The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-13 00:00:00

THE REF. TAMES BONWELL'S CASE.

COURT OF ARCHES, THIS DAY.
(Before Dr. Lushington, Dean of Arches.)
THE OFFICE OF THE JUDGE PROMOTED BY THIS BISHOP OF

LONDON V. THE REV. JAMES BONWELL.
This was a suit promoted by the Bishop of London against
the Rev. James Bonwell, perpetual curate of the district
chapel of St. Philip, in the parish of Stepney, for immorality
and other ecclesiastical offences alleged to have been corn
mated by him. On Wednesday last 28 articles were exhi-
bited against the rev. defendant, and reported in The Sun
of that day. The accusation was that he made the ac-
quaintance of a Miss Yorath, at Margate, in September,
1858, representing himself to be an unmarried man, while
he had a wife alive at the time. It was alleged that the
defendant harboured Miss Yorath, when she was preg-
nant, in the school-house near the church of St. Philip,
Stepney, in the autumn of 1859, where she gave birth to a
male child, which afterwards died. The articles detailed
the circumstances attending the connection which was
alleged to have existed between Mr. Bon'well and Miss
Yorath. It was asserted that the child was privately bap-
tized by the defendant, and that he made the arrangemen ts
for the funeral. On that day Mr. Bonwell appeared in
person to oppose the admission of the articles, objecting to
them on the ground that they contained charges which were
not ecclesiastical offences, and he also contended that the
Court could not take cognisance of offences committed out
of the diocese. He quoted the case of " Homer and
Bloomer v. Jones," 9 Jur. p. 167. Mr. Bonwell also ob-
jected to some of the articles on the ground that the dates
and places of certain alleged acts were not sufficiently
specified.

Dr. Lushington gave judgment to-day. He said that he
need hardly observe that, in considering the admissability
of these articles, they should only contain legal charges.
The Court had before it the letters of request, the decree
citing Mr. Bonwell to appear, and it had nothing else
under consideration. The Court held that the dates were
sufficiently specified, and with regard to the baptism of the
child, it was not a question when it was baptised, but
whether it was baptised by Mr. Bonwell. Taking the
whole of the circumstances into consideration, the Court
held that the articles were properly drawn and must be ad-
mitted; but at the same time the Court was desirous that
it should not go forth to the public that it expressed any
opinion as to the truth or falsehood of the allegations.
Mr. Bonwell asked leave to appeal.
After a lengthened conversation,
Dr. Lushington said he saw r o special ground for allowing
an appeal, and he must therefore refuse it.
Mr. Bonwell gave a negative issue to the articles, and the
case now stands for further hearing.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.--( THIS DAY)

NEW COURT.
(Before th© Recorder.)
CONCEALMENT OF BIRTH.

Sarah Gough, 30, widow, was indicted for concealing
the birth of her child.
Mr. Metcalf prosecuted, and Mr. Sleigh defended.
The jury found the prisoner guilty, and she was sen-
tenced to a month's imprisonment.

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Crompton.)
STEALING A LETTER.

Richard Hansford, 26, letter-carrier,•
was found gußty
of stealing a letter containing money, the property of the
Postmaster-General.

The learned Judge sentenced him to six years' penal
servitude.

MANSLAUGHTER.
Thomas Wcodgate, 48, plasterer, was indicted for ftailo
niously killing and slaying Charles Dixon.
The jury found the prisoner guilty.
The learned Judge, after commenting upon the circum-
stances of the case, sentenced him to three weeks' impri-
sonment.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE--(THIS DAY .)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
CAUTION TO LICENSED VICTUALLERS.—ARTFUL
TRlCK.—Frederick Marchant, a young man was charged
with attempting to obtain money from Mr. Larking, of the
Spread Eagle, Charles-street, Middlesex Hospital, by the
following artful trick :

The prisoner entered the house on the previous evening-
at a time a good many customers were present; and pulling
a bottle from his pocket demanded 2d. for it, saying that was
what he left on it. This being known to be untrue he was
refused the money, on which he said he would have biscuits
if he did not have money, and seized some and bolted ciff,
but was brought back and given into custody, when two other
bottles were found on him.

It was stated is be the practice of persons to buy' bottles
at the marine store shops at about one halfpenny each, arid
then to take them at a busy time to publichouses, and allei c-
ing they had them at the houses to obtain 2d. for them, and
that the practice is pretty extensively carried' on in Kane
districts.
Remanded.