The Sun.
London, England, 1834-01-03 00:00:00

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS.-(THIS DAY.)

OLD COURT.
John Barrett was indicted for feloniously breaking into and
entering the dwelling.house of Captain R. M. Grindlay, and
stealing therein, on the Ist of January, a gold watch and appen-
dages, two 5/, notes, several silk handkerchiefs, and divers other

articles, his property.
Captain Robert Melville Grindlay deposed that he resided at
No. 35, North Bank, Regent's Park, and between three and four
o'clock in the morning of Wednesday last, ha was awoke by a
noise in the house, and he got up and went to the bed-room
door, outside of which he found a pair of man's shoes, and

at the dressing-room a large clothes-bag, containing a variety
of clothes which had been taken from the wardrobe. Witness

Immediately rang the bell, and, at the same moment, a female

servant came out of the adjoining bed-room. The servant man
also appeared from below undressed, and was desired by the
witness to dress himself and assist in searching the house. In

a very short time witness and his servant were partially
dressed. A loud knocking outside commenced by two po.
licemen, as if to alarm the house. On reaching the kitchen,
the door communicating with the garden was found open. At
the garden gate the prisoner was found in the custody of five
or six policemen, and witness immediately recognized
him as a discharged servant who had left witness's
service about nine months previously. The prisoner was
without his shoes, and upon him were found five or six silk
handkerchiefs. On being asked, the prisoner said that there
were three or four more persons concerned in the transaction.

The prisoner was then sent to the station.house, and the pre-
mises were again searched by the prosecutor and two police-
men, and it was found that the only mode by which an
entrance could have been made was by a grating at the coal.

hole, which had accidentally been left unlocked, and there
were evident marks on the coals of a man having

scrambled down thereon. There was found also a large
- - - - • - -

piece of meat between two pieces of bread, which had been cut
from a joint in the larder. On the same evening witness found
that his watch, purse, ring, snuff-box, pocket-book, and keys
were missing from a chest of drawers in the room in which
witness slept. On the following morning, at the police office,
witness saw some of the articles, which he immediately identi-
fied. The value of the watch was about 101. or 121., and in the
purse were two 51. notes and a ring.
Cross-examined by Mr. STANIMERS—Prisoner was an excel-
lent servant,and witness parted with him with great reluctance in
consequence of his hasdng acquired a habit of indulging
in drunkenness Mr. Stdmmers wae vrocededingin the course

of his cross-examination to attempt to raise an inference that
the prosecutor, during the illness of his wife, carried on an
illicit intercourse with one of his female servants, when
Mr. Justice ALDERSON interfered, and said the matter was
quite irrelevant to the case.
Mr. STAMMERS said that he thought it was important to
the prisoner to pursue the inquiry. He was judging, of course,
from his instructions.
Mr. Justice ALDERSON said that counsel would of course
exercise his own discretion, but must pursue that course at
his peril.
Mr. STAMMERS then cross-examined the prosecutor on the
point already stated ; but the insinuation was most positively
and indignantly repelled by Captain Grindlay.
Redmond Hoare, police constable, deposed that, on New
Year's morning, at about half-past 3 o'clock, he was on duty in
North Bank, and his attention was attracted by a noise in the
premises of the prosecutor, and while watching the house the
prisoner made his appearance out of the front gate, without
his shoes, and endeavouring to make his escape. Witness,
however, stopped him, and asked him who he was. The pri-
soner said he was Captain Grindlay's servant, and that he
(witness) knew him well enough. Witness replied that he
had no right to know any man coming out of a gentle-
man's house at that hour in the morning. He
offered witness some money, observing that it was Christmas
time, and his master would not give him leave to go out in the
day and he was now going out for a lark. Witness insisted
upon the prisoner accompanying him back to his master to
recognize him, or he would take him as a prisoner. On, this the
prisoner again offered money, saying here is plenty to make it
all right, and that witness was a ---- fool if he did not take it.
Without saying more the prisoner struck witness, knocked
him down, and then attempted to make his escape. Witness
got up and followed, and in the pursuit the prisoner was ob-
served to throw something from his pocket, which proved
to be five silk handkerchiefs which he had thrown down
in succession, and called out to witness to pick them up, on
which witness said he was determined to do his duty, as he
would not be bribed by any man; and that, if he did not
surrender he would strike him on' the head. Witness did strike
him three blows on the arm with his staff, but they made
no impression on him, as witness was a little injured by his
previous fall. The prisoner then closed upon the witness, and
they both fell to the ground, and the prisoner again libe.
rated himself. Witness, however, still kept in sight of the
prisoner, until he was stopped by another police constable,
who was attracted by witness's cry of " Stop Thief." The
prisoner was taken back to Captain Grindlay's, and on their
way witness picked up the five silk handkerchiefs which the
prisoner had thrown away. The prisoner was searched at the
station-house, and on him were found a gold watch, a guard-
chain, a seal, a purse containing two 51. Bank of England notes,
two sovereigns, half-sovereigns, a snuff-box, a cameo ring, and
two pocket-books. The shoes found at Captain Grindlay's
were tried on the prisoner, and were found to fit him.
John Hull, another police-constable, deposed that he stopped
the prisoner when he was pursued by the last witness.
Captain Grindlay identified the articles found upon the
prisoner and now produced, as being his property, which was
safe in his room on the night previous to the robbery.
Mr. STAMMERS submitted to the Court that the evidence
failed to make out the charge of breaking and entering.
Mr. Justice GsseLen said the Court had long since felt that
want of proof, and he should charge the Jury accordingly.
Mr. STAMMERS addressed some further observations in a low
tone of voice to the Court, which were inaudible to us.
Mr. Justice ALDERSON observed, that now the case had
closed, he could not avoid again adverting to the course which
had been followed by the counsel for the prisoner, with refer.
ence to the cross-examination of the prosecutor. He could not
but say it was most reprehensible in counsel to have pursued such
an irrelevant inquiry at the suggestion of any individual. It
was not because an individual was put in a witness box that he
should be exposed to so gross an insult as had been offered to
Captain Grindlay.
Mr. STAMMERS said that he was sure if his Lordship was in
his situation at the bar, his Lordship would, with such instruc-
tions, have pursued the same line of examination which he had
done.
Mr. Justice ALDERSON—Indeed, Sir, I should have done
no such thing. It was never my practice, when at the bar, to
insult any witness. The result of the cross-examination shows
me that it could not, in the least degree, bear upon the guilt
or innocence of the prisoner, and the questions which had been
put to Captain Grindlay, were an unseemly insult to that
gentleman ; for nothing could be a greater insult to a
gentleman of the high character and reputation of Captain
Grindlay than the insinuation that he had slept with one of
his female servants during the illness of his wife. The course,
I repeat, is one which I should have been incapable of pur-
suing when at the bar, and which I will not suffer as long as I
have the honour of a seat upon tie Bench.
Mr. STAMMERS—I must still, my Lord, adhere to my
former impression that my duty compelled me to press that
inquiry, and I must repeat that lam sure that your Lordship
with such instructions as I have received, would have done
the same.
Mr. Justice ALDERSON, in a most emphatic and energetic
tone—Mr. Stammers, I have expressly and distinctly said
that I should never have done so ; and after such an assertion
on my part, I think the repetition of observations most extra-
ordinary and improper. I repeat that you have offered one of
the greatest insults that man can make to man, to Captain
Grindlay.
Mr. Justice GASELEE was of the same opinion, and con-
curred entirely in what had fallen from his Learned Brother.
f Mr. Stammers abruptly left the Court without making any
urther observation.
The prisoner, on being called upon for his defence, said that
he did not break into the house, and denied that he had stolen
the articles named in the indictment, for they had been given
him by his sweetheart, the servant Kelly, who lived with the
prosecutor.
Mr. Justice GASELEE, on summing up the case to the Jury,
commented strongly upon the conduct of Mr. Stammers in his
line of cross-examining Captain Grindlay, a gentleman whose
high character and professional services were well-known and
appreciated by many gentlemen at present in Court. His
Lordship observed, that he had never before seen Mr. Slam_
bmcuoetTur shrh,tee
whwho,oopuel
Jury, l
would be
e
buteuhnneoddfelererstsshtooeno servicedh,
ewt
direction
oahsha idma
yt
i that
auf
thnhi young
d is
saLordship,
memberfuture ca
reer.
The
of e
r t
from
lthe
Court Bar ;
acquitted
the prisoner of the charge of breaking and entering ; but, after
a short deliberation, returned a verdict of Guilty of stealing in
a dwelling.house property above the value of 5/.
ca receivedr .

NEW COURT.
(Before the COMMON SERGEANT.)

g a
y
ilip
Anntoni
nfpo/a/r
sot
ss:itcoeeria,oslf,it.sta,i
statement
ytoeioo,7ukt
time-piece,
je,eiier, urchin,
riihor enht
prisoner,
rlr•
Philips,
pays,:
tyti
fsporeo
fafh ,tiph)%ei in-
dictedpeople
o f s.
Fcor
ild
low
Saffron-hill, into her house, in which she had not been six hours
before she purloined the time-piece, which she pledged for 14s.
at the shop of a pawnbroker, named Wood, in St. John-street.
The case was clearly proved against the prisoner, and the
Jury found her Guilty.
The COMMON SERGEANT felt no doubt that the prisoner
was regularly being brought up by her parents to the practice
of thieving, and commented in severe terms on the conduct of
the pawnbroker, for taking a timepiece from a child so young.
Mr. Linwood, the shopman of Mr. Wood, stated, that the
prisoner, on being strictly interrogated as to where she got the
timepiece from, said that her mistress had sent her to pledge
it for thirty shillings.
The COMMON SERGEANT said that robberies were increased
in consequence of thieves finding so ready a receptacle for
stolen property at pawnbrokers. lie would not allow the
his
pawnbroker, in the present case, one farthing towards
expenses.
Wni. Pluck and John T 1 hilebread were indicted for steal-
ing, on the Ist of December, several sacks of flour, the pro-
perty of Messrs. Farmers, millers, at Enfield.
Mr. CLARKSON, on behalf of the prosecution, stated that the
case against the was one of considerable aggravation.
The prisoner Pluck was in the service of Messrs. Farmer, as
a watchman, for the purpose of protecting the property in the