The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-28 00:00:00

'ALS.

if it was not given up he would set fire to the bed and
burn them both in it. The prosecutor still persisted in
declaring that he had no more money, and at length the
gang of ruffians left the house, taking with them the
booty they had obtained. In consequence of the effectual
manner in which they had disguised themselves, neither
the prosecutor nor his wifo was able to speak to the
identity of any of the persons concerned is the outrage,
and the only evidence they could give upon the point was
that the prisoner resembled in gait and general appear-
ance one of the men, but the guilt of the prisoner
was clearly established by the evidence of one
of the gang, a man named Prior, who was
admitted a witness for the Crown; and the cor-
roborative testimony that was adduced in support
of it. From the statement of the accomplice it
appeared that ho had been living in the house of the
prisoner, a lodging-house at Gravesend, for a short time
before the burglary, and on the Wednesdy before it
was committed, the prisoner proposed to him to join in it,
and introduced him to four persons who were strangers
to him, but who, he said, were first-rate housebreakers,
and they arranged to commit the robbery on the Ist of
June. They then, he said, proceeded separately to the
neighbourhood of the prosecutor's farm, for the purpose
of " sounding," and ascertaining what his arrangements
wore, and having discovered that none of the labourers
slept upon the tarm, they resolved upon carrying out
their project as they had arranged. They, accordingly,
six in number, went to the prosecutor's farm, and having
obtained a ladder, it was placed against the bed-room
window, and some of the gang went up the ladder, for
the purpose of forcing their way into the bed-room,
while the accomplice Prior was set to watch another
part of the house, to see that no one left the premises
in that direction, and ho was instructed to knock out
the brains of any one who attempted to do so. The
prisoner Clark, it appeared. was at first stationed at the
toot of the ladder, to give an alarm if any one ap-
proached, but after his companions had been in the
house a short time he joined them, and assisted in
the search for plunder. Witnesses were examined in
corroboration of the accomplice's story, who proved that
the prisoner was in his company on the day the robbery
wa- committed, and that he had also been seen near the
fns-n.-tfie4;-aou-wuctuer Lad Inert-servants slept on the
premises; and in addition to these facts, it appeared that
after he was in gaol he made a statement to one of his
fellow-prisoners which was tantamount to an admission
of his share in the transaction, and that he also said
that Prior would have had his share of the booty if he
had waited a few days.
Mr. CUARNOCK addressed the jury on the part of the
prisoner, and endeavoured with considerable ingenuity to
show that there was no reality, no actual corroboration
of the accomplice's testimony, and upon that ground he
called upon them to acquit the prisoner.
Mr. Sergeant GAZELEE summed up ; and the jury,
after a very short deliberation, returned a verdict of
Guilty.
The Learned SERGEANr, after making some appro•
priate remarks upon the very aggravated and alarming
character of the offence of which the prisoner had been
convicted, ordered judgment of death to be recorded,
with an intimation that the prisoner would be, transported
for life.

July 26.
The Chief Baron returned to the circuit this morning,
and took his seat in the Nisi Prius Court. Mr. Baron
Alderson proceeded to town on Wednesday evening to
attend at Chambers, and Mr. Sergeant Wallinger pre-
sided in the Crown Court. In the course of the day a
third Court was formed before Mr. Sergeant Gaselee.
(Before the CHIEF BARON and a Common Jury.)
STORRER U. HARMAN.

This was an action upon a bill of exchange for 1721.,
the defendant being sued as the acceptor.
A great number of special pleas were put upon the re-
e,,rd, but the material defence relied upon was that the
bill had been obtained by fraud, and that the plaintiff
was aware of the fact, and that he had given no consi-
deration for the bill.

Mr. M. Chambers and Mr. Hur!stone were for the
defendant; Sergeant Gaselee and Mr. Lush appeared for
the plaintiff.
The case on the part of the plaintiff consisted in
merely the production of the bill, and proof that the ac-
ceptance was the handwriting of the defendant.
Mr. CHAMBERS, on the part of the defendant, said
that the defence he was instructed to offer was, that he
had been swindled out of this bill, under a pretence that
it should be discounted for him ; but instead of that
being done, he bad, in point of fact, never received a
single farthing, and when the jury had heard the evidence
he should adduce, he believed they would not entertain
any doubt that the plaintiff, who now sued as the holder
of the bill, was perfectly cognizant of the fraud that had
been practised, and on that ground he was not entitled to
recover.

Mr. Bryant deposed that he was the drawer of th4bill
in question. In the beginning of the present year, the
defendant, with whom he was acquainted, wanted to
raise some money upon a reversionary interest,:and witness
endeavored to get some person to advance him the
amount he required, but failing to do so, he suggested
that a bill of exchange should be drawn by him, and ac-
cepted by the defendant, and he told him that ho believed
he should be able to get the bill discounted, through the
agency of a person named Smith. Accordingly, on the
26th February, he accompanied the defendant to a public-
house in Beak-street, where they saw a brougham and
servant standing at the door, belonging to Smith, and
they afterwards saw that person in the smoking-room of
the house. It was then arranged that this bill should be
drawn, but as Smith had not got money enough to buy a
stamp, he went out to borrow some. Smith came back
accompanied by a person named Cubitt, and the stamp
was at length procured, and witness drew the bill, and it
was accepted by the defendant, and then handed to Smith
who undertook to got it discounted. In the month of
November previous to this transaction be saw the plain-
tiff, who carried on the business of an upholsterer at
Southampton, for the purr ose of arranging a debt which
Smith owed him, and upon that occasion the plaintiff
seemed very vindictive against Smith, and said that be
knew he could never pay him, unless he had a "slice of
luck," or " nailed" somebody, as he generally did.
Mr. Cubitt deposed that he was an upholsterer, and
carried on business in Sherrard-street, Regent street.
He was, to his sorrow, acquainted with John Smith,
the person referred to by the last witness. He remem-
bered, on the 26th February, that ho came to his shop
and wanted to borrow ten shillings of him. Ho refused
to let him have the money then, but accompanied him to
Campbell's Stores in Beak-street, where he found the
defendant and Mr. Bryant, and after some conversation
a stamp was procured and the present bill was drawn
and accepted and handed to Smith, who took it away,
saying that he was going to get it discounted by a soli-
citor, and that he would bring the money back in two
hours. A day or two after this he saw the bill still in
Smith's possession, and he wanted witness to discount it,
offering to give half the amount of the bill for the accom-
modation. About a fortnight after that, the plaintiff and
Smith came to his shop in the brougham of the latter,
and Smith said that he had "nailed" the fellow at last,
and had got his acceptance, and he understood him to
refer to the defendant. After this had occurred, he saw
the plaintiff again at his shop, and he; remarked to
him that he was surprised a person who represented
himself to be a respectable tradesman should mix him-
self up with persons such as Gadderer and Co., who
were known to be the most notorious swindlers in Lon-
don, and with whom Smith was connected. The plain-
tiff replied that he had got the bills in his possession,
and that he would make the people pay. Witness then
told him that he must be aware that Mr. Harman had
never received a shilling of the money, and he at the
same time told him that the bill had been hawked about
the City with his indorsement upon it, and; had been of-