The Sun.
London, England, 1824-02-26 00:00:00

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS—(Tms DAY.)

Thomas George Nolen, a very genteel young
man, was indicted for stealing six boxes of eggs,
value WI. and upwards, the property of Charles
Agneray, a foreigner..
The prosecutor's evidence was detailed through
an interpreter as follows :—The prosecutor re-
sided in ..Montague-close, Borough ; on the 3d of
-April last he saw the prisoner, who purchased
six cases of eggs of Itiin for '2l/. Gs., which was
to be paid for directly. The goods were accord-
ingly sent home that day, in the afternoon ; the
prosecutor was then informed to call the iiext
morning for the money ; he did so, but the pri-
soner was then gone, and had taken the property
with him. The prosecutor never saw him after-
wards, until January last,, when he called upott
him and wanted to purchase several other cases
of eggs, when lie caused hiM to be apprehended.

theCommoN SERGEANT said, this was a case
for an action, as it appeared the goods were ob-
tained on credit, which was to be paid the next
day, and the prisoner goes a considerable time
afterwards to buy more eggS of the same person,
it could not be considered a felony.
The prisoner was accordingly acquitted.
hYilliam Holdsworth, aged 14, George Sackay,
16, and James Purcell, 18, were indicted for
stealing a quantity of horse-radish, the property
of Mr. Gabriel Patcher. It appeared from the
evidence that the two former prisoners were ob-
served lulling about the prosecutor's premises,
and at length stole the property now produced;
they were instantly pursued.
The facts were clearly proved against the two
first named prisoners, who were found Guilty,
and acquitted Purcell.
The COMMON SERGEANT called them up for
judgment, and said he had no doubt they had
gone out-for the express purpose of committing
depredations, and therefore the system of street
robberies must be put a stop to. . The sentence
of the Court was, that you, Sackay, be trans-
ported for seven years, and Holdsworth to be
imprisoned 12 months in the House of Correc-
tion, and kept to hard labour.
Joseph Crown was convicted for stealing a pair
of boots, value 20 shillings, the property of
James Taylor. The prisoner was sentenced to
pay a fine of 101., and be imprisoned until such
tine was paid.

MEAT RIC ro PROSECUTION.—Yusterchy John
Warden, a man of very respectable appearance, was indicted
for defrauding R. W. Elliston, Esq. his employer, on the 4th of
February, of two sovereigns and two shillings, his property, in
the parish of St. Martin's in the Fields.
W. H. Turner, Esq. deposed,That on the 4th of February he
went with a party of three friends to Drury-lane Theatre. Ile
asked for a private box, and was directed to the Prince's side
of the house, where he first saw the prisoner, who said he had
sonic private boxes disengaged up, stairs, which the witness
declined, he swishing for one below ; the prisoner then told wit-
ness that he could put him into the Duke of Gloucester's box ;
witness asked the expence, and the prisoner said he might give
him what he pleased. The prisoner desired witness not 'to bring'
his party through the house, but along vinegar-yard. Witness
gave the prisoner two guineas for the box.
Cross-examined by Mr. AN E ws.—Witness had said if he
could not get a box down stairs, he would go. to Covent-Carden,
and on the prisoner hearing that, he said he would chew witness
and his party into the Duke of Gloucester's box.
.tamuel Spring, box-book-keeper of Drury-lane Theatre, de-
posed, that the prisoner was private box-keeper on the Prince's
side, and had eight boxes under his c!aarge. It was his duty
to let those boxes, and if any of them were let lie ought to ac-
count for the money to witness. The money should be entered
in a book. Prisoner had the care of the Duke of Gloucester's
box, which was rented by his Royal Highness for alternate
weeks. The week in question was his Royal Highness's. No
one had any disposal of it at that period but the Duke. Had he
come, every one in it must have been turned out for his Royal
Highness. lie had never accounted to witness for the money
received from Mr. Turner. Mr. Elliston knew of the fraud
from Mr. Turner. On no occasion did a private box-keeper
let a box, in which the renter of it had only alternate weeks,.
in a week that it belonged to such renter. It would be altoge-
ther irregular for the witness to receive money from a box-
keeper under such circumstances. _

Mr. AtuAEtx stated to the Jury that the prisoner was in-
dieted for defrauding his employer, Mr. Elliston ; but by the
testimony adduced, it appeared no part of the prisoner's duty
to account for money received in the week in question for the
Duke of Gloucester's box. Mr. Elliston himself could not let

t ; therefore it could not be held that the prisoner had tic-
rauded I%lr. Elliston. _ _ _

The Jury, under the direction of the Court, found the pri-
soner—Not Guilty.