The Sun.
London, England, 1867-07-05 00:00:00

THE BOARD OF ADMIRALTY:

Mr. Corry presents his compliments to the Editor
of The Sun, and begs that he will insert the enclosed,
as he is anxious that his reply to Mr. Seeley's ques-
tion respecting the Board of Admiralty should be
correctly reported.
Friday July 5.

"My eiperienco at the Admiralty as First Lord has
been very short, but I have as yet had no occasion to be
sensible of any inconvenience resulting from the present
constitution of the Board. The subject of tho honourable
member's question is one which, if dealt with at all, ought
to be approached with great caution, and not without grave
and mature consideration, and .1 have not at present any
intention of consulting my colleagues respecting it."

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

BOW-STREET.

EXTESSIVE FORGERIES OF POST-OFFICE ORDERS.—
Samuel Dunstan, a young man who had been in the ser-
vice of Mr. Hoadley, grocer and Post-office receiving
house keeper, Brighton, was placed at the bar charged
with forging and uttering a number of post-office orders
for £lO.

The prisoner absconded from his employment on the
26th of Juno last, but nothing was missed until he re-
ceived a telegram from London, asking him to examine his
blank-form books, when ho discovered that eleven forms
had been torn out of the middle, and the orders referred to
in the evidence corresponded with those so abstracted.
The prisoner had filled up the forms for £lO each,
and obtained payment of some of them from various money
order offices in Brighton before ho left the town. The
other orders ho made payable in Yorkshire, and it was
in trying to obtain the money from. the York
postmaster that the fraud was discovered. Information
was at once sent to the General Post-office in London, and
Smee, the officer, apprehended the prisoner on his arrival
in London by the Great Northern Railway. The prisoner
then told the officer that ho had received the money for
the various orders, and that it was his intention to pro-
ceed to Harwich and embark from there for New York.
Alfred John Moore said ho was an assistant to Mr.
Aldridge, who kept a post-office et Brighton. Money
orders were issued and paid there. The letter of advice
produced arrived at their office on the 26th of June. It
purported to have been issued at the York-place post-office
at Brighton, and it authorised the payment of money order
503, for £lO, to A. Brown, from S. Smith. The money order
produced was the one referred to in the advice, and it
was presented to him for payment on the morning of the
27th of June, by the prisoner at the bar, who signed the
receipt " Albert Brown," in his witness's presence. The
£lO was paid in gold.
William Gell, an assistant to Mr. Phillips, post-office
receiver, Kemp Town, Brighton, said the letter of advice
produced arrived at three, on the 26th or 27th of
June. It authorised the payment of money order, 501,
for £lO. It represented to have been issued by the York-
place officer, and it was paid to the prisoner to the best of
his belief. He signed the receipt "Alfred Brown."
George Cosstick, post-office receiver, Western-road,
Brighton, gave similar evidence with respect to the pay-
ment of a post-office order, numbered 505, to A. Brown
for £lO. He paid the prisoner the amount in gold.
William Barrett kept a post office receiving house at
Waterloo-street, Brighton. He paid the prisoner the
amount of a money order, No. 506, for £lO.
The prisoner, after being cautioned, said he had no other
answer to make to the charge, except that he was guilty.
The witnesses were bound over, and he was fully com-
mitted for trial.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.
A STREET OUTRAGE—STRANGE CONDUCT OP A CON-
STABLE.—Win Walls, a painter, of No. 45, Stanley-street,
Chelsea, was charged before Mr. Tyrwhitt with assaulting
two females, named Rebecca Chard and Lucy Kavanagh.
Rebecca Chard said—l reside at May's-buildings, Down-
street, Piccadilly, and yesterday I was walking along Pic-
cadilly, having been to look for my son, when the prisoner
struck me a violent blow on the nose without saying a
word to me. My nose bled, and I said to the prisoner,
" You have made my nose blood," and ho then struck me
in the mouth. I spoke to a constable, but ho would not
take the prisoner into custody, and the prisoner then
turned round and deliberately struck another female.
Mr. Tyrwhitt—Why did the constable not take the
charge ?

Complainant—He asked me if I would be sure to be at
the court in the morning, and I said I would, and he then
asked the other female if she would attend the court, and
on her stating that she might not b© able, as she had
to go to a rehearsal, ho would not take the prisoner.
Mr. Tyrwhitt—Were you quite sober?
Complainant—Certainly ; but I do not think the priso-
ner was quite sober.
Mr. Tyrwhitt—There must be an inquiry into the po-
lice constable's conduct in the matter. Was the prisoner
taken •by another constable for striking the other female?
Complainant—Yes. The prisoner struck me on the eye
without any provocation whatever.
Mr. Tyrwhitt—llow do you get your living ?
Complainant—l char at the Duke of Grafton's and other
noblemen's houses.

Mr. Tyrwhitt—ls the other female who was struck in
attendance ?

Complainant—She is not.

Police constable Middleton said—While passing along
Piccadilly with the witness, I was told by the sergeant to
go and see the cause of a number of persons collecting. I
saw the complainant crying, and bleeding from the nose,
and another female had also been struck. On the two fe-
males pointing out tho prisoner as having assaulted them,
ho took him into custody. The prisoner said that the
persons had been mobbing him.

Mr. Tyrwhitt—Was the other a poorish female ?
Constable—Yes. She promised to be hero this morning.
Prisoner—l was going along Piccadilly when I was
mobbed, my hat knocked in, and 1 put up my hands to de-
fend myself.

Complainant—There was no ono near him when ho first
struck me. The crowd collected when his brutal conduct
was observed.

Mr. Tyrwhitt—lt becomes the duty of a magistrate to be
extremely sharp in these cases of unwarrantable assaults.
There was no ground for the prisoner's act, except a low
brutal spirit, which some persons possessed. It was a great
pity the prisoner had not struck a man, who, in return,
would have marked him for some time. Such persons as
the prisoner would not attack a man, but would a female.
Ho should commit the prisoner for two months with hard
labour, and the number of the constable who refused to
take the prisoner must be ascertained, and his conduct in-
quired into.