The Sun.
London, England, 1841-08-05 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
HOME CIRCUIT—Lewes, August 3.

The Comm _ssion was opened yesterday by Mr. Ser-
eant Taddy, and this morning both Courts proceeded to
business.-- Lord Chief Jus:ice Tindal presided in the
Crown Court, and Mr. Set. jeLnt Taddy at Nisi Prius.
The Grand Jury having been sworn, and the Earl of
March appointed foreinan, his Lordship proceeded to
address some obseivations to them in reference to the
eases that would be brought before their notice. His
Lordship observed that although the number of
prisoners for trial at the present assizes was not so very
great, beinc, thirty-six, yet the offences charged were
some of them of a most serious character, and would re-
quire their most attentive consideration. There were
some charges of violence upon females to which he
would not Advert more particularly, but it might perhaps
as well for him to remind the Grand Jury that the
Legislature, in its wisdom, had thought fit to abolish the
capital puniehment for offences of this description, and
to substitute transportation for life. Although, how-
ever, this was the case, offences of that description and
some others were taken from the cognizance of the
Quarter Sessions, and the Grand Jury would have, there-
fore, to look at all those points which experience had
suggested as necessary to be proved in support of cases of
this description, and to decide whether the evidence
was sufficient to warrant them in sending the cases be-
fore the Petty Jury. There was also a charge against
three persons of attempting to suffocate another. with
intent to murder him ; and although it did not appear
that there was any previous or grudge between
the parties, yet if the Grand Jury believed, from the
expressions made use of by the prisoners and their con-
duct at the time, that they really intended to murder
the prosecutor, it would be their duty to find the bill.
His Lordship observed that there was also a charge
against two individuals of having maliciously killed a
sheep, with intent to injure the owner, and the circum-
stances of the case were of a somewhat novel kind, for

it appeared that the moment the act was co nmitted the
prisoners gave information to a policeman, and said that
their object in committing the act was that they might
get transported. It would be difficult in such a case to
suppose that they were actuated by any malice towards
the owner of the sheep, but it was his duty to tell the
Grand Jury that the law did not require any evidence
of the malicious intention, but the mere act was sufficient
to constitute the offence. His Lordship then alluded to
one or two other cases, and dismissed the Grand Jury to
their labours.
-Henry Thompson, 19, a well-dressed young man, was
indicted for stealing a ring, value 41., the property of
Vincent Silvani.

Mr. CREESY conducted the prosecution.
It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner, who,
there is no doubt, is a member of that fraternity termed
the swell mob, went down to Brighton, accompanied by
at friend on a " professional" expedition. On the 20th
July he went to the shop of the prosecutor, who is a
jeweller, and asked to see some mourning rings, and a
number were shown him, but he did not like the " style"
of any of them, and left the shop without purchasing
anything, and very soon afterwards a black enamel dia-
mond ring was missed, and on the same day the ring
was pawned by his companion at a pawnbroker's at
Brighton. When the prisoner was taken into custody,
he was very indignant, and said that he was the son of
a gentleman on Brixton-hill, and that he was incapable
of doing such a paltry act. A letter addressed to the
prisoner was, however, found by Solomons, the chief
officer of Brighton, from a confederate in London, on
which he referred to a watch he had received from the
prisoner, which he described as having "very thin cases,"
and a " very inferior :French movement," and assuring
his " dear friend," the prisoner, that he could only send
him 1/. 155., and praying him to send some better things
as soon as he could ; and it appeared very evident that
extensive trrangements had been made for plundering
the tradesmen of Brighton, but which were frustrated
by the timely apprehension of the prisoner.
The prisoner in his defence declared that he did not
steal the ring.
The Jury found him Guilty.
He was again indicted for stealing a ring, the property
of Robert Nineham Brinton.
In this case it appeared that the moment the prisoner
left the shop of the last prosecutor he proceeded to that
of Mr. Brinton, and he there also wished to purchase a

- •
mourning ring, but having looked over tell the cases that
were shown to him, he said thal none would suit him,

and left the shop, and about two hours afterwards one of
the rings that had been shewn to the prisoner was missed
from the fray in which it had been placed. No one else
had been in the shop, and the prisoner must have taken
it, and as no trace of it could be found, there is no doubt
that it was duly despatched to the " dear friend" in
London.

Lord Chief Justice TINDAL, in his address to the Jury,
said that whatever their suspicions
.might be in this case,
he did not think that the evidence was quite cogent
enough to warrant them in convicting the prisoner, and
he therefore directed an acquittal.
There was another indictment against the prisoner for
stealing a ring, but it was not proceeded with. The pri-
soner was then ordered to be transported for seven years.
Henry Parker, 29, and Richard Johnson, 22, were in-
dicted for unlawfully and maliciously killing a lamb, the
property of Thomas White.
Mr. Johnson appeared for the prosecution.
The prisoners pleaded Guilty.
Mr. JOHNSON, addressing the Court, said that the
Learned Judge would see by the depositions that the
present case was one of a rather singular character, and
he was instructed to leave the matter entirely in the
hands of his Lordship.
Chief Justice TINDAL said that he did not see any-
thing in the circumstances of the case to warrant him
in preventing the law from taking its course. The prisoners
had previously been policemen, and having forfeited their
character, they had committed this offence for the purpose,
as they said, of `getting transported. The offence was
clearly made out, and the Court could not enter into
the motives of the parties, but must visit an offence of
so serious a character with the punishment it deserved.
The prisoners were subsequentlp called up for judg-
ment, and his Lordship, addressing them, said that they
had pleaded guilty to a very serious offence. The
Court had nothing to do with any alleged motive, er
objeot for its commission, but was bound to pass such
a sentence as would be likely to deter others from com-
mitting the same act,
The prisoners were then ordered to be transported for
ten years.