The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-15 00:00:00

GUILDHALL.

Patrick and Catherine Burrows, with six children,
were placed at the bar on the charge of begging at a
late hour the previous evening in Farringdon-street.
A few days back an application was made to the sit- '
ting magistrate by Patrick Burrows for relief, and he
was referred to the union, upon which he became most
abusive outside the court for some time, threat-
cuing that he would break the windows ; but
being watched closely he eventually departed,
thclaring that as he could neither get relief from the
workhouse nor from the magistrate he would break
some one's window for the purpose of getting into
prison, or resort to the alternative of begging to efft-ct
that object. flow he has lived since was not mentioned;
but he, with his wife and family of six children, were
found in Farringdon.street, between eleven nod twelve
o'clock, walking about to excite the sympathy of those
who might be passing by. They were conveyed to the
station-house, when the inspector ordered the officer to
convey the five children (the other being at the breast)
to the West London Union. The officer did so, but the
porter refused admitting them, at the same time telling
him that as they belonged to Gray's Inn-lane, he had
better take them to the workhouse there. In conse-
quence of this refusal he returned with them to the
station-house, and they were locked up in one of the
cells all night. On the woman was found 6id., with a
bag, a saucepan, a spoon; and on the male prisoner a
cigar-case, five duplicates, and two tobacco-boxes.
Alderman CHALLIS asked if they were known, and
was informed by an officer of the City of London Union
that the prisoner had been a most troublesome customer.
He had received relief over and over again, and they
had offered to pass him and his family to Ireland, but he
refused to go back.
Alderman CHALLIS said, however bad the father and
mother might be, nothing could justify the refusal of the
officer to admit the children, particularly when they
were brought there by an officer. He should, therefore,
order a summons for him to attend at once.

The summons was immediately made out, and shortly
after Robert Turlo, the porter, appeared.
Police•constable 313 deposed to taking the children to
the West London Union about twenty minutes past
twelve o'clock, when the defendant refused to admit
them, and desired him to take them to Gray's Inn lane.
Alderman CHALLIS—Did you tell him that you had
their father and mother in custody? Officer—l did.

Alderman CHALLIS—WeII, Mr: Turle, what have you

to say for such conduct ? Turle—l certainly told the
officer to take them away to Gray's Inn-lane, as thqy
did not belong to our union. Besides, the father has
been a constant annoyance to us, and has been repeatedly
relieved.
Alderman CHALLlS—Officer, where did 3 ou find them?
Police-constable—lu Farringdon-street.
Alderman CHALLIS said, he could not understand why
the defendant should refuse to take the children in at
such an hour of the night, more particularly when taken
by an officer, who informed him that their parents were
in custody. He had clearly 'violated the rules and regu-
lations issued by the Poor-law Commissioners respecting
cases of urgent necessity, and rendered himself liable to
a penalty of 201., but, thinking he had acted ander a
misconception he should only tine him 10s. in this in-
stance. If the refusal to admit urgent cases was re-
peated, the next find would be 51.
The man was sentenced to one month's hard labour,
the woman to fourteen days' imprisonment, and the
children were directed to be taken to the union.
There were no less than twelve more Irish 'vagrants,
who were sentenced to terms of imprisonment varying
from seven days to one month.
BOW-STREET.

The two begging-letter imposters, who, passing as
man and wife, in the names of Thompson, Henderson,
Heppell, Johnson, Mother, &c., have carried on an ex-
tensive business for several years past, were placed at
the bar before Mr. Henry for further examination.
The officers of the Mendicity Society were in attend-
ance to prosecute, with ample presumptive evidence to
convict the prisoners in at least twenty cases; but in
the absence of the illustrious and noble personages to
whom the letters written by the prisoners had been ad-
dressed, with more or less success, it did not appear
that the Court was in a much better position to proceed
with the investigation than when the cue was remanded.
Mr. Taylor, of the Royal Household, was present,
but no further steps were taken with respect to, the beg-
ging-letters signed " Elizabeth Henderson, ar?ci
dressed to the Queen, the application havingfailed
its principal object, although not altogether uLpr.roduc
tive to the male prisoner, who, on recei
Tay-
lor's unfavourable reply, in. the nameeof‘wilie.tge.r
iMtaajleasrtgye,
availed himself of the official envelope,
la
to effect another
" privy purse " seal and autograph,
as possible, the hand-
imposition, by imitating, ast f, a„ note to
cheque
forwriting and signature of
gentleman, with
iitnh
purport-
ing to come from
.that
genenveloPe in question, and by
101.," and inclosed In
the
ee
and the envelope to a lady,
forwarding. the forgedaPpenal to her benevolence, and a re.
together with an
quest that the inclosures might be returned, ho suc-
ceeded in obtaining a sovereign from that quarter.
on produc Dowager,ed, anc
Captain Bedford, almoner doefsetheti
Queen
proved that two letters of the, rip
" Richard Heppell, had been addressed to her
sDlgajeesty a short time .
since.
Mr. llENriv inquired there were any cases in which
the applicants had obtained money? The clerk of the
Mendicity Society said there Were several, but the par-
ties could not attend, excepting in one case with which
they were ready to proceed.
Mr. Cutlibt,rt Ellison, of Whitehall-gardens, proved
that he had received letters from "Margaret Mather
within the past fortnight. The writer alleged that she
was suffering extreme distress from the ill-treatment of
her hu• band and the loss of a child which she had no
means of burying; and she also stated that two of her
brothers worked in one of his (witness's) quarries. A
letter from Lady Walsh= to the applicant was enclosed
in the first communication received by him, showing
that she had been assisted by her Ladyship; and, before
witness had replied to it, he received the second letter
1 40111 the spore WINIMD, who repeated her ts.le of diStIC3I

and requested him to return Lady Wahhaniss letter,
which he did, with a Post-office order for 10s. In De-
cember last witness sent the same woman 11., in reply to
a similar appeal. The various begging letters produced
appeared to witness to be in the same style and hand-
writing as those forwarded to him, which he had de-
stroyed.
Proof was given that_the Post-office orders .had been
paid to the prisoners.
The male prisoner said the Magistrate need not trou-
ble to inquire into this case. Ile admitted that his wile
did write the letters to Mr. Ellison, and did receive the
money from him; but that gentleman had been induced
to relieve his wife by Lady Walsham's letter, and by
the fact that two of his brothers were in his service, nei-
ther of which could be called a " false pretence."
Mr. llENnr—But the letter represented that she had
lost a child, and was unable to bury it.
The prisoner said he did not write the letter, and
could not be supposed to know what was in it. Lady
Walaham knew his wife, and the letter was a legitimate
One.
llorsford, a mendicity constable, said that the wo-
man litd admitted to him that she never had a child in
her life.
Mr. HENRY considered that the charge was fully made
oat against both the prisoners in the present case. Ilis
worship inquired it the prisoners bad been previously
convicted?

Mr. Ferguson, clerk to the society, stated that they
had, but the convictions had not been returned.
A long conversation then ensued between the megis-
trate and the mendicity officers relative to the treatment
of these cases. His Worship thought they ought to be
taken to the sessions, as he had no power to inflict mere
than three months' imp iconment, which was no effec-
tual check to the system; but the obstacles to such a
course seemed to be considerable. In the first place, the
Mendicity Society had no funds to defray the expenses
of prosecution; secondly, the benevolent individuals
who had been cheated of their money would not come
forward to prosecute; and thirdly, when they did pro-
secute, the prisoners were almost invariably let off
with three months' imprisonment—a result which would
have been secured by a summary conviction, without
any of the trouble or expense incurred by the parties
concerned.

Mr. HENRY regretted that such offenders could not
be punished more severely. His only course, under the
circumstances, was to sentence the prisoners to three
months' imprisonment ; but he strongly recommended
the society to take the subject under their consideration.
Afrer the removal of the prisoners his worship inti-
mated that a charge of forgery, at common law, might
be substantiated against the male prisoner, if satisfac-
tory proof could be give n of his having forwarded the
letter, purporting to bear the signature of Mr. Taylor,
to the lady from whom the sovereign was obtained.
John Hebditch, charged with feloniously entering the
warehouse of his late employers, Messrs. Shoolbred and
Co., drapers, &c.. of Tottenham•court-road, and steal-
ing upward of 50/. was fully committed for trial.
WORSHIP-STREET.
A tall muscular fellow, named James Blackett, who
was recognised by the police as having been before re-
peatedly in custody for various offences, was placed at
the bar before Mr. Hammill, charged with burglariously
breaking into the premises of Mr. Robert Barnes, a
tradesman in Spitalfields.
The prosecutor's son stated, that having been left
alone in the premises on Sunday night last, he carefully
secured all the fastenings and retired to rest, but between
one and two o'clock the next morning he was alarmed
by a smothered noise in the sitting room below his bed
room, and upon hastening on to the landing he saw a
man's arm thrust through a glass door at the foot of the
stairs, from which one of the panes had just been cut
out, endeavouring to draw back the bolt which held the
door inside. The man had a lighted candle in his hand,
which threw a strong refection on his face, and after no-
ticing him sufficiently to render a mistake in his iden-
tity impossible, ho ran to one of the foot windows
and called loudly for assistance; but before it arrived
the burglar had effected his escape, and upon ex-
amining the premises he found that an entrance
had been gained by breaking through a skylight
over the kitchen, the iron bars of which had been so
wrenched out of their fastenings as to be capable of
admitting a man's body. The burglar had then made
his way into the shop, the tills and drawers of which he
had ransacked, and after subjecting the furniture of the
parlour to a similar process, was endeavouring to force
access to the upper part of the house when he was dis-
turbed in his operations, leaving behind him in the yard
a fustian jacket, in one of the pockets of which were a
cap and silver spoon, the latter of which had been left
the night before on the sitting-room table.
Police-constable 152 II stated, that hearing cries of

•` Police!" and " Thieves!" from the last witness, who
told him that the house bad been broken into, he ran
round to the rear of the premises just in time to ses a
man vault over the back wall in his shirt sleeves and

without a hat, and dart down an adjoining turning; he
pursued him through several courts and streets for more
than a quarter of a mile, when he unfortunately struck
his foot with such violence against a pile of paving
stones as to severely injure his ancle, and while inca-
pable of moving from pain the thief availed himself of
the accident to get away; but he twice turned round in
the course of his flight, and the second time, being close
to a gas-lamp, he had a full view of his countenance, and
could positively swear to the prisoner's identity.
Sergeant Wakefield stated, that having before had the
prisoner in charge for felony, he felt satisfied, from the
description, the first witness.had given of the burglar, that
the prisoner was the same man, and having succeeded in
tracing him to a low coffee-house at Whitechapel, at
three o'clock that morning, where he found him in the
company of a number of thieves and desperate characters,
he took him into custody.

The prisoner altogether disowned the fustian jacket
produced by the police, and stoutly denied all know-
ledge of the robbery ; but he was positively sworn to
both by the prosecutor and constable who had pursued
him, the former stating, that upon his being brought
to his house that morning he had instantly identified
him ; and
Mr. IiAmmILL, considering the case clearly esta-
blished, ordered him to be committed till that day week
for the depositions of the witnesses to be taken against
him.