The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-08 00:00:00

SURREY SESSIONS.

The undermentioned sums have been awarded to
the following general officers, as rewards for distinguished
services :—Lieut.-General Lloyd, 2001. per annum ;Lieut.-
General C. Gordon, 2001. ; Major-General Aylmer, 2001. ,•
Major-General Sir de Lacy Evans, 1001.; Major-General
Floraipg, 1001.; !kyr-General Maclachlani 1001.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
Henry Dimsdale was called upon to surrender and
take his trial for an assault.
The defendant, it will be remembered, had a true bill
returned against him and other parties at the last session,
fur a series of assaults, by pelting persons with eggs,
upon the return from the Oaks' Races.
Mr. BALLANTINE, who appeared for the defendant,
said that he was at present confined in the Queen's
Bench Prison upon civil process, and the prosecutor had
not taken the ordinary course of bringing him here by
habeas to take his trial. He, consequently, was not in
attendance, and as there were other parties included in
the indictment, it would probably be better that the
whole of the cases should be disposed of together.
The trial was accordingly ordered to stand over.
Edward Pontifes, 38, pleaded guilty to a charge of
embezzling three several sums of 61., the property of
Philip Pound and another, his masters.
Mr. BALLANTINE, who was fur the prosecution, in-
formed the Court that the prosecutors were omnibus
proprietors, and in tesnsequance of the absence of the
regular conductor, the prisoner had been employed to
act in his place with an omnibus plying to the Exhibi-
tion. He only went one journey,• during which he re-
ceived fourteen shillings, and upon arriving at the ter-
mination of the journey, he very coolly appropriated the
whole amount to himself, and refused to give up a single
farthing.
The RECORDER said it was a very impudent robbery,
and it was fortunate for the prisoner that nothing was
known to his prejudice before, or he would have been
much more severely punished. Ile then sentenced him
to be imprisoned, and kept to hard labour, for three
months.
Robert Young, 38, was indicted for embezzling money,
the property of his employers, Messrs. Squire and
M'Culloch.
Mr. Robinson prosecuted; Mr. Parry was for the
defence.
The prisoner, it appeared, had been in the service of
the prosecutor, who was a wholesale druggist in Bishops-
gate-street, for thirteen years, and he had latterly been
employed as town traveller to the firm. In that capacity
he had to receive money on their account, and it was dis-
tinctly proved that he had in two instances received
money from the prosecutor's customers, which he did not
afterwards account for.
Mr. PARRY addressed the jury for the prisoner, and
called several respectable witnesses, who gave him a
high character for integrity and honourable conduct.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty, but strongly re-
commended the prisoner to mercy, on account of his pre-
vious good character.
In answer to a question put by the RECORDER Mr.
squire stated that he had reason to believe that the total
amount embezzled by the prisoner was at least 3001.
The RECORDER said he would take time to consider
what sentence ought to be pronounced.
James Smith, 21, was indicted for feloniously forging
and uttering a cheque for 731., with intent to defraud
the London and Westminster Bank.
Mr. Parnell prosecuted; Mr. Ballantine, defended the
prisoner.
The circumstance of the case were of rather an extra-
ordinary character. It appeared that the prisoner, who
is the son of a clergyman at Boston, St. David's, Somer-
setshire, went to the St. James's-square branch of the
London and Westminster Bank on the 14th May, and
presented a cheque purporting to be signed by William
Lewis, one of the customers of the bank, for 731., and re-
ceived the amount. It appeared that he had subsequently
presented another cheque of the same description for 161.,
which was also paid, and it would seam that he had on a
third occasion presented a cheque apparently drawn by,
the same person for 2801., but as there were not suffi-
cient funds to meet it, the cheque was not paid, and a
communication which was thereupon made to the sup-
posed drawer of the cheque, led to the discovery of the
forgery. From subsequent inquiries that were made,
Trow, one of the city of London detective police, went to
the residence of the prisoner's father, accompanied by
Lewis, and the prisoner, on being told what he was
charged with, at first denied that he was guilty, but
shortly afterwards he made a statement to the officer, in
which be admitted that he had forged the cheque in
question, and said that he had spent the money in riding
about, and that all that remained of it was concealed in
the coal cellar, where the officer, upon making a search,
discovered a five-pound note, five sovereigns, and some
silver, in a bag. From questions that were put to the
bank-clerks by Mr. Ballantine, it appeared that Lewis,
the person whose name was represented to have been
forged, bad kept an account with the bank for three
years, but he had not originally been introduced by any
one, and he had never had a larger balance at any time
than two or three hundred pounds. It also appeared
that after the cheques which were alleged to be forged
had been handed over to him with his pass-book, two
or three days elapsed before he returned them, with the
representation that they were forged.
Wibiam Lewis, the person referred to, was called to
prove the forgery. He described himself as a jeweller, car-
rying on business at 42, Gloucester-street, Queen-square,
Bloomsbury. He said that be kept an account at the
London and Westminster Bank, St. James's branch, and
the cheque for 731. was not his handwriting, and had
not been written with his authority. lie made the same
statement with regard to the 161. cheque, and expressed
his belief that both the cheques were in the handwriting
of the prisoner.
The witness was subjected to a most severe croes•ex-
emanation by Mr. Ballantine, but he evaded as ruiticb,hg:
possible giving a direct answer; and it was note !!did not
Recorder interfered, and threatened that if bile would
answer the questions in a proper manner tbanft
evidence
take measures to compel him to do so, thait
wets elicited
could be extracted from him. At length in this court
robbing a
/ego sum of money by
a gentleman named Kerrie of a
dtothat he had been concerned
Cremorne Gaatrd. ens with
cheating at cards, and be said
upon the occasion by gei,cik_g_n a fiat,e
g askedp thehe
and th sucbarsed-s
one of the parties to " p tinins
Parr in out their
quently at one of theothmeeres
so as to assist the
erased h the charge was
scheme of- plunder;tn he
.wt when
turned round against
9ganif asnd gave evidence for the prosecution.
preferred
his comPani°-
believed the other parties swindled said that he
Kerrie out of 1,0001.; but he said he had nothing to do
with it. Be then proceeded to state that ho first met
the prisoner at Neath, at an hotel, and that he was aware
that at that time he was an undergraduate of one of the
colleges RtOxford. When he was at /Teeth he was en-

These sessions commenced yesterday at the Sessions-
house, Newington-causeway, before Thomas Puckle,
Esq., chairman, Charles Francis, Esq., and other ma-
gistrates. The calendar was rather light, containing
only forty-two prisoners for trial, owing to the quarter-
sessions having only terminated on Saturday at Guild-
ford.
Elizabeth Brown, 22, was indicted for stealing, in
Vauxhall-gardens, the silver top of a smelling bottle,
the property of Thomas Lawson, from the person of
Harriet Lawson. She was also indicted for stealing a
purse containing 16s. 6d. from Jane Lawson, in the same
place.
Michael Hayden, an officer of the City police, said
that on the evening of the 15th of June he was in Vaux-
hall-gardens watching the company. As the balloon
was about to ascend he perceived the prisoner follow
several ladies, and try their pockets. She then pro-
ceeded towards a fountain, and deposited something
behind a shrub, after which she walked sway. Witness
went to the fountain and found a purse, which induced
him to communicate with the inspector on duty, Mr.
Cowling, respecting the prisoner's conduct. They ac-
cordingly folbwed her at a short distance, watching her
actions, when they saw her put her hands under
Mrs. Lawsuu's visite and—take something from
her pocket. She was immediately seizad, nod the silver
top of the smelling-bottle was found in her hand. She
was then conveyed with all possible haste to the police-
s',ation, and searched, when a purse cotitaining 71. 104.
and twenty franc pieces was found on her; also two 100
franc notes and and another purse containing 16s. 6d.,
which Miss Lawson identified, and in her glove was 10s.,
all of which she had adroitly stolen that evening.
Owners were found for the French money, but being
foreigners and compelled to leave England, it was given
up to them, on their proving its identity.
Mrs. Lawson stated that she was looking at the bal-
loon with her husband and sister, when last witness came
up to her and asked her whether she had lost anything.
She put her band in her pocket and found her smelling-
bottle, but missed the top. That now produced was
the one she lost.

Miss Lawson identified the purse as ,her property.
As soon as her sister-in-law found she bad been rubbed.
she put her band in her pocket and missed it and the
contents.

In defence the prisoner said site found the things all
tied up in a corner of the gardens.
The jury, without tho least hesitation, found her
Guilty, and the Court sentenced her to nine months hard
labour at Brixton.