The Sun.
London, England, 1846-02-04 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.
(Before the RECORDER.)
Joseph Barrett, 36, late a constable belonging to the
City police force, was indicted for stealing six quarts
of wine and eighteen bottles, the property of George
Barker.

Mr. Payne prosecuted, and Mr. Mellor appeared for
the prisoner.
The only points of interest in this case were the cir-
cumstance of the position of the prisoner, and the in-
genious manner in which the robbery was committed.
It appeared that the prosecutor had let a part of his
house to the prisoner, and he occupied it with his wife.
A portion of the premises so occupied was over the pro-
secutor's wine-cellar, and the prisoner had taken ad-
vantage of this, to break a hole through the floor, and
by this means abstracted the property. At the last
session the prisoner's wife pleaded guilty to the robbery
and was sentenced to six month's imprisonment.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty.
Mr. PAYNE said that the prosecutor had lost pro-
perty to a very considerable amount, and there was
this circumstance of aggravation in the case of the pri-
soner, that he appeared to have induced his wife to
plead guilty to the charge on the former occasion, in
the hope that ho might thereby himself escape pun-
ishment.

The RECORDER said it was quite unnecessary to urge
any topic of aggravation, as the case in itself was one
of a very serious character, which rendered it his duty
to pass a severe sentence, viz. transportation for seven
years.

Mr. Barker said, that on a former occasion he hail
recommended the woman to the merciful consideration
of the Court ; believing that the prisoner was the mor,
guilty of the two, and he was still desirous, if it were
possible, to obtain some mitigation of her punishment.
The RECORDER said that if any representation was
made to the Secretary of State, and he was referred to,
he should not oppose an alteration of the sentence that
had been passed upon the wife of the prisoner.
Edwin William Edwards, 17, described as a clerk, was
indicted for stealing a cash-box, 6/. in silver money, and
a 51. Bank of England note, the property of John
Edward Creevy, and another.
Mr. Baldwin defended the prisoner.
It appeared that the prosecutor and his brother carry
on the business of a licensed victualler, No. 100, High
Holborn, and on the night of Jan. 6, the prisoner and
some other persona were in the bar-parlour partaking
of some refreshments, and very soon after the persons
were gone the cash-box and its contents were missed.
Suspicion fell upon the prisoner, and from information
received by the police, a constable went to the lodgings
occupied by him, and betwinii the bed and the mattress
he found the cash-boyi, the lock of which had been
abstracted from it.
forced and them ~„ey
The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the prisoner
was se7;venced to be imprisoned and kept to hard-labour
fr..; six months.

Frederick Tyler Russell, 22, pleaded guilty to an in-
dictment, charging him with feloniously forging and
uttering an order for the payment of 551., with intent to
defraud the Governor and Company of the Bank of
England.

sentence was deferred.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-ROUSE.
THE CORPORATION AND THE WATERMAN'S STEAM-
BOAT COMPANY.—Mr. Webster Flockton, who was a few
days ago convicted before the Lord Mayor upon the
charge of having caused a barge to be laid before the
archway at Paul's-wharf, thereby obstructing the clear
and orderly passing of craft, appeared again before his
Lordship to answer a complaint for a repetition of the
alleged offence, upon the 30th of January.
As might be expected, from the hostile condition of
affairs between the Corporation and the Waterman's
Steam-boat Company, much interest was excited. It
will be recollected that Mr. Flockton appealed against
the convi►•tion in the first case. The defendant conducted
his own defence, and before the evidence was taken de-
clared that there was no obstruction at the plying-place,
and that the access to the stairs was as free as was the
access to the Old Swan stairs, Mr. Thornton's wharf, or
any other plying• place in the neighbourhood.
The LORD MAYOR said he drew no comparison be-
tweea any two cases, and would not allow one to inter-
fere at all with another.
Henry Kirby, waterman and lighterman, stated that
on the day specified in the summons, a barge with " W.
Flockton, No. 644" upon it was lying upon Paul's-wharf
causeway, fastened to the piles. He always considered
that the place belonged to the Corporation. No boat
proceeding from London-bridge could get to the stairs
without going round the barge, which floated at high
water, but was aground at low water. The piles about
the place were placed there by the Corporation.
The LORD MAYOR—Can you reach the public stairs
through the piles with a boat ? Witness—No.
The LORD MAYOR—In what way does the barge hinder
the due and orderly passing of boats to the landing place ?
Witness—lf I attempted to go to the stairs between the
piles I should be liable to have my boat smashed between
the barge and the stairs. I must go ruund the barge, if I
want to get to the stairs.
The LORD MAYOR—Are these stairs public? Witness
.—Yes, I have known them to be so these thirty years,
and the City to keep the piles in repair. I have not
rowed to the stairs since the barge has been there. I
have been differently employed.
The witness produced his freedom in the Waterman's
and Lighterman's Company, which was examined by
Mr. Banyon, the clerk to the Company, and pronounced
genuine.
The LORD MAYOR—Does the barge so obstruct the
passage to the stairs that if a person were to fall from it
into the river a boat would have to go round before it
could resider assistance ? Witness—Certainly. l‘ly
Lord, it has gone abroad that I have been instigated by
rival concerns to appear in this business. That is not
the fact ; we are hard-working men, and we contend
that we have rights as well as steam-boat proprietors.
I am contending for our right.
Mr. Flockton—My Lord, the complainant says he is a
hardworking man, and that he is injured by the posi•
den of the barge. Now, upon the first accusation
against me he admitted that he had not rowed a boat,
nor been in the habit of rowing one for eight years;
how, then, can he be aggrieved by the barge? I said
and I believe that he is employed by the old Steam-boat
Company of Woolwich.
The complainant—l am not biassed by any company,
I positively assert, my Lord.
Mr. Flockton—The barge is a small way upon the
causeway, but to call it an obstrnction is quite absurd.
It lies opposite to a shed, and is in the mud, where it
cannot occupy any space injuriously to those who wish
to land passengers at the stairs.
Robert G. Hasler, a fraeman of the Waterman and
Lighterman's Company, gave evidence similar to that
given by the complainant, as to the obstructive position
of the barge, and stated that she h ►d lain in the same
place every day since the movement of the first com-
plaint, and that she formed a permanent impediment.
The LORD MAYOR—Has your boat ever come to the
stairs since you first saw the barge there ? Witness—
Never.
Mr. Flockton—Have you a boat which plies to those
stairs ? Witness—No. If I had they were so occu-
pied that I could not do anything there.
Mr.lFlockton—lt is evident, my Lord, that this man is
no more injured than the other.
The LORD MAYOR said the evidence of both wit-
nesses went to show that if a person fell off the barge