The Sun.
London, England, 1849-01-04 00:00:00

crowd back, and the deceased, who was the outside
man, was thrown under the waggon, the prisoner
being at the time near to the fore-horse, and with his
back to the waggon, and was not even aware that the
accident had happened. It was also shown that
while passing through the crowd the prisoner moved
his shaft horse by means of the whip, so as to keep his
vehicle away from the people as much as possible,
and prevent it from doing them any injury. A police
constable was also called, who proved that one of the
witnesses who had deposed to the fact of the prisoner
having made use of the threat that he would do for
some of them if they did not get out of the way, was
not present, and that he admitted to him that he knew
nothing whatever of the transaction.
The Jury stopped the Learned Counsel as he was
about to call witnesses to speak to the character of
the prisoner, and intimated their opinion that the
charge was not made out.

Mr. Justice PATTESON remarked, that certainly,
according to the evidence of the witnesses for the
defence, the occurrence was purely accidental.
The jury said this was their opinion.
Mr. CLARKSON said that the prosecution was not
instituted from any vindictive feeling, and the only
object of the inquiry was to ascertain the truth.
After, therefore, what had been stated by his Lord.
ship, and the intimation given by the jury, he fel
that he ought not to address the jury in reply.

The jury then returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
Mr. CLARKSON applied for the expenses of the pro
secution.

Mr. Justice PATTBSON said of course they would
be allowed—it was a very proper case for inquiry.
James William Ludlam was indicted for stealing
a quantity of bank notes and gold, amounting alto-
gether in value to 3501., the property of Charles
Butler.

Mr. Parry prosecuted, and Mr. Ballantine defended
the prisoner.

The circumstances of this case have been reported
within the last few days in the police reports. The
prosecutor is a beer-shop keeper in Brandon-street,
Lock's-fields, and the robbery in question was com-
mitted on the night of the 16th December, about
seven o'clock, by some person getting into the bed-
room window, and breaking open a drawer which
contained the money. The chief evidence against
the prisoner was that of a female named White, who
swore that at the time the robbery must have been
committed she saw the prisoner jump from the win-
dow of the room. None of the money appeared to
have been traced ; but there were other circumstances
tending to confirm the evidence of this witness, who
spoke to the prisoner's identity, which left little doubt
of his guilt.
The jury, after a good deal of deliberation in the
box, retired for nearly half-an-hour to consider their
verdict, and at seven o'clock they agreed to a verdict
of Guilty.
The prisoner loudly asserted his innocence, and
declared ithat the prosecutor knew he was not the
man who committed the robbery.
• The prosecutor said he knew nothing of the sort ;
and he also denied most positively having sent three
men to the house of the prisoner to communicate
with him upon the subject of the robbery.
A police constable informed the Court that he had
taken the prisoner into custody in 1847, when he was
about to commit a robbery, and found fourteen skele-
ton keys and a crowbar in his possession.
Mr. Justice MAULE then sentenced the prisoner to
be transported for ten years.

The :Prisoner was identified by another licensed
victualler, named Wiggins, as the person who had
stolen between 601. and 701. from her house on the
evening previous to that on which the robbery at
Mr. Butler's was committed.

NEW COURT.
(Before the RECORDER.)
_ _ _

Isabella Jennings, aged 26, married, was indicted
for stealing a quantity of plate and other articles,
valued 2001., the property of Cranstoun George
Ridout.

Mr. Payne prosecuted, and the prisoner was un-
defended.
It appeared from the statement of the Learned
Counsel for the prosecution, that the prosecutor is a
gentleman residing in Wimp°le-street, and that the
prisoner at the bar was sister to a girl who lived in
his service at the time of the robbery, which was
effected under the following circumstances :
In August last the prosecutor went out of town,
leaving Elizabeth Rogers (the girl alluded to) in care
of his house, which contained, amongst other pro-
perty, a large quantity of plate, which was carefully
packed away in a closet. Upon the prosecutor's re-
turn to town in the early part of October, he found
that the plate closet had been broken open, and its con-
tents abstracted ; and the account given of it by the
girl Rogers was, that some ono had effected an entrance,
and committed the robbery. This the police at
once found to be a falsehood, and the result was the
apprehension of Rogers a man named John Jennings,
and Elizabeth his wife, all three of whom were
tried and convicted at the November sessions of this
Court, but upon whom judgment had been respited.
Those prisoners were related to the present one, the i
two females being her sisters, and the male her bro-
ther-in-law, and also brother to her husband. Since
the conviction of the three prisoners in November, the
female Elizabeth had made statements which led to
the apprehension of the prisoner at the bar, who was
aware that the plate had been stolen, and had pawned
a part of it.

Isabella Jennings, who was brought up from the
interior gaol to give her evidence, deposed to the pri-
soner being her sister. Shortly after the prosecutor
left town, she (witness) went to live with her un-
married sister, at his residence in Wimpole-street,
where she was visited by the prisoner Isabella, who,
although not present when the plate closet was broken
open, was aware afterwards that the robbery had
been committed, and on the 22d of September accom-
panied herself, her husband, and Rogers, to the shop
of Mr. Gray, a pawnbroker, in Fleet-street, where
she pawned a portion of the stolen property.
James Avant, the manager of Mr. Grey's busi-
ness, proved the prisoner to have pawned the portion
of the property alluded to.
The prisoner did not offer anything in her defence,
and the jury found her Guilty on the second count
included is the indictment, namely, the receiving.
The other prisoners, Elizabeth Rogers, John Jen-
nings, and Elizabeth Jennings, were then brought
up to receive judgment.
The RECORDER, in passing sentence, said that the
Lord Chief Justice, before whom the first trial had
been gone through, had marked down the sentence
he wished to be passed upon the prisoners tried be-
fore him, which was, that John Jennings be trans-
ported for fourteen years ; Elizabeth Rogers to
twelve monthslimprisonment and hard labour ; and
Elizabeth and Isabella Jennings to five months' im-
prisonment.

- James Wright, 13, Owen Tierney, 16, were in-
dicted for stealing a handkerchief, the property of
James Joseph Morris, from his person.
A man named Webb, who stated himself to be a
bill-sticker, stated that he had watched the two pri-
soners for some time, the elder one hiding the
younger from view whilst he tried several persons'
pockets, and when near the Surrey Theatre Wright
committed the robbery, and hid the handkerchief in
his bosom, where it was found by the police.
Other conclusive evidence having been given, the
jury found Tierney Guilty, Wright having pleaded
Guilty.

As his Lordship was about passing sentence,
Mr. R. G. Ibbett, of Fleet-street, one of the jury
in waiting, begged to direct the attention of the Court
to the fact that he had heard the witness Webb ex-
amined in a civil case in the Exchequer Court, and
that in the course of cross-examination he (Webb)
had admitted that he acted as a sort of spy to the
police, and received a small stipend from them for his
services, and principally lived upon that and the ex-
penses he obtained for his attendance as a witness ;
and that he had been instrumental in bringing a
great many offenders to justice. He also admitted
that he had been several times in trouble for felonies,
and had been convicted.

Webb being re-called, denied that he was in the
pay of the police, or that he had ever been convicted.
Inspector Scott, of the II division, intimated to the
Court that the statement made relative to Webb
having; been convicted was true, but denied that
he was regularly in the pay of the police.
Jenkinson, a constable of the G division, said that
Webb had been pointed out to him as a convicted
felon.

Webb then admitted that he had been in trouble,
but that it was nine years ago, but again denied that
he was a spy for the police. It was, however, satis-
factorily shown to the Court that he had, when ex-
amined in a case tried at these sessions, admitted
having been employed by the police to assist in getting
up cases.
The RECORDER said it would have been more sa-
tisfactory had the jury known the character of the
witness before they had returned their verdict; but
there was abundant evidence without him ; if, how-
ever, the jury differed with him, he would re-open
the case.

The foreman of the jury said be would sooner be-
lieve the prisoner than the witness Webb.
Another juryman said the case was abundantly
clear without him.
Tierney having again denied being in company
with the other prisoner,

_
The RECORDER again examined the police, who
proved his guilt beyond a doubt.
Mr. Jonas, the clerk to the gaol, said both pri-
soners had been convicted at this court; Wright upon
more occasions than one.

The RECORDER then sentenced Wright to twelve
months' imprisonment and hard labour, and Tierney
to three months.
Alexander Ford alias Powell, aged 27, a. druggist,
wasindicted for forgery.
Mr. Bodkin prosecuted, and the prisoner, who