The Sun.
London, England, 1858-08-19 00:00:00

DEPOSIT

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.-Aug7lBl

. OLD COURT.
"James llor-kek , 37, was charged with stealing a post
letter, containing a sovereign, a sixpence, and six postage
stamps, the property. of the Postmaster-general.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Poland conducted the prosecution;
the prisoner was defended by Mr. Cooper.
Mr. Bodkio, in opening the case to the jury, stated that
in consequence of repeated complaints of the loss of letters
in the district where the prisoner was employed as a post
letter carrier, the authorities of the Post-office took the
usual proceeding in-such cases of addressing what was called
a "test letter," to be delivered within the district. He said
that as some observations had been made with regard to this
course of proceeding, he felt it right to observe that rob-
beries to an enormous amount were committed by letter-
carriers, and the authorities of the Post-office had no other
means of detecting the guilty parties but by resorting to the
proceeding of despatching a test letter, and with respect to
the argument that had been made use of that such a
proceeding was a temptation to the commission of
crime, he said it was obvieus that it was no extra-
ordinary temptation, the test letter being placed with the
genuine letters, and thus was not likely to have any effect
except upon dishonest persons. In point of fact, the Pro-
ceeding was nothing more than was adopted by tradesmen
every day, when they suspected persons in their employ-
, merit of robbing them, of marking money in their till with
a view. to discover who was the guilty party.
The witnesses for the prosecution were then exernined,
_nd it appeared that, on the 28'11 of July, Mr: Clair,
er
..!'sie.iMelaf the inspectors of the Post-office, enclosed ea
.saveteigv, a sixpence, and six postage stamps in . as,
*or addressed to a person in Nottingham-Place,
evgroad, which, it appeared, was within2"the district
assigned to the Sussex-place receiving house, ,where
the prisoner and some other letter-carrielerere em-
ployed. The • usual steps were then taken ro trace the
letter, and it eppears that it was in the first instance placed
in the bundle of a letter-carrier named Simmer, who would
have bad to deliver , the letters that were addressed to Not-
tingham-piletee ; and the prisoner was observed to look over
the bundle of letters, and after handling the one in question,
to remove it from Shuter's bundle. He subsequently, it
appeared, seemed to have some suspicion that be was
watched., and be was seen to run across
whore
m
the post-office to a public-house oppoiite,
he asked to go into the water-closet ; and upon this place
being searched nteerwards the en elope of the letter
was discovered, but the money and th °stage stamps had
disappeared. No one but the prisoner a eared to have had
access to the water-closet on the morniu in question, and
consequently no one but he could bare piked the envelope
where it was found.
Mr. Cooper sddressed the jury for the defence, and in the
course of his speech he complaiced of the course that was
adopted by the Post-office in sending these "test letters,"
and be said that in hii opiuion it was calculated to entrap
honest persons into the commission of crime.
Mr. Justice Williams, in his summing up, saidje appeared
to hint that there was nothing at all improper lb the use of
a test loeer, and tie Reid that the Pest-office authorities were
termed to use -every means in cue.' p• e.. re ~cvet ,i,,
parties by whom robberies of this description were eea,_
[flitted, and this appeared to be the most effectual means
that could be tale .ur titateparpose-
The jury, after a ry short deliberation, returned a ver-
erric
diet of guilty.
James Richmond, 20, wan charged with a similar offence.
The same counsel conducted the prosecution. The pri-
seiner was defended by Mr. Sleigh.
The father of the prisoner, it appeared, bad been in the
service of the Post-office for 30 years, and he was still em-
ployed there. The prisoner was also employed in the office,
and the-evidence against him was of a similar nature to
that which was adduced in ,t 4 laee.ease,
-The jury found the prisoner guilty, but reCommended
him to mercy on account of his youth.
. • .
Joseph
_Charles Marottz, 'Tomei' Quin, wad .Edward

Thomas Lawrence, three other Post-office letter-carriers,
aLio pleaded guilty to charges of stealing letters containing
money.
Mr. Bodkin informed the Court that Marotti and Quin
were both employed at the same office, and after repeated
complaints of the loss of letters, Marotti was detected and
committed for trial, and in less than a fortnight afterwards
the other man, Quin, was also detected in committing a
similar offence.
Mr. Justice Williams sentenced the prisoners Horlock,
Quin, and Marotti to undergo six years' penal servitude ;
and Richmond and Lawrence, on account of their youth,
were sentenced to the more lenient punishment of four years'
penal servitude.
Henry Thompson alias Stanbrough, 36, a respectable-
looking man, was charged with uttering a forged £lO note
with intent to defraud.
Mr. Giffard and Mr. Orridge prosecuted ; Mr. Sleigh de-
fended the prisoner.
1 t appeared that the prisoner had resorted to a very in-
genious proceeding to commit the offence imputed to him.
He went to the shop of Mr. Blackburn, a hosier, in Hol-
born, and selected :_ome shirts and other articles, and then
pulled' out his purse, apparently for the purpose of paying
for the goods, but appeared suddenly to find that he had not
got money enough, and he then directed the shopkeeper to
pack up the things and he said he would send for
them. In the course of the dag he applied to a
ticket porter in Lincoln's-inn-fields, and gave him
a letter addressed _to Mr. Blackburn, which contained
a forged £lO note, and he requested him _to take the
amount of the bill out of the note and send him
the change in the parcel. It happened rather curiously
that one of the clerks employed in the London and
Westminster Bank was accidentally in the prosecu-
ter's shop when the letter was oells*ed. The forged
:gate avas-shrrtin_ LC! hipa,,and be at once saki lia4at tt _wns_ not
genhine: 'A 'quariTity of rag 'were 'Were then. picked up 'lnd
given to the porter and he went away, and as be was
proceeding along Bow-street the prisoner came up vi
!!'•!) to ',ire t:;e -pal eel. Tue
e,htcr, who was aware of what had taken place
at the shop, told the prisoner that Mr. Blackburn
wished to see him about the change, and he at first
consented to accompany him, but at length he evi-
dently became aware that something was wrong, and
endeavoured to run away, but the porter laid hold of
him, and detained hint until a policeman came up and took
him into custody.
When the case had proceeded to some extent, the pri-
soner, by the advice of his learned counsel, withdrew his
plea of not guilty, and pleaded guilty to du; charge.
Mr. Sleigh then addressed the learned judge in mitiga-
tion of punishment, and said be was instructed that the
prisoner was very respectably connected, and was in the
service of Messrs. Fox and Henderson down to the period
of their failure, when be was discharged, and since that
period he had unfortunately become connected with persons
who were known by the designation of betting-men, and
the prisoner's statement to bim was that he had received
the note in question from one of these persons, and he was
not aware that it was forged.
A witness was called, who gave the prisoner a very good
character.
Sentence was deferred.

Harry Bunbury, 38, a geeticmanly-looking young
man, pleaded guilty to three indictments, charging him
with uttering forged acceptances to bills of exchange with
intent to defraud. _ _ _

Mr. Sleigh, WIo appeared for the prisoner, said that the
was a very melancholy case. The prisoner was the son of is
deceased general officer, Gen. Bunbury, and it was a
very painful thing indeed to see him in his presena
degraded position. It appealed that there had been aomt
disputes between the prisoner and his relations upon the
subject of property, and at a time when he was in great dis-
tress he placed the name of Ihe solicitor to his relations as
the acceptor to these bills of exchange, thinking that he
should by this proceeding compel his family to do some-
thing for him. The prisoner appeared to be under the
impression that In so doing he had only committed a venal
offence, but he, as his advocate, felt himself compelled to
inform him that this was no ithtification, and that he
had no legal answer to the charge; but under the
circumstances, be trusted that the Court would feel that
the justice of the case would be satisfied by the infliction
of a lenient punishment upon the prisomer, particularly
when it was recollected that he was now branded as a felon,
and that his prospects in life were for ever destroyed.
Mr. Martin, who appeared for the prosecution, said that
the prosecutor desired to recommend the prisoner most
strougl-y to the merciful consideration of the Court.
In this case also sentence was deferred.
Edward Holtaway, a young man, surrendered and
pleaded guilty to a charge of bigamy.
Mr. Sleigh, who appeared for the prisoner, said be was
instructed that no deception had been practised upon the
second wife, and that she was perfectly well aware be was a
married man at the time the ceremony of marriage was per-
formed between them. _

Mr. T. Salter, who was instructed to prosecute, said that
his learned friend was quite misinstructed upon this subject,
and he called the prosecutrix, a respectable and very good-
looking young woman, who stated that it was not true that
she was aware the prisoler was married when she married
him, but, on the contrary, he represented himself to be a i
single man.
In answer to questions put by Mr. Sleigh, the prosecu-
trix said that a roan named Taylor did say something to her
about the prisoner havieg a wife and children, but he only
said that, he had heard it of some one else, and when she
taxed the prisoner with it he denied it.
Mr. Sleigh then called two young men, named Taylor and
Boakes, as witnesses, and they stated that they both informed
the prosecutrix before her marriage that the prisoner Was a
married man, and cautioned her to be careful. Oae of
them also stated that the prosecutrix told him upon one
eecacion that she had seen the prisoner's wife, and that
there had been a " shindy" between theta. (A laugh.)
The prosecutrix denied that this statement was true, and
her mother was called, who stated that the priconer de-
clared himself to be a single man down to the last moment,
and it was not until six made preparations to go to Graves-
end, and inquire upon the subject, that he admitted he wt.s
a married man wheu he married her daughter.
The prisoner was sentenced to six months' imprisonment
and hard labour.

NEW COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Willes.)

..Edward Wellington Boate was indicted fur feloniously
applying to his own use certain sums of money which had
been entrusted to bim by virtue of his employment in the
public service of her Majesty.
After some conversation between Mr. Sleigh and Mr.
Robinson,
His Lordship agreed to allow the case to stand over until
next session, the accused entering into his own moguls-
ances in £lOO.