The Sun.
London, England, 1846-10-22 00:00:00

and delivered up the property to him. He could not
tell the prisoner's motive for leaving a parcel in his
(witness's) house so long. All the time that it was there
no person called for it, but the day upon which witness
delivered it up to Mr. Haines, a man came to his bar and
asked for it, but he then told him it was too late, as he
had delivered it to an officer.
Mr. ELLIOTT—Who was the person who called ?
Witness—l don't know who he was, your Worship.
Prisoner—lndeed you do as well as I do, and better,
for the first time I met him was with you, and in your

Witness—No such thing, the first time I saw him was
with you. _ _

Cross-examined by Mr. Games—He did not help him-
self or his friends to any of the gloves from the parcel,
nor had he disposed of any other goods which the parcel
contained. Had never offered valuable property, which,
in addition to the gloves, the parcel contained, to Mr.
Elgee, a publican in the Kent-road. The prisoner had
frequently been at his house when there were police-
officers there, but it was not until they had quarrelled,
and that the prisoner had charged him with having stolen
property in his possession, that he thought of giving the
parcel up.

Henry Boor, assistant to Mr. llamber, one of the
messengers to the Bankruptcy Court, stated that on the
20th of January, 1844, he was put into possession of the
stock of a bankrupt, named Williams, No. 17, Regent-
street. On the Ist or 2d of February an assignee was
appointed, and it was arranged that the stock, which was
of the value of 1,3001., should be disposed of at a valua-
tion. Witness remained on the premises until the night
of the 14th of February, when he went home, and on
returning on the following morning, he discovered that
the place had been robbed of about 600/. worth of pro-
perty. The property produced he believed to be a part
of that stolen.

George Hancock, at present a railway guard, but for-
merly a shopman to Mr. Williams, of No. 17, Regent-
■treet, deposed to all the property produced being a
portion of the stock of Mr. Williams at the:tim►e of his
bankruptcy.
Mr. 'Umber, one of the messengers belonging to the
Court of Bankruptcy, here requested to state that he
was messenger in possession of the goods of Williams,
in January, and the earlier part of February, 1844, and
had, unfortunately, been held accountable for the loss,
so that, in point of fact, he was the prosecutor in the
present case. The prisoner, in his account to him (Mr.
Hamber), said that when he had deposited the parcel at
Wright's, there was a vast quantity of property in it,
which was not to be found, such as silk stockings and
other things, and that Wright, as he should be able to
prove, had offered part of the goods for sale at different
places. Wright, on the contrary, gave the prisoner the
worst character possible, and the latter, retorting, paid
him off with interest.

Mr. Games addressed the magistrate at some length
in reply to the evidence, and expressed a hope that his
client would! not be kept in custody for one moment
upon the testimony of such a witness as Wright had
shown himself to be.

Mr. ELLIOTT thought that there were two strong
points in the case affecting the prisoner; the first was his
recent possession of the property after it had been stolen,
and his threat against the landlord of having stolen
goods in his possession. In his opinion there was a
prima facie case established, and as the case was one
which would require a lengthened investigation, he
should remand the accused till that day week.

Mr, Games applied for the prisoier's liberation on
bail, but Mr. Elliott refused to accept bail.

WESTMINSTER.

Two fellows of notoriously bad character, who gave
their names John Smigh and Edward Watson, were
charged with the following daring highway robbery.
Robert Hurd, a pensioner from the British Legion in
Spain, stated that at about four o'clock on the previous
afternoon he met Watson, of whom he had some pre
vious knowledge, and, on his representing that he
was very unwell, took him into a public-house and gave
him something to drink, in paying for which he exposed
some sovereigns. On leaving the house, a few minutes
afterwards, he proceeded up Pear-street, Westminster,
but had not gone above a dozen yards when the pri-
soners came behind him, and Watson seized him by the
throat, and, with the assistance of his companion, threw
him on the ground. Watson continued his hold, pressing
prosecutor's throat with such violence that the blood
gushed from his mouth and nostrils, whilst the other
fellow rifled his pockets of 81. in gold, some silver, and
two watches, with which they immediately made off.
John Thropp, a mason at the House of Lords, who
woi passing at the time, and saw the offence committed,
very quietly followei the prisoners, and saw them jump
into a cabin Peter-street, and gave directions to be driven
over the water. The mason ran after the cab until he
met with a policeman, when the prisoners were secured,
and the watches found under the seat of the cab, but no
trace was discovered of the money.
The prisoners, who admitted to the police that they
had taken the watches, but denied all knowledge of the
money, made no defence, and were fully committed to
New-gate for the highway robbery.