The Sun.
London, England, 1853-12-20 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—Der. 19.

The sittings of the court for the December General
Session were resumed this morning at the Guildhall,
Westminster, by adjournment from Clerkenwell, before
Mr. Serjeant Adams, Mr. Witham, and a bench of ma-
gistrates. There were 79 prisoners for trial, of whom
76 were committed on charges of felony.
John Donoghue, 47, pleaded guilty to a charge of
having feloniously embezzled the sums of 121. 11s. 3d.,
71., 11. 9s. 2d., 221. 18s. 9d., and other sums, which he
had received for and on account of Thomas Mordell
Smith and William Mate, his masters and employers.
The prosecutors in this case carry on a very extensive
business as tallow-chandlers at Kensington, under the
name of Tucker and Co., the original name of the firm,
and the prisoner was in their employ as money-collector.
He had mixed himself up with betting-office transactions
to some extent, and had made use of money he had re-
ceived on his employers' account for the purpose of
speculating upon the result of horse-races.
Mr. Woollett appeared for the prisoner, and having
addressed the court in mitigation of punishment, called
Mr. Smith, the prosecutor, who said he was sorry he
had felt himself compelled to prosecute in this case. The
prisoner had been in the employ of the firm 13 years,
and altogether he had known him about 20 years. The
character of the prisoner had been irreproachable up to
these transactions. He had collected between 40,0001.
and 50,0001. a-year for the firm ; he had a wife and eight
children to support, and he had been the trustee of a
charitable fund amounting to 2001., which he had not in
any way misappropriated. The defalcations amounted
to about 501. Witness most strongly recommended him
to mercy, and if the court would deal leniently with
him, he would ensare that at the expiration of his sen-
tence he should leave the country.
A betting book found on the prisoner was handed up
to the court for inspection.
The Assistant Judge said this was one of the most
painful cases he had ever had to deal with. It was a
most sad thing to see a man who had maintained so
high a character with his masters in such a position.
One of them had come forward, and with the true spirit
of an Englishman, not only recommended him to mercy,
butintimated that when the term of his punishment
had expired, he would provide him with the means of
leaving the country in order that in another clime he
might redeem his lost position. Notwithstanding the
great confidence that had been reposed in him, as was
evidenced by the amount of money annually passing
through his hands, he had become connected with those
vile betting places, and had placed his name to bills for
his losses, and when he found he could not pay them,
he used his masters' money for the purpose. This was
not one of those cases where a high character had been
made the screen for systematic theft, which would have
been a circumstance of aggravation, not mitigation, and
under all the features ot the case, and especially con-
sidering the recommendation and suggestion of the pro-
secutor, the court was disposed to deal as leniently as it
possibly could with the prisoner. The prosecutor had
probably saved him from a sentence of penal servitude,
and the court had no doubt that at the expiration of the
sentence he would carry out his promise. He then sen-
tenced the prisoner to six months' hard labour, and im-
pressed upon him the importance of using his utmost
efforts when in another country, to regain his former
high character.

(Before Mr. Witham.)
ELLIOTT V. THE CHURCH RATE Ol? ST. GEORGE THE MARTYR

In the short notice of this appeal, which came before
the court on Friday, there was a slight error, as to the
actual point on which the decision was given, which
should be set right. The appeal was not dismissed on
the objection taken by Mr. Bodkin as stated, but the
order or warrant appealed against was quashed by the
court on the ground that it was not made under seal as
required. Mr. Bodkin's objection was in effect over-
ruled, and the merits of the ease were about being en-
tered upon when the objection as to their being no seal
on the order was started and was held to be fatal, and
the order quashed. The result so far therefore was in
favour of the appellant, but the main question involved
in the appeal of course remains untouched.