The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-29 00:00:00

TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 29, 1860.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—May 28.

(Before Mr. Whateley, Q.C.)

The Court resumed its sittings this morning, and
proceeded with the criminal business,

- Augusta Horton, 31, and Ann Williams, 30,
were indicted for stealing a purse containing the
sum of £5 Os. 10d. from the person of John Davis.
Mr. Ernest Jones was counsel for the prosecu-
tion ; Mr. Ribton defended the prisoners.
The prisoners accosted the prosecutor, a butcher,
living at 2, Maze-mews, Jermyn-street, in the
Green Park, and during a rapid conversation
adroitly picked his pocket of his purse. He took
the purse from Williams's hand ; it was open, and
the money gone, and he gave them both into the
custody of the policeman on duty.
The jury found both prisoners guilty ; and
Mrs. Haine, female officer of the Westminster
Prison, proved a former conviction, and a sentence
of ten years' transportation against Williams, who
had been convicted previously to that, and put in a
list of eight summary convictions against Horton.
The learned Judge sentenced Williams to five
years' penal servitude, and Horton to two years'
hard labour.

Thomas Hooper, 30, carman, and Edward Pur-
cell, 23, were indicted for stealing 18 oranges, the
property of the Midland Counties Railway Com-
pany, their masters. They surrendered in Court.

Mr. Staveley Hill was for the prosecution, Mr.
Ribton defended Hooper, and Mr. Ernest Jones
was counsel for Purcell.

This was a prosecution instituted by the direc-
tors of the Midland Railway Company against two
of their servants, and the case sought to be made
out was that the prisoners had broken the bulk of
a chest of oranges on the way from the Castle and
Falcon, Aldersgate-street, to the goods depot of
the Midland Railway, at King's-crossrand taken
out about 131bs. The prisoner Hooper was the
driver of the van in which the chests were, and
Purcell was what is termed " the dog,"—that
is, one who sits behind, on the tail-hoard,
to watch that nothing falls off, or is taken off.
The oranges, which were consigned from Bullock,
of London, to Russell, of Leicester, weighed, when
sent out from the Castle and Falcon, 5 cwt. 3 qrs.
and 16 lb. ; when they were weighed at King's-
cross, they were 131 b. short of that, and some loose
oranges were found in a van which the prisoners
were about to take from the station. Upon Pur-
cell they found two oranges, which he admitted
having taken, and Hooper had eaten one; informa-
tion having been given to the officers, the prisoners
were charged with having broken the chest, and
taking the oranges therefrom.
It was urged that the directors had no other feel-
ing in the matter than that of protecting property
entrusted to their care as carriers, and to cast sus-
picion from those servants who were honest, who it
might have been supposed were concerned in these
petty depredations, and they had no alternative,
under these considerations, but to prosecute.
The learned counsel fur the defence, on behalf of
their respective clients, said in effect that this pro-
secution, if successful, would ruin the whole pros-
pects in life of two honest, hard-working men, who
had hitherto borne irreproachable characters
(Hooper had been in one situation 11 years in the,
Eastern Counties) for what amounted in fact to no
more than this, that a package of oranges having
got open by accident in transit, some of the oranges
got loose, they picked one or two up to eat them
without the slightest idea that what they were
doing was t.) be attempted to be construed into an
act of felony.
A witness named Longlcy, who rode in the van
all the way from the Castle and Falcon, to King's-
cross, with the prisoners on the journey in question,
deposed that neither Hooper nor Purcell attempted
to touch an orange chest at all; if they had he must
have seen them.

The learned Judge summed up the evidence, and
the jury at once acquitted both the prisoners.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—May 28.

MANSION-HOUSE.—Thomas Hayward, a re-
spectable-looking young man, was brought before
the Lord Nlayor, charged by Mongen, one of the
detective constables of the city of London, under
the following circumstances :
The officer stated that on Saturday evening he
went into a public-house, in Fenehurch-street,
where he saw the defendant, who immediately be-
gan to abuse him, and threatened to serve him out,
and to " do" for him. He told him to be quiet, and
not interfere with him, but he persisted, and con-
tinued annoying him, and at length he said, " I
have got stolen property about me now, and you
dare not interfere with me." -Witness observed
that he had a parcel under his arm, and he asked
the defendant what it contained, and he said it was
the stolen property he referred to, and upon that
he took him into custody.
The Lord Mayor—You took him, I suppose, upon
his own confession that he had stolen property in
his possession ?
The Officer—Exactly, my lord. (A laugh.)
The Lord Mayor—Do you know anything about
the prisoner ?
The Officer—l do not know anything against him,
my lord. I believe he was formerly a merchant's
clerk, The parcel that was upon him only contained
a few pounds of rice, and I believe it was merely a
sample, an 4 that it had been given to him by some
person connected with a firm in Mincing-lane, who
had authority to do so.
The Lord Mayor—Has he been locked up since
Saturday night ?
The Officer—Yes, my lord.
The Lord Mayor—Well, prisoner, how was it you
made such an ass of yourself as you„appear to have
done ? •
Prisoner—l did not tell the officer that I had
stolen property about me. All that I said was that
I had a parcel.
The Lord Mayor—Well, I think you have been
sufficiently punished. Go about your business, and
do not make such a fool of yourself again.
The prisoner, who looked very sheepish, was then
discharged from custody.
Eliza Smith, a rather good-looking married
woman, was charged with tmlaw fully attempting
to destroy herself.
William Barnard, a City police-constable, deposed
that he was on duty on London-bridge on Saturday
night, about a quarter to twelve o'clock, when he
saw the defendant wandering about in a very
wretched state, and she appeared desirous to go
down the steps to the river, but he prevented her
from doing so, and tried to induce her to go away.
She refused, and told him that she intended to de-
stroy herself, and upon this he took her into custody.
The Lord Mayor—Have yon made any inquiries
aboUt the prisoner?
The Officer—T have, my lord, and have ascer-
tained that she is the wife of a respectable labour-
ing man, and they have five children.
The Lord Mayor—Well, prisoner, what answer
have you to make to this serious charge of intend-
ing to destroy your own life ?
Prisoner—l was driven to it by the wretched life
I live with my husband. He is always abusing me,
and making use of bad language, and I could not
stand it any longer and resolved to make away with
myself, and should have done so if the policeman
had not interfered.

The Lord Mayor—ls the husband present ?
A decent-looking man stood forward, and said
that he was the prisoner's husband.
The Lord Mayor—Well, you hear what she says.
What answer have you to make to her statement ?
The Husband—My lord, there is no truth at all
in it. I earn sometimes as much as £2 or £3 a
week, and I give it all to her, but she has such a
violent temper that it is impossible to have any
peace with her.

The Lord Mayor--How do you account for her
acting in this manner ?
The Husband—l cannot account for it, my lord.
I do not think she really meant to destroy herself,
but her passion and bad temper got the better of
her, and she did not know what she was about.
The Lord Mayor—l supposed you are willing to
shake hands with her, and take her home and take
care of her ?

The Husband—Certainly, my lord, I had no
idea she was going to act in such a way as she has.
We had made an arrangement to go to the Crystal
Palace to-day and have a holiday, when she picked
a quarrel with me and rushed out, and I heard no
more of her until I found she was in custody.
The Lord Mayor to the Prisoner—Well, woman,
your vile temper seems to have placed you in your
present position, but as your husband appears wil-
ling to forgive you, I shall not punish you, but I
hope it will be a warning toyou in future.
The husband and wife then le ft the court together.

GUILDHALL.—DanieI Williams was charged
with assaulting one of the " volunteers" connected
with the Queen's printing-office.
Henry Cocking said he had been to drill on Sa-
turday evening last, at Bridewell, and after deposit-
ing his rifle in the armoury, he adjourned with a
friend to a public house in Bridge-street, Black-
friars, to have a glass of ale and on leaving he asked
the prisoner—who, with several females, was ob-
structing the footpath—to move and allow him to
pass, whereupon the prisoner called him a --
rifleman, and asked him " who shot the dog"—
(laughter)—and refused to stir. Witness immedi-
ately pushed past him, and the next instant received
a violent blow on the nose from the prisoner, who
was evidently in liquor.
The prisoner denied the charge of assault, and
said the female was in court whose husband struck
the "volunteer" for insulting the females.
Alderman Finnic said it vfaz 1 Tcry unprovoked

assault, and fined the prisoner ss. for
and 2s. 6d_ for assault,
Mr. Joseph Vaphofski, a tailor, of 39, Fetter-lane
was summoned for unlawfully assaulting a girl 15
years of age.
Frances Knights said she had been nearly eight
months in the defendant's service, and she com-
plained that he was, to use her own expression, "a
very great blackguard." She then described that on
various occasions he had unfastened his clothes and
exposed himself to her, and urged her to allow him
to have improper intercourse with her, at the same
time holding out inducements to obtain her com-
pliance. The last time he did so was on the Sun-
day before last, and the previous occasion was a
fortnight before that, his wife being confined
on the following night. Witness said he had made
use of the most " undecent" talk, and put his arm
round her waist, and said as he could not make use
of his wife for four weeks he must make use ofsome
one, and if she would let him do what he wanted he
would take her out for a holiday and pay all ex-
penses. This all took place in the room adjoining
the one in which his wife was lying, the two rooms
being separated only by folding doors. She did not
give any alarm, but she told her mother of it, but
she did not tell her all that happened. She told
her sister. Her mother thought it was only an ex-
cuse to leave her place, and told her not to mind it
unless it occurred again. She told her mother seve-
ral times of similar occurrences. She was to have
left her situation on the following day, having
given notice to that effect. His wife used to go out
early every Sunday Morning, and it was while she
was out that he wanted her to go into his bed, as he
was not a very early riser.
The mother of complainant said her daughter
told her of defendant's conduct four or five months
ago, but she did not believe it, and told her to go
about her business, and not come home with such
paltry excuses. She was to have stayed another
week, but she declared that, if her mother would
not take her away, she would run away from her
situation and her home too. The defendant and
his wife, when the mother went to complain, repre-
sented the girl as a thief and a liar.
The defendant, who is a foreigner, denied the
charge in tote, and called as witness a respectable
married woman, who worked for him. She said
the defendant had never been guilty of the slightest
impropriety towards her, although she had been
left alone with him at work in the same room many
times. On the night that defendant's wife was con-
fined the complainant told witness that Mr. and
Mrs. Varshofski were very nice people, and she
liked her situation so well that she hoped she should
stay there a long time. This was on the night after,
as the complainant alleged, the defendant behaved
towards her as she had described.

being drunk,

Alderman Finnis, after expressing surprise
and disgust that a mother should allow her
'daughter to remain under the same roof with a man
four or five months after receiving such a complaint,
said he had listened very attentively to the evi-
dence, and had noticed the manner in which it
was given, and had come to the conclusion that he
could not credit the girl's story. It was most im-
probable that the conduct complained of should
have taken place within hearing of the defendant's
wife, and without any alarm being given, if, as
was alleged, it was so much against the complain-
ant's will as to induce her to leave her .situation.
If there had been any truth in the girl's complaints,
he should have thought a mother's first care, if she
believed them, would have been to remove her from
such contaminating influences. He, therefore, dis-
missed the summons, and recommended the defen-
dant not to let this lesson be lost upon him, but
to be exceedingly circumspect in his conduct to all
the females in his house, so as not to give the
slightest ground for the repetition of such a charge.

M ARYLE B ONE. -- MURDEROUS ASSAULT.—
Maria Briscoe, a tall and middle-aged woman, was
brought before Mr Seeker charged with assaulting
and inflicting a serious wound upon the head of
George Bruce, barman at the Marquis of Anglesey,
Devonshire-street, Lisson -grove.
The complainant stated that about a quarter to
eleven o'clock the evening before the prisoner, who
was in the company of three men, entered the house
when one of the men 'asked for half-a-pint of gin,
with which he was served. After it was drunk a
pot of porter was asked for, upon giving which he
was told that it was near the time of closing. The
man said he would not go until he thought proper.
He took the pot away, and being followed by him
(complainant) gave the pot to the prisoner. While
he was in altercation with him the prisoner came
behind him and gave a violent blow with the pot on
the back of his head, which caused the blood to
flow freely. (Complainant had a patch of adhesive
plaster on the wound, and the collar of his shirt
was saturated with blood.

Mr, Chas. Pinningar, the landlord of the house,
corroborated the evidence. He said that he saw
the prisoner take the pot from the man and strike
the head of the barman with it. It was a frightful
wound. His orders were to see that his house
should be closed before eleven o'clock.
_ _

Mr. Seeker ob.,2erved it was a most serious charge,
as erisypclas might come on. Ile should remand
her for a week.

The prisoner was remanded for a week.
VIOLENT ASSAULT WITH A POKER.— Charles
Delmore, residing in John's-place, Commercial-road
Eat, and Charles Long, were charged under the
following circumstances :

Mr. Bice appeared for the prisoners.
The evidence went to show that on the previous
evening House and Martin, detectives of the D
division, were in pursuit of a prisoner who entered
the house 16, Charles-street, Lisson-grove. They
went up into the first floor, where they thought
their prisoner had entered. When they were in the
room Belmore observed, "We want no -
preachers here." House said, "We are not
preachers. lam a policeman," and asked
him if a young man had not come in, to which no
reply was given. He was, however, immediately
attacked by Long with a poker, which broke his
hat. He was also further attacked by several other
persons who were in the room, and during the
melee his shirt was torn to pieces.
House produced his hat and shirt, the former of
which was doubled up, and the latter was nearly
torn to shreds.

Long was fined 10s., and the other prisoner was
discharged.

LAMBETH.

CASE OF STABBING.—Jod Holland, a determined-
looking young rascal of 16 years of age, was
brought up on a warrant charging him with using
a knife and stabbing James Sayers, a potboy at
the Montpelier Tavern, near the WaYworth-gate.
The complainant deposed that the prisoner had
been in the habit of hanging about the front of his
master's house, and helping himself to beer brought
from the bar by children, and, in fact, was a perfect
nuisance and terror to the inhabitants. On Thurs-
day evening he took his station in front of the
house, and " knowing his usual game," he re-
quested him to be off; he refused to do so, and
commenced a volley of the most abusive language,
upon which he caught him by the collar and shook
him, but not so as to hurt him. The prisoner
struggled hard, and struck at him several times in
a determined manner, but he thought nothing of i 4
and was about to go away with his beer, when he
discovered that he was wounded in the side by the
blood running down his leg. He also discovered
that his coat was cut in no less than twelve places,
and that one cut, deeper than the others, corres-
ponded with the wound in his side.
Hayle Semenner, a paperhanger, said he was pre-
sent and saw the struggle between the last witness
and the prisoner, when the former shook the latter
violently, but did not strike him, and had it been
any one else than the prisoner he (witness) should be
surprised at the desperate resistance he made. The
prisoner struck the potman several blows about the
side and body, but he had not the slightest idea at
the time that he had a knifh in his possession.
When the complainant let the prisoner go, the latter
in an exulting manner said, "You've got enough of
it, you've got some ribands to look after, loolcat your
coat ; and if you should come down our way, Hill-
street, with your beer, I'll take care to turn your cans
over, so look out." The prisoner then walked away,
and complainant discovered that he had been
stabbed. This witness, in conclusion, described the
prisoner as one of the most determined and saucy
young ruffians that could be well conceived, and a
terror to the neighbourhood.
The prisoner denied having used the knife, but
when taken into custody a small two-bladed pen-
knife was found on him, which it was admitted he
had been in the habit of carrying.
The prisoner's father, a respectable man, admitted
that his son was rather violent in his temper, but
complained of the conduct of the potman in shaking
him as he had done. He promised that, if leniently
dealt with, he would so look after the prisoner for
the future that no further complaint would be made.
The Magistrate said it was most fortunate that the
prisoner did not commit a more serious injury; and
if properly dealt with he should be sent for trial.
On account of his father, and the promise he had
made of looking sharply after his son, he would
deal more leniently with him on one condition, and
that was that the father would promise him not to
pay the penalty he was about to impose.
The father promised this, and the worthy magi-
strate sentenced the prisoner to pay a fine of X 5, or
in default to be imprisoned with hard labour for
two months.

DARING ROBBERY.—Ann James, alias Ann Bur
deaw, a middle-aged female and notorious thief
was charged with stealing a watch from the person
of Henry King.
From the evidence it appeared that the prosecti-