The Sun.
London, England, 1858-12-03 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 3, 1858,

LAW INTELLIGENCE. Dec. 2.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.

(Before the Judge Ordinary and Common Juries.)

WEBER V. WEBER AND PINE.

Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., and Mr. Macqueen were
counsel for the petitioner ; Dr. Swabey for the re-
spondent ; and Mr. Edward James, Q.C., and Mr.
L. Temple for the corespondent.
The petitioner, Mr. Weber, prayed for a dissolu-
tion of marriage on the ground of his wife's adul-
tery. The respondent and the corespondent denied
the allegations of adultery.
The petitioner became acquainted with the re-
spondent in 1854, he being at the time employed
in a commercial house at Liverpool at a salary of
about £l2O per annum. The respondent, then Miss
Emily Mary Ann Reade, had just left a boarding
school, and was 17 or 18 years of age. As her mother
objected to her marriage with the respondent she
accompanied him to Gretna-green, where they were
married in June, 1854. They returned to Liverpool,
and were again married at St. Margaret's Church,
Birkenhead, in the following August, They at first
lived with the respondent's mother, who was then
married to a Mr. Oakes, and afterwards took lodg-
ings in Ashton-street. They did not live together
very happily, and on one occasion she left his house
and stayed for a short time with her mother. In
1856 the firm to which Mr. Weber belonged
stopped payment, and his mind became so much
affected that he had to be confined for four months
in a private asylum. When he came out his wife
refused to receive him, and at last, in March, 1857,
a deed of separation was drawn up, in pursuance of
which he permitted her to live apart from him, and
made her an allowance of £52 per annum. She was
then living with her mother and the corespondent.
Mr. Pyne, who is a commercial traveller, was an
inmate of the same house as a lodger. It was
alleged that an improper intimacy had. sprung up
between Mrs. Weber and Mr. Pyne, and that they
occupied the same bedroom, first at a house in
Boundary-lane, where her mother lived, in July
and August, 1857, and afterwards at a house at
Woburn-hill, to which the family had removed, in
February and March, 1858. The petitioner is about
30 years of age.
The first witness examined on the part of the
petitioner was Mr. John Murray, who had married
the parties at Gretna-green, and who said he had
officiated there for the last. 13 years. He described
the manner in which the marriage was effected.
The lady and gentleman told him that they wished
to be married. He told them to stand up, and in
the presence of two witnesses asked them if they
were single persons and free to marry. They each
said that they were, and then told them to join
hands. He said to the gentleman, "Do' you take
this woman to be your lawful wife, for better and
for worse as long as God spares you to each other ?"
The gentleman said, " I do ; " and he put the
same question to the lady and received the same
answer. A ring was then put on her finger, and
they declared themselves to be man and wife ac-
cording to the laws of Scotland before the witnesses.
They then signed the marriage certificate and the
register. That, he said, was the " whole concern,"
and the parties quitted Gretna-green after a stay
of 20 minutes or half an hour. It was proved by
Mr. Kinnear, a member of the Scotch bar, that this
was a valid marriage according to the law of Scot-
land in 1854.

Evidence was given that in 1855 Mrs. Weber
had been met in the streets of Liverpool in com-
pany with persons apparently of an equivocal cha-
racter, and that since the separation she had been
seen in a room, in the house of her mother, on
one occasion in the company of Mr. Pyne, and
on another occasion in that of a gentleman who
was not recognised, under circumstances which
could leave no doubt that she had been gailty
of adultery. These circumstances were stated by
the servant of a neighbour, who said they occurred
in a parlour of Mrs. Oakes's house, and that she
had witnessed them from her master's garden.
The learned counsel for the respondents addressed
the jury on behalf of their respective clients, point-
ing out the improbability that Mrs. Weber and Mr.
Pyne would have committed the acts imputed to
them in a room where they could be seen by wit-
nesses on the outside of the house, commenting
upon the credibility of the witnesses who had been
called to prove those acts, and contended that the
evidence only showed that Mr. Pyne was a lodger
in the house of Mrs. Oakes, and that Mrs. Weber
was in the habit of occupying Mr. Pyne's bedroom
when Mr. Pyne was absent.
On the part of the respondents Mr. and Mrs.
Oakes were examined, and stated that no improper
intimacy had taken place between the respondent
and the co-respondent. Mr. Leather, a medical
man, stated that he had attended Mrs. Weber in
March last for a complaint which rendered it highly
improbable that she could then have intercourse
with any person, and added that Mr_ Weber had
offered to pay his account for attending upon her
if he would give evidence on his behalf. It was also
proved that Mr. Weber occasionally visited and
slept with his wife during her residence with her
mother.

The learned Judge having summed up, the jury
found a verdict for the wife.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME CIRCUIT.—CHELMSFORD, DEC. 2.
(Before Mr. Justice Wightman.)
Alfred Corder, 25 who pleaded guilty to an in-
dictment charging him with feloniously setting fire
to a quantity of farm buildings and other property
with intent to injure Thomas Hills Wood, and also
to defraud the Sun Fire-office, was brought up for
judgment.
The prosecutor in this case is an extensive farmer
at White Notley, in the neighbourhood of Brain-
tree, and it appeared that the prisoner was an entire
stranger to him, and there appeared to be an utter
absence of motive for the commission of so serious
an offence. The fire in question took place in the
night of the 19th Sept., and property to the amount
of £4OO was totally destroyed. The moment the
prisoner was taken into custody he admitted his
guilt.

- Mr. Justice Wightman, in passing sentence, said
it was difficult to understand what could have in-
duced the prisoner to commit so serious an offence,
but, as a warning to others, he felt it to be his duty
to order him to be kept in penal servitude for 15
years.

4 ;Henry Abbott, 31, who pleaded " Guilty," and
Jas. Marsh, 35, were charged with a similar offence.
Mr. Woollett conducted the prosecution.
The prisoners, who appeared to be in a very desti-
tute condition, went to the police-station at Witham,
and asked for some relief, and finding that the super-
intendent was not there, and could not obtain what
they required, it appeared that they at once pro-
ceeded to the farm-yard of Mr. Crump, a farmer at
Witham, and deliberately set fire to a stack of
wheat, valued at £l2O, the whole of which was
consumed. The prisoners were both taken into
custody upon the spot, and the evidexce clearly
established their guilt.
They were sentenced to undergo penal servitude
for 10 years.
Christopher Ketteridge, 23, and Charles Barker,
32, were indicted for burglariously breaking into the
dwelling-house of Samuel Richardson, and stealing
a watch and other articles ; and the indictment also
charged the prisoners with assaulting and using
personal violence to the prosecutor at the time of
the commission of the robbery:
Mr. Woollett prosecuted; Mr. Taylor defended
the prisoners.
_ _ _ -

The circumstances of the case were of rather a
singular character. It appeared that the prosecutor
was a labouring man, living in the neighbourhood
of Saffron Waldon, and that on the 12th September
he had been to the harvest spending, where he no
doubt enjoyed himself to a considerable extent, and
returned home about 1 o'clock in the morning.
According to his evidence, upon his entering his
cottage he saw the prisoner Barker standing in the
lower part of the house, and the other man, Ket-
teridge—both of whom he was well acquainted with
—standing on the top of the staircase ; and he said
they both attacked him and beat him with a stick,
and robbed him of his watch and other property.
The prisoners, it appeared, were readily found after
the transaction, and they denied all knowledge of
the robbery, and declared that they were not near
the prosecutor's house when it took place.
Mr. Tayler, in his address to the jury for the de-
fence, declared that, according to his instructions,
the prosecutor was in such a state of intoxication at
the time the supposed robbery took place as not to
know what he was about, and that he was under a
complete delusion or description of nightmare, and
that nothing of what he represented actually took
place. He called as a witness a man named Gar-
wood, who lived in a cottage adjoining that of the
prosecutor, and he stated that oriothe night in ques-
tion he heard him come home at a late hour, and
for a very considerable time he appeared to be reel-
ing and falling about like a drunken man, and at
length he made such a disturbance that he was in-
duced to get up and see what was the matter. He
knocked at the cottage door of the prosecutor,
and•for some time he could not obtain any answer,
and when he did come a considerable period elapsed
before he could find the key, and nearly as long
before. he could place it in the keyhole and open
the door. Upon his going in he fining the prosecu-
tor nearly naked and dreadfully intoxicated. All
the furniture was in confusion, and the prosecutor
had placed chests and other articles upon his bed,
while he himself was walking about naked. Upon
his telling him to dress himself, the prosecutor put
on his breeches the hind part before without ap-
pearing to know the mistake he had made, and in

'

that condition he sat down and smoked a pipe. It
also appeared that,upon the premises being searched
after this, the watch and other articles that were
supposed to have been stolen were found concealed
about the prosecutor's cottage, but no article what-
ever had been actually removed.
The jury upon hearing this evidence, without
troubling his lordship to sum up, at once returned
a verdict of not guilty..

credit attached, she sent to the prisoner to take to
ber brother. From the comparison of the hand-
writing of the letters received she said she believed
the endorsement of the name of " Robert Thomas"
on the letter of credit was in the handwriting of
the prisoner.
_

It appeared that the letter of credit was issued
by the Union Bank of London, who were agents of
the Oriental Bank, and was in the following form :
"Union Bank ,of London, 2, Princes-street,
London, July 28, 1858.
" (1,330)—0n demand, please to honour
the draught of Mr. Robert Thomas for 1;50. Equivalent
received here from the Shropshire Banking Company,
Wellington.
"Your most obedient servant,
" (Signed by the Assistant Manager).
'" To the Oriental Bank Corporation Melbourne."
Evidence was given to show that, according to
banking practice in this country, a letter of credit
in this form was usually paid on the simple endorse-
ment of the payee, but whether it would be so I aid
at Melbourne was not shown. According to the
regular practice, on the presentation of the letter of
credit at Melbourne, the bank there would ' ake
pains to ascertain the identity of the person cred ted
and, in the terms of the letter of credit, wi uld
"honour the draught" of the party to the extei t 0:
the letter of credit.

Mr. Scotland, upon this evidence, submitted that
the endorsement was not shown to be an " order."

After considerable discussion on this point,
Mr. Baron Bramwell said he was sorry for it, if
in other respects the prisoner was guilty. It was
quite true that, if the bank at Melbourne chose to
pay such a letter of credit on the simple endorse-
ment of the person credited, the latter could not.
afterwards oblige the bank to pay him a second
time. But the letter of credit was directed to the
Oriental Bank at Melbourne, who were to "honour
the draught" of " Robert Thomas." His lordship
thought the simple endorsement in this country was
not an order, not being within the original man-
date; and he therefore directed the jury to acquit
the prisoner, which they did accordingly.
Mr. Baron Bramwell then suggested that the pri-
soner might be indicted for the misdemeanour of
attempting to obtain money by false pretences, but
Mr. Motteram said the prosecutor was not dissa-
tisfied with the result of the prosecution ; and he
did not wish to press the matter any further.
As soon as the intelligence of the prisoner's ac-
quittal reached the hall, the prisoner's wife, a young
woman- of very respectable appearance, was so over-
come by the intelligence, that she fell down, and
dropped her child from her arms. Restoratives were
administered, but it was some time before she was
in a state to be removed.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—Dec. 2.

BOW-STREET.—Mary Anne Edge, the wife of
a private soldier in the Grenaier Guards, was
brought up, on a charge of threatening to commit
suicide.
On the evening of. the 24th she was observed
sitting on the steps of Westminster-bridge, by a
man who sells fruit at the foot of the bridge. He
asked her what she was about, and she replied that
she was going to drown herself. He called the
attention of the constable to the matter, and the
prisoner was taken, to the station. She had been
drinking. At the examination before the magis-
trate on the following day the husband, a soldier
of excellent character, with two good conduct
stripes, attended, and told a sad story of the
misery produced by his wife's unfortunate habit of
drinking. He did all in his power to keep a com-
fortable home for her, and it would, in fact, be as
comfortable as could be desired if she would only
attend to it ; but she was ruining him by her
drunkenness. The children were growing up
neglected, to say nothing of the probable influence
of the bad example she was setting them.
The sergeant also attended and spoke of Edge in
the highest terms.
While in the House of Detention on remand the
prisoner had seen the Rev. George Jepson, the
chaplain, several. times, and a letter had been
received, by Mr. Hall from the rev. gentleman,
expressing his belief that his remonstrances had
had a beneficial effect on her and that she was
sincerely penitent. She had promised her husband,
in Mr. Jepson's presence, that on her release she
would go home and for the future abstain from
drink, and do all in her power to restore comfort
and happiness to her husband and children.
Mr. Hall hoped she would do so, for if she per-
sistsd in her present course it would result in her
utter ruin. He trusted she would consider before
it was too late how much sorrow and humiliation
she had brought on herself and her husband,
and might yet entail upon her children. If she
would keep the promise she had made to Mr. Jep-
son she might yet make amends for all that she had
done, and might henceforward be comfortable and
happy. with her husband. Relying on the promise
he would' discharge her, though she was liable to be
sent for trial, and, on conviction, to be sentenced
to a long term of imprisonment.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.—Edward Gordon
Herbert. a boy of 15 years of age, was charged with
burglariously entering the premises of his em-
ployers, Messrs. George Barton, Kent, and Co.,
wholesale brush manufacturers, Great Marlborough-
street, and stealing therein £5l, their property.
Mr. Edward Lewis, of Marlborough-street, ap-
peared for the prosecution.
Mr. Lewis opened the case with the following
statement :—I appear on behalf of Messrs. Kent,
brushmakers, of Great Marlborough-street. The
prisoner is charged with stealing from their pre-
mises upwards of £5O. This is an important case
inasmuch as others have been accused at this bar of
stealing the money, the charge being supported
only upon the evidence of the prisoner now at the
bar. After detailing the burglary and loss of money,
and the reward of £5O offered by the firm, Mr.
Lewis went on to say that the boy gave evidence
which induced Mr. Kent to have three persons in
the employ of the house in whom he had hitherto
placed the greatest confidence apprehended. This
boy (the prisoner) then declared on oath that he
overheard Gale and another man talking about
committing the robbery, and that being detected in
listening to that conversation Gale told him he would
give him a sovereign not to tell. The robbery was
committed the next day, and when the police were
sent for Gale, according to the prisoner's story, gave
him a sovereign to say nothing. The prisoner's fa-
ther, having found out that his son was in possess-
sion of money, questioned him, and the boy told
him the story which he afterwards repeated in
court, and on which the three persons in Messrs.
Kent's employ were apprehended. These men
all denied the charge, and were afterwards dis-
charged, as the magistrate said, without a stain on
their characters. Sergeant Crocker, having sus-
picions watched the boy, and a day or two ago saw
him go.to Hammersmith churchyard, dig up the
ground and take something out. When the pri-
soner was taken into custody £7 in gold was found
in his possession.
William Ogden, clerk, said—l locked up the fac-
tory on the night of the 11th of Nov. I was in the
habit of seeing the prisoner leave the premises, but
did not see him leave on the night of the robbery.
I locked up the drawer under the desk in which
money was kept to pay wages with. There was
£39 ls. in the drawer on the night of the robbery.
I locked it up and took the key with me.
Robert Conolly, another clerk, said, I locked up
my desk on the night .of the • robbery and missed
from it next morning £5 ls. 6d. The desk had
been broken -open and was in the offiee-
George Quick, in the employ of Messrs. Kent,
locked his desk on the evening before ; at that time
there was £5 19s. Bd. in money in the desk, which
was also in the office; and he missed the amount the
following morning...
Thos. Edwards, a -carman employed by the firm,
said, the' morning after the robbery he found the
back premises and the factory door open. Saw
several desks also open, and noticed a pair of pin-
cers lying on the floor.
Sergeant Glass, 3 C.—On the 13th November I
went to the premises of Messrs. Kent, where I saw
two desks in the office which had been forced open,
also a drawer open in another room. Was shown
a chisel, which fitted the marks both on the desks
and drawer. Also saw the ring part of the' key
broken off. The pincers were found near the door,
and had evidently been used to turn the key. I
examined the lock of the front door to see if a false
key had been used to open it, but found no marks.
The desks appeared as if very little force had been
required. The breaking open had evidently not
been done by a practised hand. After the prisoner had
made his statement to his father I took from him
145., which the prisoner said was part of the sove-
reign he had received from Gale to keep silence.
He said that Gale was the porter, and pointed him
out. This purse and cap were given by the father.
I went yesterday to the prosecutors', where, the
prisoner was at work. I asked him where he had
been, and he said to Hammersmith. I asked what
money he had on him, and he said none. I searched
him and found in his pocket, tied up in a handker-
chief, seven sovereigns and 10s. in silver. He said
he had got that from a tombstone in Hammersmith
churchyard, where lie had put it the Sunday after
the robbery, that Gale gave him that money when
Kent's
e
he gave the sovereign. In another pocket I found a
piece of new sponge, identified
said hehadr s.
notK deriont by Mss
foreman. I told prisoner should take him inte
custody for the robbery, and he
it. After the charge bad been entered at the station
I accompanied the prisoner to Hammersmith
churchyard, and he pointed out a tombstone from
which he had taken the money, showing a small
hole of three or four inches in depth recently made.
Sergeant G. Crocker, 9' C; accompanied the last

witness and corroborated his evidence. Upon the
apprehension of the three men, upon the prisoner's
statement, I asked him if a sovereign was all Gale
had given him, and he said it was.
Thomas Gale deposed that he never gave the pri-
soner a sovereign or any other sum, either before
or since the robbery.
_ _

Mr. G. B. Kent-identified the sponge produced
and found on the prisoner. The prisoner worked in
the department where it was used, and had con-
fessed it was their (Messsrs. Kent's) property.
Sergeant Glass said, the prisoner told him the
sponge had been given to him by another in the
same employ.
Mr. Bingham (to prisoner)—Do you wish to put
any questions to the witnesses or say anything now
to me ?

Prisoner—Yes, sir. lam guilty.
Mr. Lewis said, the firm was exceedingly anxious
the men accused by the prisoner should be cleared
from the charge.
Mr. Bingham said, there is now no imputation
whatever on those men. Mr. Beadon never be-
lieved the boy's statement from the beginning. The
press will no doubt give currency to all you wish
to say on behalf of the persons wrongfully accused.
The prisoner was remanded for a week.

THAMES.— George Collins, alias Lewis, aged
30, and George Wilkinson, alias Cyrus Knigt,
aged 28, who have been in custody since the 9th
of November, were finally examined on the charge
of stealing from Mr. J. T. Burke, a hat manufac-
turer, of Union-street, Southwark, on the last
Derby day; a gold chronometer watch, originally
manufactured by Mr. Arnold, in the Strand, for
the Rev. Theodore Williams, vicar of Hendon, at a
cost of 95 guineas.
After hearing all the evidence,
Mr. Yardley said he was no inclined to believe
the prisoners were the persons who stole the watch,
but they had been improperly dealing with it, and
no doubt knew it was stolen or unlawfully ob-
tained. The watch was a very heavy one, of great
value, the very appearance of which indicated it
was stolen, and dragged from the person with
great violence. When the prisoners were taken
into custody they gave false accounts. There was
no evidence that they stole the watch, but he
should convict them of unlawful possession of the
property, and sentence them to two months' im-
prisonment and hard labour.

SOUTHWARK.—James Atkinson, collector and
traveller to Mr. John Walker, wholesale teadealer
and grocer, 157, High-street, Southwark, was
brought up for final examination, charged with
embezzling various sums of money, amounting to
nearly £lOO, the property of his employer..
Additional evidence having been given in sup-
port of the charge, the prisoner was committed for
trial.

LAMBETH.—Henry Rudledge and Charlotte,
his wife, were re-examined, the former on a charge
of violating his daughter Kate, a girl between 14
and 15 years of age, and the latter with assisting
him in the commission of the act.

Mr. Sleigh, instructed by Mr. Shaen, solicitor
to the Society for the Protection of Young Females,
attended for the prosecution, and Mr. Wontner for
the defence.

Mr. Sleigh said he should not trouble his wor-
ship at any great length on that occasion, but he
could not help saying that it was most fortunate
for the ends of justice in-the case that he had, in
the discharge of a public duty, and in the exercise
of his judgment on the former examination, given
the wife of the prisoner into custody; for upon her
being searched a letter was found on her which
would form a most important feature in the prose-
cution, as it fnrnished, in the handwriting of the
wife, a perfect proof of the husband's guilt, as well
as a corroboration of the testimony of the prosecu-
trix. The learned gentleman here read the follow-
ing extract from the letter in question :—" Remem-
ber lam not in a heathen country. Do not bring
Kate with you. If I should return home I should
like her to be treated as a daughter, and not as a
wife." _ _

The following additional witnesses were then
called :

Mrs. Amelia Dallas, the searcher at the station-
house in Kennington-lane, said that after the charge
was booked against the prisoner on the last clay of
examination she searched her, and found on her the
papers produced. The prisoner was about to de-
stroy them by tearing them up, when witness asked
her what they were, and she said only a letter,
which she intended to give to her husband. Wit-
ness, however told her she must take them from
her, and she did so. The papers produced were
the same.

The Rev. Jeremiah Cotter, a Catholic priest,
said ho formerly belonged to St. George's Cathe-
dral, but on the 17th of October last he had been
,sent to take charge of the mission at Woolwich.
About the end of that month the prosecutrix and
her aunt, who were members of his congregation,
called on him at his chapel, and the former com-
plained to him of the improper conduct of her
father towards her. The aunt and the niece at once
left Woolwich, and went to reside at the house of
Mrs. Henville, in the London-road, close to St.
George's Cathedral. Some days after, he thought
it was the following Thursday, he (Dr. Cotter) met
the male prisoner in the street in Woolwich, when
he spoke to him, and asked about his daughter and
her aunt. He then told him his daughter had com-
plained of his unnatural and disgusting conduct
towards her, upon which he became exceeding'y
excited, said it was a lie, and that he had been to
Mr. Mayne to stop his daughter and her aunt at
every station in the kingdom. He (Dr. Cotter)
then told him that if he met him on the following
afternoon he would take him to where his daughter
1 and her aunt were, and he did so. On the even•
ing of Friday week he accompanied the prisoner
from the cathedral to the house where his daughter
was, and on seeing Mrs. Henville he told her the
prisoner was the man belonging to the persons
lodging there. Mrs. Henville upon this opened the
door leading to the room where the daughter and
the aunt were, and the prisoner at once went in
there while he (Dr. Cotter) remained in conversa-
tion with Mrs. Henville. In about five minutes he
heard a loud screaming, and on the door being
opened he saw the male prisoner holding his daugh-
ter with his left hand and pressing her downwards,
and the large knife or dagger produced on
the former examination open in his right
hand, and he appeared to be in a very excited
state. On observing him the prisoner
stretched out his right hand, in which he still held
the knife, and exclaimed, " You see that I am going
to kill her and myself too. At this moment the
officer who was concealed in the house was called
and rushed into the room, and a struggle took place
between him and the prisoner, during which the
latter managed to put the knife away. The officer
requested further assistance, when he (Dr. Cotter)
ran into the street, and seeing two policemen he
requested their assistance, and the prisoner was
secured.

Mr. Norton—Dr. Cotter, did you observe the
prisoner close the knife ?
Dr. Cotter—l cannot say I did ; but I observed
he placed his right hand behind his back. The
witness further said that upon being made ac-
quainted with the nature of the prisoner's conduct
he thought it of so shocking a description that its
very publicity would do much mischief, and his
object, therefore, was to have the daughter re-
moved from the scene of such shameful injury.
Mr. Sleigh observed that the "explanation was
unnecessary, as there could not be the slightest
doubt that the rev, gentleman. had acted in every
way as became a clergyman and a gentleman.
The testimony of a surgeon who had examined
the daughter terminated the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Wontner observed that the charge was so
serious that he felt it would be much better for him
to have it sent before and tried by a jury, and
therefore he (Mr. Wontner) should not offer any
observations at present on the contradictory state
of the evidence. 'With respect to the wife the law
was somewhat different, and he should leave her in
the hands of his Worship.
Mr. Norton said he should send both prisoners
to take their trial on the charge of rape.
Mr. Sleigh was instructed to say that a second
indictment for rape would be preferred against the
prisoner at the Old Bailey, in which a young
woman, named Ellen Saltmarsh, who had been a
short time in the service of the prisoner, would be
the prosecutrix.

GREENWICH.—Chas. Land, 35, described as a
draper, of 4, Church-street, Deptford, was brought
up for final examination, charged with committing
a criminal assault upon Clara Susannah Emma'
Land, his own daughter, aged 10 years.
• The depositions were taken, and the prisoner was
fully committed for trial.

[ADVERTISEMENT.]—Rarey's Horse and Cattle Improv-
ing cod Is equally adapted to improve the stamina of ill-
conditioned Horses, Cows, Bullocks, Calves, Sheep, and
Pigs. It causes no extra expense, as it contains far more
and better nourishment than its cost of Lid: per feed sup-
plies in corn and hay; hence ensures an actual saving in
the keep. But its principal advantages are a great improve-
ment in the digestive functions, the stamina and general
condition of horses enabling them to perform far more
labour without getting distressed. Pt imparts new vigour
to sick, debilitated, or old apparently worn-out horses, and
it puts rapidly the finest flesh on cattle generally, and im-
proves the milk in cows, as it enables them to extract the
entire nourishment out of everything they feed on. Rarey
and Co., 77, Regent's Quadrant, Piccadilly, London.
Packed in tins of about 90 feeds, lls. ; in casks of about 450
feeds, 508. ; of about 1,000 feeds, £5, being about ltd.; per
feed.

AN ExTB, (ORDINARY CASE OF BELL

STEALING.

At the Stratfoi. •d Police-court yesterday Samuel
Tuttlebee, a genera. 1 dealer • .1. Ashton, a carpenter;
and W. Irvin, a cam 'an, c/f East Ham, Essex, were
placed at the bar before .T.oseph Somes, Esq., on a
charge of stealing a la.- ;e bell, valued at 2,000
guineas, the property of Al derman Finnis, of Wan'
stead-park, Essex, and the City of London.
The bell, which is a spiel idid piece of oriental
workmanship, is composed oi various metals, chiefly
the offerings of the Burmese, people to their gods,
and formerly belonged to or ie of their temples or
places of worship, and was c aptured during the late
Burmese war by a relative o f the alderman, to whoa
it was presented.
Edward R. Benmore, gar wiener in the service of
Alderman Finnis, said that; the bell was the pre'
perty of his master, and Ir..ad been suspended to
yew tree on the lawn in the garden of the mansion.
The bell was very valuable, a nd witness saw it quite
safe on Monday last. On the following morning;
about 8 o'clock, he went rc ,Und the grounds and
discovered that the bell he d been taken awai'
Witness made a search and traced footsteps from
the lawn to Wanstead Fores t, where he believed
the thieves had placed it n a cart and carried it
away. Witness did not km w the prisoners.
Mr. West, brassfounder, Backchurch-lane, et
whose shop the bell was foi and by the police as it
was being broken up, stated . that the bell had been
brought to him by Mr. Da) r, a large dealer in old
metal. He agreed to give 9 r-d. per lb. for it.
Day was accompanied by a z nan named Marks.
Chas. Wm. Day, of Welhnl ;ton-place, West Indio
Docks, Poplar, stated that °I t Tuesday morning last,
the prisoner Tuttlebee came ; to his house and said
he had a piece of metal for r sale, something like a
large bell, and weighing 14c. wt. Witness told bill!'
that he could not buy a bell o f that dimensions, bia,
he would take it up to town to a person who would
purchase it. Witness had not seen the bell at that
time, but the prisoner said it 'was in a cart up the
road. Witness told him to drive the cart to Spital'
fields Church. The prisoner Irvin was driving the
cart, and when they reached Whitecha.;Del witnese
saw Mr. Marks, whom witness stopped , and said
" There is- a man who is a dealer in me tal at Vie'
toria Docks, whom I have known some time ; he
has some. metal for sale." The bell was taken
to the house of Mr. Marks, where it was taken out
by the prisoners Tuttlebee and Irvin. Mr. Marks
exclaimed " Why, this is a rum bell. It is a foreigi?l,
one." Tuttlebee then said "I want to gl ;t it settled.
Witness told Tuttlebee that nothing c onld be done
with the bell until it was broken up. He left for
a short time, and when he returned Ite found the,
,'
Tuttlebee had been trying to break up the bet"
his hands were galled and blistered with the sledge
hammer he had been using. Tuttleb ec; asked hila,
eightpencelalfpenny a pound for the metal'
Witness asked him where he had got the bell
from ? and he said, " I know the party ; it is all
right." He did not mention the name of any per,,
son, but he said, " I have to pay for it when it P
weighed."
Magistrate—l think you ought to have 104
more discretion in the matter.
Witness—l thought it was an old bell brought
from India.
Seargeat Copping stated that when he toot
Tuttlebee into custody, he said a man named Ash"
ton asked him to sell the bell for him, and that the
cart belonged to Irvin, who lived on the Marsh "
West Ham. He apprehended Irvin and Ashtea,
(who tried to make his escape). Irvin stated that
Ashton had employed him.
A statement of Tuttlebee implicating the other
two prisoners was handed in and read, and the
prisoners were remanded till Saturday.