The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-06 00:00:00

minutes, and concluded about ten minutes to nine,
':hen the congregation were dismissed with the bene-
diction.

But the mob had not dispersed from the streets and
the churchyard, and the police were directed by the
mayor to disperse them. Mr. Ingle, who disrobed
himself of his surplice in the vestry, and came out in
his gown, proposed to go into the main street and to
proceed home in his academical vestment. The mayor
requested him to retire by a private way into Long-
brook-street, when he would be safe. We regret to
have to add that Mr. Ingle refused to take this kind
suggestion, and an altercation, attributable to this
cause, between himself and the mayor, was threatened,
which was one of the most unhappy results of the
night's disaster, and must have been most irritating
to his worship, who considered himself obstructed by
the individual who must be looked upon as the
origin of the uproar, and whose person he was then
endeavouring to save from violence. Further evils,
however, were averted by the friends of Mr. Ingle
carrying him off by the way the mayor proposed, and
he was not further molested.

In passing sentence on one of the rioters on Tues-
day, the Mayor of Exeter thus commented on the
conduct of the " clerical stirrer up of strife," whose
" priestly pride" had occasioned the disturbance,:—
"Now, it'is intolerable, whatever may be the mo-
tive, that the peace of a large city like this should
be thus idly outraged—and it is still more intoler-
able that any church of this city should be thus
rendered the arena for scenes of this unholy and most
distressing nature • and I regret, most deeply regret,
that its origin should be found in the conduct and
proceedings of one, from whom, considering his pro-
fessional calling, better things might have been ex-
pected. The conduct of this gentleman has, upon
this occasion, been characterized by a most unbe-
coming levity, inasmuch as it was entirely gratui-
tous, and, by an indecent and reckless carelessness of
consequences, inasmuch as indications of what has
taken place had, on his pursuing a similar course on a
former occasion, been evinced.

" During the course of the last Sunday evening, I
was waited upon with a request—to do what ?—to
protect a person who was voluntarily doing that which
was creating a disturbance; to do ary such thing I
did not conceive it to be my duty. Forsooth—are
the magistrates of this city to he called on to re-
move the houses, e• that an incendiary, with his blazing
torch, may rush through the streets ? Are they toe'
protect every tool-hardy seeker of notoriety and causer
of brawls? No—their duty is a wider one—to protect
the peace of the city generally. In accordance with
this feeling, I, therefore, immediately repaired to the
scene of riot and disturbance, in order to render such
assistance as was in my power, to stay and quell it ;
and, I am happy to say, I found no great difficulty in
so doing; for, to the credit of the large mass of people
whom I found collected, excited as they were, the
most implicit obedience to my wishes was immedi-
ately rendered, save in one instance, and that was in
the person of the prime cause of the whole disturb-
ance. The merits of his previous conduct, I shall not
consider it my business further to canvass or refer to,
but, as regards his resistance to my frequently, and,
it length, somewhat authoritatively, expressed re-
quest, as regards the route he should pursue on leav-
ing the church, I have this strong and advised remark
to make, that he neither proved himself a gool
mor evinced a seemly or proper respect for the office
which it is my lot, at this moment, to hold ; and it is
rather due to my own forbearance, than to his own
ilLcretion, that I did not at that time take him into
oustody, and that he is Tilt sanding will you at that
htr, a.iswering to t'-:e very serious charge of obstruct-
i-,g me in my duty, while quelling that riot, of which
he himself had been the chief cause and in •tigator.
I know not if I should again recognise this gentle-
man, but the hurried view 1 then had of him led me
to conclude him to be very young. 1 trust, therefore
the whole of his conduct on that evening is attribu-
table, as in your case, to youthful indiscretion, rather
than to any vicious and determined intention of
creating disturbance, animosities, and ill-feeling; I
would fain trust that suchis the case. It is, however,
a serious matter for him on the one hand, to frighten a
whole city from its propriety, and on the other, to in-
trude himself into a parish to which he is not in any
way attached, and there stir up strifes and contentions
which, by their recurrence cannot fail to reanimate
enmities between the flock and their pastor. _ _

LAW LNTELLIGENCE.
COURT OP QUEEN'S BENCH, Nov. 4.
(Sittings in Banco.)

SMALL AND ANOTHER V. GIBSON.

Mr. Sergeant SHEE moved in this case, which is onj
of considerable importance,to those engaged in maritime
pursuitS, for a rule to show cause why the plainti4
should not be at liberty to enter judgment upon the
issues found for them, awarding 551. 11,. and the coatst,
notwithstanding the verdict found for the defendant, upon
the second issue; or fur a new trial. The case was
tried before Mr. Justice Wightman at the sittings at
Guildhall on the sth of July last. The jury found foe
the plaintiffs on several issues, and for the defendant
upon the one referred to. The action was upon a time
policy of insurance upon the ship Susan, dating from
the 23d Sept., 1843, to the 25th Sept., 1844, effected in
1843. The declaration alleged that the ship had been
rendered valueless during the existence of the policy,
and claimed the usual compensation. The defendants
put several pleas upon the record. The second (which
was found for him) set forth that the ship was not, at
the commencement of the risk, nor at the making of the
policy of insurance, nor on the 25th of September, sea-
worthy, or in a fit and proper condition to go to sea.
The third urged that the vessel was not during the con-
tinuance of the risk injured by the perils of the sea;
and another plea set up that during the insurance the
ship became damaged, and was not fit to remain at sea;
that the owners were aware of the fact, and ought to
have had the vessel repaired at a small expense; but
that they did not do so, and that the ship remained at
sea, and was destroyed through the negligence of the
owners. The vessel traded between Madras and the Mau-
ritius, carrying merchandise and Coolies: On one of her
voyages she encountered some boisterous weather, and
was obliged to put into the nearest port, where she
was condemned. The question involved in the case wa►►
whether the seaworthiness of a ship at the commence-
ment of the risk on the 25th of September was an
answer to an action to recover an insurance for time.
There were no cases upon this point. The Learned
Sergeant cited, however, cases which touched upon the
matter. lie contended that a time policy only required
that a ship should be seaworthy when she commences
her voyage, and the ship in question was fit t 3 undertake
the voyage. An owner very seldom knew the
,exact
place where his ship was at a given time; it was, there-
fore, impossible he could be aware with any certainty of
her condition.
The Con itT granted a rule upon the first point—that
relating to the judgment.
REG. V. GREGORY.

"Nor:would I altogether acquit the incumbent of the
parish himself from some slight share of blame; :or I
deem it to be his duty as a good citizen, after what
had occurred, some three or four years ago, to take
every precaution that the frightful scenes of those
days should not be repeated. It cannot but be re-
collected that something like a promise of this kind
was made, and any speeious excuses or reasonings
whereby this promise is avoided, are not compre-
hended by the multitude, who look solely to the
broad and easily appreciable facts. The peace of a
large parish, and the good will and respect of its
parishioners, are well worthy the consideration of its
pastor."
The Bishop held a public investigation into the
circumstances of the case yesterday, nominally to
inquire into the conduct of Mr. Ingle, but really to

In this case the Duke of Brunswick had been the pro-
secutor.of an indictment against a parson of the name of
Barnard Gregory, who had been convicted thereon, and
sentenced to six months imprisonment in the Q teen's
Prison. The attorney had entered the verdict generally
upon the:whole indictment, some of the counts of which
charged no offence, in consequence of which a writ of
error had been brought.
M SNOW now moved for a rule to show cause why
the j ;dgment roll should not be amended according to
the rule of sentence made by the officer of the court,
who hid entered the judgment upon each count sepa-
rately. The 'Learned Counsel contended that the judg-
ment might be amended after a writ of error had been
brought,. and joinder therein, and even after argument,
rnent,- as in the present case, if there was anything to
amend by.
The COURT granted a rule nisi.
TniatEN V. DE BURGH.
Mr. Sergeant StiEi: showed cause against a rule which
had been obtained on the motion of Mr. M. Chambers,
Q.O , to enter a nonsuit in this'ease.
The action waibrought by a surveyor against the de-
Tetidant, Who wawa member of the managing comnittee
of the Oxford, Thame, High Wycombe, and Uxbridge
li,adway Cempany,. to recover the amount of his charge
far Surveying the late of the proposed railway. In the
first instance, the plaintiff, on the 23d of October, 1845,
nd ad,tressed ti' letter to the committee, in which he
,ire ed to survey' the line at tha rate of 50/. a tulle ; but
•on t 1.6 following.dly he Was present at a meeting of the
couranitt, c,' wNn r. r. solution was passed, and assented
to b) the plaintiff, in which it was res deed that the pro-
posed terms should be abandoned, and that on the survey
bailor completed he (Mr. Trimen) would be perfectly sa-
tisfied' With leaving his remuneration in the hands of the
committee. The committee had subsequently paid him
the sum of 800/., which, in their judgment, was a suffi-
cient remuneration for his services. The defendint had
contended that the plaintiff ought to have declared spe-
cially upon the written agreement, and that if he had
done so he would not be entitled to more-than the com-
mittee might think proper to-e-"rant.
Mr. Sergeant SUEE and Mr. FIANCE now showed cause
against the rule, and contended that not the amount but
the rate of the plaintiff's remuneration was to be deter-
mined by the committee.
Mr. CLIANDERS, Q C., rose to reply, but was stopped by
the-ConaT,--who - Made the rule absolute:
Rae absolute.

_ •
COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Nov. 4.
(Before. Mr. Commissioner. GouLtkurot.)
WILLIAM HAMMOND'S BANKRUPTCY.
The bankrupt in this case was a seed-crusher, carry •
ing on business at Uxbridge, and now appeared before
the Court on the question of certificate.
The bankrupt was.opposA on the general grounds of
misconduct us a trader, including allegations of sales of
property, &c.,_ to relatives when he knew he was in an
insolvent -condition.

Mr. Commissioner- GOULBURN, regarding the casoas a
I very batione,. and considering that the bankrupt had
acted in a fraudulent and dishonest manner, ordered a
suspension of the certificate for two years. Alluding to
the late Act of Parliament which empowered the Com-
missioner to grant a release to those bankrupts who had
had their certificates either refused or suspended when
they were supposed to have undergone sufficient. punish-
mtnat, his Honour said, he was of opinion that the most
convenient course to pursue would be to mention at the
time of giving decision the date at which (presuming the
bankrupt to be incarcerated) the Court would grant his
release. ,Under these circumstances, he would order that
in the case of the proem bankrupt protection be granted
after he had undergone six months' imprisonment.

afford the Right Rev. Bishop Philipotts an opportu-
nity of abusing the Mayor and magistrates, of de-
claiming priestly authority superior to all secular
rule, and of launching his ,episcopal thunders at the
heads of " the Puritans" of St: Sidwill's, and to ad-
vise priests never to yield to the dictation of a
Puritan mob. We quote from the report of these
proceedings, given in a second edition of the Western_,
Times, the following account of the Puseyite incum-
bent of St. Sidwill's of the manners and moral state
cf his congregation, reminding the reverend gentle-
man, at the same time, that " as every tree is known
by its fruits," we are warranted in concluding that
these are some of the fruits of the Puseyite tree :
" The Rev. Francis Courtenay spoke under
a manifestation of deep solemnity. He felt bound to
close the church in the evening, and he desired to
give his reasons for so doing. He th-n proceeded to
describe a state of dissoluteness and disorder, as the
usual state of things at this church, on a Sunday
evening, which is hardly credible. In a part which
he designated the ante-church—a young man had been
known to light his cigar by the gas. Parties talked,
and young girls flirted there—young people had
been seen making signals to each other across the
gallery, and many young females had been ruined by
their- attkmdance at these Sunday evening lectures.
You might have thought that he was speaking of the
vestibule of a brothel, or one of the dancing saloons of
the metropolis, from the description which he gave of
this sorrowful scene of levity, irreligion, and demorali-
sation. Under these circumstances he felt bound to
close the church. If, however, the Bishop com-
manded him, then being bound by his vows to render
obedience where God had placed authority—he should
obey. But God would relieve him from the respon-
sibility, and in the day of judgment he should not
have to answer for it. He dwelt with apprehension
on the consequences which impended over his
parishioners for their wickedness at this Sunday even-
ing lecture, and appeared to expect an eFpecial judg-
Tamt, as the punishment of this last Sunday even-
ing riot."

'Ma investigation ended in smoke, having abused
the mayor and laity, and eulogised the clergy, the
Bishop declared he wanted to go home, and went
home accordingly.

PULMONARY DISEASES IN CATTLE.—On this sub-
ject Mr. Pond, author of the, "Farmers' Cash-Book,"
has just, issued a short pamphlet, which is well worthy
the perusal and consideration of farmers, dairy-keepers,
and others interested in the rearing of cattle. While
pointing out the ravages of pleuro-pneumonia
in dairy stock, the writer also lays down valuable
and practical remedies and preventives. After stating
that he had made an inspection of thirty dairies
in Edinburgh (about one-fourth of the whole nuna-
ber), Mr. Pond presents the folloting statistics
to show the alarming fatality of the disease, arid
consequent loss entailed on the owners of the cattle:
—" The aggregate usual number of stock of these
30 dairy-keepers is 537, and the loss from pulmonary
disease, within the last twelve months, had been no
less a number than 458, or on an average about 16
deaths in every stock of 18 cows. When I say that the
lo,s has been 458, it is not to be understood that
that number actually died in the byres, but that
that fearful number either died there, or were removed
from the stock and immediately slwightered, before
the disease was communicated to the system. In either
case, however, the dairy-keeper has been a severe
lo,er—in fact, every cow attacked has been almost a
'dead loss' to him." In speaking of bad ventilation,
the evil effects of which he forcibly points out, as well
as the healthful influence of fresh air, the author re-
marks—" In many instances, I observed that the mode
of ventilation adopted (if it deserved the appellation)
tended more to do mischief than to counteract evil. A
certain degree of heat is no doubt very essential to the
comfort and thriving of cows, and that fact being ad-
mitted, shows that they should not be subjected to
currents of cold air; but the warmth produced from an
over-crowded byre, or by an atmosphere loaded aith
ro.pired air, must be as destrucive to health as it is
insidious and sure in its effects. No stronger reasoning
can be advanced in support of ventilation than the fact,
that when the oxygen of the air is ci,nsurned, itifl un-
tnable substances do not burn in it, and animals intro-
jeri:‘,LayanTeihs.E:mirst:
duced into air deprived of its ox3gen immediately die."
Caledonian Mercury.
&c. The
Ir:OOCd,ONSUMPTION,
of G. Amott Esq., Principal Surveyor clot Customs,
published in the
Muss 11,ite, Mr.
Clinriey. Captain Lindsey, R.N., Bcc., are
Sir 11. N. W—s, B trt.,
the severest forms of disease Clinical Report of Cases by Dr. Cronin,
071 the Use of " Ana
may
be
had
dsease of the stomach, heart, snd
in the treatment of some of
lungs, and
gratuitously between ten and
a
coon nel3: ißndluaseiTlsyOt;LoatBb eul 4Gv
eArRy b- M, Leicester-place, Leicester-square.
y supplied with samples, and
the sales of the week are coltrequentligmly to a limited
extent,- at about former prices ; the refined market is
steady. Rum and Molasses continue very dull.—Bristol
Mercury.

MONDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 6, 1848.

LONDON SESSIONS-SATURDAY.
DERBY SWEEPS.-WILLIS, APPELLANT ; SIR P. LAURIE
AND ALDERMAN WILSON, RESPONDENTS.
This case, which excited a great deal of interest, was
an appeal made from the decision of Sir Peter Laurie
and Alderman Wilson, who convicted Mr. Willis. the
proprietor of the King's Head public-house, in New-
gate-street, for that he, being duly licensed under the
9th of George IV., did, on the 22d of May, knowingly
and unlawfully, and against the terms of the said li-
cense, and against the force and effect of the Act :of
Parliament, suffer certain gaming in bis house, and
suffer and permit a certain game, or lottery called a
Derby Sweep, to be played and drawn as by lot, By
directioa of the magistrates who convicted the appellant,
the City Solicitor conducted the proceedings for the re.
spondents. At the commencement of the proceedings
the Recorder sat alone for some time, both parties hav-
ing consented to abide by his decision. Subsequently
Alderman William Hunter entered the court.
Me.tsrs. Wire and Child were the solicitors for the
appellant ; Mr. R) land and Mr. Laurie were counsel for
the respondents; and Mr. Clarkson was counsel for the
appellants.
Mr. ItYLAND said the license had been granted to the
appellant under certain conditions, ona of which was
that he should not allow any unlawful games, or any
gaming whatsoever in his house. The question was one
of considerable importance to the publican, but, in his
opinion, of much more importance to the public in gene-
ral, inasmuch as it was calculated to affect the morals of
the community to a most mischievous extent, if the de-
cision of the magistrates were declared null and void. It
was regulated by the appellant that there should be 2,000
tickets, at ss. each; that the person who should draw the
horse that should be first in the Derby race would be
entitled to 3001.; the person who should draw the horse
that should be second in the race should be entitled to
801.; the third horse in the race would entitle the holder
of the ticket having his name to 40L; and there was a
deduction of 5 per cent. from each of the prizes to be
paid to the landlord, who, as a matter of course, doubled
that profit by the contingent trade arising from such a
multitude of speculations on the game. His Lordship
would not forget that at the past Central Criminal Court
Sessions a young person was convicted of felony, who
afterwards acknowledged that he had been led to commit
the offence in consequence of the temptation which these
sweeps held out of realising a large amount of money.
The practice of permitting sweeps had also the effect of
inducing persons to frequent public-houses, so that the

_
immoral tendency of the unlawful game was unquestion-
able, and it was the duty of the magistracy to crush it
altog'ther by inflicting such penalties in all cases as
would far exceed the amount of pecuniary recompense
derivable from the infringement of the obligation ex-
pressed in the license; and, if it were necessary, by re-
fusing to license, in any future case of the violation of
the law. It could not, he thought, be denied that the
Derby sweep was a lottery.
Mr. CLARKSON said. it was not his intention to make
any objection calculated to prevent a speedy decision on
the question, which was, as had been observed, a very
important one. His client had no idea of requiring
proofs of any of the facts of the case. He admitted that
the Derby sweep held at his house was a lottery. The
great point was whether the sweep was held in violation
of the license.
Mr. RYLAND referred to the schedule of the Act 9th of
George IV., cap. 61, which set forth the terms of the li-
cense under which the appellant kept his house. He
considered the case of the Art-Union in point. There
was a lottery which had about it none of the mischiefs
with which sweeps abounded; on the contrary, it was
calculated to promote intellectual attainments and im-
prove the taste of society. The violation of the law,
however, was held to be of so much consequence, that
an immediate stop was put to ;hat innocent lottery, and
it became necessary to pass an Act of indemnity for the

protection of those who unconsciously subjected them-
selve3 to penalties by the infringement of the law. Mr.
Ryland then referred to. the 10th and 11th of William
IV., cap. 17, which related to ". mischievous and unlaw-
ful games called lotteries," and also to the preamble of

the .42d Of George 111., cap, 119, which also related to

_ .
certain mischievous g,aties or, lotteries; and likewise to
the 6:h and 7th of Wiiliain IV., which referred to the
illegtlity of lotteries and tickets, and chances or throws
therein. He could not- -11)r a. moment see how there

_ .
could be any doubt at all about the validity of the con-
viction, and he expressed., a most confident expectation
that it would be sanctioned by, the Bench.
The RECORDER—The question is, whether the Derby
sweep was a lottery and a gaining within the meaning of
the words expressed in the license.
Mr. RYLAND that was the question. He did not see how
the license could have been more essentially violated than
had been proved in the case of the appellant. The
tendency of those sweepstakes in a moral and pecuniary
point of view was most pernicious. It encouraged a
most dangerous spirit of gambling, and was calculated
to lead to lois in most, cases, and to ruin in many; but
the publican was sure-tole served, not only by obtaining
a considerable per centage out of the sum subscribed,
but by an increase of trade, by means of the calamitous
temptation, •

Mr. LAURIE proceeded to argue upon the same
side. He contended that ,the case of Allport v. Nutt,
decided in 1845 before Lord Chief Justice Tindal, was
exactly in point, the only difference being that the
present case was much stronger. Effect must be
given to the words of general prohibition con-
tained in the 10th and 11th William IV., cap. 17, whch
recited that " Several ill-diiposed persons, for divers
years last past, had set up many mischievous and un-
lawful games called lotteries, and had thereby most un-
justly and fraudulently got to themselves great sums of
money from the children and servants of several gentle-
men, traders, and merchants, and from other unwary
persons, to the utter ruin and impoverishment of many
families, and to the reproach of the English laws and
Government by colour of several patents or grants under
the great seal of England for the said lotteries, or sotue
of them, which said grants or patents were against the
common good, trade, welfare, and peace of his Majesty's
kingdom; and for remedy thereof it is enacted, ad-
judged, and declared that all such lotteries are common
and public nuisances, and. that all grants, patents, and
licenses for such lotteries, or, any other lotteries, are
void and against law." The words he had quoted we re
decisive of the illegality of the Derby sweep, which w as
to all intents and purposes a lottery, and could not for a
moment be sanctioned after the decision upon the es.se
to which he had referred. Amongst the publicans wh o
were obedient to the laws the feeling was strong against
these sweeps.
The RECORDER—It appears that the only thing cer-
tain in Derby sweeps is, that each person must pay five
shillings.
Mr. LAURIE—There were more than 1,800 blanks cut
of the 2,000 tickets; in fact, there was no one argument
of law or morality that did not completely discountenance
the practice which the decision of the magistrates had
condemned, and to the affirmation of which by the Bench
he looked with perfect confidence.
Mr. CLAtotsore, for the appellant, argued that Lis
client had not committed any offence, against the terms
of his license; the gaming referred to in that instance
not having any reference to Derby sweeps, which, ho w-
•ever unlawful they might be considered by some to :be,
were not comprehended in the matters which the licens ad
victualler had in his license pledged himself to repudiate.
Ile considered that Derby sweeps were illegal within
the meaning of the Act against lotteries or little goes,
but he could not see that the conviction in the presc nt
instance was sustainable, as it did not at all appear to
him that a racing sweep came within the terms of the
license. airt.
Cthleariccosnonvichtaiodnmwa-daes
arguments of the counsel
tti(;:tiftl.hiaebulßeogtcdo°i
dtlihnne gootßbsj
eececotniilosoniwd we
trhhei idee ha that
for the respondents could be evaded in deciding up on
such a case.
Mr.CLarticsom wished that the Recorder would give the
appellant an opportunity of applying to the Courts abe ve
in a case of such great importance. Oue of the highest
authorities in Westminster, Hall had given it as ?his
opinion that the case did not come within the meaning
of the words of the Act.
The RECORDER said he was desirous to give the up-
pliant the opportunity, but unfortunately he could hot
do so without quashing the.conviction; a thing which he
could not conscientiously do.
Mr. CLARKSON then made an objection to this form of
the conviction, but it was not considered tenable.
The RECORDER then affirmed the conviction, but said
that the decision would not at all affect the appellant as
to his license. Ills Lordship considered that the (de-
fendant had acted fairly in appealing in a matter of so
much importance to the trade; it would, however, be
dangerous for licensed victuallers to have any more Lot-
teries of the kind in their houses, as the magistrates
would unquestionably stop the license of any violator of
the law.
Mr. CLARKSON informed the Court that his client bad
determined, whatever should be the result of this appeal,
never to have anything of the kind again in his house..
Mr. RYLAND and Mr. LAURIE spoke in terms of :ap-
probation of the conduct of the appellant.
The penalty of 5/. was then paid, and handed over to
tho poor-box.

POLICE INTELLIG ENCE.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

Jonas Harris, formerly in the Guar.'s, and in Om A
division of police, from both of which forces he was dis-
missed for bad conduct, was brought before Mr. Bh ig-
ham, charged with having committed a robbery, attene led
with violence, on Miss Catherine Bisset. a maiden kidy,
residing at No. 11, Gloucester-terrace, Kensington.
Miss Catherine Bisset stated that on Friday after-
noon, about two o'clock, she was walking alone in Ken-
sington-gardens, and on passing one of the alcoves :her
attention was attracted to a woman who appeared to be
dodging her steps. Not liking the appearanc. of :the
woman she increased her speed, with the intention of
seeking temporary protection in one of the keeps r's
lodges. She had not proceeded further than the Maunt
alcove when a man rushed out upon her, and, without
saying a word, fulled he-r to the ground by a blow wath
his fist between her shoulders. The robber then seized
her reticule, and tried to force it from lit r. Having 8,
large sum of money in it, she struggled with the pow).
ner, and for some time prevented him from taking it.
She screamed loudly for assistance, in the hope of
trading the attention of the park-keepers, still retaining
hold of the reticule. The strings of the reticule at
length gave way, and the man ran off with the reticule,
dropping a cheque for 101. in his hurry to escape. The
reticule contained a cheque for 501. and a small sum in
silver. As soon as she recovered she made the best of
her way to the keeper's lodge, and gave an account of
the robbery and also a description of the prisoner, Kite
haying had a full view of him while erlaged in the
struggle to save her reticule. Witness afterwards wont
to the bankers', Messrs. Herries and Co., and stopped
the cheque. The prisoner at the bar was the man who
knocked her down and robbed her of her reticule.
Moses Benjamin, shoprnan to Mr. Myers, clothier,
Marylebone-lane, said, on Friday afternoon, about four
four o'clock, the prisoner came into the shop, and said

he wanted a suit of clothes about the value of 6/. The
prisoner fixed upon a suit of clothes, in payment of
which he offered a cheque for 50L on Messrs. Herries and
Co. Witness asked him where he got the cheque from,
and the prisoner replied he had just received it from his
old mistress, in payment of his wages. Witness took
the cheque to Mr. Myers, who directed him to detain the
prisoner until he had been to the bankers to ascertain if
it was genuine. Witness did as he was directed, and in
a short time Mr. Myers came back with a police-con-
stable, who took the prisoner into custody.
Police-constable Hadley, 199 D, said he was on duty
at the station in Marylebone-lane on Friday afternoon,
when Mr. Myers called upon him and produced a 501.
cheque, stating that he had received it from a person then
in his shop, and that from what he had just heard at the
bankers he believed the cheque had been stolen. Witness
accompanied Mr. Myers to his house, and there saw the
prisoner, who, when questioned, gave such unsatisfactory
answers that witness conceived it to be his duty to take
him to the station-house. On searching the prisoner a
half-crown was found in his possession, and also a glove.
The parkkeeper found the fellow glove near where the
struggle had taken place.
Miss Bissett idsmtified both gloves.
Police-sergeant Whicher proved that the prisoner had
been in the police force, and had been discharged for
misconduct.

The prisoner said he would reserve his defence, and
was committed.

THAMES.

Ellen Lenerett was brought before Mr. Ballantine,
charged with stealing seventeen sovereigns from Patrick
Sullivan, her father.

The prisoner, a dirty, noisy, dissipated woman, has
given much trouble to her father, who is an Irish ballast
getter, awl by his industry and frugality saved a good
deal of money, the greater portion of which he indis-
creetly carried in his pockets, instead of investing it in
a savings-bank. On Friday afternoon, on the termina-
tion of a very hard day's work, he was annoyed by his
(laughter, who demanded some money of him, and vowed
she would exterminate him if he did not comply with
her demands. The prosecutor said ho would sooner

throw his money into the common sewer than give her
any, for he knew she would waste it, as she had done
before, in the gin shop, or a much worse place, and
to avoid her he ran out of his house. She followed
him, and, to use his own words " haunted him
up and down the streets, and bully-ragged him
for several hours." In despair he again went home,
followed by his daughter, who used the most horrible
language, and declared she would not quit his dwelling
till she had some money. He gave her 25., and told her
not to let him sec her again, and directly afterwards
pulled off an old waistcoat, the pockets of which con-
tained seventeen sovereigns. She immediately snatched
the garment off the dresser, where he had placed it, ab-
stracted the money, and ran away. In her haste she
dropped one of her pattens in the passage and another in
the street, and, although she was half drunk at the time,
got away with the money. On the following malting
the prosecutor and his son, John Sullivan, traced the
urisoner to an Irish colony in the neighbourhood of Gray's
Inn-lane. She was found in bed " stone-blind drunk,"
and when she recovered her senses, she told her brother
she went home with a strange man in a cab, and he
robbed her of all the money she took from her father. Sae
afterwards told a police-constable, 88 G, that she had
not taken the sovereigns out of her father's pockets, and
that he gave her 23., and one of the pieces turned out to
be a sovereign. A quantity of pawnbrokers' duplicates
were found upon her, but no money.
Mr. BALLANTINE said the prisoner was a most aban•
dolled and wretched woman, and committed her for trial.

George Grove, a young fellow late a footman in the
service of Mrs. Kemble, a lady of property residing in
Denmark-hill, Camberwell, was finally examined on a

charge of stealing and pawning a quantity of massive
family plate of the valuo of upwards of 1001., the property
of his mistress.

Nine different pawnbrokers produced the stolen pro-
perty, and some of them were severely reproved by the
magis!rate for taking in such massive property having
a crest from a person they were not in some instances,
able to swear to.

The prisoner was fully committed for trial.
SOU HWARK.

Alexander Byers, an engineer, living at D,,clthead,
was summoned before Mr. Srcker to show cauie why he
refused to maintain his two illegitimate children, which,
with their mother, had become chargeable to the parish.
The complainant, rather a decent looking Scotch-
woman, with a baby in her arms, and another about
two years old at her feet, stated that about six years
ago she was married to a man named Mackintosh, at
Glasgow, but unfortunately, after living happily together
about a year, he was killed by falling off a scaffold while
assisting in building a new church at that place. After
the funeral she obtained service in a respectable family,
when she received 131. a year as wages. While in that
place she became acqu tinted with the prisoner, who
worked at a factory in Glasgow. After keeping com-
pany with her for some time, he contrived to seduce her
from the p.iths of virtue, and persuaded her to leave
Glasgow and accompany him to Loudon, promising at
the same time to cherish her and keep her from want.
They lived together four years, the result of which was
the birth of the two children now with her. A short
time ago he got tired of her, and having married another
woman, ho turned her and the children into the streets
to shift for themselves. She had since then made re-
peated applications to him for assistance, but he treated
her like a brute, telling her to go to the workhouse.
She was at last compelled to go to the latter place, or she
would have starved, as she had parted with everything
she possessed to purchase food.
Tho defendant here made an objection to the summons.
She had there stated her name to be Brackenbridge,
whereas now she called herself Mackintosh. He could
prove that her right name was Ferguson, as she was
married to a man of that name lately.
The complainant denied ever being married since
Macintosh died, or living with any other man but the
defendant. The reason she asked for the summons in
the name of Brackenbridge was because it was her
maiden name, and she thought she had no right to her
late husband's. Her name was certainly Macintosh.
Mr. SECKER said that the summons was certainly
made out wrong; but if the defendant liked, the name
could be altered, and the summons decided.
The defendant, in a very violent manner, exclaimed
that he did not care for the Bench or any person; the
summons was wrong, and he did not care a fig for it.
His conduct became so violent that the Magistrate or-
dered him to be locked up, and at 'a late hour another
summons was served on him for hearing another day.