The Sun.
London, England, 1831-05-17 00:00:00

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.
POST-OFFICE ROBBERY.

Wm. Pearson was indicted for secreting and embezzling
(whilst in the employ of the General Post-office in the
city of London) a letter containing ten 10/. Bank of Eng-
land notes, the property of Wm. Gosling and others, on
the 19th of April last.
There was another indictment against the prisoner, for
embezzling ls. 2d., being part of the postage received by
him for a certain letter which came into his hands.

The ATTORNEY-.GENERAL (with whom was Mr.
GURNEY and Mr. SCARLET!) stated the ease for the
prosecution.

The prisoner, who is a young man, 23 years of age.
listened attentively to the long indictments which were
read to him.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the present prosecution
was founded upon the Act 52 Geo. 111., cap. 143, which
rendered it punishable by death for any person in the em-
ploy of the Post-office, lint in this case a doubt might
exist as to whether strictly the prisoner was in the empiq
of that great establishment. The third section of the samt
Act rendered the law equally penal for any person what-
ever to steal any letter or packet from any office, bag, or
mail, used for the reception and conveyance of letters.
The prisoner had been in the employ of Messrs.
Abraham and Co., of the Inner Temple gateway, and
was sometimes employed
,among the letters received at
their house by the General Post-office, and the letter is
question might have come to his hands. One reznarkabh
:act connected with the vise is as, that one of the 101.
notes was found concealed in a boot, which it was the
prisoner's duty to clean. The Learned Attorney-General
then detailed the whole facts connected with the case, and
the following witnesses were called :

Thomas Ritty is clerk in the banking house of Messrs.
Gosling and Sharp ; on the 19th of April 111 wrote a
letter to John Collett Powlett, Esq., of Turvey, in Bed-
fordshire, inclosing therein ten bank notes of 101. each,
which lie received from a clerk of the name of Ewings.
William Ewing' produced a book which contained the
numbers and dates of the notes from 5,160 to 5169 in-
clusive, all dated 17th March, 1531. for 101. each.

Mr. Bradley, also a cleric. to Messrs. Gosling proved
that on that that on the 19th of April he put the letter
into the receiving-house, under the Inner Temple gateway,
but whether he dropped it into the box, or gave it
into the shop he could not tell. The latter was his usual
course.

By Mr. C. PHILLIPS—Is in the frequent habit of taking
letters there.

Mr. John Abraham is a law-stationer, and keeps the re-
ceiving house for letters in the Temple ; the prisoner
was in his employment, and at the time the letter was put
in it was his business to attend to the received letters ; to
take them out of the box and put them into a hag ; and
if any person gave them into his hand it was his business
to put them immediately into the unpaid bag. He used to
a'sist witness in making up the letters to send to the Posts
office. Among other things he was employed in a morn-
ing to clean boots and shoes.

By Mr. C. PHILLIPS—He did not live in the house;
he received six shillings a week and his board. Has eight
clerks in the stationery business, some of whom occa-
sionally made up the bags perhaps ; he would not swear to
the contrary. The prisoner had been in his employ for
two years, during which time he was entrusted with a
great deal of property. He had a high opinion of him.
George White—ls a clerk in the Post-office. If a
letter had arrived from the receiving-house on the 19th of
April, it would have arrived at Newport Pagnell on the
following morning.

J. C.-Powleti, E.q. lives at Turvey House, Bedford,
which is ten miles from Newport Pagnell, Bucks. On
the 18th of April he wrote to Messrs. Goslings to send
him a hundred pounds in Bank-notes, which not arriving,
he wrote again, stating the fact.

By Mr. C. RunZirs—Does not know of any other
gentleman of that name in the neighbourhood.
William Abraham stated that soon after the discovery
he requested the prisoner to go to the Post-office directly.
He wished to go back to his room, but was not allowed to
do so. After the prisoner was gone, witness put on a pair
Of boots which had been cleaned by the, prisoner, and in
one of them he found the 10/. note now produced. The
prisoner absconded when sent to the Post-office on the
morning in question.

Mary Onwatd was in the service of the prosecutor on
the 20th of April. The prisoner came into the kitchen
in the afternoon of that d•iy, when she thinks she saw a
note in his hand, and she saw a letter on the dresser.

By a Jul yman—She would not swear positively that it
was a Bank-note.

The not, fund in the boot of Mr. Abraham was again
produced, when

Mr. Ewing, the second witness, proved that it was one
of those lie handed to Mr. Ritty, on the 19th of April.
Mr. Buquitt, a clerk in the Bank of England, proved
that no otter note than No. 1,569 was issued from that
establishment on that day.
J. Tyrell stared that he saw the prisoner at the Post-
office in the month of March, on quite a different business
to this. Witness asked him if lae had any money ? He
said no. Witness searched him, and found some upon
him. Subsequent to this he saw him at Bow-street, when
Mr. Peacock, the solicitor, was there, and told him not
to answer any question to criminate himself. He said
he would tell Mr. Peacock all about it. The note
was shown to him, and the word " Bank" pointed
out ; he said, " that is my hand-writing ; I had the
note and put it into sty master's boot. He went on
to say that on the evening of the 19th of April, near half-
past eleven, he saw a female in Fleet-street, with whom
he went into a public house and had something to drink.
He said she had at the time a letter and some Bank-note+
in her hand ; she asked him to write the word " Bank"
on the note+ ; he did so on some, hut not on all. She
then made him a present of one of the notes (that pro-
duced) for his trouble. He said he had never seen the
woman befcre, nor did he know where she live!. He
said when called by his master to go to the Post- office, he
that moment threw the note into the bout. He was asked
whether he bad called for a light from the cook, which
he denied, as also perusing a note or letter in her presence.
Mr. Peacock, the Post-tiffiee solicitor, deposed that lie
gave the prisoner a caution, and held out neither promise
or threat 'o induce him to confess.

This was the case for the prosecution.
Die. C. PHILLIPS, for the prisoner, submitted that the
indictment could not b-! sustained. The prisoner was
charged with the theft generally ; the evidence and the
indictment were clearly at variance. The letter was said
to be directed to John Collett Powlett, Esq., of Turvey
House, Bedfordshire, whereas the c“unts ift the indict-
ment set forth that " it was directed to a certain person
at Turvey, in the county of Bedford", omitting the word
" House" after " Turvey." There was not a tittle of evi.
deuce that there was such a place as Turvey at all.
There was another objection—there was no proof that
the letter was abstracted from the house; he grounded the
objection on an anal.'gy of stealing ft om the person. In
the case of Rex v. Thompson, a point was reserved for the
opinion of the Judges, and they decided that to constitute
the charge of stealing from the person, there must he a
complete removal from the person. There was another
ground for objection—there was ao proof that the letter
was put into the box appropriated for the reception of
letters.

Mr. Powlett was recalled, and proved there was no other
mansion in his neighb”uthood called Turvey House.
The JUDGES over-ruled all the objections, and called
upon the prisoner for his defence.

The prisoner said he would throw himself upon the
mercy of the Court.
_ _

Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE summed up, an.l the Jury,
after consulting for an hour, returned a verdict of—Guilty
of stealing the note.

NEW COURT.

TVilliam Pennefather was indicted for stealing a sea-
cbest, containing wearing apparel and other articles, value
Si. and upwards, the property of Frederick Henry Cob:
Pepper, a mariner.
The prisoner is the Poplar carrier, and on the day
named in the indictment the chest and its contents were
delivered into his custody to convey to town, hut it never
reached its destination, and the prisoner was apprehended
for having stolen it.
Mr. CHARLES PHILLIPS, for the prisoner, upon looking
at the record, discovered that the articles were laid to be
the property of Frederick Cole Pepper, the prosecutor's
name being Frederick Henry Co!e Pepper. The teamed
Counsel therefore, upon that ground, took an objection to
the indictment.
The COMMON_SERGEANT concurred with Mr. Phillips,
and allowed the objection.
Mr. Wontner here came forward, and said that there
could be no doubt but that the prisoner was a man of good
repute. Nearly the whole of the inhabitants of the neigh-
bourhood where he resided were ready to give him an un-
impeachable character.
The constable also spoke to the good character of the
prisoner, and he had no hesitation in saying that the chest
bad been stolen out of the ( art without the prisoner's
knowledge.
The COMMON-SERGEANT said that the fact stated by
Mr. Wontner nas a strong feature in the case. The
Courtiwas alsva)s relaY
to receive information from him