The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-07 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY • EVENING,. DECEMBER 7, 1859.

nails on the sole and a piece of the heel plate worn
away. In the left boot the iron tip is loose, and
the impressions show the mould thrown up, and
the boot has been soled near the heel, which is
shown in the impressions. I carefully covered
many of the footmarks up, and the same day
went with Mr. Barton and compared again, mak-
ing impressions in the same way. I produce a
gun I received from James Langford. It was
then out of its stock and without a ramrod.

T went next day to the stack where I was in-
formed the gun had been found. The stack is
about 70 yards from Crowe's house and about 50
yards from the Golden Ball. I found the ramrod
under the roof of the stack.
Cross-examined—Dickerson told me he would
give me his coat, but I took him into custody, and
then went to his house. The boots were not con-
cealed, and the trousers were on the table. When I
went to Dickerson's house I found a man named
Wells there. As far as my own knowledge goes these
may be Wells' boots. The stack where the gun was
found is about a mile from Dickerson's house.
(Numerous other witnesses were called to speak
to the comparison of the footprints, and some who
had seen Dickerson and Crowe together on the
evening in question, and one who had seen Dicker-
son with a gun on that evening.)
Charles Wells—l am a labourer. I believe these
to be the boots the policeman took out of Dickerson's
house. I was there at the time he took them. They
are Dickerson's boots.

By the Judge—They are not my boots. I never
wore them, neither that evening nor any other time.
Examination continued—l heard Dickerson's wife
ask him where his frock was. He said he had left it
at his master's. She said she would not go with
him with those old clothes on. His trousers were
very wet at the bottom.
Cross-examined—l was not before the magistrates.

His Lordship observed that the attorney for the
prosecution ought to have furnished a copy of this
evidence to the prisoner's attorney.
Mr. Sims Reeve stated that he was not instructed
by an attorney, and knew no more of the case than
he learnt from the depositions.
Mr. Cooper stated that the attorney who origi-
nally appeared for the prisoner had been informed
of the evidence which Wells would give.
His Lordship wished it to be understood that he
did not impute unfairness t• any one : he was only
suggesting the fair course to be pursued on all such
occasions.

Mr. Sims Reeve addressed the jury for the pri-
soner, and called two witnesses, who swore that
Dickerson was drinking in the Watton King's Arms
about 7 o'clock in the evening of the 11th Ogtober.
Mr. Cooper replied on the whole case.
His Lordship summed up, going carefully through
the whole of the evidence.
The jury, after five minutes deliberation, found
the prisoner guilty on the second count of shooting
at the prosecutor, with intent to do him grievous
bodily harm. •
His Lordship sentenced the prisoner to eight
years' penal servitude.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—WINCHESTER, Dec. 6.
(Before Mr. Baron Channell.)
Edmund Wardroper, late solicitor, of Pete Afield,
who pleaded guilty yesterday to two indictments
charging him with forging two promissory notes,
was this morning put to the bar, and sentenced to
ten years' penal servitude.
The prisoner, a most respectable man, 50 years
of age, was then removed from the bar, evidently
feeling his position most painfully.
John Parker, a soldier, who pleaded guilty yes-
terday to an indictment charging him with having
forged a post-office order, was sentenced to 18
months' imprisonment and hard labour.
Wm. Hellyer was indicted for cutting and wound-
ing Walter Knott with intent to resist his appre-
hension at Alverstoke.
The jury found the prisoner guilty of unlawfully
wounding, and he was sentenced to six months'
imprisonment with hard labour.
John Rolf and Wm. Goodchild were indicted for
cutting and wounding Thomas Holloway, a consta-
ble, in the execution of his duty, with intent to do
grievous bodily harm and to prevent the lawful ap-
prehension of John Rolf.
Mr. Cooke prosecuted ; Mr. Russell defended Rolf.
It appeared that on July Bth Holloway and Cob-
den had Rolf in custody. He contrived to escape.
On July 30th Holloway went in plain clothes and
saw the two prisoners at Havant. Holloway endea-
voured to take Rolf into custody, but he ran away
across a meadow. Holloway followed, overtook, and
took hold of him and said, " Halloa, Rolf, is this
you ?" He answered that his name was not Rolf.
Holloway told him it was, and he wanted him again.
Rolf said that was not his name. Holloway said it
was, and as he was taken prisoner he should behave
like a man. Rolf said he would, and Holloway took
out his handcuffs to handcuff him. Rolf said he
should not, and began to scuffle/with him. Good-
child was then coming up, and Holloway asked him,
in the Queen's name, to assist him in taking Rolf.
Holloway and Rolf fell to the ground, and Hollo-
way tried to put on the handcuffs, when they were
suddenly caught out of his hand by Goodchild, who
struck him on the head with them and knocked
him down. Blood began to flow over his face. Good-
child caught hold of Holloway and pulled him off
Rolf, saying, " Run, you fool!" Rolf ran away ;
Holloway followed, caught him again, and drew his
staff, but Rolf took hold of him, and prevented his
striking him. They both again fell to the ground and
struggled for five minutes. Goodchild came up and
pulled Holloway away, and Rolf got the staff and
ran away. Holloway followed Rolf and collared
him, and they struggled, and Rolf put his thumb in
Holloway's mouth. Holloway bit the thumb and
held it fast with his teeth, and was in that way
leading him along when he was tripped up. Rolf
put his hand in his pocket. Holloway said, " Rolf,
don't draw your knife, or it will be a bad job."
Rolf said, " I'll knife you, you !" and drew out
his knife and tried to open it with his teeth.
Holloway then tried to throw him. Rolf said to
another man who was there, but whom Holloway
could not see for the blood that was flowing from
his head over his eyes, " Come here and hold the
while I cut his throat, and then we will throw
him into the pond." Holloway said, " Don't cut
my throat ; my life is as sweet as yours. I am beat
and I'll give in ;" and he let Rolf go. Holloway
was then struck and kicked in the face, and his
teeth were broken. The two men went away.
There was one knife cut on his head nearly four
jinches in length. The men were sober. It was
between 11 and 12 o'clock at night. Holloway
was in plain clothes. From the evidence of the
surgeon it appeared that he was called up on that
night to attend Holloway on the floor of a room
in the Golden Lion, partially insensible. There
was a severe incised wound extending across the
head. There was another similar wound on the
side of the head. There was also a contused wound
on the opposite side of the head. There was another
wound over the right eye. The lip was laid open.
Both eyes were contused. The incised wound
penetrated to the skull. Holloway still suffered
from the effects of the injury. Rolf was afterwards
taken into custody as he was lying under a rick
covered with the straw. He had a knife in his
pocket. There was a large quantity of blood upon
his shirt and hankerchief.
Mr. Russell, in addressing the jury, said that he
thought he should not shrink from his duty by tell-
ing them that he could not alter these facts ; but he
would suggest to them that they might take a
merciful view of the case and find that there was
no premeditation or malice, and that the prisoner
Rolf was guilty only of the minor offence of unlaw,
fully wounding.
The learned Judge summed up. The bounden
duty of Goodchild was to assist Holloway.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty, with intent
to resist the lawful apprehension of Rolf.
The prisoners were then sentenced to three years'
penal servitude.
His Lordship then called up Holloway, and told
him he had performed his duty with great courage,
bravery, and determination, and that in approba-
tion of his conduct, and to encourage others, he
ordered him to be paid £5 as a reward for his con-
duct on that occasion.

he succeeded at length in getting out of the yard,
but only in time to see the backs of the two women
at a distance, running off. He set off after them,
and the two men went with him, keeping close to
him and endeavouring to prevent his overtaking
them. They got away into the railway
station, where there was a crowd of people going
from York Races, and he lost all trace of them.
The prosecutor then turned round and seized the
two mez who still kept near him, and after a run-
ning struggle with them succeeded in securing one,
and taking him to the police-station. This was the
prisoner, of whom the prosecutor swore he never
lost sight. His capture of the man was seen by a
witness named Porter. Two women were after-
wards taken into custody, but were discharged, the
prosecutor not having satisfactorily identified them.
The jury found the prisoner guilty.
His lordship sentenced him to three years' penal
servitude.

(TRIALS AT YORK CASTLE.)
Abraham Fawcett, aged 37. was indicted for
cutting and wounding with intent to murder, or to
do some grievous bodily harm to Ann Watts, at
Leeds, on the 14th of July last.
Mr. Hannay prosecuted, and Mr. Blanshard de-
fended the prisoner.
It appeared that the prisoner lodged at Ann
Watts' house, and had done so for some time. Pre-
vious to this occurrence the prisoner had taken to
drinking, and was frequently drunk. On the day
in question the prosecutrix, who was; 74 years of
age, went to lie down on her bed about four o'clock
in the afternoon, as was her custom, and she had
fallen asleep, when she was suddenly awakened by
some one grasping her throat. She looked up and
recognised the prisoner, who said he would take
ber life if she resisted, and attempted to commit a
criminal assault upon her. She struggled and suc-
ceeded in getting off the bed and out of the room,
and she then discovered that she was bleeding from
the throat, and that her throat was cut. She ran
out of the house, and a neighbour saw her and
sent for a surgeon, Mr. Munely, who examined
and dressed a ragged wound in her throat, three
inches long, from which she lost a good deal of
blood. She said that a man upstairs in her
room had done it. He went upstairs and there
found the prisoner lying on the floor almost insen-
sible, with his own throat cut. There were various
pools of blood about the room, and an open razor
was found on the bed wet with blood. It appeared
that before his fit of drinking the prisoner had
borne a good character. The prosecutrix had since
died, but not from the effects of the wounds she re
ceived.
The jury found the prisoner guilty of unlawfully
wounding.
His Lordship sentenced him to be imprisoned,
with hard labour, for 18 calendar months.

ment of his wife, but the account be gave of her
habits and conduct was anything but favourable,
and he denied that he had ill treated her.

The Assistant-Judge thought this had no direct
bearing on this particular charge, which was one of
felony, stealing the prosecutor's property.
Martha Potts said she lived at 3, Brill-terrace,
Somers-town, and on Monday, April 18, she saw
prisoner outside Mr. Bell's house talking to Mrs.
Bell. After that prisoner went and got a cab, with
which he came to the door with witness, who had
been sent after him by Mrs. Bell. When the cab
got to the door Mrs. Bell came out with s eral
boxes and parcels, which the prisoner helped her
to put into the cab, and they went away to Euston-
square Station. Since then she had seen them to-
gether three or four times.
Mr. Sleigh, counsel for the prisoner, submitted
that the prosecution had not disclosed any case of
felony against the prisoner.
Mr. Charles Smith, on behalf of the prosecution,
,urged that the fact of the prisoner having assisted
the wife in removing the property was sufficient to
send the case to the jury. Besides he had pawned
the ring himself and a mantle, and no doubt a great
deal of the property, besides the money, had been
got rid of by his aid.
The Assistant-Judge said there was no evidence,
as it appeared to him that, with the exception of the
ring and the mantle, the prisoner had had anything
to do with the property, and it was a great misfor-
tune that the notes had not been traced. There
was no doubt that a man committing adultery, and
who assisted in carrying off the goods and property
of the husband, though he acted jointly with the
wife, was guilty of larceny ; but in this case it was
not proved that the prisoner had anything to do
with but the mantle and ring, which might be con-
sidered part of her necessary apparel. As to the
adultery, that was a matter they could not deal with.
Mr. Sleigh said that had not been proved.
The Assistant-Judge said he did not think a jury
would deliberate long upon that. According to
what he understood to be the effect of the most re-
cent decision in a case of this sort, it was, that an
adulterer could not be guilty of larceny in going
away with the adulteress, who was only in posses-
sion of things requisite for her personal use, and
that the rule of law applied to cases where the adul-
terer assisted in carrying off valuable property.
Mr. Smith—The money and the six or seven
parcels.
The Assistant-Judge said the money had not been
traced, and all that the prisoner was proved to have
been concerned with was a ring and a mantle.
The prisoner ran away with this woman, and it
would seem they became so reduced to want as to
pawn these things. Probably the prisoner pawned
the ring and mantle at her request. There was no
prof that the prisoner had dealt with anything but
those two articles, and they were articles of personal
use. As to the adultery there was abundant evi-
dence, but this was a court of criminal law, and he
had to express no opinion upon the baseness of the
prisoner's conduct, but he thought the evidence did
not legally make out a case of larceny against him.
The jury accordingly returned a verdict of not
guilty.
The Assistant-Judge told the prisoner to be very
careful as to his future conduct. To say the least
of it, he had been placed in considerable peril, and
had the evidence been sufficient to justify a convic-
tion, the consequences would have been, perhaps,
rather serious. The prosecutor ought to have taken
batter measures for getting up the case, and tracing
his property, particularly the notes. Sufficient evi-
dence might have been procured.
Mr. Sleigh said the prisoner was not the seducer ;
he had been seduced and made the victim of this
woman.
The Assistant-Judge said he thought the learned
counsel was rather angry with the prosecutor for
giving his wife such a bad character. (Laughter.)
As to her conduct, that could be investigated in
another court, which was just now busily engaged
in such inquiries.
Mr. Smith said this case would be one of them in
due course.
The prisoner was then discharged.
(Before Mr. Creasy.)
James Procter, 38, was tried in this court for steal-
ing £7los. from the person of a sailor named Charles
Johnson.
The prosecutor came to London from Liverpool
by the North-Western Railway on the 25th of
November, and when he got into the train he had
in his pocket about L 7 10s. in a purse. The pri-
soner got in at the same time. A lady was in the
Tcarriage, but she got out about the middle of
the journey, and he and the prisoner were left
alone. When he got to Camden Station he missed
his purse, in which he had placed his railway
ticket, and the prison sr was given into the custody
of the collector. The ticket was found on the floor
of the carriage, and the purse was taken from the
prisoner's hand. He was then given over to the
police, and Mr. Beresford, the superintendent,
asked him what money he had about him ; he said
he did not know exactly, but thought somewhat
near £3. On his being searched, as nearly as pos-
sible the sum lost by the prosecutor was found upon
him, composed of the same description of coin. He
then said he picked up the purse in the carriage,
but there was no doubt that he picked it out of the
sailor's pocket while he, half seas over, was having
a nap on the carriage seat.
The jury found him guilty, and Mr. Creasy sen-
tenced him to eight months hard labour.
A great number of cases, in whick the prisoners
pleaded guilty, were investigated and disposed of.