The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-22 00:00:00

have taken to Messrs. Scott, Simpson, and Co., and another
firm in the City, with whom Messrs. Wainwright and Co.
had had transactions for sugar, and he was empowered to fill
up the blank cheques for the amount that might be required
in reference to these transactions; but it appeared that, in-
stead of doing so, he filled up the cheques fur the respective
sums of 3501. and 5001., and instead of paying in the cash and
cheques he had received from the other firm, he applied those
cheques for that purpose, and kept the money. When he
was apprehended five 100/. notes and other moneys were in
his possession.
The jury Acquitted the prisoner of the forgery.
He was then arraigned upon an indictment for larceny, in
stealing the eight 100/. notes, and the evidence having been
again produced, the jury returned a verdiet of Guilty.
Mr. Baron PLATT sentenced the prisoner to be transported
for seven years.
Mr. CLARKsorr applied for the restoration of the money
found upon the prisoner, and also. that a large quantity of
shawls, cigars, and other property, which had been found in
the prisoner's possession, and which no doubt he intended to
have gone abroad with, it being the produce of his plunder,
should be delivered up to the prosecutor.
Mr. Baron PLATT said the property ought to be de-
livered up.

PsEW COUR!:
(Before the RECORDER and Alderman HuGHEs.)
On the opening of the Court several prisoners who stood
indicted with cases of petty larceny, &c., pleaded guilty.
A young man of respectable appearance, named John
Roberts, who had surrendered himself to answer four separate
charges of embezzlement, was placed at the bar.
The prisoner was first indicted with embezzling 11. out of
Si. 10s., the property of his master, Mr. I'. Shepherd, and
which he had received on his account.

Mr. CLARKSON appeared as counsel for the prisoner.
Mr. PARRY, counsel for the prosecutor, stated the case,
from which it appeared that the prisoner was occasionally
employed at Covent-garden, as salesman to the prosecutor,
who is a market gardener.
The requisite evidence having been given, the prosecutor
was cross-examined by Mr. CLARKSON, who elicited from
him that the prisoner had served him faithfully for seven
years. He also admitted that he had turned out the pri-
soner while the late storm was at its height.
The jury considered the evidence insufficient, and accord-
ingly acquitted the prisoner.
A similar charge was preferred against the prisoner upon
which also he was acquitted on the same ground.
The counsel for the prosecution refused to proceed with the
hird indictment, and the prisoner was liberated, a result that
eemed to give great satisfaction to nearly all present.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
WORSHIP-STREET.

THEATRICAL Moa.--Joha Belasco, nrother to the well•
known prize-fighter of that name, appeared upon a warrant
before Mr. Broughton, charged with having violently as-
saulted a glass-deall named Henry Davis.
The complainant, whose person exhibited marks of severe
and recent ill-treatment, stated that while passing through
Petticoat-lane, on the afternoon of Monday last, he was
accosted by the prisoner, who told him that a gentleman,
with whom he had been in communication, had informed
him that Mr. Barnard Gregory was to perform that even-
ing at the Haymarket Theatre, and that he wished him to
organise as many persons as he could collect together to
hoot him off the stage. The prisoner was accompanied at
the time by a large mob of the lowest characters in the dis-
trict, and offered him a shilling. together with a free admis
shun to the theatre, and as much liquor as he chose to par-
take of, if he would join the expedition and allow his name
to be inserted in a book in which those of all the others were
inscribed. Witness, however, refused to take any part in
the proceedings, upon which the prisoner distributed a
quantity of halfpence amongst his followers, to pay their
passage by the penny steam-boat to Hungerford-stairs, and
they all set out on their errand. Shortly before they parted,
the prisoner threatened that he would "serve him out" for
refusing to form one of the party, but he saw no more of him
until the preceding [evening, when they accidentally met
each other at a public-house in Petticoat-lane, and the pri-
soner, after assailing him with the most scurrilous epithets,
struck him on the nose with the bowl of a tobacco pipe, and
nstantiv followed up the attack by a violent blow with his
fist, which blackened both his eyes, and caused an effusion of
blood from the nose that had continued, at intervals, ever
since. In answer to a question from the magistrate, the wit-
ness stated that when the prisoner made the first overture to
him he was in company with an acquaintance who was
also solicited to proceed with the mob to the
theatre; but that person Is as then unable, from
the pressure of business, to attend and give evi-
dence. On being called upon for his defence the prisoner
declared that the whole of the complainant's state-
ment relative to their alleged interview on the previous
Monday was a fabrication, and that with regard to the assault
in the public-house, the complainant himself was the aggressor,
by flinging at him a quart pot, and that he merely acted in
sell• defence. The prisoner then called Edward Myers, a
Jew clothesman, who corroborated the latter part of his de-
fence, but admitted that the prisoner had uttered some ex-
asperating expressions to the complainant before any per.
sonal violence was resorted to. On being interrogated by the
magistrate, the witness said that the contepnplated gathering
to interrupt the performances of the theatre had been the
common subject of conversation in Petticoat-lane for the
last fortnight, but that he bad not known the defendant to
be mixed up in it.
The complainant here intimated that he should be able to
bring several witnesses in support of his testimony, and
amongst them the brother of a publican in the neighbour-
hood, whom the defendant had also threatened with violence
because he refused to connect himself with the riotous
faction.

Mr. BROUGHTON said it was impossible in the present im-
perfect state of the evidence to arrive at a correct judgment
on the case; and as both parties were anxious for an adjourn-
ment, he should order the warrant to stand over, and require
the prisoner to enter into recognisances for his future ap-
pearance.