The Sun.
London, England, 1860-11-09 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—Nov. 8.

MANSION-HOUSE.---A young man, named
Edward Sowerby, who presented all the external
indications of a person of unsound mind, appeared
before Mr. Alderman Lawrence upon a summons
which charged him with indecent and disorderly
behaviour in a place of public, worship, namely, a
meeting house of the Society of Friends, commonly
called Quakers, in White Hart-court, Bishopsgate-
street.

The defendant, who wore a moustache, and who
professes to be a Quaker, walked into the court
with a widc-awake hat on with an extra broad
brim. He was requested by Partridge, the gaoler,
to uncover his head, but he said that with him it
was a point of conscience not to take off his hat.
Partridge very civilly told him that he was in a
court of justice, and that he must take off his hat,
and if he would not he must do so for him, and he
quietly suited the action to the word, amid a good
deal of laughter. The defendant has made himself
very notorious for his indecent proceedings at the
meetings of the Society of Friends, and he has been
repeatedly fined in consequence.
Mr. Humphreys, of Newgate-street, who ap-
peared in support of the complaint, said that
the gentlemen who were the complainants had
felt it to be their duty to institute the pre-
sent proceedings against the defendant, as
unless some steps were taken to put a stop to such
conduct as that which was now complained of, it
would be impossible for them to attend their places
of worship with any peace or security. He then
went on to state that on the day named in the sum-
mons, the 31st October, while divine worship was
going on at the meeting-house belonging to the
Society of Friends in White Hart-court, the defen-
dant got up and made use of the most offensive
expressions, and his conduct was so violent and
extraordinary that a great many of the female por-
tion of the audience got up and left, and the ser-
vice was abruptly closed. The defendant had been
repeatedly guilty of similar mjeconduct, and had
been fined for the offence, and he hoped that some
other method would be taken, in conformity with
the act of Parliament which gave a magistrate the
power to imprison any person guilty of such an
offence without the option of paying a fine, to put a
stop to such offensive arid illegal proceedings.
Ebenezer Leadbeter Simmons was then examined
upon his affirmation. He first produced the certi-
ficate of the registration of the meeting-house in
question as a place to be used for divine worship in
conformity with the act of Parliament.
Mr. Goodwin, the chief clerk, told the defendant
that as he had no legal adviser, he thought it right
to inform him that by the statute this certificate
was made evidence of its contents.

The defendant bawled out that this act of
Parlia-
ment was never intended for " Friends.', was
only intended to apply to lying priests and false
persons. (A laugh.)
Mr. Simmons then proceeded to state thatheeds
was
one of the overseers of the Society of Friends
which held its meetings at the meeting-house
in White Hart-court, Bishopsgate, and he wes
present at a meeting of the society for the pur-
pose of divine worship according to the rules
of their society on the 31st October. The defen-
dant was present, and he took a seat near the
minister, and while the service was going on he
suddenly jumped up, and exclaimed in a loud voice,
" Your ministers, ciders, and overseers are deceivers
and hypocrites; they are only eager for money, and
their god is their belly." He also said that they
were liars, and he turned round to the younger
portion of the audience and told them not to pay
any attention to what their ministers and overseers
told them, for they were only leading them into
mischief. The def ~dant did nut at first address
any in particuAar, but he shortly afterwards
turnedn
teowam were overseersrdsJosephßrosvn o f theansociety,
Edward
e,
both of whom
made u
y offensive expressions towards them.
to
bWitnesssisleeot oe went vrr to leave the buiid int
talking
rui
gt it had
to the defendant and requested him
e
haadloundo
effect. The defendantcontinued

and excited manner, and the consequence was that
a good many of the female members left the meet-
ing-house. 'Witness tried to induce the defendant
to be quiet, but to everything he said the only
reply was that he was a liar, and eventually the
confusion was so great that it was considered ad-
visable to abruptly close the meeting.
Alderman Lawrence asked the defendant whether
he wished to ask Mr. Simmonds any questions.
Defendant (to the witness)—Thou sayest I called
thee a liar. Compare thy conduct and that of those
belonging to thy sect with that of the first Quaker,
and I ask thee whether thou art not a liar. (A
laugh.) Thou wearest a broad-brimmed hat and a
cut-away coat, but thou art no real Quaker.
(Laughter.)
Alderman Lawrence told the defendant that he
was only permitted to put questions relating to the
facts, and he could not be allowed to persevere in
such a course of examination.
Defendant—l say that Quakers hare no right to
swear.
Alderman Lawrence—The witness has not been
sworn. He has merely affirmed the truth of his
evidence.
Defendant—He has made a solemn affirmation,
which is tantamount to an oath. Quakers should
only say " Yea, yea—nay, nay." (Laughter.)
John Rawlings, another overseer of the society,
said he was present on the day in question, and he
bore testimony to the violent and outrageous con-
duct of the defendant. He called them all hypo-
crites, children of the devil, and every other ex-
pression in the way of abuse that could be imagined.
(Laughter.)
Mr. Humphreys (to the witness)—I believe you
are rather hard of hearing, Mr. Rawlings ?
Mr. Rawlings said he was, but the defendant
spoke so loud that he heard perfectly well what he
said.
Edward Marsh, another of the elders of the so-
ciety, gave similar evidence as to the conduct of the
defendant to that deposed to by the other witnesses.
Alderman Lawrence then asked the defendant
what answer he had to make to the charge.
The defendant said that he believed he was
charged with disturbing the congregation at this
meeting-house. He denied that he had disturbed
them. All he did was to tell them that they did
not walk in the ways of God, and they did not like
it. (A laugh.) Instead of his disturbing them,
they disturbed themselves. (Laughter.)
Alderman Lawrence told the defendant that the
had no right to disturb the congregation, and the
law would not permit him to do so.
The defendant—l contend that as a Quaker I had
a perfect right to speak when I did. (Laughter.)
It is part of our religion to sit still until God moves
us to speak. They sit for hours till God moves
them. (A roar of laughter.) I sat still till God
moved me, and when he moved me I spake. (The
tone in which the defendant said this caused a burst
of laughter in the court.)
Alderman Lawrence said that the pretence that
God had moved him to do what he did was no excuse
or answer to the complaint, which he considered
had been fully established. He had the power to
send him to prison for two months without the in-
fliction of any fine, but he should not go to that ex-
tent on the present occasion. The defendant, how-
ever, must understand that if he repeated such
conduct he would certainly be sent to prison. He
should now order him to pay a fine of 405., and in
default he would be imprisoned for one month.
Mr. Goodman, the chief clerk, then asked the de-
fendant whether he intended to pay the fine.
The defendant replied—Certainly not.
Mr. Goodman then asked him whether he had
any goods upon which distraint could be made to
levy the amount.
The defendant said the only goods he had were the
clothes he was wearing, and he did not know
whether they worth 40s. (A laugh).
Mr. Goodman told the defendant he had given
a very foolish answer. He knew perfectly well that
his clothes would not be taken off.
The defendant said he had nothing else, and he
shouN not pay the fine.
Alderman Lawrence —Very well, then you will
go to prison for a month.
The defendant, upon hearing this, picked up his
" wide-awake" and clapped it on his head, but Par-
fridge again pulled it off, and he was then removed
from the court.

GUILDHALL.—David Evans, a bill-sticker in
the employ of Mr. Scott, a bill-poster, of Burleigh-
strest, was brought up for final examination, charged
with stealing a quantity of posting-bills belonging
to the London and Brighton Railway Company.
This case has been several times before the court,
and the facts adduced in evidence went to show
that Messrs. Waterlow, of London wall, printers
and stationers to the railway company, contracted.
with Mr. Scott to post the large bills at a stipu-
lated sum per thousand, and the bills received
for that purpose by Mr. Scott were distributed
by him to several bill-stickers in his employ, to be
affixed upon the various advertising sites throughout
the metropolis. Upon the opening of the Victoria
station of the London and Brighton Railway at
Westminster, large posters were issued announcing
the fact, some of which, with others, were entrusted
to the prisoner to stick up, and shortly afterwards
it was discovered a large quantity of those and
similar bills had been sold to a person of the name
of Soames, of Harper's-mews, Theobald's-road. In-
quiries were accordingly instituted by Messrs. Wa-
terlow on behalf of the railway company, and it was
then ascertained that Soames had bought several
cwts. of such bills of the prisoner at the rate of 7s.
per cwt., the full value even as waste paper being
estimated at 15s. per cwt. Alderman Humphery
commented upon the conduct of Soames in buying
such property of a bill-sticker at less than half its
value, and that individual appeared yesterday with
his attorney, who complained of Ald. Humphery's
remarks. and of their appearing in the newspapers.
Alderman Finnis said he would hear anything
in explanation at the termination of the case.
Several witnesses were then called, from whose
evidence it appeared that one lot of large bills,
which Soames admitted he bought of the prisoner
at 7s. per cwt., were afterwards sold at 15s. per
cwt. to Mr. Ongley, a blacking manufacturer, 163,
Union-street, Borough, who, upon opening the par-
cels and discovering that the bills were new, and
not out of date, ashad been alleged, gave immediate
information to the railway company.
Alderman Finnis complimented this witness in
very high terms for his conduct in these transac-
tions, and intimated that if all tradesmen would act
upon the same principle there would net be quite
so many facilities for robbery.
The solicitor for Soames said, Ald. Humphery
had stated that any one could see the bills were not
out of date upon the very face of them, whereas
there was only one parcel that was not out, of data.
He had several gentlemen present to negative Al-
derman Humphery's assertion about the goods being
purchased at half their value, as 7s. per cwt. was a
very good market value.
Alderman Finnis said he thought the solicitor
was not doing his client any good. He perfectly
concurred in all the remarks of Alderman
Humphery. That there had been great looseness
in the manner in which Soames's business had been
conducted must be apparent to all, and it was
equally clear that bills which Soames bought at 7s.
had been sold again at 155., and ultimately proved
to have been stolen. These facts were quite suffi-
cient to satisfy him that Soames had acted very
imprudently in buying these bills under the circum-
stances which had transpired. Soames had brought
these remarks upon himself, and he must take the
consequences of his own acts.
The prisoner was then fully committed for trial.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.—AN ALLEGED
VOLUNTEER ASSAULT.-Mr. Louis Robert Hazle-
wood, of the Parthenon Club, Regent-street, ap-
peared before Mr. Tyrwhitt on a summons charg-
ing him with an assault on Mr. Frederick Kent, on
the Ist inst.

The complainant appeared in Court as a member
of the London Scottish Volunteer Corps, in full
grey uniform, with his kilt and bare legs.
The defendant, who it was said was also a volun-
teer in a different corps, was represented by Mr.
Edward Lewis, of Marlborough•street.
The complainant said he was walking along the
Haymarket, in full uniform, after 12 on the night
in question, in the direction of Pall-mall. Near
the corner of Jermyn-street the defendant, who was
behind him, and had two other gentlemen with him,
called out, "There's a - young Scotchman."
He took no notice, and proceeded on his way, and
when at the corner of the Opera-colonnade, the
defendant assailed him again with the same expres-
sion. He stopped an instant, intending to turn
away, when defendant ran against him, and struck
him in the mouth. Holding up his hand to guard
off a second blow, defendant's hat fell off, and he
(complainant) caught him by the collar, and held
him until a constable came up, who, refusing to
take the charge because no marks of violence were
visible, required him to give his card, and recom-
mended a summons.

Cross-examined—Complainant said he had two
young girls with him. They were prostitutes, but
he knew them before they became so. None but
defendant and his friends were following them.
Had been three times before in the Haymarket of a
night in his uniform. Defendant made use of the
bad language more than twice. Did not knock
his hat off. Did not run away, but kept his stand.
Had been at drill up to half-past nine.
Police-constable 138 C, said he saw a number of
People, and heard quarrelling, when he came up,
but nothing more.
Mr. Lewis said his client, himself a volunteer,
Would scorn to be guilty of ouch conduct to another