The Sun.
London, England, 1861-08-29 00:00:00

frankness the right hand of friendship wherever it
is tendered to us. We do not distrust that prof-
fered :right hand, because we see the left hand
grasping the hilt of the sword. But when that
left plainly does so grasp the hilt of the sword it
would be extreme folly in us to throw away our
shield of defence. (Loud cheers.) There are, gen-
tlemen, two securities for peace. The one consists
in a state of perfect insignificance, the other in a
state of perfect defence. The security arising
from perfect insignificance. England, I think,
will never enjoy. (Laughter and cheers.) The secu-
rity for peace which arises from a perfect state of
defence, unconnected with any notions of aggres-
sion, not coupled with hostility towards any one, but
confined solely to a manly determination to protect
and maintain what we have, is a security which I
trust this country will long continue to possess.
And so far from that being a reason why the
most friendly relations should not be kept up with
foreign Powers, in my opinion it is the only true,
solid, and stable foundation upon which those
friendly relations and the hope of a durable peace
can permanently rest. (Cheers.) Mr. Mayor, my
lords and gentlemen, I beg to return you my most
sincere and heartfelt thanks for the honour you have
done me, and I can assure you that I shall ever
consider the day now drawing to a close one of the
proudest in the whole course of my life. (Loud and
prolonged cheers.)
Several minor toasts followed, after which Lord
and Lady Palmerston left the hall, and drove off
amid the acclamations of the multitude to WEI. lmer
Castle.

The banquet, which was of a very sumptuous
character and admirably served, was provided by
the Messrs. Staples, of London, and fully supported
the reputation of their establishment. The musical
arrangements were under the direction of Mr Winn,
assisted by Miss J. Wells, Mrs. Winn, Mr. Donald
King, Mr. Shoubridge,'and Mr. Fielding. Mr.
Harker ably officiated as toastmaster.
The town was brilliantly illuminated, the whole
population thronging the streets and keeping up
the festivities till far into the night.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE-Aug. 28.

BOW-STREET.—Two men named Bray and
Chapman were charged by William Dixey, a well-
dressed young man of prepossessing aspect, with
robbing him of his purse and £l2 in gold.
They were defended by Mr. Lewis, jun. (Lewis
and Lewis).

The prosecutor, who described himself as a draper,
but afterwards admitted that he was at present a
draper's assistant intending to establish himself in
business shortly, deposed that he met May on the
19th inst. in Vickress s Tavern, corner of the Strand
and Wellington-street, where he went in to get a
glass of ale. Bray drew his attention to a drunken
man who was making great exhibition of a pocket-
ful of bank notes, and suggested that "as gentle-
men," they would be doing the drunken man a
service if they should see the man home, that he
might not be robbed of his "lot of money." Wit-
ness " taking an interest" in the drunken man
assented, and they saw him safely to the Craven
Head in Drury-lane, where he said be was lodging.
There Bray ordered a pint of ale, for which the
drunken man was going to pay, but witness
to prevent him from changing a £5 note volun-
teered to pay for it. In order to do so
witness took out his purse, which contained
£8 10s. in gold, but no silver. Replacing the
purse in one waistcoat pocket, he took some loose
coin from the other, and after paying for the ale,
replaced the remainder of the money, £3 10s. in
gold and some silver, in the pocket from which he
had taken it. He drank about half a glass of the
ale, but dissuaded the drunken man from tasting it.
Chapman then entered, with another man, not in
custody. They appeared to know Bray, who
directed Chapman's attention to the drunken man,
observing that he had " a lot of money," and that
they had been seeing him safe home. Chapman
challenged the drunken man to toss for £5. Wit-
ness dissuaded him from doing so. He suspected
they were all three in league to swindle the poor
victim.

Mr. Henry inquired whether by " the pcor vic-
tim" he meant the drunken man or himself ?
The witness said he meant the drunken man, but
he himself was the victim as it turned out. The four
then proceeded to lay pipes on the floor, and chal-
lenged witness to bet that he would jump over them
without breaking any of them. He declined, and
seeing that they wanted to " have " him, he took
the £3 10s. out of his pocket, and watched his op-
portunity to put it in his purse as soon as he could
do so unperceived. Bray then came on one side of
him and Chapman on the other. Chapman seized
his hand, wrenched it open, and took the £3 10s.
from him, while Bray took his purse from his pocket,
and they all decamped at the same moment. Bray
aml Chapman left by different doors. Witness im-
mediately gave information to the landlord, and
then 'proceeded to the station-house, where he told
the inspector what occurred, and gave a description
of the three men—the two prisoners and the man
who came in with Chapman. Did not describe the
drunken man. On Tuesday evening he saw the
three men standing oppogite his residence in Lam-
beth-walk, and calling a policeman gave Bray in
custody. The other two ran away, but after a
chase Chapman was taken, though the other man
escaped.

In cross-examination, the witness strenuously in•
sisted that he did not toss or bet, and that the drunken
man did not toss. Did not think there was any
betting. Did not pledge his watch to bet. Pledged
it the same evening, but that was after giving in-
formation at the police-station. Pledged his watch
in order to pay a bill, which he had intended to dis-
charge out of the money of which he was robbed.
Did not pay the bill after all, being tired, and prefer-
ring to go home. Neither of the prisoners was with
him when he pledged his watch—at least, as far as he
knew. They might have followed him—if so, he did
not se; them. Borrowed £3 or £3 3s. on the watch,
at a pawnbroker's near Drury-lane. Gave his cor-
rect name and address to the pawnbroker, but did
not know that it was by this means the prisoners
knew where he lived and went there to see him.
Would swear that he did not tell the inspector he
had been swindled. On being pressed, he would
not swear he had not said so, but did not think he
could have said such a thing. Did not say it was
done by putting down pipes and betting that he
would jump over them. Did not say he had been
tossing with the men. Would swear he did not
bet or toss with them.

It appeared that Sergeant Haspinall was acting
inspector on the occasion in question, and had made
a report of the prosecutor's complaint to this effect,
—That three men (whom he described most
minutely, and, as regarded the prisoners, with pre-
cise accuracy) had defrauded him of £l2 by tossing
and betting upon his jumping over tobacco pipes.
That in a bet of £3 he staked the money by laying
three sovereigns on the counter, but before the
wager was decided one of the men seized the stakes,
and they all decamped.
The prosecutor said the report was incorrect.
Mr. Henry—lt was taken down from your own
mouth.

The Prosecutor—l said I was robbed of the
money. I did not say that I staked it, or that I
bet or tossed at all.

Mr. Henry—You must have said so. The in-
spector could not have invented it.

- The Prosecutor—l do not mean to impute such a
thing to the inspector. I told him that they wanted
me to bet and toss, but I was confused and excited,
and he may have misunderstood me.
Mr. Henry observed that the words had been
taken down from the prosecutor's own mouth.
Mr. Lewis called the magistrate's attention 'to
the deliberation and collectedness exhibited in the
careful—and, as regarded the two prisoners, accu-
rate—description of the three men.

Mr. Henry then sent for Sergeant Haspinall,
who positively swore to the accuracy of the report.
The prosecutor did not say a word about money
being taken from his hand, or from his pocket.
Mr. Henry would be glad if the prosecutor could
explain his inconsistent statements, which ap-
peared to him (Mr. Henry) to be wholly irrecon-
cilable.

The prosecutor thought some allowance ought to
be made for a slight discrepancy under such cir-
cumstances of excitement.

Mr. Henry said it was not a slight discrepancy,
but a material contradiction.

The Prosecutor—This morning Mrs. Bray offered
me £2O to witl draw from the prosecution.
Mr. Henry said that had nothing to do with the
main question before him, which was, whether the
prosecutor's statement, which was wholly unsup-
ported, bore out his case. He should be glad to
assist the prosecutor against such characters, if he
could do so withjustice, but he could not send two
diametrically opposite statements before a jury.
How were the jury to decide which they Would be-
lieve ? He knew which he thought the more pro-
bable, 'and if the prosecutor had awdhhihecre,dutloouhßihs
first story themen should have gone for trial. But
would a jury believe a statement
not originally made on oath, Was contradicted by
his own sworn deposition ?
Mr. Parfitt, the landlord of the Craven Head,
said that the affair did not happen
nothappenseravtintghe,
but was
but in the room- He Was
near at band, and he heard nothing of it till four ,