The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-25 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—Tan. 24.

MANSION-HOUSE.—A genteel-looking lad,
named Charles Cole, 18, was this morning brought
before the Lord Mayor charged with forging and
uttering a cheque for £5O, under very singular cir-
cumstances.

It appeared that the prisoner was in the service
of Messrs.; Morgan and Co., of Cannon-street, as a
supernumerary clerk, and this position gave him an
opportunity of seeing the letters, and noticing the
signatures of the customers of the firm. Among the
latter were Messrs.' Levy, wholesale salesmen, of
Houndsditeh, who keep a banking account with
Messrs. John Brown and Co., of Abchurch-lane.
The offence imputed to the prisoner appeared to
have been committed with very great ingenuity.
Having obtained a knowledge of the signature of
Messrs. Levy, it appeared that on Wednesday last
the prisoner presented himself at Messrs. Brown's
bank with a letter addressed to the cashier, which
contained an order for a cheque-book, and directions
that the amount of the stamps in the cheques should
be charged to. the account. The cashier gave the
prisoner a cheque-book, and he went away with it,
and it seemed that yesterday morning the prisoner
went up to a commissionaire, and handed him a
cheque for £5O drawn upon Messrs. Brown,
and apparently signed by Mr. Levy, which
he requested him to go and get cashed. The
little culprit, exhibited a great deal of cool-
ness in the matter, and told the messenger that
he had not time to go into the City himself as
he had some other business to do, but he must be
sure to be back by 12 o'clock. The commissionaire
went with the cheque as ho had been directed, but
the clerk, although the signature was imitated ex-
tremelywellappeared to have entertained suspicion
that all' Nv,A:tiicl right, particularly as it appeared.
*AI
that the 'eh
,' ,-t.lie,first out of the book that
he had given,loititt-O*o previous day. The com-
missionaire said that he did not quite like it him-
self, and in the first place inquiry was made of Mr.
Levy, who at once stated that the cheque 'WO a
forgery, but the signature was so well imitated,
that if any time had elapsed, he said that he should
hardly have been Able to say whether the signature
was genuine or not. Mr. Levy then accompanied
the commissionaire to Trafalgar-square, where
they found the prisoner waiting, and he was taken
into custody. When he was taken to the police-
station the prisoner said that he saw a report of a
case of forgery in the newspapers a short time back,
and that this had induced him to commit the act.
Packman, a detective officer, said that several
similar Gets of forgery had been recently committed
upon banks"r`s in the City, and he had reason to to-
nere that the prisoner was connected with them.
The Lord Mayor remanded the prisoner,who said
nothing in his defence, to a future day.
•

MARLBOROGH.STRtET.—The Hon. Otway
Toler was charged with obstructing the police in the
execution of their duty, and Priscilla Brazier and
John Barnes were charged with being drunk and
disorderly.
Police-constable A 334 said, about .1 o'clock that
morning the defendant- Barnes 'and the woman
Brazier were in the: Haymarket, drunk and making
a great distur6ance a Baines -wantehd to' fight every
one that passed, and by his conduct caused a crowd
to assemble. He went forward to take Barnes into
custody, upon which the woman kicked and struck
him repeatedly. Barnes resisted with all his force,
and' witness had to exert himself to retain his pri-
soner. He sprung his rattle, it'd& ,pith assistance
Barnes was:forced towards thetti,o9lPuse;kick-
ing, fighting, and throwing himmff miAhe'ground
like a madman. The two defendants Barnes and
Brazier were got at last to the station-house and
locked up. Witness was quite exhausted through
the severity of the struggle with Barnes and the
obstruction of the mob.
Police-constable Jeffrey, C 49, said he went to
the assistance of the last witness. When in Jer-
myn-street the defendant Toler interfered, and
called the police " brutes." There was a great
crowd, and the defendant Toler was the foremost
person. The defendant said the police were not
taking the man to the station the right way. He
the defendant it would be much better if he
let the police alone and mind his own business.
The defendant Toler then threw himself between
witness and the defendant Barnes, and seized him
(witness) by the collar, saying, "You are a lot of
savages." He laid hold of the defendant, upon
which the defendant drew back, struck at him, and
pushed him against the hoarding. The defendant
Toler was eventually taken to the station, and
charged with obitructing the police.
The solicitor who attended for Mr. Toler cross-
examined—Did not know how Mr. Toler got the
wound on his forehead. Did not strike the de-
fendant Toler.
Police-constable Jeffrey confirmed the evidence
of the violence of Barnes and the woman. Mr.
Toler followed, crying, " Shame ; that is not the
way to take a drunken man." After Mr. Toler
pushed the other constable he was taken into cus-
tody, but resisted greatly, and it was in getting
Mr. Toler into the station that his forehead was
grazed by the door.
In defence Barnes said he had been to the Oxford
Music Hall, and on his return home was annoyed
by some girls, and all he did was to insist on the
police getting their names, and for this ho was
taken into custody.
The defendant Brazier said she saw some soldiers
striking at Barnes, and she interfered.
Mr. Toler said he was returning from his club
when, seeing a number of people and hearing frantic
screams, he stopped to inquire what was the matter.
Seeing the police taking Barnes along in what ap-
peared to him a very rough manner, he remarked
what a very stupid thing it was to take a drunken
man to the station-house that way. He was smoking
a cigar at the time; the policeman laid hold of him
so as to knock the cigar from his lips, and at the
same time his head was knocked against a wall and
he was dragged into the station-house. When he
was in the station-house ho said he had no intention
to mix himself up with the affairs of strangers. If
.he had interfered improperly he was sorry for it.
Mr. Yardley said it was Clear that Barnes was the
cause of all that had occurred; it was his violent
conduct that caused the crowd and called for the in-
terference of the police. He should inflict a fine of
40s. or 14 days on him, and a.fino of 10s. or seven
days on the woman. With-regard to the defendant
Toler, he had been guilty of great indiscretion by
his interference with the police. Probably if the
defendant Toler had seen the first of the disturbance
he would have known better, and would not have
lent himself to obstruct the police while performing
their duty. He should fine him 40s. or 14 days'
imprisonment.
The amount stolen from Mr. B. W. Lacy, of
Westbourne-grove, by the gang of swell-mobsmen
who have been robbing tradesmen, is not £lOO, as
at first reported, but only £2O.

WESTMINSTER.—Ann Cavanagh was finally
examined, charged with stealing two £5 notes, and
£1 2s. 6d. from St. Margaret's and St. John's Work-
house, York-street, Westminster, and Mhard Cava-
nagh, her husband, with feloniously receiving the
same.
On the morning of the 24th of last March Mrs.
Pearse, the matron of the St. Margaret's Work-
house, placed two £5 notes and other money in a
drawer in her bedroom, and on the following morn-
ing missed them. The female prisoner, who was a

f

pauper in the workhouse, waited upon Mr. Pearse,
and had access to the-room where the notes were
deposited. She absconded immediately after supper
on the night of the 24th, and her husband, who was
also an inmate of the workhouse, discharged himself
on the following day. On the Bth instant the pri-
soners were met in Bridge-street, 'Westminster, and
given into custody. One of the missing £5 notes
was traced to the prisoners, who obtained change
for it at the end of last March, from Mr. Pye,
butcher, 2, St. James's-street, Old Kent-road, the
male prisoner putting his name on it.
In defence, the female prisoner said " I am not
guilty of stealing the notes," and the male prisoner,
" I never handled them."
Prisoners were committed for trial.
Sarah Freeman, a genteel-looking young woman,
said to be very respectably connected, was charged
with stealing a great quantity of miscellaneous pro-
perty from the house of her master.
The prisoner, who was in the employment of Mr.
Win. Dutifea, haberdasher, 19, Victoria-road, Pim-
lico, was detected in the act of carrying out a great
quantity of property belonging to her master ; and
upon an examination of her boxes more was found,
together with a gold watch and chain and a great
quantity of jewellery. Prosecutor estimated the
value of his property at £2O, and said that although
the prisoner, with whom he received a high cha•
reefer, was unacquainted with his business when
she entered into his employment 12 months ago, ho
gave her £2O per annum, and board and lodging.
The prisoner, who admitted her guilt, but did not
appear the least discomposed, was remanded until
Wednesday.
John Saunderson, a strong rough-looking fellow,
was finally examined, charged with begging.
On Sunday evening the defendant, while intoxi-
cated, placed himself in front of several ladies in
the King's-road, Chelsea, and solicited alms.
Horsford, an officer of the Mendicity Society,
proved that defendant had been twice before con-
victed of a similar offence.
Mr Arnold observed that the condnct he had been
guilty of called for full punishment, as it was cal-
culated in a man of his appearance to create great
intimidation.
He was committed for a month to hard labour in
the House of Correction, and was removed, using
he most disgusting language to the magistrate.

LAMBETH.—James Edward Morgan, a licensed
broker, and who keeps a large furniture shop,
No. 12, in the London-road, appeared before
the Hon. G. C. Norton, to answer to a sum-
mons charging him with unlawfully retaining
and taking a larger amount for costs and charges
than are allowed by law,
Mrs. Elixabeth Howse, a widow, residing in
Brighton-place, New Kent-road, deposed that on
the 4th instant she employed the defendant to dis-
train upon the goods of Mr. Samuel Slight, who
occupied two rooms in her house, for £lO rent then
due and owing to her, and he at once walked up-
stairs and made a levy. Before doing so, he repre-
sented himself to be a broker, and expressed his
willingness to make the levy, and having placed a
man in possession for two or three hours, removed
the goods in a truck to his own shop. Some days
after he (defendant) told her that he had got the
goods condemned for £lO 10s., and said the tenant
had agreed to take them at that price. Some days
afterwards"he told her that he had got part of the
money, and expected the whole, and as soon as he
got it he should take it to her. This he did not do,
and in consequence she sent her servant, and fre-
quently called at his house herself, without being
able to see him; and she ultimately left word that
if he did not at once settle -with her she should
apply to the magistrate on the subject. Soon after
this the defendant called on her, when he acknow-
ledged to having received the £lO and an I 0 U for
10s. more from the tenant, and offered her £7 12s.
4d., which he said was the balance due to her,
after taking his expenses. He also-told her that
she should give him two sovereigns for the trouble
he had been put to in getting out her lodgers. At
that time there was a man, named Lord, present,
and she then refused to take themoney offered, and
took out the present 81113111MMS.
In reply to a question from Mr. Norton,
The witness said the defendantgaite her the bill
of his expenses, amounting to £27fai Bd., but he
had neither offered nor Oiien her thel 0 U for 10s.
She further said that theyrisoner had not asked her,
nor had she offered to pay him more than his legal
and ordinary charges' as a broker.
The defence set up for the defendant by his solici-
tor was, that he had given over the job to Lord, and
through himmistakes occurred ; but he (defendant)
was willing .to pay back any overcharge and ex-
penses. .
Dixon, the second usher, here informed the ma-
gistrate that this was not the first time that Mr.
Morgan had been summoned to this court on a com-
plaint similar to the present, when he endeavoured
to get rid of the responsibility by shifting the blame
on to Lord, who was somewhat .notoriouOlnown
as a broker, but in which he failed. .
Mr. Norton observed that-tinere could. Ve'no pre-
text what4ver for allegii3g that • Lord had ;bees the
broker, as the -defendant had not only undertaken
to make the levy, but at once executed it; and it
was-only on the occasion of the £7 12s. 4d. beitrg
offered to the complainant by Morgan that she had'
seen Lord. The overcharge by the defendant' all-,
peered to bell 35., and for this, the act of PArlil
ment gave him (Mr. Norton) the power to convict
him in a penalty of treble that amount. The ctn.
was every bad one, and he did not see why he shoOd
make the slightest mitigation. The defendant must
therefore pay £3 9s. and 2s. expenses.
The defendant replied he should do no such thing,
for in point of fact the magistrate had no jurisdiction
in the case, the rent'not:exceeding—E2o per annum.
Mr. Norton soon.set hint right in. his law by tell-
ing him that it WaS only' where the rent claimed
exceeded .E2O that ;the magistrate had not jurisdic-
tion. An ofdershohlilbemide on him (defendant)
for the L 3 110.; siniVd he. did not comply with that
order an execution;Wdule be levied on his goods.
The defendant here ; said he had not a shilling's
worth of property, and all the goods in his shop
and house belonged to his landlord.
Mr. Norton observed that the law in such cases
was very ,properlf ' most stringent. If sufficient
goods could not be found to satisfy the execution,
the defendant must be committed to prison, there
to remain until the money is paid.

SOUTHWARK.—George Arkwright, a dark-
looking man, was brought before Mr. Combe,
charged with knowingly uttering counterfeit money
at the house of Mr. Ray, the Three Compasses,
Bermondsey New-road.
Lucy Strapp, barmaid to the prosecutor, said the
prisoner came into the house the previous evening
and called for half a pint of beer. She served him,
and he handed her a shilling, which on taking up
she perceived to be a counterfeit. Knowing the
prisoner had visited the house before, and that bad
money was passed, she called her master, who de-
tained the prisoner, and gave him into custody.
The landlord of the house said that on the previ-
ous day the prisoner tendered him a counterfeit
shilling, exactly like the one produced. Witness
put it in the fire and saw it melt. He allowed the
prisoner to go. He added that the prisoner had
been carrying on a wholesale business among the
publicans in Bermondsey. One gentleman in court
had a handful he had taken lately.
Mr. Combe asked if he could identify the prisoner
as the party who uttered them.
Witness replied that he believed he could, as he
answered the description in every particular. Ills
worship would see that the counterfeit shilling was
well executed, and such pieces might deceive very
good judges.
Mr. Conibe ordered the prisoner to be remanded
until Wednesday next, so that the solicitor to the
Mint might have an opportunity of investigating
the case. .
Remanded accordingly.

WORSHIP-STREET.—Thomas Pearce, a reck-
less-looking man, of middle age, was charged before
Mr. Knox with stealing a watch from the shop of
Mr. King, a watchmaker and jeweller at Kings-
land.

The prosecutor appears to be a victim to theft,
for his name is familiar to the public in connection
with the daring burglary effected on his premises
nearly a month since, when property to the amount
of more than £2OOO was alleged to have been stolen,
not one-half of which was recovered, and but one
of the rogues taken, he being now on remand.
From the evidence now adduced against Pearce,
it appears that a few days ago he entered prosecu-
tor's shop, and carelessly requested to be shown a
watch hanging up in the window, which was no
sooner permitted than he darted out at the door and
effected his escape before the shopman could recover
from the astonishment such a bold act naturally
occasioned. The police, however, succeeded in a-d
prehending the prisoner from description, and his
identity was sworn to. A remand now proved that
he had sold the watch to a general salesman, named
Lawrence, in Beech-street, Barbican, on the day
following the robbery, and this witness swore that
he was induced to buy it from the fellow's repre-
sentation that he was hard up.
Mr. Safford, the clerk, asked what Mr. Lawrence
had given for it ?
Mr. Lawrence replied 7s.

-Idr: King said the article was certainly not an
expensive one, having been marked up at only 355.
Mr. Lawrence observed that the trade price would
be about 95., and repeated why he had bought it at
less.

Bendal, the gaoler, asserted that on a future occa-
sion he should be able to prove a former conviction
against the prisoner, and thereon
Mr. Knox directed a further remand.