The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-24 00:00:00

MARYLEBONE.

Sarah Collyer, the young woman who has been
twice examined before Mr. Long, upon the charge of
having murdered her &male infant, was again placed
at the bar, when, after Mr. Fell, the chief clerk, hail
read over the whole of the depositions taken by him
at some length (the particulars have already appeared),
the prisoner, who said that she was delivered of the
child in the street, and that it was not born alive, was
fully committed for trial.
MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

James Bartholomew, potman to Mr. Street, Trevor
Arms, and Charles Brown, son of Mr. Brown, land-
lord of the Somerset Arms, with their two assistants,
John Furger and John Ryan, were brought before
Mr. Hard wick, charged with unlawfully selling beer
at the Crystal Palace, Hyde-park, contrary to the
Act of Parliament of 2d and 8.1 Victoria, cap. 47,
sec. 7.

Mr. Thomas Westbury Hall, cashier to Messrs.
Fox and Henderson, the contractors, stated that for
some time past considerable anxiety had been mani-
fested as to the completion of the Exhibition building
within the time allowed by the Commissioners, in
consequence of a number of the men getting drunk
during the hours of work, and on Monday last,
thrmirrh several of the men being in liquor, and excit-
ing others to join thew, the contractors were under
the necessity ofnr-er.;ng th. whole of the men. about
2,460, to leave off work at half-past five o'clock.
With a view to discover how the men contrived to
get drink sufficient to make them drunk, he went
that morning, by order of Messrs. Fox and Hender-
son, round the building, when he found the defendants
selling beer to the workmen. Directly they saw him
they offered to sell him some, when, according to
instructions received from the Executive Committee,
he gave them in charge.
lu defence, Bartholomew and Brown said they
had been in the habit, ever since the commencement
of the building, of selling beer there, and they had
ever received any orders to the contrary. They,
therefore, were not aware that they had been infring-
ing the law.

Mr. Hall said they must have been aware that they
were acting wrong. Bills containing an abstract of
the Act 21 and 3d Victoria had been stuck up about
the building for some time, and they must have
known that the sale of beer, or any other excliseable
liquor, was prohibited in the park. The men were
allowed to have beer supplied to them when they
worked all night; and if it was not for some strin-
gent restrictions against the supply of malt liquors to
the men during working hours, many accidents would
happen. On Monday a man fell through the glass
and was killed on the spot. A few minutes atter-
wards another man was found lying drunk and asleep
close by the same spot.
Mr. HARDWICK said the defendants could not have
been thole so long without their conduct attracting
the notice of some of the authorities. They were
obliged to carry large cans, which the police, who
were acquainted with the rules issued by the com-
mittee, could not fail to see. He was, however, of
opinion that the defendants had acted more in error
than otherwise, and would endeavour to put them in
the right. He (Mr. ffirdwick) supposed that they
allowed beer to be sold to those persons who brought
heavy goodi to the Exhibition ?
Mr. Hall said there was no exception made in the
rule to any parties; the only object the committee
had in view was to prevent accidents. He (Mr. Hall)
added that Mr. Younghusband, the refreshment con-
tractor for the Exhibition, had provided a room on
purpose for the accoinmodaion of the workmen,where
they could have a good dinner and a pint of beer for
eightpence. There was a clause in the bond entered
into by Mr. Younghusband, conjointly with the
Executive Committer, compelling him to supply the
workmen at that low price, and he was also bound not
to supply any of the men with beer after two o'clock
in the afternoon.

Mr. HARDWICK said there was a clause in the Act
which gave him the power to inflict a penalty of 40,
for each offence, but as it appeared to him that they
had been labouring under some mistake, he would,
under the particular circumstances, reduce the fine to
24., in reference to BArtbolomew and Brown the
other two defendants, who had acted as assistants, he
should discharge with a caution.