The Sun.
London, England, 1836-10-26 00:00:00

CITY REGISTRATION OF VOTERS.
(THIS DAY.)

(Before Mr. MYLNE.)
SAINT MICHAEL BASSISHAW.
On ' Mr. MYLNE taking his seat this morning, Mr..
Kemble, the Secretary to the Reform Association, whose
claim to'sote was postponed for his appearance this morn-
ing, to show that he was something more than a mere ser-
vant to the Club ; but it appearing that he did not pay the
rent of the premises in respect of which he claimed his
right, his name was rejected.
In consequence of this opposition, it was stated that Mr.
Rowcroft (the agent to the Conservative Association)
would be objected to on the same ground ; and upon his
name being called this morning his claim was disallowed, the
circumstances being precisely similar.
SAINT LEONARD, EASTCHEAP.
There were no claims, alterations, or objections, to this
parish.

(Before Mr. CRAIG.)
PAYMENT OF TAXES.—Mr. Rogers objected to the
name of one individual, on the ground of his not having
paid the taxes.
Mr. Trott, for the Liberals, stated that the individual
had been summoned before the Magistrate for the non•
payment of taxes, and excused ; and he contended that that
was a sufficient payment.
Mr. Rogers submitted that that was a receiving of pan-
cilia relief.
Mr. CRAIG so considered it, and expunged his name.

CENTRAL CRIMINAI:COURT.

(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.
Frederick Shouls, aged 21, a red-haired ill-looking fe
low, was.indicted for feloniously assaulting Lawrence Jo
seph Russell, a member of the corps dra»zatique, who had,
within the last few months, imported himself from Cork,
and taking from him a hat, his property.
Mr. Russell stated that he was a dramatic performer,
havinc, no defined place of residence, for which offence he
had been vilely incarcerated for nineteen days. Having ob-
tained his release, he determined to regale his inward man,
in order to make amends for the ill treatment his outward
one had received. On returning home on the 18th of Oc-
tober, between one and two o'clock, after having devoured
roast beef to repletion, and drunk sundry pints of strong
ale, he was knocked down in Jew's-row, Chelsea, and his
hat taken from him by a person unknown. Though he
was elevated, he was sober enough to know how to go home.
On finding that he had lost his hat, he immediately gave
the alarm, and two officers came up. The night was so
dark that he could not discover who the person was that
knocked him down. Saw his hat afterwards in the station
Mouse ; it was worth about one shilling. The hat pro-
i duce& was his.
Police Constable B 17—I saw the prisoner on the night
in question, going up White Lion-street, Chelsea, with a
hat in his hand. He bad a cap on his head. Discovered
the prosecutor lying in White Lion-street. On assisting
him up he complained of having been robbed of his hat.
Witness sent a constable in pursuit of the prisoner, bit he
could not overtake him. Witness then went to his
lodgings with another constable, and after some de-
-lay - they were admitted. On seeing the prisoner,
witness asked him what he had done with the hat he
taken from a person in Royal Hospital-row. He denied
that he had taken it. Witness said that was useless, as
he had seen him go up White Lion-street with the hat in
his hand. The other constable searched the house and
found the hat under the bed. On taking the prisoner to
the station•hotise, he said he had picked up the hat. The
prosecutor was the worse for liquor, but the prisoner was
perfectly sober. The former had been imprisoned 19 days
for having no settled residence.
George Foster, another police-constable, corroborated
the evidence of last witness. The prisoner in his defence
said that he accidentally stumbled against the prosecutor
who was so drunk.that he could not stand ; as to the hat
I that had been found in his room, he had picked that up.
The Jury found the prisoner Guilty of stealing the hat,
but without violence.
The policeman stated that the prisoner was a very bad
character, and bad only been 12 days out of' prison.
Wm. Waller, 22, was indicted for burglariously entering
the dwelling-house of Conyers Metcalf, and stealing there-
from four Si. notes, the property of Daniel Stanhouse. From
the statement of Metcalf it appeared that on the night of
the 10th of the present month himself, his wife, and a lodger
named Stanhouse, left the residence of witness in Backchurch-
lane, Whitechapel, to go to a public house ; they locked the
house up, and everything was safe when they left ; on return-
ing home they discovered that Stanhouse's box had been forced
open, and the four notes stolen out. The prisoner was at
the public house when witness, his wife, and Stanhouse
entered, immediately after which he left and again returned.
Upon witness discovering the robbery, suspecting the pri-
soner who bad been in the habit of occasionally calling at
his house, he had him taken into custody, but he denied
having anything to do with the robbery.
Stanhouse stated that he lodged in the house of Metcalf,
and about a month ago he received 701. for wages at
Somerset House, which he deposited in his trunk. He af-
terwards took 351. out.
The policeman who took the prisoner into custody stated
that on searching him he discovered only ls. and a knife.
Qn taking him to Metcalf, the prisoner said something to
him, upon which Metcalf said he had made it all right, and
if the witness would say nothing about it he would give him
a sovereign. Witness said he would do no such thing fcr a
100 sovereigns.
The landlord of the Angel and Crown, Wenclose-square,
stated, that on the evening of the robbery the prisoner came
to him, and requested him to take care of 141. which he
'gave him. Witness took the number of the notes and
marked the sovereigns, which he now produced.
The prisoner said nothing in his defence.
Mr. Justice VAUGHAN, in summing up, said that, al-
though the prisoner was capitally indicted, yet as no proof
had been given of the house being broken into in the night,
the capital charge must fall to the ground.
The Jury found the prisoner Guilty of stealing to the
amount of 51. in a dwelling-house.