The Sun.
London, England, 1854-02-02 00:00:00

SWITZERLAND.

The Zurich Gazette, of the 30th ult., contains the
following telegraphic despatch from Geneva of the
29th :—" The troops yesterday occupied the farms
of the hamlet of Schevrons. Quite a panic pre-
vails. Yet nothing has happened. In the evening
the troops returned home, one company remaining
in the town. At Merin, there has been a meeting
of ultra-Montanes. These intrigues have a political
rather than a religious character."

NEWTON RACES.

(THIS DAY.)

(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)

ARRIVALS FOR THIS DAY'S RACES.

-
Hurdle Race.—Sir Robert, Chorister, Napoleon 11.,
Luck's-all, Squire of Malton, Miss Purdon, Cheroot,
The Admiral, Hernandez.
Steeplechase.—Minna,, Tulip, The Duchess, Laby-
rinth, Columbine, Friendless, Napoleon IL, Sarah, Miss
Purdon, A. Y., Crabbs, Maid of the West, Royal Blue,
Old Rake, Linnet.

Handicap Plate.—Sir Robert, Lancashire Lass, Sir
R. Trenchard, Solyman, Royal George, Voucher,
Rackete, Telegraph, Sam, Friendless, My Mary,
Andante, Sweeparina, Violet, Worcester.

ORDER OF RUNNING.

Hurdle Race
Handicap Plate
Steeplechase
Selling Stakes

. 2 0
. 2 30
. 3 15
. 4 0

BETTING AT MANCHESTER—LAST NIGHT.
NEWTON STEEPLECHASE.
4 to 1 on the field.
Disposition to back Labyrinth and Miss Pardon.
LIVERPOOL STEEPLECHASE.
Bto 1 agst Miss Mowbray (offered).
16 to 1 agst Peter (taken).
22 to 1 agst Peter Simple (taken).
40 to 1 agit Luck's All (taken.)
METROPOLITAN STAKES.
15 to 1 agst Royalist (taken).
GREAT NORTHERN HANDICAP.
20 to 1 agst Aquila ktaken.)
CHESTER CUP.
30 to 1 agst Newmiuster (offered).

DERBY.
sto 1 agst Autocrat (taken).

LINCOLN.

The following have paid forfeit for Steeplechase—
Vainhope and The General; Hurdle Race—Bourton
and Mire Hill.

CRTMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY).

OLD COURT.
.(Before Mr. Justice Wightman.)

Mary Chapman and Thomas Higgins, who were con-
victed on Wednesday of forging a will, were placed at
the bar to plead to another indictment for misdemeanour
arising out of the same transaction.
The prisoners pleaded guilty.

Another defendant, naleeßicliard Huxford, was in-
dicted on the charge, and he surrendered to take his
trial. No evidence, however, was offered against him,
and he was ordered to be discharged from custody.
The other prisoners were sentenced to be imprisoned
and kept to hard•labour for two years.
Robert Woods, 38, was indicted for feloniously setting
fire to a dwelling house, two persons named Ann Car-
penter and John Carpenter being therein at the time.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Clark conducted the prosecution.
Mr. Parry was counsel for the prisoner.
This was a prosecution instituted by the direction of
the Commissioners of Police, the prisoner at the time of
the occurrence being one of their constables, and attached
to the M division of police. The circumstances under
which the charge was preferred were of a very extraor-
dinary character. It appeared that the prisoner had
been in the force for sixteen years, and .bore the reputa-
tion of being an efficient officer, and on the night of the
13th January he was on duty in Bermondsey-street.
Between 12 and 1 o'clock in the morning of that day a
sergeant, named Squires, was passing the house of a hair
dresser, named Carpenter, in that street, when he saw
the door was open, and on going in he saw the
prisoner in the act of endeavouring to set fire
to a partition in the shop with a piece of
paper, which he had lighted from his lamp. When
the sergeant went in he saw that the door had
been forced open, and on his' speaking to the
prisoner, he put out the fire, and very slight injury was
done to the partition. There did not appear to be the
slightest motive for the commission of such an act by
the prisoner, and the only suggestion of this character
appeared to be, that a police constable was entitled to
a reward of ten shillings upon discovering a fire, and a
further reward of ten shillings if he prevented any
persons from entering the premises until the
arrival 'of the fire brigade. The case rested almost
entirely upon the evidence of Squires, who spoke
poaitivoly to the faote above narrated ; but in his cross-
examination he admitted that he had bad some dispute
with a man named Mahonick, who lodged with the
prisoner. He also said that since the prisoner had been
committed, he had asked the clerk at the police court
to give him a copy of the deposition ho had made, and
he said he had obtained it merely for his own guidance,
and he at first declared distinctly that this copy
was at home, but he afterwards admitted that
it was in his pocket at that moment. It like-
wise appeared that the prisoner would have been
entitled to a pension of 271. a year, from the period
he had been in the force ; and it appeared, there-
fore, very unlikely that he should have been guilty of so
serious an offence for the paltry consideration of the few
shillings he would have received for giving notice of the
fire.

Mr. Parry, in his address to the jury on behalf of the
prisoner, remarked upon the extraordinary nature of the
charge, and the improbability that a man of good
character, and who had for so many years been in the
police, should have committed such a desperate offence,
without any motive except the trumpery one of obtain-
ing a few shillings. He also remarked upon the evi-
dence given by the witness, Squires, and contended
that, under all circumstances, the jury would not be
justified in convicting the prisoner of so, serious an
offence upon such evidence as had been adduced.
The learned judge summed up, and the jury imme-
diately returned a verdict of not guilty. '

MARLBOROUGH-STREEZ. - (THIS DAY.)

UNFOUNDED CHARGE AGAINST A SOLDlER.—Charles
Oxley, a private soldier belonging to the Scotch Fusilier
Guards, was brought before Mr. Bingham, charged
with assaulting Caroline Lewis, who described herself as
a dressmaker, residing at No. 11, Upper Baker-street.
The complainant stated that yesterday she had been
at work at No. 11, Sloane-square, and at 8 o'clock last
night she left to return home, and went through Hyde-
park. Feeling very faint and tired, she sat down on a
seat near the footpath, and had not been there long
before the defendant came up and set himself
down by her side, and began pulling her about
in a very improper manner. She struggled with
him, when he threw her on the ground and tore her
clothes nearly from her back. She then screamed out
as loud as she could, when the defendant ran away. She
then walked on, and had got about 20 yards, when he
again came up to her and made an infamous proposal to
her, which she indignantly rejected. In a few minutes
afterwards she met a policeman, and gave prisoner in
charge.
Rolfe, 539 A, proved taking defendant, who was
rather the worse for liquor, into custody.
Defendant denied the charge, and said the complainant
accosted hinaln the Park, and asked him to give her 2s.
6d., and go home with her. He refused, as he wanted
to get to his barracks. She followed him, and on meeting
with a policeman she said he (defendant) had grossly
assaulted her. The constable then took him into cus-
tody.
In cross examination by Mr. Bingham, the complainer
prevaricated so much that he directed the constable to
take her to No. 11, Upper Baker-street, and see if she
really did live there ; and after he had ascertained that
fact, to go with her to 10, Sloane-square, and inquire
whether she had worked there or not. If her statements
turned out incorrect, he was to bring her back to the
court.

After an absence of more than an hour, the constable
returned with the woman, and informed the magistrate
that her statement as to her residence, and the place
where she had been at work, was totally unfounded,
He had been to both places, at neither of which was she
known. . _ _

Mr. Bingham said, if one portion of the complainant's
statement proved false, he must naturally conclude that
the other portion was unworthy of belief ; and he should
be doing wrong if he convicted the defendant on such
evidence. Defendant was therefore discharged.