The Sun.
London, England, 1851-09-18 00:00:00

place. He immediately procured assistance, and the
prisoner was taken into custody, and as they were
going to the station-house, he said that the boy was a
bad boy, and he had chastised him for it.
Eilward Harris, another constable, proved that he
assisted the last witness to take the prisoner into
custody, and he produced the poker, which he found
in the fireplace, and which he said was still hot when
he accompanied Crebo a second time to the house.
Mr. Waldeis•rave, tue surgeon who examined the
person of the boy, said that his back was severely
bruised and burnt. There were also burns upon each
of his arms and upon his chest, upon his thighs and
upon his leg, and the skin was destroyed by the
burn on the chest. The burns were .all of such a de-
scription as would be caused by the poker that had
been produced.
The prisoner, when called upon for his defence,
said that the boy behaved very badly and. continually
robbed him, and he had punished him for his mis-
conduct, but he denied having burnt him.
Mr. Baron MARTIN, in summing up, told the jury
that the only question they had to decide was the in-
tent of the prisoner, for he had no hesitation in stat-

ing that, however bad the conduct of the boy might
have been, the use of such an instrument as a redhot
poker was illegal and unjustifiable. If they were
satisfied by the evidence that the prisoner really in-
tended to maim or disable his son, in that case they
would find him guilty of the whole charge, but if
they had any doubt upon the point the prisoner was
clearly liable to be convicted of an assault.

The jury, after deliberating a short time, found the
prisoner Guilty of an assault, and Acquitted him of
the felony.

The Learned JUDGE, in passing sentence, said that
the prisoner had been very properly convicted of
about as inhuman an act as he believed had ever been
brought to the notice of a court of justice. It was
possible that the boy was a bad boy, and he would
admit that this was probable ; but it was almost in-
credible that a father should have resorted to such an
instrument as a redhot poker as a mode of punish-
ment. The boy had actually shown good feeling, for
he had gone away from the court, no doubt, in the
hope that by the want of his evidence his father would
escape punishment. Fortunately for the ends of jus-
tice this was not the case, and the prisoner now
stood convicted of this most shocking offence. The
Court was in some difficulty with regard b the
punishment, because they felt that the prisoner's fa-
mily must suffer by his being imprisoned for a long
period ; hut, at the same time, they had a duty to
perform, and they were bound to pass such a sen-
tence as would be likely to operate as an example, to
protect children from being subjected to violence of
such a description, and that people should be taught
that if children did misbehave themselves they were
not to be treated in this brutal manner. He then sen-
tenced the prisoner to be kept to hard labour for 15
calendar months.

NEW COURT.
(Before the RECORDER.)

Robert Gazely, 48, horse dealer, was indicted for
stealing a mare, valued at 41., the property of Benja-
min Stafford.
The facts were briefly these :—The prosecutor was
a horse dealer, and the prisoner was in the habit of
obtaining customers for him, and in the present in-
stance had taken the mare and sold it, never paying
the prosecutor.
The jury found him Guilty.
It was then proved that the prisoner bad been twice
before convicted of felony, the last time for horse-
stealing, when he was transported for ten years,
three years of which had been commuted, and he re-
turned home to this country last year.
He was again transported for 20 years.
In the case of Win. Bridger, who had been com-
mitted, with a woman named Saunders, from the
Marlborough-street Police-court, the statement of
Bridger, who alone was placed on his trial, was re-
turned with the depositions. Upon being placed in
the hands of the Clerk of the Arraigns, it appeared
that they had not been taken in accordance with the
provisions of one of the statutes known as Jervis's
Acts, which requires that a copy of the caution given
to the prisoners should be appended to the depositions
and precede the statement. This had not been done.
The RECORDER said an omission of this character
might cause the most serious consequences, and per-
haps tend to frustrate the ends of justice, as it became
necessary, on account of the provisions of the Act,
that proof of the caution having been given must be
established before this Court. Upon this occasion
the policeman was able to supply the deficency, by
giving evidence of the fact; but the Court might
upon another occasionbe without such evidence, and he
trusted that in future no omission of this sort might
occur.

Mark Benjamin Miller and Henry Usher, two
gentlemanly-looking young men, surrendered to take
their trial upon an indictment charging them with
having been guilty of indecent conduct in a public
high way.
Mr. Huddlestone, by the direction of the Court,
prosecuted; Usher was defended by Mr. Ballantiue
and Mr. Clarkson, and Mr. Bodkin defended Miller.
The facts of the case, which are unfit for publica-
tion, were of an extremely improbable character, and
rested solely (as far as the absolute act was concerned)
on the testimony of a man named Murphy, a park-
keeper in the Regent's-park, who deposed to seeing
the two prisoners shortly before one o'clock in the
day, on a Sunday, lying together on the grass in the
Regent's-park, close to a very frequented thorough-
fare, and there commit the act imputed to them;
there being at time a gentleman and some children
at no great distance from them. The prisoners, when
taken to the station, seemed much shocked at the
charge, and protested their innocence, stating that the