The Sun.
London, England, 1854-08-18 00:00:00

CRIMINAL COURT.—August 17.

OLD CO URT.

( Continued from our First'Edition of Yesterday.)
THE FIRE IN FLEET-STREET.

Mr. Parry having addressed the jury for the prisoner,
Mr. Baron Martin summed up• the case with great
minuteness, and with his usual impartiality,
The jury retired to consider their verdict at six
o'clock, and were about half an hour absent. Upon
their return into court they gave a verdict of guilty.
The learned Judge, in passing sentence, said that the
jury, after a. very careful inquiry, had felt themselves
compelled to find the prisoner guilty, and he had no
hesitation in saying that he entirely corcurred in that
verdict. He considered the offence of wilfully setting
fire to a house one of the most aggravated crimes that
could be committed, and it was dreadful to contemplate
the consequences that might have resulted from the com-
mission of such an act in a place like Fleet-street. A.
very short time ago his life must have been forfeited,
but although the law no longer went to that extent he
must, no doubt, have prepared himself to receive the
next severest penalty of the law for the crime of which
he had been convicted. His lordship concluded by
passing upon the prisoner the sentence of transportation
for life.
Francis Quick, who pleaded guilty en Wednesday to
a charge of obtaining goods from tradesmen to a large
amount three months before his bankruptcy, with a
fraudulent intention, was brought up for judgment, and
entenced to be imprisoned for 13- months.

THIRD COURT.
(Before Russell Gurney, Esq., Q.C.)
Jane Redford, aged 39, a respectable-looking woman,
was indicted for marrying John Flynn, her husband
being alive.
It apP2are4, from the certificates, that she married
her first husband in 1539 at St. Sepulchre's, and the
second one at Kensington, in September, 1853.
The second husband, a very respectable-looking man,
some years her senior, said that he had lived with her
for some time previously to marriage, and she told him
that her husband bad left her for another woman, and
that he had died of the cholera.

The prisoner said she thought that to be the case.
Tho police-officer who took her in charge said that
was untrue, for when be apprehended her, she told him
her hti,baud was living.
The jury found her guilty, and she was sentenced to
two months' iinprisonnient.
John Smith., a respectable-looking middle-aged man,
was indicted for bigamy.
Mr. O'Brien prosecuted ; and Mr. Payne defended.
The prisoner, in this instance, had married his first
wife in 1814, at St. Peter's, Bethnal-green, and his
second wife at the same church in 1354.

Mr. Payne. for the prisoner, said that the prisoner
having been away from his first wife, who had left him
for another man, about seven years, he had thought he
had a right to marry again.
Mr. Gurney said that persons should know that under
Any circumstances a marriage contracted whilst the first
wife lived was not a legal one, and that for tie parties
not to have seen each other for iven years was not
enough ; they must use diligent inquiries as to whether
each other were still living. and then they would escape
the penal consequences of the act.
Mr. Payne sail, unfortunately persons in prisoner's
station did not know where. the File should be drawn.
This mail's wife had been away from him above eight
years.
It was here stated that she had left him two years af-
ter the marriage in consequence of the ill-treatment and
want to which she had been subjected.
Mr. Payne said that was not true, and called a wit-
ness, who stated that prisoner was an industricus, ho-
nest man, and did not live happily with his first wife in
consequence of her love of pleasure, and her giving her
company to a lover of hers before her marriage, and
with whom she had now gone to live, and by whom she
now had three children.

The second wife, a pretty, respectable-looking young
woman, said that her parents were aware of the priso-
ner's-situation, and thought that the marriage would be
legal.. Prisoner had never deceived her, and behaved
very kindly.

The Jury found him guilty ; and, under the circum-
stances, he was sentenced to one month's imprisonment.

Patrick ill Weounte, aged 16, a respectable-looking
Irish lad, was indicted for cutting and wounding Patrick
Barry, with .intent.

Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted, and Mr. Ribton defended.
The parties, it appeared, all of whom are Irish, lived at
the Land and Shears, public-house, Middlesex-street,
Whitechapei, and on the 25th of July, in the afternoon,
the prisoner began intuiting prosecutor's wifea.ud daugh-
ter, and upon his going to remonstrate with him for his
conduct. the young ruffian aimed a kick at the lower
part of his person, and hurt him very seriously. He
then fetched a poker, and, whilst some person held pro-
secutor,• prisoner, holding the poker in both hands,
knock him down by. a blow upon the temple, from the
eff..:cti of which. he was for some time in a dangerous
state,: ar,d was now very bad. •
For the defence it was proved that there had been a
row in this Hibernian Agapemone going on for twelve
rnoritkis continually, in consequence of the difference of
their religious tenets, prosecutor and his family being
taunted with being Orange Presbyterians, and a disgrace
to their county ; and a host of witnesses were called to
prove-that the mother of the prisoner had been knocked
dowlay prosecutor.
There was the usual amount of hard swearing upon
both sides, and it appeared that upon ;his Sunday after-
noon there was a general Irish fight in the house.
Mr. Ribton contended that it was merely a case of an
unlawful wounding.
Upon this count the prisoner was convicted, and sen-
tenced to three months' imprisonment and hard labour.
This, with a few other cases, ended the business of
the session. The New COurt did not sit this day.
The next session commences on Monday, Sept. 18.