The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 23, 1859,

£487 4s. 4d., which would net have paid for one-
ten,th of the printing and letters written if they
had been charged for. The contributions to the
Nation were £BlO 1225., and to the other aspirant
for political martyrdom, £176 12s. 4d., making the
total above named. So much for the :',l(Mahon
sword movement, and for the men who endeavour
to promote a disloyal feeling amongst the people."

LAW INTELLIGENCE—Dec. 22.

COURT FOR DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL
CAUSES.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
GIBSON V. GIBSON.

Dr. Wambey, Mr. Sergea.nt Shee, and Mr. Cole
appeared for the petitioner; and Sir F. Slade, Q.C.,
Dr. Spinks, and Mr. Speke for the respondent.
In this case a suit was instituted for a restitution
of conjugal rights by Mr. Charles Gibson, who al-
leged that his wife, Mary Howard Gibson, had for
some months past withdrawn herself from cohabi-
tation without any reasonable cause, and that she
still refused to render him conjugal rights, although
repeatedly and earnestly requested to return. The
marriage took place on the 10th of November, 185,1,
at St, James's Church, Piccadilly, Mr. Gibson being
a clerk on the Bristol and Exeter Railway, and his
wife the natural daughter of a gentleman of for-
tune, named Teast, living at Durham Lodge, near
Clifton. The respondent, by her answer, admitted
that she had withdrawn from cohabitation, but de-
nied that she had done so without lawful reason,
and alleged, that the petitioner had treated her
unkindly and cruelly in 1853, and subsequently
had committed adultery with divers persons. She,
therefore, prayed the Court to dismiss the petition
and grant her a sentence of divorce.

M. Daniel Gibson, the father of the petitioner,
deposed to the fact of the marriage having been ce-
lebrated, first, at the Bavarian Chapel, in War-
wick-street, and afterwards in St. James's Church,
Piccadilly. He had occasionally visited the
parties at Durham Lodge, near Clifton, the house
of the lady's father. In cross-examination he said
his son had been a clerk on the Bristol and Exe-
ter Railway, but lie was not aware that his
salary was only £BO a-year. His son was con-
siderably in debt, now owing about £3,000.
In support of the case of the wife, Mr. Sydenham
Teast was examined—Upon Mr. Gibson's marriage
with his daughter he took him into his house to re-
side, and occasionally furnished him with money.
He kept a carriage, and horse for Mr. Gibson. The
petitioner at length left his situation on tbe Bristol
and Exeterlway, and witness then gave him a
dock and wharf at Bristol rent free, and also got
him in the commission of the peace for the county
of-Gloucester. He afterwards put his son-in-law
into partnership with two timber 'merchants, and
at the time gave him £2,000, and advanced 11,000
more. In 1856 he used his influence to get Mr.
Gibson a commission in the South Gloucester
Militia. After the first year of the marriage wit•
ness observed a marked change in his son-in-law's
conduct towards the respondent. This was after
the militia training was over. He recollected his
daughter being prematurely confined in November,
1358. Mr. Gibson had been up in London for some
weeks. He was not present at any interview be-
tween his daughter and her husband before he went
away. Mr. Gibson returned to the house a few days
after the birth of the child, bat he did not remain
there. He subsequently came again and lived there
as before, but he had not been in witness's house
since the summer in the present year. He recol-
lected Mr. Hepworth bringing some copies of let-
ters to the house.

Cross-examined—He had not been on very good
terms with Mr. Gibson during the last few years.
Did not approve of his conduct—keeping late hours,
and so on. He had consulted with Mr. Strickland
relative to Mr. Gibson, but he left it to his daughter
to do as she wished in the affair. He paid the
expenses of prosecuting the present suit. After
the first year of the marriage, Mrs. Gibson fre-
quently complained that her husband did not show
her proper attention, and kept late hours, and
went after other women. Recollected a meeting
taking place in November last between Mr. and
Mrs. Gibson and himself and the senior Mr. Gib-
son. The object of that meeting was that the
parties should either make it up or agree to a sepa-
ration, or come to a final decision. The disagreement
was about some letters and a photograph was
talked about. They all seemed to agree that the
best thing would be for the parties to separate, and
then young Gibson said he would take the eldest
child from her, and the second one when it was two
months old. She then began crying very much, and
it was settled the child should remain until Satur-
day. Old Mr. Gibson expressed his displeasure at
his daughter-in-law's conduct. Witness did not
propose on that occasion that the parties should
live together again. The petitioner expressed uo
wish to be reconciled to his wife. No reconciliation
took place, and neither party seemed to wish it. He
was acquainted with his daughter's handwriting,
and believed the six letters produced to be her.3._

Ite-exatnined—His daugirtor had charged her
husband in his presence with kicking her and hurt-
ing her knee, and also with threatening to shoot
her.

Mr. G. A. Hepworth deposed that he was' a sur-
geon, practising at Gloucester, and was attached to
the Glinicester militia. His wife was the daughter
of a musical professor at Gloucester. She was of
some musical proficiency, and attended concerts and
oratorios in the county. In September Mr. Gibson
joined the regiment. At that time Mrs. Hepworth
was living with witness in Gloucester. Mr. Gibson
and his wife were saying at the Queen's Head
Hotel. An intimacy sprung up, and Mrs. Gibson
used to be very much with Mrs. Hepworth. He re-
collected his wife going on her tour. He could not
state the date because she had come down from Lon-
don and smashed a cabinet to pieces and taken his
journal. Upon her return. from the tour he acciden-
tally found certain letters in a little metal case in
her bed room. The letters produced were those he
discovered. He took them' over to Clifton the next
morning and showed them to Mrs. Gibson. He after-
wards, at the request of. Mr. Teast, sent him copies
of the letters. Mrs. Hepworth was not living with
him now. The last-time they were together was in
September last. The photographs produced repre-
sented Mr. Gibson and Mrs. Hepworth.
Cross-examined—Thought photography was a
very pretty art, like most people. His portrait had
been taken with his arm round. Mrs. Gibson's waist.
That was when all the parties were very intimate.
Mrs. Hepworth at present supported herself, but
not their children. He mentioned findingthe letters
to his wife before he showed them to Mrs. Gibson.
Mrs. Hepworth had an engagement to sing at Liver-
pool the next morning. Out of consideration for
her engagement he told her he had destroyed the
letters, but she afterwards discovered he had not,
and during her absence a long and angry corres-
pondence ensued. There :had been throughout a
continual struggle between his indignation and his
affection.. He had not been actively engaged in get-
ting up evidence against his own wife in the pre-
sent case. Three or four letters had passed between
him and Mr. 'Watkins, the sheriff's officer at Bristol,
about tracing his wife. At Gloucester he was ac-
customed to drive about with Mr. and Mrs. Gibson.
Mrs. Hepworth used to sit on the coach-box with
Mr. Gibson, and he and Mrs. Gibson behind.
Charlotte Sawyer, a servant at the house in Man-
chester-street, Manchester-square, deposed that Mrs.
Hepworth used to be visited there by Mr. Gibson.
He had visited her two or three times, but was never
alone with her. There were two or three ladies al-
ways present. Knew of their going out together of
a morning, and remaining out three hours. _

Cross-examined— One of the three ladies slept
with Mrs. Hepworth.
Mrs. Mops, of 116, High-street, Ramsgate, stated
that a lady and gentleman called at her house in
August last. They passed by'tbe name of Mr. Gib.;
son and Mrs. Hepworth. The lady engaged apart-
ments for the gentleman. Mr. Gibson slept there
the same night, and kept there three weeks. There
were two bedrooms and one sittingroom. Mr. Gib-
sou's father and two sisters came there on the 11th
of August, but Mrs. Hepworth used previously to
visit him. She was sometimes alone, and sometimes
with another lady. On one occasion she stayed
some hours. When she left, Mr. Gibson always
accompanied her. Mrs. Hepworth lodged at
No. 4, Cliff-street, at the time. It would take
five minutes .to walk from ono lodging to the
other. Mr. Gibson used on some-occasions not to
return until midnight. Witness objected to having
to sit up so late, and he then. took a latch key. Mr.
Gibson's father and sisters remained a fortnight,
and Mrs Hepworth never came while they were
there. Mr. Gibson left on the 15th August, but
refurad on the 1 i th, and left altogether on the
23d. He said he was going by the seven o'elook,
express, but she afterwards saw him at Marg,ate.
The witness identified Mr. Gibson and Mrs. liep-
wdrth by means of photographs.
Cross-examined—Would, not undertake to say
that Mrs. Hepworth called at High-street moic
than once a day. About four times she was (=mil-
piniecl.by a lady, who once dined with him, but not
alone.

C l irrfil'-1 set rdeaeutg, 11 Leurnis)uf
atthr,e,
pl arnodyleadsl
took rooms there on the sth August. The tYh ofa
t At ihres . lodgingsHepworth iri
apart-
ments were occupied five weeks and a half by
MadaMe Cornwall, the nurse, and two children,
and Mrs. Hepworth herself. Mr. Gibson visited
the house on the first Saturday or Monday, and
was in the habit of calling about twice every day.
Sometimes he saw Mrs. Hepworth alone, and at
[
other times Madame Cornwall was present. In the
evening Madame Cornwall sometimes went to bed
_ ... . .

and left others in thedrawing-room until 12 o'clock
at night. On many occasions they told witness to
go to bed, and Mr. Gibson would nmke the door
fast, she, however, declined to leave the door un-
fastened, because she thought they might not know
how to secure it. Almost every night when he
came she had to fasten the door after 12 o'clock.
Mrs. Hepworth went away on the .15th August,
and returned on the 18th. She went alone. On
the 19th she again lift, but came back the next day.
During the visits of lir. Gibson to Mrs, Hepworth,
witness once found the drawing-room door locked.
It was about five in the evening. She knocked for
admittance, but it wa3 not op Red, and Mrs. Hep-
worth said she did not want tea yet. She knew that
Mr. Gibson was there. Mr. Gibson lately came to
Cliff-street with another gentleman, and asked her
what she had been saying about him. She told him
she had only said what was the truth. When she
saw the letter he had written to Mrs. Hepworth,
she felt indignant, and told all she knew. She in-
formed him about the door being locked, and he
said, "But Cornwall was in the room, was she not 9"
She said she did not think so.

Cross-examined—Madame Cornwall was a lady
about 30 years of age. There was no communication
between her bed-ream and the drawing-room. Mrs.
Hepworth and Madame Cornwall occupied the same
bed-room.

Jas. Bramner, a tailor and draper at Bristol—ln
August last Mr. Gibson was indebted to him in a
large sum. He hadbeen unable to find Mr. Gibson.
On the 15th August he was at Rosherville Hotel,
at Gravesend, when he saw a cab drive up to the
door with Mr. Gibson and a lady in it. '1 he photo-
graphic portrait produced of Mrs. Hepworth was
that of the lady. It was about six in the evening.
Cross-examined—He had a process out against
Mr. Gibson, but unfortunately he did not have it
with him at Rosherville.

Elizabeth Green was chambermaid at the Rosher-
ville Hotel in August last. Recollected Mr. Gibson
and Mrs. Hepworth coming there. The lady said
they should require a bedroom for the night, but
about two hours afterwards she rang the bedroom
bell and said they would require another bedroom.
They did not sleep at the hotel that night. Did not
see the' gentleman in the bedroom. The parties
dined in a private sitting room, and left at eight
o'clock. The sitting room adjoined the bedroom.
Cross-examined—The lady went into the bedroom
alone. The luggage was all taken into the bedroom
when they first arrived. The folding doors between
the rooms were locked and the sofa drawn across the
door of the sitting apartment.
Re-examined—Before Mrs. Hepworth asked for
a second bedroom, a gentleman had spoken to wit-
ness about the parties.
Jas. Browning, waiter at the Rosherville Hotel,
remembered the parties coming to the hotel in
August. He generally corroborated the evidence of
the last witness. They paid for the bedroom, and
when they were going away Mr. Gibson said he
had changed his mind, and was going to London.
Charles Blake, employed at Bristol to register
the passengers of omnibuses, knew Mrs. Gibson ;
also knew a person called Miss Farley. He saw
her get out of a fly in the latter part of August of
last year. Mr. Gibson was walking up and down,
and she joined him: They took one of the stand
flys and went off together.
On cross-examination he said he had not seen
Miss Farley in London.
Mrs. Jones—Lived in Church-lane, Old Park,
Bristol. Kept a lodging-house, to which gentle-
men some times brought ladies. Had seen Mr.
Gibson there with a lady three or four times in the
winter of 1858. The lady went by the name of
Farley.
Cross-examined—Did not know the gentleman's
name when he called, or the name of the lady.
Had since. seen the lady at Fendal's Hotel, near
the court. When the name of Mr. Gibson was first
mentioned to her the photograph was not shown. She
had seen it previously. She knew at once that it
was the portrait of the gentleman who had come
to her house.

William Evans, a fly-driver at Bristol, knew Mr.
Gibson when he resided at Mr. Teast's house.
Recollected his engaging his fly in June, 1858, and
was told to drive towards Stoke's-croft, and take
up a lady. He took up a lady, and then drove the
parties between six and seven miles along the Glo-
cester-road, and back to Bristol. It was dark when
he got back. The next morning he found some
lady's hair-pins in the handle of the fly. About a
fortnight afterwards he was engaged to take up
Mr. Gibson and the same lady. She had a little
child with her, but it was asleep.
Harriett Saunders knew Mr. Gibson, and was in
his company in June and July, 1858. She drove
with him in a fly five or six times, when unfortu-
nately he took advantage of her. He had also had
connexion with her at Exeter. On one of the occa-
sions when she went in a fly with Mr. Gibson she
had a little boy with her.
Cross-examined—She had been introduced to Mr.
Gibson by a friend of his in Bristol. After the firbt
introduction she did not see him again for twelve
months. She had known him by sight, however,
fora long time.

This e\:idenee closed the case of the respondent.
Me following testimony was then adduced on
behalf of the petitioner.

_ .
Mrs. Hepworth, sa
idshemwraass
mthareriwedifeinoflBMr.s3.
Since
Hepworth,
that timeePvvorth ofGloucester.
she had been engaged as a singer.
In September and October, 1858, the Gloucester
were out for training, and Mr. and Mrs.
Gibson became remarkably,
,intimate with her and
her husband. They drove out together, and that
intimacy continued until she left Gloucester.
That intimacy gave her some uneasiness. She
became: jealous of Mrs. Gibson. Next saw Mr.
Gibson on the 21st October, on her return from
Wolverhampton, where she had been singing
at a concert. Met him at Birmingham
but did not sleep. there. She never bad any impro-
per connexion with Mr. Gibson in 18;8, either at
Birmingham or Wolverhampton. Went to Chelten-
ham for professional purposes, but had no improper
intimacy with Mr. Gibson there. While living at
Manchester-street, t wo lady friends were living with
her. Mr. Gibson very often visited there. He was
very musical, and they sometimes sang together:
They had frequently sung together in Mr. Hep-
,worth's presence. She went to Ramsgate with her
children with the permission of her husband. On
the occasion of the door being found locked she was
not alone with Mr. Gibson, Madame Cornwall
locked the door because she was unwell, and the chil-
dren kept running in. She called on Mr. Gibson in
High-street, Ramsgate, five or six times, but only
once alone. She went to fetch a book, and rested
there about half-an-hour, being very tired. When
she met Mr. Gibson on his way to Gravesend, she
did not do so by appointment. She had taken her
ticket to London ; but being in no hurry to reach
London, she was induced to stop at Gravesend to eat
whitebait. Mr. Gibson was going to meet his father.
She had not the least intention of staying at Graves-
end all night. Had an engagement for the next day
at Cheltenham. They went to the Rosherville
Hotel, and witness went into a bedroom, where, ou
seeing sonic of Mr. Gibson's luggage, she imme-
diately asked the chambermaid to show her another
room. No improper intimacy had ever existed be-
tween her and Mr. Gibson at any time.
Cross-examined—On the night of the day she
was - at Rosherville witness slept at the Euston
Hotel ; Mr. Gibson accompanied her to London,
and left her at the station. It must have been 11
o'clock when she reached her hotel. Mr. Gibson
left the train immediately on its arrival at the
station, in a great hurry, because be had seen
a creditor of his at Rosherville, who lie thought
might have followed him. Would not swear that
she had not let Mr. Gibson know she was going
to London that day. It was very immaterial,
but her impression was that he did not know
she was going. She had known Mr. Gibson about
six weeks whtn she received the two letters
produced from him. She thought it was very in-
discreet of him, and she wrote, saying she did not
approve of his language. The week previously
there had been a great commotion on the part of
Mr. Hepworth because Mrs. Gibson had not made
her appearance as'promised, and he was very violent.
The letters, however, were very enigmatical, and
she did not know exactly to what Mr. Gibson
alluded. When she was at Ramsgate Mr. Gibson
came down there with his family. She told him so
on one of his visits to Manchester-street. Her hus-
band knew where she was. A short time ago she
opened a drawer of her husband's and took out all
the papers that were necessary for her. They were
not papers at all concerned with this suit. She
had received other letters from Mr. Gibson than
the two referred to, but none of them begun " My
darling Clare."
By the Court—Was only at Ramsgate once last
summer. Should be sorry to any how she went down,
whet;ier by rail or boat. Could not at all remens-
her, but thought it was by boat. Met Mr. Gibson
by accident in the High-street the day after her
arrival.

Mrs. Cornwall deposed that she was a widow,
and resided in Manchester-street, Manchester-
square. Knew the pet itioner intimately. had known
him from a child. Mrs. Hepworth and Miss Somer-
hays were residing with her. Mr. Gibson occa-
sionally visited at the house by her invitation. He
was never alone there with Mrs. Hepworth. Never
saw the least impropriety pass between him and
that lady. Was at Ramsgate in August last. Mrs.
Hepworth's nurse and children accompanied her.
Mrs. Hepworth went down a day earlier to take
the apartments. They lived together the whole of
the time. Mr. Gibson visited them, and on the
occasion of his visits she was always present. Re-
membered locking the door because the children
annoyed her. Had called oiz Mr, Oibs°ll with Mrs.

~- - -~-

Hepworth. Never saw any improprieties paSs be-
tween those parties.
By the Court—Never went to bed before Mrs.
Hepworth at Ramsgate. Half-past 11 was the
latest hour at which Mr. Gibson ever left the house.
MiA's Somerhays also stated that she had never
known any undue intimacy to have existed between
Mrs. llepsvorth and the petitioner.
A `ter some further testimony the further hearing
-of the case was postponed.
The following are the letters referred to :
" Bristol, Oct. 27, ISSS.
"My OWN DARLING CLARE,—I was so disap-
pointed at not receiving evan a short note from you
this morning, though, of course, from the tone of
your last I had no right to hope it. I was really
very ill and unhappy yesterday—ill, because I had
two of those dreadful attacks in my head, and
wretched on account of your letter ; and to make
matters worse Madame took it into her head to be
very disagreeable. It appears (but you must not
seem to know this, or ho would, of course; guess
that I told. you) that he told her the night we
were at Gloucester that you left your people at
Wolverhampton after the concert and came to
me at Birmingham, stopped there all night, and
came on with me in the morning. I have, of course,
said it was all a lie, so you must remember that the
train you left Birmingham by was the 9.20, while
the one I am supposed to have come by was the
10.20. It's rather lucky that the trains fit so well,
as it seems probable that we should have come that
way ; and as we have denied coming together it
would never do for us to admit it. I cannot tell
you how I hate that woman now, every day more
and more, and how happy I should be if we could
only be happy together. I know with you I should
be perfectly happy, and I am quite sure I would do
all I could to make you so; and I rather fancy I
should succeed—do you think I should ?I so long
for to-morrow evening, in the hope of having a few
lines from you, should you not be to busy to write
to this por old child. If you have not written, do,
darling, write to me, and write kindly. I must
finish to-day, as I feel too ill to. write. My heart
beats just as it did the other evening.
" Yours fondly attached,
" Mind, in case of aecid.ints' destroy my letters
directly you have road them, asl think I now quite
understand his game."

" Bristol, Oct. 28, 1858.
"My own Darling Clare,—l was so delighted
with your letter received this morning that I hardly
know what to do with myself. What a dreadful
idea it is to think that you should have the power
of making me so miserable or so happy ! I wish
you would always try to do the latter, as it would
be so easy to you and so jolly to me. How could
you be so silly as to take such an absurd idea into
your head about the Bridgend letter ? I cannot
imagine what I could possibly have said to give
rise to any such notion, and really nothing was
further than that from my mind, so I sincerely
trust you will never again be so naughty. I did
not know what to think all day yesterday at not
hearing from you. I wrote you two letters, but
thinking that, perhaps, you did not wish to hear
from me, destroyed them both ; and now I am so
sorry I did not send one of them, as, perhaps, you
may have thought it unkind my not writing ; but
that was the only reason. I stayed down here till
the afternoon post was in, in hopes of hearing
from you ; but it was no go. About seeing you
to-morrow, you must not think it is
because Ido not wish, as I would give all in the
world to again see you, but I really don't see how 1
am to manage it, as were I to be away, my fat
friend would be sure to guess I was gone to see
you, so I must wait till next Friday, and meet you
in London. Write and tell me about what time
you will arrive. I see by the list I can write you
on Tuesday, Liverpool ; on Wednesday, Boston ;
and on Thursday, Lyne—is that right ?—and on
Friday I shall again see my darling ; how I do long,
my sweet one, to be again with you! Will you
not be able to stay in London pver Sunday, as we
might have a jolly day togetliN ? I wish I were
going to be at Liverpool with you. I think you
are wrong about our fair friend writing ; she tells
me that she offended George dreadfully that night
when I was asleep, and I fancy she did, as he
seemed in a very bad temper when we left. lam
very glad you are not coming by the boat to-mor-
row, as she told me this morning that she means to
go and meet it, as she fancies you are coming by it,
and that I should be there to meet you, as G. told
her you would be in South Wales till Saturday
morning. Won't she be sold—first at going for
nothing ? Can you manage not to let G. know you
are going to London, as he is sure to let her know,
and then she might insist on coming with me, which
would not add to my comfort in the slightest
degree ? Mind you write to-morrow before you go
home, and on Tuesday you will find a letter from
me at the post-office, Liverpool. Did you think
last night of that day week at Cheltenham ? I could
not, for the life of me, go to sleep, thinking how
happy I had been, how happy I could be with you,
and what a darling you are. The more I think of
you the fonder I become, so you must promise me
never again to fancy by any thing I say in my let-
ters it would be possible for me to change. I
always write my letters very fast, and never read
them over, so that I may very often express myself
badly ; so please think of that next time before you
write me such a very unkind letter as the Cardiff
one was ; but yours of to-day certainly made up for
it, as it really was a dear, kind child to write to me
so nicely. Adieu, my sweet one, till Friday, when
I shall expect you to be very affectionate.—Yours
fondly devoted, " CH.
"Mind and destroy my letters before you go
home."

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—Dec. 22.

(Before the Assistant-Judge,)
Frederick Rogers, 25, was indicted for stealing a
box, containing a Chinese puzzle, ail:a two brooches,
of the value of £2, the property bt the London and
South-Western Railway Con3-pally.
Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted ; the prisoner was unde-
fended.

lie surrendered in court. The offence alleged
against the prisoner was committed at Hounslow
station. The prisoner kicked a box which had
been left on the platform by the guard, and picked
it up.

After the foreman of the jury pronounced a ver-
dict of guilty, Air. Gent, as arnicus CUrlO2, suggested
that in point of law the case did not amount to lar-
ceny, and one of the jury said the verdict had been
given without his concurrence.
The jury were thereupon directed to reconsider
their verdict, and ultimately they were discharged
without giving a verdict at all.
Sarah Gale, 30, was indicted and convicted at the
last sessions of robbing a man of £2 23. 6d. in a
II brothel in St. George-street, St. Giles's.
It appeared that she was an old offender, and had
undergone'four years' penal servitude.
She stated that since she had come home she had
made every endeavour to earn an holiest living,
and gave names and addresses of persons with
whom she hadlived.
The learned Judge directed Mr. Foulsham, the
officer of the House of Correction, Westminster, to
make inquiry as to the truth of her statement, and
the report which ho now presented to the Court
was very. unfavourable to her; she certainly had
had three • situations, but in each she had grossly
miseouduetod herself. Many efforts had been made
to reclaim.her without avail, and she was deemed
incorrigible.
The learned Assistant-Judge sentenced the pri-
soner to four years' penal servitude.
Samuel Croome, a respectable-looking middle-
aged man, was indicted on Wednesday for having
embezzled several sums of money, amounting in
the aggregate to about £l6, which he had received
on account of Mr. Boulton, gas meter manufac-
turer, of Bagnigge-wells-road.
Mr. Sleigh and Mr. F. H. Lewis were counsel
for the prosecution. Mr. 'Metcalfe was for the pri-
soner.

The trial of this case lasted the whole day, and
iad been fixed to be taken.

The prisoner had been in Mr. Boulton's service in
a confidential capacity, and the accounts produced
certainly showed a deficiency of money received by
the prisoner, but they had been kept in anything
but a business-like manner. The prisoner's defence
was, that it was a spiteful and malicious prosecu-
tion got up against him, in consequence of his hav-
ing been engaged with another person in the same
line of business, who had obtained an injunction
against the prosecutor for infringing a patent, and
that the prosecutor had got up this case as a trap
for him. This was emphatically denied. The
examination in chief as to the accounts, and the
cross examination lasted some hours.
Mr. Metcalfe made a long and very able ad-
dress to the jury, after which the learned Judge
summed up most carefully, and told the jury that
not only the prisoner, but the prosecutor, was under-
goinc, the ordeal of a trial ; for on the one hand,
the prisoner was guilty of robbing his master of
money he had received as his servant, and had
aggravated his offence by false accusations against
him ; or on the other, because a person with whom
the prisoner had had some transactions, had ob-
tained an injunction against the prosecutor, he (the
prosecutor) had produced falsified books, made a
false charge for spiteful and vindictive reasons, and
had entered the witness-box to support that charge
by the basest and most infamous perjury. It was
a most serious issue between the parties, and he
commended the case to the most careful and serious
consideration of the jury.
The jury retired, and after about an hour's
deliberations eanie inta court, and returned a ver-

diet of guilty. The foreman said they recom-
mended the prisoner to mercy, and they could not
but say that the books, in their opinion, had been
kept in a bad, careless, and loose way, which had
afforded the prisoner a temptation to commit
these frauds. That was why they recommended
him to mercy.
The Assistaut-Judge said he should defer fhe
sentence until next Sessions, and well consider the
whole case, and he hoped to be able to remove from
his mind a good deal of the painful effect which the
infamous and detestable defence set up by the pri-
soner had produced. He entirely agreed in the
verdict of the jury, and the prisoner, instead of
doing anything in the way of reparation, had
greatly added to the wickedness of his conduct.
The prisoner, who had surrendered to answer the
charge, was then removed to Coldbath-fields.
(Before Mr. Creasy.)
Dennis Murphy, the younger, aged 25, a perfect
picture of a desperate ruffian, was convicted of
robbing his father of 4s. lid.

The prisoner had been before convicted at the
Old Bailey, and had been a curse to his parents.
The offence he was now convicted of was robbing
his father while he was asleep. They lived at 29,
Burn-strect, l'orarylebone.
Mr. Creasy sentenced the prisoner to ten years'
penal servitude.
The prisoner's conduct to his father while in the
dock was shocking, and his parting wish cannot be
given.
__

- John Thomas Stevens, a drayman, was indicted
for feloniously embezzling three several sums of
Os. which he had received on account of Frederick
Lightfoot, brewer, of Oxford-street.

file prisoner was found guilty, and sentenced to
eight months' hard labour.

-Mr. Metcalfe and Mr. Dickie prosecuted ; Mr.
Ribton was for the prisoner.
Emma Hay don and Harriet Taylor, two prosti-
tutes, were found guilty of robbing a man named
Ferguson of his watch.

flaydon wat not so bad a character as Taylor,
who had been before convicted of a similar offence.
Haydon was sentenced to eight months' hard
labour, and Taylor to three years' penal servitude.