The Sun.
London, England, 1836-09-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAy, SEPTEMBER 9, 1836.

MIDDLESEX ADJ OURNED

SESSIONS,

The list contains sixteen cases, one for felony, one for
nuisance in keeping a gambling-house, and the remainder
are for assaults.

James Duke, Esq., Sheriff elect, took the oaths and qua-
lified as a Magistrate for the county.
_Montagu Hart (indicted with James Hancock, William
Canty, William Aston, Ben Lewis, George Campbell, and
James Hollick Davis), appeared to take his, trial, and pleaded
not guilty to a charge of keeping a gaming-house in St.
James's, Westminster. _

The prosecutors, David Jacobs and Moses Jacobs, did
not appear to prosecute ; and the COURT instantly ordered
their recognizances to be estreated,and directed the Jury to
acquit the defendants.
Mr. C. JONES moved the Court to discharge the recog-
nizances of Charles Perry, prosecutor, against Louis Louis,
Barnett Lipscomb, and Levy Lemon, gamblers and gaming-
house-keepers, indicted for a nuisance in maintaining the
n)torious house, No. 1, Leicester-square. The Learned
Counsel made his application on sworn affidavits, in which
it was stated that all means used to apprehend them had
failed, principally in consequence of the new police refusing
to serve or execute the bench warrants granted by that
Court. The affidavit particularly referred to policeman
No. 22, C division, and No. 40, C division.
The CHAIRMAN would respite the recognizances of the
prosecutor, but would not discharge them. °The Court then
directed the affidavit to be laid before Colonel Rowan, so
that he might be informed of the conduct of the policemen,
who appeared to have been better paid to refuse to do their
duty than they would have been if they had performed it.
Mr. JONES—Yes, the Court understands these tricks.
Mr. Sergeant_ ADAMS made some further strong remarks
on the conduct of the policemen.
The Court adjourned at half-past five o'clock to this day.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.

Mr. James Woolley applied to the LORD MAYOR in con-
sequence of a severe loss arising from a Stock Exchange
transaction, and an immediate summons was in consequence
served by Daniel Forrester, the officer, upon a very respec-
table shopkeeper bf London, to state what he knew of the
transaction.

and whilst he was at work there, a • man called to in-
quire after a job, and saw witness at work ; be was re-
fused, and he left the place. After leaving Mr. Chandler
he procured work at Mr. Stephenson's, but the men,
who were Unionists, having been informed by the man
who saw him at Mr. Chandler's that he had worked
there after the " strike," he (witness) was subjected
to every species of annoyance, and they were conti-
nually reproaching him with being a " document man,"
and nothing that he could say could convince them
to the contrary ; and be was told that it was no matter
whether he had signed a document or not, he ought
not to have worked for Mr. Chandler after he knew that
his men had struck for wages. About three weeks ago
he had occasion to go into the country, and on his re-
turn in a few days, he found that his planes, the handles of
his saws, and the whole of his principal tools, were deeply
impressed with the words " document man," and he was
obliged to leave the shop. He made inquiries as to who
had been guilty of the transaction, and a lad employed on
the premises informed him that he had seen the defendant
do it, and he accompanied him to this office, and swore to
the fact, when a summons was granted. Witness added
that he procured another place of work at Mr. Brass's, in
Redcross-street ; but the men, on seeing " document man "
stamped on his tools, rendered him miserable, and he was
forced to leave the shop, ever since which he had been out
of work.
Mr. BENNETT—Is it not possible- to erase the words
from ypur tools ? Witness replied that they were so deeply
stamped that it would render them useless. The impres-
sion would be left, and it would be easily discovered that
they had been stamped by unionists—it was impossible
for him to get employment in any shop with the same im-
plements.
Mr. LAING—What do they mean by "document man ?"
The Clerk explained that when the strike for wages took
place at Messrs. Cubitt's, in Gray's Inn-road, they deter-
mined on not employing any man unless he signed a docu-
ment not to join the Union, from which the term " docu-
ment man" originated.
Mr. Gibbon, a professional adviser for the defendant,
contended that as there was no direct evidence against his
client, he ought to be discharged.
Mr. BENNETT said—l regret that there is not sufficient
evidence to prove a case, or the party should be severely
punished. I must, under the circumstances, discharge the
defendant ; but I must say that it is a most infamous pro-
ceeding.
The complainant,then left the office, and at the outside he
was met by a gang of working men belonging to the Union,
who hooted after and called him names of an opprobrious
nature, and' the poor fellow hastened off evidently in fear of
having violence offered to him.
" WHO ARE YOU?"—Marl Patterson, alow prostitute,
was brought up by a police constable of the E division,
charged with being drunk and creating a disturbance on
Wednesday night last at a late hour.
The constable stated " Who are you ?" was a cant ques-
tion now in vogue amongst the lowest blackguards in Lon-
don, and on Wednesday night last, while he was on duty in
Holborn, the prisoner was drunk and creating a disturbance,
assailing every one with " Who are you ?" Witness or-
dered her away, on which she said " Who are you ?" and
refusing to go he told her " who he was," and took her to
the station-house.
Mr. BENNETT (to the prisoner)—" Who are you ?"
What are you ? Prisoner—l get my living at the needle.
Mr. BENNETT (to the constable)—Do you know her?
Constable—Oh, yes, your Worship, very well.
Mr. BENNETT—Then what is she? Constable—The
most drunken prostitute that we have to deal with.
Mr. BENNETT—She is fined 55., or seven days imprison-
ment.

Mr. Woolley on Wednesday sold to Mr. C. Chapman,
the stock-broker, 1,000 Portuguese 5 per Cent. Bonds, and
was paid for them by a check upon Ladbroke's for 6851.
The check was returned for want of assets. Mr. Chapman
had stated that he wanted the bonds for his frietid, who was
going out of town immediately—a representation which was
found to be untrue. Mr. Woolley afterwards ascertained
that immediately after Mr. Chapman secured the bonds, he
pawned them for 6001. to a member of the Stock Exchange,
from whom he insisted on receiving bank-notes, which
bank-notes, there was every reason to suppose, were placed
in the possession of the shopkeeper. In fact, the latter had
admitted that such was the case.

The Shopkeeper—The facts were briefly these :—This
Mr. Chapman is a collector of assessed taxes, and I am
his security. I had not seen him for months, and when I
last saw him he told me that his pocket had been picked.
I received a letter from him, containing Bank notes, but
not at all to the amount mentioned by Mr. Woolley.
The LORD MAYOR—Have you got that letter ? The
Shopkeeper—No ; but I recollect the contents, which
stated that he had been speculating in foreign securities,
and brought himself into difficulties, and that he hoped
he (the shopkeeper) would not be much a loser. The let-
ter concluded in some very deploring words about his wife
and children, and I was afraid that he might make away
with himself. I paid the amount (4001.) into the hands of
Mr. Till, who is at the head of the Land-tax Office, but
I do not know what my liabilities may be.
Mr. Woolley—That 4001. I told you not to part with,
as it was my property.

The Shopieep-er-LHow did I know that it was your
money he sent to me ? Mr. Woolley—You had not paid
it to Mr. Till before you saw me, and we spoke upon the

affair.

The Shopkeeper—l received a portion of the Govern-
ment money, with which he had been gambling, from him,
and I paid it to the Crown.
The LORD MAYOR—Mr. Chapman makes away with
property not his own, and then robs Mr. Woolley to re-
place. The conduct you have pursued in this case, Sir,
has not been at all prudent.
Mr. Woolley—Were you not in possession of the money
this morning, when I spoke to you about it ? The shop-
keeper hesitated in his answer to this question, but the
LORD MAYOR having asked him whether he was disposed
to compromise his character by an evasion of this kind,
and having repeated Mr. Woolley's question, he answered
in the affirmative, to the best of his knowledge. The case
was, he added, distressing to all parties. It was evident
that Mr. Chapman had been swindling Mr. Woolley. Ha
was himself security_for Mr. Chapman, who had sent him
a certain portion of his liabilities, and he was not to know
that the money was Mr. Woolley's.
Mr. Woolley—l told you not to part with it.
The LORD MAYOR—Depend upon it, Sir, that Mr.
Woolley has a strong case for action against you, and will
recover the money.
The Shopkeeper—How am Ito know when a gentleman
has been robbed that the bank-notes I have received are
the identical notes which have been taken from him ?
The LORD MAYOR—It will be shewn to you that these
are the identical notes, for Mr. Till will pay them into the
Bank this day, where they are stopped.
The LORD MAYOR then told Mr. Woolley that he
should grant a warrant for the apprehension of Mr. Chap-
man, but Mr. Woolley said he should wait the result of
the next day's inquiry.

She was then committed to the House of Correction.
Ann Kearney was charged by Mr. Tourkay, confec-
tioner, of William-street, Regent's Park, with having as-
saulted him whilst passing through the street, without any
provocation.
Mr. LAING asked the prisoner how she procured her
living ? Prisoner—l am a married woman.
Mr. LAING—What is your husband? Prisoner—He is
a performer.
Mr. LAING—What sort of a performer ? Prisoner—ln
legerdemain. He goes to the fairs and the races for his
living.
Mr. LAING—You mean that he is a conjuror, don't
you ? Prisoner—Yes, a conjuror.
Mr. LAING—No doubt ; he can conjure the property
out of people's pockets ; that is, he is no more than a com-
mon vagrant or vagabond.
Mr. FLOWER (a Magistrate)--I suppose he is a thimble-
.

rig man.
Duke, the officer, knew him to be a regular " thimble-
rigger" at the races ; and he asked where he was at
present ?
She was fined 55., or to be committed to prison, which she
could not conjure up, and she was sent to perform at the
House of Correction.