
knocked down and kicked for no reason except that he took
the part of his son, whom they were kicking.
Cornelius Bryan, jun., was also called, and said in the
midst of the disturbance he was knocked down and kicked,
and on his father interfering he was also brutally as •
saulted. _ _

-&tl7lerine Bryan, a very respectable young woman, was
----
then called, and said that she was in the house when her
brother and father (an old man) were there. The defen-
dants: aniog§t ctlacro, wore very insolent, cut knocked her

brother down and kicked him. Her father said " Don't
strike my son, he's not done anything," upon which Moore
brutally knocked him down and kicked him, cutting his lip
open, and rendering him insensible. A man picked him
up and sat him on the stairs, thinking he was dead, and
then Moore came out, and in the most cruel manner dragged
her father along the passage by the hair of his head and
kicked him again. He was now lying very ill in bed.
Prisoners cross-examined the witnesses, but failed to elicit
anything in their favour.

Mr. Dayman remanded them for a Week, refusing bail.

SOUTHWARK.

SERIOUS CASE OF CUTTING AND STABBING.--A young
man named Patrick Galvin, a shoemaker, residing at Red
Cross-court, Borough, was charged with committing a des-
perate assault on a married woman named Bridget ICeenan,
who also lives in the court, which is principally occupied
by the very lowest class.
The complainant whose face and head were covered with
plaster, said that about 10 o'clock on Saturday night she
had some altercation with the defendant and his wife in the
court, opposite their place, and shortly afterwards the
former struck her a violent blow, which knocked her down.
The defendant, in reply to the magistrate, said that on
the night in question his wife and the complainant had some
words, and when he saw her subsequently ho accused her
of telling stories of the former, and without any further
provocation she flung a saucepan at him, which struck him
on the forehead and cut him, and she also struck his
child.

The complainant denied this statement positively, and
said that she had given the defendant no provocation before
he struck her, but she admittel that she flung a small tin
can at him. She alleged that there was no truth whatever
in the statement as to any quarrel having taken place
previously between her and the defendant's wife. She
called two witnesses, who corroborated her account of the
affair, and one of them said that while she was on the
ground Mrs. Galvin (defendant's wife) struck her on the
back of the head with a sharp instrument, a small iron bar,
but of this it appeared the complainant was unconscious.
For the defence two witnesses were called, but the evi-
dance did not materially affect the preceding on behalf of
the complainant, and the prisoner was remanded for a
week.