The Sun.
London, England, 1848-01-19 00:00:00

SOUTHWARK:

In the course of the morning Mr. Richardson, of
the firm of Richardson and Son, provision merchants,
Tooley-street, near London-bridge, attended before
Mr. Cottingham to make a complaint of an alleged
nuisance existing in the vaults under their pre-
mises.
Applicant said, that for some weeks a horrible
stench had arisen ;rom the vaults underneath their
premises, so much so that the health of themselves as
well as the neighbours was much endangered. There
were five vaults underneath the house, which are in
possession of Mr. Fenning, of Fenning's wharf, but
by him let to another person, who dealt in salt pork.
Finding that the effluvia did not abate, but rather
increased, he sent for his plumber, Mr. Brighton, of
Tooley-street, who went and examined the vaults.
They then found that the, smell arose from barrels of
diseased pork. The stench was so overpowering from
one of the vaults, that neither himself nor Mr. Brighton
was able to enter it.
Mr. COTTINGIIAM--DO you really suspect that it
is injurious ? Applicant—l do. The effluvium from
the- vaults is so great, that unless it is instantly re-
moved, there could be no telling to what extent their
health may be injured.
Mr. COTTINGISAM-By a recent Act of Parliament
the magistrates have the power to remove such nui-
sances. But, in the first instance, you must apply to
the parish officers, who will send two.medical men to
inspect the premises, and sign a certificate to that
effect. They would then bring the occupier of the
vaults before me, when I might order the nuisance to
be instantly removed, or inflict a heavy penalty. I
consider that it is a great pity you did not make com-
plaint. before, as the nuisance might have been abated
much sooner.

Applicant--,-I thought that it would have been
abated, and that it was only temporary.
Mr. COTTINGIIA-M—We hear the owner of the pre-
mises is highly respectable;' I should, however,
like
,to have the occupier of the house before me,
when I have no doubt he will consent to the removal
of the nuisance. The Magistrate then directed
Murray, one of the officers of the Court, to proceed
to the premises with Mr. Richardson, and request the
occupier of the vaults, to return with him.
Murray then left the Court. with Mr. Richardson,
and in an hour's time returned with Mr. Fenning. The
officer stated that he had examined the vaults, and as-
certained that there was no truth in Mr. Richardson's
statement. He wanted that gentleman to attend
with Mr. Fenning, but he positively refused.
Mr. COTTINGHAM said that he was very much
astonished that a respectable tradesman should come
before him and make such a statement. He had
actually said that he had employed his plumber to
examine the premises, and that the effluvia from one
of the vaults was so great that he' dared not enter.
He (the worthy Magistrate) believing that such was
a fact, took the trouble to point out the Act of Par-
liament which gave him 'sewer to remove it.
Mr. Fenning said that there certainly had existed
for a short time a slight smell, which was caused by
the removal of some barrels of pork, the brine of
which had become sour, but he could assure the
Magistrate that the meat was quite sweet and good.
A tradesman, carrying on an extensive business as
a pork and provision dealer, attended with Mr. Fen-
ning, and proved that the pork was sweet, although
the brine was a little sour.
Mr. COTTINGHAM said that from Mr. Richardson's
absence it clearly showed that he was wrong. It
was a great pity that he should come into a public
court and make such an exposure, which,' if it had
gone forth uncontradicted, might have injured Mr.
Fenning in the estimation of the public. He cer-
tainly must express his disapprobation of his conduct
for making such. an erroneous statement.

Mr. Fanning thanked the magistrate and with•
drew.
LAMBETH.

Joseph Parnell, a little fellow, whose head did not
r( ach the top of the bar of the felons' dock, in which
he was placed, was charged with stealing eight
sovereigns, belonging to his parents, and Sarah
Walker, a middle-aged female, was also charged with
receiving a part of the money, knowing it to have
been stolen, and further with unlawfully harbouring
the child.
From the statement of the mother of the youthful
prisoner, which was corroborated by himself, it ap-
peared that on the sth inst. her son absconded, taking
with him eight sovereigns, which herself and husband
had, with the greatest care, saved, and did not re-
turn until the day before. From questions she had
put to the boy, she elicited that on the day he took
the money he met a boy belonging to the female pri-
soner, and accompanied him home, and from that
time until the day before she harboured him at her
house. It also appeared that in order to disguise
the boy, and prevent the police, who had been made
acquainted with the robbery, from knowing him, the
female prisoner had caused the long curly locks of
the boy to be shorn off; and, further, purchased a
suit of coarse slop clothes and a south-wester, so as
to make his disguise perfect, but on finding that all
his money was gone, she turned him out, and de-
sired him to go about his business. The poor woman,
who seemed almost broken-hearted, said she had
eleven other children, six of whom were younger
than the prisoner, that she worked hard at ironing
from morning till night; that her husband had also
been obliged to work hard to support their large
family; yet the fruits of many years' labour, and that
which they had accumulated by sixpences and shil-
lings at a time, was now gone.
The only defence set up by the female prisoner
was that her boy had brought her fellow-prisoner
home, when the latter said he had got no father or
mother, and that the money was his own.
Mr. ELLIOTT very much regretted the loss of the
prosecutrix, and admitted the robbery was in her
case, and, with so large a family, one of great hard-
ship. He remanded the prisoners until Monday
next, but as the boy was so extremely young, only
ten years, he, on the application of the mother, allowed
himto go home to the day of examination.

MoNET-MtuxEr.---The premium- on gold at Paris
is 13 per mille, which, at the English Mint price of
31. 17s. 10161. per ounce for standard gold, gives an ex-
change of 25.47 ; and the exchange at Paris on London
at short being 25.621, it follows that gold is 0.60 per
cent. dearer in London. than in Paris. By advices from
Hamburgh the price of gold is 434} per mark, which, at
the English Mint price of 31. 17s. 101 d. per ounce kit
standard gold, gives an exchange of 13.91 ; and the
exchange at Hamburgh on London at short being
13.121, it follows that gold is 1.14 per cent. dearer in
London than in Hamburgh. The course of exchange at
New York on London is 1104 per cent., and the par of
exchanr between England and America being 109
23.40 per cent., it follows that the exchange is 1.19 per
cent. in favour of England. But, the quoted exchange
at New York being for bills at 60 days' sight, the in-
lerest must be added to the above difference.,

.‘

;

.Bulllitt) 7 :r

jZI-D2l-'Z'ZT\O Si ri