The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-12 00:00:00

moment that it was of particular importance, as he had
known the vestry clerk's door left unlocked many times
lcalsatrokffie,ceorneknoorwtnhetovihsaitviengbeaegneonnothoef
to his office on the basement.
is stated to have left by the lower lodge
had no money to pay the poor, who had assembled in
s
of this robbery the board of directors
gt haeltn previously.
oc
premiseslooernaconsequence
and.
hundreds, and they had to remain till the necessary
amount was procured from the banker's by Mr. T. IL
Smith, a member of the board, from his own account.
A special meeting of the board of directors tock place
on Saturday afternoon, at three o'clock, when an in•
vestigation, lasting several hours, was entered into. 'l2'„e
meeting was held with closed doors, but, from what has
transpired, suspicion points very strongly to some of the
officers of the establishment, although everything was
very cleverly done to make it appear to have been the
act of a stranger and regular housebreaker. In order
to strengthen this view of the case, four or five skeleton
keys were thrown into the garden fronting the-house,
No. 15, Cook's-row, Old St. Pancras-road, about three
doors from the front of the vestry rooms, where they
were picked up on Saturday morning, and handed over
to Dickerby, the detective constable, by Mrs. Tiffin,
the niece of one of the beadles, who keeps the house,
and who found them there. These keys, on being tried
by the officers, were found to open almost every door in
the place.
Up to a late hour on Saturday evening nothing had
transpired to lead to the discovery of the delinquent.

RI OA
TUu
RSD A y CH._A Very
extraordinary
A degreeP RAPE
of
excitement has been occasioned in this usually quiet
village, during the past week, owing to the apprehension
of a gentleman practising as a solicitor in this place, on
a charge of rape, preferred against him by a young-lady
holding the situation of companion to his wife.
The complainant's name is Maria O'Grady. She is
the daughter of Lieutenant O'Grady, who was shot in a
duel, about twelve years since, by Captain Smith, brother
of the Princess of Capua. After Lieutenant O'Grady's
decease, his widow married Mr. Waghorn, a brick and
tile manufacturer, of Ewell, in Surrey. This alliance
proved very unhappy, and about two years since a
separation took place between the parties. Mrs.
Waghorn, some time afterwards, being greatly re-
duced, applied to the guardians of the Epsom Union
for relief, and her case exciting, some interest,
Mr. Oades, of Banstead, charitably received the
complainant (her daughter) into his family, as
a nursery governess. Miss O'Grady remained in Mr.
Oades' family only a very short period,and
when that
gentleman desired to remove her, he applied to Mr.
Thomas Henry Bartlett, a solicitor, practising at Ep-
som, who had been employed professionally by Mrs.
Waghorn in some proceedings she had taken against
her husband, to know where her mother resided, in order
that Miss O'Grady might be sent to her. Mr. Bartlett,
a married man without any family, did not furnish Mr.
Oades with the desired information, but at once under-
took to receive the young lady in his own house. Here
Miss O'Grady appears to have remained for some time,
in the capacity of companion to Mrs. Bartlett. In No-
vember last, during the absence of Mrs. Bartlett from
home, the offence preferred is alleged to have taken
place. Miss O'Grady states, in her deposition taker.
fore IBaron de Tessier, Mr. Northey, and Mr. Gosse,
magistrates acting for the district, that on the night of
the Gth of November, while sleeping alone, she was
alarmed by discovering Mr. Bartlett in bed with her,
and that in spite of her expostulations and entreaties he
succeeded in accomplishing her ruin. She adds that the
next morning she complained of Mr. Bartlett's con-
duct to a servant, the only female in the house. With-
in one week of this date, Miss O'Grady was sent to
Liverpool by Mr. Bartlett, and in consequence of the
parties to whom she was sent not being discovered, she
communicated with her mother, and her return to town
was the result. The conduct of Mr. Bartlett then be-
came the subject of inquiry, and on Monday last, a
formal complaint having been made to the magistrates,
after due consideration a warrant was issued for his
apprehension.
The warrant was placed in the hands of Mr. Inspec-
tor Kennedy, the chief officer of the district, who ap-
prehended Mr. Bartlett at the railway station, on his re-
turn from town the same evening. Mr. Bartlett remained
in custody on Monday night ; and on the following day
appeared before the magistrate, when, after hearing the
evidence of the complainant, the bench decided on hold-
ing the defendant to bail, himself in 3001., and two sure-
ties in 150/. each _

It is necessary here to state, that the female servant
to whom Miss O'Grady first complained was not present
at this examination, and it appears that she was sent
away from Mr. Bartlett's service simultaneously with
Miss O'Grady's departure for Liverpool. The efforts of
the officers to discover her destination have, as yet, been
wholly unsuccessful.
Mr. Bartlett will be brought up for examination on
Tuesday next.— Weekly Dispatch.

THE! RECRIVT MAIL ROBBERIES ON
THE GREAT WESTERN RAIL WAY.

On Thursday last the Right Worshipful" the Mayor,
assisted by the following Magistrates, Samuel Kingdon,
Esq., Dr. Pennell, G. C. Holroyd, Esq , W. Kennaway,
Esq., H. Hooper, Esq., and E. Woolmer, Esq., held an
examination at the city gaol, in the case of Poole and
Nightingale, charged with robbing the mail train on the
Great W estern Railway.
Mr. Mountford and Mr. George Turner attended on
the part of the Post office authorities; and Mr. Willes-
ford for the prisoners.
The first witness examined was Mr. S. M. Cox, at-
torney, residing in Lower Northenhay-street, in this
city. He stated that on the evening of the Ist of Ja-
nuary he came up from Dawlish to Exeter by the mail-
train. He had taken his seat in a first-class carriage,
which was divided into two compartments. In the divi-
sion with witness was another gentleman, but there
' was no one in the other division. On the arrival of
the train at Starcross the outer door of the carriage next
the platform was opened. Two men came in, passed
through the division in which witness was, and went
into the second compartment. They closed the division
door after them, and pulled down the blind. The se-
cond of the two wore a Jim Crow hat, moustaches, and
a dark cloak. No other person then got into that com-
partment. The train proceeded to Exeter. On its ar-
rival at the Exeter station, in order to get out, witness
had to pass through the division in which the two men
were. As he opened the division•door for this purpose,
one of the two men opened the side carriage door and
went out before witness on the platform, so that he did
not see his face sufficiently to recognise him again. The
other man was ',lying back in the seat, which enabled
witness to see his face, for the man looked steadfastly ,
at him. This was the one with the moustaches. Wit-
ness also looked intently at him, with the thought that
he recognised his face He thought nothing more of it
at the time; but afterwards, when he saw the prisoner
Poole taken to the Guildhall, he identified him as the
man whom he had seen in the carriage with the Jim
Crow hat and the moustaches. Witness had previously
seen Poole about his own neighbourhood. He also re-
collected having seen him once in the market. Thought
it was the Thursday before Christmay-day, but was not
clear about it. Had no doubt that Poole was the man
whom he saw in the railway carriage.
Elizabeth Towel!, daughter of a plasterer residing in
Exe Island, in this city, stated that she was now living
in the service of Mrs. Hawkins, in Castle-terrrace, St.
David's. She had been lately servant to the prisoner
Poole, who then resided at No. 1, St. Petrock's-terrace,
St. David's. Left his service on Wednesday, the 31st
January, after having lived in it four months. Witness
had seen the prisoner Nightingale at her master's house
two or three times. The last time she saw him there
was on the Sunday night before Poole was apprehended.
He rang at the door, and she answered the bell, when
he asked for her master. She inquired his muse, and he
replied that his name was Mr. Smith. She :old Poole
of it, who then went to the door. She left then talking
together, and did not see Nightingale enter the house.
She remembered being at the Guildhall on the morning
after the night on which her master was apprehended.
She first saw him in the cell at the back of the Guild-
hall. Poole asked her what she was wanted for. She
replied that she was wanted to know if she could iden-
tify the man that was with him. Poole then said, "You
don't know anything?" She said, "No, sir." Nothing
more passed between them that day. In a conversation
between witness and Mrs. Poole, respecting her ability
to identify Nightingale, the latter told her that it was
impossible for her to identify Nightingale, as sae had
only seen him by candle-light. Mrs. Poole had alto told
her that if she said anything against her master she
would never prosper.
These were all the additional witnesses, and their de-
positions having been taken, the inquiry doted.—
. Exeter and Plymouth Gazette.