The Sun.
London, England, 1857-10-28 00:00:00

SUN. 1.40 YDO'N, WE DNES-DAY EVENING,- 0-CTOBER 28, 185'7.

bringing any evidence they thought proper to prove
the state of his mind.

Sir H. Thompson (the foreman) said he thought
the deed was done in a fit of temporary insanity.
Lady Bateman, who was in the house, could prove
if necessary that the deceased had been very low
spirited when suffering from the pain in the head.
The Rev. Mr. Warburton stated, in reply to Mr.
Delves, a juryman, that he was certain the deceased
had not the pistol in his hand when he went to the
closet just before the fit ing.
Both Sir H. Thompson and. Mr. Adare, j ury men ,
spoke to conversations with the deceased, in which
he mentioned his happy circumstances, and seemed
very pleased with his position in life.
Susan Harris, the housemaid, stated that she saw
the pistol in a leathern case on the marble stand by
the side of the bed at half past 8 on Thursday night.
Several jurymen expressed their concurrence in
the foreman's opinion, and a verdict was returned
that the deceased destroyed himself in a fit of tem-
porary insanity.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—Oct. 2i".

(Before Mr. Bliss, Q. 0.)
Geo. Lloyd, 26, was indicted for feloniously break-
ing into and entering the shop of Michael Grouse
and stealing therein nine pieces of cloth and other
property, value 161. He was also charged with re-
ceiving.
Mr. Hawthorne prosecuted ; Mr. Ribton ap-
peared for the prisoner.
During the night of the 13th inst. a robbery was
committed on the premises of the prisoner, a tailor,
in New Oxford-street, who resides in Camden-town;
and it appeared from the evidence of the prosecu-
tion that at 7 o'clo* in the morning the prisoner
and another man were seen by the police in King-
street, Bloomsbury, in joint possession of a bag
which contained the property which was the pro-
duce of the robbery. The other man escaped, and
subsequently one Wm. Sinclair was taken on sus-
picion of being that person, but an alibi was set
up before the magistrate, who discharged him.
Lloyd declared that he knew nothing of the other
person or of the robbery, and that he was only near
him by accident, when he, seeing the police, threw
down the bag and ran away ; but against tit's there
was the oath of the constable that fie saw the pri-
soner c arrying the bag aud hand it to his companion
just before the latter threw it down and ran off.
Mr. Ribton, in his address to the jury, suggested
that even if they thought they could rely upon the
policeman's statement for accuracy, there was still
a doubt, which the prisoner ought to have the
benefit of. It was really a " not proven" case.
The jury, after consulting together in a private
room for an hour, found the prisoner Guilty of re
ceiving the property feloniously.
A. previous conviction for burglary, and a sen-
tence of 18 mouths, were proved against him, in
addition to which it was stated that he had been
convicted of pocketpicking aud had been the Cill-
stant associate of the most notorious housebreakers
in the metropolis.
The learned Judge sentenced him to be kept in
penal servitude for four years.
Thomas B istin, 20, a pawnbroker's assistant,
was indicted for having stolen a ring of the v4lue
0f.145., the property of Ca-arlotte Glover.
Mr. Hawthorne prosecuted ; Mr. Ribtou ap-
peared for the prisoner.

- The prosecurix, a gaudily-dressed girl of the
I town, lodging in College-street, Chelsea, stated that
she became acquainted with the prisoner, who vi
' sited her four or five times, although she did not
know either his name or address. On the last oc-
casion he turned over several articles which were
upon her dressing•table, and seemod much t) ad-
mire a ring, which sho told him, in reply to a ques-
tion, was given to her by a gentleman who had
gone to Australia. After he was gone she missed
the ring, and on meeting the prisoner a few nights
afterwards at.Cremorne-gardens she asked him for
it, and said she would say no more about it if he
hal taken it in joke, but that if he did not return
it she would give him into custody. The prisoner
sail " ---- your eyes, I know nothing about your
ring," as he persisted in that assertion she carried
her threat into effect, and he was locked up. The
ring was afterwards givenup to her bythe prisoner's
father, who wished her to withdraw the charge on
payment of a sum of money to cover the expense
she had incurred in going about trying to find the
prisoner—that expense was about 3/. 155., but she
was afraid to take the money as the case was before
a magistrate. All she wanted was her ring, as she
valued it far beyond its mere intrinsic worth.
In cross-examination she positively stated that
when she demanded the ring of the prisoner, on
meeting him at CremornP, he did not say he had
got it "with" him, but that he had not got it "at
all." She had been to Cremorne with him, and had
' waltzed. He had treated her to refreshment, and.
he had paid her money at various times. She con-
tradicted a statement made by her before the ma-
gistrate at the police court with reference to a con-
versation they had had about the ring when he took
it up.

Tile depositions were put in as evidence to prove
this contradiction. The prisoner made a statement
before the magistrate to the effect that, seeing the
ring on the table, he took it up and asked if it was
hers, placsd it upon his finger, and as he was sitting
on the sofa when he took it off he put it in his waist-
coat pocket, as he was not near enough to the table
,o put it where he took it froci, and forgot to take
it out before he left.

The prosecutrix further stated that the prisoner
told the policeman that he would return the ring if
he bad it with him, but the fact was he h.id taken
it in a joke and had lost it, and would pay double
and treble its value if the charge were Lot gone on
with, but sbe persisted.
Another woman who was with the prosecutrix at
Cremorne, corroborated her statenient as to the
prisoner having positively Stated that he knew no-
thing of the ring.
The policeman stated, that when the charge was
made the prisoner said—" Don't give me in charge,
Lotty ;-1 did take it, but it was only is joke, and I
jewel!erY proved thatthe prisoner left
haveleo4ler stitin;
i ring,—that produced, crone like it—with him for
security of 3s.
a s
and
6d., the balance of the price of a
watch. The ring was given up to the prisoner's
father.
Mr. such a charge will be my ruin."
A d
of felonious intention.
T
acquitted the prisoner.
on the question
re.
yßibt stoppedon addressed
tl ae ee d
—"- - •

was indicted f y.or) stealing 1,000
' (Before Mr. Crean
Edward George
bricks, the property of Henry Bird.
Mr. Poland appeared for the prosecution ; Mr.
T. Salter for the prisoner.
The pi isuner was employed to cart away bricks
and he was seen to de-
liverfr om a
a lfioealdd
aatt Na optltaioneg
iliTliv,
as
ordered to, but it
could not be proved that a load was deficient in the
quantity property delivered. ,
The jury retire I to consider their verdict, and
eventually acquitted the prisoner.
Sarah Clifford and Mary Ann Williams were in-
dicted for stealing a cigar case,
value Ss. GI, the
property of Sarah Mtrshall • four punes, value
145., the property of SArauel floluie3; and 35
yards of cloth, the property of Merrick Waldis.
'
From the evidence given is appeared that the
prisoners had been robbing tradesmen by going to
shops under the pretence of purchasing some
small article, hut redly for the purpose of stealing
anything there might be upon the counter.
They were convicted and sentenced each to six
months' hard labour.

Mary Hudson was brought up from the Bride-
well, Tothitl-sells, to be dealt with as an incorri-
g ble, disorderly person, under the sth of Geo. IV.
The prisoner was taken into .custody for using
language of the most filthy description to persons
passing along the high road at Brompton, and,
having ben summarily dealt with no less than 18
times since.lBs3 for offences of the same descrip-
tion, she was on this charge committed to hard la-
bour until the quarter sessions, then to be dealt
with as the Court should think fit.
Mr. Creasy, aftsr fully investigating the circum-
stances, ssntenced the prisoner to six months' hard
labour.

The prisoner was evidently an educated woman,
although she had sank to the lowest grades of drat' -
kenness and prostitution.
William Southern, 19, a clerk, was indicted for
stealing the sum of 251. in gold and bankuOte., the
moneys and property of Joseph Sold ani and ano-
ther, his mailers and employers, He was further
indicted for Stealing a gold watch and two silver
watches, value 151., the property of Joseph Soldaui.
Mr. Lewis
.prosecuted ; Mr. Metcalfe appeared
for the prix-mer.
It appeared from the evidence that the prisoner
was in the °lei byment of Messrs. Soldani and Co.,
of Henrietta-Ttr_et, Covent-garden, and on the 7th
of &ptetnber th 3 prisoner had handed over to him
the sum of 251. to invest for his masters in the
London and Westminster Bank. The bankers'
passbook was also given to him for the purpose of
having
an entry made to their credit for that
amount. When the book was brought back in a
few days an entry
was made in it for the sum of
251., but on a subsequent transaction taking place
on behalf of Mr. Soldani, the ledger clerk at the
bank crossed out the entry as to the 251., denying
that the entry
was in the handwriting of the clerk
who woull receive the money. The prosecutor
found that
aPcount in the bankers' ledger was
defieient the sum
of 25/ , and he stated, to the bet
of his belief, that the entry in the passbook was in
the prisoner's handwriting.
Mr. Metcalfe addressed the jury for the prisoner,
contending that no proof had been given that the