The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-06 00:00:00

WESTERN CIRCUIT.— WiNcnEsneß, MARCH 4.

The calendar contains fifty-four names, of which three
are for murder, two for arson, and four for unnatural offences.
George Knowlton was charged with having feloniously set
fire to a barn, a cowshed, and other buildings, the property
of Edward Buckley, Esq., on the 2d of. January last, at
Minesteed.

Edward Buckley, the prosecutor, deposed that the prisoner
had been in his employ some time before the 2d of January,
the day on which the premises in question were burned. Saw
the fire about eleven o'clock at night. On that morning the
prisoner had been before the vestry, seeking for relief or em-
ployment, and witness mentioned that he had offered employ-
ment to him, on very good terms, which he refused to take, in
consequence of which the vestry refused him relief. They
had no means of employing him.
Joseph Short, a constable, had the prisoner given into his
charge on Monday, the 3d of January ; kept him in his house
until the Saturday following, when the prisoner desired him
to take down what he had to say in writing. Witness cautioned
him, and took down his statement ; after which he read it over
in presence of three others. The prisoner stated that Thomas
Thomas had met him that evening, and desired him to fetch
matches and a tinder-box, and that he would set the premises
on fire. The prisoner accordingly procured those things, and
Thomas set the cow-shed on tire, and they both ran away.

That he returned some time after, when the fire was out.
That Mr. Buckley had passed him with a -liglited lantern in
his hand, which he held up to his face. The prisoner thought
then he was undone, for if Mr. Buckley had searched him he
would have found the tinder-box on him.
The prosecutor volunteered to give the prisoner a good cha.
racter. Verdict—Guilty.
Mr. Baron GVRNEY, after a suitable and impressive address,
passed the awful sentence of death upon the prisoner, holding
out to him no hopes of mitigation.

CIVIL COURT.

MORTON V. WATSON.

This was an action for a breach of promise of marriage, to
which the defendant pleaded that as they went to church to be
married the plaintiff refused to marry him, and released him
from his obligation, upon which issue wat joined. The
plaintiff was a dress-maker, residing in her father's house in
Gosport, the defendant was an attorney's clerk, each of them
are about thirty years of age. They became acquainted with
each other about the middle of July, 1832 ; in a few days after-
wards the defendant became quite smitten with the plaintiff,
he wrote a letter to her on the 23d of July, expressing a hope
that she would grant his request within the two following days.
Ho wrote two other letters, couched in the most amorous
terms. On the 26th of July, he wrote a letter to her sister,
whom he had never seen, and addressed'her, " My dear sister,"
requesting her to assist at their marriage the 'following day,
and ending with these words :—" You will find me a true bro-
ther, though in law." On the 27th of July they went to
church to be married, where the attorney in whose office he w2.s
serving, and who was his guardian, interposed, and the mar-
riage was prevented ; still he went home with her in a coach,
expressed his regret that the marriage had not taken place,
and subsequently wrote a letter to her, expressing a hope that
they would be married before long. On the 2d of September
following, she sent her attorney to know if he would marry her,
when he absolutely refused. These were the facts of the case.
The Rev. Henry Beck on the 26th of. July gave the de-
fendant a license to marry the plaintiff. She came to the
church at eight o'clock the following morning, accompanied
by her brother. The defendant was waitinr, for her. Mr.
Minchin, the defendant's guardian, was there, who repre.
sented to her the folly of marrying him, when he had not the
means of supporting a wife. y Witness also told her it was
better for her to give it up, and it was his impression both
from her conduct and from what she said that she would
think no more of it. She then left the vestry.
Verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, one shilling.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—DURIbIat, MARC,! 2.

The Northern Circuit commenced at .this place on Saturday.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON opened the commission about six o'clock
in the evening. Both the Learned Barons attended divine
service yesterday morning in the cathedral. This morning
business commenced. Mr. Baron PARRS presides in the
Crown Court, and Mr. Baron ALDERSON on the Civil side.

- The calendar presents 28 cases, two of which are for man-
slaughter, hut none of those offences to which the last penalty
of the law is awarded appear among them. The cause list
also presents 28 cases for trial, but none of them appear to be
of great public interest. Several cases were disposed of in
each Court in the course of the day. .

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

OLD COURT.

Joan Wood, aged 22, was indicted for stealing a wooden
image from the shop door of Anne Stevens, tobacconist, carry-
ing on business at 22, Prince's Street, Soho.
The prisoner was apprehended by a policeman with the
image in his possession. Guilty.
Thomas Smith and William'Crooh were indicted for stealing
a sack, value 55., and 168 bushels, value 121. 155., the pro-
perty of John Nicholas Jardin.
Crook pleaded guilty.
It appeared from the evidence for the prosecution that the
prisoner Smith called upon the prosecutor, who is a basket-
manufacturer residing in Leather-lane, and represented him-
self as a general dealer, carrying on business at No. 15,
Minerva-street, Hackney, and asked if he could supply him
with fourteen dozen of baskets to complete an order which he
had received from the country. Jardin agreed to supply him
with the baskets, and sent them by his foreman and a porter to
the prisoner's house. Smith was standing at the door, and
asked the foreman if he had change of a 201. note, and on his
replying in the negative, Smith sent Crook to get change,
and the foreman accompanied him ; they went to several public-
houses, and Crook at length contrived to slip away from the
foreman. In the mean time, Smith gave the porter 2d. to
drink, and when the foreman returned Smith and the goods had
disappeared. The house in Minerva-street bad been only taken
that morning by the prisoners, and they had brought in a tea-
chest full of bricks, for the purpose of making the people of
the house believe that they were getting in goods. Smith
was apprehended immediately afterwards with a sack contain-
ing the property on his back.
Smith got a very good character.—Guilty.
The Ricoauaa said au example should be made of the pri-
soners in order to protect the public from such infamous frauds.
As the present was Smith's first offence, and as he had got a
good character, his sentence should be only twelve month's
imprisonment and hard labour. With respect to Crook, he
had been twice before the Court upon charges of felony, and
his sentence should be transportation for seven years.
On the sentence being pronounced, Smith pleaded hard to
be transported.
The Riscortneft said Isis request could not be cornpliedswith.
An erroneous impression had gone abroad, that persons who
were transported could indulge themselves in their idle and
vicious propensities ; but it appeared by the Act 2d and 3d
William IV., chap. 62, that every person transported for
seven years, must be kept to hard labour for at least four
years— those transported for fourteen years must be
kept to hard labour for the term of six years—and those
transported for life, must be kept to hai d labour for eight
years before the Governor of the colony could grant the con-
vict any ticket of leave or other indulgence. This could not
be too generally known, and he thought it would be advisable
to have a copy of the section posted up in the gaol.
George Clements, a respectable looking man, a;ed 30, was
indicted for stealing a tobacco-box, value one penny, from the
person of Edward Sweeny.
The prosecutor, an Irishman, deposed that he is a labodrer,,
residing at East Ham, Essex, and was returning in a state of
intoxication from the Borough on the night of the 18th of
February, when he fell opposite the Mile-end station-house.
The prisoner, who was on duty at the time, came 'up to him
and put his hand into his pocket, and took out his tobacco-
box. Prosecutor accused him of stealing his box, and two
persons coming up, prosecutor was taken by the prisoner to
the station-house. The charge was there repeated by Sweeny
to the inspector. Prisoner dnied that he had taken it, but
on being searched the box was found in his great coat pocket.
When taken before the Magistrates the prisoner said he bad
picked it up from the ground.
Samuel Hone, inspector of the R division, and policeman
K 241, by whom the prisoner had been searched, corroborated
this evidence.
The prisoner in his defence said he had picked up the box
from the ground, and his only motive in denying that he had
taken it was because he was indignant at the charge of having
picked the prosecutor's pocket.
The prisoner got an excellent character from several very
respectable gentlemen ; and the inspector /lane, said his con-
duct had been most exemplary for the two years and a half he
had been in the police.
The Jury, after deliberating for about ten minutes, found
that the prisoner was " Not Guilty of intent to steal the box,
but that he had acted with great indiscretion in not giving it
up when called upon."
Mr. C. PHILLIPi, who conducted the prisoner's defence,
said the verdict was a. ve'ry humane one, and the p:isoner should
feel much indebted to them.

The RECORDER said the conduct of the inspector 'lane in
following up the inquiry, and ordering the prisoner to be
searched, was very creditable to him, as it would show the
public that the officers of the police made' tie distinction be-
tween the men under their charge and the public generally.