The Sun.
London, England, 1867-01-04 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONLON, FRIOAY EVENING, JANUARY 4 1867.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.--This Day.

AIARLBOROITGFI-S I BEET .
REFRACTORY CONDUCT IN A WORKHOUSE.—Three
rough-looking young men, named Thomas Challenger,
William Peel, and Albert M‘Grady, were charged before
Mr. Knox with refractory conduct in St. James's Work-
house.
William Henry Knight, superintendent of labour in the
workhouse, said that he was informed that the prisoners
were making a great noise in ono of the halls, and on
proceeding there he found that the prisoner had been up-
setting the tables and jumping up)n them, and their con-
duct was of such a disorderly nature that the old men
were afraid of them.
William Judge, an inmate of the workhouse, and act-
ing as " captain" of the third hall, said that last night
the prisoners commenced upsetting the tables and broke
some jugs, and they then fastened the door, so that no one
could either get in or out. The prisoners had been pre-
viosly snowballing and upsetting the whole hous.
Peel asked the witness whether l►e had not said to him
"Out of the workhouse into a prison—out of a prison into
a workhouse ?"
The witness said he never made such a remark.
Peel then asked the witness whether he had not told him
that the reason why he was in the workhouse was because
he could not go out with his blacking box in snowy
weather ?
Burgess, 142 C, said that on taking the prisoners into
custody at the workhouse, they said they would do what
they could for the officer Knight, and they would like to
have a mouth for him.
In answer to Mr. Knox, Knight said that he believed
Challenger had been brought up in the workhouse school.
The others had been six times in the house. Their con-
duct had been very bad. That morning they had made
use of bad language, and thrown their broad about.
Mr. Knox said that the prisoners had been guilty of re-
fractory conduct, as proved by the second witness; and
the constable had proved that they had threatened the
officer Knight. He should commit them for fourteen days
each.
As the prisoners were leaving the court they observed
he officer Knight, and stated that they would do some-
hing for him when they came out of prison.

BOW-STREET.
A SOI-DISANT CLERGYMAN.—John M'Lennan, a middle-
aged, shabby-genteel-looking man,".was placed at the bar
on remand, charged with stealing a mutton chop, value 3d.,
from the shop of Mr. Payne, butcher, Drury-lane.
The case against the prisoner was, of itself, a very trivial
one, but the prisoner himself had acquired a notoriety
amongst the police from the number of times he had been
taken into custody on various charges of theft. On one
occasion ho was charged with stealing a book from a
railway-station, and he having on that occasion repre-
sented himself as an ordained minister of the Church of
England. Ho was fully committed for trial; and being
tried at the Surrey Sessions the presiding judge addressed
him at some length for the disgraceful position ho
occupied for one in his station of life. He on that occasion
got off with a very few weeks' imprisonment, the judge
not being acquainted with his real Character, as ho had
carefully changed his name on each occasion of his being
taken into custody.
To-day Lockerby, the officer appointed by the magis-
trates to identify offenders, attended at Bow-street, and
informed Mr. Vaughan, the magistrate, that he had known
the prisoner ever since 1852, during which he had been
convicted no less than between 14 and 15 times. He was
a regular old thief.
Mr. Vaughan having cautioned the prisoner, ho said in
his defence he was innocent of stealing the chop, and that
the whole thing was a mistake.
The magistrate said he thought otherwise, and therefore
he should fully commit him for trial.