The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-17 00:00:00

PRIVATE COMMITTEES.

GORR .11.1 LS GRAVITATION WATER-WO WES.
The length of the works proposed to be executed is five miles, and
the cost 120,0001. Agents, Messrs. Deams. Dunlop, and Hope.
After hearing the evidence of Mr. Gemmill and Mr. Gale, the
Committee declared the standing orders complied pith.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, March 16.
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND.)
THE ATTORNEY-GINERAL V. HODGSON.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.)
Ills IiONOUR, at the conclusion of the case, gave judgment
allowing the demurrer, considering that the gift of Christo-
pher Flaherty came within the provisions of the law of
morunain.

BANKRUPTCY COURT, March 16.
(Before Mr. Commissioner SIIIEPIIERD.)
IN RE H. BOCCHIER.

The insolvent in this case, who was a captain in the nary,
now on half-pay, applied for his interim order. His debts
were stated at about 10,0001., and he off red to set aside 25/.
a year out of his half pay, which was 2181. per annum, for
the gradual liquidation of his debts.
Mr. Tucker, as solicitor for the insolvent, said that 7,0001.
odd out of the 10,0001., stated to be debts, were liabilities. He
was captain of a certain vessel, and he undertook to take
care of a cargo for a person. The ship was wrecked, and an
action was tried and decided against the insolvent. The cargo '
was worth about 5,0001. Captain Bouchier has been residing
abroad for some time, and he came here at the request of his
creditors, all of whom, with the exception of one or two, to
the extent of about 300/, were willing to accept the proposi-
tion of 251. a year.
The insolvent, on examination, stated that he took the
benefit of the Insolvent Debtors' Act in 1835, with debts
to the amount of 9,000/, which were all paid, with the
exception of about 0004 by gradual payments of 401. a
year out of his half-pay. That sum was stopped
by Government. His daughters never kept an academy in
France, and they were never in one. He had resided in France,
where he hired a house and furniture at 80/. per annum, but
there was no furniture in France of his awn. The insolvent
bad made voyages to India, during which he had been very
unfortunate. lie had resided in Ostend, but he had no pro-
perty there. His wife had a private income some four or.
five years since, and she sold it to pay off an over-due bill
upon which an action had been brought ; and in conse-
quence of it the insolvent had &diked eleven months' impri-
sonment in France.
Mr. RYDER, as solicitor for a Mr. Yates, said he appeared
to oppose upon the ground that the insolvent had contracted
a debt of 50/. with his client in Belgium, without any reason-
able means of payment.
Mr. TUCKER said the insolvent had no indea of taking the
benefit of the Insolvent Act when he contracted these debts,
and his son, who was second mate in a ship, would have paid
Mr. Yates. had the creditors not requested his client to
come to this Court, he would not. tinder all the circum-
stances of this case, he (Mr. Tucker) hoped the Court would
grant the interim order.
The Learned COMMISSIONER, looking at all the facts of the
ease, granted the interim order.
The insolvent will pay 25/. a year to his creditors.

ASSIZE IN TEL LIGENCE.
WESTERN ClRCUlT.—Dorchester, March 14.
The commission was opened here d yeater ay at three
o'clock, with the usual formalities, and the Learned Judges
attended Divine service immediately after. The cause list
showed an entry of six causes, of which one was marked for
a special jury.
The common juries were taken to-day, and were got
through before two o'clock. The special jury was then post_
pened until Monday.
The calendar contained a list of 56 prisoners, •f which 2
wore for murder, 3 manslaughter, 2 arson, 1 concealment of
birth, 6 burglary, and 3 highway robbery. The ether
offences charged were all of a light character. Of these 56
prisoners. 4 were stated to be able to read and write well, 10
imperfectly, 19 could read, and 18 could neither read nor
write; of 5 no account was given.
CROWN COURT.—( Before Mr. Justice Eats.)
Joseph Way was indicted for having wilfully and mall-
cieusly set fire to a wheat-rick, thete 3
property
rtyllaasrty. Ann
Biles, at Milborn St. Andrew, on the
Mr. Slade appeared for the prosecution ; Mr. Ball defended

the prisoner.
Mr. SLADE having stated the facts of the case to the jury,

called
William Moses—l was at the Oak inn, at Milborn St. An-
drew, on the evening of the 31st of January. The prisoner
was ;here. There was an alarm office; this was about half-
past eight. I then missed the prisoner from the house. I
had not missed him before.
Sarah Bishop—l keep a small shop at Milborn. I know the
- - 7 laner. I heard an alarm of fire on the evening of the 31st
Zaanuary last. About ten or twelve minutes before that
timelJae prisoner came to my shop and bought some con-
• grevi etches. I know the barley-rick that was burnt on
that t; it is about 250 yards from my house.
Croy xamined by Mr. BALL—He asked for lucifers. I
' siked:h' whether he would have the silent or noisy ones.
Ilecseal e did not care which. He took the noisy ones.
Strickland—l was standing outside the Oak public-
- L•-]ions on the night of the fire with the ostler. The prisoner
e&4e np and said, " How are you?" I said, pretty well. He
then astd, "Here's a light in the road." I looked and saw a
light,, said, "It is the coach coming down the road, or
tiserneau." He said, "There is a great fire up here ;" he
taken Dried 0 Fire 1" and I then saw a fire, and went to
amid.

.~`~_.

~~
~~

Cross-examined—The prisoner went also. I saw lAim at
work assisting. This was Atom upar_pikat (dot.

William Prince—l was up at the fire on the 31st; this was
of a barley stack, and was assisting there " dousing " the
fire out. Way, the prisoner, was there. He made a remark
to me " This is enough to open any farmer's eyes. They
turn men away who have a wife and family ; they had better
give a man a sovereign then turn him away."
Cross-examined by Mr. BALL—There were two free that
night. This was at the first fire of the barley rick.. It was
said before all the people. I remember the prisen.:r watch-
ing his master's (Mr. Simmons) premises. He sa, I took a
a bit of wood therefrom. He never saw me take any; but
he said he did. I was discharged in consequence.
Henry Symonds—l saw the prisoner at the second fire, the
one at the prosecutor's rick. He said, "How's the time to
speak out. I suppose this fire will be blamed to people out
of work, when they may have nothing more to do with it
than other people."
By the Juisax—The wheat rick, where the second -fire
was, belonged to widow Biles, the barley rick to John Bites.
Thomas Biles--I was at the first tire of the barley rick.
Way, the prisoner, was there. I saw him go away towards
H had no bucket. About ten minutes after
there was a fire at widow Biles's. That is about 300 yards
from the first fire.
Cress-examined by Mr. BALL—When I saw him at the
first fire, he was trying to keep the fire off another rick. I
am no relation to widow Biles.
William Simmons—l was at the barley rick of Benjamin
Biles when it was on fire. While there my attention was
drawn to another light. I thought there was another fire.
I said to Mr. Stanfield, who was there, " You make one way
to the fire, and I will go another, so as to cut off the retreat
of any person who might be running away from the second
fire." I came to a gate leading into the road from the field
where the fire was. The fire had taken considerable progress
on the rick on one side. The wind blew ,best, quite in a
contrary direction from where the first fire was. The first
fire was away from the second fire.
Cross-examined by Mr. BALL—The prisoner worked for
me two years. I cannot say I have not chastised him. He
was a boy when he worked for me. I would rather not answer
questions as to his character.
Isaac Stanfield—l was at the first fire. I saw the light of
a second fire. Mr. Simmons was there. lie gave me some
directions, and I went up a lane towards the second fire. I
came to a gate, and heard footsteps coming from the second
fire, as I was in the act of opening the gate. I saw a man
running in a direction from the second fire. He ran to ards
where the gate opened. I stepped through and met him.
I stopped him, and said, " Halloo, my friend, who are you?"
He made ne answer. I took hold of him. I said, "Do you
see that ?" pointing to the light of the second fire. He said,
"It's a fire." Two persons came up from the first fire on
horseback ; one said, " For Ged's sake, open the gate." This
was Mr. Dunman. I said, " I shall not open the gate until I
know who this man is." He then said, "My name is Joseph
Way." When I first took hold of him he was out of breath
and agitated. Upon this, I let the prisoner go and ran to
the fire. When I got there, I saw the two persons on horse-
back who had come to the gate. I was the third person at the
fire. It had begun five feet from the ground. It had begun
on the side farthest from the first fire at Benjamin Biles's.
Cross-examined—The wind bore from the second fire to-
wards the first. The man was coming from the second fire
to the first fire.
By the Julacat—l knew the prisoner when we came in con-
tact.
By Mr. BALL—The prisoner was at the second fire, assisting
during a part of the time.
William Dunman was called, and corroborated the last
witness.
The Rev. Mr. Headley—l am vicar of Milborn St. Andrew.
I was at the fire at widow Biles's. I had occasion to speak
to ;the prisoner, and admonish him for his bad behaviour
there. He swore and used bad language ; he also had a pole,
knocking the fire about so as to cause danger to the other
ricks. I threatened to give him in charge of the constable
if he did not behave better. I afterwards went with the con-
stable to the prisoner's house. He found some Lucifer matches
in his bed-room (producing them). I bought some matches
of Mrs. Bishop, of the same kind that she stated she had sold
to the prisoner.
Mrs. Bishop was re-called, and stated that the matches
found were of a different kind to those she had sold to the
prisoner on the night of the fire.
The prisoner's statement before the magistrate was then
put in and read. It was to the effect that he had bought the
matches for his wife.

Mr. BALL then addressed the jury for the prisoner at some
length, and contended that there was no evidence at all in
this case on which a jury could act to justify a conviction, and
that although they might have some lurking suspicion that
he was in some way connected with the transaction, yet they
were not to act upon suspicion. but must have direct proof
that he was the man whose hand fired the rick.
Mr. Justice Enas then summed up the case to the jury,
who, after deliberating for a short time, returned a verdict of
Guilty.
The Learned JUDGE then sentenced the prisoner to be
transported for life.
The unfortunate man was then removed from the dock
Much
otesting his innocence of the crime laid to his charge.
Much surprise was expressed in the Court at the verdict
given in this case.

MIDLAND CIRC ottinghant, March 16.

CLARKE V. HUGHES.

This was an action tried in the Guildhall this morning be-
fore Mr. Under-Sheriff Swann, in which Mr. Richard Clarke,
surveyor, of Middlesex, was the plaintiff, and Mr. Hughes
Hughes, a wealthy Alderman of the city of London, and
barrister-at-law, the defendant, to recover 181. 16s. 10d. for
work and labour done. Mr. Miller appeared for the plaintiff;
and Mr. Macauley for the defence.
The action was simply to try whether the defendant, Mr.
Hughes Hughes, who was the chairman of the Sheffield
Nottingham, and London Direct Railway, was or was
not liable for the services of the plaintiff. In October
last Mr. Brees was the engineer, and in the month fol-
lowing a quarrel arose between him and the company, and
he was dismissed. Mr. Borsley succeeded ; but during this
period the plaintiff and others continued their work, and it
would be shown that Mr. Canr., solicitor, of Nottingham. a local
agent of the company, assured the plaintiff that he and the
other surveyors should be paid their arrears, and for their
future work. After the panic things did not go on pros-
perously, and the plaintiff found it necessary to apply to the
board of directors, of which Mr. Hughes was the chairman,
and the answer he got there was that he should be settled
with. This had not been done, hence arose the present
action. The witnesses would prove all the circumstances.
Edward M'Dermot, surveyor, living in Middlesex,' said he
was employed in November last to make a survey of the Shef-
field, Nottingham, and London Direct Railway. The plain-
tiff (Mr. Clarke), a surveyor, was also engaged on the same
line. At the first he ( witness) worked under Mr. Brees'
direction. He was an engineer. Afterwards lie received in-
struetions from Cann (solicitor), a local agent of the company.
Mr. MACAULEY thought that they were not in a state to
hear what Mr. Cann had said.
Mr. MILLER produced the prospectus, in which Mr. Cann's
name appeared.
Mr. MACAULEY said the account was for work and labour
done, and certainly the prospectus of the railway company
had not yet been made material to the issue.
Mr. MILLE,. said he should not only prove that Mr. Cann's
name was en it, but that Mr. Hughes was at the board and
acted there. _ _ _

Examination continued—The plans were completed before
the SOth November, and were deposited by witness and
others with Mr. Cann. He saw Mr. Cann take the plans
out of the office in which they had been working. After
that, said he, I was at the office of the company, in Moor-
gate-street. The plaintiff was with me on several occasions.
I went into the board-room. The committee was sitting.
Alderman Hughes was in the chair in the month of Febru-
ary. I spoke and also Mr. Clarke. He said he wanted to
be paid for his survey. Mr. Hughes replied he was very
sorry that the committee had not paid his arrears before,
that it was a distressing situation for Mr. Clarke and the
other surveyors to be in, but the shareholders had not paid
up their last deposits, as was expected. The committee had
come to a resolution of dissolving the company, and
they would take steps to inquire into the amount of the
liabilities of the company, and that we were to send in our
accounts; that he (Mr. Hughes) had himself subscribed 100
guineas already, and having ascertained the amount of their
liabilities, we should be paid, and each member of the provi-
sional committee would be called upon to pay their propor-
tionate share, which he stated would be about 501. a piece.
He then stated if we could call upon hint that day week wo
sscshhtlaooatutriekll ddte
hhdhealadvaveinne
os ootsumond, e
oeot. Inrnceia3,aiii
lcs;ecdaoi
account
tlei.eumt Vallrltdottsliieti.elann: 'tiaivsnelnlelt.o t settled we
company al7
ay. 3,lnrlorrti
Clarke, on that day week. I did not see the alderman. I
saw the secretary, and he then referred us to Messrs. Amory
and Sewell. I did not call any more.
Mr MACACLEY said he should have no objection to Mr.
Miller calling that witness again after he had called Mr.
Cann. It would be far more convenient if the plaintiff would
show that he was employed by Mr. Cann.
Mr. MILLEa was not going to call Mr. Cann, who was the
company's agent, but he was going to show that the com-
pany's agent had employed the plaintiff.
Examination continued—After I lied been working under
the direction of Mr. Brees, Mr. Cann, in answer to a question
put by myself, in the presence of Mr. Clarke, to the effect
that we could not go on any further, and we wished to know
who we were to look to for payment, said the company was
desirous of getting the plans done, and whatever claims we
had against Mr. Brees should be paid, and also the work
done on behalf of the company.
Mr. MILLER—What are the exact words? Witness—The
words were, that we should be paid not only the arrears from
Mr. Brees, but for any work done in foture. Upon that in-
timation I and Mr. Clarke proceeded with the survey, and
we acted under the direction of `'l r. Borsley, a surveyor.
Mr. Cann said we were to take our instructions from Mr.
Borsley. Borsley had been acting before that under Mr.
Brees; bet when Mr. Brees was dismissed we took our in-
structions from Borsley by order of Mr. Cann. These direc-
tions were for the plaintiff and myself.
Cross-examined—lt was on the 20th of November when
Borsley came. I was employed under Brees at the latter end
of October or beginning of November. I had been serving
under him on another line. My agreement was a verbal
one. He was to pay me three guineas a day. I did not say
Clarke had been employed under Brees. I have heard from
Clarke that he was to have three guineas a day. If I have
said Clarke agreed with Borsley it was inadvertently said.
I have received money on account. I received 151. from Mr.
Cann, and some money from Mr. Borsley. I first made ap-
plication to the office of the committee on the 3d of December.
I did not apply to Mr. Borsley. I knaw Mr. William Pratt.
He is not here. He is a surveyor, and worked on this line.
I have never seen his handwriting. I do not know Clarke's
handwriting.
Mr. MACAULET handed two letters to witness, but he said
he did not know the handwriting.
Cross-examination continued—l have brought an action
against Mr. Alderman Hughes for 301.
Mr. MacauLer —I suppose, when you have got this ver-
dict, you expect Mr. Clarke to help you. Are you subpoenaed ?
Wls,itinre mAcss—lAaumi;,T.l
The
re
is
n sthiss_l doact otiennankdnoCw.larke's; how
many more are there?
MACA U
chairman ; why don't dare say you sue Alderman Hughes as
you
sue one in Nottingham—for
instance, Lord Ranclifree
—I did not know that
Lord Rancliffe lived in Nottinghame"
; besides, there is some
ing aaPppeleierd to Borslev. I applied to Mr.
diffißcen.eltxyaiinninsuedeLl
Cann and to Mr. Hughes. I would fake money from any
body connected with the company.
Henry Stubbs, varnish-maker, a friend of Borsley's, came
down to assist on the line from Nottingham to Tibs:e'lf,aud
overlooked the men. Attended at the board meeting of the
27th of January last at the office in London, with Clarke and
others, and heard them ask for money for surveying on the
line, Mr. Alderman Hughes was in the chair, and lie said
that it had pot beenin
rethweeirpotwo.ercatoll
i remuneratethecourteheemef
the
their services, hilt they
tow e
lave tptileauwetilthint ebma;
ttiht
eayt
lie was
sanvdexthedeyatwtohueldpoesiltdieoanYtohnefy
would endeavour to paw.
Cross-examined—l did not go to varnish the surveys, but
as Borsley's confidant, and to see that the men kept to their
work of levelling, instead of drinking champagne in a morn-
ing to breakfast. I went to be a witness at the board-room.
I went at Mr. I3orsley's request, to ascertain what was going
on in the board-room-. i have nd claim against the company.
George Wilson, surveyor—Was on this line, and ; ecol-
looted Dir. Cann hying directions, about the 19th or ?otll of

November. Mr. Cann stated that Mr. Brees had received
1,900/. of the company's money, and had not done them jus-
tice, and that whatever instructions Mr. Borsley gave us we
were to abide by, and that what bad been left unpaid by Mr.
Brees should be paid. We were at work in a room at the
George the Fourth Inn, and Mr. Cann said if Mr. Brees
Should force his way into the room we were to tumble him
out, and we were not to let him have the plans. I was pre-
sent at the board meeting on the 27th January, and on seve-
ral other occasions, and I heard the promises of payment. I
saw Mr. Alderman Hughes there.
Cross-examined—l am sorry to say I have my action.
When Brees ceased to be engineer to the company he owed
me a balance- I was not there when Clarke first came. I
was to have 30s. a day.
Re-examined—Clarke was employed when Cann gave
directions for us to receive instructions from Borsley. Clarke
was at work in the room when Mr. Cann came in and spoke
about the plans.
Mr. MAcAULKY addressed the fury for the defendant, as•
curing them that Mr. Hughes did not wish the plaintiff,
after earning his money, to lose it, but he considered he was
not the party who ought to be applied to, as it would appear
in evidence that the plaintiff had made an engagement with
another person, and not with the directors. He would call
Mr. Borsley, the engineer, who would show that he con-
tracted with the plaintiff, and he was to pay his account.
Mr. Borsley would give his evidence se clearly as not to
leave the shadow of a doubt.

James Atkin Borsley. civil engineer, said—l have been in
practice 'four years. I was employed by the company to
complete the survey, and 1 became responsible from the 22d
or 23d of November. There was only a short space of time
to complete the survey, as all must be finished by the 30th
of November. I contracted with the company to do the
necessary work. I employed Mr. Clark. I received no in-
structions from the company to employ him. He was in
London unemployed at the time I engaged him ; he had been
employed by me previously on the Oxford and Salisbury line.
He had been in my employ about a month. Had always paid
him before. When I had him in my employ before he was
employed on my own account. I employed the surveyors,
Clarke. Pratt, and Wilson. I engaged them by the mile, not
at so much a day. They were to have 101. a mile for the
survey. I had no authority from the company to employ
Clarke, or to fix particular sums. The line was up on the
30th of November. I paid them from time to time sums on
account. I had enguged with the company to do the work
for a fixed sum.
Mr. MILLER objected to the question which obtained the
last answer, and a note was taken by the Under-Sheriff of
the question objected to, namely—" Had you engaged to
perform these surveys for a fixed sum ?"
The UNDER-SHERIFF was of opinion the answer ought not
to be received, as it did not furnish any evidence as to the
terms made with the present plaintiff.
Mr. MACAULET—In your employment as an engineer by
the "company. was it a part of your employment to engage
persons for the company? Witness—No, I engaged them
entirely at my own responsibility.
Mr. MACAULEY—You have told me that you paid nume-
rous sums on account; let me ask you, whatever the sum
may be that you may have a claim upon the company for,
whether that claim has been settled ? Witness--.No, it
has not. - _ _ _ _

Mr. MACAULF.Y—When you undertook with the company,
to complete the surveys did you receive any money on ac-
count? Witness—No, I did not. I have since received a
small proportion on account. Pratt and the ether two ware
engaged at the same time.
Mr. MACAULEY—In the first instance, when you engaged
them, did you engage each one to do so much work? Wit-
ness—No, I looked to Pratt. He was to do so many miles of
survey, at 10/. a mile. Wilson and Clarke were to assist him
in it. The money paid was paid over t• Pratt, and the
three divided amongst themselves. I paid them in one gum.
A letter dated Ist of February, after the action had been
brought, written by Pratt to Borsley, stating the account
due from Borsley to be, to Pratt 251. 12s. 6d., to Clarke
15/. Cs 9d., and to Wilson 22/. 1 ls. 6d., was put in evidence.
Mr. MILLER objected to it, but the Under-Sheriff over-
ruled the objection.
Cross-examined—l wrote to Pratt, and he furnished the
letter in answer. I have threatened the company with an
action, but I think I shall get my money without proceeding.

Mr. Rymington was the first engaged 'by the company, and
then Mr. Brim I worked under the latter for two months.

Re- examined—Mr. Rymington received 1,000/., and re-
turned it to the Company.
Mr. MAcAULET, on closing his case, submitted that he
was entitled to a non-suit; which Mr. MILL= objected to,
and replied.
The UNDER-SHERIFF slimmed up, and in a few minutes
the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages
18/. 16s. 10d.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSI()N-BOUSE.

A young man, named Joseph Myers, who is what is called
a general dealer, and resides in Spitalfields, was apprehended
by Daniel Forrester, the officer, upon the charge of having
been in possession of some 10/. notes of the Warwick and
Leamington Banking Company, which had been stolen in
the year 1845.
Mr. Mullins, of the firm of Bush and Mullins, solicitors to
tin Committee of Bankers for protection against forgery and
fraud, attended upon the part of the bankers.
The Warwick and Leamington 'banking-house was plun-
dered on the 4th of July, 1845, of 100 10i. notes, dated Lea-
mington, Ist of January, 1844, by, as was supposed, one of
the clerks, who is now in custody in that place. The Bank-
ing Company have, in consequence of the robbery, issued an
entire new circulation of notes, dated the Ist of September,
1845, and a handbill has been sent round, calling upon per-
sons who may hold any of the old notes to present them for
payment, and stating the fact of the discovery that some of
the stolen notes have been lately passed in London to grocers
and other tradesmen.

Superintendent W. Shirley Roberg, of the Leamington
police, produced a warrant signed by Mr. W. C. Reynall,
magistrate of the county of Warwick, and backed by the
Lord Mayor, for the apprehension of the prisoner, and other
parties, charged with having feloniously received bank-notes
of the establishment which had been stolen, and which were
represented to be the property of Mr. Henry Somerfield, the
registered public officer of the backing concern. Witness
stated that he believed he should be able next day to identify
the prisoner as one of the parties named in the warrant, so
as to be justified in taking him down to Leamington.
The LORD MAYOR—Does the prisoner wish to say any-
thing?—The prisoner declared that he, knew nothing at all
about the offence he was accused of having committed.
The LORD MAYOR—The superintendent has told you what
you were charged with ? The prisoner—Yes, my Lord, but
I am wholly ignorant of the business.
Mr. Mullins said that some of the stolen notes had been
s'opped. Within the last few weeks persons had gone about
with them to grocers, distillers, and other tradesmen, and
having made small rurchases, offered them in payment.
It will be recollected, that soon after the robbery was com-
mitted, Daniel Forrester traced Blaney, one of the clerks of
the banking-house, to Calais, and there, with the assistance
of the French authorities, succeeded in apprehending him.
Blaney was detained in prison until it was ascertained that
the case did not come under the 6th and 7th of Victoria, en-
ti led, "An Act for giving effect to a Convention between her
Majesty and the King of the French, for the apprehension
of certain offenders." That Act states, " That the high con-
tracting parties should, on requisition made in their name,
through the medium of their respective diplomatic agents,
deliver up to justice persons who, being accused of the crime
of murder (comprehending the crimes designated in the
French Penal Code by the terms assassination, parricide, in-
fanticide, and poisoning), or of an attempt to commit
rder, or of forgery, or of fraudulent bankruptcy, committed
within the jurisdiction of the requising party, should seek an
asylum, or be found within the territories of the other," Icc.
The result of the investigation at Calais was, that Blaneywas
discharged from custody, although there existed not the
slightest doubt of his guilt. Since that time the police au-
thorities in England have been actively engaged in watching
suspected parties.
The LORD MAYOR regretted that the Act did net com-
prehend rohly-ries of so extensive and desperate a kind as
those which had been committed upon banking-houses by
the persons employed in them, and remanded the prisoner
until this day, when it is expected he will be removed to
Leamington in the charge of the superintendent.
Two very little boys, named George Thompson and Thomas
Owen, were brought up, charged with having picked pockets.

Policeman 56T, stated that he was in Princes-street, in
plain clothes, that morning, and observed the two prisoners,
who seemed to be adepts at thieving, slip their hands into
the pockets of several gentlemen. At last witness, to his
surprise, felt Thompson's baud in his own pocket. The boy
finding nothing there, hastily transferred his hand to the
pocket of a gentleman, and then conveyed something to his
own, and witress caught hold of him, and drew a large snuff-
box from his trowsers. Owen, who was the smallest boy of
the two, was just as active in the crowd. Witness searched
Thompson, and found in one of the legs of his trowsers a
silk purse, containing Cs. 6d., and in his waistcoat pocket a
sovereign. The boy had stated to witness, upon being ap-
prehended, that upon leaving home he was possessed of no
-.-Lore than 2s,

The LORD MAYOR—A good morning's work.—Remanded.
BO U'-STREET.

A young man, in woman's clothes, named John Travers,
was Placed at the bar before Mr. flail, charged with frequent-
ing the public streets for an unlawful purpose.
This was the second or third cave of the kind which has
L-en brought under the notice of the Court within the past
fee weeks.

It was proved by constables A 5G and C 140, that the pri-
soner had been seen in the public thoroughfares near the
club-houses in Pall.mall East, and the neighbourhood, for
some time past, at about the hour of midnight. The latter
officer stated that he had seen him upisards of twenty times
lately, and that he generally resorted to dark courts and
narrow passages. Having always supposed him to be a
woman, he had merely spoken to him occasionally, to • desire
him to " move on," upon which he generally walked in the
direction of Leicester-square. On Friday night he was in
conversation with an elderly gentleman, and at about one
o'clock on Sunday morning he was apprehended by A 56,
who, having heard that there was a man in woman's apparel
in the habit of frequenting his beat, approached and spoke to
the prisoner (after he had left a gentleman), and took him
into custody. The prisoner resisted him, and denied that he
was of the male sex ; but when called upon to account for
his conduct in court, he attributed it to a mere frolic, stating
that he had made a bet with a friend that he would pass un-
detected in his disguise.
Inspector Partridge said, that from what bad come to his
knowledge, he was satisfied that the object of the prisoner
and his associates, in frequenting the streets and parks, was
either to steal or to obtain money by practices of the most re-
volting and unnatural character.
An officer stated that he had made inquiries respecting the
prisoner at a•public-house where he lived, but the man to
whom he applied assured bins that "he was not born yes-
terday," and declined giving him any information.
Mr. Hata. remarked that this case wet open toe great deal
of observation. It was impossible, after hearing the evi-
dence of the inspector and the two constables, to suppose
that the prisoner had assumed the garb of a woman in a
mere frolic. He had been seen upwards of 20 times lurking
about in dark and narrow passages. and frequently in conver-
sation with other men. Every one who had had any ex-
perience in life, and knew to what extent vices and crimes
of the most abominable nature prevailed in this large town,
must deduce from these circumstances the most unfavourable
conclusions. To protect the public, therefore, from the in-
juries
which these men inflicted on society, he should require
the prisoner to enter into his own recognizances for 501., and
to furnish two sureties of 25/. each, to be of good behaviour
for six months, or to be committed in default.
The prisoner then put on his bonnet, leaped out of the
dock, and retired amid the execrations of the Court.

WORSHIP-STREET.
Two lads, about seventeen years of age, named James
Mullane and John Brown, alias Elliott, were placed at the
bar before Mr. Broughton, charged with being concerned in
stealing a quantity of plate, the property of a Miss Beaumont,
in Finsbury-square i and also a gold watch and some silver
spoons from the dwelling-house of Mrs. Lemon, a widow lady
residing in Hoxton-square.
It appeared from the evidence that on the morning of the
7th instant the prisoner Mullany called at the house of Mrs.
Lemon, and, having informed the servant he had been seut
by his master, Mr. Walker, in the Hackney. road, for some
boots to repair, she showed him into the parlour, and went
upstgre with the weenie to liefmwtrw, cou.returaing txt

the passago with an intimation that no such person as Mr.
Walker was known there, shea found the prisoner had disap-
peared: and learned from the daughter of her mistress, a
child five years old, that the moment witness had left the

parlour the prisoner ingratiated himself with the child, and
having asked her if there was no pretty watches and spoons
about the place, had been led by her into an adjoining room,
where she pointed out to hire her mother's gold watch and
several spoons, the whole of which the prisoner instantly
transferred to his pocket, and darted out of the house with.
On the following Monday morning_ the prisoner presented
himself at the residence of Miss Beaumont with a similar
message, but the servant refused to admit him, assuring him
there must be some mistake, and he went away, but renewed
the attempt tthree times the same evening, and finally, on
the following morning, called with a letter, which he said
had been sent by his master, and in an authoritative tone de-
sired the girl to give it at once to her mistress. On re-
entering the kitchen, the servant saw the prisoner hastening
up the area steps, and, on examining the place, she found that
six silver forks and two spoons had been carried off. In-
formation of both robberies was communicated to the police,
and as City-policeman Haydon, 274, was passing through
Field-lane, Holborn, a few days since, observing the two
prisoners making signals to a Jew, who accompanied them
into a neighbouring public-house, he followed them in there,
and detected them bargaining with the Jew for the sale of
the gold watch and two dessert spoons, which he instantly
secured, together with the prisoners, and conveyed to the
station.
The articles produced were identified by two of Mrs.
Lemon's servants as their mistress's property, and the pri-
soners, who expressed their intention to reserve their de-
fence, but who were recognised by sergeant Brannan of the
G division as old offenders, were fully committed for trial on
both charges.
CLERKENWELL.

Martin Jennings, a young man of athletic appearance, I
was placed in the felons' dock, charged with the wilful
murder of Mary Murray.
The prisoner was undefended.
A mass of evidence was given, but that of a few witnesses
will be sufficient to explain the occurrence.
It appeared from the evidence of Elizabeth Tye, who re-
sides in George's-yard, Golden-lane, St. Luke's, that on
Saturday night the prisoner, who had been drinking with
others, went into witness's house, where he had an altercation
with the deceased, he alleging that she had taken ls. from
his pocket. The woman, who was quite sober, positively
denied it, and the prisoner struck her twice on the upper part
of the body. The prisoner was not drunk. Witness remon-
strated with the prisoner, and opened the door so that the
deceased might escape. She ran out, the prisoner immedi-
ately followed her, and witness saw no more until she found
the deceased lying insensible in the dust-hole at the end of
the passage. That was about three o'clock.
Mrs. Sarah Angelina Hewett deposed as follows—l live on
the second floor at No. 2, George's yard. I was in bed on
Saturday night, and was aroused by the dreadful screams of
I a woman in the court. lam sure it was a female voice. I
heard her say, "Martin, don't kill me." It was then a quar-
ter to three o'clock.

Mr. GRELIIWOOD—How do you knew the time have
three rooms, and a clock ii each room. There is a clock at
the foot of my bed, and I saw the time by a light which was
burning on the table. soon after the first cries I heard the
same female voice again exclaim, " I have not got your shil-
lin ; don't murder me ;" and then dreadful screams from the
same woman. There was silence, and in some minutes after
I heard a person say,' The woman is dead."
Elizabeth Tye, junior, swore she saw the prisoner strike
the deceased on the head at the dust-hole. The deceased fell
immediately, and did not say a word.
John Waldron swore he saw the prisoner strike the de-
ceased. About ten minutes after he saw deceased lying in the
dust-hole at the end of the passage. She was quits insen-
sible. She turned up her eyes, and there was a gurgling in
her throat. She never spoke.
Police-constable 81 G swore be was called off his beat in
Golden-lane to George's-yard. He saw the deceased in a
house there. She had been carried from the dust-hole and
seemed insensible, but life was not quite extinct. She was
removed to the station on the stretcher, where she died al-
most upon arrival. The prisoner came up whilst witness
was standing by the deceased in George's-yard before her
removal, and said he wanted to give her in charge for stealing
a shilling. Several persons present said aloud that it was
the pi isoner who had struck her ; the prisoner did not
deny it. He was arrested and attempted to escape on
his way to the station. He found Is. 3d. in the pocket of
deceased.

Police-constable 62 G swore that the woman who held the
head of the dying woman in her lap said to the prisoner,
who was standing by, " Ah, you vagabond, you have given
her her last blow ;" the prisoner was silent.
Mr. J. B. Mather, a surgeon, merely deposed, that upon
his arrival at the police-station, at a quarter to four o'clock
on Sunday morning, the deceased had just expired. He did
not make any post mortem or other examination of the body;
but there did not seem to be any mark of violence on the
head. He did not examine under her dress.

Police-constable 226 G deposed that the woman gave signs
of life when she reached the station. She vomited, blew her
nose, and wiped her face ; suddenly her colour became livid,
and she died in a moment.

The prisoner, who was twice about addressing the Court,
was stopped by the Magistrate saying it was not the proper
time, and that he could not be too cautious.—He was re-
manded.