The Sun.
London, England, 1835-10-15 00:00:00

HINXMAN V. HINXMAN.

In this case it will be remembered that on the last Court
day notice was given that a decree for the sequestration of
the property of the Rev. H. Hinxman should be moved for
to-day ; and a(ccordingly, on behalf of Mrs. Charlotte
Hinxman,

Dr. BURNABY, in the place of Dr. Phillimore, rose to
move the Court to pronounce him in contempt, in pursu-
ance of the provisions of the statute 2 and 3 W. IV., c. 93.
The Learned Counsel went through the various stages of
the proceedings in this case, to the circumstances of which
the above Act, he contended, was fully applicable ; for it
appeared that in several instances the defendant had ne-
glected to attend to the orders of the Court, and though
the monition for alimony by ways and means had not been
personally served upon him, yet from the affidavit of Mrs.
Hinxman's solicitor, no doubt could remain but that he was
perfectly aware of all the proceedings that had taken place,
being at present actually in London, and merely concealing
himself to avoid the service of monition which the Court
had issued against him.
The COURT, in the present instance, was satisfied, first,
that the defendant had absconded for the purpose of escap-
ing from a personal service ; and, secondly, that he knew of
all the proceedings before the Court, which must therefore
comply with the motion of Counsel.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HOUSE.

A boy, between ten and eleven years of age, was brought
before the LORD MAYOR and Alderman THOMAS WOOD,
for the purpose of being bound as an apprentice to a respec-
table chimney-sweeper, under the new Chimney-Sweepers'
Act, which provides that no boy under ten years of age shall
be bound to that trade. This provision is obviously intended
to diminish the number of climbing boys. The child intended
to be bound is at present on the parish.
The LORD MAYOR wished to know whether there existed
any objection ?
The Overseers of the parish to which the boy belonged
said there was not the least.

The LORD MAYOR observed that the streets swarmed
with poor children, to whom the new poor law regulations
furnished an additional incentive to commit depredations
for the support of life. In his opinion it would be much
better if those wretched children were protected by this
trade for six years instead of being subjected to contamination
from the proflicacy around them. Chimney-sweepers' boys
were not half so badly off as the boys who worked in the
coal pits. On the contrary, when it was customary to give
them a trial before they took to the trade, he was not aware
of any instance in which the climbing was objected to, and
had witnessed many ludicrous proofs of preference.
Alderman T. WOOD by no means objected to the master
in this case, but he could not, without further consideration,
and looking over the Act, consent to the application.
The LORD MAYOR—I certainly take a different view of
the case. It is our duty as Magistrates to carry the Act
into effect, and here we are directly, and in my opinion most
fairly called upon. However, the case shall stand over
until you satisfy yourself.
Mary Mearthy, an old Irish woman, was brought up
by an officer, who found her lying insensibly drunk in the
streets. She had in her pockets some pairs of stockings,
which seemed to have been just had out of a haberdasher's
shop ; and she had about her person several duplicates for
a great many pairs of other stockings.
Mrs. M'Carthy said that she had met an ould friend from
Ireland, and they went into a shop full of lights, where she
drank something very sweet, until she thought the place was
one blaze of fire, and knew nothing more until she awoke in
a watchhouse.
The old woman was remanded. • No doubt is entertained
that she stole the goods at a shop-door, and treated her com-
panions with the produce of the plunder.