The Sun.
London, England, 1833-12-17 00:00:00

BO W- STREET.

AN IMPOSTOR.—EIiza Price, a Welsh woman
was yesterday placed at the bar, charged with
having obtained sums of money from divers persons,
whom she had succeeded in imposing upon by
means of fictitious letters of distress.

The prisoner was remanded in order that inqui-
ries might be made into her character.
EMBEZZLEMENT--A man named Couzens was
charged with having embezzled various sums of
money, the property of his employer, Mr. Hodgson,
the soda.water-manufacturer, in Bedford-street,
Covent-garden.—Committed.
SECOND CIIARGE.---Mr. Bell, clerk to Mr. Del-
valle, residing on Cornhill, paid the prisoner 9s. for
soda water supplied to his employer by Mr. Hodgson.
Mr. Hodgson never received any such sum from
the prisoner.
Upon this charge the prisoner was also committed
for trial.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
A MEMBER OF THE TRADES' UNIONS.--A jour-
neyman tailor, named Sherwood, was brought before
Mr. CHAMBERS yesterday, charged with having
violently assaulted a young man belonging to the
same trade.

The complainant on Saturday evening met the
defendant, and was accused by him of having pro-
cured his dismissal from a shop at which he had
been employed. Words ensued, and he was struck
and knocked down several times by the defendant,
who continued to ill-use him, until the police came
to his assistance.

The defendant, in reply to the charge, certainly

did accuse the complainant of getting him out of
work, as he had very good evidence that such was
the fact. The policeman who took him into
custody, did not see the commencement of the
affray, which took place in Cooke's-circus, where
they had gone for the purpose of being " sworn in"
as members of the Union.

Mr. CHAMBERS—Sworn in ! And pray what is
the nature of the oath you took ?
The defendant appeared here to recollect himself,
and endeavoured to explain away his observation, by
saying, that he meant he was " initiated."
Mr. CHAMBERS then proceeded to put questions
to the defendant, to elicit the nature and the ob-
ject of the Union, but the answers were purposely
evasive.
Mr. CHAMBERS then asked the complainant, who
was a newly elected member of the Union, what
were the rules he had been required to swear to ?
Complainant—The rules are not yet printed.
There is no oath required to be taken that I am
aware of.

Mr. CHAMBERS—On your oath, was there not a
Bible presented you to kiss ? Complainant—I did
not not see any Bible, nor was I required to kiss
any book. I was blindfolded when first introduced.
Mr. CHAMBERS—Were there any persons with
swords ? Complainant—There might be such a

thing.
Mr. CHAMBERS—What was required of you ?
Complainant—To maintain the interests of our trade
Mr. CHAMBERS—I suppose by that was meant,
that our coats were to be made as dear as possible.
What was the price you fixed upon for making a
coat 14 Complainant—We did not fix any price.

We only agreed that we would have six shillings a
day for day work.
Mr. CHAMBERS—Is not one of your rules to this
effect--,-" That if a stranger, not a member of your
Union, is engaged by a master tailor, you will not
permit him to work."
Complainant—Yes, it is. The members would
not work with any one who is not a member of
some of the Unions, and it would soon be discovered
if the applicant was not amember, as all the Unions
are in correspondence.

Mr. CHAMBERS said it was quite clear the par-
ties had become members of one of those conspira-
cies which had so extensively spread of late among
the working classes.

The complainant declared he would no longer be
a member of a society to which the defendant be-
longed, as it would be a disgrace to him. The de-
fendant bad deserted his wife and family, and taken
up with a common prostitute.
The defendant denied this, but Mr. Baker, in-
spector of the C division, informed the magistrate
it was quite true ; for a well.known prostitute had
brought him his breakfast in the station-house, and
when his wife came to him to ask if she could as-
sist him in any way he treated her with the coarsest
brutality.
Mr. CHAMBERS said it appeared that the Trades'
Unions were not at all particular as to the character
of the members they admitted. From what had
been stated, he thought the defendant a very fit ob-
ject for admission into one of these Unions.
The defendant was, on the decision of two ma-
gistrates, fined 40s. for the assault.