The Sun.
London, England, 1834-10-17 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1834.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

t .- --

MANSION-HOUSE.

A younr, man named Brealey, the apprentice of Mr.
Effingham Wilson, was finally examined upon the charge
of having robbed his master of money in numerous small
sums, to the amount of upwards of 1001.
Mr.,. 'Wilson stated that he had given at different times
(and specified the times) to the prisoner money to pur-
chase books at • Longman's, Simpkin and Marshall's, and
other booksellers. This money he appropriated to his own
use, at the same time that he signed his initials as a receipt
• of th3;books in the books of the houses at which he dealt.
Evidence was given in one case against him, and Mr.
Wilson produced a paper containing a long list of the sums
he had thus pilfered furnished him by the prisoner.
The Loan MAYOR—Did he acknowledge that he plun-
derediyou ? Mr. Wilson—He did.
The LORD MAYOR—Upon any promise or understand
ing that you would forgive him? Mr. Wilson—Certainly •
not. I never made him any promise.
lhh LORD MAYOR—What arc the words you used to
induce him to make the acknowledgment? Mr. Wilson—
I tohl him that the least he could do was to tell me to
what extent he had robbed me, in order to remove unjust
suspicion from the other persons in my employment, and
he then sent me the list.
The LORD MAYOR—And he was not to consider that
request as implying pardon ? Mr. Wilson—By no means.
I first sont him home to his father for it was represented
to me that if his mother, who was very ill, should hear of
disgrace the shock would probably kill her, and I wished
that-his father might exercise his parental influence over
him, and admonish him.
The prisoner's solicitor submitted that the prosecutor had
not made out a prima facie case against his client, and that
the young man was entitled to his discharge.
THE LORD MAYOR—A prima facie case ! What do
you call the positive evidence, that he had received this
money and did not pay for the books, and his own confes-
siOn in his own hand-writing ?
The prisoner's Solicitor asked whether the confession was
a voluntary confession?
The LORD MAYOR—You have beard what Mr. Wilson
has stated about it. A jury will decide upon the whole of
• the merits of the case.

The prisoner's Solicitor said that the confession was cer-
tainly extorted from his client by the expectation of for-

giveness.
Mr. Wilson—l made no promise whatever.
The LORD MAYOR—I consider it to be my duty to send
the case to a jury.
The prisoner was then fully committed.
John Michell, the cabman who stabbed Charles Brad-
field with a knife in the side, was brought up for final
examination.

The prisoner very solemnly assured the Lord Mayor that
he bad received the very greatest provocation from the
prosecutor, who struck him several times, and against whom
it was impossible for a man of his (the prisoner's) size to
stand for a moment. _ _

The LORD MAYOR immediately proceeded to emo.mine
the witnesses minutely, and one of them admitted that the
wounded man bad struck the prisoner before the latter
used the knife. .

The prisoner—My Lord, he struck me desperately five
or six times, and one of these men cried out to him that it
was a shame to beat me.

The witness alluded to admitted that he had several
times said to the wounded man, that it would do him no
credit to beat the lad.
The Loan MAYOR—You meant that he ought not to
strike a person so much his inferior in size ? Witness—
Exactly.
Prisoner—l had no chance with him, my Lord. He
struck me a blow that marked me under the eye.

Witness—l didn't observe that.
Daniel Forrester, the officer—l stood close to the pri-
soner at the first examination, and when I heard him say
the wounded man struck him, I looked at him closely and
observed that he had a cut under the eye.
The LORD MAYOR—The conduct of the prosecutor did
not justify the use of so deadly a weapon : but the case has
a different appearance from that which it at first assumed,
and these circumstances will no doubt operate in your
favour at your trial.
The prisoner said that he had the knife in his hand cut-
ting his bread and meat at the moment he was so violently
attacked.—Committed for trial.

The wounded man is quite recovered.
A mere boy, a conductor to an omnibus, was charged
by Mr. Wityear, the Superintendent of the City Police.
Mr. Wityear stated that as he walked along the street
saw the defendant and two other boys, also conductors,
contending for a female passenger. One of them held her
by one arm, while the other held her by the other, and the
third actually seized her by the legs. Each of the boys
dragged her a different way, but the defendant made the
most desperate struggle to get her to his omnibus, while
the poor lady was much alarmed at their violence, and en-
deavoured in vain to get away.
The defendant said he really thought that the lady fan-
cied his omnibus, and he thought she ought to have her
way.—Ordered to find bail.

GUILDHALL.
Yesterday, among the applications from poor prisoners in
the Fleet who had sworn they were not worth 101. in all
the world, and who therefore prayed the City allowance of
sixpence a day for their support, was one from Blanchard,
the comedian, and another from Penny, the publisher of
unstamped newspapers.
Mr. Alderman BIRCH signed the orders for their relief.

HATTON-GARDEN.
Messrs. Hazzard and James, headborougbs of Hamp-
stead, summoned John Cole, the owner of a beer-shop in
that parish, under a clause of the Beer Act, which, it will
be seen, is of great importance, not only to persons of the
defendant's calling, but to the proprietors of public-houses.
This is the clause alluded to :
"Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, that it shall be lawful
for all constables and officers of police, and they are hereby
empowered, to enter into all houses which are or shall be
licensed to sell beer or spirituous liquors to be consumed on
the premises when and so often as such constables and
officers shall think fit ; and if any person having such license
as aforesaid, or any servant or other person in his employ
or by his direction, shall refuse to admit, or shall not admit,
such constable or officer of police into such house or upon
such premises, such person having such license shall, for the
first offence, forfeit and pay any sum not exceeding M.,
together with the costs of the conviction, to be recovered
within twenty days next after that on which such offence
was committed. before one or more Justices of the Peace ;
and it shall be lawful for any two or more Justices before
whom any such person shall be convicted of such offence for
the second time to adjudge (if they shall think so fit), that
such offender shall be disqualified from selling beer, ale,
porter, cider, or perry by retail for the space of two years
next after such conviction, or for such shorter space of time
as they may think proper."
It appeared from the evidence of the complainants, that
at about half-past eleven o'clock, last Saturday night, they
knocked at the door of to defendant's house requesting
admittance, a. Loy suspected a number of persons were
tippling there. No notice was taken of their application,
until they threatened to burst open the door, when they
were let in by a female. As soon as they had crossed the
threshold the defendant called out " Who is there ?" and
on being answered by the female that complainants were
about to examine the premises, to ascertain if all the cus-
tomers had departed, he exclaimed " Poker the —," and
made use of other language too foul to mention, and came
down stairs and endeavoured to turn them out. The com-
plainants, through the interruption, could not perform their
duty, and they left the place, after informing the defendant
that they should appeal to the magistrates for protection.
Their threat caused him to abuse them much worse ; and
when they had walked a few paces from the house, the
defendant followed them, calling out " Murder, thieves,
and fire," and thereby created considerable alarm.
The defendant, when called on for his defence, accused
the complainants of having first of all maltreated him, and
lie called his sister, who swore they struck her brother seve-
ral times before he retaliated.

Mr. Rogers, who resides at Hampstead, said this was
not the first complaint against the defendant, who was
totally unfit to have the management of such a house.
Mr. LAING, having told the defendant he had better be
cautious, fined him .5/., and sentenced him, in default of
payment, to two months' imprisonment and hard labour in
the House of Correction.

fend*. had. been brought to him, and described the means
which:be had used to preserve her from the ill consequences
of ber!rash attempt.
T 4 prisoner said that the quarrelling and beating of her
busbatd bad induced her to make the attempt, but she ac-
knowledged that she had been drinking, and she promised
to make no more such rash attempts, and to keep sober in
future.
The police constable who had charge of her produced
47 pawnbroker's duplicates and three farthings, found upon
the prisoner, to whom he returned them.
Mrl?. I3ENETT, after having lectured her upon her wicked-
ness, jliscbarged her, and held the husband to bail to keep
the pOce towards her.