The Sun.
London, England, 1858-08-03 00:00:00

nesday to call upon me ; and en that day I received another
letter from him-from Portsmouth ; but in the meantime I
called on Mr. Parkin. I did not Bee the prisoner again
until Saturday last, when he came and inquired if the
things he had ordered a fortnight previously were ready. I
said they were, and invited him into the show-room, and
while he was trying on the things he produced two bills of
exchange for £lOO and £5O, which he gave to me, and said
he was going to Cherbourg and should want £.50. Both bills
were drawn and endorsed by the prisoner, and pur-
ported to be the acceptances of Mr. Parkin. They were
both dated July 30, 1858. I then said he must have been
aware that the bill of exchange for £4O bearing Mr. Par-
kin's name as the acceptor was a forgery, and he said it was.
I then asked him if the other two bills were also forgeries,
and lie said they were. I then called up my foreman, and
in his presence interrogated the prisoner again, when he
repeated that the bills were forgeries. I called in a police-
man and gave him into custody.
Mr. Win. Parkin said—l am a solicitor, and live at 29,
Argyll-street. The acceptances to the bills produced are
not in my handwriting, neither have they been written with
my authority. The signature is not very like mine. I know
the prisoner's handwriting. The bodies of the bills, as well
as the forms of the acceptances, appear to have been written
by him, but the signature is in a disguised hand. I have
written to the prisoner several times, but not about Mr
Hobson. I was concerned two years ago in purchasing of
Mr. Hobson a mortgage which he held upon the prisoner's
reversionary property.
Cross-examined by prisoner—l am the attorney to Major
Adair and others, holding the estate on your behalf.
Alderman Cubitt, after reading the usual caution pre-
scribed by law in such cases, asked the prisoner if he wished
to say anything in answer to the charge?
The prisoner said—l wish to state, relative to Mr. Parkin
and Mr. Hobson, that I have a claim upon this property,
and that I hold Mr. Parkin's acknowledgment in his own
handwriting of his not having paid me the sums agreed to,
and that the letters I showed Mr. Hobson were not forgeries,
but bond fide letters. That every party belonging to the
family, solicitors and all, have received notice from me
that I have never received the sums stipula.ed to be paid
to me, and for that very reason I claimed a share in the
estate, although Mr. Parkin and his clients did all they
could to shut me out. I also wish to state that at Crane-
court,. Fleet-street, at the Scottish Hospital, of which Major
Adair is the secretary, I signed various mortaes to the
amount of £6,000 and upwards, and at theg end of each
mortgage there was a receipt drawn out acknowledging
that I had received a fair proportion of the property for that
mortgage, whereas all that I received was £245. I was to
have had E• 250, but they kept back £5 because they got
me ,i5O a-day earlier than agreed open. They then pur-
chased my equity of redemption for X,50, which I sold on
their promise to keep good faith with me, which
they did not. Upon the death of my father, knowing
they had not a leg to stand upon, and that I
was in want of money, they got me to sign a
decd of confirmation of the past, for which they were
to have given MO £250 then and to leave the rest until a
future day, when the estate came to be wound up. I re-
ceived part of that money when I signed the deed; and with
regard to the rest, Mr. Park;n wrote to say it should be
forwarded on my making application for it. I did make
repeated application, and got a few pounds in dribs and
drabs, but the balance I never got. To prove how they got
my property into their hands, I wish to say that the firm of
Messrs. Gaston, Aguilar, And Baker, cement manufacturers,
got mortgages from me for goods which they contracted
debts for, and never paid, leaving me liable, and one mort-
gage alone, for £1,500, Mr. Parkin bought on behalf of
`his clients for £250, showing how little they thought of the
validity of the mortgage.
Alderman Cubitt—This is no answer to the charge. Do
you wish the whole of this statement to be returned with
the depositions?
Prisoner—That is what I desire, sir.
The prisoner was then committed for trial.

BOW-STREET.
William Robie, a costermonger, was charged with in-
decently exposing himself to the servant-maids in Gordon-
square and the neighbourhood, and with addressing filthy
language to them.
It was proved by the evidence of several witnesses that
the disgusting conduct complained of had been going on for
some months past, although the prisoner had always man-
aged to avoid apprehension until Saturday, when he was
pursued by a fishmonger's assistant and given into custody,
exhausted almost by his endeavouring to escape. He at
first denied the charge, and Mr. Lewis, his solicitor, cross-
examined the witnesses, in the hope of establishing a case of
mistaken identity, adding that the prisoner bore an excel-
lent character, and was a married man, his wife's confine-
ment being hourly expected. Eventually, however, to
avoid the risk of still greater punishment at the sessions,
the prisoner pleaded guilty, and begged the magistrate to
dispose of the case by summary conviction.
The servant-maids having also begged the Court to spare
them the pain of appearing again,
Mr. Henry committed the prisoner to three months hard
labour, remarking that he deserved a much heavier punish-
ment, and doubtless would have received it if the case had
gone for trial.
Mr. Henry has received a donation of ss. in postage
stamps from H. C.," who requested that it might be given
to the young man at the brothel in George-street, for hav-
ing very properly refused to allow the cabman, Knight, to
remain in the room with the servant girl, Mary Barry,
whose case was reported on Saturday.

WESTMINSTER.—CRUEL ROBBERY OF A PARENT.
—Harriet Hardiman and Anne Hawker, two young
women, were placed at the bar before Mr. Paynter, charged
with the following heartless robbery :
The prosecutor was John Hardiman, father of the first-
named prisoner, a poor, hard-working smith, a widower, in
bad health, with five children to maintain. On Saturday
night be went to bed, with his week's wages, amounting to
135., in his pocket, and on awaking in the morning found it
bad all gone. The door of his humble abode had been left
as usual unlocked, a circumstance of which his daughter
availed herself to enter in the night and rifle his pockets
of their contents. The other prisoner had been seen with
her at the door of her father's house, and was found in her
company when she was apprehended, shortly afterwards,
with similar coins to those stolen in her possession.
In reply to the magistrate prosecutor said that his daugh-
ter, who might have been of great service to him, had
absented herself from his house three months ago, and had
taken to evil courses and companions,
The prisoners, the former of whom admitted the robbery,
were committed for trial.
SERIOUS AND UNPROVOKED CASE OF WOUNDING.—
Elizabeth Saunders, a woman of dissipated appearance,
was charged with assaulting Miss Margaret Gibson.
The prosecutrix, a very genteelly-dressed young woman,
residing at 23, Paradise-walk, Chelsea, said that the defen-
dant lodged in her mother's house, and on Saturday night
was intoxicated and created a great disturbance. Some
boys followed her home, and complainant was standing in
the passage of the house when she was suddenly struck by
defendant on the head and fell.
Mr. Paynter inquired the extent of the injury ?
Complainant, who wore a linen bandage round her head,
said it was a very deep cut, and pained her very. much.
She had had it dressed at the hospital. She gave defendant
no provocation of any description.
Isabella Martin said she was present at the time of the
assault. The wound was inflicted with a china image,
which defendant deliberately threw at the complainant.
Complainant
.screamed and fell. She was insensible for
some minutes, and bled copiously from the wound. It was
at first thought that she was killed.
Defendant, who made no reply to the charge, was re-
manded for a week.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.—ASSAULTS ON WOMEN.
—Charles Cattle, 119, Jermyn-street, was brought before
Mr. Long, charged with ill-using his wife, Mrs. Martha
Cattle.
The complainant said her husband came home yesterday
morning about two o'clock drunk, and began beating her
with his fists, and he then threw her down on the floor,
jumped on her repeatedly, and kicked her all over the body.
She had been married ten years, and this was not the first
time her husband had ill-used her.
The prisoner, in defence, said his wife did not speak the
truth.
Police-constable Turvey, 200 C said he was called in,
,
and he found the complainant nearly naked and exhausted,
and shamefully beaten. The prisoner resisted violently,
and struck him several times.
Police-constable Robinson, C division, said the prisoner,
Elizabeth
2te6H complainant
1 Hallows.
wssh when .
The
She
when at the station-house, assaulted him and bit his hand.
Mr. Long sent the prisoner to hard labour for three
months for assaulting his wife, one month in addition for
assaulting the constable, and to find bail for six months at
the expiration of the terms of imprisonment.
William Murphy was charged with a violent assault on
sa, a. ikl,d e thei sdl h
heps wasihrmi:
w prisoner
n he
yi
arno t
ue Ph: c
and
na
meant
di
api
nl
then
atynbodyn
struck
such
cue hc nkci
indecentlyog libe _rt
theoadsfuseatu. itihh July,
ld
e e
replied,
several blows with his fist on the face. The prisoner put
his hand into his pocket, pulled out samething heavy, threw
it in her face and stunned her.
Mr. Long sent the prisoner to hard labour for two months.

John Beal was charged with beating Mary Beal, his wife.
The wife, who had her head bandaged, said her husband
was about to break the furniture when she interposed. Her
husband laid hold of her, lifted her up, and threw her vio-
lently on the floor, cutting her head open. Her husband
was constantly in the habit of beating her, and did nothing
towards the support of his family.
The son confirmed his mother's evidence.
The father in defence said his wile took up the poker.

The son said this was true.
Mr. Long said that being the case he would let him off
this time, and would only order him to enter into his own
recognisance to keep the peace.
OBTAINING GOODS BY FALSE PRETENCES.—Henry
Summerley and Samuel Owen were charged with obtain-
ing ten decanters from Mr. John Hobson, 19, St. James's-
street, by fraudulent pretences.
Charles Smith was in the employ of Mr. Hobson. About
one o'clock that day Summerley came to the shop and
ordered ten decanters in the name of a gentleman named
Halford, No. 9, Rutland-gate. The prisoner was told to
call in half an hour. He did so, and took away the de-
canters in a cab. The prisoner was followed, and witness
SAW the other prisoner Owen help him to take the decanters
from the cab.
There being nn evidence against Owen, be was discharged.
The prisoner Summerley was then charged with obtaining
goods from Messrs. Miller and Son, Piccadilly, by false
pretences.
Evidence was given that the prisoner obtained 81h. of
candles and a quantity of oil from the firm in the name of
Halfora.
Ai it was suspected there were other cases of the same
description the prisoutr was remanded for a week.

WORSHIP-STREET.—A MARRIAGE NOTA-LA-DIODE.
—A very youthful couple, still in their teens, although
bound in wedlock made their reluctant appearance before
the magistrate, accompanied by their respective parents,
who sought for advice under very embarrassing circum-
stances. The bridegroom's father, who appeared to be a
respectable tradesman, stated in effect that having two
places of business he had entrusted the management of one
to his son, who had not long been home from school, and
was satisfied with his conduct until Tuesday, when
absented himself from business, and after his return the
asteunding fact was elicited from him that he had inthan
the
meantime contracted marriage with a girl younger
himself. For a time he refused to disclose the whereabouts
of his young wife, who, however, was now in court with her
mother—(a timid-looking girl was in fact now observed
crouching and occasionally peeping from behind her parent).
The magistrate said it certainly was a strange story, and
asked the father if he thought his son was out of his mind.
The father replied that he bad never had reason to think so
before this occurrence.
The girl's mother DOW eame forward and said that t
and after
man first saw her daughter at a Christmas party,
wards became such a passionate suitor that his conduct was
quite alarming to the object of it, who had on one occasion
even resorted to the expedient of hiding herself under a bed to
avoid an interview with her admirer. The day before this