The Sun.
London, England, 1865-04-05 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS-April 4.

The April Quarter Sessions were continued to-day at
Clerkenwell, before Mr. W. H. Bodkin, Assistant-Judge.
Charles Sadler, 26, dressed as a butcher, was charged with
stealing a leg of mutton, of the value of 10s. 6d.
Mr. Warner Sleigh prosecuted ; Mr. Ribton defended.
On the 28th of January last a leg of mutton was delivered
at the house of Mr. Thompson, 3, Bloomfield-road, Pad-
dington, from the butcher who supplied the family, and two
minutes afterwards a.man, wearing a butcher's apron, called
for it, saying it had been delivered to the wrong customer.
The unsuspecting cook gave up the joint, and the thief, who
had personated the servant of the family-butcher, was not
seen afterwards. The prisoner was taken into custody on
the 26th of March and charged with being that person ; but
in his defence it was shown that he was in the employment
of a butcher in Lisson-grove, and the jury acquitted him.
Joseph Brown, 22, and George Brown, 20, were charged
with stealing a mare, the property of Henry Palmer.
Mr. Orridge prosecuted ; Mr. Ribton appeared for George
Brown. The prisoner Joseph Brown pleaded guilty.
The prosecutor, a greengrocer at Kingsland, turned a cob
mare out on Haekney-common, whence it was stolen on the
same afternoon. On the following morning the prisoner
Joseph was found offering to sell it for slaughtering at Mrs.
White's, in Whitechapel ; but, as the value of the animal
was only £3, he would not have boon arrested had his
account of himself been satisfactory.
Mr. Ribton said there was really no evidence against his
client.

A verdict of not guilty was taken in the case of George
Brown, and Joseph Brown was sentenced to nine months'
imprisonment, with hard labour.
Ellen Daniels, 23, pleaded guilty to a charge of stealing a
mantle from the shop of Mr. Edward Lloyd, a linendraper.
The shopman said she appeared to have beon drinking
and the mantle dropped from under her shawl as she was
leaving.
statement was handed to the Bench by the prisoner,
which disclosed those facts :—She was left without parents
some years ago, and she married a man by whom she had
a daughter now about five years of age. Her husband was
tried at these sessions in July, 1862, for highway robbery
with violence, and sentenced to six years' penal servitude.
She had been four times previously convicted and had re-
cently finished a term of three years' penal servitude.
The prisoner, with all the indications of sincerity, pro-
mised not to offend again, and piteously implored a lenient
punishment.
The Assistant-Judge said that if the Court were to act
according to their notions of public duty the prisoner would
be sent to penal servitude for seven years as quite incorri-
gible, but they abstained from passing that sentence, with
the knowledge that if they did err they erred on the side of
mercy, and in the hope that when she and her husband
gained their liberty they would change their course of life.
She must be imprisoned and kept at hard labour for two
years.

Joseph Grimes, 37, was indicted at the last sessions,
together with two other young men, named Wright and
Furness, for stealing two rolls of woollen cloth and other
articles, the property of the Groat Northern Railway Com-
pany. Wright and Furness pleaded Guilty, and the jury
were discharged when it was found, when they had been
locked up for some hours, that they were unable to agree
upon a verdict.
The prisoner was now tried again on the same charge.
The facts were simple enough. Four or or five persons
were seen loitering in streets at Pentonville with a truck
on the evening of the 23d Feb., and as suspicions were ex-
cited their proceedings were watched. A railway van drove
up to the door of a publichouse in North-street, and both
the driver and the lad who assisted him entered. The men
brought the truck to the tail of the van, which was thus
left unprotected, and transferred property worth £3O or
£4O into it. The police, as they were going away, caught
the three prisoners, but the others were not apprehended.
The defence of Grimes on the last trial and on this occa-
sion was, that he was an innocent agent, that the men had
employed him to hire the truck, and that as the goods were
loose at the tail of the van he could not suppose that those
who employed him were doing wrong in removing them.
Fresh evidence was adduced to-day, which showed that,
instead of being a stranger to the four men, as he repre-
sented, Grimes had frequently been seen in the company of
one of the two men who have eluded justice.
The jury found a verdict of guilty.
Mr. Cooper, who appeared for the prosecution, stated that
the prisoner had been formerly convicted, and six years and
a half ago was a terror to the inhabitants of Rio.
Mr. J. R. Wilson, who had kept an hotel at Rio, said that
Grimes had been frequently in prison there, and on one
occasion' had stolen some ducks from him—the night fol-
lowing the day on which he had induced him to buy them.
George Lockyer, the prison officer, said that Grimes had
been tried at these sessions for being concerned in a forcible
•
entry, and sentenced to a month's imprisonment.
Grimes—Yes, my lord, there wore 10 of us tried before
your lordship for assaulting the brokers.
Lockyer—And most of them were convicted thieves.

Wright,:upon being called upon, stated that a man in the
employment of the Great Northern Railway Company had
put them up to the robbery, and took them the night before
to see the publichouse where the van would stop. If it were
not so, how, he asked, should they know where the van
would stop, and why should the goods be uncovered behind,
:rad why should the carman call the boy into the public-
house ?

Mr. Cooper said that Messrs. Wontner, who instructed
him, had made inquiries of the officers of the railway com-
pany, and it was believed that Wright's statement was a
gross calumny, for the mere purpose of screening ono of
the men, still at largo.
Mr. Itibton, who.appeared for Furness, stated that he
was only 17, and had borne a good character.
Lockyer said that he had been in the company of thieves,
and was under recognisances to appear as a witness in a
jewel robbery.

The Assistant-Judge—Was he concerned in it?
Lockyer said he was, but it was through his information
that the others had been taken.
Grimes begged the court to. remember that ho was con-
victed for felony 15 years ago.
Lockyer said he was tried and acquitted in 1858.
The Assistant-Judge then sentenced Grimes to 10 years'
penal servitude, and Wright to 12 months' and Furness to
six months' imprisonment, with hard labour.

(Before Mr. Payne.)
James Butler, 28, was charged with stealing two bird-
cages and a pair of trousers, value 17s 6d., belonging to
Henry Weston.

Mr. Cooper prosecuted ; Mr. Ribton defended,
This was a robbery of a fellow-lodger, and the prisoner,
having been previously convicted, was sentenced to seven
years' penal servitude.
Robert Eaton, 50, was-charged.with stealing three trusses
of hay.
Mr. Cooper prosecuted ; Mr. Ribton defended.
The prosecutor, Mr. John Kent, is a farmer at South-
gate. Tho hay was stolen from a shed, and footmarks
wero traceable to the prisoner's stable. Three trusses,
which corresponded with those lost, were found there,_ and
the only account the prisoner gave was that he had bought
and paid for, them.
Guilty. Six months' imprisonment with hard labour.

THE PRITCHARD CASE.—Nothing further has yet
,ranspired with regard to this case. It is expected that
'.lO trial will take place in Edinburgh in the course of the
The Evening Citizen states that Dr. Pritchard
continues to bear up as well as could be expected, consider-
ing the most unhappy position in which, whether guilty or
innocent, he is placed.
ADVERTISEMENT.j—NoIIoway's Ointment—Sore Breasts,
Inflamed Nipples, Old Wounds, Sores, and Ulcers.—
There is no medical preparation in the world which may
be so thoroughly relied on in the treatment of the above
ailments as Holloway's ointment ; and scarcely a day passes
in which authentic testimonials to its extraordinary efficacy
are not rec3ived from all parts of the globe. Nothing can
be simpler or more safe than the manner in which it is ap-
plied, or its action on the body, both locally and constitu-
tionally. The ointment, rubbed on the part affected, enters
the pores just as salt enters moat, and not only gets rid of
the local evil, but penetrates to the sore of it, and drives
it from the system.

summer.