The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-26 00:00:00

SURREY SESSIONS.

(Before J. W. FRESIIYIELD,Esq.,and a Bench of
William Tucker, an innkeeper of Walton-on-Thames, who
was found guilty on Monday of stealing some fowls and a
bushel of peas, the property of the Earl of Ellesmere, which
appeared in The Sun of that day, was again indicted for
receiving fourteen fowls the property of John Johnson, of
Walton-on-Thames, well knowing them to be stolen.
Mr. Locke conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Chamock
defended the prisoner.
It appeared that on the night of the 3d of February last
an outhouse on the prosecutor's premises was broken open,
and the fourteen fowls stolen therefrom. On the following
day the prisoner was seen it: Guildford, with the fowls in his
possession, quite dead. In answer to the constable who de-
tected him, he said that he purchased the fowls of a man on
the road, but that he could not find him.

Hollington, inspector or the Guildford police, said, that
while the prisoner was in his custody on a previous
charge, he heard him tell a man to go to his house
at Walton, and tell his wife to put the fowls out of the way.
Hide, another constable said, that he went to the
prisoner's brother's house, on the 4th of February, and
there found a basket containing fourteen fowls, which were
indentitied by the prosecutor as his property.
Frederick Egan, another constable, said that about
seven o'clock on Wednesday evening, the 3d of Fe-
bruary, he was in a coffee-house at Chertsey, where
he saw the prisoner. He was boasting that he could
skin a sheep better than anyman—especially if the sheep was
stolen. He also defied witness or any constable to take him
into custody should he commit a felony. The prisoner left
the house about a quarter of an hour afterwards, and pro-
ceeded towards the prosecutor's premises.
The witness underwent a cross-examination by Mr. CHAR-
NOCK, in which he said that he had not given evidence on any
former occasion against the prisoner, but that he was called
upon by the prosecutor. He was not paid, like the Mint
witnesses, 7s. a day. He had only 3e. a day, which he con-
sidered not sufficient. lie should have no objection, how-
ever, to receive 7s. a day.—(Laughter.)
Mr. CHARNOCY, in his address to the jury, commented in
severe terms on the evidence of Hallington, the " eaves-
dropping constable ;" who he considered unworthy their be-
lief. He read a report from the Times in which Mr. Justice
Coleridge, at Cambridge, refused to receive the evident of a
constable who overheard some conversation said to havebeen
uttered by a prisoner while in his custody. The Learned
Judge publicly condemned such evidence. He therefore
called on the jury to be cautious how they receive the sole
unsupported evidence of such a man. Several witnesses hav-
ing been called to the prisoner's character, the Chairman
summed up, condemning the conduct of the Learned Counsel
for the prisoner, in producing a newspaper report for the pur-
pose of prejudicing the minds of the jury. He really con-
sidered there was too much liberty taken by some of the
Learned Counsel in that Court, which was not allowed in any
other, and which took up unnecessarily the time of the pub-
lic. So much stress should not be laid upon the evidence of
the police, who, he believed, in the present case, had given
their evidence in a fair and straight forward manner. They
had heard the whole of the evidence, and it would be for
them to say whether the prisoner was guilty or not.
The jury consulted for a tew minutes, and returned a ver-
dict of Guilty.
Egan, the constable, was called by the chairman, and said
that he had long suspected the prisoner of being concerned
in various robberies committed in Walton and the neighbour-
hood. The license of his house had been suspended in con-
sequence of his bad character.
the enaix3tAx sentenced him to six months' imprison-
ment for the former indictment, at the expiration of which
a further term of six months' imprisonment, for having pos-
session of the fowls belonging to Mr. Johnson.
The prisoner wished to address the Bench, but Mr. Char-
flock, his counsel, advised him not to do so, as the Court had
acted very leniently with him on both indictments.

EXTRAORDINARY MODESTY.--The amiable Master
of Trinity has been lately heard to say, "Let Who-will be
next Bishop. I shall be satisfied,"—,puneh.