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

GUILDHALL.

Frederick Winscom, a boy 15 years old, was brought
before Mr. Alderman Wood for re-examination, on sus-
picion of having stolen about 25L he had in his pos-
session.

The prisoner was shortly examined before Mr. Alder-
man Wilson on Friday, when Henry Gardner, a City
policeman, said he took the prisoner into custody at a
shoemaker's shop in Farringdon-street, having heard
that he had a quantity of gold in his possession, which
he was spending as if it were' his own. The prisoner
told him he had a father residing in Winchester-square,
Winchester, but he had lately been living with his bro-
ther, at Bittern-grove, near Southampton. On search-
ing, he found on him nineteen sovereigns, eleven half-
sovereigns, and Bs. 6d. in silver. He had also a pistol
loaded with ball, and a little stock of ammunition.

Mr. Alderman WILSON questioned the prisoner how
he came by so much nioney ? and he stated that he
found it wrapped up in a newspaper in the road at Bit-
tern, about a month ago, and after hiding it for a time
to see if the loss would be advertised, he came up to
London. There were some discrepancies in his story,
and he was further questioned, when Mr. Alderman
Wilson remanded him, and directed that his father and
brother should be written to.

On Monday the prisoner's father arrived from Win-
chester. 'He wept and appeared to be much affected at
his son's situation. He said his son had done wrong,
but he had made an arrangement with the parties, and
he begged that the Alderman would deliver his son and
the money up to his care.
Mr. Alderman WOOD put some questions to ascertain
some particulars of the offence, and what bort of arrange-
ment had been made.

The father avoided giving any information, except
that the money was stolen, and that as the robbery was
committed on Thursday, and he was apprehended in
London next day, he could not have spent much. He
afterwards admitted the money was stolen from Mr.
Halls, a publican in Broad-street, Portsmouth, where
his son had slept for two nights.
Mr. Alderman Woos was apprehensive that the pistol
was purchased and loaded with the intention of making
a deadly resistance, if the injured person should attempt
to apprehend him. He sympathised with the grief of the
parent, but he must not be carried away by his feelings.
The father might be a very respectable man, but it might
be wrong to rely implicitly on his representations as to
the extent and nature of the offence. Besides, he could
not order the money to be given up to the father, as that
would leave the officer exposed to the liability of an
action to recover it from the real owner, nor would it be
convenient to summon the owner and his witnesses to
come from Portsmouth to London. The better course
appeased to be to direct the officer to convey the prisoner
to Portsmouth for examination.

Shortly after the prisoner bad been removed, the
owner of the money and one of the policemen from
Portsmouth arrived with a warrant for the prisoner's
apprehension. It would seem that there was no ground
for alleging that there had been any compromise in the
matter. They retired, to return immediately to
Portsmouth.

A young man, who gave bis name as J. W Coiling-
wood, was brought before Mr. Alderman Thomas Wood,
by police-constable (City) 288, charged with uttering a
forged bill of exchange 1424/., dated the 24th of March,
1846. The bill purported to have. been drawn by the
prisoner and accepted by his father. It was endorsed by
a Mr. Joseph, who endorsed it again to a Mr. Benjamin.
When the bill become due it was dishonoured, the father
of the prisoner denying that he had accepted it, or given
authority to accept it in his name, or that he was in any
way responsible for the amount. An action was brought
by Mr. Joseph, and tried before Mr. Justice Coltman at
the last assizes at Guildford, when the acceptance was
preyed not to be in the handwriting of the elder
Collingwood.
After a long hearing, the worthy ALDERMAN declared
that he did not think the prosecutor, Mr. Joseph, was in
a condition to place before him such evidence as would
justify him in remanding the prisoner; but as there were
other charges of the same nature preferred against the
latter by a Mr. Cohen, he would remand him to
Friday next.