The Sun.
London, England, 1851-11-18 00:00:00

TUESDAY

NOVEMBER 18, 1851.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
BAIL COURT, Nov 17.
(Sittings in Banco, before Mr. Justice ERLE.)
IN RE THOMAS BINNS, ONE, Scc.
Mr. JOYCE moved for a rule, calling upon Mr.
Thomas Binns, one of the attornies of this court, to
show cause why he should not pay the sums of Si.
and 41. 7s 31, and why he should not pay the costs
of the application, and, for his naiscoeduet us an at-
torney, why he should not answer the matters in the
affidavits. It appeared that two boys living in the
county, of the names of Collier and Tovey, had
been committed for trial at the Surrey Sessions.
The mothers of the boys had been recommended to go
to one of two attorneys, either to Mr. SA lroons or
Mr. Charnock, to defend the boys. The poor woman
came up to town, and selected Mr. Charnock. They
saw that person, who calculated the expense of the
defence, and said they would amount to 51. The
women had not this sum with them, but promised to
send a post office order for' the amount. They had
great difficulty in raising the money, but at length
succeeded. and then sent Collier, the father of one of
the boys, up to town with the money on the Sunday
before the sessions. The man went to Mr. Char-
nock's office, and knocked and rang, but, it being
Sunday, there was not any one there. After some
time he was coming away, when a person came from
the opposite house (Mr. 13inns's) and asked him
what he wanted. Collier told him ; and the per-
son, who was the clerk of Binns' told him to give
him the money, as it would be all the same. The
roan gave him the 51., and then asked him to sign a
paper, which he did, and which turned out to be the
paper directing Mr. Charnock to hand him over the
papers. Binns afterwards went to a learned sergeant to
get him to go to the sessions at Guildford to defend the
boys. The learned sergeant said, according to
the etiquette of the bar, he could not appear without
a junior. The boys were brought up for trial at the
sessions, but no attorney appeared; and the learned
sergeant, not having a junior, would not go into
court. But, upon the facts being stated to the Court,
the trial was postponed till the next day, and then it
was postponed to the next sessions at Southwark.
The prisoners friends then obtained more money and
paid Mr. Charnock, who, at the next sessions, in-
structed counsel. Mr. Binns also instructed counsel,
who stated himself to be the junior of the learned
sergeant. It was then left to the prisoners to say by
whom they would be defended, and they said their
friends had retained Mr. Charnock, and would have
nothing to do with Mr. Binns or his counsel. Mr.
Binns bad received 51., and the parties had been put
to an extra expense of 4/ Is. 3d.
Mr. Justice ERLE—Take a rule to show cause.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL

Mr. Alderman Wire, Mr. E. Fox, and Mr. C.
Gilpin, members of the board of management of the
Asylum for Idiots at Highgate, attended with their
acting secretary, Mr. Nicholas, before Mr. Alderman
Wilson, to request his attention to a gross fraud which
had been committed under cover of procuring admis-
sion to the asylum for an imbecile child of a cler-
gyman. _ _

Mr. Alderman Wire briefly mentioned the object
of the application, and hoped the press would take
some notice of it to guard the public against the im-
position.
Mr. Gilpin stated that, in consequence of a letter
from some person inquiring the mode of admission to
the charity, the secretary forwarded a printed form of
application, and stated that pupils were admitted on
three scales of payment-100 guineas, 50 guineas,
or 25 guineas ; the first for those requiring peculiar
treatment and special attention, the second being the
ordinary charge, and the third intended for such as
were unable to pay the higher sum ; children were
also admitted by election twice a year. No more
was heard of this application till a letter
was received from the Reverend T. S. Chal-
mers, of Stafford, enclosing a fac-simile of
the secretary's letter, the printed form of application,
a written statement of the case purporting to contain
at the foot a list of donations, and a note from the
Earl of Carlisle with a donation of 103. Mr. Chal-
mers stated that he had received these papers from his
Lordship, but he knew nothing of the persons referred
to, either of Mrs. Grimstone, or the Rev. Archibald
Chambers, of Stafford; nor did the other clergymen
of Stafford know them. The Reverend Gentleman,
therefore, forwarded the papers to the secretary, that
he might communicate with the parties interested.
The details filled up in the form of application set out
that the candidate was John Grimstone, born the 17th
of August, 1835, residing in the parish of Stanton,
that he was idiotic i❑ the second degree since his birth,
that his mother was living, with five other children
dependent upon her, that she intended to provide for
her family by keeping a school, and that she applied
for the admission on the lowest scale of payment. It
purported to contain the signatures of F. W. Whitaker
and H. Smith, both of Stanton, as having a knowledge
ot the case. The secretary was therefore directed to
write to some of the donors to the propoied fund of
1501. to enable Mrs. Grimstone to pay the annual
subscriptions to the asylum.
The secretary read the written statement referred
to, which appeared to be an appeal " on behalf of
Mrs. Grimstone, the widow of the Rev. James Grim-
stone, late curate of Stanton, in the diocese of Lich-
field, who died in June last, in consequence of u cold
caugt while attending the sick bed of a dying
parishioner," and it further intimated that 30/. would
be given from the diocesan fund. The following are
some of the subscriptions appended :
" Bishop ot Lichfield, 101.; Lady hetwynd, V.; Mrs.
Arkwright, 21.; Sir EL S. Wilmot, 5/4 Archdeacon of
Derby, 3 '.; Rev. T. Hope, 11.; Drury Lowe, 21; G.
Crompton, 2/.; Sir M. Blackiston, A; Mrs. Tunnicliffe,
11.; J. H. Woodhouse (clerk), 51-; Sir E. D. Scott, 5/ ;
Lady Charlotte Gough, 21; R. James, 1/ ; Mrs. Forster,
IL; J. H. Sharwood, 11; Hon. E. S. Jervis, 2/ ; Mrs.
Lonsdale, 1/.; W. Gruly, 2/.; Rev. James Gisborne,
2/ ; Lady Wilmot Horton, 11.; Mr. Gisborne, 21.; C. R.
Colville, 21.; Rev. J. Moore, 1/.; W. G., per cheque, 2/.;
G. Meynell, 2L; A Clergyman, 1/. 69.; W. Mundy, 21.;
lira. Evans, IL; E. S. Chandos Pole. 11. 10s.; Lady
Crewe, 1L; Rev. M. Vavesour, 21.; Rev. Marcwood
Grady, 1/.; Yarburgh Graeme, per Post-office order, 31.;
Mrs. Maude, ditto, 2/4 F. C., per cheque, 22; A Lady,
21.; and J. Kenrick, 31. 35."
Mr. Gilpin said that the secretary's inquiry, ad-
dressed to the Bishop of Lichfield, produced the fol-
lowing reply from his Lordship:—
" Wrocwardine Vicarage, Oct. 22, Wednesday Night.
" Sir,—Your letter has found me today engaged in
diocesan business here.

" There are several places of the name of Stanton in
this diocese. But the name of Grimstone, as connected
with this diocese, is strange to me, and I cannot call to
mind any circumstance relating to the case about which
you have inquired of me. The whole appears to be a
fiction.—l remain, sir, faithfully yours,
" W. Nicholas, Esq. "J. LICHFIELD."
Another letter was read from the rector of Stanton,
as follows :

" The Rectory, Stanton•by-Bridge, Swarkeston,
Derbyshire, Oct. 14.
" Sir,—Your letter of the 11th inst. has been for-
warded to me after having been to various places. Ido
not know anything of John Grimstone,' and lam sorry
I cannot assist you by sending it to any one of my
name residing at a Stanton,' in Derbyshire.—l am, sir
yours faithfully, '4 THOMAS W. WHITAKER.
" William Nicholas. Esq."
Mr. Alderman WILSON said he was satisfied the
statement in the appeal was untrue, and wished to
know if the application was for a warrant?
Mr. Alderman WIRE said it was not at the present
moment. The committee had not yet obtained in-
formation that any person had actually obtained
money from any one.
Mr. Nicholas, the secretary, said that a like impo-
sition on the charitably•disposed part of the Roman
Catholic community had been practised about a year
ago, the Idiot Asylum forms being used on that occa-
sion, when he (the secretary) placed the facts in the
hands of Dr. Doyle, of St. George's Cathedral.
Mr. Alderman Wuta said the chief object of the
committee at present was to guard the public against
this imposition.

Mr. Alderman WILSON had no doubt the press
would aid in protecting the public, and he should be
happy to assist the committee when they required
them.

square, begged to be permitted to make n statement
for the purposf• of correcting a misapprehension which
had caused his friends here and abroad some uneasi-
ness- About two months Igo a pt-non who gave the
name of Fischer, and who said he was a connnissiou
agent, living in Bury-court, St. Mary-axe, was fined
40s. for ste-tling a cake of chocolate from the Great
Exhibition. Applicant had forrrwrly carried on busi-
ness in Bury-court, and this had led some of his
friends to mistake him for the person accuoed. He
had reason to suppose that the offender had assumed a
name to which he was not entitled, as he believed the
offender's real name was Henry Myers.
Mr. HARDwicx said he had no doubt the public
journals would put the applicant right with his friends
and the public.
WESTMINSTER.

Mr. John Morris, of 41, Vincent-square, gentle-
man, was summoned for using menacing conduct to
his brother, Mr. Richard Morris, barrister and As-
sistant-Master in the Court of Exchequer, whereby
he apprehended that he went in bodily danger.
Mr. Scotland, barrister, and Mr. J. Rogers, so-
licitor, attended on behalf of the complainant.
The circumstances of the case, as detailed by Mr.
Scotland in his epplicaticn for the magistrate's pro-
tection, and by the evidence adduced, are these :—ln
the y ear 1849 defendant began to take a most hostile
part against his brother with respect to some family
property, and addressed a number of letters to him
couched in the most offensive and opprobious terms.
tie also appeared in the Court of Exchequer, and by
his gestures and excited manner caused serious appre-
hensions that he intended to resort to some act of
violence. The complainant subsequently applied to
this Court for protection in the latter part of the year
1850, when the summons was withdrawn upon de-
fendant's giving an undertaking to discontinue the
annoyance, and not to repeat his visits to the Court of
Exchequer, both of which Mr. Allen, a very respect-
able gentleman, who was then defendant's solicitor,
but who had since ceased to be so, promised to use
his influence over his client to see observed. Defend-
ant had, however, soon after recommenced a series
of annoyances and conduct of such a character as had
rendered it compulsory upon complainant to seek
again the protection of the law.
Mr. ARNOLD, lo,king at the whole circumstances
of the case, thought reasonable ground for apprehen-
sion bad been made out against the defendant, and he
should call upon him to find two sureties in 150/, each,
and enter into his own recogniidnces of 300/. to keep
the peace to his brother for twelve months.
Defendant being provided with the required sure-
ties, the necess try bail was immediately put in.
WORSHIP-STREET.

John Whittle, a gentlemanly-looking man, stated
to be the son of a well-known literary character, and
to himself hold a somewhat distinguished po.iti,)n in
the musical profession, was placed before Mr. D'Eyn-
court for final examination, charged with having by
false pretences obtained a quantity of valuable pro-
perty from a widow lady named Glessing, with in-
tent to cheat and defraud her thereof.

The prisoner, by the advice of his solicitor, ex-
pressed his intention to reserve his defence, and, the
depositions having been completed by Mr. Hurlstone,
the second clerk, he was ordered tc be committed for
trial, the magistrate consenting to accept substantial
bail for his appearance to answer the charge.
LAMBETH.

John Sands, a married man and master carpenter,
residing in Paradise-terrace, Lambeth-walk, was
placed at the bar for final examination, on a charge
of violating the person of Eliza Swindon, a girl 14
years of age.
The testimony of the prosecutrix, an intelligent
girl, and which was not at all shaken by the searching
cross-examination of Mr. Solomons, was quite con-
clusive of the prisoner's guilt, and he was fully
committed to take his trial on the capital charge.