The Sun.
London, England, 1848-09-16 00:00:00

The'ASSISTANT-JUDGE said that such proceedings were
disgraceful; he wondered how it was that Mr. Le Bre-
ton allowed his clerks to make such a compromise. If
the parish took up cases on public grounds, why did they
abandon them and defeat the ends of justice, by letting
the parties escape, by paying the costs? As to the other
part of the matter, he bad no doubt that warrants were
held back to enable the parties to compromise; but the
Court would not in any way sanction such a monstrous
system; In future, affidavits of the most stringent na-
ture would be required by the Court, and such affi-
davits should show distinctly that there was no trickery
of any kind attempted. This was the first time this
house had been indicted, and he would order the defend-
ant to be liberated on entering into recognizances to ap-
pear for judgment if called upon, which signified that he
would not be called upon if he refrained from such a
course of life, and did not open this house or any other
for similar purposes; but if he or any body connected
with this house opened another, a severe punishment
would follow.

George Hockley, John Jones, and Edward Wilkinson,
were indicted under the 6th lause of the Act for the
Prevention of Dog-stealing, better known as Bishop's
Act, from its having been obtained mainly through the
exertions of Mr. Bishop, the gunsmith, in Bond-street,
for a misdemeanour, in having wilfully and corruptly,
taken and received the sum of 61., to aid in the restora-
tion of three Cuba bloodhounds, of the value of 3001.,
which had beon stolen, being the property of Lord Alex-
ander Russell.

Mr. BODKIN appeared on behalf of the prosecution,
and applied to have the trial postponed, on the ground
that the principal witness, who was one of the noble pro-
secutor's grooms, was compelled to be in attendance
upon his Lordship in Scotland.
Mr. Sergeant ADAMS granted the application, and
fixed the case for the October Sessions.

As this was the first prosecution under this clause, a
great number of sporting gentlemen were present who
seemed anxious to hear the details.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

Edward Allgood Dickenson, of 27, Denmark row, Cold
Harbour-lane, Camberwell, was again brought up on
the charge of obtaining a bill of exchange for 3001.,
under false and fraudulent pretences, on the 18th of Au-
gust last.
The evidence, taken on the last occasion went to show
that Mr. Tracy, a lieutenant in the navy, entrusted a
bill for 3001. to a commission agent named Lawless, to
get cashed for him, and also handed to him 100 shares
in the Callington Mining Company, in Cornwall, as a
collateral security to the individual who advanced the
money. This agent gave it to the prisoner to get cashed,
and he placed it in the hands of a person named Clark.
Mr. Traoy having received a letter from the secretary of
the Mutual Communication Society, thought proper to
stop the payment of the bill, and at once demanded its
restoration. Dickinson gave an order for Clark to de-
liver up the bill and!shares, but he declined doing so, in
consequence of which the prosecutor gave the prisoner
into custody, and, after a lengthened examination, he
was remanded.
Lieutenant Tracy now said that he was exceedingly
obliged, and, in full, much indebted to Alderman Challis
for the attention he had paid to the case, and begged to
say there was no occasion to go farther into the inquiry,
as the bill and shares had been returned to him; but he
thought it right to inform him that the person's name
who refused to give up the bill was not Clark, but
Clarkson; and that he had an office, although the pri-
soner denied that he knew where to find him.
Alderman FAREEROTItER, who sat with Alderman
Challis, said that he would advise all gentlemen who
wished to raise money, not to have anything to do with
advertising agents, who were not worth one shilling; but
as soon as they obtained a bill appropriated it to their
own purposes, and the owner never received a farthing;
on the contrary, he was the loser. He hoped that next
session of Parliament, as hanging was out of fashion,
they would pass a Bill to transport such persons, and
thus put down a system which was disgraceful to any
country and to the public at large. He also was of
opinion that it would be better for gentlemen to apply
to their bankers or solicitors, instead of employing any
agent.
Lieutenant Tracy said, for the future he should take
the Alderman's advice.

The prisoner said, he was not in the habit of dis-
counting bills, and that he had taken every precaution
he thought necessary.
Both Aldermen FAREBROTHER, and CHALLIS thought
the less ho said about the transaction the better, and ho
was discharged.
James Watkins, residing at No. 2, Maidenhead-court,
St. Thomas Apostle, was placed at the bar charged with
assaulting his wife.
Ann Watkins, the wife, said that for a long time she
had been subjected to great ill-treatment from her hus-
band, by his only allowing her three parts of a half-
quartern loaf fur herself and four children, with 41bs. of
patatoes, and occasionally a little tea, to last them the
whole day. He never allowed them any meat, and be-
cause she applied to the parish for relief, to save her-
self and children from starving, her husband beat her
anal knocked her about most cruelly.
Alderman FAREHROTHER—And did he give you that
black eye and face that you have ? The wife—He
did.

The prisoner, throughout the evidence, bad a con-
tinual grin on his face, and at tome parts of it began
laughing, when _ _

Alderman FAnzanoTnza said he would find it no
laughing matter, for he intended to sce what was the
severest punishment he could inflict upon him. He
wished to know what his wages were.
The wife replied, a guinea per week.
The prisoner said that when his wife had his money
she paid no cue, and ran in debt everywhere.

Tile wife denied this, and it was evident, from her
wretched appearance, that she had for a long time been
ill-treated.

Alderman 1'111E111:OTHER, said it appeared to him that
he was one of those profligate men who married a
woman, got tired of her, starved her, and ill-treated her
into the bargain, and therefore he should remand him
for the purpose of seeing how far the law could punish
him for his cruel behaviour towards his wife, whom he
had sworn to love and cherish.

lie was then removed from the bar.
CLEI?KENWELL

Michael Mahoney, a labouring man, was placed at the
bar before Mr. Tyrwhitt, charged by Mary Mahoney,
his wife, with having stabbed with intent to murder her.
The prosecutrix, whose head and arm were cut and
wounded, deposed that she lived with the prisoner in
Bell's-court, Gray's Inn-lane. On Thursday afternoon
she left home with her sister, and on their return they
had a quarrel, when the prisoner seize,) a clog, with
which he commenced beating them about the heads, tie.
in an unmerciful manner, and wounded them ; they de-
funded themselves as well as they were able, and endea-
voured to escape from the room, but the prisoner
snatched up a pair of tyro-tongs, and after belabouring
them violently with them, seiz d an oyster knife, and
making a stab at the prosecutrix, inflicted a severe wound
on her wrist. She bled profusely, and was taken to the
hospital, where her wounds were dressed.
Ellen Keefe, the sister, corroborated this evidence.
An officer of G division heard the cries of " Mur-
der," and took the prisoner into custody.
The prisoner denied the charge, saying that the pro-
secutrix cut herself with some glass, having broken a
window.

Mr. TYRWUITT, under the circumstances, remanded
;he prisoner.

SOUTHWARK.
Richard LetchJord, a policeman of the M or South-
wark division, was placed at the bar before Mr.Cotting-
ham on the following charge:—
Maria Eaton, a young woman of 18, stated that she
came up from Mailing, in Kent, on the preceding day,
and that on her road, about 11 o'clock at night, she met
the prisoner, and, being a stranger, and seeing he was a
policeman from his dress, inquired the way to London-
bridge. He asked her where she came from? and when
she told him, he said that he would show her a house
where she could stay all night. He then led her from
the main road into a garden, saying, that that was the
nearest way, and when they had got some distance he
began to pull her about, when she rebuked him, and said
she would rather walk the road all night than that he
should act in that manner towards her. He, however,
the
threw her on the ground, and forced her to submit to his
over h
violence,er mouth.and wh e nTshhee screamedcom plcomplainant
aonutt
here
placededescribed
his

particulars of the outrage, 13y which it_appeared that a
capital offence had been perpetrated. She went on to re-
late that he afterwards gave her a shilling, which she ac-
cepted, having no other money; and on leaving her he
desired her to tell any policeman she met that he was
not the person who ill-used her. The prisoner then
walked off, and she proceeded back to the road which she
had previously left, and another policeman stopped her
and inquired if she was the woman whose screams for
help he had heard a short time before, and asked if a po-
liceman had not been with her? She at first denied it,
but afterwards told the truth as to what had happened,
when she was taken to the station-house, and pointed
out the prisoner as the man by whom she had been vio-
lated.

In answer to the Magistrate's questions the com-
plainant said, that her parents were poor people in Kent,
and that she came up to town to try and get some em-
ployment. Sho admitted that she took the money from
the prisoner after ho had ill-used her, and promised not
to say anything about it to another policeman.
Sergeant Clerk, 8 M, stated that about eleven o'clock
the preceding night he missed the prisoner off his beat in
the Kent-road, near the canal-bridge, and while he
was looking for him he heard the cries of a woman
proceed from a place called Mercer's-gardens, near
Gully-quay. He listened for a while, and again heard
a shriek, and he then went towards the spot, and
met the young girl coming from that direction. He
stopped her, and asked her if it was she who had
screamed out ? She at first hesitated, and when he
desired her to tell the truth she informed him of the
outrage that had been perpetrated on her, and said it
was done by a policeman. He then made her accom-
pany him to point out the offender, whom she said she
should know again, and he took her to two policemen
on the adjoining beats, and when she saw them she said
that they were not the men. Tho prisoner was still
missing from his beat, and the sergeant found that a
short time ago he had gone off duty, leaving word that
he was ill, and had gone to bed at the station-house. The
complainant was then taken to the station-house, and
the prisoner, who had a few minutes previously retired
to rest, was called up, and when he got down stairs be-
fore the inspector (Frond) the complainant identified him
as the man by whom she had been assaulted.
The prisoner said, the compUinant was mistaken in
his identity, and that he never saw her until he was
called out of bed at the station-house. He accounted for
going off duty the night before from sudden indisposition.
The Magistrate eulogised the conduct of the sergeant
for acting with vigour in the business, and ordered that
the depositions should be taken, and the prisoner COM-
witted fkm