The Sun.
London, England, 1859-10-29 00:00:00

LAIV INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DAY.)

CLERKENWELL COUNTY COURT.
(Before Sergeant Jones.)
DAMAGES SUSTAINED THROUGH STRAYED CATTLE-

GOODALL V TUCKER.

This was an action to recover D. 14s. alleged to have
been overcharged to plaintiff on the occasion of the pound-
ing of three strayed lorses by defendant. According to
the testimony of plaintiff, and two witnesses, it appeared
on a certain Sunday morning three horses grazing in a
fenced field belonging to plaintiff broke out and strayed
into a field belonging to defendant. The horses were all
safe at six o'clock, and at eight they were in the pound.
So damage was sustained by defendant, as his field was
thoroughly examined, and yet 345. was demanded and paid
at the pound before the horses were released.
Defendant said he had been annoyed by cattle straying
on his land, and he would not stand it any longer.
For the defence, defendant and a witness said that the
horses ran all over the field, kicking up some mangel
wurzel and eating the clover. Defendant picked up a great
quantity of mangel wurzel destroyed by the horses. He
only received 30s. out of the money paid as above at the
pound. Defendant had been much injured by the cattle of
other parties straying on to his land.
His Honour said that plaintiff could not be made to pay
for other parties. Defendant had thought proper to assess
his own damages, and obtain the money before plaintiff
could get his horses. It was very evident that plaintiff was
liable, as his horses had trespassed ; but defendant had
over• estimated the amount, and must refund 245.
Verdict for plaintiff for £1 45., and costs.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-(IRIS DAY.)

BOW-STREET.

DARING JEWEL ROBBERY.—James Jones was placed at
the bar, charged with breaking the shop window of Mr.
Henderson, a jeweller in the Strand, and stealing a quan-
tity of jewellery.

Mrs. Sanders, a lady residing at Cheltenham, but on a
visit to London, said—l was in the Strand last night, and
saw the prisoner go up and look at the window- of a shop
opposite the Lowther Arcade, in which there was a quan-
tity ofjewellery. He put up both his hands, smashed the
glees, snatched something, and then ran away. I saw a
young man run from the shop after him, and he was even-
tually stopped without my havinF lost sight of him.
William Henry Simpson, said+—l am assistant to Mr.
Henderson, of 38, Strand, jewellei. Last night I was in
the shop, and heard the window smash. I instantly ran into
the street, and there I saw the prisoner running. I fol-
lowed in pursuit, overtook and collared him. I obtained
assistance, and after having seen the prisoner safely secured
returned to the shop to see what was missing from the win-
dow. I did not miss anything, but Mr. Henderson picked
up a case containing a gold bracelet, in the street, near the
shop window.

Mr. Henderson said, I reside at 76, Wimpole-street, and
am proprietor of the house mentioned, 38, in the Strand.
I was in the shop last night, and on hearing the window
break I ran out, and saw the prisoner running. I picked
up the bracelet (produced), which I value at six guineas, in
the street, in front of the window, and a gold stud. Both
articles formed a part of the stock exhibited for sale.
Mr. Hall (to prisoner)—What hare you to say to this
charge ?

Prisoner—l plead guilty to breaking the window, but not
,o stealing the articles produced.

Police-constable 64 F, said—About half-past 7 I saw a
mob of people in the Strand. I went up and found several
gentlemen holding the prisoner, some of whom told me he
had broke a jeweller's window in the Strand. I took him
to the shop, and from thence to the station-house, and
charged him with stealing a leather case, a gold bracelet, and
a gold stud. On the road to the station prisoner said, "I've
put my mate on to a job at the nest window, and he's got
something, I know. I've only broken the window myself."
At the police station he said, "It is better to rob the rich
than the poor." _ _

Prisoner—Do you say I spoke these words to you ?
Constable—Yes.

Prisoner—l did not. All l've got to say in answer to
the charge is that I took nothing, but merely broke the
window.

The prisoner was then fully committed for trial.

The companion of the prisoner, Wm. Raymond, was then
placed by his side in the dock, and both were charged with
committing a similar offence at the:shop of Mr. Vaughan,
jeweller, of 40, Strand.

Edward Oxenham, of 6, Caroline-place, Old Kent-road,
said—Last night I was near a jeweller's shop (Mr.
Vaughan's), and saw the two prisoners looking at the arti-
cles exhibited for sale. The taller prisoner (Raymond)
then raised his right arm, dashed it through the window,
and made a snatch with his left hand at the jewellery, and
both men then ran away. Raymond, after he had gone a
short distance, was stopped by a lady, who, despite a strong
resistance made by him, during which she was struck, held
him until assistance arrived, when he was taken back to
the shop. Jones in a short time again returned to the
shop, and after standing a minute or two looking
at it went a few yards lower down the Strand to Mr. Hen-
derson's shop and there did precisely as Raymond had
done at Mr. Vaughan's.

Mrs. Derard was passing the shop of Ms.
Vaughan last night, and after I had proceeded a few yards
I heard a breaking of glass, and in ,a few minutes the pri •
senor Raymond almost immediately
as
of rings in his hand. I seized him,p when me with a tray
enhestrnckme
violently, but I held him until assistance arrived, and he
was taken back to Mr. Vaughan's.
Mr. C. Vaughan said—l reside at 39 and 40, Strand, with
my uncle, John Vaughan, who is a jeweller. At about
twenty minutes.past seven last night I was in the shop,
when I heard a smash in the window. I rushed out and
found the prisoner struggling with the last witness. I saw
a card of rings in his hand. I took them from him, and ho
was then taken back to the shop and given into cus-
tody. The card of rings produced were stolen
from the window. It originally held twenty rings,
the value of which was £464. Five diamond rings are mis-
sing, which I value at £Bl. One of the rings, worth £92,
was taken off the prisoner's finger in my presence.
Both prisoners declined saying anything in their defence.
The foreman of Mr. Vaughan made an application to
the magistrate that the property might be returned, as by
remaining in the hands of the police until the Sessions
came on, in addition to the loss already sustained by Mr.,
Vaughan by the loss of the five rings, he would be deprived
of the sale of the remainder.

Mr. Hall at first said he could not grant the application,
but after a short consultation with Mr. Burnaby, the chief
clerk, the ring taken from the finger of the prisoner: with
two or three others of the least value on the card were re-
tained by the police, and others given back to the applicant.
Both prisoners are well known to the police, and have
twice before been convicted of similar offences. One was
committed at the shop of Mr. Mott, jeweller, of Cheapside,
when some diamond bracelets, amounting in value to be-
tween two and three thousand pounds, had a very narrow
escape. In the other case a jeweller residing in Greenwich
was the favoured party.