The Sun.
London, England, 1856-06-19 00:00:00

nounced.
Chat. Langion, 32, was indicted for feloniously utter-
ing a firged 51. Bank of England note, with intent to
defraud.
The facts of the case were somewhat peculiar. It ap-
peared that the prisoner was a waiter at the Flora Gar-
dens, C ,rnbere-ell, and on the 19.,11 May he went to the
house of Martin, a publican, living in that neighbour-
hood, an l a=ked him., for chauga for a 51. note, saying
that it was for his "governor," meaning Mr. Stacey,
one of the pronrietors of the gardens, and he received
'the. change. It also appeared that on the 13th and 18th
of May he passed two other 5/. notes at the houses of
.lifferent puelicans named Wo ,lcock and Fletcher, and
received change, and the whole of these notes turned
out to be f rged. The prisoner, who, it appeared, was
well known to all the parties, was at once applied to
upon the subject' of the noteS, and he immediately
said that he had been serif to change them by a man
named Plumley, who filled the situation of ticket
collector of the Flora Gardens, and that he gave him a
shilling upon each occasion. He offered at once to go to
Plumley's house, and he and the persons who bad
changed the notes, accompnied by a constable, accord-
inglydid when it was found that he had decamped,
and he has never since been heard of. The only question
in the case was, whether the prisoner had been the dupe
of Plumley, or whether he had a guilty knowledge with
regard to the nature of the transaction ?
The jury, after considerable deliberation, returned
a verdict of Not Guilty.
henry Bartelot, 32, was charged with a misdemeanour
in having unlawfully and wilfully detained and delayed
certain newspapers passing through the Post-office from
being delivered in due course
Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Bodkin conducted the prosecu-
tion ; and Mr. Payne was counsel for the defence.
This indictment was • framed under a special aot of
Parliament, which renders it a misdemeanour for any
person employed in the Post-office to delay or detain
newspapers, or any printed matter of the like kind, pass-
ing through the Post-office, and subjects any person con-
victed of the offence t fine and imprisonment in the dis-
cretion of the court,. It appeared that the prisoner was
engaged as a sorter of newspapers at the General Post-
office, and in coceequence of some suspicion that was
entertained a watch was set upon his proceedings, and
on the 7th of May three newspapers, from which the
addresses had been torn off, were seen to come down a
letter shoot in the room where the prisoner was engaged.
He was immediately questioned respecting these news-
papers, and at first he denied knowing anything about
them ; but on being told that he would be searched, he
produced the covers belonging to them, and said that he
had taken them off because he could not make out the
addresses ; and as he had been fined for mis-sorting some
oecv,papere before, in order to avoid being fined a second
dine he tore off the addresses and threw the newspapers
down the shoot. The prisoner, it appeared, had bean
eve or six years in the service of the Pest-office.
The jiry returned a veel'ct of guilty, but recom-
mended the prisoner to mercy.
He was sentenced to be imprieme i for one month.

NEW COURT.
(Before the Recorler.)
The caes tried in this court during the day were
wholly devoid of public interest.
In two cases of burglary, where four men were con-
victed, the Recorier, in passi,,g sentence, said that the
crime was so seriou,dy upo❑ the incres,e that he should
feel it to be h s duty t pa's the most severe sentence
lipon tho,o C •neicted of that ("hiss of offence,
hat such punishment wound deter others from the corn-
omission of such clas.sof- offences. '.1:.r0 of the men con-
victed having beer before imprisoned, were sentenced to
14 yea, s' tranTortation, and the other two to five years'
peitai servitude.

THIRD COURT.
- (Before the t.fuini.ua Seigeant.
Edward Keen,.nlits Canes, pleaded guilty to stealing c 4
a quautity of workmenr's tools, and also with !stabbing'
and wounding Flenry Cross, a constable, with intent to
resist his lawful apprehension.

The Common Sergeant asked whether the prisoner was
known, and being answered in the negative, ordered him
to ba imprisoned for 12 months, telling him that his
murderous attack upo❑ the officer was the worst part of
his offe.,ce.

Jane Traitderstein, 20, widow, and James Barker, 28,
barman, were indicted for stalling 18 yards of ribbon,
the property of Elizabeth Harriet Cooper.
It appeared that the female prisoner went into the shop
of the prosecutrix who keeps a draper's shop at Tulse-hill,
Brixton, where she was detected stealing the ribbon. The
male prisoner, who bad been seen in her company, fol-
lowed when she was being taken to the station, and bay-
ing got some distance upon the road he struck the con-
stable a most violent blow upon the head with a stone
slung in a handkerchief, and then ran off. The consta-
ble, although very much injured, kept hold of his pri-
soner, and some one who saw the assault upon the officer
followed and captured the man, who said he was sorry
he had not done more injury to the constable.
The jury found them both guilty.
The man it appeared was not known to the police, but
the woman had only been a short time out of prison, she
having suffered 12 m the for a similar offence.

They were sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment and
hard labour.

Harriett Graham, who, it will be recollected, was last
session found guilty of attempting to discharge a loaded
pistol at a Mr. Graham, of the Princess's Theatre, was
brought up and sentenced to four months' imprisonment.