The Sun.
London, England, 1861-11-05 00:00:00

PEARSON V. BIUGGERIDGE.

POLICE INLELLIGENCE, Nov. 41.

LAMBETH.—PEACE WITH THE HAVELOCKS.--
It will be recollected that on Saturday week two
of the conductors of Mr. Joseph Wood, proprietor
of the Havelock omnibuses, appeared to answer
summonses for obstruction, in forming a starting-
place and terminus close to the Camberwell-gate,
having been obliged to vacate their former ground
at the end of Beresford-street, by an alteration in
the payment of toll. On that occasion Mr. Pearce,
the barrister, appeared on behalf of Mr. Wood, and
said that he had not the slightest wish to infringe
the law, or cause obstruction ; but the only alterna-
tive left to him was either to pay £5OO per annum
for his ten omnibuses or remove them. In adopting
the latter course, however, he went to a spot where
he did not think they would have caused any pub-
lic inconvenience, and where he hoped to receive the
sanction of the Commissioners of Police for a termi-
nus being formed.
Inspector Frazer said that a representation had
been made to the Commissioners of Police, and he
was quite certain they would not sanction the adop-
tion of a second stand for omnibuses in the vicinity,
and particularly at the place selected by Mr. Wood.
Ho (Mr. Frazer) had, however, authority to say
that the commissioners had no objection to Mr.
Wood drawing his omnibus on the standing oppo-
site, namely, that in front of the Red Lion, and
taking his turn with the other vehicles of a similar
description, and Mr. Elliott eventually adjourned
the summons to give Mr. Pearce an opportunity of
going before the Police Commissioners to make
what terms he could on behalf of his client.

Mr. Frazer again attended, and on the case being
called on,

Mr. Newsham, the manager of Mr. Wood, in-
formed Mr. Elliott that without troubling the Com-
missioners of Police Mr. Wood had consented to
adopt the proposition of the Inspector on the former
day of drawing on the stand in front of the Red
Lion ; and he (Mr. Newsham) was happy to say
that things were going on smoothly and satisfac-
torily, and hoped they would continuo to do so.
Mr. Frazer admitted that this was so, but added,
that though Mr. Pearce had promised that the ob-
struction should at once be done away with it had
been kept up for the whole of the day the parties
had been here.

On hearing this Mr. Elliott convicted the two men
summoned in a penalty of 10s. each and costs.
Mr. Newsham hoped his worship would not en-
force the penalty, or at least endorse the defendants
licences, as they had mainly acted under his advice
and instructions.

His Worship was however inexorable, and the
penalties and costs were paid.

SOUTHWARK.—THE SKITTLE-SHARPS AND
THE NEWMARKET FLATCATCHER.—DanieI Glad-
ding, George Shaw, and Francis Porter, rather
weli-dressed men, were brought up for final exami-
nation, charged with robbing Benjamin George
Phillips, a Newmarket waiter, of £4O in Bank of
En gland notes.
It appeared the prosecutor met Shaw in High-
street, Southwark, on the afternoon of the 23d
ult., who offered to show him the way to the
Borough-road. They entered a public-house on the
vray, when the other prisoners came in, and a tall
man, who pulled out a number of notes, and said
he had just come into a fortune. It was suggested
that they should go to another house to throw a
weight, and prosecutor was to go and see fair.
They went there, and, instead of the weight, skittles
were introduced, and they played several games.
The prosecutor lost a sovereign, all the money he
had, when Gladding bet him £2O that he could not
produce £6O within three hours. He accepted the
bet, and went with Gladding and Shaw to Black-
heath and fetched the money, amounting to £4O in
bank notes and £2O in gold. On their return to
the public-house they went into the skittle-ground,
and the notes were snatched out of his hand, and
they all made off. Jones, 151 L, apprehended them
the same night in the New-cut.
Jones said that since the last examination the
prosecutor could not be found. He understood that
he had received the £4O back and had left the coun-

try
M.
r. Edwin, who appeared for the prisoners, said
that they were sharpers on both sides, and the New-
market one had been done, therefore he was ashamed
to come forward.
Mr. Burcham observed that as there was no pro-
secutor the prisoners must be discharged.
ATTEMPTED MURDER IN THE BOROUGH"GeO.
Phillips, a young fellow of very bad character, was
placed at the bar before Mr. Bonham for Author

Police-constable 122 M replied in the negative.
He produced the prosecutor's clothes saturated with
blood, and showed the direction the knife had taken.
He asked for a remand to enable him to obtain evi-
dence of the prisoner's former conviction for a simi-
lar offence.

Mr. Burcham said it was a serious outrage, and
as the prisoner was a desperate character, he should
remand him until Thursday for further evidence.

THAMES. SERIOUS CHARGE AGAINST A
LETTER-CARRIER.—John Goodridge Whitcomb, a
letter-carrier, appeared before Mr. Woolrych to
answer .a summons which charged him that he,
being a person engaged to deliver certain post
letters, was unlawfully guilty of an act of drunken-
ness while so employed, and whilst having the said
letters in his custody and possession, by which he
had incurred a penalty not exceeding £2O.
Mr. Peacock, solicitor to the General Post-office,
said this was a prosecution instituted by direction of
the Postmaster-General, and after stating the facts
of the case said it was of the greatest importance to
the public that persons entrusted with letters should
be honest, careful, and sober men.
Mr. John Lawson, acting deputy comptroller of
the eastern district, said it was the duty of the pri-
soner to deliver letters in St. George-street, better
known as Ratcliff-highway, and places adjacent, and
also to collect letters at the receiving-houses and
bring to the district Post-office. On Saturday morn-
ing last he saw the prisoner, who had just brought
in his 10 o'clock collection co/letters, The prisoner
was stupidly drunk. He questioned the prisoner
about some letters he had neglected to deliver. The
prisoner could not or would not answer him. Wit-
ness sent Inspector Fisher to the prisoner's house,
12, Buross-street, Commercial-road. He returned
with two registered letters, four paid letters, two
unpaid letters, and a newspaper. The prisoner ought
to have delivered them between 9 and 10 o'clock on
Saturday morning.
In answer to Mr. Peacock, the witness said that
the safety of the letters were endangered by the
prisoner's drunkenness, and when he told him of
the discovery that had been made, he cried loudly
and appealed for mercy.
Mr. Gomm, clerk to Mr. C. Young, solicitor, who
defended the prisoner, asked the witness how long
the prisoner had been in the service ofathe public
as a letter-carrier.

Mr. Lawson—For 16 years.
Mr. Gomm—What character has he maintained
during that time for sobriety and honesty ?
Mr. Lawson—l have heard nothing against his
honesty, but inspectors have reported tome that he
has been under the influence of stimulants. There
has been no official report. •
Mr. Fisher, inspector of Post-office letter• carriers,
stated that he found the prisoner's official cape at
his lodgings on Saturday morning, and in it were
two registered letters, six other letters, and a news-
paper, all for delivery in the district. Defendant
was very drunk, and eould not give any explanation
about the letters.

Alfred Alexander, jun., of 93, St. George-street,
identified the envelopes of two registereet letters
which the prisoner ought to have delivered at 93,
St. George-street on Saturday morning. One was
addressed to Alfred Alexander, and the other to
Alexander Abraham. The prisoner brought one of
the registered letters to him on Saturday morning,
and said, " I have got a letter for you." He said,
" Then give it me." Prisoner said, "I will net give
it to you till you give me a glass of rum." He re-
fused to comply with the demand made upon him,
and the prisoner, who was very drunk and silly,
then left the house. He went to the district post-
office and lodged a complaint against the prisoner.
The registered letters were subsequently delivered.
They were of great importance.
Mr. Gomm, in defence, said he could not help feel-
ing this was a charge of a serious nature. It was
perfectly true the prisoner was inebriated on Satur-
day morning, and unable to deliver his letters, and
he was very sorry indeed that he had been guilty of
such folly. The morning was cold, wet, and clammy,
and the prisoner, who was unused to strong drinks,
was treated by persons at whose house he delivered
letters, with rum, which took an effect on the de-
fendant which it would probably not take upon
stronger heads. Mr. Gomm then made an earnest
and feeling appeal to the magistrate, and said the
prisoner had been many years in the service of the
Post-office that many respectable witnesses would
speak to the previous good character of the de-
fendant, and that in awarding the penalty it ought
not to be forgotten that the prisoner had already
lost his situation, and after 16 years' service, for-
feited all claims to superannuation.
Mr. John Thomas Crouch, chemist and druggist,
223, High-street, Shadwell, said he kept a Post-
office receiving-house, and had known the defendant
seven years. He always found him very punctual,
honest, attentive to his duties, and active. He never
saw defendant the worse for liquor.'
Mr. John Wardell, Wapping Wall, shipping
grocer, who also keeps a receiving-house; Mr.
Robert Boyd, a member of the Board of Guardians
of the Stepney Union ; and Mr. William Halfpenny,
a tradesman in Lower Shadwell, who had known
the prisoner about 13 years, all spoke in the highest
terms of the defendant's sobriety, honesty, activity,
and punctuality.
Mr. Lawson was recalled, and in answer to the
magistrate said—l have been looking after the de-
fendant three years last October. He did his duties
tolerably fair—moderately well. Private complaints
have been made to me of his want of punctuality,
and of his being muddled with drink, but not suffi-
cient to justify an official report.
Mr. Woolrych looked upon this as a very bad case,
a very gross case, where the interests of the public
were materially concerned. The regular delivery
of post letters by the carriers was of the highest
importance. The defendant, by his drunkenness,
had endangered the safety of many letters, the
de-
livery of which were actually delayed for several
hours. The character sought to be established for
the prisoner was quite undeserved, for he had given
grounds of complaint to his superior officers. Very
serious results might follow the non-delivery of
letters, whether they were registered or addressed
to the most humble classes of the community. The
worst part of the prisoner's conduct was, that he
refused to deliver a letter unless ho was treated
with a glass of rum. The defendant was totally
unfit for the responsible duties of a post letter-car-
rier. Taking all the circumstances of the case into
consideration, and that the prisoner was dismissed
from his situation, he should inflict the mitigated
penalty of £3.
The magistrate afterwards reduced the penalty to
405., and allowed the prisoner until Saturday next
to pay it.

WESTMINSTER.—CHARGE OF COMMITTING
WILFUL DAMAGE.—H. Hopkins, a young man, was
charged, before Mr. Arnold, with wilfully break-
ing a quantity of glass, the property of Mr. Wm.
Cook, confectioner, 15, Great Chapel-street, West-
minster.
It appeared from the evidence that at about 12
o'clock on Saturday night the prisoner went into
the shop. He was refused to be served, having on a
former occasion been told, in consequence of his bad
conduct, that he was not to enter the shop again.
Upon hearing the order he took up a bunch of tur-

'nip-stumps, which he flung among some glasses anal
broke several things. He afterwards flung- a ginger-
beer bottle at Mrs. Cook's head, which missed her,
and made use of very bad language. He also threat-
ened that he would do for both Mr. and Mrs. Cook.

Mr. Arnold observed to the prisoner t hat he was
not charged with an assault. He had therefore only
to do with the charge of wilful damage. By a late
act of Parliament, when a prisoner was convicted
of wilful damage, the magistrate had power to in.
flict a penalty, or in default ft certain term of im-
prisonment. By a new act, lately passed, he had
power to send a person to prison without a fine, and
as this was a bad case he should take that course on
this occasion.

The prisoner was sent for two mouths to the
House of Correction.

STRATFORD. CAPTURE OF A TIIEATRICAL
COMPANY AT AN UNLICENSEECTHEATRE.—Fredk.
Fredericks, described as a comedian, ww charged
with having a large portable theatre, and using the
same, contrary to the Act of Parliament 2d and 3d
Vic., cap. 37, see. 46, for the performance of stage
plays, in the parish of Barking, in the county of
Essex, and the following persons, John Rowe, Fre-
derick Fredericks, jun., Robert Newton, James
Middleton, Edward Beaumont, John Lewis, Fanny
Horrocks, and Emma Lewis, were charged under
the same section with being unlawfully engaged in
the performance of a stage play called "The
Bandit."