The Sun.
London, England, 1862-11-18 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVEN

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, Nov. 17.

The November adjourned quarter sessions of the
peace for the county of Middlesex commenced this
morning at the Sessions-house, Clerkenwell-green,
before Mr. Bodkin, assistant-judge, and a bench of,
magistrates.
The Assistant-Judge briefly addressed the grand,
jury on the nature of their duties.
Thomas Jones, 21, was indicted for unlawfully
attempting feloniously to steal a pin, value £lB,
the property of Lewis Hand, from his person.
The prosecutor, a solicitor, was going home on:
the night of November 4, and when near Hatton-
garden he was beset by the prisoner, and another
person not in custody, who dodged before and be-
hind him until he got to High Holborn, when the
prosecutor objected to their attendance any farther,
and intimated that if it was continued he should
hand them over to the police. Upon this the pri-
soner assumed intoxication and rolled up against
the proseentor, and a third person now suddenly
appeared, who rushed up to him and endeavoured to
snatch a diamond pin from the scarf he was wear-
ing, but he was not successful in obtaining it. A
struggle ensued, but the prosecutor managed to hold
the prisoner until a police-constable came up, and he
was given into custody. The prisoner's two compa-
nions managed to effect their escape, but there was
evidence to show that they were all well-known
thieves, and had the same night been seen by a po-
liceman and cautioned by him to depart from near
the place where they first fell in with the prosecutor.
The jury found the prisoner guilty.
The Assistant-Judge, after referring to the pre-
sent dangerous condition of the public streets, and
the frequent attacks upon persons by garotte rob-
bers, in one case leading to the death of the person
attacked, said it was the determination of the Court
to act with severity, and sentenced the prisoner to
be kept in penal servitude for three years.
William Tagney, 9, and John Stewart, 11, two
little boys, were indicted for unlawfully placing
stones upon the rails of the West London Railway,
thereby endangering the safety of persons conveyed
upon the said railway.
Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted ; Mr. F. H. Lewis ap-
peared for Stewart. The other boy was undefended.
On Nov. Ist, between 12 and 1 in the day, the
boys were observed to place some stones and bricks
on the rails of the West London Railway near Shep-
herd's-bush. A labourer ran up to Tagney, and as a
luggage-train was approaching he got him to assist
him in removing the stones, or the consequences
might have been very serious indeed. The other boy
ran away, but was afterwards taken into custody.
Mr. F. H. Lewis made an appeal on behalf of
Stewart, but both boys were convicted, and judg-
ment was deferred until next session.
(Before Mr. Payne,) .
Stephen Edward Meaney, journalist, was placed
at the bar to receive the judgment of the Court.
It will be remembered that this prisoner was tried
at these sessions on October 4th on the charge of
obtaining goods from three tradesmen living at
Westbourne-grove, by means of a forged letter pur-
porting to have been issued from the office of Mr.
Mayo, head of the financial department of the Inter-
national Exhibition. At the trial the jury returned a
verdict, in the first instance, that the prisoner
obtained the goods by false pretences, by means of
a forged letter purporting to have been issued from
the office of the International Exhibition, but ex-
pressing a belief that he intended to pay for them.
This verdict Mr. Payne refused to receive, and sub-
sequently the jury returned a verdict of guilty. In
consequence of the observations of some of the
learned counsel who were present and supported by
Dr. Bateman, one of the magistrates on the bench,
who contended that the first verdict amounted to
one of not guilty, and ought to have been received,
the sentence was deferred, and the question was
submitted to the Court of Criminal Appeal, and
that Court on Saturday last confirmed the second
verdict, which convicted the prisoner of the offences
with which he was charged.
On being placed at the bar the prisoner presented
a very altered appearance from that he had assumed
at the time of the trial.
Mr. Kemp (who appeared for the prosecution)
said his lordship was quite familiar with the facts
of this case, as represented at the time of the trial,
and he won ld also remember the plausible ingenuity
with which the prisoner defended himself, and the
result of the case was the question of his conviction
being submitted to the Court of Criminal Appeal.
The verdict of the jury had been confirmed by that
Court, which was a result most satisfactory to all
parties, with the exception of the prisoner at the
bar, as it was one of the most impudent cases ever
brought before the Court. He was told that dur-
ing the time of the Exhibition the prisoner, who
was a man of very extraordinary ability—and
therefore his conduct was the more disgraceful—
had made use of that ability to obtain from parties
different sums of money, and in one case obtained
from n Frenchman the sum of f. 6.
Mr. Dickie (interrupting his learned friend) said
such a statement ought not to be made, unless he
was prepared to support it by evidence.
Mr. Kemp said that his lordship knew that they
had had no opportunity of summoning witnesses to
give evidence, and if it was desirable that witnesses
should be called, rather than this man should
escape punishment, perhaps his lordship would
allow the case to be further postponed in order that
witnesses might be put into the box. When these
witnesses were produced his lordship would find
that this was not a solitary instance against the
prisoner at the bar.
The prisoner said he would disembarass the case
as regarded the necessity of calling witnesses, and
would admit that during the time the Exhibition
was open he was charged with obtaining by false
pretences £5, but on the case being brought before
Mr. Arnold it was at once put out of court, and on
a further application being made to Mr. Arnold to
order £5 found in his possession to be given up, he
said he should look upon it as his (the prisoner's)
property, and refuse to make any order about it.
Mr. Payne said it he were to postpone the case
the witnesses would show all about it.
Mr. Dickie said the prisoner was a fallen man,
for as a member of the Press he came to London,
and then he found it most difficult to obtain em-
-1 ployment.
Mr. Payne said he did not intend to act upon
anything that was not proved by evidence.
The prisoner said the statement of the learned
counsel would be most injurious to his character for
the future.
Mr. Dickie said, as the matter was now before the
public, he hoped it would now be adjudicated on.
He said that Meaney had come to London, and
being unable to obtain a situation on the Press, he
was glad to do anything to get a few shillings. As
to the scene which had occurred in the court at the
time of the trial, no one deprecated it more than
himself ; and although he was counsel for the pri-
soner, he never thought the verdict would be re-
versed. The prisoner being unsuccessful in obtain-
ing employment on the Press, could not, as a literary
man, become at once a hewer of stone and a drawer
of water ; but he was not old in crime, and at the
time of the trial a member of the bar said he had
known the prisoner in Dublin as a most respectable
man, and he hoped, under the circumstances, that
mercy would be extended towards him.
Mr. Kemp said the observations he was about
making would have been for his lordship's guidance,
and, in addition to the circumstances, the prisoner
had admitted it had been his system to get free
dinners from Mr. Morrish, of the International Ex-
hibition, and saying that if he did not get these free
dinners he would show Mr. Morrish up in the papers.
The prisoner said he must give this statement an
emphatic denial. Mr. Morrish and himself were old
friends, and Mr. Morrish gave him an invitation to
do what the reporters were doing every day, which
was, dining daily at his expense. As he saw a
member of the Press taking notes, he felt these
statements were only made to damage bid character
for the future.
Mr. Dickie asked the prisoner if he had a wife
and family.
pmasTr.sheDed prisoner said he had, and before sentence was
ehnenett,
wished
jurorto sayio a
waiting,fe w
soaridds . h
eAhte
dthe
known trial,
him for 20 years respected ; a member of the bar
who had known him in Dublin had also spoken to
his character; and even his landlady, with whom he
bad lived two years, had
(He then read a letter fromgivMenr.
of the Liverpool Daily Post, giving
similarw h i
ttye evidence.—
(He
rdoepnrciee
character.) With such a characterhasinitha' c-or
likely to sacrifice alrino
not
ter
ithehteeol drfl.
odr
first
tat rhwef
who
Lancashireor the
ha
d pa-fvaatel:
tri
wer
yydahFes
ai
sum
andee
osasupt the value of money until he got
ohPferieds3isd,?
not
tt
fieboewdwa
into the hands of the Bankruptcy Court; but if there
was anything that was dear to him it was the opinion
of tha Jury that he meditated no fraud and was
guilty of no dishOnesty.
Mr. Payne said it was clear he had no means of
paying for these articles, and had no other way of
obtaining them except by dishonesty.
The prisoner said that the learned counsel who
heard the case and all the surrounding circum-
stances were agreed that the verdict amounted to
one of acquittal.
Mr. Payne said that had all been settled by a
supreme court.
The prisoner said he was taken by surprise, as he
was told in the prison on Friday that his case would
not have been heard before the end of November.
Mr. Payne said the prisoner had been convicted of
obtaining goods by false pretences by means of two
documents, bearing the forged signature of the
official financial officer, and written on paper stolen
from the International Exhibition, so that ho had
no right to have this paper in his possession. By
these forged documents it purported that in a few

days he was entitled to £43 for advertisements in-
serted in a paper ; but it appeared there was no
such paper in existence. and no advertisements had
been inserted as alleged in these forged documents,
The subject had been referred to the Court of Cri
minal Appeal, which had confirmed the verdict of
the jury, and therefore he should proceed to pro-
nounce sentence on it. The other Matter as re-
garded Mr. Morrish he should not deal with, but it
had been shown by these documents that he had
obtained goods from tradesmen by frandulent re-
presentations, and had they been other documents
he might have been tried for forgery. This offence
had been conducted with a great deal of ingenuity,
and must he visited with a severe sentence as a
warning to others, for he had stolen the paper on
which the forged documents were written.
The prisoner said the Exhibition paper was open
who wrote their let-
, tt oe res voenr y
it,m ae
nmdb et rh
eoyf the
also
took
it
away
in their books.
Mr. Payne—But you were not a member of the
press.
The prisoner—Yes, of the Lancashire Free Press.
Mr. Payne—But there was at the time no Lan-
cashire Free Press in existence. I have allowed you
to go at great length into circumstances which
have really nothing to do with this case; but your
offence is one of a very serious nature, and the sen-
tence of the Court is that you be imprisoned and
kept to hard labour for 18 months, to date from the
time of your conviction.
The prisoner was then removed.
Alfred Thompson was then put to the bar to re-
ceive judgment. His case was also submitted to the
Court of Criminal Appeal, and the conviction con-
firmed. He got a sum of money from a woman at
the Great Northern Railway under pretence of get-
ting her a ticket to go to York, but he gave her a
useless ticket and kept the money.
Mr. Payne sentenced him to be imprisoned for
2 months.

SURREY SESSIONS, Nov. 17.

The November adjourned sessions for the county
of Surrey commenced this morning at the Sessions
House Ne‘vington-causeway, before Mr. Johnson,
chairman, Mr. Tilson, deputy-chairman, and Messrs.
C. E. Dermer, It. Peek, K. A. Gray, It. Phillips,
Lieut.-Col. M‘Donald, Captain M'Dougal, Henry
Sterry, and C. Whiteley.
The calendar contained the names of 50 prisoners
for trial, 43 for felony and seven for misdemeanour.
The state of education was as follows :—Nine could
neither read or write, 36 could only read and write
imperfectly, three could only read, and only one
could read and write well.
The Chairman, in his address to the grand jury,
said that he was sorry to place before them this ses-
sion a very heavy calendar, and he regretted very
much that it had lately increased at this season from
year to year. There were 50 cases on the calendar,
and, with those on bail and committed by the magi-
strates this morning, there would probably be 55 or
56 for trial. The corresponding period last year
there were only 35 ; in 1360, 44 ; in 1859, 25 ; and
1858, 38. He regretted to say that latterly there
had been under judicial investigation serious rob-
beries by servants and others, some of them amount-
ing to tens of t'aousands of pounds, besides daring
attacks on the person, so that it had actually become
unsafe for her Majesty's subjects to be out after
dark. Such a state of things ought not to exist,
and he hoped that at the next session of Parliament
something would be done through the deliberations
of the Legislature to put a stop to these daring
depredations. How it arose he could hardly tell. It
was, in many instances, shown that these robberies
were committed by ticket-of-leave men. These con-
victs, after serving a portion of their period of im-
prisonment, obtained a licence and were sent out
into the world. Where were the majority of these
persons to go but back to their oid haunts? They
had no friends except their old associates, and soon
they formed others, sometimes against their own
wishes. Whether some system might not be adopted
with regard to those unfortunate individuals, such
as emigration to some distant colony, that would
be for the consideration of the Legislature and
the Government. At present there was a great
difficulty with regard to them which required the
most careful consideration. On looking over the
calendar he perceived three cases of embezzlement
and 19 cases of larceny by servants, a crime very
much on the increase, he was sorry to say, and on
which lie had to communicate recently with the
Secretary of State. There were ten cases of rob-
bery from the person ; two for stealing in the dwell-
ing-house, one for housebreaking, two for receiving
stolen goods, and five for horse stealing ; that was
a crime on the increase in this county, and they
rarely had more than one charge of that descrip-
tion brought before them. The other cases on the
calendar were such as is usual for trial at these
sessions, and did not call for any further remarks
from him.
The Grand Jury then retired.

NEW COURT.
(Before I. E. Johnson, Esq.)
Henry Brown, 43, carman in the employ of
Messrs. Roach and Co., corn merchants and whar-
fingers, Pickle Herring-wharf, Bermondsey, pleaded
guilty to stealing a sack of oats the property of his
employers.
It appeared that on Lord Mayor's day the pri-
soner was sent with a load of corn to Brixton, but
he had no right to leave any excepting where or-
dered. He was, however, seen to leave a sack of
oats at South Island-place, Brixton, which he had
no right to do, and he was taken into custody.
The Chairman observed that robberies by ser-
vants had become so frequent of late that an
example must be made to put a stop to it_ He
therefore sentenced the prisoner to 12 months' hard
labour.
Thomas Smyth, 33, was indicted for stealing a
fish slice, two decanters, two salvers, and other
articles, the property of Mr. David Myers Noad,
his master, at Chertsey.
Mr. Lilley prosecuted, and Mr. Thompson de-
fended the prisoner.
The prisoner had been some time in the employ
of the prosecutor as a kind of butler and confi-
dential servant. A short time ago he was directed
to pack same goods for the country, where a portion
of the family were going to; he, however, took
away the property mentioned in the indictment.
Mr. Thompson made a very eloquent appeal to
the jury, who returned a verdict of guilty, recom-
mending prisoner to the mercy of the court.
The Chairman sentenced him to the House of
Correction for one month with hard labour.
James Willings, a plumber's labourer, was in-
dicted for stealing five hundredweight of lead, the
property of Mr. William Downs, his master ; and
Esther Feannin, the wife a plumber, was charged
with receiving the same knowing it to be stolen.
Mr. Robinson, instructed by Mr. Chipperfield,
prosecuted ; Mr. Thomson defended Willings ; and
Mr. Lilley, instructed by Mr. Edwins, defended
Feannin.
The prosecutor in this case is the well-known ex-
tensive builder end contractor of Union-street, and
the male prisoner had been some time in his employ
as a plumber's labourer. On Wednesday, the 22d
ultimo, he was seen by a young man named Deeks
to carry two heavy bundles of lead to the other pri-
soner's house, in St. Margaret's-court, and he left
the house by the back way emptyhanded. Infor-
mation was given to the prosecutor, and Holmes
and Bricklear, detective officers of the M division,
took the prisoner into custody, when about half a
ton of new lead was found at Feannin's house,
which Mr. Downs identified as his property.
Some discussion ensued as to the liability of the
female, as she had a husband living with her ; but
it was shown that he was at work at Brighton at
the time.
The prosecutor also said his losses were enormous,
but the great difficulty was to detect the guilty
parties.
The jury found both prisoners guilty, and the
Court sentenced each of them to 18 months' hard
labour.