The Sun.
London, England, 1847-10-12 00:00:00

LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, OCTOBER 12, 1847.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Oct. 11
(Before Mr. Commissioner SHEPHERD.)
IN THE INSOLVENCY OF C. W. HAGGETT.

The insolvent, a gentleman who resided at Maiden-
head, in Berkshire, applied for his final order, sup.
ported by Mr. Duncan and opposed by Mr. Cooke.
The application was founded upon a special affi-
davit and the certificate of a physician, setting forth
that the insolvent's health is in a precarious condition.
Mr. Raggett's father was the proprietor of White's
Club-house, in St. James's ; he bequeathed to the
insolvent an annuity of 541. a year for himself; 501.
a year to his wife, over which she was to have entire
control; and 501. to his children, with which he
could not interfere. The property out of which these
several annuities arose was placed in the hands of
trustees, and there was a clause in the will by which
they were bequeathed, making the annuity to Mr. Rag-
gett voidable whenever he should be insolvent. The case
came on for hearing about six months ago. The
debts were about 2501. A strong opposition was
raised by several country creditors, and an offer of
301. or 501. a year for the payment of the debts by in-
stalment was rejected. Since then the insolvent has
been in prison.

Mr. COOKE now contended that his Honour ought
not to interfere on the insolvent's behalf. The debts
still remained unpaid, although the insolvent was, in
fact, in the enjoyment of an annuity of 1541. a year.
He was willing to consent that protection should be
awarded from time to time in case the insolvent
allocated a portioa of his income to the payment of
his debts.

Mr. DuNcari said, his client had by his incarcera-
tion expiated the debt, and contended that his Honour
could not refuse to grant the final order, as the in-
solvent had not control even over his own portion of
the 1541. a year, it being voidable by insolvency. It
.
was altogether the power of the trustees to con-
tinue or discontinue the allowance.
The COMMISSIONER said, that under those circum-
stances he would grant the final order.

account for the week ending the 16th, he included
the payment of 4s. on the 13th of August, and he
produced as his voucher the wharf note.
Mr. lorry, cross• examined him—He had been out
of employment some time before -Messrs. Hocking
engaged him. He kept the petty cash account, and
accounted to Mr. Hocking. He was once deficient
10s., and till he could make out how this was, he told
the prisoner to say he had 10s. in hand, if Mr. Hock-
ing should ask, when, in fact, he had not 10s. At
least something of that kind occurred, which he could
not distinctly remember. The prisoner had the care
of the vouchers.
James Taylor, of 27, Change-alley, stated that
he was formerly in Messrs. Hocking's employ. The
prisoner accounted to him on the 9th of August, and
one of the vouchers he produced was that for Is. 101.,
alleged to have been paid on the 4th of August.
A number of other charges of falsifying entries of
carriage in the parcel book, charging booking where
the railway took none, and altering wharfage receipts,
were entered into.
Mr. Alderman HUNTER, however, thought, as the
crime amounted in law to forgery, the Court would
not be likely to try the prisoner on more than .three
indictments, and he should confine the prosecution to
the three cases above detailed.
Mr. lorry said, he understood the charge at first
to be one of obtaining money by false pretences, but
if it were deemed a case of forgery, then the evi-
dence fell short of proving who had made the altera-
tions. The figures were not shown to be in his
writing.
Mr. Alderman HUNTER said, he took it to be a case
of uttering, knowing the receipts to be altered, for the
purpose of defrauding his employers. He should com-
mit the prisoner for trial, but remand him, that the
depositions might be prepared.
WORSHIP-STREET.
Yesterday Patrick Hurley, a labouring man, was
charged with having resisted and assaulted Police-
constable Jessop, of the H division, while in the exe-
cution of his duty.
The policeman stated, that while on duty in Thrall.
street, Spitalfields, at 8 or 9 o'clock on the preceding
evening, he saw a number of young men congre-
gated beneath a gas-lamp, gambling with halfpence,
'and, observing a boy in the act of climbing up the
lamp-post, with the apparent intention of extinguish-
ing the light, he pulled him down and gave him a
slight push, which caused him to fall. An immediate
outcry was raised by the bystanders that he had
kicked and killed the boy, which brought out the
mother of the lad from an adjoining house, who com-
menced abusing him for ill-using her child, and called
out the prisoner, who advanced towards him with a
pair of fire-tongs, struck him with them several
severe blows, and then retreated into his house, the
door of which he secured. While endeavouring to
effect an entrance, he was assailed with a perfect
shower of stones, brickbats, and other missiles of a
similar description from a mob of at least 150 persons
who had collected around him, and he was at last
compelled to use his staff in self-defence until another
officer came up, when the prisoner gave himself up to
the latter constable, and was conveyed to the station.
house.
In cross-examination by Mr. Vann, who appeared
for the defence, the policeman admitted that he had
struck the wife of the prisoner upon the head with
his truncheon while her husband was entering his
house, causing a wound which bled profusely, but de-
clared that the woman had attacked him first, and
that he then bore the marks of her finger-nails upon
his hands.
In answer to this, Mr. Vann stated that he was not
only instructed to give a total denial to the charge,
but that he had numerous witnesses in attendance,
who could prove that the policeman himself had acted
with such a degree of wanton and brutal violence upon
the occasion as to show incontestably that he was a
gerson totally unfit to discharge duties of such, a nature
as those he had been intrusted with. The learned
gentleman then called
Charles Brackley, a cabinet-maker, who stated, that
while standing at his own door at the time in question
he saw the prisoner's son, a boy of only eight years of
age, playing with some of his schoolfellows near his
father's house, when the policeman came up, and
without any apparent provocation seized him by the
collar, repeatedly slapped him in the face, and then
kicked him so violently that he was knocked down in
the road. On hearing the cries of her son the prisoner's
wife came out and asked him what he meant by such
conduct, when he instantly struck her on the face, and on
her husband interposing for his wife's protection struck
him in the face also. The prisoner upon this retreated
into his house, and his wife was in the act of following
him, when the constable struck her such a violent
blow upon the head with his truncheon, that the blood
poured out in a stream from the wound, and she fell
back into the arms of a female bystander, who con-
veyed her with assistance to the house of a neighbour-
ing surgeon, by whom her injuries were dressed.
Upon observing the treatment his wife had sustained
the prisoner immediately sent for another policeman
to protect him from the complainant's violence, but
before the arrival of the second constable the com-
plainant commenced dealing blows with his truncheon
indiscriminately upon the persons surrounding him,
and, amongst others, upon the witness, who received
a severe bruise and
_afterwards,burst.open..the pri,
iii.ridoOr.w7iii such vidence 'that its hinges were
.completely forced off. The constable whom the pri-
soner had sent for at length came up, and the prisoner
at once placed himself under .his charge, and went
quietly with him to the station-house.
Two respectable looking married women, named
Bewley and Sedgwick, confirmed the evidence of the
last witness in all its leading particulars, and the
latter witness added, that just before he had assailed
the little boy, as before described, she had observed
the constable staggering along the street in such an
unsteady manner that she felt perfectly satisfied he
must have been intoxicated.
Inspector Ellis, who received the charge at the
station-house, said that when the prisoner was brought
there he at once preferred a complaint against the
constable to the same effect as the witnesses had just
detailed, but the constable appeared to him to be" per-
fectly sober.
Mr. Vann intimated that he had several other wit-
nesses in attendance, who could depose to the same
facts, if the magistrate considered it necessary to hear
their evidence ; but
Mr. Heasimm. said that he 'had beard quite suffi-
cient to satisfy him that the police-constable had
grossly exceeded his duty in assailing
a child of such
tender age in the way in which it was conclusively
proved that he had done, and that the prisoner had
only acted with the natural feelings of a father in in-
terposing for his son's protection. With regard to
the constable's subsequent violence towards the
child's mother, he was unable at that time to enter
upon it ; but he should at once order the prisoner
himself to be discharged, and direct an immediate
representation of the facts of the case to be forwarded
to the propel authorities, who would no doubt cause
a searching investigation to be instituted into the
Conduct of the officer.
Inspector Ellis intimated that a report of the case,
together with the magistrate's observations, would be
forthwith laid before the Police Commissioners, and
the prisoner, who seemed to be a hardworking indus-
trious man, was thereupon liberated.
THAMES.
Jane Smitkers, described as a sempstress, and to be
30 years of age, who refused to give her address, was
brought before Mr. Yardley, on a charge of stealing
28 yards of Orleans cloth from the shop of Mr. John
Berriman, linendraper, in High-street, Shadwell.
The prosecutor said, the prisoner entered his shop
about half past one o'clock yesterday, while he was
attending to a customer, and several others were
ar-
ticle, neg.
at obbee
gaves r v ehde. r
aSnh
answer,
asked thaand pricereluoe
fs
tea dn. abler
to be seated. The prisoner said she was in no hurry
at all, and sat down. Directly afterwards he had
occasion to leave the shop, and was not absent half a
minute. As he was entering the shop again he saw
the prisoner leaving it very quickly, and at the same
time missed a piece of black Orleans cloth from a box
near the door. lie immediately went after the pri-
soner, and overtook her about 200 or 300 yards from
the house, with the Orleans cloth wrapped up in an
apron under her shawl. He took it from her, and
gave her into custody.
The prisoner asked the prosecutor if she did not at
once- say when asked if she had the Orleans cloth,
that she had got it ?
Mr. Berriman—Yes, you did.
The prisoner —And gave it up to you, Berriman.
The prosecutor (surprised)—You did, after I found
it under your shawl.
The prisoner very adroitly wished to leave an im-
pression on the magistrate's mind that a tender inti-
macy had existed between her and Mr. Berriman.
She said she was a married woman, and had fre-
quently been to his shop. She could not expose him
without exposing herself, but he knew very well that
he had given her permission to take any article she
liked from his shop, and she availed herself of that
permission.
Berriman
The prisoner—You know I was at your shop on
Sunday morning.
hye
kdniedwnot
hergive a s tehnemiwomancoming
t o t
the
shop occasionally to make purchases.
e
that ? The question
Orleans cloth.
Mr. YARDLEY—WeII, what of
Hseaiodnl
is, whether you stole the
The prisoner—Well,
not add -to his disgrace or my own.
Mr. Berriman said, he never authorised the pri-
lperoonpledrteyxp before orheini nse o
butr i not
will
psonei to take anything out of his shop, or treated her
otherwise than as a customer in the practice of
making small purchases.
The prisoner—lt's false ; how dare younNtosoaye.
a9bs
ste
of odKrye,
the Court thatAiu
when yll oeuhn nevertaoopk gavepolice-constable,
tich ee emporeni
ssaotnan3bei g ?
e
r
I own I have done it ; my family are in
sshttlEtescilaieidahsat,,
great distress."

The prisoner—That is true. My family are in
great distress. He has authorised me to take things,
or I should not have helped myself to the piece of
Orleans cloth. He asked me to sit down, and wait
till he was at leisure. An Irish girl then brought a
glass of porter to him, and because I did not wait till
the shop was cleared he came after me.
Mr. Berriman repeated that he had never per-
mitted the prisoner to take anything out of his
shop, but he thought that he had seen her in the shop
frequently.
The prisoner—Thought you had, indeed !
Mr. YARDLEY said, the robbery was positively
sworn to, and the property was found upon the pri-
soner. It was therefore his duty to commit her to
Newgatq for trial.

SOUTHWARK.
Yesterday Eleanor and Maria Hughes, mother
' and daughter, coffee-shop keepers in the Waterloo-
road, were summoned for unlawfully detaining a
quantity of female apparel, the property of Elizabeth
Newlyn.
The complainant, a respectable-looking young
woman, stated that she was the daughter of the house-
keeper of the County-hall at Winchester, and resided
with her parents up to the month of June last, when
she became acquainted with a man named Pearce,
who had come down from London and represented
himself as holding a situation in the Custom-house.
He made overtures of marriage to her, and promised
that if she came to London with him he would marry
her there, and that they should establish themselves
at a house in the Kent-road which he was then in
treaty for, and advised her to bring away all her
clothes and whatever other property she possessed,
and not to acquaint her family of their intentions
until the ceremony of their marriage took place
She listened to his solicitations, and accordingly left
home, bringing with her all that she possessed,
amongst which were a watch, gold brooch, and other
articles of jewellery. On their arrival in town Mr.
Pearce took her to the coffee-shop belonging to the
defendants, in the Waterloo-road, and introduced her
as his wife, informing her his reason for taking her
there to be in consequence of the house he had taken
in the Kent-road not being yet prepared for their re-
ception. He also said that the ceremony of their
marriage must be postponed for a short time owing to
unforseen circumstances, and he prevailed upon her un-
der the delusive promise of making her his wife, to re-
main with him at the defendants' house, where they
lived together for several weeks, he putting off the d'
of their marriage, and making various excuses for
not fulfilling the engagement, until at length he left
the place altogether in debt for seven weeks' rent,
besides other charges, amounting to between 71. and
al. As soon as he was gone, which he effected
without acquainting her, taking with him her watch
and some other articles of jewellery, the defendants
laid claim to her clothes, and swept them all off for
the arrears of rent due to them, although she repre-
sented to both mother and daughter the circumstances
in which she was placed, and the cruel treatment
which she had experienced at the hands of the man
by whom she had been decoyed away from a respect-
able home, owing to the repeated promises he had
made of marrying her. Since then she had made
application for the restoration of her clothes, but the
defendants refused to part with anything until the
debt Mr. Pearce owed was liquidated, which she was
unable to settle, and she would have been reduced to
utter want, had it not been for the kind treatment she
experienced from a family named Wilson, in Webber-
street, who had taken her in and sheltered her since
her desertion by Pearce.
In veply to Mr. COTTINGHAM, the complainant said
that it had been discovered that Pearce had a wife and
two children, and all that he had asserted about his
being in treaty for a house in the Kent-road were
fabrications. He formerly lived in Winchester, but
had not visited that place for 13 years, until the time
she had the misfortune of meeting with. him. She
had not yet represented her situation to her family
owing to what had happened to her, but was convinced
they would again receive her. She added, she was
destitute of clothing, in consequence of the defendants
having claimed all.
The defendants explained the amount of the deb(

the complainant and kr. Pearce incurred while living
at their house as man and wife, and that, on finding
he had absconded, they levied a distress on the articles
in their apartment. They contended that they were
justified in the manner in which they had proceeded,
and considered that an imposition had been practised
upon them, owing to the parties having taken the
apartments and passed as man and wife, a character
to which they were not entitled. They added, that
the goods belonging to complainant had been what is
termed " bought in," and that she could have them
again on paying the rent, &c.
The MAGISTRATE then advised the defendants,
under the circumstances, to curtail the amount of
their bill, so that the complainant might be able to
meet it, and to give her up her clothes..
The defendants assented to the suggestion, and the
complainant then intimated that the family who had
acted so humane a part towards her had resolved on
having Pearce taken into custody.
WANDS WORTH
Yesterday, -as the magistrate was vacating the
bench, John News, a mild and inoffensive, looking
140, elevea yews of age, was brought in by. Ottley,.
190 V, a policeman in plain . clothes, and charged
with stealing five small pears, valued at a halfpenny.
The constable said he saw the prisoner and another
boy less in size throwing at some pears growing in
Mr. Oxley's enclosed garden, St. Anne's-hill. Pre-
sently the prisoner got over the paling and returned
with five pears, when he took him into custody. He
knew nothing of the prisoner previously.
Mr. PAYNTER said the lad's countenance did not
look like a thief's ; what did he do for a living ?—The
boy, who was in his shirt sleeves, and had evidently
very recently left off work, said he was employed at
Mr. Bell's match manufactory in Garret-lane, where
his father was also employed ; he admitted having
taken the pears, and was very sorry, but the other
boy was quite as bad as he.
Mr. PAYNTEE asked the prisoner what he earned a
week, and he replied 10s.
The largeness of the sum compared with the lad's
youth appeared to create some surprise to the magis-
trate.

Mr. PAYNTEU observed, that the prisoner was
liable to imprisonment for six months, but as this
was his first offence he would only fine him lOs. and
the value of the pears, and in default commit him to
Kingston gaol for 14 days.
The prisoner was removed in custody.

THE HOP GROWERS.
(From the Kentish Gazette.)
On Saturday a numerous and highly respectable
meeting, composed of the principal hop growers of
the East Kent district, was held at the Royal Foun-
tain Hotel, Canterbury.
The untoward position of monetary affairs exercises
an injurious influence in every department of trade
and agriculture through the country, and the hop
growers, who are heavily taxed for their own pro-
ductions, are not exempt from the baneful effect.
The question for discussion at this meeting was the
necessity of applying to the Board of Excise for a
postponement of the period for the payment of the
duty fixed for November next, and the most advisable
means tp adopt by which to suceed in this important,
and, to a large body of agriculturists, most momen-
tous object.
C. Neame, Esq., was unanimously called to the
chair, and the following proposition was carried with-
out a dissentient voice :
" That a committee of the following gentlemen be
appointed for the purpose of carrying out the opinion
of this meeting, that an application be made in the
proper quarter to obtain a postponement of the pay-
ment of the hop duty payable in November next,
and that such committee do immediately take such
steps as they consider proper for effecting this ob-
ject:—Right Hon. S. R. Lushington, J. P. Plumptre,
Esq., M.P., IV. Deedes, Esq., M.P., Sir B. W.
Bridges, Bart., Sir E. C. Dering, Bart., N. J. Knatch-
bull, Esq., W. 0. Hammond, Esq., J. Neame, Esq.,
C. Neame, Esq."
We have to congratulate our hop growing friends
upon this step of the East Kent cultivators, and, fur-
ther, upon the highly influential gentlemen placed
upon the committee. At the present price of hops,
to force a sale the grower must submit to a ruinous
sacrifice ; and there is no doubt, unless the authorities
grant the prayer of the committee, the sacrifice must
be made to effect the payments.
A simultaneous course of action through the hop
districts would, we have no hesitation in believing,
crown the effort with success.

THE ECLIPSE AT PARIS.—But little could be seen
of the eclipse which took place on Saturday morning,
the sky being cloudy until about ten minutes after eight,
at which period the most interesting moment was over.
The moon had then gone beyond half the sun, and the
latter body had the appearance of a crescent. The whole
terminated at two minutes to nine, but the end could not
be very clearly seen, a number of clouds remaining the
whole time flying about.
LIEUTENANT MUNRO.—This unfortunate gentle-
man recently addressed a letter to Mr. Urquhart, one of
the Council of Inverness, expressing his sincere thanks
for the promptitude with which that gentleman and his
colleagues petitioned her Majesty in his behalf. Lieu-
tenant Munro at the same time expressed his gratitude
to Providence for the universal sympathy which has been
evinced towards him.
WEST RIDING REVISION.—The West Riding re-
vision is now over, but never since the passing of the
Reform Bill did-it excite so little interest. The result
is understood to be a gain to the Liberals of from 290
to 300. But of course this estimate partakes of the
vague uncertainty which marks the boundary between
the parties erewhile denominated Liberals and Conser-
ver ires.--Bradford Observer.
THE ARCHBISHOP or YORK —This venerable
prelate completed bis 90th year on Sunday last, and we
gratified to say is in the enjoyment of his customary ex-
cellent health. His Grace received the several members
of his family to dinner in the evening, at Biehoi)therpe.