The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-08 00:00:00

BAIL C.OUR I', June 7.
(Sittings in Banco, before Mr. Justice IVlGarmiN.

EX PARTS DR. MOORE.
Mr. WIIITEHURST (with whom was Mr. Phip3on)
moved tor leave to file a criminal information against
the editor, publisher, and proprietor of the Lincoln-
shire, Boston and Spalding Free Press and Eastern
Counties Advertiser. He moved on behalf of the
Rev. Dr. Moore for a most atrocious and scanda-
lous libel against him in his capacity of a magistrate
while engaged in the petty sessions. He had had
reason to complain for a long time of the conduct of
the paper as against himself personally, but the pre-
sent libel was against him in his judicial capacity,
and therefore he felt himself bound to come before
this Court for redress. It appeared by the affidavits
that a person of the name of Savage had been
brought before the magistrates at petty sessions at
Spalding, of which Dr. Moore had been chairman
for twenty years, upon articles of the peace exhibited
against him by a Mr. Moore, who was a distant con-
nexion of Dr. Moore, and thereupon Savage was
bound over to keep the peace. On the 15th May
last, Savage was again brought before the same bench
to answer for an assault committed on his servant, of
the name of Rest, to which he pleaded guilty ; and
there was also an application for articles of the peace
against him for the eatening to shoot another of his
servants, named Turnbull. An attorney attended on
the part of Savage, and wished to call witnesses in
answer to the charge. The bench, after some dis-
cussion, although stating that it was irregular, per-
mitted him to call witnesses as an indulgence; and
after going into the facts, Dr. Moore, or one of the
magistrates, asked one of the witnesses whether he
thought Turnbull need be afraid of Savage, and the
answer was" Not when he was sober ;"
upon which
Dr. Moore observed, that was the very point, and
therefore Turnbull must be protected against him,
and the magistrates, therefore, bound Savage over to
keep the peace. On the 23d of May a long article
by way of comment upon the case appeared in the
paper in question : it asserted that the case was a dis-
grace to any court of justice; that the account of the
witnesses was twisted by Dr. Moore into a meaning
it was never intended to convey ; that it was the se-
cond time they had had occasion to notice this petti-
fogging spirit on the part of the chairman; they had
no hesitation in saying that a man who could so com-
mit himself was unfit to sit on any bench of' magis-
trates, and that were they lord-lieutenant of the
county he would be immediately removed from the
commission of the peace; if Dr. Moore were allowed
to twist evidence as he pleased justice was at an end;
that Dr. Moore's conduct on another occasion was
disgraceful in the extreme ; that such things might
conic to light as would render the Lord Chancellor's
interference in the reconstruction of the bench an
a'osolute necessity. Dr. Moore had made affidavits
denying that he had the slightest feeling towards the
man. The Learned Counsel could not conceive a
more violent libel, or one that more called for the
summary interference of this Court.
Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN—fake a rule to show
cause.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
BOW-S 7 BEET.
Dennis Healey, described as a labouring man, but
having the appearance of an ostler, was charged with
being accessory to the commission of a murderous as-
sault upon Wiliam M'Carthy, a recruit in the East
India Company's service.
It appeared that a man named George Hickey and
M'Carthy had been drinking with a number of Irish
labourers at a public house in St. Giles's, and, at
about six o'clock in the evening (Wednesday), turned
out to fight at the corner of Tottenham-court•road.
During the affray Hickey, the smaller man of the two,
was observed to take a knife from his waistcoat
pocket, and it was afterwards found that he had
plunged it into the abdomen of his assailant, who was
consequently removed to King's College Hospital.
Owing to the indifference of the mob, and the appa-
rent negligence of the police, Hickey was suffered to
escape to a public-house in the neighbourhood, where
he changed clothes with the prisoner Healey, and
thereby avoided detection. The police, guided by the
description of Hickey's clothes, apprehended Healey,
but found, on taking him to M'Carthy at the hospital,
that he was not the principal. He was therefore de-
tained as an accessory after the fact, having assisted
Hickey in effecting his escape.
The police stated that several of the mob present
during the fight were acquainted with all the parti-
culars, hut had refused to attend and give evidence.
One of them had been brought to the court, but on
being sworn declared that he knew nothing at all
about it.
Mr. JARDINE expressed his surprise that Hickey
had been suffered to escape. It was a discreditable
thing to happen in broad daylight in one of the most
populous parts of London. He in luired if the wound
received by M'Carthy was dangerous ?.
-A Tcehretikcisapteecfrtoo etesdcrti.hbaetd itit wasasa.
severe punctured wound in the left side of the
abdomen. rmofthtleiehEous
division
surge surgeon
The prisoner said nothing to the charge. He was
remanded for further examination.
Charles Worrell, a letter-carrier in the Charing-
cross Post-office, was charged with stealing a letter
containing money.
The prisoner was detected by a rather singular
accident. Edward Lawrence, another of the letter
carriers, had been in the habit of privately indulging
himself in the forbidden luxury of smoking, in a vault
under the building, and while secreting his pipe be.
hind the wooden roof of a cistern his knuckles came in
contact with a letter, which appeared to contain coin.
He struck a light, looked at the direction, and then,
carefully replacing the letter, went up and informed
Mr. Heath, the inspector, who accompanied him
back again to the vault, examined the letter also, and
then put the porter on watch near the spot. In a few
hours afterwards the prisoner entered the vault, and,
seeing no cne at hand, took the letter from the cistern,
and put it into his pocket. Benning, the porter, now
presented himself, and stated what he had seen. The
prisoner assured him he was mistaken, and expressed
his willingness to go before the inspector; and, at
this moment he took the letter from his pocket and
threw it into the cistern. Benning saw it, and fished
it out. It was addressed to a soldier in the Vauxhall
Hospital, and contained 2s. The prisoner was taken
before the officials in 6t. Martin's-le-Grand, and
displayed much contrition on his way thither, especi •
ally when passing Newgate. He told Mr. Sculthorpe,
president of the London district, " that he did not
secrete the letter in the first instance, but, seeing it
there, accidentally in the afternoon, conceived the
notion of stealing it."
A remand was requested by Mr. Peacock, to en-
able the soldier to attend and prove the very obvious
fact that he did not receive the letter in due course ;
upon which the prisoner will be committed for trial.

SOUTHWARK.
Mary Ann Hob den, a tall, thin, spare-looking
woman, the wife of one of the porters of Guy's Hos-
pital, was brought before Mr. Cottingham, charged
with the murder of her infant child on the preceding
afternoon.

Mary Buckle stated that she lives in King-street,
Snow's•fields, and that on the preceding afternoon
the prisoner's husband called on her in a hurry, and
informed her that his wife had destroyed their child,
and that it was then lying dead at home; and he
begged of her to go there with him. Skie accord-
' ingly accompanied him to his house, No. 14, Guy-
street, in the same neighbourhood, and on entering
the dwelling she found the prisoner sitting on a sofa
in the parlour, and by her side the child was lying
dead, with a cloth thrown over it. She appeared
to be in a very desponding state of mind, but said
nothing until witness pulled the covering off the
child, and, observing that it was quite dead, asked

IMr. Bourdillon, on being recalled, stated that
several parties who had been about to subscribe had
I called to make inquiries of him as to the chance of
the claimant, when he had given them that which
was his real opinion upon the subject, namely, that
the prospect was most favourable.
Lord BROUGHAM, the evidence having cloyed, said
that he could not help expressing his regret that this
matter had been postponed last year. The object of
that postponement had been to enable the claimant to
bring a witness from America. But it now turned
out that not only had the parties delayed sending for
six months, but that even now they were not in a
position to hold out any hope that the man would be
forthcoming. A great offence had been committed,
and a crime of no ordinary kind had been perpetrated
—first, there had been a palpable forgery in a prayer-
book, then there had been a fabricated tombstone pro-
duced, and then the authenticity of both had been at-
tempted to be supported by perjury. These were grave
offences, and the more so because one of the parties to.
them had been a person who had been seeking to obtain
honour and dignity at the hands of their Lordships.
But there was another point. One object of the pro-
, ceeding had been, by the making out the claim to the
peerage, to upset an existing title to certain estates.
Well, to effect this end there had been a sort of joint-
stock. speculating body formed, by whom subscrip-
tions had been made to enable the claimant to prose-
cute his claim. A gross fraud ha.i, therefore, been
committed on the privileges of their Lordships'
House, and they were called upon to vindicate them.
There was, however, much difficulty in the way of
proceeding in consequence of the death of the prin•
cipal party. He would, therefore, move that the
evidence be printed and taken into consideration on
a future day, with a view to see what course should
he adopted to punish the parties, and to prevent a re-
currence of such proceedings, and thereby not only
vindicate the insulted honour and dignity of their
Lordships' House, but hold out a warning to conspi-
rators and their dupes, and so arrest such individuals
in their dishonest courses.
Lord CAMPBELL fully concurred.
The motion was then put and agreed to.