The Sun.
London, England, 1838-10-23 00:00:00

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.
(Bdofe the RECORDER.)

Charloile Ponieroy way
quantity of jewellery, the property. of a widow named
Cook, and Ann Bartlett was indicted with feloniously re-
ceiving the same, well knowing them to be stolen. -
Mr. CLARKSON conducted the pro...,ocution.
Mrs. Catherine Cook stated that she wa,;7 a widow, and
resided on the 18th of October at the house of Mr. Justine,
in East-place, Lambeth ; on that day went to the cash-box
in her bed-room, where she kept her money and. jewellery :
at that time everything was safe, but shortly afterwards all
was missed. In that box was a diamond pin, value 251.,
and -a gold neck chain, worth 141., together with a great
number of other articles of jewellery, of the
,value of up-
wards of 501. The prisoner Pomeroy was in the service
of Mr. Justine, and waited upon the witness. No other
person could have access to the room but the prisoner, as
there was no other servant in the4iouse.

I with ste

14rge

Brodie, a policeman of the L division, in consequence
of the information he had received, went to the Surrey
Theatre and took the prisoner Bartlett into custody, telling
her that he wanted her for a robbery in the house of Mr.
Justine ; she said that she had nothing to do with it, that
Pomeroy was then in the theatre, and that the things were
at her mother's house. Witness followed Bartlett's direc-
tions, and found the box and the articles of jewellery,
buried in the dust heap. Upon the box being discovered,
Bartlett said that Pomeroy had brought in her dirty linen.
The prisoners declined asking the witness any question.
Bent, also a policeman of the L division, corroborated the
evidence of the last witness.

Sewell, a police officer, took Pomeroy into custody on
Friday last. Upon asking her if she had any property be-
longing to Mrs. Cook, she put her hand in her pocket, and
gave him a silver clasp.
Mrs. Cook identified the clasp as her property, and
stated that it was in her lost box.

William West, the shopman to a pawnbroker in Mount-
street, Lambeth, produced a gold neck-chain and eye-glass,
which he received from the prisoner Bartlett in pledge, who
stated that she brought it from Mrs. Lavalott.

The shopman of• Mr. Savage produced a wedding-ring,
pledged at the shop of his master by Bartlett. Pomeroy
was present. He also produced other articles which had
been pledged by Pomeroy.

Mrs. Cook identified ;11 the articles as her property.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Both prisoners declined saying any thing in their defence.
Several witnesses gave the prisoner Pomeroy a good
character.

The RECORDER summed up, and the Jury found both
prisoners guilty.

The COURT sentenced Pomeroy to ten years' transporta-
tion, and Bartlett to seven years. The sentence of
Pomeroy to be accompanied with a recommendation of
remittal to one year's imprisonment.
TH. ARSON CASE —The Grand Jury have ignored the
bill against the pauper who is charged with attempting to
set tire to Aldersgate world' ouse.

NEW COURT.

Peter Wilkinson,-agel 15, was indicted for stealing a
watch anti guard, value 61.. and four sovereigns, the pro-
perty of Captain Peter Williams, his master, from a vessel
in the river Thames.

The prosecutor stated that he is commander of a coast-
ing vessel belonging to the port of Newport, which was lying
on the sth of this month in the Thames. The prisoner
came down to the cabin in the night and committed the
robbery and absconded from the vessel. The watch has
been recovered, but the prisoner had spent the sovereigns.
A pawnbroker, residing at Stone's-end, proved that the
prisoner offered the watch for pledge on the day after the
robbery ; but as he gat e a very unsatisfactory account of
it., he gave him into the custody of an officer, who found
*he prosecutor's purse in his pocket. Verdict—Guilty.
The COMMON-SERGEANT told the prisoner that, if the
law empnwert.d him, he would transport him for seven
years. He thought that ten years' exile was too much ;
hence he would order that the prisoner be imprisoned and
kept to hard labour for three months, three weeks of which
he was to be kept solitary.
Philip Johnson pleaded guilty to tn indictment charging
him with embezzling 101. the property of William Collins,
smith, to whom lie was clerk and servant.
The prosecutor said he had lost other monies, but as the
conduct of the prisoner bad been irreproachable for seven
years down to a recent period, he recommended him to
mercy.

The COURT in consideration of this recommendation, in-
stead of -transporting him, sentenced him to six months'
hard labour.

GUILDHALL.-(THIS DAY.)

Etienne Hubert, who was remanded a few days ago,
charged with having committed robberies at the Ram Inn,
Smithfield, and several other places, to a considerable ex-
tent, was again brought up, for the purpose of being com-
mitted.

Sir P. LAURIE inquired how the prisoner had been get-
ting his living is this country.
Sergeant WALLER replied that he had lived since Ja-
nuary last by plundering, and had never received anythif g
from his friends during that time. He disliked France, and
did not wish to go back again.
Sir P. LAURIE said it was often very inconvenient for a
man to go back to his own country. However, there arght
be a country ►nore suitable for him.—(A laugh.)
A cominuiiieation from Brighton was produced relative
to a robbery committed there, and from the description
there can b little doubt that the prisoner was the thief.
The depositions in the cases of Mr. Stevens, Mr. Jack-
son, Mrs. Fok, Capt. W. Allen, and Mr. Dclaport, were
then read over.

A person, who stepped forward as interpreter for the pri-
soner, in answer to questions by the Magistrates, said that
be knew nothing of the prisoner in France.

Sir P. LAURIE thougi►t he must have escaped from some
prison there. He must have had considerable practice
sonwwhere, for these were not the depredations of anovice.
The prisoner, who declined saying anything in his de-
fence, was then committed for trial.

THE LATE FIRE IN PRINTING-HOUSE-SQUARE.— A
boy about thirteen years of age, in the service of Mr.
M‘Laaeilin, whose premisrs wore destroyed by fire on
Saturday night last, was brought up, in consequence of
some information which had been given to the office in
which the property was insured by two persons named
Brown, a mother and daughter, whose window is exactly
opposite that of the workshop where the fire broke out.
Tne statement alluded to was to the effect, that about ten
minutes past seven they saw a boy with a lighted c. odic in
each hand in the workshop, one of which threw a oongst
some shavings upon ihe floor, and they immAiatcly gave
an alarm, by opening the window and crying out " Fire !"
Mr. M'Laughlin was in attendance, accompinied by a
professional gentleman, we believe.

MArgaret Brown, the daughter, an .1 her mother, Mary
Brown, repeated the staternk.‘nt above mentioned.

The boy stated that he had not enough wood tor the fi,es
on Sunday and Monday mornings, and that he went into
the carpenter's shop, and took the wood out of the fire-
place, and that a sp rk flew from the candle and set tile
shavings on fir, rued that he was so perplexed that he did
not know what to do, and therefore gave no alarm.
Sir P. LAURIE said the story of the boy and that of
the tamale was precisely - tne same, with the exception of
the number of candies, and that, perhaps, m4itt be ac-
counted for by the reflection of two windows. It ap-
peared from the account given by the boy that the occur-
rence was purel; accidental.
Mr. D. Mq:aughlio stated that the boy hid been par-
ticularly cautioned never to take a candle amongst the

Sir P. LAURIE enquired how he took a candle, contrary
to the orders of his master ?

The prisoner replied that he could not see to get the
wood without one.

Sir P. LAWRIE said that he was quite satisfied that the
two women had done their duty faithfully. He believed
that many of the fires which unfortunately occurred were
were not accidental, although that could not ba proved ;
and any person who could give any information was only
doing an act of justice in coming forward in the manner in
which the witnesses had done.
Mr. M'Laugblin, in answer to Sir Peter Laurie, stated
that he was not aware the prisoner could have any motive
for setting the premises on fire, and under that circum-
stance he was discharged, Sir Peter Laura remarking that
he might be brought up again if anything further trans-
pired.