The Sun.
London, England, 1846-09-14 00:00:00

saulting her, were placed at the bar before Mr. Jardine
this morning, having been remanded from Thursday.
As the complainant was said to be unable to attend
the prisoners were remanded till this day week.
The elder prisoner, who, though admitted to bail, had
been unable to find sureties, applied to the magistrate to
allow him to be liberated on his own recognize' es.
Mr. JARDLNE refused to do this; but said he would
take lighter bail, and would only require two sureties in
51. each, or one in 101., instead of two in 10/. Le could
not admit the other prisoner to bail.
THE ROBBERY AT THE HOLBORN BATHS.— William
Curtis, who was remanded from this day week, on a
charge of stealing, and Joseph Styles and Llizabeth
Hoold, remanded from the same day, on a charge of re-
ceiving a gold watch, the property of Mr. Hetley, of
Soho-square, glass merchant, were this day finally ex-
amined and committed for trial.
CLEF:KENWELL.

John Priest, a braer, in Angel- terrace, Pentonville,
was summoned by Mr. Thomas Stanfield, John-street-
road, for taking, under a distress warrant, more than he
was entitled to.

The defendant, it appeared, was in arrear for poor-
rates, amounting to 3/. 10i., to the parish of Clerkenwell,
and a warrant was granted to enforce payment, which
was placed in the hands of the accused for execution.
The goods of the complainant were seized and sold to the
amount of nearly 5/. The defendant charged for ex-
penses attending the same, as follows:-3s. for the levy,
2s. 6d. for possession one day, 10s. appraisement, 2s. 6d.
stamp of appraisement, 3s. 6d. van and removal, 10s.
catalogues and sale, and 4s for two summonses.
Mr. GREENWOOD having perused the various charges,
observed that the two first items were legal, but the two
next were unjust, because the appraisement was not
made by two brokers, as required by law. The docu-
ment not being legal, the stamp could not be charged;
further, the defendant had no right to charge for a van,
and the levy being made Si., the charge for the sale
would only be 6d. in the pound, whereas the sum of I Is.
had been charged, as likewise 4s. for a summons, when
the warrant authorising the seizure only gave 2s.
The defendant said he had not charged more than he
he was authorised in doing.
Mr. GREENWOOD indignantly told him that he had,
and that his conduct had been most wicked, and would
be considerably aggravated by his statement, as the
warrant itself directed 2s. only to be taken for the sum-
mons. He should, therefore, enforce the power given
him by the Act, and order the defendant to pay three
times the amount of the several overcharges, and the
costs.

The defendant said he should appeal, but was told
the law gave him no power.
➢lr. GREENWOOD remarked on the hardship to which
poor persons were subjected by the brokers levying for
rent, &c., and upon the ignorance of the sufferers in
submitting to these impositions, when ample powers
were given to the magistrates to redress such cruel
wrongs. He then called upon the defendant to pay the
fine and costs.

The defendant answered that be would not pay, con-
sequently a distress warrant was immediately ordered
to be issued against his goods and chattels, for the
amount.