The Sun.
London, England, 1858-08-13 00:00:00

HILLS V. THE LONDON GAS-LIGHT COMPANY.

This was a special jury cause, which commenced on Tues-
day before Mr. Baron Bramwell in the Crown Court.
The Attorney. General came down specially, and with Mr.
M. Chambers, Q.C., Mr. Hindmarsh, and Mr. Pollock,
conducted the case ler the plaintiff; Mr. Boy'll, Q.C., Mr.
Luih, Q.C., Mr. Webster, and Mr. G. Denman were coun-
sel for the defendants.

The actien was brought to establish the right of the
plaintiff to a patent for purif%ing gas. A vast number of
scientific and other witnesses were examined on both sides,
and the cause is likely to occupy another day before it is
brought ti a conclusion.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—LINCASTER, AUG. 10.
COURT.
(B:fore Mr. Baron Martin and a Special Jury.)

ECCLES V. THE MAYOR AND CORPORATION OP BLACK-

BURN.

This was an RANI of trespass, for entering upon and
buildinz walls on tie plaintiffs' land, and for divertinz the
river Blaekwater. The defendants justified under a local
Act of Parliament. _

Mr. Edward James, Q.C., and Mr. Crompton Hutton ap-
peared for the plaintiffs; and Mr. Atherton, Q.C., Mr.
6egar, Q.C., and Mr. Russell for ihe defendants.
The plaintiffs, it appeared, are cotton spinners at Black-
burn, end owners of a plot of land abutting on the river
Blackwater. This land is very valuable for manufacturing
purpcses, from its contiguity to the liver. The defendants,
acting, as hey supposed, under the authority of the Blackburn
Improvement Act, 1854, enchried a part of this land, com-
pensating the plaintiffs by adding to their wirer hard, di-
verted the river from its ancient bed, so that it no lor.ger
passed over the pittiniffs' laud, and ran a sewer under the
land. The Vaintiffs contended tkat the land in question
was wi.hout the scope aid operation of the Local Improve-
ment Act. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs having
opened his case,
Mr. Atherton admitted that he could not resist many of
the facts opened for the plaintiff?, end suggested that an ar-
rangement night be come to on terms. After a conf_r.?nce
between the learned counsel,
A verdict was take r fur the plaintiffs, subject to a refer-
ence as to terms.
An action of trespass to try the tight to a piece of land,
wide% was nn exceedingly nninteresting character, re-
solving itself into a question of b :undary, finished the civil
business of the assize.
On the criminal •idc the Lord Chief Baron tried an indict-
ment fir ;ape upon an oil wunan, and an a,slult on a s!le-
riff's officer, which was, in fact, a public-house row, and that
fini,hed the criminal business.

LIVERPOOL, AUG. 12.
TLe leaned judges of tsis assiza arrived here yesterday,
and opened the commi,sion.
This morning their lordships took their sea's at 12 o'clock,
Lord Chief Baron Pollock sitting in the Crown Court, and
charging the grand jury.
The calendar contains a list of 87 prisoners. Of these 6
are charged with murder, 7 with marsslaugLter, 8 with rub-
bery, 19 with burghty, 5 with rape, 10 with cutting and
stabbing, 2 with forgery, and the rest with minor offences.
The cause-list contains an entry in the fiat list of 21
causes, and in the second of 95, or a total of 116 causes ; of
these, 11 in the first list, and 31 in the second, are marked
for special juries.
Mr. Baron Martin commenced trying civil causes at 12
o'clock, and having disposed of an undefended action fir
money lent, no other causes wereiready to be proceeded with,
and after an ineffectual attempt to call on various causes in
their order, his lordship, expressing a threat to strike out the
cases not ready, proceeded to try criminals.
None of the criminal cases disposed of were of any beyond
local interest. They were chiefly street robberies in Man-
chester.

OXFORD CIRCUIT—GLOUCHSTER, AUG. 12.
CIVIL COURT.
(Befure Mr. Justice Byles and a Special Jury.)
RABOT v. nrOWN AND OTIIERS.

Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., Mr. Dowdeswell, and Mr. G!iffiths
appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. Sergeant Pigott and Mr
Gray for the defendants.
Tile plaintiff in this action, Andre Rabot, was a French-
man, and master and part owner of a French brig named the
Emma, and the defendants were corn merchants at Cardiff,
carrying on business under the style of Spiller and Brown.
The plaintiff sue,' the defendants for maliciously and without
reasonable cause having him arrested, on December 26, 1857,
up n an allegation that they had a claim upon him for the
sum of £515 5a for damage done by his negligence to a
carp) of wheat which he had brought from Marseilles to
Cardiff, aad that he was about to leave Cardiff with his ship
in ballast for a foreign pert. It appeared that on the 18th
of Sep•ember, 1857, the defendants, by their agent at Mar-
seilles, had diartered the plaintiff's brig to bring a cargo of
1,262 qr. of wheat from Marseilles to Cardiff. When the
vessel at rived at Cardiff it was found that the cargo had sus-
tained considerable injury, and the question then arose whe-
ther this was owing, as the plaintiff alleged, to the storms
and perils of the sea, or, as the defendants contended, to the
negligent conduct of the plaintiff, who was the master of
the ship. The ship arrived at Cardiff on the 21st of Nov.,
1857, and the plaintiff then went, with three seamen, to the
French Vice-Consul there, and made a protest, and re-
quested the defendants to appoint a surveyor. They declined
to du FO, but the next day, in the absence of the plaintiff,
they sent a surveyor and opened one of the hatches. The
cargo was delivered, and a claim was made upon the plain-
tiff for damage done to it by his alleged negligence, but the
plaintiff resisted this claim, and when an offir was made to
refer the dispute to a judge of the County Court the plain-
tiff declined this proposal, and said he should sue the de-
fendants' agent in the French Court fur the freight. Tice
defendants then made an affidavit that'shey had a claim on
the plaintiff in respect to the damage done to the corn, and
that he was about to quit England, and upon that affidavit
a capiaB issued, and he was arrested on the 26th of Dec.,
1857, and kept. in custody till the 20th of February,
1858, when he put in bail. The defeadants then pro-
ceeded with their action against the plaintiff, to re-
cover damages for the alleged negligence, and the same
came on for trial in this city at the last assizes. The defence
set up by the present plaintiff was, that there was no neg-
ligence on his part, but that the damage arose from the
perils of the sea, and in the result the present defend-
ants failed to establish their claim. The plaintiff then brought
this action to recover damages for the malicious arrest and
for the balance due fur freight; but as the defendants had
paid the amount due for freight into court, the only question
now was, whether or not the defendants had arrested the
plaintiff without reasonable cause and maliciously. This
depended very much on the same facts as were in issue at
the first trial, end as they were gone into at great length the
trial occupied the court nearly the whole of yesterday and
this day. A great many witnesses were examined on both
sides, and the defendant, in order to alma that he had acted
bottafide, gave evidence that he had consulted Mr. Hughes,
the barrister of the. South %Vales Circuit, as to whether the
plaintiff should be arrested; but when that gentleman was
examined, it appeared that be had given his opinion on a
statement of facts which showed that there was clear negli-
gence on the pact of the master (the plaintiff), and had ad-
vised that the facts should be carefully looked into before
any arrest was made.
Mr. Iluddleston and Mr. Sergeant Pigott having twice
addressed the jury,
Mr. Jusice Byles summed up the evidence at great
length, and finally directed the jury, in subst ince, that if
they believed the damage was done to the cargo by the
negligence of the captain or Owners and no: by the perils
of the sea, or had the app arance of being so caused, and the
plaintiff was eithergoing ab oad, or the defendants had been
it.forund or believed that he was about to do so, there would
be reasonable and pnbable cease for arresting the plaintiff.
and they ought to find a verdict fur the defendants. But if
they believed that the facts necestary to constitute reason-
able and probable cause did not exist, and the defendants
did not feleve that they existed, but were actuated by some
malicious or indirect motive, such as the desire of personal
gain, in causing the plaintiff to be arrested, they ought to
find for the plaintiff, with substantial damages.
The jury then retired to consider their verdict, and on
their return into court found for the plaintiff—Damages,
£l5O.

CRIMINAL COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Hill.)
Mr. Jnitice Hill has been engaged all day in the trial of
cases the pal ticulars of which are unfit for public! tion.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.—Capt. R. Dawson, was sum-
moned upon the complaint of James frai'ibb.t,o, a licensed
steam pilot; for that he, on the :31st (laN of July 4,st, 1-eing
then the master of the William JoiHE?,
exempted from pilotage, and navigatii-!g witiiin the pilotage
district between London-bridge and Gravesend, did unlaw-
fully, after a qualified pilot had offered to take charge of
such ship and had made a signal for that purpose, employ,
and continue to employ, a certain man named Abraham
Read, then and there being an unqualified person, to pilot
her, contrary to the Act 17th and 18th Vic., cap. 104, sec.
35.3

Mr. Fletcher appeared for the complainant ; and Mr.
Winckworth on behalf of the General Steam Navigation
Company, to whom the William Jolliffe belongs.
The defendant pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Fletcher briefly opened his case, and stated that the
offence, if proved, would render defendant liable to a penalty
not exceeding £2 145., being double the amount of pilotage
chargable on the William Jolliffe between London and
Gravesend. He then called the complainant,
James Hambleton, who said—l am a licensed pilot, and
now produce my license. On Saturday, the 31st ult., I saw
the William Jolliffe coming down from London-bridge, I
being then off the Tower. She was then in charge of an
unlicensed pilot named Abraham Read, whom I saw waving
his hand to the man at the helm. I hoisted my flag, and
the captain came from the starboard side to the larboard. I
asked him whether he wanted my services, and be said
"No ;" and without stopping he went right away. I can't
say that he was master of the William Jolliffe, but he was on
the paddle-box. The William Jolliffe was making about
9ft. of water at the time, and the pilotage to Gravesend for
that draught is £1 7e.
Cross-examined—l do not know Capt. Dawson, and can't
say whether he has been up and down the river for 30 years.
I took him for the captain by his conduct. I will not under-
take to swear that he was not in charge of the ship. The
vessel was eased when I hoisted my flag, but not for me. I
can't say who gave the order to ease her. The defendant, in
answer to my question, did not state that he was himself a
pilot; or, if he did, I did not hear him. I can't say whether
Read continued in charge after I made the signal, but he
still stood on the paddle-box.
Mr. Winckworth—Have you not said in writing that the
captain came to the port side and took charge of the ship ?
Complainant—l have said so.
Mr. Winckworth—ls that your writing ?
Complainant—lt is.
Mr. Winckworth then read a letter addressed to the
superintendent of the Steam Navigation Company, on the
2d instant, in which the complainant asked that a portion
of the work now done for the company might be given to
him ; and in which he made reference especially to the
refusal of the captain of the William Jolliffe to employ him
on the 31st ult., and asserted that the captain, upon his
application, himself took charge of the ship.
Cross-examination resumed—l believe it is the practice
I f the General Steam Navigation Company to have licensed
watermen to assist their captains in navigating their vessels
as far as the Pool; but I am not aware that Mr. Read is a
licensed waterman. I saw the name of Captain Dawson en
the books at the Trinity House as the holder of a Board of
Trade certificate.

Lord Mayer—That certificate should be produced.
Mr. Winckworth—lt shall be. I have it in court. Don't
you know, Mr. Ilambleton, that steam-boats carrying pas-
sengers are navigated by captains holding a Board of Trade
certificate ?

Complainant—l do:; but then the captain must pilot the
ship himself.

Mr. Goodman (chief clerk)—ln the busy parts of the
river is it not usual to have one person on each paddle-box
of a steam-boat to guard against accidents ?
Complainant—Yes, it is.
Mr. Goodman—But you don't contend that both these
persons should be licensed pilots ?
Complainant—l don't know how that may be. I have
seea it done.
Mr. Winekworth—But suppose the chief mate had been
on the paddle- box instead of Read, and had waved his band
to the man at the helm, would you consider that being in
charge of the vessel, the captain being on the other paddle-
box or on the bridge at the time?
Complainant—No; but there is a difference between the
chief mate and another man.
Wm. Co;, a waterman, who was with the complainant
when the latter made his signal, was examined, butcould give
no positive evidence as to the fact of Read being in charge cf
the vessel either before or after the signal was made ; but his
evidence led to the conclusion that the latter was certainly
not the case, and he admitted that all he saw was that Read
waved his head once as if to the man at the helm. There
was no ot her evidence.
Mr. Winkwoz th contended thdt there was no proof, and
that the case wasone of the most trumpery that had ever come
In-fore a Court. He believed it had originated entirely from
ill-will, as the complainant, two days after the affair of the
William Joiliffe, wrote to the company fer a part of their work,
and because he did not get it took out the summons. To
that summons he (Mr. Winekwortli) had two objections—
first, that the Wiliam Jolliffe was ao exempted ship; and,
secondly, that the defendant did not continue to employ an
unlicensed pilot, after a duly qualified pilot had offered to
take charge of the vessel. As to his first objection the
vessel was exempted before the Mercantile Shipping Act
came into operation, aad the very clause under which the
summons had been taken out continued all existing exemp-
tions. The learned gentleman here read the clause, show-
ing the continuance of existieg exemptions; amt titen the
sec., c. 69, Geo.l V., which exempted from the obligation
to carry pilots all coesting vessels, Sze., having captains or
mates duly licensed; and he also produced a certificate
granted to defendant by the Maid of Trade in 1855, and
renewed annually since, licensing him to pilot any vessel
belonging to the General Steam Navigation Company with
a draught of water not exceeding 1] feet between London
and Great Yarmouth. Finally, the learned gentleman met
an objection urged on the opposite side by quoting a bye-
law made by the Trinity IlouQe, and published by Order In
Council in the London Gazette of the 17th July, 1857, ex-
tending to ships carrying passengers the exemptions pre-
viously enjoyed by ships not carrying passengers under the
37th section of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1854.
Mr. Fletcher took a technical objection to the Board of
Trade certificate ; but the Ojection was overruled, and
Tee Lord Mayor expressed his opinion that every possible
precaution had been taken in navigating the vessel, as ac-
cording to the complainant's own showing there had been
a man to look-cut upon each paddle-box, and Viet every
requirement of the law had been duly complied with. The
complainant appeared to have been looking more to his own
benefit than to the public good when he applied for the
summons; but be that as it might, the summons must be
dismissed.

Mr. Winckworth said it was extraordinary that such a
summons should be taken out against Capt. Dawson, who
had navigated up and down the Thames for 30 years. He
should not, however, ask for costs, being satisfied with the
result of the case; but if ever such a case were brought
forward again it was the intention of the Steam Navigation
Company to press for costs.

WORSHIP-STREET.—PROMPT RECOVERY OF
STOLEN PROPERTY.—CharIes Davis, a young man of
very smart appearance, and rather good-looking, and
Margaret Rogers, keeper of a common lodging-house in
Thrawl-street, Spite!fields, were finally examined before
Mr. Hammill, upon a charge of feloniously possessing stolen
property.
About four in the afternoon of the 4th inst., Dubb and
Savage, detective constables of the K division, were enter-
ing Thrawl-street, when the prisoner Rogers, who was
standing at her door, instantly darted inside at the sight of
them, and being as quickly followed, was found in the back
bedroom with the prisoner Davis, and upon the bed were a
broken-open writing desk, the contents of whirls (upwards of
100 letters and other property) were strewn about, and a lady's
work-box wrapped in a table cloth, and under the bed a pair
of candlestick'. Rogers pointed out Davis as having brought
the things there, and on the officers inquiring if be was the
man who had arrived shortly before in a cab, Davis said
the fact was that he had no knowledge of the stealing of the
things, but while walking in the street he saw a young man
named Jones, who had lint lately come home after 6 months'
imprisonment, and that person invi.ed him into a cab, in
which they were driven to Thrawl-street. -
The finding of the wilting-desk and work-box as above
stated was reported last week in the Morning Post, and
Ann Edwards, servant of a lady named Evans, residing at
Kensington-park-gardens West, near Notting-hill, now
attended, and identified all the property, which she saw safe
at nine in Cue morning of the 4th inst., and missed at three
in the afternoon, little more than an hour before the officers
found the articles in SpitaifiAds.
The prisoner Rogers protested that she had no knowledge
that the things had seen stolen, and Davis, in reply to the
usual question, said be had nothing to offer now in defence,
and wished the case to be sent to teal.
Donoway, a police constable, proved that in October last
Davis was convicted at the Westminster sessions, and sen-
tenced to four months' imprisonment.
The prisoners were committed fur trial.
ROBBERY BY FEMALES.—Charlotte Griffin, Eliza-
beth Buckley, and Fanny Hart were charged with robbing
Mr. William Hardman, of Dame—street, Islington, who
stated that about one in the morning be was passing a
fruiterer's in Shepherdess-walk, near the Eagle Tavern, when
the prisoners insisted upon hie treating them, and Griffin
laid hold of his arm. He pushed her away, upon which she
struck him a blow in the mouth. The others then got hold
of him,
worth
ooiandranti
e)hpa.
od folrt
guineas,
irmu wnlo
the
haimi
es
,an ngwcomingadsguardodower
cuhchain,
upne
already,
wgs a
ohi
ndih," Your watch
discoveredaays
hnthat
been
his
Nawv adroitlye
loose from his neck.
The prisoners were remanded.

MARY LE BONE. SHOPLIFTING BY FEMALES.—
Mary Everett and -Eliza Wright, the former describing
herself as a paper colourer, and the latter as a book-folder,
both of them very respectably attired, were placed at the
bar charged with having stolen two shawls, value 155., the
property of Mr. Gill, a pawnbroker, carrying on business
in the Hampstead-road.
John Crick, an assistant, deposed that on the previous
eveuinz, between 5 and 6 o'clock, the prisoners entered the
shop, and asked to look at some shawls. Witness placed a
dozen of different patterns and qualities on the counter, and
after turning them many times they said that none of them
suited. lie (the witness) was about to move the shawls away,
when he observed Wright conceal one of them beneath
her dress. He told the prisoners he was quite sure
that they had not come to purchase, but to steal, and
on his laying hold of Wright, and turning her round, a
shawl dropped from her person on to the floor; she also
dropped a second oue when threatened with being given in
charge.
Mr. Long—What evidence have you against the woman
Everett?
Witness—A man who was in. the shop heard her say to
Wright—" Kick it:(alluding to the shawl first-dropped)
under the chair."

Mr. Long—ls that pason present?
Witness—He is not, sir.
Grounds, 94 S, stated that when he took the prisoners
into custody, neither of them had anything to say. He (the
officer) produced the two shawls, which were identified by
the first witness as belonging to his employer, Mr. Gill.
The prisoners were remanded till Tuesday next.
DARING ROBBERY.—John Nowell and Mary Whiting
were charged with having been concerned in the following
daring robbery :
It appeared from the evidence that on Tuesday afternoon
a man named Daniel Gould, residing at Kensington, went
into a public-liouse in 1:n.1-street, Lisson-grove, and that
while there the male prisoner rushed in and took his handker-
chief, containing 225. iu silver, from his pocket.
The pri-
soners, who hastily quitted the house, were subsequently
taken into custody by police-constable 95 1).
The woman, whose complicity in the robbery was not
satisfactorily shown, was discharged, and Howell. who
pleaded guilty, was sent to hard labour in the House of Cor-
rection for two months.
- -

-----
ASSAULT ON A CONSTABLE.—Nathaniel Young, a
baker,
was charged with a most violent assault on Davis,
91 D.

The evidence went to show that on the same morning at
an early hour, Davis, 91 D, saw the prisoner loitering about
in a suspicious manner in Dorset-me%,s, Dorset square,
and also observed him try ses oral doors as if with the inten-.

tion of making an entry. The officer, who was not satisfied
with the account which he gave of himself, took Lim into
custody, when the prisoner exclaimed, "I'll serve you out
you --," and threw him down with great force.
Mr. L:)11g couvicted him in th pezinEy of 205., or 14
daya' itnprisumeEt.

CLERKENSVELL.—DARING IiOBBERY OP 6ILVER
PLATE.—Three fashionably-attired young men, well-known
thieves, who gave the names of Henry Phillips, Henry
Evans, and James Dunbar, were placed at the bar, before
Mr. Tyrwhitt, charged with stealing one silver soup ladle,
one palr of sugar tongs, and two silver knives and forks,
from the dwelling-house of Mr. H. W.:Elder, residing at
Hornsey.

The Prisoners were seen by Mrs. Eliza Cattram loitering
about near the prosecutor's house, and on her return from
the post-office she saw Phillips come out of the garden with
something in his possession. An alarm was given, and the
prisoners followed and found lying in a field. They were
questioned, and gave a very unsatisfactory account of them-
selves ; upon which they were locked up, and while at the
station the soup ladle fell from one of their trousers. That
morning Sergeant Monaghan, 38 N, searched she field
where the prisoners had been lying, and found near the
spot the silver knives and forks produced.
The prisoners said they went to Horusey, as they bad got
a half-holiday, and added that Phillips found the property.
Mr. Tyrwhitt sentenced the prisoners to three months'
hard labour in the House of Correction.

SOUTHWARK.—THE BERMONDSEY NUISANCES.—
In the course of the afternoon Dr. Challice, the medical
officer of health of the Bermondsey district, attended with
Mr. Drew, the vestry clerk, to prefer a complaint against
Mrs. Sarah Cripps, a glue and scotch manufacturer, of
Seven-mead, Bermondsey New road, for carrying on an
offensive trade—that is, the manufacture of scutch—which is
injurious to the health of the inhabitants of the neighbour-
hood.

Dr. Challice, on being sworn, said that during the last
two months he had received complaints from the inhabitants
of the Bermondsey New-road respecting the offensive
smells which daily emanated from the defendant's premises.
He accordingly visited them, and perceived that it was
caused by the use of sulphureous acid in the manufacture of
scutch, a filthy decomposed animal matter. The defendant
had made a communication with the sewer for getting rid of
the refuse filth, which spread all over the neighbourhood,
and eventually made its way into the Thames. The process
was new, and a short time ago brought into use by Mr.
Benjamin Young, who had extensive premises in Ber-
mondsey; but, owing to the offensive smells, he was com-
pelled to remove the business to Erith-marshes.
The defendant's son, who managed the business, said that
there was no offensive smell whatever, and they had for ten
years carried on the process of making scutch with sul-
paureous acid, and no complaint bad been made before.
Dr. Challice intimated to his worship that the new process
had not been brought into use ten years. He was positive
that the smells emitted from it were not only offensive, but
injurious to health. In fact, it ought to be remedied
at once, or in such hot weather as they had now it might
cause considerable disease among the innhaitants.
Mr. Combe asked who preferred the charge?
Mr. Drew replied that the vestry had done so for the
protection of the inhabitants.
Mr. Combe thought that if such was the case it had
better go the sessions. It was a matter too serious for him
to deal with.

Dr. Challice said that it was his opinion that unless the
process was done away with immediately disease would
spread about fearfully.
Mr. Cripps denied that it was injurious to health, having
been carried on for so many years without complaint.
Mr. Combo., after some discussion, adjourned the sum-
mons until Monday, to give the defendant an opportunity
of calling in a practical chemist, who could consult with
Dr. Challice on the matter in question. However, the
defendant must not continue the practice, Apr she will
render herself liable to heavy penalties each, day.

LAMBETII.—DESPERATE ASSAULT ON A POLICE-
CONSTABLE.--A costermonger named David Hall was
charged before the Hoe. Mr. Norton with violently assault-
ing Police-constable M'Carthey, P 145, under the following
circumstances on the 10th of July last :
Toe complainant stated that on the evening of the day
is question several persons were assembled at the Newington
Arms, King-street, East-street, Walworth, when the pri-
soner, with two men named Williams and Charles Andrews,
and another of the name of Otty, endeavoured to make
their way up stairs into the room. As they were causing a
disturbance they were refused admission and ejected. While
they were in the street a crowd collected and a disturbance
arose. Witness endeavoured to preserve ordee, in attempt-
ing to do which he was obstructed by the prisoner, who
exclaimed to some persons in the crowd, "Keep back and
I will chuckle the —." He then gave witness a blow
upon his mouth, and another under the right ear. At the
same time he was tripped up by some one, and fell. While
he was on the ground he was kicked several times in his
side by the prisoner.
In answer to the magistrate, the witness said that for
several days after the assault upon him he felt the effects of
the blows, and was laid up in bed. The man Otty, who was
in his custody, succeeded in escaping iu consequence of the
attack upon him by the prisoner.
Mr. M. Fox, landlord of the Newington Arms, gave evi-
dence in corroboration of that given by the constable.
The prisoner observed that he was sorry for what had
happened, and he would take care that nothing of the sort
should occur again.
Mr. Norton asked what was known of the prisoner ?
Police-constable P 64 stated that since this occurrence the
prisoner had carried about hies a knife, with which he has
threatened to rip up any one who should lay to take him into
custody. The police had been cautioned against him.
The complainant stated that he was informed the prisoner
was in the habit of carrying a pickaxe about with him.
' Mr. Norton remarked that it was a very cowardly act en
the part of the prisoner, and that he should send him ft r
trial.

The depositions were taken, and the prisoner was corn-
milted for trial.

GROSS CRUELTY TO A HORSE.—Thos. Day, dairy-
man, INo. 26, Piit-street, St. George's-road, Southwark,
was cha.ged with cruelly ill-treating a horse by violently
beating it with a whip-handle in the Westminster-road that
morning.

George Smith, a constable of the Royal Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, stated that about seven
o'clock he and Wtn. Guest, another of the society's officers,
were at the foot of Westminster-bridge, when they saw the
defendant, who was with another man in a cart, and which
was drawn by one horse. The prisoner was beating the
animal very violently with the butt end of a heavy whip
upon its back and ribs. The poor creature went on with
great difficulty, when on reaching Astley's Theatre sewral
of the foot-passengers cried out " Shame 1" The prisoner
paid no attention to the remark, and again struck the horse
violently. He stood up in the cart for the purpose of
giving the blows more effect. At York-place a man got
out. Witness and his brother officer went up to the prisoner
and told him that they should take him into custody.
Mr. Norton—How many times did he strike the horse
Smith—From 10 to 15 times. (Witness produced the
whip.)
Mr. Nort.,n—What sort of' condition was the horse in ?
Smith—ln a very bad condition, and totally unfit for
use. There was scarcely any flesh on its ribs, and it was
extremely emaciated. On the way to the station-house the
prisoner wanted to bribe me, and make it up.
The prisoner said that he only struck the horse twice.
Smith said that when be said 10 or 15 times he spoke
within the mark.

Guest corroborated the evidence.
The prisoner, in answer to the charge, said that lie gave
£lO for the horse four years ago, and that it was about
eight years old; a veterinary surgeon said it was fit to
drive.

Mr. Norton went to look at the animal, which was in the
police-statio❑ yard adjoining the court. On his return, he
observed that the animal was nearer 10 than 8 years of age,
and was to.ally unlit to be used. It was more likely worth
10d. than £lO, and could hardly put a leg to the ground.
If he (the prisoner) consented to have it sent to the
knacker's to be killed, he should not send him to prison.
The animal was sold to the knacker for 205., and killed.

TEIAMES.—THB SOLDIER'S WIDOW.—AN UNHAPPY
MARRIAGE.—A woman of respectable appearance and ad-
dress, a native of Ireland, who was in a state of great afflic-
tion, came b'fore Mr. Selfe and requested his interference
under the following circumstances.
The applicant stated that she was the widow of a soldier
named Patrick Readdy, of the Ist Madras Fusiliers, who
served his country in India under Havelock and Neill, and
was killed between Allahabad and Cawnpore. One of her
children died in Cawnpore; the other, a girl 5 years old,
she left in Newtown, Madras, under the care of Mr. Fewkes,
a missionary, and returned to England. She applied for
relief to the Committee of the Indian Mutiny, and was al-
lowed ss. per week, and an additional 2s. 6d. per week from
the Clive Fund. On the Ist of July in the present year she
had the misfortune to meet with a soldier named Samuel
Spurling, recruiting-sergeant for the Tower Hamlets
Militia, who represented that he had formerly belonged to
the same regiment as her departed husband, and had seen
him in Madras. A few days afterwards Spurling proposed
marriage to her, and said he had a pension of Is. a-day, that
he was receiving pay from the Tower Hamlets Militia, and
was paid 10s. per week for drilling boys at a school. Sue
refused to change her condition, but he continued his ad-
dresses, and asked her to buy the " marriage lines." She
declared that she would never marry a man who could not
buy the "marriage lines" fur himself. However, she re-
ceived such an excellent character of Spurling from many
soldiers' wives and others that she ultimately agreed to
marry him and pay all the expenses. Her intended took
lodgings for her in the house of Mrs. Shannon, in Back
Church-lane, Whitechapel, where she remained for a few
days, and application was made to Major Woodcock of the
Indian Mutiny Relief Fund Committee for a sum of money
to "start" her and her new husband in a new home, and
they were married on Monday last in a registrar-office in
Whitechapel. She paid all the expenses of the wedding,
and took her " marriage lines" (certificate) to Major VVood-
cock, who gave her an order upon Alderman Innis, the
treasurer of the Mutiny Relief Fund, for the payment of
£lO. She received a cheque for £lO from Alderman
Finuis, which was duly honoured at the Bank of England. She gave the money to her husband, who, ou the wedding-
day, in spite of her remonstrances, paid more attention than
he ought to have done to two soldiers wives, and spent a
good deal of money with them. On Tuesday morning her
husband said he had some business to attend to and must
leave her for a few hours. She gave him very good a::vice,
when he broke out into a violent passion and struck her. Ile
then left home and called for a cab, into which he entered
with two girls of the town, and she had never seen or heard
of him since.
Mr. Selfe—The £lO was given as a substitute for the
pension.
The applicant—lt was, sir.
Mr. Selfe—And your new husband only stopped with you
one night ?
The applicant—Yes, sir, and he left me penniless. This
is the secoLd day I have been witln.ut food.
Mr. Self—He must be a most heartless fellow. You say
he has a p&nsion ?
The applicant—Yes, sir, a pension of ls. per day, and
Major Woodcock says he must apply for it on the Ist of next
month, orloseit.

Mr. Selfe—You can compel him to maintain you, and the
parish will no doubt attach his pension.
Mr. Wit!le, the second usher of the court, said he knew
Spurling well; he had very frequently brought recruits to
that court to be attested. He believed Spuriing was upon
the spree Titer Lis ruatriage.
Mr. Selfe—He must maintain his new wife. Give her a
half-crown from the poor-box fund, and direct her to the
parish officers, who will, Lo doubt, louk after her gracele:•s
husband, and stop his pension.
STEALING WINE IN THE LONDON DOCK.—lrchard
an oil cooper, aged 35, in the employ of the London
Dock Company, was brought before Mr. Selfe, charged
with stealing nine quarts of port wine.
John Sayre, a constable in the service of the London Dock
Company, stated that at one o'clock on Wednesday after-
noon his attention was called to tha oil-wharf in the dock,
and lie was informed that a puncheon of wine had been
pluuthred, and that many persons had drank, of it. lie

instituted an inquiry, and discovered an " octave"-i-a small
ct ak containing the eighth part of a pipe—in a very secluded
place, called No. 2 arch, on the oil-wharf, where no wine
ought to The prisoner was lying, near the octave in a
vault, dnd drunk, and', ha conveyed him the station-
house. The octave vvat regaugad, and a deficiency of nine
(parts vt•l., awerta,Nce. There was a hung in the bung.!.-
hole instl:,.ad of a " shile.," which was lying near ibe ca.,k.
The witness produced the Wye, and added that two more
octaves of wine were lying near the one that had been plun-
dered. They ougbt not to have been brought to the place
where they were discovered.
Mr. Selfe—How do you know the prisoner was drunk on
port wine ?

Sayre--When he reached the station-house he vomited,
and brought a good deal of wine off his stomach. It was
port wine.
The prisoner admitted that he broached the octave of
wine and drank some of it, but he did net drink nine quarts.
Mr. Selfe—l don't suppose you did—not at one time.
The prisoner—Others followed my example, but I could
not help that. _ _ _

Mr. S elfe said the prisoner's conduct was highly disgrace-
ful, and sentenced him to pay a fine of 40s. for unlawfully
drinkirg wise in the dock. The flee was paid.
CONVICTION OF TWO DANGEROUS THIEVES.-
Thomas Wicks, alias Convict Tom, aged 24, and James
Johnson, alias Stewart, two well-known thieves, who, it
is firmly believed, are ticket-of-leave men, although the
police could not give legal proof of the fact, were brought
up on remand before Mr. Selfe, charged with being in
King-street, Stepney, for the purpose of committing felony,
and also with committing two robberies, one at the resi-
dence of Mr. Benjamin Simpson, No. 2, Bromley-street,
Commercial-road East, the other at No. 9, White Horse-
street, Stepney.
It appeared that the attention of the police had been
called to the suspicious movements of the prisoners for
some time, and their footsteps had been dogged from day to
day, and houri to hour, but the constables employed had no-
thing tangible on which to act until Sunday afternoon last,
when they were found loitering about King-street, Stepney,
and peeping through the key-boles of the doors of houses, the
occupiers of which were from home. Mills, a detective,
306 K, asked them what business they bad in the street, and
why they were peeping through key-holes. Weeks said it
was very hard he could not turn the corner of a street with-
out being molested. They were taken to the station-house,
and gave fictitious names; but tbeir real address was No.
25, Lomas-buildings, Bull-lane, Stepney. On searching a
drawer in a room in the lower part of the house, Mills
found four pawnbrokers' duplicates, all relating to property
that had been stolen. On proceeding to a room upstairs
Mills perceived that the lath and plaster had been partially
removed. There was a large hole in the ceiling, Mills
thrust his hand through it, and discovered a secret
cupboard, in which were deposited a jemmy, two
files, a bunch of skeleton keys, and a latch key. The
latch key was identified by Mrs. Elizabeth Simpson, of No.
2, Bromley-street, who now attended, and said that on
Friday morning last, soon after she had taken in the milk
for breakfast, she heard a noise in the passage, and upon.
going to ascertain the cause of it, she saw a man hastily
leave the house. She missed from a table in the parlour
the latch key now produced. Her parlour contained a
quantity of dirty linen prepared for the wash.
Mills produced a coat, the duplicate relating to which
was found in a tin box in the lower part of the prisoner's
house. Mills said that the street door of the house in
Bromley-street was forced and broken. Thera were marks
such as would be produced by a jemmy like that found in
the prisoner's house. _ _

Mrs. Simpson hi entified a coat produced by a pawnbroker,
and pawned by a female, as the Property of her husband.
Ann White, the wife of James White, of No. 9, White
Horse-street, Stepney, identified anothereoat produced by a
pawnbroker, and pawned by Wicks. She saw Johnson put-
ting on the coat in the passage of her house on Friday last,
and he started with it on his back and made his escape.
The prisoner's, after some hesitation, pleaded guilty, and
said they had been drawn into bad company, and depraved
women, with whom they cohabited, instigated them to com-
mit robberies.

Mr. Selfe said the prisoners appeared to have been camp-
ing on an organised system of robbery, and sentenced Therm
to six months' imprisonment and hard labour.

[ADVERTISEMENT.]—A few more of the extraordinary
Carts without Medicine of Indigestion (Dyspepsia), Flatu-
lency, Constipation, Nervous, Bilious and Liver complaints,
Cough, Asthma, Consumption and Debility effected by Du
Barry's delicious Health Restoring Revalenta Arabica Food
are here elven :—Cure 52,422—" Bridgehouse, Frimley, 3d
April, 1854,—Thirty-three years' diseased lunge, spitting of
blood, liver de•aagement, deafness, singing in the ears, con-
stipation, debility, shortness of breath and cough, have been
removed by your Revalenta Arabica. My lungs, liver,
stomach, head and ears, are all right, my hearing perfera,
and my recovery is a marvel to all my acquaintances.._
James Roberts, wood merchant." From the Venerable
Archdeacon of Ross.—No. 32,83G—"Three years' excessive
nervousness, with pains in my neck and left arm, and gene-
ral debility, which rendered my life very miserable,
has been radically removed by Du Barry's health restor-
ing food.—Alex, Stuart, Archdeacon of Ross, Skibereen."
Supported by testimonials from the celebrated professors of
chemistry Dr. Andrew Pre, Dr. Shorland, Dr. Harvey,
Dr. Campbell, Dr, Gattiker, Dr. Wurtzer, Dr. Ingrain,
Lord Stuart de I)ecies, Major-General Thomas King anti
many other respectable persons, whose health has been re-
stored by it, after all other means of cure had failed. Suit-
ably packed with full instructions. In cannisters, 11'0.,
2e. 6d. ; 21b., 4s. 6d. ; 5113., lls. ; 121 b., 225. The 121 b.
cannisters are sent carriage free, on receipt of Post-office
order. Barry du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, Lon..
don, and through all chemists and grocers in town and
country.—lmportant Caution against the fearful dangers
sf spurious imitations:—The Vice-Chancellor Sir William
Page wood granted an injunction on the 10th March, 1854,
against Alfred Hooper Nevill, for imitating "Du Barry's
Revalenta Arabica Food."