The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-06 00:00:00

____________ --
QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DAY.)
Sittings at Guildhall, before the LORD CHIEF JUSTICX
and a Special Jury.)
THE QUEEN V. THOMAS.
This was an indictment for an indecent assault. The
defendant, who was a young man respectably connected,
was observed on Sunday afternoon, the 27th of June,
1847, by a police officer on duty at London-bridge, to be
conducting himself towards two lads in a most unbe-
coming manner. This officer drew the attention of a
brother constable to the indecent nature of the defen-
dant's movements, and while one secured the boys the
other captured the defendant in the act of running away.
Upon being taken before the Lord Mayor, the defendant
was committed to the Old Bailey, but his friends subse-
quently sued out a certiorari to remove the indictment into
this court. The witnesses were this day ordered out of
court, and after Louis Courquard, the boy upon whom
the alleged assault was committed, had given his evil..
dente, Scott, one of the police officers, swore positively
that he stood behind the defendant in one of the recesses
of the bridge when he was committing the indecencies;
but the other officer as positively swore that he was with
Scott at the time on the opposite side of the bridge, and
they witnessed the assault from that point.
The jury after this contradiction stopped the case, and
returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

SHERIFFS' COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Under Sheriff BURCHF.LL.)
SPIERS V. MORRIS.—FALSE IMPRISONMENT.
This was an action to recover damages for false
im-
prisonment.
The defendant suffered judgment to go by default, and
appeared in person to address the jury in mitigation of
damages. The facts of the case will best appear from
the evidence.
Thomas Tuttleby examined—Was in the employ of
plaintiff, who is a gardener in Kensington. In May last
he was engaged at defendant's garden, in Chepstow-
place, Westbourne-green. Plaintiff asked defendant for
his money, and a dispute arose, but plaintiff insisted.
Defendant said at the time, "I'll be along with you for
this," or words to that effect. About a week afterwards;
witness was at work next door, and defendant went
with a policeman, and, taking a cord or line out of
his barrow, asked who put that there? Witness
at first said his master, but recollecting himself,
said he did ; it was made up of several small pieces
picked out of some rubbish between the two houses
which were newly built. Defendant said he would give
plaintiff in charge. The policeman said that if any one
was in the wrong it was witness. Defendant said he
did not care ; he would have plaintiff taken, and they
went in search of him and took him into custody.
James White, police-constable T. 164, proved the fact
of taking plaintiff into custody. He advised defendant
not to make the charge, but he persisted. Plaintiff was
locked up on Friday evening, 12th May, at six o'clock,
and taken before the magistrates at Hammersmith at 12
the next day. The magistrate said, there was no case.
Defendant valued the line at Bs.' but it was not worth
two-pence ;it was all pieces. Defendant pressed tho
charge very much.
The UNDER-SHERIFF—DO you consider it your duty
in such a frivolous and trumpery case to lock a man up
for so many hours ? Witness—l am not allowed t..
judge. I consider it my duty to take any charge of
felony.
The UNDER-SHERIFF—Have you any discretion Ia
the matter? Do you consider yourself bound to lock a
man up under such circumstances, where no other
charge exists, and you know where to find the parties?
Would you be bound to take a man in charge for steal-
ing a cabbage leaf; which is of no value ? Witness—l
am not to judge of value, my duty is to take the party to
the station-house, and the inspector is to judge of the
propriety of taking the charge.
The UNDER- SHERIFF-4 only wished to know whether
you had any discretion ?
The defendant briefly denied that he had any malici-
ous motive, and said he had only done what he consi-
dered legal and right.
The UNDER-SHERIFF said it was a most frivolous,
trumpery case even if the plaintiff had been the party
who had taken the line, which it clearly appeared he was
not. It was unfortunate that some persons, of whom
defendant was ono, who laboured under that unfortunate
state of mind, that however insignificant the value of the
article, it was their duty to the public to prosecute. In
this case there was no justification. The jury would
give general damages, as, although it had been stated,
and perhaps could have been proved, plaintiff had sus-
tained special damages, the evidence could not be re-
ceived as there was no special count in the declamation.
The jury gave 201. damages.

NEWMARKET RACES.
(THIS DAY.)
(BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.)

The Grosvenor Stakes of 100 sovs, hft for two-yr
olds ; colts, Bst 71b, and fillies, Bst 41b. T.Y.O
(3 Subs.)
Sir C. Monck's Vanguard ...
Field-Marshal Grosvenor's c by Cotherstone
Handicap for three yrs old, &c.
Duke of Rutland's St. Ann ...
Lord Exeter's Carissima
Colonel Peel's Vert Vert
... 3
The Chesterfield Stakes of 30 sovs. each, 20 ft; for two
yrs old colts, Bst 71b; and fillies, Bat 41b; the winner
of the July Stakes to carry 91b, the second 41b extra.
Last half of B.M. (44 Subs.)
Mr. Payne's Farthingale
Mr. Mostyn na Czarina
•..
Mr. Newton's Jane Eyre ...
••• 2
Match—Lord Exeter's Circassian Maid beat Sir J. Haw-
ley's Touchy.
Sweepstakes for two and three yrs old. New T.Y.C.
Lord Albemarle's Kangaroo ...
Mr. E. R. Clarke's Coronet ...
Mr. Bouverie's Prairie Bird
... 3
Match--Duke of Bedford's St. Rosolia beat.
Lord Ches-
terfield's Rhodanthe filly.

•• • 1

... 2

... 1

2

... I

••• 2

... 1

... 2

s.
On the 24th ult., at l'Eldinfliburgh, Lady Blantyre,-- of-a
daughter.
On the Ist inst., at Kinnaircl House, the Hon. Mrs. Drum-
mond, of a (laughter.
On the Ist inst., at Fitzroy -square, the wife of J. M.
Teesdale, Esq., of a daughter.
On the 2d inst., at Sarn-fawr, Glamorganshire, the lokife of
G. H. Verity, Esq., of a daughter.
On the 2d inst., at Addington-square, Camberwell, Mrs.
Hunter, of a daughter.
On the 2d inst., at Surbiton, Surrey, Mrs. W. Paterson, of
a daughter.
On the :3d inst., at Clapham-common, the lady of Major
Leckonby Phipps, of a son.
On the 3d init., at Cavendish-road, St. John's-wood, the
wife of George Dc Morgan, Esq., of a son.

At Bath DIED.
E , aged 62 Charles, son of the late J. Protheroe,
sq., , of Richmond-terrace, Clifton.
On the 26th ult., at Peary house, Mayo, G. Lynch, Esq.,
M.D., aged 34.
On the Ist inst., at Hoxton, aged 62, Simon Kent, Esq.,
late a Captain in the 98th Regiment of Foot.
On the 2d inst., at Ramsgate, Lady Wood, widow of Sir
Mathew Wood, Bart., aged 79.
On the 23 inst., at the Hot Wells, Bristol, Ann, the wife
of Major Robert Brereton.
On the 3d inst. at Hyde-park-gardens, Lieut.-General J.
W. Morris, late of the Bombay Establishment.
On the 4th inst., aged 17, Edward Henry, the last sur-
viving child of Mr. E. It. Linnecar, of New Basinghall-street.

London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, at
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112,
Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, iA the county cf
Middlesex, Thursday, July 6, 1848.

believe that the crowd waited in Finsbury-square for
reinforcements. He then described the route of the
procession. Ile walked for some distance at the head of
the procession, and saw that the shopkeepers were so
alarmed that they closed their shops before they came
up. There was much noise.
Cross-examined by Mr. PARRY—From Vernon's way
of saying he did not like curses, he considered that he
wished to deprecate such expressions. Went to the
meeting as a reporter. Could not say whether Vernon
got into the van to avoid the pressure. A good many
got up behind and tried to get into the van, but ho
(Fowler) knocked them down, in order the better to
enable him to pursue his avocation.--(Laughter.) He
could positively undertake to say that Vernon walked
in the procession in the square. He (Fowler) was not
there the whole time, as he went away to see a boy pick
a pocket.—(Laughter.)
Cross G 217, corroborated the evidence of Inspector
Hardy.
Speck, City police 119, said he assisted in dispersing
the mob in Red Cross-street. They had great difficulty
in doing so. The police were attacked and a brickbat
was thrown at him which cut through his hat, injured
his head and caused him to be confined to his bed for
three days. Williams spoke from the window of a
coffee-house.
sergeant Williams, 47 City police, corroborated the
evidence of the last witness with this addition,
Vernon asked the crowd if they wanted a Re-
publican Government, to which they replied in
the affirmative. He told the people to go away
peaceably, but if the police interfered with them to
avenge such interference. The crowd remained there
altogether about an hour and a half.
By Mr. PARRY—Was about fifty yards off; he did not
take notes.
Price, another constable, gave similar testimony--
An iron pot, he said, was thrown at him from a
window in Red Cross-street while the speaking was
going on, and struck him on the head. There were
also brickbats, earthenware jugs, stones, and other
articles thrown at the rest of the policemen who were
attempting to disperse the mob.
James Collins, another police-constable, also gave
evidence to the same effect.
Mr. PARRY took an objection to the Attorney-Ge•
neral's examining the witness as to the words used by
Williams and Fussell when they said that they adopted
all that had been said by John Mitchel, unless the
grounds on which Mitchel was convicted were proved
,in the ordinary way.
The objection wag, however, after some discussion,
overruled, the COURT observing that the indictment of
Mitchel's conviction, which had been put in, was quite
sufficient.

The record of Mitchel's conviction was then taken as
read, and this being the case for the prosecution, the
jury retired for refreshments.