The Sun.
London, England, 1824-11-06 00:00:00

POLICE [NTELLIG ENCE.

IMPORTANT QUESTION.
GUILDHALL.—Mr. J. Reeve, pawnbroker, Snowhill, ap-
peared on summons yesterday before Mr. Alderman MAOXAY,
to shew cause why he refused to deliver up ,certain property
which had been unlawfully obtained and illegally pawned with
him, without the privity or authority of the owner; agreeably
to the directions of the 39th and 40th Geo. 111. cap. 99, com-
monly called the Pawnbroker's Act.
Mr. DI alEs, jun., attorney, who attended upon the part of '
the complainant, Mr. Woolfit, upholsterer; St. Paul's Church.
yard, opened the case by stating, that property to a consider-
able amount had been obtained from his client by ayoung man
of the name of Ritchie,
whom he had subsequently prosecuted
to conviction at the Old flailey, and he bad been sentenced to
transportation. Part of this property was in the hands sf se-
veral pawnbrokers, but as it was understood that the case of.
Mr. Reeve would decide that of the others, be had not applied
for summonses against them. He 'was proceeding to prove
that the property in question—s. tea-chest, had been fraudu-
lently obtained, when—
Mr. IiARMER (who appeared ror Mr. Reeve) said—l admit
all the facts of your case. I allow that Mr. Reeve has the pro-
perty; that it was obtained from you under false pretences, and
that you have convicted the party for the fraud. But I contend
that the Magistrate has no jurisdiction in the present case.—
The words of the statute are, " If the owner or owners of any
goods or chattels shall make out to the satisfaction of any Jus-
tice, that the same shall have been unlawfully obtained or.
taken, and unlawfully pawned or pledged, such Justice shall
thereupon cause such goods and chattels forthwith 'to be re-
stored to the owner or owners thereof." Now, I contend that
the complainant is not the owner of this property, and that he
ceased to be so the moment he parted -with it to Ritchie. In a
case of felony, though possession be parted with, the right of
property still remains in the original owner. This is the dis-
tinction between felony and fraud ; in the latter case, the right
of property as well as the possession must be parted with ; in
felony, the possession only. In order to convict Ritchie of the
fraud, the right of property must have been parted with ; other-
wise the man's offence would have been felony.
Mr. Harmer then referred to the case " Parker v. Patrick,"
in the Term Reports, Easter Term 1793. The defendant Pa-
trick had prosecuted to conviction a prisoner who had obtained
goods under false pretences froin him, and pledged them with
Parker, a pawnbroker. The property being produced on the
trial, Patrick got possession of it, and the pawnbroker subse.
quently brought his action for the recovery of it, and obtained
a verdict. Upon a motion for a new trial, the Court said,
" This case is distinguishable from the case of felony ; for
there, by positive Statute (21 Henry VIII. cap. 11.) the owner,
in case he prosecutes the offender to conviction, is entitled to
restitution; but that does not extend to this case, where the
goods were obtained front the defendant by fraud ;" and the
motion was refused. This • Casei Mr. Harmer contended, was
decisive of the present.
Mr. Di atv:s asked what was the date of that decision, and
finding it to be before the passing of the present Pawnbrokers'
Act, argued that the clause in that Act upon which he was pro-
ceeding was made expressly to alter the law as thus laid down,
lie then quoted the clause, laying great stress upon the words
t unlawfully obtained," and insisted that this property must
be decided to be unlawfully obtained, and not feloniously.

Mr. liAltatEft-Certainly so, or you could have had no con.
viction. The case I have quoted being before the passing of
the Pawnbrokers' Act can make no difference in the question.
The clause in the present Act expressly says " the owner or
owners." My point is, that your diem is not the owner of this
property. If he had been the owner he could not have con-
victed Ritchie of the fraud. •
Mr. Beresford, the Chief Clerk, !mid, that as the question
was very important, he would stibmit to the Alderman the pro.
pricty of titling the opinion of the City Solicitor, who was ac-
cordingly sent for, and oh hearing the state of the question,
said, that in his judgment the (lase alluded to was precisely in
point. The question was not as to the unlawful taking; but
whether or no the present complainant was the owner of the
property, and after the case quoted, there scented to be no
doubt toe principle decided being the same as must govern the
present case—the distinction between fraud and felony. Such
was his present opinion ; but he would look. into the subject,
and if he found any reason to alter that opinion, Mr. Dimes
shoUld be made acquainted with it. By this decision the pro.
perty remains with the pawnbrokers.

Maxstox-HousE.--Yesterday a deputation waited upon
the LORD MAYOR, from the Governors of " the Female Or-
phan Asylum," and stated, that from the report of the transac-
tions of the Justice-room, they collected that his Lordship had
under his care a female orphan, whom he was desirous of ob-
taining admission for into their charity. They presented to his
Lordship a book of the rules by which they were governed, and
begged that the facts of the case should be communicated to
them.
The Lon) MAYou stated, that he had made inquiries,
and found that the parents of the child were respectable
tradespeople in the city of Edinburgh, who were induced,
amongst others to go out to Poyals, upon the false repre-
sentation that diey would there find civilized life, abundance,
and happiness. The society were aware, through the medium of
the press, how fatally untrue those representations proved to
be. The parents of the child escaped from the desert in a state of
indigence, but the father had contracted a disease, the prodUce
of climate and hardship, which soon released him from all
mortal inflictions; and the mother quickly followed, from the
same causo, aggravated by the pangs of separation. This child,
the last of a respectable family, was left in the care of another
emigrant, who, having lost all his property by going after the
new government, in the hope of becoming something wonderful
in the eyes of his countrymen, was compelled to place her in

the hands of the Lord .11,,y,yr, uatil smite ins:itution could be
found which might humanely put such a construction upon its
rules as would not exclude so unfortunaic an object. There
had been several other cases of this nature., to which the press
very properly and feelingly directed the public .attention, and
in which public subscription had been effectually used. This
orphan had been supported on the residue of that subscription,
and bik hordship was extremely anxious, before the expiration
of his Mayoralty, to have her in a parmanent manner provided
for. The nurse, in whose Caru.,ahe had been placed, had con-
ceived an attachment for and was deshons. of keeping her,.
even at her own cost, but the V7oMail Was very poor, and could
not be expected to be able .to serve the child.

- The gentlemen of the deputation said they were happy to be •
able to put into effect his Llrdship's. wishes.on the subject.
They would, indeed, be unworthy of the support which they
received from the put,lic, if they hesitated to give every ad-
vantage which their institution atllrded to such a case.
The' Lonn Mayo,, in warm terms, thanked dill» for the
ready manner in which they had come forward..to anticipate his
wishes. It was not every institution which he had had to deal
with in the course of his Mayoralty, that came forward with such
proMpt bencrolence to relieve.a ease of distress); and there,
were. some institutions which could 4'40 to send cvtry. depend-
ent they had to a boarding seTicsil, so immense vim the contri-
butions levied. upon the charitablefor their support. He had often
met with. a Freezing adherence to the letter of nice distinctions,
which excluded the greater number of the destitute objects, for
the relief of whom the money of. the public was expressly given.
His Lordship, in alluding to the manner in which the deputation
became informed of the case, observed that it formed another
strong proof of the absolute necessity of publishing occurrences at
police-offices. If that practice were given up (and he trusted.
would not), the cause of humanity_ would sustain irreparable
injury ; for not only
:did police reporting operate to the pre-
vention and detection of crime, but it placed before the eyes of
the charitable the sufferings tithe unfortunate, and gave an in-
structive lesson to the inexperienced. IVithout the aid of-. the
organ to which he alluded, numbers of refugees might have
perished, and many widows and orphans would, to his know-
ledge, have wept in vain; for their miseries would have re.
coved no alleviation but . empty pity, notwithstanding the
number and wealth of our charitable institutions.

• •MARYLEBON E-Orricr.=-A Alr. triiodhani appeared to an
information obtained against hint by Mr. White, the district
Surveyor for having made windows- in the party-walls of a
house which he hdd recently erected, contrary to the prio:i,,ions
of the 234 and dilth sections of an Act passed in the 14th of
George 111., entitled The Building' Act." The object of
the Act is to prevent houses being built of Improper materials,
or in a way calculated to afford facilities for the progress of
lire; and it is on the latter account that party-walls are re-
quired to be built without any openings whatever. From the
importance of the object, the enforcement of the enactments
has been confided to the district Surveyors. In the present in.
stance the offence was admitted ; and it appeared, that through
ignorance bf the law on that point; Mr. Niroodliam had so con-
structed his houSe, that the blocking up of the windows (which
he is tOnipelled to do) will he attended with seriousineonvenience
to him.
Mr. RAWLINgON and Mr. Ottirrrms joined in expressing
•
their opinions, that as many new erections were being -made in
all parts of this district, and' as otherg 'might err equally inad-
vertently, it would be advisable to circulate a brief summary of
what was, and what was not allowed.

Mir. Wit ir E remarked, that he knew of no way by which that
ell
tobtainedoth o i>4)e s b.oya
ob
givenjectocof
brought
As respected the case then before them, his only object was the
eit
eespbuyblic dieityd a
iil which i
pcahper seas
s.
due discharge of his public duties ; and if Mr. Woodham
would undertake to block up the windows, he would give him
a month for No. doing, and in the mean time the information
might stand over, with an understanding that it would be with.
drawn immediately on the alterations being Made.
Mr. \Voodham expressed .his thanks for the forbearance
shown him, and gladly acceded to the proposed arrangement.
now-Fir itEvr.—On Thursday evening a well-dressed young
man, who gave his.name John Brown, but whose real name
was said to be George, was brought . before Sir R. )nitwit,
charged on suspicion of robbing a gentleman of his watch in
rtleo
Covent-garden Theatre.
rge Jones Abram, the prosecutor, went into the
the
l%
ipri. t
pit of the theatre at the opening of the doors on ‘Vednes.
day night, and in endeavouring to secure a good seat, he
pushed on with others, and at that instant he observed the
prisoner pressing against him in a very peculiar manlier,
and getting first behind and then in front of him. lie
thought it singular at the time, but front the appearance
of the prisoner, he did not suspect hiM of any thing dis.
-honest. The prisoner took a seat near him, but in a very short
time he disappeared. In about three quarters of an hour 31r.
Abram missed his watch, and he immediately suspected that
the prisoner must have taken it. lie looked about the pit, and
at length saw the prisoner standing in another part among a
crowd. He looked steadily at him, and the prisoner observing
this went out. Mr. Abram followed, but not in time to stop
the prisoner, who went straight into the street. The check-
taker, however, being informed of Mr. Abram's loss and sus.
picion, sent two constables after the prisoner, and he was
brought back. He was searched upon the landing-place, where
the box of the check-taker is placed, but nothing found upon
him. He was taken back into the theatre, and in a few minutes
a gentleman passing out, saw a watch upon the spat where the
prisoner had been searched. This proved to be the prosecutor's
watch, and the prisoner was consequently detained.
The prisoner protested that be knew nothing of the robbery;
and being asked why he left the theatre immediately before the
conclusion of the play, he declared he did not leave bet re the
curtain tell.

Two witnesses swore that the curtain had not fallen, even
when the prisoner was conducted back to the pit.
Sir It. Bi lINIE said, there might be some doubt as to the pri-
soner's guilt, but the evidence was too strong to allow of his dis-
charge without the intervention of a jury.
The prisoner was fully committed to Newgate for trial.

UNIox-Ii A LL. —Yesterday .Thomas Hotly, who was some
days ago brought before M. SWAB rY% -Esq., charged with bay.
big committed a singular species of imposition, underwent a
final examination. Air. Hines, the proprietor of the Brighton
conch, attended, and Monk, the driver.
Air. Hines produced an anonymous letter, which he stated he
had received since the last examination of. the prisoner, and
which, lie presumed, from the tenor of it, was written by that
individual. The letter was as followii, and addressed to Alessrs.
Hines and Monk

"gentlemen--\u doubt you will be surprised on receiving a
letter from the person who, but a few days ago, improperly
Obtained from you-the sum of 14s. Gd., -*ln& sum will be re.
turned to you as soon as possible. I atii an 'unfortunate person,
out of employment-, without money or friends. Poverty and
distress drove me to 'the sad itheinative prietised on You: some
months ago, I never contemplated 'Sikh an act. Rest assured,
Gentlemen, that the amount shall be returned to you the mo.
ment I have it in rniy poWei. I acknowledge the magnitude of
the crime, and with the greatest contrition I beg W subscribe
myself (and in fact I am) a Miserable indiOdual.
" Mr. Hines, Us. Bd.-..111r: Monk, ‘2N. gd.,,
Mr. Monk now told the 31agistrate that Mr, Attree, the
olirrithAiletvni fto whom the
oldi of brown paper, was ad..
parcel, eon-
gtaeinntilnegmnaonthriensgidbinugt
t4a,fo
dressed, was on a tour anti for which the landlord of the White
Hart had advanced the, i;ticri
.of 11. Ss. thls to the prisoner
eillr. Attree, Monk
the prisoner
prisoner
upon the repreientatitin : that Mt', . Attreeth.ewboaluiad.ncree ftiuuned,
the sum of I/.
bthe
thatsame,
g eint
tibeelinnagnty e ;11hileatiaiboe ofye nn,
I:eme7 LI41), twoiulle,hwe
pay the
the
and
ds mfraormk edo own
hthneoowtinisirdees
peo of
italbi thety parcel,
at Mr. ilines's booking-offiee,.
3uan.d6edrt.ooovke,r utopotrlehpisib,orner7wpohonasiebniltitayw,
atyo.
fraud was discovered, and the prisoner was apprehended on
Wednesday last in' Clapham,
while in the act of endeavouring to play off a similar fraud.
The Magistrate observed, that there was no necessity of hav-
ing the attendance of Mr. Attree, as that case Was sufficiently
supported by the evidence of the landlord of the White Hart at
lUttchant, and Monk, the driver.
Tile prisoner was then asked if .he was disposed to say any
thing with respect to the alleged fraud- Ile replied, that be,
had nothing to !state in his defence ; and he was fully com-
mitted for trial. .

A poor woman of the name of Phoebe Wilkes,
on Saturday evening last picked up five ten pound notes, of the
Bank of Sparrow and Co. The loser shortly after published an
acitount of bis ill hick, when they were readily restored by the
fortunate woman, to whom the reward of five pounds was paid.
(ChamsArd Chlonick.)