The Sun.
London, England, 1853-12-07 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGtENcE.

GUILDHALL.—Leivis igers, who was remande4
from last week, was brought before Alderman Copeland'
on the charge of being found in the unlawful possessio;.,
of a gold watch and other valuable property, which
formed a part of the produce of an extensive robbery,
recently committed on the premises of Mr. Matthews,
a watchmaker and jeweller, of Leighton Buzzard,in
Bedfordshire, on which occasion property, consisting of
plate, watches, and jewellery, to the amount of from
8001. to 1,000/. was carried away.
Mr. Frederick Folkard said—l am a pawnbroker,
carrying on business at 160, Blackfriars-road. I pro-
duce a silver Geneva watch, pledged by the prisoner on
Monday, Nov. 28, for 255., also a gold watch and six
rings, pledged by the prisoner on the following day for

50s. The intrinsic value of the articles is not more

than 555.
Mr. Matthews —The whole of this property is mine,
and Mr. Folkard has come forward voluntarily to give
information.
Cross-examined—I identify the silver watch by a
defect in the movement, and a mark in the case. Two
of the rings bear my private marks. I have not sold
any of the property produced.
Inspector Shelford said—l searched the house 177,
Southwark-bridge-road, the address given by the pri-
soner, and found a fish knife and fork, three butter
knives, nine forks, and a scoop.
Mr. Matthews—l believe this property is also mine,
Ibut I have a witness who identifies it positively. They
are not all silvereand the value of them is about 50s.
Inspector Shelford said—l have found other property,
some of which has been recognised by the prosecutor ;
and I therefore apply for a remand, to enable me to
make further inquiries.
Mr. Solomons said he could have no objection to a re-
mand at the present stage of the case, but with regard
to the cheque for 151. and the 10/. note found on the
prisoner, he had witnesses to prove that they came into
the prisoner's possession in the usual course of business,
and were no part of the robbery in question. The
cheque was dated a fortnight prior to the robbery, and
could not, therefore, be connected with it. Under these
circumstances, Mr. Solomons applied that the cheque
and the note might be given up to the prisoner, to sup-
port his wife and family, and provide the means for
defence.
Alderman Copeland refused to interfere, and the pri-
soner was remanded.

CLERSENWELL.—On Monday evening, just before
Mr. Corrie left his seat on the bench, a cabriolet, con-
taining a gentleman, two young ladies, and a policeman,
drove up to the door of the court, and on alighting they
were instantly introduced into the presence of. Mr.
Corrie, in a state of evident excitement.
The " gentleman" was perfectly intoxicated, with his
coat torn, as if he had been in a struggle and resistance,
and his name and address appeared in the police sheet
as Robert Francis Webb, gentleman, of Clarence-street,
Islington. The young ladies were his wife and her sister,
who had received considerable violence.
Mrs. Sarah Webb, the wife, a handsome person, of
superior manners, appeared with her arm bound up, and
suffering much pain. Having been sworn, she said that
the prisoner was her husband, and he had been in the
habit of ill-treating her. She had prosecuted him twice
before at the Worship-street court for assaults upon her.
On Monday afternoon he returned to his residence under
the influence of liquor, and commenced a quarrel with
her and her sister, on which occasion he seized a red-hot
poker, with which he attacked them and threatened that
he would kill them. He struck her on the arm with the
weapon, and her arm was nearly broken. She was so
much injured that she was under medical assistance.
Mr. Corrie—Pray, what is the prisoner ?
Mrs. Webb—He is a gentleman as far as property
goes—he is a man of fortune. They went in fear of their
lives through his threats and ill-treatment.
Mr. Corrie said, from the difference in their appear.
ance he at first thought that perhaps the prisoner was
her father. He (Mr. Corrie) conceived that he was not
then sober.
Mr. Bayliss, the chief usher, said the prisoner was
evidently drunk.
Mr. Corrie—Then I shall remand him until to-morrow
(Tuesday) when the case shall be gone into.
The prisoner was then locked up, and eventually con-
veyed to prison in the police van.
Yesterday he was again brought up for examination,
when his wife and her sister were accommodated in the
clerk's room, with Mr. Pelham, their solicitor, while Mr.
Wakeling consulted with the prisoner in the gaoler's
room. He was subsequently placed at the bar, when
Mr. Pelham, addressing the bench, said, under all. the
circumstances, viewing the position in life of the parties
—the prisoner being a gentleman of considerable wealth
--he would suggest that the case should be adjourned for
a week. Mrs. Webb had put up with the prisoner's ill-
usage for a length of time past. They had been married
some years, and had five children ; and in the interim
of the adjournment they would make out a deed of sepa-
ration. He hoped Mr. Corrie would accede to this pro-
posal.
Mr. Wakeling, on the part of the prisoner, consented
to it, and was ready to put in substantial bail for the
prisoner's appearance in a week, in order to answer the
charge, or to come to some amicable arrangement in the
matter. Mr. Wakeling concurred, and said Mr. Day,
his client's collector, would become his bail.
Mr. Corrie said he would consent to adjourn the case
under the hope that some amicable arrangement might
be arrived at. It was a very violent case—one which
deserved the severest penalty of the law. The prisoner
was in liquor at the time of the assault, and his wife
must be protected from his temporary madness. He
ordered the prisoner to put in bail, Mr. Day in 2001., and
himself in 100/.

Mr. Pelham urged that, as the prisoner was a man of
immense wealth, the amount of the bail ought to be
larger.
Mr. Corrie then ordered Mr. Day to put in his bail in
500/., and the prisoner 2501., to appear at this court in
a week.

THAMES. John Thompson, 35, .an ill-tempered
looking fellow, described as a shipwright, of Ship-street,
King-street, Wapping, was charged with violently as-
saulting his mother-in-law, Elizabeth Hutchinson.
It appeared there were some family differences, which
induced the daughter of the prosecutrix to place her chil-
dren under their grandmother's care. The prisoner went
to demand them and their elothes, and as the prosecutrix
did not produce them as quickly as he wished, he knocked
her down three times with very heavy blows on the
head.
Thompson, in his defence, said his mother-in-law had
abused him like a pickpocket, threw a glass of gin in his
face, and endeavoured to strike him with the poker.
The prosecutrix denied this. After she was knocked
down she took up a fire-shovel in self-defence, but did
nor use it.

Ellen Bryant confirmed the complainant's statement,
and described the assault as a most cowardly and un-
manly one. The woman had done nothing to provoke it.
Mr. Yardley said he was glad there was a law to
punish such brutal and cowardly fellows, and sentenced
him to three months' hard labour.
~

Mary Nugent, a repulsive-looking Irishwoman, wife
of a dock labourer, residing at Crown-court, Glasshouse-
street, was charged with assaulting and wounding her
own child, a boy three years of age, who now lies in a
precarious state in the London Hospital.
Police-constable 454 A said there was no prosecutor in
this case. The woman's husband gave her in charge for
the assault, but did not appear against her.
Mr. Yardley—Then the woman must be discharged.
Constable----The child is in immediate danger, sir, and
may not live.
Mr. Yardley—Then, if anything fatal occurs, bring
the prisoner here again. How did it occur ? Constable
—There was a quarrel, as I undertand, between her and
her husband, and she threw a piece of crockery at him,
but instead of hitting him it bit the child.
Mr. Yardley—Then she must be discharged, but in
the meantime you look to the results.

NAY AL INTELLIGENCE.