The Sun.
London, England, 1862-09-02 00:00:00

TEE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY OVVIING, SEPTEHBER 2, 1862.

against him he was ready to meet it, and that if
there were none he demanded his unconditional re-
lease. Mr. Cameron being in no hurry to reply, Mr.
Winder wrote to him again on the 15th of March,
and received the following answer :
" Lochiel, March 24, 1862.
" Sir,—You surprise me by saying in your letter of the
15th inst., received to-day, that it was by my order you
were taken from Philadelphia to Fort Lafayette and placed
in confinement, &c. I knew nothing of your arrest until I
saw the fact stated in the newspapers, and, being at the
time closely engaged in the discharge of my official duties,
neglected to inquire into the case, presuming, however,
that it was done by order of the State Department which
had charge of such cases as I presumed yours to be,—Very
respectfully, " SIMON CAMERON.
" W. H. Winder, Esq."
To this document Mr. Winder replied as follows :
" Fort Warren, March 30.
" have to thank you for your prompt reply to my
request for information as to the cause which induced you
to issue an order for my transfer to Fort Lafayette. Your
letter confirms me in my supposition that your name had
been used without your knowledge, or inadvertently signed
to a paper without heeding its contents. It was obtained
somehow through the district attorney. I give you a copy
of the document by authority of which Colonel Burke took
charge of me, and placed me in Fort Lafayette :

" Philadelphia, Sept. 13.
" Dear Sir,—Permit me to introduce to you my deputy,
Mr. Starkey, who carries with him Mr. Winder, to be deli-
vered to your custody per order of the Secretary of War.—
Very respectfully your obedient servant,
" WM. MILLWARD, United States Marshal.
" ' To Lient.-Col. Martin Burke, Commanding
at Fort Hamilton.
" ' I am Sir, yours very respectfully,
" W. H. WINDER.

" To the Hon. Simon Cameron, Lochiel,
near Harrisburg."
On the afternoon of the same day, Mr. Winder
wrote a second letter to Mr. Cameron, enclosing
him a copy of the telegraphic despatch purporting
to be signed by himself and addressed to Mr. Coffey,
the District Attorney of Philadelphia, ordering his
arrest and transference to Fort Lafayette. Mr.
Cameron promptly replied in the following terms :
" Lochiel, April 2, 1862.
"Sir,--I have enclosed your letter of the 31st, received
to-day, to the Secretary of State, and disavowed all know-
ledge of your arrest, with a request for your release, if you
have been held by my direction.—Very respectfully,
" To Mr. W. H. Winder." " SIMON CAMERON,
Mr. Seward refused to order the release unless
upon the previous terms of taking the oath of alle-
giance, and transferred the case to Gen. Dix and
Judge Pierpoint, the Commissioners appointed by
the War Department for the examination of politi-
cal prisoners. From these gentlemen Mr. Winder
learnt for the first time that his offence was " his
correspondence with various parties and his writings
for the newspapers," and by them he was promised
to be set at liberty on parole and on taking the oath
of allegiance. Mr. Winder denied that his corre-
spondence or writings were treasonable, disloyal, or
illegal; demanded, if they were thought so by the
Government, to be brought to trial in due form and
course of law, that he might have an opportunity
of defending himself, and declined to take the oath
as a necessary preliminary to his demand for jus-
tice. His correspondence with the Commissioners
is dated in the beginning of May last, since which
time more than three months have elapsed. He is
still in Fort Warren a close prisoner.
Mr. Winder's case is but one of hundreds, but the
state of public security and political morality which
it discloses might well make Americans reflect on
the unhappy position of their once great and free
Republic. They may not be aware of it themselves,
but the Northern people have already lost their
own liberties in the futile attempt to destroy those
of their Southern brethren—and, worse than all,
perhaps, to people who love the " almighty dollar"
so much, they have not lost their liberties gratis,
but have already incurred debts to the extent of a
thousand million dollars by the process, and will
incur as much more in another twelve months,
unless they renounce the idea of subjugation, and
come to terms with a people whom they never can
subdue.
MIDDLESEX SESSIONS, Sept. 1.

The September General Sessions of the Peace for
Middlesex commenced this morning,
at Clerkenwell, before Mr. sergeant (ileumlee, pre-
siding for the Assistant-Judge ; Mr. Payne, deputy ;
and the following justices :—Mr. Dixon, Mr. Mar-
tin, Mr. Kepp, Dr. Bateman, Mr. Rigg, Mr. Good-
hart, Mr. J. D. Fletcher, Mr. Summers, Mr. Prance,
Mr. Miles, and Mr. Charles White.
The learned Sergeant delivered the charge to the
grand jury.
The calendar for this session is very light, there
being only 36 prisoners for trial, in consequence of
the heavy list of business last week. There were 32
cases of felony and 4 of misdemeanour.
Wm. Bishop, 30, described as a billiard marker,
was indicted for stealing a purse, containing Ss. 6d.
in money and 100 postage stamps, from the person
of Lucy Ayling.
Mr. Gent prosecuted ; Mr. Besley was counsel
for the prisoner.

The ease for the prosecution was that the prisoner
some months ago went to a shop kept by Mr.Ayling,
493, Oxford-street, where photographs were sold,
and while looking at some picked Mrs. Ayling's
pocket, and making some excuse went away. Some
time after he called again, and was recognised by
Mrs. Ayling as the man who took her purse; but he
said he had never been there before.
Mr. Besley addressed the jury for the prisoner,
contending that, upon all principles of law and jus-
tice, the prisoner could not be convicted upon such
evidence of so serious a charge. There was a mis-
take as to identity.
The learned Judge very carefully summed up, and
the jury found the rrisoner not guilty.

SECOND COURT.
(Before Mr. Payne.)
Joseph Sinai! was indicted for an assault upon a
warrant-officer of the Hammersmith Police-court
named Acres.

Mr. Gresham prosecuted ; Mr. Pater was for the
defence.

This case arose out of domestic matters of an un-
pleasant nature, and the prosecutor went to execute
a warrant upon the defendant in the middle of the
night. The prosecutor did not say who he was, or
in what capacity he visited the house ; but flourished
a stick, according to the case for the defence, and
then an assault was no doubt committed.
The defence set up by Mr. Pater was in effect
justifiable, and the jury adopting that view found a
verdict of not guilty.
A number of ordinary cases were disposed of.

been in the brick-fields. I was afterwards sent for
to go to the station to identify a man, and I then
told my mother and father all about it. The man
who was then in custody was not the man who had
insulted me in the brick-field.
Cross-exomined—The man who insulted me was
attired in a light suit. He sppke to me, and I told
him my name and address. lie first said he would
give me in custody, but he did not say what for. I
had never seen the man before.
John Heins, a boy about nine years of age,
said—l was with the last witness in Rydon's brick-
fields about half-past eight on Friday night. I saw
that gentleman (meaning the prisoner) popping his
head up and down behind the bricks. I told Polly
and then I ran away. It was quite dark, there
being no lamps there. I ran first; Polly ran after
me and hallooed and screamed, and then the pri-
soner ran after Polly. I turned round and saw the
prisoner put his hand over her mouth and chuck

her down on her back. I saw him put a white
handkerchief over her mouth, and heard him say
to the other man, " Clark, fetch that boy." The
prisoner then blew a whistle. I was only a few
yards from the prisoner when he spoke to Polly,
but I was further off when I saw him throw her
down. It was quite dark at the time. I ran away
and told the police. The prisoner was dressed in
a light suit and had on a dark billycock hat. lam
certain the prisoner is the man although I never
saw him before.
Police constable Peet, 415 A, said—About half-
past nine on Friday night I was on duty in the
Lower-road, Islington, and went with the previous
witness to Rydon's brick-fields. I found some
other constables there, and we searched the field
and found a man lying behind the bricks dressed
in a white smockfrock. He was taken into cus-
tody, but he was not detained as the boy said he
was not the man. I went further into the field
and saw a man behind some bricks. He was sur-
rounded by a number of boys with sticks, who said
if he attempted to move they would kill him. I
took that man into custody, told him the charge,
and he said he knew nothing about it. It was very
dark. I took him by the side of the railway, hav-
ing hold of him, when the prisoner gave a sudden
jerk, made use of bad language, and endeavoured
to jump over the palings of the railway. I did not
leave my hold of him, and we both hung over the
railings together. He broke away from me, and
threw me down the railway bank just as a train
was passing at full speed.
Mr. Barker—What do you think was his inten-
tion ?

Witness—l think he intended to murder me. I
should have been under the train had I not been
stopped by the poles of the telegraph. I was bruised,
That man had on a light cap. The man I had in
custody was about six feet high, and had on a light
grey coat. (The prisoner is about five feet seven or
eight, and is dressed in a black suit.)
Mr. Barker—Are you certain that the man you
had in custody was attired in a grey suit ?
Witness—Yes.

Mr. Barker—And that is the man who the boys
said was one of the men who attacked the com•=
plainant ?
Witness—Yes.

The complainant was recalled, and stated that
the man who assaulted her had a beard and mou-
stache_ He kissed her several times.

Mr. Barker (to the constable)—Had the man you
had in custody a beard and moustache ?
Witness—He had no moustache, but he had a
large beard and whiskers.
The Constable continued—From information I
received I went to Rydon's brick-fields and saw the
foreman. He consented to come to the station to
answer the charge, and the prisoner said he would
go with him, and if he was detained he would be
bail for him. He went to the station, and prisoner
was detained, because the witnesses positively
identified him. I have since searched the prisoner's
lodgings, and could not find any men's clothes of a
light description.

Mr. Barker inquired if either the prisoner or the
foreman answered the description of the man who
threw him over the pailings of the North London
Railway.
Witness—No, decidedly not.
Mr. Wontner said he had refrained from cross-
examining the witnesses at any length, and he
should not occupy the magistrate's time by making
a lengthened speech. All he could say was, that
the witnesses were mistaken, and he should most
clearly prove an alibi.

Several witnesses were called, who proved that
they had known the prisoner for ten or twelve
years, and that he bore a highly respectable cha-
racter. They never knew him to wear a light suit,
and they accounted for him on Friday evening last
from half-past seven, when he left his employ, till
the time he went to bed, viz., between 11 and 12,
ho having a few friends at his house.
Mr. Barker said it appeared to him as clear as
the sun at noon day that the witnesses were mis-
taken in the identity of the prisoner. He should
discharge the prisoner, and he might say that he
left-the dock without a stain upon his character.

IMPORTANT QUESTION UNDER THE BASTARDY
LAWS.—Henry Thurlow, wholesale and retail pro-
vision merchant, 2, Blackmoor-street, Clare-market,
was summoned to show cause why he should not be
adjudged the father of a bastard child, to which
Jane Elliott, of 8, James-street, Islington, had given
birth.

Mr. Thomas Wakeling, solicitor, of Great Percy-
street, Clerkenwell, attended for the prosecution ;
and a gentleman, whose name did not transpire, for
the defendant.

The complainant stated that she had cohabited
with the defendant as his wife in Henry-street. At
that time she was married, and her husband was
alive. Her husband left her in 1856, and went to
New York, and she had not seen him since, and now
believed that he was dead. She had had other
children by the defendant besides the one which she
now wished the magistrate to make an order on the
defendant to help to support, but they were dead.
The defendant had paid several sums of money to-
wards the support of this child, which was born in
1860, but having lately married he had discontinued
his payments, hence the present summons.
The solicitor for the defendant said he did not
wish to raise any question or to make any defence,
but would at once consent to an order.

The magistrate remarked that the complainant
being a married woman he must see whether he
could iilake an order that could be acted upon.

Mr. Wakeling said there were several cases on
the point. He was entitled to an order if he could
prove non-access.
The aunt of the complainant's husband said that
her (complainant's) husband left her and went to
America. She was certain he was dead. She was
also certain that he was not in this country whilst
the complainant was cohabiting with the defendant.
The Magistrate, having looked into the books,
said he found that the order could be made out, and
describe the complainant " as the wife of A. 8., a
single woman." He should make an order for
25...6d. per week and costs. _ . _

William Henry Lomax, of 14, Princes-street,
Bedford-row, was summoned by Elizabeth Bethon,
of 2,5, Leigh-street, St. Pancras, to show cause why
he should not contribute towards the support of her
illegitimate child, of which she alleged him to be
the father.

The case was clearly proved, and it was stated
that, on one occasion when he had only paid ls. 6d.
for the support of the child he was asked how he
would like to keep the child for that amount, he
said he should not like to do it, but if he was com-
pelled, he would throw himself into the Thames.
The usual order of 21. 6d. per week and costs were
made.
CUTTING AND WOINDING.—WiIIiam Canning,
a very old man, was charged with cutting and
wounding Ann Hayes, with intent to do her some
grievous bodily harm.
The poor woman presented a sad spectacle, her
face being covered with surgical plasters. She said
that she went to the prisoner to ask him for some
money that he owed her, when he, without any
provocation, struck het with some sharp instrument,
and inflicted the injuries she now had upon her.
Police sergeant Lock, 21 N, handed in the follow-
ing medical certificate :
Caledonian-road Police-station, Aug. 31,1862.
"This is to certify that I was this morning called
to attend Ann Hayes, Id the above station. I found
her suffering from a wound extending obliquely
from above the corner of the nose through the
upper lip, which must have been produced by some
sharp instrument. _ _

" THOS. a MITCHELL, Surgeon."
The prisoner, in defence, denied the charge.
Mr. Barker remanded the prisoner for a few days.

MARYLEBONE.--RITFFIANLY OUTRAGE UPON
Two LADIES.—An ill-conditioned-looking young
fellow, who gave the name of William Townsend,
was placed in the dock charged with the following
attempt at highway robbery with violence.
Mrs. Jane Mould deposed—l reside at Boulogne,
but at the present time I am on a visit to my
daughter at No. 7, St. George's-square, Regent's-
park. Last Friday evening I went in company
with my daughtel. to German Reed's entertain-
ment. After it was over we went on our return
home in an omnibus as far as the Adelaide, near
Chalk Farm. When we got out I asked the
ez my two sons by it, they
con-
ductor how long it would be before the next vehicle
would be up, es 1 pected
having gone to a theatre. After taking out my
watch to look at the time, I said I would go on
home and send the servant for them. Myself and
my daughter proceeded on,
and as 1 was ou the rail-
way bridge I noticed a man following us on the
opposite side of the road. I noticed him more par-
ticularly under a lamp, and the prisoner resembles

him. As my daughter was so very timid I did not
tell her my suspicions, but quickened our pace to-
wards St. George's-square. We proceeded along till
we came to a place with grass growing, and
which I thought to be a field, very dark, and
being bounded on one side by, a wall. As we
got to a corner of the wail the man sud-
denly jumped out and made a grasp at me, which I
evaded, and ran off screaming " Murder" and
" Police," towards some houses, when I was caught
by some ladies who came out from one of the houses.
The place where the man came upon us is a very
lonely spot.
Mr. Yardley—ls this the man that you saw fol-
lowing you P
Witness—l think it is.

•- - -
Mr. Yardley—Are you sure that prisoner is the
man ?

Witness—To thr best of my belief he is. When
he missed me he seized my daughter and threw her
down and rifled her.

Mr. Yardley—Was he taken into custody at the
time ?

Witness—No, sir.
Mr. Yardley—When did you see this man ?
Witness—At the station-house, where I was sent
for, and asked if I could see any one there that I
had seen before. I pointed out the prisoner from a
great many other men.
Prisoner—l am innocent of this. It is not me.

Isabella Mould *aid—l am daughter of the last
witness. Last Friday night we were returning
home together, and as we got to a lonely spot I was
seized by a man, and he took me up in his arms
and threw me down with very great violence on
the ground, and much bruised and cut me. He then
put his foot on me, and turned my pockets out and
rifled about my belt. I could not see the features
or dress of the party, because the hat which I wore
he knocked over my face and eyes. I was picked
up in a fainting state.
The last witness's dress was produced, and bore
undoubtedly marks of the owner having been
roughly handled.
John Enwright, 395 S, stated—On Friday night
last, about a quarter to eleven, I was on duty, and
when I got in front of the Adelaide public-house I
saw the prisoner smoking a pipe, a short one.
I then proceeded round rnv beat, and heard
screams of " Murder" and "Police." I went to
the spot, and saw the ladies, who were greatly
excited, and the elderly lady gave me a description.
of the man. She described him as a bull ,head look-
ing man, wearing a darkly coloured green coat (a
description answering the prisoner as he stood at
the bar). The following day I went out in plain
clothes, in company of Sergeant Leveret, 7 S, and
at night time on Saturday evening went to outside
the Adelaide, where we saw the prisoner, and took
him into custody on the present charge.
Mr. Mansfield asked if there was any one present
who had seen the prisoner about the place men-
tioned at the time.

Sergeant Leveret said the barman could speak as
to prisoner entering the house just before the time
the robbery took place.
Mr. Yardley said that that was most important,
and remanded the prisoner for a week.

LAMBETHe.—ROBBERY AT A PRAYER MEET-
ING.—John King, alias Bray, a notorious thief, was
charged before Mr. Elliott with picking the pocket
of Mrs. Mary Clark, the wife of a milkman, of a
florin, at a prayer meeting.
The prosecutrix deposed that on the evening
before she attended a prayer meeting, at the York-
road Chapel, and in the course of the service she
felt the prisoner's hand in her pocket, and his with-
drawing it. She in consequence examined her
pocket, and found that he had taken a florin and
two penny-pieces, which, with a sovereign, she had
safe a few minutes before, and she charged the pri-
soner with robbing her. lie denied it, and asked
her to allow him to pass by, but she refused, and
kept him until he was taken by a constable,
Police-constable 179 L said that on searching the
prisoner he found that he bad got the thieves'
pockets with the bottoms out, so as to be able to
pass the hand through them, and he also found the
florin-piece and two penny-pieces on his person.
The prisoner stoutly denied the charge, saying the
money was his own, and was remanded for the at-
tendance of the constable who had had him in cus-
tody for several offences similar to the present.
ASSAULT ON THE CRYSTAL PALACE PLATFORM.—
Mr. Henry Ewen, described as a gentleman of for-
tune, residing at North Lodge, Park-road, Regent's
Park, appeared to answer a summons taken out
against him by Mr. William Miller, an attorney at
law, charging him with an assault.
Mr. Metcalfe, the barrister, attended on behalf of
the complainant, and Mr. F. H. Lewis for the de-
fendant.

The case occupied some time in hearing, but the
ahorb fcboto warn thAge:—On the evening of the 22d
of last month the complainant, with Mrs. Miller and
a little boy of five years old, and the defendant, with
Mrs. Ewen and childi and accompanied by Miss
Rogers and a Mr. Litcoffel were on the Crystal
Palace platform, awaiting the arrival of a train to
take them to town. At length a train arrived, and,
Mr. Miller observing a first-class carriage empty,
approached with the intention of getting into it.
Mr. Ewen having previously laid hold of the handle
of the carriage, kept possession of it until his party
came up and admitted them to the exclusion of Mr.
Miller and his little boy, and though Mrs. Miller
had managed to get in, she returned on seeing the
defendant striking her husband. Mr. Miller, an-
noyed at being prevented from getting into the train
by the defendant, called him a " fool and a black-
guard," upon which the latter struck at him and hit
him one slight blow on the left jaw. The result was
that Mr. Miller was unable to go by the train, and
was left behind ; but having obtained the name and
address of Mr. Ewen he took out the present sum-
mons against him.
For the defendant it was alleged that the com-
plainant had pushed Miss Rogers rudely from the
earriage ; and after hearing the parties at some
length,
Mr. Elliott observed that it was quite clear the
defendant had no right to take possession of the
carriage in the way he had done to the exclusion of
the complainant and his wife and child, and it was
equally clear that the complainant was wrong in
making use of the offensive expressions, and there-
fore there were faults on both sides. It was equally
clear that an assault had been committed by the de-
fendant, which could not be justified, and for that
assault he must pay a penalty of 205., or in default
20 days' imprisonment.
The penalty and expenses were at once paid. I

ALLEGED WILFUL DESTRUCTION OF

SHIPS.

At the Liverpool Police-court yesterday morning,
Geo. Ruston, described as a shipowner, was brought
up charged with having, along with others, been
an accessory before the fact fraudulently to cause
the destruction of the ship Roscoe, by burning her.
Mr. Lushington, instructed by Messrs. Lowndes,
Bates, Lowndes, and Robinson, conducted the pro-
secution, and the prisoner was defended by Mr. H.
Forshaw.

The prisoner was owner of the ship Roscoe, and
had been previously in the corn and ship-bread
trade. Thos. Jamieson was part owner of the ship,
and also had the command of the vessel. The Roscoe
was loaded with coals at Cardiff, for Smyrna, and
the prisoner told Jamieson that, as the ship was
welt insured he was either to knock the ship's
brains out, or if that could not be accomplished he
was to act fire to her. For the purpose of more
effectually carrying out this object, three barrels of
ruin and two barrels of brandy were put on board
at the instance of Ruxton. When the vessel was
within 18 miles of Smyrna and about four miles from
land, she was set on fire at tie instigation of the
prisoner.
Thos. Jamieson was the first witness. He had
been in the habit of getting ship bread from the
prisoner for ships under his command for several
years prior to 1856. In that year he, at the sugges-
tion of the prisoner, became part owner of the
Roscoe along with him, and witness was appointed
captain of her. When he went the first voyage in
her the prisoner told him if she became leaky he
was not to take her into port, but to let her go
down, as otherwise they would all be ruined. On
a second voyage, which was to Miramichi, he was
not to let her go wrong, as she could not be in-
sured unless at a high premium. On the third voy-
age she was laden with coals from Cardiff for
Smyrna; but prior to that she was taken into the
graving dock and caulked and sheathed with zinc,
as the prisoner said to the witness, that she might
present a good face to the underwriters. This being
done, the prisoner said to witness, as he was about
to start on the voyage, "Now we have a good thing
on be sure you knock her brains out ; and if you
cannot do that set her on fire ; there is plenty of
rum and brandy on board to burn her." About
midnight on the 3d March of that year (1857) the
witness took several bottles of turpentine out of
about two gallons which had been put on board by
the prisoner to aid the brandy and rum in burning.
Having taken the turpentine he smeared some of
the spare sails in the fore hold with it, and set it on
fire. The fire spread rapidly and the crew and the
captain took to the boats, and the ship was burned.
On witness's arrival in England Ruxton congratu-
lated him on the success with which he had man-
aged the matter.
Llewellyn James was second mate of the Roscoe
in the voyage in which she was lost. Just as they
were leaving Liverpool the prisoner and the captain
were in the cabin, and witness overheard the pri-
soner say to the captain, " Now, be sure you put
the fire well into the brandy, that it may burn well,
and that will be all right, and you will be all right."
As the prisoner was leaving the ship, at the
Bell Buoy, he said to the captain, "Now,
Jamieson, everything is all right, and I hope
you will be soon back." On the night in
question the captain tock the witness and
the first mate into his cabin and gave them some
grog, and from some circumstances which then
took place witness suspected that the ship was to
be set on fire that night, and he soon after packed
up his clothes. Soon after twelve o'clock he saw
the captain come up from the fore hold, and in a
short time after the fire broke out. The crew and
captain took to the boats, and the ship was destroyed.
Samuel Wallace Bickley, a corn dealer, who nad
had frequent dealings with the prisoner, who was
in his debt, said that on pressing him for money
the prisoner told him that the Roscoe had gone to
sea, and that he had given instructions to Jamieson
to knock her brains out, and as she was insured he
would get money from the insurance company, and
he did not care what became of the crew. Conver-
sations of this kind occurred at different times, and
when he received intimation that the Roscoe was
burned he (Ruxton) was quite delighted, and said
so ; saying that now he (prisoner) should get
money, and be able to square off. The prisoner on
several occasions told witness that he hoped the ship
would go to the bottom, as he should then get
plenty of money.
The prisoner was committed for trial at the
assizes on this charge.
A second charge was for having incited a Captain
John O'Connor to cause the destruction of the ship
Montrose, of which the prisoner wo owner. While
the ship was lying in the outer roads of Cardiff the
prisoner said to O'Connor he was not to bri 3 back
the ship on any account, adding that if he (O'Connor)
would scuttle her he would give him £lOO and the
command of another ship. This took place in May,
1861, in the Mount Stuart Hotel, at Cardiff, and
the ship made the voyage to Africa and back in
safety, as he (Captain O'Connor) had resolved not
to carry out the nefarious instructions of the
prisoner.
In this case Mr. Raffles declined to interfere,
partly because he was not satisfied with the evi-
dence, and partly because he doubted whether he
had any jurisdiction in the case.