The Sun.
London, England, 1834-08-29 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS-(THIS DAY).

(Before B. ROTCII, Esq., M. P., and a Bench of Magistrates.)
Edward. Thomas, a child of eight years of age, and of by
no means hardened appearance, was indicted for stealing 11
sovereigns, a watch, chain, seal, and key, and other articlesi
the property of Henry Chamberlain, his grandfather. Upon
the prisoner being arraigned at the bar, and asked whether he
was guilty or not, he burst into tears, and was some time be-
fore he could say Not Guilty.
Henry Chamberlain, a decrepid old man, stated that'he lived
at Brentford. On going home he missed his property, and,
suspecting the prisoner, he set the police to work to find him.
On discovering him the whole of the money was found about
him. Witness kept his money in a chest in his house. The
prisoner did not reside there. Had stolen things before.
Police constable T 19, on hearing of the robbery, made
search after him. The prisoner, who lived with his mother
close by the prosecutor's house, appeared to witness to have
got from his mother's house by the spout, in at the window of
the prosecutor's house. The witness was in search of him for
come time.

The CHAIRMAN here interrupted the case, observing that
he was sure the Jury and the Court would think him right in
recommending them to find the prisoner guilty only of simple
larceny, and not stealing in a dwelling-house, as in the result
of the latter verdict his only course would be to transport hini
for life. The sovereigns were not identified, nor was it proved
that the stealing took place in a dwelling-house.
The prosecutor said he could not swear to the sovereigns,
but he was positive the watch, chain, and the other things
were his property.

The CHAIRNIAN again recommended the jury to find the pri-
soner guilty only of the simple larceny.
The jury found the prisoner guilty of stealing to the value of
less than 51., and not in a dwelling-house.
The CHAIRMAN inquired if the father of the boy was present,
and on being answered in the affirmative he directed him to
come forward. The father stated that the boy had been under
the care of his mother-in-law who was rather strict with him.
He was in the habit of running away from school and going
out at nights. In consequence of this he was reprimanded and
his clothes kept from him, and he supposed the boy got from
his (witness's) house to that of his grandfather for the purpose
of looking after his clothes.
The CHAIRMAN said that the harsh treatment of the boy had
doubtless caused him to commit the offence, and he prayed of
the witness to consider the responsibility that rested upon
himself and wife. He was afraid that there were but too
many boys rendered thieves by the harsh treatment of their
parents. _ _ _

The COURT sentenced the prisoner to one month's imprison-
ment in the house of correction, fourteen days of that period
to be in solitary confinement.
The father of the boy returned thanks to the Court for its
clemency, and
The CHAIRMAN desired him to beg of his wife to'reflect
on what she had done by her harsh treatment.
George Smith was convicted of stealing one pair of shoes,
the property of Richard Forty, and was sentenced to one
month's imprisonment ; two weeks to be spent in solitary con-
finement, and to be once whipped.

Joseph Bajent, who was convicted of stealing a drinking
glass, value sevenpence, from the house of Ann Dodson, the
Old Swan, Chelsea, received a similar sentence.

Mary Williams was convicted of stealing a pair of hoots,
the property of Stephen Smith, and was sentenced to one
month's imprisonment ; one week to be spent in solitary con-
finement.

John Clarke was indicted for stealing 2s. from his master,
Mr. Fincham, the tea-dealer, of Charing-cross.
Henry Fincham, of 55, Charing-cross, deposed that the
prisoner was in his employ as porter. Having lost a good
deal of money out of the till, he caused several pieces of
money to be marked, and placed in it. On coming down on
the morning of the 27th, he missed two of the marked shil-
lings from the till. He called the prisoner to him, and
charged him with the theft. The prisoner said he was mis-
taken ; and the witness being about to call a policeman, the
prisoner put his hand in his pocket and brought out 25., which
he placed on the desk, and which the policeman took up. The
shillings were those which he had marked.
A clerk of Mr. Fincham's deposed to his master's marking
10s., and placing it in the till.
Policeman A 105, saw the prisoner place the money on the
desk, which he took up.
The prisoner, in his defence, said that he had lived in seve-
ral respectable situations for a long course of years, and had
never been placed in a situation like the present. He had
lived several years with Mr. Fincham, but latterly several per-
quisites, which he had hitherto enjoyed, had been taken away,
and his wages were not adequate for his support.
Several witnesses gave the prisoner an excellent character.
The Jury found the prisoner Guilty, recommending him to
mercy, on account of his former good character.

Tile CHAIRMAN sentenced the prisoner to 14 days' solitary
confinement in the House of Correction.

Mr. Fincham said, that under a search warrant, they had
found coffee, tea, and several other articles in the possession of
the prisoner. With respect to his having low wages, he
thought it but just to himself to state, that since the prisoner
first came into his service his wages had been increased, and
he had never complained that his wages were not sufficient.