The Sun.
London, England, 1825-12-12 00:00:00

,~_._
~-----

James Pinkett,age'd 18, was capitally indicted
for burglariotisly stealing- from the dtvelling-
house of John Stt.rollso!k, a silver watch, his pro-
perty. 1-4.rotri ;.,,iVen it a pears, that
cart the 20th of Nnyeintier, there was a brd-
, !ock hunt in the neighbgarhood Bethnal:
Creep, during which: several poknus wept,
up to the shrp window slick was. broken,
and the watca in, qtiestion carried off.--
Next n orning Vie prisoner Was apprehended at
the and Queen public-house,- Hare-street,
Bettina I-green, and the stolen watch found Upon
him. several witnesses give the prisoner an ex-
cellent character, and the Jury found him Gulky,
Death—but recommended hint strongly to mercy,
in which the proseciftOr joined.

NEW COURT—(Tiffs DAT.)
EN(4,3, ZZLEME stood elarged on
two indictments, wit-having received various sums of Money
from thetutomers of Mr. Thorne, Godfrey, an egg-merchant,
in Aylesbury-street, Clerkenvfell, and converting the same to
his own use. The charges being proved, he was, pronounced
Guilty. on both.—There was another indictment against him of
a similarnature, which however was abandoned.

OLD BAILEY NEW COURT, SATURDAY, DEC. 19..
)13efitre'Mr. Sergeant ARAIUN and a London Jury.
Stanley De Cowry'lreland, whose exploits in swindling have
so frequently of late been detailed in our police reports, was in-
dicted for having, on the 11th of October 4ast, stolen six dozen
knives, six dozen tbrks, s snuffer-stand, and a cork-screw, value
altogether 211. 10s., the property of Joseph Daniel.
The prisoner, on being placed at the bar, applied to have the
trial postponed, on the ground that he had not had sufficient
time to instruct counsel and summon witnesses, the Grand Jury
having found the bill against him so lately as the preceding
evening.
The-Cot:nee reftised the application, because the prisoner
'had been in custody for six weeke, and had therefore, it was
supposed, sufficient time to prepare for his defence.
It appeared from the evidence, that the prisoner had hired a
house in Olocester-place, and maintained a dashing appearance,
keeping horses, livery servants, &c. The prisoner called on .the
prosecutor and directed the articles mentioned in the indict-
ment to be sent to his house, saying that they should be paid
`for on delivery. • The goods were sent, but when they arrived
Mr. I.eland was not at homeeand they were left. The prose-
cutot4 wife frequently called for payment,- but the answer she
generally received was, " not at home." At length she ob-
tained an interview with the prisener, who denied that his name
was Ireland, and said that he knew nothing about the goods__
The prosecutor now sent another person to the prisoner to de-
mand the goods; or payment for them. The prisoner left the
room, laying that he would bring the goods or the money ; but
instead of doing so; he left the house. It did not appear that
the prosecittor had declared that the goods 3110llid not be left at
prisoner's house without payinent. The prisoner's name was
entered in his books as a debtor.
Mr. Law, on the part of the prisoner, submitted that there
was no evidence to support the charge of larceny; the transac-
don was merely one between debtor and creditor.
The Court adopted this view of the subject, and directed the
Jury to acquit the prisoner, which they accordingly did. The
prisoner was ordered to be detained to 'take his trial at the
Middlesex Sessions, on 'Monday; for conspiracy.
Isaac Israel ds Mallielm, alias Jackson, was indicted for
stealing 100/. in Bank of England notes, and other articles, the
property of Philip Lawson, a pawnbroker.
It appeared from the evidence, that the prisoner, whose per-
son was known to the prosecutor, came to his (the prosecutor's)
house on the 7th of March last, and offered to pledge some
brilliants and other articles of jewellery, for 1037. The prose-
cutor, after examining the jewels to ascertain their worth,
agreed to advance the sum required upon them. The prisoner
then suggested that the property -should be•sealed up, and the
prosecutor handed it to him .for that purpose. The prisoner; as
the proaecutor believed, sealed up the jewellery, and delivered
the parcel to him, 'which was placed in an Iron trunk, and
locked up. Some time after this transaction the prosecutor, hav-
ing heard that many pawnbrokers had been defrauded by hav-
ing sham 4ewellety- pledged with them, bethought himself of
again looking at the parcel which' he had received from the pri-
soner.. lie in consequence broke the seal of the parcel, and to
his astonishment found that it contained only a few rubies and
emeralds, worth only about 5/., and no brilliants. Ire was then
convinced that the prisoner must have 'substituted one parcel
for the other.
Air. Cuatwoon, on behalf of the prisoner, contended that
no case of felony had been established against the prisoner.
TheArkleuce iteerely went to prove that he had cominitted-
fraud.
The COURT reserved the question for the opinion of the 12
Judges, and left the Jury to decide upon facts.
The Jury tannecliately returned a verdict of Gui?.f.e.