The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-11 00:00:00

CROYDON PETTY SESSIONS.

(Before Mr. D. R. WARRINGTON and other Justices.)
Mrs. Elizabeth Vickery, who keeps a large beer-
shop, called the Castle, at Gibbet-green, near Croydon,
was charged upon four informations, laid by Mr. Bar-
nard, the Supervisor of Excise for this district, by or-
der of the Board of Excise, with having sold wine
and brandy without a license, whereby she had incurred
penalties amounting to 2001.
The defendant, when called upon to plead, said that
she admitted she had sold the spirits and wine, and that
she was not licensed ; but she said she should not have
done so, but that the Excise °facers who went to her
house told her they could not drink beer, and that no
harm should come of their being served with wine.
The BENCH said this was a very grave imputation
upon officers placed in a very responsible situation, and
they considered it better that the evidence should be
gone into.

William Bullen, an officer of Excise, was then exa-
mined, and he deposed that he went to the house of the
defendant, in company with another officer, and they
ordered dinner and a pint of sherry, which was brought
to them ; and in the bill they were charged 3s. Gd. for
the wine. They had also some brandy, for which they
were charged is.
Another Excise officer, named Drew, confirmed the
statement of the last witness.

The CHAIRMAN said a serious imputation had been
cast upon the officers of having trepanned the defendant
into the commission of the offence, and he should wish to
ask both of them upon the solemn oath they had taken,
whether there was any truth in the statement that they
had told the defendant they could not drink beer, and
that she would not get into any trouble if she allowed
them to have wine.

• Both the officers stated positively that nothing of the
kind took place, and they said that so far from any diffi-
culty being made to let them have wine, that when they
came to have their dinners, they found some glasses
ready placed upon the table, and the moment the wine
was ordered it was brought to them.
Mr. Barnard said that the present informations had
been ordered by the Commissioners of Excise, in conse-
quence of their having received information that at. the
defendant's beer-shop as much business was carried on
in wine and spirits as at any large tavern. The present
informations had been laid with a view to put a stop to
such illegal proceedings.
The BENCH said they had no doubt that the state-
ment made by Mr. Barnard relative to the conduct of
the defendant was founded on fact, and they should
therefore convict her.
Mr. Barnard said that the Board of Excise were not
anxious to press heavily upon the defendant, and if a
conviction took place on the two first informations, he
was instructed to withdraw the others.

The BENCH told the defendant she ought to be very
grateful for the leniency she had experienced, and they
hoped the present proceedings would be a warning to her.
She was then convicted in the penalty of 251. upon each
of the two first informations.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HO USE.

The agents of Mr. Ledger, the late candidate for
the office of Bridgemaster, appeared before Alderman
Wilson to prosecute a case of wilful and corrupt perjury
under the II th Gco. IV., cap. 18, sec. 3, alleged to
have been committed at the late election for that office.
The subject has become matter of deep interest in the
City, particularly since the statement made in the Court
of Alderman, that hundreds of strangers to the livery
and frecdetn of the City had voted on the occasion, and
the Justice-room -was crowded.

Thomas Bradstock was put to the bar on the charge
of having perjured himself' on Tuesday the 20th of
January (the sixth day's poll), by swearing that he was
a freeman and liveryman of the City, and had been so
for twelve months past.
Mr. Stodart, froei Mr. Humphrey's office, appeared
for the prosecution, and called witnesses.
James Churchill Meech, of No. 5, Rose-place,
Globe-road, Mile-end, deposed that he had been cheek
clerk to Mr. Gibbs at the last election for Bridgemaster.
He was present at the polling-place when the prisoner,
whom he had known since the year 1832, came up to
poll. Witness suspected that the prisoner was not a
freeman or liveryman ; and, in a friendly way, asked him
how long he had been a liveryman ? to which he re-
plied "fourteen months." The oath was then administered
to the prisoner by Mr. Jaques, the poll-clerk to the Se-
condary, and witness took the regulation check, after
having heard him distinctly take the oath and poll.
Mr. William Jaques, poll clerk to Mr. Secondary
Potter, who presided during the polling, stated that he
had some knowledge of the prisoner as being at the
election, but could not distinctly swear to him. Wit-
ness polled none except these to whom he ad-
ministered the oath ; and it was his duty to enter
the names of all parties polled in the poll-
book. (Here Mr. Secondary Potter produced the
poll book. Witness real the name " Thomas Brad-
stock, draper," from the pall book, which had been
catered by him. The person who appeared to poll,
gave at first the name of Bradlock. Witness then de-
sired him to spell the name, and he spe:t it " Brad-
stock." That was in consequence of what the check
clerk, Meech, bad observed to the person voting.
James Churchill Meech (the former witness) said, he
heard the prisoner give the name of Bradlock first, and
corrected him.

Thomas Sloarnan, beadle to the Drapers' Company,
deposed that there was no such name as Thomas
Brmistock in the Drapers' List of the Livery. Wit-
ness knew all the drapers by name but not by sight, and
he knew that the prisoner was not a liverymen of the
Drapers' Company.
Mr. Thomas Dudman, of Coopers'-row, Crotched
Friars, clerk to Mr. Ledger, recollected that on the
20th of January the prisoner came up to the poll.
Witness heard all that passed, and saw the oath admi-
nistered to the prisoner. Witness suspected the pri-
soner himself.

Alderman Wll..oN—Well, prisoner, what Imo you
to say ? Prisoner—Nothing, sir, but that I was never
there at all.

Alderman WILSON—Who and what are you?
Prisoner—l have got property, and I am assisted by
my father. 1 have been in the Mint, and my father
and brother are now in that establishment.

Alderman WILSON—I shall commit you for trial
but the offence is bailable.

Mr. Hill, the solicitor, who appeared fur the priso-
ner, requested to know with what amount of bail the
Alderman would be satisfied ?

Alderman WILSON—He must enter into security
himzelf to the amount of 100/., and provide two good
sureties, in 50/. each, and 24 hours' notice of bail must
be given.

Mr. Thompson, election agent, submitted that as
the matter was of great moment to the citizens of
London, the Alderman would probably direct the City
solicitor to prosecute.
Alderman WlLaoN—Certainly. The City Solicitor
shall, in such a case, be instructed to prosecute. Mut-
ters of this description may seriously affect the City,
and the Magistrates will do all in their power to put an
end to such practices as have evidently taken place at
that election.

The prisonor was then ordered to be committed.

ACCIDENT TO PRINCE ALBERT.—The pa-
ragraph in a Morning Paper, stating that the ice in Buck.
Ingham Gardens, at the time Prince Albert was skatirr, on
Tuesday, gave way, and his Royal Highness fell into the
water, is correct, except as to the time and the depth of
the Prince's immersion. It was in the af:ernoon that the
i%cemideersnetd to occutrhreedc,hain in ndinwstaetaer, ha only sunk half his depth.
That his Royal Highness being
That part of the ice which gave way had been broken the
previous evening for the supply of the aquatic fowls. We
are exceedingly happy, however, to state that his Royal
Highness does not feel any bad effects from the accident,
and is in perfect health.—Globe.
THE COAL TRADE.—In a paragraph in the
last number of the Tyne Mercury, we took occasion to
observe upon the resolution of the coal-owners to put an
end to the restriction on the quantity of coals offered for
sale at one time in the London market, and the probable
effect of the change on the staple trade of this district.
We trust that the public generally, and the inhabitants
of the metropolis in particular, will watch the effect of
ft,e, alteration in the price of coals fur their own fire-
ides. will, we 'are persuaded, see that much of
the clamour which has for many years been raised
against the coal.owners of the north belongs of
right to the Corporation of the City of Lon-
don and the other worthies, great and small,
who enjoy their several shares of plunder on the
Thames. A very large portion of the
.cost of the
coals,:they will find now by experience, is occasioned much
nearer their own doors than they have hitherto been dis-
posed to believe. One effect of the removal of the re-
strictions in London has been to produce an expectation in
several ports on the coast that a like removal of restrictions
would take place with them, and that vessels would obtain
quicker dispatch than they could previously do. Upon this
matter we believe the coal-owners themselves have not yet
engage their serious attention.
come to any decision, but we think it is one which
should
early
We repeat it is our
sincere opinion that the truest and wisest policy of the coal-
owners is in every branch of their trade to put an end to
restriction,—to look for profit to an extended business, rather
than by continual limitation to offer continualinduecments,
year after year, to open new collieries, not merely in this
immediate neighbourhood, but in the whole of the district'
—on the Wear and the Tees, as well as upon the Tyne._
Tyne Mercury,