The Sun.
London, England, 1862-11-27 00:00:00

from the violence now laid to his charge, and pro- I
tested that he was innocent. I
James Mowatt, 31, smith, John Allen, 30. tailor,
and Lawrence Sherriff, 27, traveller, all well-
dressed men, were indicted for feloniously assault-
ing William John Northcott, with intent to rob
him.
Mr. Clark and Mr. Cooke appeared for the pro-
secution, and the prisoner Mowatt was defended by
Mr. Holdsworth, and Mr. Edwin Besley defended
' the prisoner Allen.
This case formed another of the garotting charac-
ter, and it appeared from the evidence that the pro-
secutor, while returning home from a friend's house
in Pimlico, on the warning of the 13th November
inst., was proceeding along Long-acre to his abode
in Chapel-street, Lamb's Conduit-street, when he
i observed three persons approaching him. He
stepped aside to give them room to pass, when he
was violently struck on the back of the bead, be-
tween the neck and shoulders, and felled to the
ground. The prosecutor identified as his principal
assailants the prisoners Mowatt and Allen, but he
could not speak to the identity of the prisoner Sher-
riff as the third party in the attack. In a future
stage the evidence failed to fix complicity upon
Sherriff, and by the direction of Mr. Baron Bram-
well, a verdict of acquittal was taken with regard
to him.
The evidence to fix the offence imputed to the
other two prisoners rested upon the evidence of the
prosecutor and the police, the former distinctly
swearing that the two men were his assailants on
the night in question, and that he was enabled to
swear to their identity by the gaslight under which
the onslaught took place. The prosecutor unhesi-
tatingly proved that Mowatt knocked him down,
and that when down Allen knelt upon him, while
the third mail, who escaped, attempted, without
success, to rifle his pockets.
The evidence of police-constable M'Gowan, 40 F,
and of Sergeant Matthews, went to establish the
fact that both the prisoners had been seen together
very shortly before the robbery, or attempted rob-
bery, was committed.
Police-constable Ackrill, of the F division, proved
that in consequence of information he received of this
robbery, he apprehended the prisoner Mowatt on
the following day between 10 and 11 o'clock. On
telling him the charge, the prisoner said he would
go quietly if he (witness) would not screw him up
along the streets. The prisoner was then conveyed
to the police-station. Following the information
he had received, he (witness) subsequently took the
prisoner Allen into custody at a public-house known
as the Spies. On telling him the charge, Allen
said, " All's right." The witness added that he had
seen all the three prisoners together in Great Coram-
street, Russell-square, shortly before the robbery.
William Gordon, another police-constable, proved
that he saw the two prisoners and a third man to-
gether very shortly before the attack had been
made upon the prosecutor. They were then in St.
Martin's-lane in company with a prostitute named
Mitchell.
Mr.-Heldsworth addressed the jury on behalf of
his client, the prisoner Mowatt, and urged upon their
consideration the fact that the darkness of the
night prevented the speaking with certainty as to
identity of the prisoner.
Mr. Besley followed on the part of the prisoner
. Allen, and suggested to the jury that it was not be-
cause a man was seen in a particular locality at an
unseemly hour that he was thereby to be impli-
cated in a criminal offence of so serious a character
as that upon which he now stood arraigned. The
identity was not made out, and, therefore, the pri-
soner was entitled to an acquittal.
Mr. Baron Bramwell summed up the evidence
with great minuteness, and
The Jury, after a brief consultation, returned a
verdict of guilty against both the prisoners.
The learned Judge, as in the previous cases,
wished to be informed what was previously known
of the prisoners.
The officer Ackrill was then called, and proved
that when he apprehended the prisoner Mowatt he
found secreted between the bed and mattress a
jemmy, a life-preserver, and a bunch of well-finished
skeleton keys. It was further proved that Mowatt
had not only been convicted of burglary and had
suffered six years' penal servitude, but that since he
had returned from that conviction he had been sum-
marily disposed of for attempts at robbery in the
streets and for burglary in dwelling-houses.
With respect to the prisoner Allen four convic-
tions for felony were proved against him so recently
as September, 1860, and since then he had served
several terms under summary convictions.
Mr. Baron Bramwell ordered the prisoners to be
removed. As in the former cases, he would take
time to consider the sentence.
Charles James, 18, labourer ,was indicted for rob-
bing with violence David Marshall, and stealing
from his person a watch.
Mr. Clerk and Mr. Cook appeared for the prosecu-
tion ; and the prisoner was undefended by counsel.
The prosecutor stated that about half-past eight
o'clock on the evening of the 26th October last he
was in Cow Cross-street, Clerkenwell, when he was
attacked by the prisoner and several other men, one
of whom seized him by the throat and threw him
to the ground, when his watch was taken from him.
The other a-sailants effected their escape, but in the
end the prisoner was secured.
The jury, without any hesitation, returned a ver-
dict of guilty.
A police-constable, in answer to the court, said
that he had known the prisoner as the constant as-
sociate of thieves for the last five years, and proved
that he had several times been summarily convicted.
Sentence deferred.
Susan Thompson, 21, spinster, was indicted, toge-
ther with a person unknown, with feloniously as-
saulting Philip Levine, with intent to rob.
Mr. Horry prosecuted.
The facts of the case were very simple. The pri-
soner was a prostitute, and on the night in question
she met the prosecutor in the Whitechapel-road,
and after some conversation with him he became
aware that a man was following them, when he
wished to leave, not wishing to come in contact
with her follower; but the prisoner suddenly seized
hold of the prosecutor, who in a moment received
a violent blow, but whether from the prisoner or a
confederate he could not state, and on this point the
evidence was not clear.
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty.
Mr. Baron Bramwell, in passing sentence, said
that this case was unlike the others which had
preceded it, It had not been clearly shown to his
mind that she was acting in concert with a man. If
it had been so he should have passed upon her a
sentence of penal servitude for a long term of years.
Under the circumstances of the case, however, the
sentence was that she be imprisoned and kept to hard
labour for a term of 12 calendar months.

THIRD COURT.
(Before the Common Sergeant.)
Francis Hearn, 21, cabinetmaker; John Simpson,
30, labourer; Henry Austin, 32, brass castor; and
Charles Kembell, 29, baker, were indicted for steal-
ing a gold chain and other articles value £5, the
property of James White, in his dwelling house.
The prisoners Hearn and Simpson were farther
indicted for stealing a watch and other articles,
value £5 and upwards, the property of Richard
K. Bowley, in his dwelling house.
A third indictment charged the prisoners Austin,
Kembell, and Simpson, with stealing in the county
of Essex a bracelet and other articles, value £5, the
property of George H. Polyblank, in his dwelling
house.

There was a fourth indictment against Kembell
and Simpson, for stealing a gold watch and other
articles, the property of Thos. Millard.
Mr. Clerk, with whom was Mr. Cook, instructed
by the'Solicitor to the Treasury, conducted the pro-
secution ; and Mr. Cooper appeared as counsel for
the prisoner Kembell.
The circumstances of this case have been very re-
cently before the public in the police reports ; and it
appeared from the opening statement of counsel,
and the evidence adduced in the two indictments
proceeded with, that the prisoners Kembell and
Austin had hired from the stables of a job-master in
the City a horse and gig. They gave the name of
Yates when entering on the engagement, who was
stated to be a bootmaker. The address was found
to be erroneous, but on subsequent inquiries it was
found out by the exertions of Inspector Bond, of the
P division of the Metropolitan Police, aided by Ser-
geant Leonard, of the City Detective force, and the
prisoners were taken into custody. The mode of
operation adopted by the prisoners was to drive
round the suburban districts, and, under pretence
.of
selling goods or obtaining orders for goods, obtain
access to the plate closets or select apartments of the
house in which valuable property was deposited.
The moment that approach was allowed, either by
the area or the balconies of the upper storey win-
dows, the property was
placed in the waiting vehicle,
which was driven off at too rapid a pace for tha po-
lice or servants to pursue. The evidence adduced
proved that the prisoners Austin and Kembell
were the principals in the felony, and the other
two prisoners had disposed of the property on the
same day, by pledging the property stolen, and in
some cases selling the duplicates.
At the conclusion of the case for the prosecution,
Mr. Clark said that as far as the prisoner Simpson
was concerned the case was onl one. of mere
.
case from the consideration of the.
suspicion, and therefore he should
jury_
draw his
not offer Mr. Cooper, on behalf
any
the prisoner Kembell,
snaoitdcho
me
bat should
the
wnhyle.hdehfaedncbee,
been adduced.
a dhde
uccoeudl.d
The jury recorded a verdict of guilty against
Austin, Hearn, and Kembell.
Jane Yates, 32, married, was indicted for feloni-