The Sun.
London, England, 1847-10-25 00:00:00

C 7, *
/
dlesex maPgißstrlaSteOsF,
.•
• 614 • 4,44,, •-• ,
ioivN
iv
:Diu::
,SaTpC:lePs.).l.4
4,, 0t.4
tkv 7 -
N.V.
.eere.arnTeshtelyiennitgraeaittithe attention of our readers to
~;„„. • „
e
n •
a report of the proceedings at
(a_ • •
4/ '
,Lfitk • ate
.1. DI , - • 4„,„ . —
•

rensd. areT his, amused
however,th tills
a meeting of the Mid-
_ -axed in our Friday's
_niquities of prison discipline it dis-
closes are scarcely credible at the present day. In
the pages of Fielding and Smollett we read of such
othariniegast,u ations, but we take them to be as inapposite represen-
tations of our present social existence as are Gillray's
them as
so.
o. historical
jo Jonathan-
Wild a t
hfli
Ica-
Wild would have smiled approvingly on the efforts of
his present representatives at the Marylebone Police
Court. Peachum and Lockit, the great masters of
the art, would have allowed that, if not outdone, they
were equalled in the capacity for screwing the last stiver
out of the wretched creatures whose crimes or misfor-
tunes had consigned them to the gaoler's care. The
punishment inflicted by law on the culprits is already
severe enough; there is no need that it should be
aggravated by the rapacity and tyranny of a series of
gaolers, warders, sham attorneys, and impostors
acting as the clerks of admitted attorneys. These are
the inner cogs and wheels of the machinery of the
criminal law with which the public cannot be ac-
quainted, but, doubtless, in their working they pro-
duce suffering far more intense than the actual
punishment awarded by the judge. A mere narra-
tion of the facts which are said to have recently
occurred at the above police-office will be more
damnatory of the system than any comments we can
offer upon it.

The story, as it is told by Mr. Rotch, is as fol-
lows :—A prisoner, whose name does not appear, was
brought up for some offence to the Marylebone
police-office. Whilst he was locked up there his
wife, wishing to communicate with him, could not
obtain permission for the interview from Mitchell,
the gaoler at the office, until she had given him
two shillings, and also paid for some gin. The
prisoner besides, the woman's husband, had previ-
ously given Mitchell 2s. 6d. to carry a message, so
that on the other hand he was turning an honest
penny. Thus much for the extortion at the police..
office. The prisoner was committed. When in cus-
tody, it appears the man stated that as he had done
the act of which he was accused, he should plead
" Guilty." From this course he was dissuaded by
the gaoler, who prevailed upon him to engage the
legal services of a person named Robinson, as the
charge was serious, and Robinson was expert in
bringing prisoners through a desperate case. Robin-
son was of course waiting in the neighbourhood, and
demanded five guineas for his services. The method
in which this money was raised, and the result of the
disbursement, will scarcely be credited by those who
have not unhappily been compelled to know that sach
proceedings are of every-day occurrence at the Cen-
tral Criminal Court, and at sessions. The poor
woman had not the money. Her first step was,
therefore, to dispose of everything she had in the
world, furniture, clothing, &c. Even so she could not
make up the sum, and Robinson would be satisfied
with no less than the exact five pounds and five
shillings. She then took the shoes off her feet
and pawned them. Still the tale was short, and
Robinson obdurate. She had already borrowed from
a friend, sold all she had, pawned her clothes and
shoes ; one only source of raising a shilling or two
remained—she took the shoes off her children's feet,
and pawned them also. With all this she was still
3s. short, but she gave Robinson all she had raised,
and implored him to save her husband. This legal
gentleman, it appears, was not satisfied, but taking
hold of the poor woman's pocket, shook it, and said,
" This is not all you have got ; vou have something
more here !" Finally a sum of 51. 14s. 6d. was made
up and given to the legal adviser.
One might have supposed that Robinson's services
were of some value as he set so high a price upon
them. The consciousness that he was in the posses-
sion of a great secret which would enable him to get
the man off might have excused him to his own con-
science. No such thing. As soon as he had pocketed
the money, he coolly informed the poor woman that,
by the advice of counsel, her husband must plead
" Guilty."'

The next point in this distressing tale is this :
The unfortunate woman, hearing that her husband
was condemned, was anxious to communicate with
him, to learn what flannel or little necessaries he
might wish to take with him. She waited under-
neath the court for the purpose of speaking to him
as he was being conveyed from the cells to the van.
Before this moment arrived, however, she says she
gave the last sixpence she had in the world to the
warder* for conveying a message to her husband, and
with the same view was induced to promise another
official on duty that she would find the means of pro-
curing him a pint of porter from over the way.
The account would stand something thus between
this unhappy couple and the harpies of the criminal
law : s. d.
Paid Mitchell, gaoler at Marylebone Po lic e
office, by husband, for bearing a message 0 2 6
Paid ditto, by wife, for same purpose 0 2 0
Paid ditto, price of gin, say
Paid Robinson, legal gentleman, for pro-
fessional services in recommending hus-
band to plead " guilty," proceeds of sale
of furniture, clothes, wife's shoes, chil-
shoes, &c
Paid ditto, for same service, by wife, being
loan from a friend, which caused her ruin 1 11 6
Paid by wife to warder at Court House,
being her last coin, for bearing message
to her husband
Paid by ditto to another warder, for like
services, price of porter, say .

£5 17 2
Unless that last item was paid for in Birmingham
"inconvertible," it is difficult to understand how
actual payment could have passed. Let us hope that
it will be sufficient to call public attention to the
existence of such iniquities in the very heart of our
social system to procure the immediate dismissal of
all parties concerned. By the report it will be
seen that these are not the only acts of extortion
with which the warders stand charged, and the
magistrates have already done what they could in the
matter, having discharged two of the warders and
severely admonished another. So far all is well
but we cannot so easily get rid of the impure brood
who batten on the crime and misery of their fellow-
creatures. How are we to deal with such gentle-
men as Mr. Robinson is said to be ? If the fact be,
as is stated, that these persons are, generally speak-
ing, officers of the various police-courts, the remedy
would be obvious enough. We greatly fear, however,
that this gives but an imperfect account of them as
a class. In the humanity of the gentlemen practising
at the criminal bar—in the honesty and uprightness
th
of gaolers who would warn the prisoners
. of
.e
to efforts
—in
the
and e
bench
he
discountenance
oftheir
The matter is, we
the ill rather than a total reform.
them on every occasion we look for an alleviation of
understand, to be laid before the Home Secretary for
his careful consideration.

''' This person has written to up aenying that he To.
ceived any money.

p A.RDON OF WILLIAM HENRY
BARBER.
(From the Hobart Town Courier of May 1.)
This remarkable man, who acted as attorney for
Joshua Fletcher in the celebrated " Emma Slack "
will forgery case, is at present in Hobart Town.
He had just come down from Norfolk Island in the
Pestonjee Bomanjee to Impression Bay. A day or
two after his arrival, her Majesty's special warrant
for a conditional free pardon reached him direct from
England. He is therefore free to go to any part of
the world except the United 7ii:ingdom. But we
think that this is the precursive, step to an uncondi-
tional pardon, which will rest' re him to his friends,
most
oucraasbele thereiil..
and home, and happiness. The matter cannot of
iest honourable
rest here. The Government have either done
cantoo bmeuncoh toomoerdiumee
little.betw.r: th
i rilmr. Barber's
nocence and the most perfect guilty knowledge
the fraudulent, nature of the
transaction,
In the
latter view of the case he deserves no sympathy ;
he merits no indulgence ; and pardon
da
circurns%ances would be a under such
premium a upon the most nr,rous kind of hd'
is onesty. If he was, in the
firFl.6 instance,
perfectly innocent, then a conditional
',Jordon is continued •
injustice. A ir. W. H. Barber
i was an eminent solicitor, in excellent practice in
the city of London. His professional
income at the
time of his arrest and trial amounted to 3,0001.,
a year. Of this, by the well-planned fraud of his
client Fletcher, he was deprived at a blow. But Mr. .
Barber's moral innocence is now established beyond
all doubt, and full civil and legal exemption will soon
follow. But who can adequately conceive the state
' of mind to which a man of eminent abilities and
cultivated taste must have been reduced by being
thrust down from a highly respectable sphere of life
to herd with the outcasts of Norfolk Island for nearly
three long years of convict slavery ! How shall he
be recompensed for his sufferings—how shall he l t_s_
reinstated in his once exalted professional station
no?
His painful experience of probation tortures wislll
doubt, have put him in pose ession of numerous end
illustrative of the effect of prison discipltione.udgn
and
as Mr. Barber is a person. -well qualified hopej he will
reason, and write upon the subject,th
weet enshrouded
do something towards ealcidatinges
the yet
the
question. Few men could.
miscreant den, so tyranni-.
de-
grading horrors of such a nus .
t has been of late,
governed as i
tally and so absurdly
without being the worse for three years' Norfolk
Island life; vet we hear that Mr. Barber has borne
his sorrows and sufferings with the meek fortitude of
true heroism, and that his conduct throughout tle
whole period of his island captivity has been exam•
glary and inoffensive.