The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-18 00:00:00

CRIMINAL COURT.-(THIS DAY

OLD COURT:

The Court was occupied throughout the morning with
cases of uttering counterfeit money, but none of theta pos-
sessed any interest whatever.

NE 1V COURT.
Thomas Livermore was indicted for embezzling two trifling
sums of money from his master, Mr. W. Lamprell.
Mr. DOANE. who appeared for the prosecution, stated the
case, from which it appeared that the prosecutor Will
licensed victualler, and that the prisoner was in his employ,
his duty being to carry beer to his customers, and to make
up his account 3 daily. The latter he omitted to do in July
last, and gave no account of the money he had received
from one of the customers, with the embezzlement of which
he was now charged.
The payment of the money to the prisoner having been
proved, and the witnesses cross-examined by Mr. Ballantine,
who appeared on the part of the prisoner,
The COMMON SERGEANT summed up, and

The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
UTTERING A FORGED ORDER.—James Russell, a lad, ap
parently about 15 years of age, was indicted for uttering a
forged order on the 23d of July last, with a view to obtain
goods fraudulently.
Mr. CLARKSON, who appeared on the part of the prosecu-
tion, stated the case. The cffence with which the prisoner
stood indicted was very common, and one from which re-
spectable persons in business had suffered very severely. The
prosecutors, Messrs. Ellis and Co., who carried on a respect-
able business, had amongst their customers a gentleman
named Owen, who was also in business in Great Coram-
street. On the day in question the prisoner came to the
shop of Messrs. Ellis and Co. and presented an order, which
purported to be from Mr. Owen, and which was as follows:
" Gentlemen—You will oblige me by sending by the bearer
a piece of satin of each of the enclosed patterns, each piece
not to exceed in price 4s. " D. W. OWEN."
These facts having been proved, the prisoner, who
was called on for his defence, said that he had
been the dupe of another person, with whom previously he
had had some acquaintance, and who met him on the day
in question, and represented himself to be in the employ of
Mr. Owen. This person gave him the order, which he told
him he had just received, and desired him, as soon he had
obtained the goods, to meet him at a place which ho speci•
tied. He was quite innocent of any intention to commit the
crime with which he was charged.
The ComstoN SERGEANT summed up. lie 'Said the
points which the jury had to try were, whether
the prisoner had presented the order in question,
whether that order was forged, and whether the
prisoner at the bar was cognizant of the latter fact. The
two first had been clearly established ; and he thought that
there was little credit to be attached to the statement of the
prisoner.
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty ; and, it appearing
that the prisoner was well known at the Court, he was sen-
tenced to be transported for seven years.

BOW-STREE 1.-(THIS DAY.)
Mr. Robert Oliphant, the son of Mr. James Oliphant, army
accountant, was charged with an assault upon Mr. Dimand,
partner to Mr. Eisenberg, the " chiropodist.
Mr. Dimand, who is a foreigner, and spoke with great
difficulty, stated that the assault arose out of a dispute in
respect of some money borrowed by the defendant in the
name of his father, for-payment of which he applied to the
father yesterday. Mr. Oliphant sent a message to him,
desiring him to go to his (Mr. Oliphant's) office, and to wait
there for him. This he refused to do; but Mr. Eisenberg,
who was with him at the time, went to the office. Mr.
Oliphant again sent a message to him to go to the office, and
he did so. On his entering the office he found Mr. Eisenberg
there, with the defendant and his brother, Mi. Henry
Oliphant, who both " began to abuse him," and called him
a " scamp," " rascal," " vagabond," &c. Ilc turned to
Mr. Eisenberg and said, " Let us leave these blackguards,
and go away;" upon which the defendant rushed upon
him and struck him a violent blow on the mouth,
which hurt him very severely, and drew blood. A police•
man was then sent for, and took the prisoner in custody,
while witness left the office and went to the nelrest surgeon's.
—(The witness's mouth was very much swelled.)
Mr. Eisenberg said that, on his entering the office, he
found the defendant and his brother there. The latter asked
him how Mr. Dimand dared to go and talk to his father
about the money he had lent his brother ? And the de-
fendant said—" If he comes down here we will knock hint
down ; and if I do it I'll dash his brains out ; he shall not
walk out again; he shall be carried out." Mr. Henry
Oliphant either said the same thing, or " assisted the de-
fendant to say it," but witness was not quite sure. When
Mr. Dimand was heard coming down stairs to the office tie
defendant and his brother both said Here be is; we'll do
for him :" and on his entering the office the defendant com-
mitted the assault described by Mr. Dimand.
The defendant admitted that he struck the complainant,
but denied that the circumstances were as they had been
described by him and Mr. Eisenberg. He said that when
Mr. Eisenberg entered the office he (defendant) complained
of the conduct of Mr. Dimand in going to tell his father
about a debt which he had contracted, and said," The dirty
little devil deserves to be kicked out of the office." Mr. Di-
mand, on coming into the office, called his brother (Mr.
H. Oliphant) " a blackguard," of which he took no notice,
but defendant said, " I would not let him call me a black-
guard, I would knock him down if he did so." The com-
plainant then turned to him and called him a blackguard,
upon which he struck him in the face. He did not use any
of the language described, and neither he nor his brother
threatened to knock the complainant down, or knock his
braiiisout, or " do for him."
The defendant called, as witnesses, his brother, Mr. Henry
Oliphant, and a clerk in the office, who fully confirmed the
above statement.
Mr. JARDINE said that he thought the provocation proved
to have been given, though it would not justify, would yet
palliate the assault. It would have been better if the de-
fendant bad acted in the same manner as his brother had,
and taken no notice of the complainant's abuse ; or if he
had turned him out of the office, nhich he might have done
without striking him. However, he would not go to the full
extent of tl,e law, but would tine the prisoner 405., or, in
default, sentence hire to one month's imprisonment.
A charge of obtaining 61. under false pretences was after-
' wards preferred by the complainant's solicitor against de-
fendant, but Mr. JARDINE refused to entertain it, saying he
thought there was no foundation in it.
as