The Sun.
London, England, 1866-08-17 00:00:00

BOW-STREET•

John Hetherton was placed before Sir T. Henry, the
chief magistrate, charged with obtaining £26, by false pre-
tences, from Mr. W. Stephenson, of Cannon-street.
Mr. L. Lewis, of Ely-place, prosecuted; and Mr. W. Wil
liams defended the prisoner.

The Prosecutor said he was a merchant, residing in
Cannon-street. On the 6th of August he saw an advertise-
ment in the paper relative to the sale of a horse, and as he
had just returned from Paris with the intention of pur-
chasing one, he went to the address given and met the
prisoner, and they both went to Groombridge-mews, Lin-•
coin's-inn-fields, and then he was shown a cob,
and the price was stated to be thirty guineas.
He told him the price was more than he had intended to
give, but that he would call next day with a friend, and on
the following day he went, accompanied by the gentleman,
and after an examination an offer was made of £26. The
prisoner bad previously told him ho had been a lace mer-
chant in Holborn, and that he had made a great deal of
money, and that he was about to realise the whole of his
property, and thus he wished to sell the horse, which had
formerly been ridden by his little girl, and was a perfect
pet with all his children. Upon the representation
that the horse was perfectly quiet, by the advice
of his friend he offered £26, which was taken
by the prisoner, and a warranty of soundness was given.
The cob, however, turned out anything but sound, and
was, in fact, a very vicious animal. The representations
of the prisoner about his being a gentleman were all false.
Mr. M. Williams, who appeared for the defendant, said
the remedy of the plaintiff must be by civil process—he
could not proceed criminally.
Sir T. Henry thought that the proper course for the
plaintiff to pursue was by county court summons. The
plaintiff had acted on the advice of his friend. You bought
the horse not on the prisoner's representation, but on the
judgment of your friend, an experienced judge of horses,
being an officer in the Life Guards.
Complaina.nt—No, it turned out that he did not know
anything about it.
Sir T. Henry—Mr. Lewis, you know that is not enough
to enable you to indict for false pretences. If it were,
there would be no occasion for actions for broach of war-
ranty. It has been clearly laid down that a breach of war-
ranty is not an indictable offence. Soundness is a matter
of opinion. You adjourned your decision until you con-
sulted your friend, you know.
Complainant—l hadn't the money with me on the Mon-
day. (Laughter.)
Sir T. Henry—You acted on your friend's judgment.
Complainant—l thought the defendant was a gentleman,
otherwise I should have consulted a veterinary surgeon.
I trusted to the defendant's representations.

Sir T. Henry—lf you had you would not have waited
until the next day to consult your friend. The law of
false pretences has been much extended of late, and very
properly, but I am sure Mr. Lewis, who probably knows
all the cases, cannot find one that goes as far as this.
Mr. Lewis reminded the chief magistrate of a ease which
had but recently been before him (Sir T. Henry), which
appeared to him (Mr, Lewis) to ho ou all fours with this
case.

Sir T. Henry—Oh, but I did not send that case for trial,
(Laughter.) You were on the other side in that case.
(Laughter.)

Mr. Lewis—Your opinion, Sir Thomas, was much
against me. (Laughter.)
Complainant—The prisoner gave me a false address.
_ _

Mr. M. Williams—That has nothing to do with the ease.
Sir T. Henry—it is not every falsehood that renders a
man liable to an indictment.

Complainaut—l parted With my money on the represen-
tations of the prisoner.
Sir T. Henry —You parted with your money on the re-
presentation of your friend. If you had applied to me for
a warrant before you gave the prisoner into custody, I
woad have told you all this, but you did not do so. You
gave the man into custody.without applying for a warrant.
Mr. 31. Williams—A very dangerous proceeding.
The prisoner was then discharged.