The Sun.
London, England, 1849-09-20 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Sept. 19.
The cases heard to-day before Mr. Commissioner
Fonblanque did not warrant a detailed report. Charles
Larndin, of Newbury, an upholsterer, had his certifi-
cate suspended three months for neglecting to keep
proper books
; and King arid King, builders, of
Islington, had their certificates suspended six months,
on the ground of reckless trading. In both instances,
however, protection was granted.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Sept. 19.
The cases disposed of in this court to-day were of
little public interest.
In the case of Henry Farrell , a comedian, and late
manager of the Wakefield Theatre, an opposition was
raised by Mr. Dowse:on the .ground of a vexatious
defence to an action. The point was not established,
and the insolvent was discharged.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Baron PLATT and Mr. Justice WILLIAMS.)
Philip Freeman surrendered and pleaded guilty to
an indictment charging him with misdemeanour.
Mr. CLARKSON, who, with Mr. Bodkin, was in-
structed for the prosecution, said that this indictment
was preferred by the Commissioners of Lunacy against
the defendant, for having unlawfully maintained a
house for the reception of lunatic persons without
having a licence for that purpose. The circumstances
were shortly these :—ln consequence of information
received by the Commissioners, they proceeded to the
house of the defendant at Sutton, near Hounslow,
where they found two persons of unsound mind, and,
having ascertained that the defendant had no licence,
and that the persons in question had been admitted
without the certificate of any medical man, they had
felt it their duty to institute the present prosecution
The Commissioners had no desire to aggravate the
offence of the defendant, but they at the same time
felt that it was one which must be put down by the
arm of the law, and they considered it essential that
it should be publicly known that in every case where
the Act of Parliament was violated the parties would
be brought before a Criminal Court.
The defendant was ordered to enter into his own
recognizance to appear and receive the judgment of
the Court on tho following day.

Alfred Clark, 23, was indicted for feloniously
cutting and wounding Thomas Everett, with intent
to maim and disable him. •
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Robinson prosecuted, and
Mr. Paine defended the prisoner.
The prosecutor deposed that he was a warder at
Pentonville Prison, and thht the prisoner was ad•
mitted to that establishment on the 7th of August.
On the morning of the 16th he was engaged in un-
locking the cells of the prisoners confined in one of
the galleries, and, after he had opened that in which
the prisoner was placed, he was proceeding to the
next one when he received a violent blow on the
back of his head, and on his reeling round from the
effects of the blow, he saw the prisoner with the leg
of a stool in his hand, and before he could recover
himself the prisoner struck him a tremendous blow
on the mouth, which felled him to the ground, and
rendered him insensible, and when he came to him-
self he found he was in the hands of the doctor. The
effect of the prisoner's violence was to dash out four
of his front teeth, and he was obliged to keep his bed
for several days, and was still under medical treat-
ment. A day or two before the assault was com-
mitted upon him he had occssion to complain of the
prisoner being dirty in his cell, and he had threatened
to report him and have him punished.
By Mr. PAYNE—The prisoner, he believed, was
brought from the Penitentiary at Millb ink upon the
breaking out of the cholera in that establishment. Ile
did not know how long he had been at the Peniten-
tiary, or whether he came from that prison with a
good character. The prisoners at the Model Prison
were locked up at eight o'clock at night, and remained
alone until six the following morning, when the cells
were unlocked. They were not allowed to converse
or to hold any communication with each other or any
other persons. They were very particular in their
regulations regarding the cells, and the prisoners were
compelled to fold up their beds in the form of a
parallelogram, and, if they failed to do so, they were
liable to be reported and punished.
Two other wardens confirmed the evidence of the
prosecutor, and in answer to a question put by Mr.
Payne, it was stated that at the time the prisoner at-
tacked him, he appeared in a very excited state.
Mr. Bradley, the surgeon of the prison, described
the nature of the injuries received by the prosecutor.
It appeared that the four upper front teeth were com-
pletely smashed, the four under ones loosened, and the
lower lip was cut completely through. The prosecu-
tor, it appeared, was still under his care, and had been
unable to resume his duty.
.Mr.YArain inquired if it was not frequently the effect
of solitary confinement and prevention ffom communi-
cation with others to irritate and excite the mind ?
The witness replied that in some cases, un-
doubtedly, solitary confinement would produce
irritation of the nervous system, but he had no
reason to suppose that it was the case with regard to
the prisoner.
Mr. PAYNE asked whether the nervous irritation
to which he had alluded did not in some instances
amount to actual insanity ? The witness replied that
it did, hut they were exceptional cases.
By Mr. BODKIN—The prisoner had only been in
Pentonville prison for 14 days, and he did not exhibit
the slightest appearance of insanity. The general
health of the prisoners was extremely good.
Mr. PAYNE, in his address to the jury for the pri-
soner, urged that the discipline of the prison had
affected his mind, and that, in a moment of excite-
ment, he committed the act in question; and although
he said he could not attempt to deny that an assault
had been committed by the prisoner, yet he submitted
that, under the circumstances, he ought not to be
convicted of the felonious intention imputed• to him
by this indictment.
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS having summed up,
The jury, after a short deliberation, found the
prisoner guilty of a common assault.
Sentence was deferred.
Isaac Clark Chater, 42, was indicted for a felonious
assault upon Maria Perry.
Mr. Ballantine conducted the prosecution on be-
half of the authorities of the parish of St. Luke,
Chelsea.
The offence imputed to the prisoner by this in-
dictment appeared to have been committed under
very aggravated circumstances. The . prosecutrix,
whose husband had died just before of erysipelas in
the head, was suffering from the same malady, and
in a state of insanity, and the prisoner was sent by
the parish authorities to assist a nurse in taking
care of her, and it appeared that while the nurse was
taking some rest in an adjoining room the prisoner
committed the act imputed to him, the unfortunate
woman being at the time from her condition of mind
quite unconscious of the outrage having been com-
mitted upon her.
Mr. Baron PLATT summed up, and
The jury,without any hesitation, found the prisoner
Guilty.
The Learned JUDGE sentenced the prisoner to be
transported for life.
Sarah Jackson, aged 40, described as a widow,
was placed at the bar. She was charged upon
two indictments with attempting to murder her
children, by cutting the throat of one and stabbing
the other.
Mr. PAYNE, who appeared for the prosecution, said
that he should not have to occupy the attention of the
jury with any evidence in support of the charges
against the prisoner, because he believed there was no
doubt that she was at that moment in a state of in-
sanity, and incompetent to understand what was
going on or to plead to the indictments that had been
preferred.
Mr. M'Murdo, the surgeon of Newgate, was then
examined, and he fully confirmed the statement of
the Learned Counsel with regard to the condition of
the prisoner's mind.
Mr. Cope, the governor of Newgate, gave similar
evidence, and the jury at once gave their verdict,
" That the prisoner was of unsound mind and incom-
petent to plead to the indictment against her."
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS then gave directions that
the prisoner should be detained during her Majesty's
pleasure.
John Bloomer Weeks, a dissipated-looking young
man, was indicted for feloniously attempting to dis-
charge a loaded pistol at Frederick Shipton, with
intent to murder him.
In other counts of the indictment the prisoner's
intent was laid to be to do the prosecutor grievous
bodily harm, and to resist his lawful apprehension.
Mr. Ryland and Mr. Laurie prosecuted. The
prisoner had no counsel.
The prosecutor, a constable of the City police-
force, deposed that on the afternoon of the 4'h of
September he was on duty in Basinghall-street,
when the prisoner was pointed out to him as the man
against whom a warrant had been issued for sending
a threatening letter to his brother-in-law, and he
went towards the prisoner to apprehend him.
When he was about a yard and a half from him the
prisoner pulled a pistol out of his jacket-pocket and
presented it at him, exclaiming at the same time,
" Stand off for your life. One step and I'll fire."
Witness rushed at him, and the prisoner pulled the
trigger; but the pistol missed fire. He then seized
him and threw him on the ground, and when he was
secured he said it was a good thing for him (prose-
cutor) that the pistol did not go off, or he would
have " had it." As he was conveying the prisoner
to the police-station he said he would have his re-
venge, and on his being searched a bullet-mould,
some gunpowder, and two pieces of iron, were found
in his jacket-pocket. The prisoner was quite sober
at the time. The pistol was afterwards taken to a
gunsmith, by whom the charge was drawn, and the
pistol was found to contain gunpowder and a bullet.
He subsequently conveyed the prisoner to New-
gate, and as they were going along, he
said he wished he had shot him, for then
he should be hanged, and he would rather be
hanged than be transported for fifteen years,
which sentence he knew he should have. Witness
asked him what object he could have in shooting him
as he had done him no injury, and the prisoner replied
that if he had shot him he should be at liberty, and
might have obtained his revenge.
The prisoner put some questions to the constable
in cross-examination, but did not elicit any fact that
was favourable to him.

Frederick Hammond, a person in the service of Mr.
Lovell, a clothier in Basinghall-street, and who it ap-
peared was the prisoner's brother-in-law, deposed that
he pointed out the prisoner to the policeman upon the
day in question, and directed him to take him into
custody. He then confirmed the statement of the
officer with regard to what occurred when he endea-
voured to take him into custody ; and he also stated,
that as the prisoner was going to the station-house he
heard him say that he was determined to revenge
himself upon Mr. Lovell, and that he would do for
him.

By the prisoner—Was quite sure he saw a flash of
fire from the pistol when the trigger was pulled. He
was aware that a warrant had been issued for the
apprehension of the prisoner for sending threatening
letters to his brother-in-law.

Several other witnesses were examined, all of whom
corroborated the above testimony.
Roe, the City officer, produced the warrant which
had been issued against the prisoner at the instance of
his brother-in-law, Mr. Lovell, for threatening to do
him some personal injury.
The prisoner, when called upon for his defence,
made a long rambling statement, in the course of
which he asserted that, although he had certainly pre-
sented the pistol at the officer, yet he positively denied
having pulled the trigger.
Mr. Baron PLATT summed up, and the jury, after
a short deliberation, found the prisoner Guilty upon
the third count, which alleged his intent to be to re-
sist his lawful apprehension.
Baron PLATT asked the jury whether he was to
understand that it was their opinion' that the prisoner
did not mean to hurt the policeman, when he at-
tempted to discharge a pistol at him loaded with
gunpowder and a bullet at a distance of a yard and
a-half ?

One of the jury said they certainly were of opinion
that the prisoner intendel to do the officer some bodily
harm.

Mr. Baron PLATT remarked -that it made no dif-
ference to the Court what v erdict was pronounced,
but he was anxious that the j ary should give such a
one as would be satisfactory r nd reasonable to them-
selves upon after consideration 1. if they were satisfied
that the prisoner had attempt ed to discharge a loaded
pistol at the prosecutor at. the di stance of a yard and
a-half, he did not see how they could come to any
other conclusion than that his intention was, at all
events, to do him some bodily harm.
The jury then again d(dibe.rated, and in a few
minutes returned a verdict of Guilty upon that count
which alleged the prisonees intention to be to do
grievous bodily harm.
Sentence was deferred.

Robert Thompson, 33, was convicted upon satisfac-
tory evidence of a criminal s assault upon a girl eight
years of age, named Anna 'Ward, and he was sen-
tenced to be transported for ten years.
NEW COURT.
(Before the COPXMON-SERGEANT.)
Alfred Smith, aged 34, labourer, was indicted for
stealing a watch and chain, valued at 211., the property
of Maria Foster.

Mr. Ballantine prosecuted, and Mr. Robinscn de
fended.

It appeared from the statement of the Learned
Counsel and the testimony of the witnesses that the
prisoner, who is a good-looking man, wearing
spectacles and having his whiskers most tastafully
arranged, was first known in London four years ago,
when he came from Derby to seek employment as a
journeyman baker, which trade, it would appear, he
had followed. Shortly after that period he became
acquainted with the prosecutrix, who is a waitress at
some dining-rooms in Oxford-street, to whom he in-
troduced himself as Captain George Fitzroy. Campbell,
an officer in the Spanish service. He then sported a
large pair of military-looking moustaches, and his
deportment and conversation being easy and gentle-
manly, served to carry out the deception to a person
in her station, the more especially as he, having become
aware of the fact that she had saved up a considerable
sum of money, made her a proposal to become his lady,
Iwhich proposal she, being somewhat fallen into "the
sere and yellow leaf," did not fed at all disinclined to
listen to, and the result was her acceptance of him as
her lover; and matters went on most pleasingly for
some time, the noble soi-disant Captain Campbell
continually feasting on her sweet glances and the good
fare provided at the dining rooms. After having been
, acquainted for some time she lost sight
lof him for twelve months, at the end
of which he returned and accounted for his
absence by stating that he had been reaping military
laurels in Spain. He then renewed his protestations
of love, stating that his letters had not reached, owing
to the disturbed state of the continent. Absence
having made the fair one's heart grow fonder, and
I daily listening to the " hairbreadth stapes and perils
he had passed by flood and field," she eventually
agreed to " o'erlook the follies of his youth, and
broken vows," receiving him again as her " bosom's
lord:" Gratitude for this, his love's forgiveness, in-
duced the prisoner to unfold to her his determination to
forego all prospects of future glory and advancement
on the tented field, and sink the military in the civil
life. The climax of the affair was, that he told her that
a situation of a lucrative nature was vacant for him
lin the Bank of England, which he meant to accept;
under which representation he borrowed the watch
named in the indictment, for the avowed purpose of
cutting a dash amongst the influential friends who
were to procure him the appointment, and with wgom
he was going to dine, with a promise to return it the
same evening. At a later period in the evening she
saw him again, and he was without the watch and
excused himself from returning it by stating that he
had left it with his friends under the fear of being
robbed. From that day he was non est until a few
weeks ago, when she met him accidentally, and gave
him in custody of the police, when he avowed he had
pledged the watch a few days after he bad obtained
it, and gave her the duplicate.
In answer to the Court, she said that during their
acquaintance he had defrauded her out of above 801.
For the defence it was set up that the liaison exist-
ing between the parties was of an improper nature,
and that the property was pledged by her consent,
she sharing in the proceeds.
This she positively denied, and the jury at once
found the prisoner Guilty of larceny.
The COMMON-SERGEANT, in passing sentence, ob•
served that the attack upon her character by way of
defence was only an aggravation of the offence, but
she had sworn it was false, and, even if true, would
not have been any answer to the charge.
The prisoner was then sentenced to 18 months'
imprisonment.
The COMMON-SERGEANT having learnt from the
prosecutrix that she had not been induced to leave
her situation, said he hoped she would not do so, and
ordered her watch to be given up to her.
The prosecutrix, who is a smartly-attired woman,
between 30 and 40 years of age, thanked his Lord-
ship, seeming much pleased at again obtaining her
property.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

A well-known woman of the town, named Ann
Jones, living in Newcastle-street, in the Strand, was
charged before Mr. Alderman Farebrother with com-
mitting the following daring robbery.
Mr. James Watts, of Nottingham, but at present,
whilst in town, staying at Payne's Hotel, Monk well-
street, Falcon•square, said, that on the previous
evening he was returning home from Islington., when
the prisoner followed him for some distance, first
walking on one side of him and then on the other,
until near Thragmorton-street, when she suddenly
whipped his silver watch, of the value of 3/. 10s., and
which was secured by a very strong india rubber
guard, which she broke, out of his pocket, and handed
it to another woman, who ran off. lie instantly
seized the prisoner who had taken the watch, thinking
that if he ran after the one who had it he might lose
both the delinquents, and held her in custody until he
saw an officer, when she as conveyed to the station-
house and charged with the robbery.
Alderman FAREBROTHER asked if he spoke to the
prisoner ? Mr. Watts replied that he did not.
Alderman FAUEBROTULa asked if she was known ?
and being informed that she was, sentenced her to
two months' imprisonment.
BO IV- STR r ET.

Yesterday two well-dressed young women, named
Anne Saunders and Mary Anne Browne, were
placed at the bar before Mr. Henry, charged with
stealing shawls and silk mantles from the shop of
Messrs. Shoolbred and Co., drapers, in Tottenham-
court-road.

An assistant in the service of the firm stated that,
about three o'clock in the afternoon of Tuesday, ob-
serving the prisoners come out of the bonnet depart-
ment and walk down the shop on their way out, he
saw the fringe of a new shawl hanging below a por-
tion of Browne's dress, which he communicated to
one of the partners, and after they had left he followed
them to a public-house in the neighbourhood, where
they found two shawls and four silk mantles value

111: and upwards, in their possession, which they said
they had purchased at another establishment, although
the articles bore the private shop mark of the pro-
secutors.

Jane Johnson, a shop woman, proved that about a
month back the prisoners purchased a bonnet, on which
they paid a deposit, and on Tu2sday came to pay the
remainder, but never mentioned that they wished to
purchase such articles as were produced.
Mr. Jenkins, a partner, said, that when he dis-
covered a shawl concealed under Saunders' dress, the
other prisoner attempted to escape out of the window,
and resisted the officer who was called to apprehend
them.
The prisoners declined saying anything in their
defence, and they were fully committed for trial.