The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-10 00:00:00

(Before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN.)
_ -

Milton Tfrallwork was indicted for bigamy.
Mr. Monk conducted the prosecution ; the prisoncr
was not defended by counsel.

The two marriages of the prisoner were proved in the
usual way. He had been married to his legal wife many
years ago, but had been separated fr6m her for a long
period before his marriage to one Betty Jones, who was
called as a witness. _

The prisoner conducted his own case with great self-
possession, and cross-examined the witnesses to show
that it was in consequence of the gross misconduct of
his legal wife that he had been separated from her. Betty
Jones, also, in answer to the questions put by him in
cross-examination, stated that she had also been married
to another, and that her husband about eight years ago
had gone toi America; but no question was put to her
as to whether or no she had been aware of his existence
within the seven years preceding her, marriage, to the
prisoner.
His LORDSHIP, in summing up, said that it had been
sought to show that Betty Jones had a husband at the
time of her being married to the prisoner, but this had
not been proved, and even if it had so appeared, the
validity or invalidity of the second marriage on that
ground would have made no difference in this case.
Verdict, Guilty.—Sentence deferred.
Joseph Turtonshaw was indicted for cutting and
wounding Bernard Foy, with intent to do him some
grievous bodily harm.
Mr. Monk conducted the prosecution ;ithe prisoner
was defended by Mr. Pollock.

It appeared from the statement of the prosecutor that,
on the evening on which this occurrence took place, he
was standing at his own door, when his attention was
attracted to some women and a policeman, who were
at the door of an adjoining outhouse. The policeman
was knocking at the door, and insisting on its being
opened, threatening to break it open if this was refused.
The door was finally opened, and the prisoner and a
woman came out. The prisoner then ran into the pro-
secutor's house, on which the prosecutor, saying he
should not remain there, took hold of him, turned him
round, and thrust him out at the door. While the pro-
secutor was pushing him out, a policeman came up and
took hold of the prisoner at the other side. The pri-
soner then made a blow at the 'prosecutor, who found
that he had received a severe wound on the wrist. The
prisoner was then taken to the Bridewell by the police-
officer, and, on being searched, a fieam and a knife were
found upon his person. On the knife being produced,
the prisoner said that was what he had done it with, and
that he had intended to ma it into the villain's heart,
for he had been robbed.
Verdict, Guilty.—Sentence deferred.
Newton Barrow and Thomas Taylor were indicted for
a burglary in the house of Mary Hankinson, and stealing
therein certain spoons, coats, shoes, and other articles, the
property of Thomas Coward.
Mr. Pollock conducted the prosecution. The prisoner
Taylor was defended by Mr. Monk.
The prisoner Newton Barrow was, it appeared, the
nephew of Mrs. Hankinson, by whom he had been
brought up, and in whose house he resided. He had a
key to the outer door. For some nights before this oc-
currence he had not been at home. On the night of the
robbery there was no proof of the doors having been
fastened when the family retired to- rest, but the follow-
ing morning the back door was found to be open, and it
appeared the articles in question had been removed from
one of the upper rooms. In the course of the following
day some of the property was found to have been
pledged by the prisoner Taylor at the shop of a pawn.
broker in Manchester, in consequence of which he
was apprehended. It now appeared by the testimony
of several witnesses, inmates of Taylor's house,
that the prisoner Barrow had come to Taylor's about
three o'clock that morning, having with him a carpet
bag, in which were the articles in question. Taylor
and the other persons were it was said, up at that early
hour in consequence of a person in the house being ill.
The prisoner asked for lodgings, but his request was
refused. He then asked to be permitted to sit by the
fire till morning, and was allowed to do so. He took off
three coats which he was wearing over his own. These
he asked Taylor to pledge. Taylor assented, and when
the shops opened pledged them for 7s. in the name of
Holt. While Taylor was absent Barrow also gave one
of the persons in the house (a woman) a silk handker-
chief, a penknife, and other articles, all which proved to
be part of the property taken from Mrs. Hankinson's.
The spoons, it appeared, belonged to the prisoner him-
self; having belonged to his mother, but had been, after
her death, in the possession of his aunt since the time
when he, an infant, had been placed under her care.

On the conclusion of the case,
His LORDSHIP intimated that there was no case
against Taylor.
The prisoner Barrow addressed the jury, contending
that there was no evidence of any burglary, but admit-
ting he had been guilty of the theft.
Verdict—Guilty of larceny.
A previous conviction having been proved against him,
His LORDSHIP, after a severe comment upon the base-
ness of the prisoner's conduct, sentenced him to be
transported for seven years.
(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
Owen Morris and Thomas Kelly were indicted for
having, on the 4th of September last, cut and wounde,l
Robert Johnson, with intent to do him grievous bodily
harm.

Mr. Cross conducted the prosecution ; the prisoners
were defended by Mr. J. Pollock.
It appeared that the prisoners, with four other men,
all Irish reapers, had, iu the latter end of August last,
been employed by a person of the name of Latham, a
farmer at Great Lever, to cut down a field of grain of
nearly two acres, Cheshire measure. For this they were
to receive 21. 178. 6d. and 50 quarts of beer. On the
4th of September, when the job was about completed,
Mr. Latham and his wife happened to leave home for the
purpose of attending Turton fair. While they were ab-
ent the six reapers came to the house, in which there
was at the time no person except the female servant and
Mr. Latham's children. They made some complaint
about not having had the quantity of beer for which they
had stipulated, and insisted upon having some more. She
gave them two gallons, but they were still unsatisfied,
and under the influence of the threats which they used
she was induced to let them help themselves to what
they pleased. On Mr. Latham coming home, he found
the farmyard in an uproar, and was immediately assailed
lie got away, and went for assistance to
Mr. Johnsen, the prosecutor, the constable of the
township. -Mr. Johnson accompanied him back
by
murderth him.
to the farm yard, they having taken with them
to their assistance some briclemaleere whom they
reapers,
met on their way, among whom was a person
of the name of Woods. When they got to the yard the
was still continuing, and some of the party
dagain to assail Mr. Latham. Mr. Latham
Johnson to take Morris into custody. Johnson
edialxitisrtpeetotmcisrttepbudtaln'ee ated with the men on the impropriety of their
conduct, upon which they, Morris being the ringleader,
began slashing with their sickles in all directions, John-
, son being severely cut about the head and hands, until
he succeeded in wresting from Morris a pitchfork, with
which he had armed himself on his sickle breaking. With
the handle of this he knocked Morris down, on which
the others ran away.
Mr. POLLOCK addressed the jury for the defence.
His LORDSHIP summed up, and the jury by their ver-
dict found Morris guilty of the felony, and Kelly
guilty of a common assault.
It appeared from the statement of the Learned Coun-
sel as to a second indictment which it was not considered
necessary to try, that the person Woods, already men-
tioned, had had one of his figures so severely injured by
the blow of a sickle that amputation became necessary.
His LORDSHIP said, that the only circumstance of mi-
tigation in the case, and which induced him to abstain
from passing a sentence of transportation, was that the
prisoners, it would appear, had not deliberately armed
themselves with these dangerous instruments with a pre-
conceived intention of inflicting these injuries. Tb
offence, however, was one of a very aggravated 116;--a
justified in stopping. short of a sentence of transportati n
woas.
fie would not, however, pass that sentence, but they
must each of' them undergo a very long period of impri-
sonment.

Morris was then sentenced to be imprisoned for two
years, and Kelly for one year.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(Before Mr. Sergeant ADAMS, Assistant-Judge, and a
full Bench of Magistrates.)
JUVENILE OFFENDERS. -On Wednesday, Thomas
Gardner, a little boy only 7 years old, and standing 3
feet 10 inches in height, was found guilty of having
picked the pocket of a lady on Westminster-bridge, on
Monday last.
It appeared that a lady, in passing over the bridge,
had had her attention attracted to three boys, of whom
the prisoner was one (the other two were much older),
by the sound of money falling. The prisoner picked it
up and handed it to his companions, by whom a division
appeared to be made. She then walked onwards, but
had not proceeded more than twenty or thirty yards ere
she was passed by a woman, who carried a basket on
one of her arms, whilst on the other side of her she ob-
served the prisoner walking, evidently closely watching
her. The woman's attention was principally directed to
the basket, and presently a puff of wind having blown
her gown aside, the little prisoner pushed his hand into
her pocket, and ere he was able to release his arm she
laid hold of him and retained her grasp until a police-
man came up, when she gave him into his custody.
The boy had fast clutched in his hand which had been
in her pocket a shilling and three sixpences,
all of which,
of course, were at once claimed by the owner.
The Learned JUDGE, when the.jury had pronounced
their verdict of " Guilty," said—What could be done
with this little child? It would be ruination to send
him to a common prison. These scenes were positively
heartrending. Was he to
pass over the cases of these
children as though the fact
of their being brought to that
bar was to be regarded quite as a matter of course?
Was he to change his nature and so to steel his feelings
against the claims and helpless condition of so small a
creature as that now before the Court? What could be
done with this child?
A juryman thought he should have been summarily
convicted.

The Learned JUDGE—There was the error. What
the year preceding the
would the juryman say when he was informed, that in
ebtabliiihnaent of that tribunal