The Sun.
London, England, 1834-09-15 00:00:00

BO W- STREET.

On Saturday Timothy Welch, an Irish labourer, was
brought up on a warrant by the parish-officers of St. Cle-
ment Danes, charged with refusing to support his wife, who
had in consequence become chargeable to that parish.
Catherine Welch, the wife of the defendant, deposed that
about five months previously the defendant had turned her
and her child out of his lodgings, and had refused to support
them ; she had since repeatedly applied to him, but without
effect. She had lately been taken into the parish work-
house of St. Clement Danes, where she had been delivered
of a child.

Mr. Spencer, the overseer of St. Clement's, stated that
the expenses incurred for the support, &c., of the defend-
ant's wife and children had amounted to 3/. 10s. 3d. On
their being first admitted into the workhouse the defendant
had agreed to pay 4s. weekly for their support. He had paid
but 6s. 6d., however, and the present proceedings were in
consequence instituted.
The defendant declared he was unable to contribute any-
thing towards his wife's support. He was at present out of
employment.

Goodwin, the messenger to the parish, said that it was
his own fault that he was unemployed. He had left an ex-
cellent place of work for the sake of joining the Union, and
he had found bitter reasons to repent his folly, as he had
had no work since.
The defendant did not deny this statement, but repeated
that it was out of his power to pay the amount demanded.
He was willing, however, to pay a weekly stipend.
Mr. Spencer, the overseer, was inclined to put faith in his
promises, and at his instance the warrant was suspended.
Mr. Alderman Copeland, of the firm of Copeland and
Garrett, of Portugal-street, Lincoln's Inn-fields, appeared
to a summons obtained by William Everett, the contractor
for the Pine-apple gate, Edgeware-road, charging him with
evading the toll under the following circumstances :
It appeared, from the evidence of Richard Welling, the
collector at the above gate, that, on the Ist of the present
month, a cart, bearing the name and address of the defen-
dant and his partner, drew up within ten yards of the gate.
One of the porters who accompanied it, took from it*two
large empty baskets, with which he proceeded to a house
a few yards through the gate. After a short time he re-
appeared with the baskets, which were then full, and which
he replaced in the cart. Witness informed him that he was
committing an offence against the act by evading the toll,
and demanded 3d. of him for the toll. He refused to pay
it, however, and drove off.
Mr. Copeland admitted that his servant had committed
the offence complained of, but without his being aware that
he was acting illegally.
The carman was then called, who denied that the wit-
ness had demanded any toll of him, or had made use of any
observation to him.

Welling repeated his former statement, which he declared
was true.

Mr. MJNSHULL had no alternative but to convict. He
should, therefore, fine the defendant in the penalty of. 10s.,
and 4s. 6d. costs.

Mr. Copeland immediately paid the fine, and said he had
to complain of the insolence and misbehaviour of the wit-
ness Welling on a second day, which should be the subject
of proceedings elsewhere.

Several other cases of Everett's were then disposed of.

HATTON-GARDEN.

On Saturday several licensed victuallers appeared at this
office, at the suit of Byers the notorious informer, amongst
whom Mr. Holnbrook, the proprietor of the Calthorpe
Arms, Calthorpe-street, Gray's-inn-road, who, it was alleged
by the informer, had suffered gaming at billiards and baga-
telle in his house.

Mr. Nangle, clerk to Messrs. Harmer and Flower, at-
,ended for the defendant.

Byers, being sworn, was about to give his evidence, when
Mr. Mallet, the clerk, said, I believe there has been no
information laid in this case—has there been ?

Byers—No, sir ; it is not necessary.

Mr. Nangle—But it is. I was about to make that objec-
tion, but you have saved me the trouble. The case must
fail, your Worships.

Byers—l have brought forward cases at other police-
offices of the same kind, and they do not require an infor-
mation to be laid.
Mr. Mallet—lt is the rule at this office.

Mr. Sergeant SELLON—And the proper rule.By not lay-
ing an information, you deprive the party charged of pro-
curing proper assistance.
Mr. ROGERS—That is not the case here. He has legal
assistance in Court.

Byers—l can only say, your Worships, that I always get
summonses without difficulty at every other office without
laying an information.
Mr. Nangle—lt is the standing rule at this office, and
the Magistrates, no doubt, will adhere to it.
Mr. ROGERS—Byers must have known that to be the rule
of the establishment, and he ought to have laid the in-
formation.

Byers—l thought that as other offices did not require it,
you would dispense with it here.
Mr. ROGERS—Certainly not ; we are not to guided by

what they do at other offices, and if we deviate from our
rule now, and take the case, you are not to come here again
at any future period and remind us of it as a precedent.
Mr. Mallet—lf your worships postpone the case, the in-
former may lay an information on the same case.
Mr. Nangle said that he was perfectly willing to enter
into the case at once, but he would not interfere with the
rules of the establishment.
Mr. Sergeant SELLON—I do not like to deviate from the
usual practice of the court. The informer ought to have
exhited his information in the usual way, and give the de-
fendant a fair opportunity of defending himself, and not
take him off his guard. -I
shall not hear the case without
the usual practice is adhered to.
Mr. ROGERS concurred with Mr. Sergeant SELLON, and
said it was better to keep to their established rules.
Byers then quitted the office, " quite chop-fallen."