The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-10 00:00:00

4VUE;SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 10, 1859.

ASSIZE INPELLIG.ENCIE.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—YORK, Dec. 8.

(Before Mr. Justice Wightman.)
William Frederick Hardy, a clerk in the Leeds
Post-office, was indicted for stealing, on the 3d of
October last, a post letter containing a 1;5 Bank of
England note and half a sovereign, the property
of the Postmaster-General.
Ms. West and Mr. Blackburn prosecuted ; and
Mr. Maule defended the prisoner.
It appeared that on the 3d of October last a Mr.
Joseph Clarke, who is a china dealer at Todmorden,
posted a letter at the post-office in that town,
addressed to Mr. Whitick, yeast-dealer, of Hull,
and containing a £5 Bank of England note and a
half-sovereign. Before posting the letter he took
the number and date of the note. The letter was
put into the usual letter-bag, which, in its convey-
ance to Hull, would have to pass through the Leeds
post-office, and be there opened and the letters
sorted. The bag in due course arrived sealed up
at the Leeds post-office, where it was opened, and
it was the duty of the prisoner to sort the letters
and to forward them to their destination. The
letter in question never arrived at Mr. Whitick's,
and its non-arrival was made known to Mr. Clarke,
who communicated with the post-office authorities
respecting it. Early in November the prisoner was
seen in possession of a £5 Bank of England note,
which he was anxious to get changed. He was seen
at the Midland Station Hotel getting some refresh-
ment, after which he tendered a £5 Bank of Eng•
land note for change, and, not obtaining change,
he went to the Town-hall refreshment-room with
Mr. Barr, printer, where he again asked for change,
and Mr. Barr said a policeman would get him
change, and called a policeman named Buckle to
take the note and get it changed. Buckle went to
a Mr. Gibson, who, having learnt that Mr. Barr
had sent him with the note, changed if, and en-
dorsed Mr. Barr's name on it. The note went into
circulation, and ultimately found its way into the
Bank of England, where its payment had been
stopped. There was no other note of that number
and date in circulation, and therefore there could be
no mistake as to the note. The note was found
with the endorsement put upon it by Mr. Gibson,
and was thus traced back to the prisoner.
For the defence it was contended that the letters
had passed through many persons in the post-office,
to whom suspicion might attach as well as to the
prisoner, and that the £5 note which had been in
circulation might have passed as innocently through
the prisoner's hands as through those of any other
person after its abstraction.

His Lordship having summed up, the jury im-
mediately found the prisoner guilty.—Sentence was
deferred.

John Lee, aged 24, was indicted for a garotte
robbery at Sheffield, on the 26th of October last,
and stealing from Willoughby Howe £3O, ane.
Maude shawl.

Mr. Maule and Mr. V. Blackburn prosecuted;
Mr. Campbell Foster defended the prisoner.
It appeared that on the day in question the pri-
soner was going to the Victoria Station in Sheffield
about half-past six o'clock, and met a man and
woman ; at the moment that he met them he was
suddenly seized from behind, a man's arm was
thrown round his neck, he was pulled 'back and
almost strangled. The man and woman before
him immediately rifled his pockets of his purse and
about £3O in money, and took from him a Mande
shawl of a peculiar pattern, which he had purchased
at Mr. Richards' shop in Sheffield the day before.
A witness named Empsall stated that just before
this robbery he had observed.a man and women in
the road as he :was going to the railway station,
and noticed the man, whom he believed to be the
prisoner. A few days after this occurrence the
prisoner went to a tailor named Sykes, in Sheffield,
and asked him to make him a suit of clothes out of
a piece of cloth which he produced, which was
nearly four yards long, and Sykes did so. On the
10th of Nov. the prisoner was taken into custody,
with these clothes on, and Mr. Richards swore that
they were made out of the Maude sold by him to
the prosecutor, which was nearly four yards long,
and was of a peculiar pattern.
The jury found the prisoner guilty, and he was
sentenced to three years' penal servitude.
Henry Ross and John May were indicted for a
burglary in the dwelling-house of George Storey,
at Slaythwaite, and stealing therefrom three bottles
of spirits, arid other articles, his property.
Mr. Price and Mr. Shepherd prosecuted. The
prisoners were undefended.

It appeared that the house of the prosecutor,
George Storey, is situate Lat Slaythwaite, in the
parish of Skelton, and on the night of the bur-
glary, March 10 last, his family consisted of him-
self, his two daughters, and his son Henry ; his two
' daughters, in consequence of his infirmities, sleep-
ing in the same room • as that in which he slept.
The doors of the house were properly fastened about.
9 o'clock in the evening, and the family were all in
bcd by 10 o'clock. About 1 o'clock on the morn-
ing of March 11, the I:rosecutor's daughter Anne
was awoke by a light. She saw three men in the
room, one of whom had a lighted candle in his
hand. She immediately seized a gun, and called
out to her father to use it, but he giving no answer
she struck with it several times and hit something,
but whether or not the men she could not say—at
the same time calling out for her brother. The
candle in the meantime was put out. One of the
men pushed her into a corner and repeatedly struck
her over the head. So soon as she was able to get
away from him she got a candle which was in the.
room and lighted it. There were two men only in
the room then. In the meantime her sister Eliza-
beth and her brother Henry were awoke. Her
sister first observed a man standing by her bedside
with an axe in his hand, in the act of striking at
her ; but her brother coming into the room at the
moment seized him and the other man at the same
time. He immediately received several blows upon
the head and was felled to the ground. Elizabeth
Storey escaped from the house. Anne Storey posi-
tively identified the two prisoners, and Elizabeth
Storey the prisoner Ross. May demanded money.
Anne said she would give him all they had if he
would spare their lives, and handed him her purse,
containing Bs. He replied, " If that is all, you must
die." Ross and May then left the room, but May
returned and searched the drawers and George
Storey's clothes. The men then left. On the house
being examined it appeared that the entry had been
made through a window on the ground-floor, part
of the frame of the window having been taken out.
George Storey, who, it!is supposed, was struck
when in bcd asleep, was severely cut on the head,
as was his son also, and his daughter received no
less than 11 cuts on the head.

Evidence was also given, showing that the . two
prisoners were in the neighbourhood.of the prose-
, cutor's houie on the day before the burglary, and
on the morning of the 10th of March, and also on
the following morning (the • 11th). 11,03 escaped
after having been taken into custody, and May,
when charged with the offence, said, " I know all
about it ; you need say no more."
The prisoners, who were not defended, said they
had been in the neighbourhood in February, but
not in March, and knew nothing about the offenee.
The jury found the prisoners guilty, and sentence
of death was oriaered to be recorded, the learned
Judge stating their lives would not be sacrificed,
but that they must not expect to receive &less
punishment. thau transportation for 20 or 25 years.
The granq jury, on being discharged, had called
the attention of the judge in commendable terms to
the " rescau.te conduct" of Anne Storey," and his
Lordshi-p regretted that he could not award. her
any re,..mmpence.
Joseph Wadsworth (a boy. 15 years old) was in-
dict'td, under the 13th section of the 14th andlsth
Victoria, cap. 19, for feloniously plaeinf, two stones
Won the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway with
'Antent 'to destroy the engine and carriages, and with
intent to endanger the lives of divers persons tra-
velling thereon, at Elland, on the 27th July last.
Mr. Maule prosecuted, and Mr. Wheelhouse de-
fended the prisoner.
It appeared that on the day mentioned a woman
named Ann Buckley, who is employed as a gate-
keeper at a level crossing the line, was watching
at the door of her own cottage for the approach
of an excursion train from Scarborough. While
so doing she observed. the prisoner stooping down
over the "up line" of rails at a place about 400 or
500. yards from her cottage. She had known the
lad for many years, and after seeing him bend down
once she saw him leave the rails for a moment, and
then again return and bend over the other rail on
the same or "up" line. He then went away, and in
a short time she went to the spot, and there, accord-
ing to her statement, she found two stones, each
square, flat, and of about 61b. weight. 'One of these
stones was placed on the top of each rail, and was
" packed." up with rubbish; as she said, in order to
make them stick to the place where they had been
put. t
01 Haring r
neighbourremnoevecodm first,tp haelalsniteocdin
bes Suybshhs
ieesagmusaehovntethl ieynr forma-
tion
oa fafter-
wards police. The lad,
wards came to ask her forgiveness saidt she
had no power to forgive him, but told: hime
the stationmaster at Elland.and hear what.heegseade About 11 o'clock the boy .came back, and he then
told Mrs. Buckley, that Mr. Hepworth, the station-
master, had said.he could not tbrgive such a thing
as that.. For the defynce it was contended that the
whole case rested upon the unsupported testimony
of Mrs, Buckley, and it was further insisted that,
even admitting Mrs. Buckley's statement to be cor-
rect, yet that it was impossible to suppose that the
prisoner would go into such a public part of the
railway, almost close to a cottage from which he
could be seen,. and place stones there in broad day-
-light. with the intention alleged in the indictment,
-and of which intention it was necessary that the

jury should be themselves satisfied before they could
convict the boy of the offence with which he was
charged.
Mr. Justice Wightman having summed up,
The jury, after a deliberation of about half an
hour, found a verdict of Not Guilty.

DEC. 9. -
OUTRAGE UPON A ktMALE NEAR HALIFAX.

Joseph Briggs, 27, William Shaw, 23, George
Chappell, 21, Samuel Earnshaw, 23, Charles Cook-
son,
20, and John Marsden, 23, were charged with
a felonious assault upon Sarah Ann Burrow, at
Halifax, on the 6th ult.
Mr. Foster and the Hon. F. S. Wortley were for
the prosecution ; Mr. Maule defended .Marsden ;
Mr. Price appeared for all the other prisoners.
Mr. Foster said the charge against the six pri-
soners was attended with unexampled violence and
cruelty. The young woman upon whom the offence
was committed was respectably connected, was 22
years of age, and at the time of the occurrence in
question was residing with her uncle at Halifax, as
his housekeeper. The prosecutrix had a cousin,
Martha Ann Burrow, who also resided at Halifax,
and a young man named Allan Tweedale was court-
ing her, and he invited her and the prosecutrix on
the sth of November to visit his sister at Brighouse
on the following day. There being no train on the
Sunday afternoon from Halifax to Brighouse, it
was arranged that they should walk, and Tweedale
agreed to meet them on the road. The prosecutrix
and Martha Ann Burrow left Halifax between four
and five o'clock in the afternoon of Sunday, the 6th
ult., and proceeded forward in the direction of
Brighouse, but Tweedale did not join them on the
road as they expected They went to the house
where the sister of Tweedale resided, and, as the
young woman was not then at home, they proceeded
direct to the railway station at Brighouse, intending
to return to Halifax by t"he train which left Brig-
house at seven o'cleck at night. The prosecutrix and
her cousin entered the waiting-room, when Allan
Tweedale joined them, and he persuaded them not'
to travel by the train, but to accompany him to the
station hotel, and there partake of some refresh-
ment. They remained conversing with Tweedale
till about nine o'clock, and then went to the station,
but found that the train was gone, and that it
would be necessary to walk home to Halifax. The
weather was then unfavourable, and they returned
to the hotel for a short time. A young man named
Joseph Wood, who resided in that neighbourhood,
entered the room and joined the party. It was pro-
posed that they should start for Halifax, and on
quitting the hotel Tweedale walked with Martha
Ann Burrow, and Wood accompanied the prosecu-
trix. Almost immediately adjoining the station at
Brighouse there is an archway over which the rail-
way passes, and under this archway they had to
pass. Near to this place there were standing a
party of eight or nine men, whom they passed, and
after they had proceeded a short way Martha Ann
Burrow discovered that she had left her veil at
the hotel, and she returned for it. In pass-
ing through the archway she had again to
walk past the men, amongst the party being
the prisoners at the bar. Briggs struck her lightly
on the back, when she turned round to him and
said that he was an ill-behaved person, and then
walked on, overtaking the prosecutrix, and Wood
and Tweedale; having arrived at the outskirts of
Brighouse, they proceeded along a footpath across
some fields, and this footpath is continued for a
distance of some three hundred yards between two
high walls ; at this place two men came up, one of
whom was Briggs, and he seized Allan by the collar,
upon which Tweedale turned round and pushed him
off. The other man in company with Briggs was
the prisoner Shaw. In a few moments after this
occurrence the prosecutrix :was seized round the
waist by Chappell, and other two of the prisoners
also got hold of her, used her most roughly, and
took improper liberties with her. With a deter-
mined effort the prosecutrix succeeded in releasing
herself from the grasp of Chappell and his two
brutal companions. She proceeded along the nar-
row enclosed footpath between the walls, when she
heard her cousin screaming violently. Three of the
party had also seized Martha Ann Burrow, but she
herself ran along the footpath to a farmhouse two
hundred yards off, where a person Pitchforth re-
sided, in order to obtain assistance, and she was
'followed by Tweedale. The prosecutrix was sur-
rounded by the prisoners, who dragged her along
the field, and whilst she was held down by four of
them Briggs and Shaw obtained possession of her
person. The poor girl struggled and resisted as far
as she could, until she was out of breath, and at
length she became insensible. After the outrage
had been committed, the prosecutrix was assisted to
the house of a Mr. Stott, whose wife behaved most
kindly •to her. Her bonnet was destroyed, her
dress was torn and muddy and drenched with wet,
and she was crying in so distressed a state as to
be almost unable to make herself understood re-
lative to the wrong which she had suffered.
Mrs. Stott provided the prosecutrix with a bed
for the night, and she remained under Mrs.
Stott's roof until the following morning. The
identity of the whole of the prisoners was spoken
to by the witnesses, the prosecutrix, the young men
Tweedale and Wood, and Martha and Burrow,
swearing to them as being the men engaged in the
outrage.
The prosecutrix, a good looking and well-dressed
young woman, was then examined. She Was in great
distress, and gave her evidence with some difficulty.
Tier testimony was clear and satisfactory, and was
not shaken in cross-examination.

Martha Ann Burrow, in her evidence, gave a
detailed account of all she saw on the night in
question, and she corroborated her cousin in several
important particulars.
Tweedale, in his cross-examination, was asked
why he did not interfere and endeavour to prevent
the outrage being perpetrated, and, in reply, he
said he was afraid of being attacked by tho pri-
soners.

Wood, in cross-examination, admitted that he
was in liquor at the time.

All tho prisoners were found guilty.
Briggs was sentenced to twenty-five years', the
other prisoners each to twenty years' penal servi-
tude.

NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE, Die. 8.
(Before Mr. Baron Martin.)
Thomas Mills was indicted for the wilful murder
Of Rebecca Mills, on the 18th of October last.
The Ron. A. Liddell and Mr. F. Headlam prose-
cuted ; Mr. Davison and Mr. Bruce defended.
It appeared that the prisoner and his wife on the
18th of October last had been to Acomb, celebrating
the event of putting the first timbers on the roof of
a cottage which the prisoner was at that time build-
ing. It was shown by the evidence in the case that
the prisoner and his wife came to a public-house
kept by a person called Ridley about ten o'clock on
that evening ; both were at that time intoxicated ;
they remained here until nearly 11, nothing having
transpired beyond a few words occasioned by the
prisoner objecting to his wife smoking a pipe and
having mono drink. They then left, and proceeded
homewards by a by-road, accompanied by a man
named Rutherford, who had left Ridley's public-
house with them. The wife appears to have used
abnsive language to her husband while the three
proceeded on their road linked arm in arm, the pri-
goner being in the centre; she also lost hold of her
husband's arm, and staggered across the road to the
wall. On her return it was shown that her husband
struck at her and she fell. The blow was repeated,
and with the same effect. Rutherford at that time,
hearing what he supposed to be the steps of persons
approaching, went in search of assistance. He re-
turned, however, without any, and found the de-
ceased lying on. the ground near the wall an her
right side, and the prisoner striking and kicking
her. After this Rutherford made every effort to
pacify the prisoner and asked him and the deceased
to go with him to Acomb Colliery, which was near
this spot, where he was an engineman, to pass the
night. The prisoner appeared to have agreed to this
but his wife turned towards Ridley's. The prisoner
followed his wife, and seems again to have assaulted
her. Upon this Rutherford returned to Ridley's
public-house, and procured the assistance of two
men named Neale and Hall. They all then re-
turned to tb.e spot where the prisoner and his wife
had been -.left (a distance of about 200 yards),
and found the deceased lying on the ground, the
prisoner sitting astride her body, beating her neck
and, head with both his hands. They were sepa-
rated, and in the course of separation the prisoner
twice fell on the road.l They appear then to have
placed the cloak or shawl of the deceased over her,
and she having said, " Hush, I'm not much worse ;
he does not know where I am now," they, left her
lying on, one aide of the road and the prisoner on
ttl6 'J t her. On their return to Ridley's they met a
girl named Herdman. She,it appeared, after they
passed her, heard other screams, and proceeded in
a direction towards the•prisoner and his wife, and
then observed, both being on their feet, that the
prisoner struck his wife on the back, and then
kicked her, upon which she .again fell. She also
spoke to an expression used by the prisoner to his
wife at the time, " You --, you have often pro-
voked me, but this shall be the last time:" Herd-
man, being frightened, immediately returned to
Acomb, the prisoner following her, andlo minutes
atter the occurrences she had witnessed the pri-
roller and his wife, accompanied by two policemen,
paslied the door of her master's 'house. These police-
trim it appeared, had heard the screams at about a.
distance of half a mile, and on proceeding to the
spot whence they appeared to come found the de-
ceased lying in the read. They asked her what
I was the matter, but she made no complaint, an.i on
proceeding with her towards the village of At:omb
the prisoner met'iliem, -upon which the dec eased
said, "Here, the pclice are taking me." The prisoner

at first threatened -violence towards police, but even-
tually accompanied his wife and the policemen on
his way homewards for a distance of 400 yards, ob-
serving, as the policemen left them, that it was a
good job they had met with thorn, for he did not
know what would have become of them. It was
shown that a person named Maughan, living
some 200 yards further down this road, while
in bed, heard noises, "as he imagined at first,
of persons in fun," and afterwards " as of a woman
in distress," but he was entirely unable to fix even
the time when he went to bed. Near to this cot-
tage next morning were found the shawl of the de-
ceased and marks as of persons having fallen in the
road. Nothing farther was proved with respect to
what had taken place in the course of the night,
but between five and six in the morning a man
named John Nixon heard cries of a man shouting
" Murder" and " Oh, dear, help me." This con-
tinued for about 20 minutes, upon which he pro-
ceeded to the spot whence the cries proceeded. He
met on his way there a man named Heslop, who
accompanied him. They found the deceased lying
on the side of th© road in the arms of the prisoner.
He called to them for assistance, and requested
them to get a cart and a doctor for his " poor dear
wife." It did not appear whether at this time the
wife was dead. A cart was procured. and life being
at this time extinct, the body was removed to an
adjoining farm. It appeared on cross-examination
that this road was in a state of very bad repair ;
the witness Nixon said, " You might bury yourself
in the ruts." It was also shown that close to where
the prisoner and the deceased were last found a
large stone lay upon the road. The only other ma-
terial evidence in the case was that of Mr. Stain-
thorpe and Mr. Stokoe, two surgeons, who made a
post mortem examination'of the body. They agreed
that death had been caused by an effusion of blood
from a rupture of the spleen ; they also agreed that
such rupture must have been caused by violence.
Mr. Stainthorpa thought it possible that the de-
ceased might have lived four or five hours after
such a rupture was caused. Mr. Stokoe gave it as
his decided opinion that if the rupture had been
caused by the violence deposed to antecedent to the
appearance of the police, it would have been physi-
cally impossible that deceased could have walked
to where she was found by Nixon and Heslop.
Mr. Davison, for the defence, contended that the
rupture of the spleen could not have been caused
by any violence of the prisoner deposed to, and sug-
gested that the state of the road was such that a
woman in the state of intoxication deceased
was shown to have been in might well have
received the injuries from a fall or other accident
subsequent to the time the policemen left them.
The learned Judge, in summing up, told the jury
that he thought the case did not amount to wilful
murder; but if they believed the rupture of the
spleen had been caused by any act of violence of
the prisoner's, they must find him guilty of man-
slaughter.
The jury, after some consideration, returned a
verdict of guilty of manslaughter, and the prisoner
was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.
This concluded the business of the assizes, and
the learned Judge immediately proceeded to Dur-
ham, where, having opened the commission and
charged tie Grand Jury, he attended Divine ser-
vice in the cathedral. _

The calendar is very light, containing only eleven
cases.

HOME CIRCUIT.—MAIDSTONE, Dec. 9.
(Before Mr. Justice Williams.)
Francis Mayne, 23, a tall, athletic young man,
was indicted for the manslaughter of Ed. Millgate.
Mr. Russell conducted the prosecution ; the pri-
soner was defended by Mr. Addison.
It appeared from the evidence for the prosecution
that the prisoner and the deceased both belonged
to the town of Maidstone, and the deceased was
noted for his pugilistic propensities, and he was
constantly quarrelling and fighting. On the even-
ing of the 18th of November they were both at a
public-house called the Jolly 'Waterman, in Earl
street, 'Maidstone, with other persons, and one of
the company produced a dice-box and dice, and the
prisoner and the deceased played with them for a
stake of 2s. that were lying on the table. The pri-
soner claimed to have won the money, but the de-
ceased snatched it up and put it into his pocket,
and upon his refusing to give it up the prisoner
struck him. A fight then took place in the house,
and-the deceased was knocked down, and the pri-
soner went away. Millgate, the deceased, got
up in a great passion, and exclaimed, " I will
go after the and give it him," and fol-
lowed the prisoner into an adjoining street, called
Pudding-lane, where the fight was renewed,
and the deceased was knocked down three or four
times, and, according to the evidence of some of the
witnesses, while he was on the ground the prisoner
kicked him in a most violent manner upon the.belly
and head. The evidence as to the kicking was,
however, somewhat contradictory as, acconling to
one or two of the witnesses who were examined,
the prisoner did not kick the deceased violently,
but merely touched him gently with his foot in
order to make him get up and renew the fight.
The last time the deceased was knocked down he
fell into a coal shed, and a man who was at work
there closed the door and said he had had enough,
and told the prisoner to go away, and ho did so.
The deceased shortly afterwards complained of a
severe pain in his belly, and it was with difficulty
he got to his own house, where a doctor was sent
for and he was then removed to the infirmary,
where he lingered in great agony for two or three
clays'and then died. Upon a post mortem exami-
nation it was discovered that the bladder of the de-
ceased was extensively ruptured, and this was the
cause of death ; and the medical gentlemen who
were examined stated that the injury might have
been occasioned either by a kick or a fall while the
bladder was in a state of distension. There did not
appear to be any external indications upon the de-
ceased's person to indicate that he had been kicked
with any violence in the region of the injury. •
Mr. Addison addressed the jury on behalf of the
prisoner at some length, and he contended that he
had to a very considerable extent acted in self-de-
fence, as the second fight had been forced upon him
by the deceased, who had followed him out of the
publichouse and renewed the contest. He also urged
that the injury might have been occasioned acci-
dentally when the deceased fell, and that as to thp
kicking it had been very much exaggerated, and
there was no evidence to show that the death was
occasioned by an injury of that character.
The learned Judge, in summing up, said that the
learr.ed counsel for the prisoner was not justified
where persons fought rounds together in contend-
ing that death might be caused in self-defence, for,
in such a case, where death ensued, it was un-
doubtedly manslaughter. Where it appeared,
however, that two men fought fairly with their
fist, and death ensued, a slight punishment was
always inflicted, but a good dial depended upon
whether any unfair advantage was taken. In this
case, therefore, in the erent of their finding the
prisoner guilty, ho should he glad if they would in-
form him whether they thought the kicking had
anything to do withcausing the death of the deceased.
The jury, after a short deliberation, found the
prisoner guilty, but said it was their opinion that
the death was not occasioned by the kicking..
Mr. Justice Williams said that in coasequence of
this expression of opinion by the jury he should
pass a much lighter sentence than he otherwise
would have done. The prisoner had undoubtedly
committed an offence against the law, but under all
the circumstances he thought the justice of the case
would be sat;sfied by his ordering him to be impri-
soned in Maidstone Gaol for one month without
hard labour.

most filthy illustrations; that this abominable book
had -been carried home by her brother, and that she
herself carried it to the warehouse and showed it to
the women with whom she worked. There was no
witness to the assault but this girl, and in the name
of justice it was to be hoped that the Court would
not upon such unlikely and unsupported testimony
commit for trial, and meanwhile deprive of his
liberty, a respectable young man who was married
and the father of a family. His employers, utterly
disbelieving the charge, had come forward to sup-
port him, not more probably from the thorough
acquaintance with his complete respectability than
from a knowledge of the character and habits of
the women whom they were compelled to employ.
The learned gentleman then called attention to,some
discrepancies in the evidence, and more especially
to the statement of Mrs; Dawson, who worked in
the warehouse, that the girl's mother had told her
to apply to the prisoner for money to settle it, and
that it was not until after the prisoner had refused
to give a single shilling that the mother gave him
into custody—a statement which on the previous
examination the mother had denied.
The Lord Mayor expressed a desire to hear the
witnesses further upon this point; and
Mrs. Dawson being again examined said that as
they were leaving the court on the last occasion Mrs.
Percival admitted that she had authorised her to
apply to the prisoner] for money, but that she had
forgotten it before, and meant to admit it next time
(yesterday).
Elizabeth Sewell, another witness, corroborated
this statement.
Mr. Robinson then said he should refrain from
all cross-examination, as it was impossible to make
the case in favour of the prisoner stronger than it
then stood. At the same time, he tendered to the
bench a copy of the book, which he said had just
arrived from Wych-street ; but by opening the
leaves of which no one would defile his fingers, the
Lord Mayor contenting himself with the inquiry
whether that was the identical-book.

The Lord Mayor and Mr. Alderman Abbiss then
withdrew to a private room, and upon their re-ap-
pearance in court, after an absence of about half an
hour, _ _

His Lordship said that he and his brother alder-
man, after full consideration of the evidence, had
arrived at the conclusion that it was amply suffi-
cient to justify, them in committing the prisoner
for trial. The prisoner, however, might be admitted
to bail, himself in £lOO and two sureties in ,E5O
each.

Bail was given immediately.
Henry Shorey and Nathaniel Dettmar, journey-
men butchers, were brought up on remand charged
with stealing a horse and oart and eight quarters
of beef, of the value together of £lOO, the property
of Messrs. %Varmington and Morris, of Leadenhall-
market.

The prosecutors had a slaughterhouse and stables
in Gun-yard, Bishopsgate, where, on the evening of
the 30th ult., the horse and cart and beef were left
securely locked up. At five o'clock the next morn-
ing, however, it was discovered that the place had
been entered and the horse and cart and meat
were gone, upon which inquiry was immediately
made in Newgate-market, where the meat was
found, having been delivered to a salesman there
by porters employed by two men who accompanied
a cart belonging to the prosecutors. The meat
was immediately delivered up, being identified
through some accidental cuts, and the horse
and cart were taken, home by a labouring
man who had found them in the Blackfriars-
road, where they had been standing, as if lost, all
day. On the former examinations, the prisoners
having been apprehended upon different days, some
difficulty was experienced in establishing the iden-
tity of the prisoners as being the two men who ac-
companied the cart to Newgate-market, but the fact
was pretty well established now, so far as Shorey
was concerned, one of the witnesses admitting that
he had before sworn that he could not identify him
because he had been over persuaded to say nothing
about it.
Shorey therefore was committed for trial, but, as
the evidence was still defective with regart to Dett-
mar, he was discharged.

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.—Joseph Wright,
known to the police as " Brighton Joe," an asso-
ciate of thieves, and frequently in custody, con-
victed at this and other courts, was re-examined on
a charge of stealing from a coffee-house in Upper-
St. Martin's-lane, where he had taken a bed for the
night, a mantle,-._ a- shawl, and various articles of
female wearing apparel, the property of the land-
lady; and a. coat and gold shirt-studs belonging to
a lodger. `. - •
The property was carried off on the morning of
2Gth August last, and. Mrs. Skeggs, the prosecu-
trix, identified the prisoner as taking a bed at her
house the previous night, and that he was the only
stranger there on, that occasion. That the property,
seen safe the day of the night he arrived, was stolen
from a chest of drawers in the room, and that he
left at 8 o'clock in the morning, giving an order for
his breakfast in half an hour, but never returned.
The prosecutrix added that she afterwards recol-
lected that he looked particularly stout about the
body and broad across the chest on leaving, and
gave information to the police on discovery of her
loss.
A Arr. Bingham, from Brighton, who slept in the
room adjoining the prisoner's, proved missing his
property on getting up in the morning..
The daughter of the prosecutrix also positively
identified the prisoner.
The prisoner denied sleeping at the house, and
was committed for trial.

WORSHIP-STREET.—A well.dressed woman,
named Mary Anne Hill, was charged with the fol-
lowing robbery :
Two ladies, named Evans and Barker, got into
an omnibus at Kingsland on the preceding evening
to be carried to the Surrey side of the water, but
found it so crowded with passengers that Mrs. Bar-
ker was obliged to sit in Mrs. Evans's lap for some
part of the distance till two of the passengers got
out. Just before this took place Mrs. Barker felt
somebody touch her dress, but imagined Mrs. Evans
had done so, and thercfore took no rcitice of it, but
presently after the prisoner, who had been seated
beside them, called to the conductor to let her out,
and for some reason which was not explained Mrs.
Barker suddenly suspected her, and on feeling in
her dress pocket found that her purse had been
stolen. She therefore called to the conductor to
stop her, which he did, and the prisoner was charged
with the robbery; the prisoner indignantly denied
the charge, but was taken to the station, and on
the road dropped a shilling. The officer drew her
attention to the shilling, but she refused to pick it
up, saying it was not hers, evidently from a fear of
its being identified, the contents of Mrs. Barker's
purse consisting of silver, hut on nearing the station
she acknowledged the shilling was her's, and told
the officer he might get drink with it, if he chose.
On searching her the purse could not be discovered,
but Inspector Webster said he felt satisfied, from
what 'he had learnt, that tho prisoner belonged to
a gang of women who got a living in this way;
and the prisoner, who stoutly declared that she
knew nothing whatever of the robbery, was re-
manded.

LAMBETH.—Mr. Norton was engaged for some
time in investigating a case in which a poor woman
named Davis sought to recover compensation from
a furniture dealer named Ellis, residing at Camber-
well, for her furniture, amounting to £l5O.
It appeared that in. 1854 the complainant mar-
ried a man named Wilcox, a plumber and glazier,
and having at the time £3OO, her own property, she
furnished a house in High-street, Peckham, and
established her husband in business. In the spring
of 1858; owing to the badness of trade, her husband
became embarrassed, and Ellis, who had previously,
worked for him, advised that the furniture in the
house, which was very valuable, should be removed
to an empty house of his to avoid the creditors.
The furniture was accordingly removed to a house
in Sumner-street, Borough, where they were left
under lock and key, the latter being in Wilcox's
possession. Complainant and her husband went to
the country after the latter passed through the In-
solvent Debtors' Court, and while there the hus•
band absconded, and the wife not only found out
that he was married to another woman, but found
the former wife out: After this she gave Wilcox
into custody, and he was brought to this court,
committed for trial, found guilty at the late Old
Bailey 'Sessions, and sentenced to three years' penal
servitude. While the prosecution was going en
the complainant called one day at the house of the
defendant, and seeing a portion of her property-
there, she asked how he came by it, and Ellis ac-
knowledged that he had picked the lock.
In reply to a question from the Magistrate, the
witness said she was not aware that the, defendant
lent Wilcox any money, or 'that thee, latter owed
Ellis any.
In cross•exemination by Mr. Solomon, for the
defendant, the witnr.ss admitted that the house in
Mead's-court had been taken in her maiden name,
and that she had been aware that the goods had
been removed to defraud the creditors. She was
not aware that the defendant had lent them any
money, bfit, on the contrary, believed that Wilcox
had lent the defendant £7 ; for he told her so, and
heard the defendant say he should pay £7. That
was last Christmas. Sho (witness) did not hear
-Wilcox say, at the Southwark Police-court, that he
had signed a paper, but he said something.' about it
in conversation.

A Mrs. Rogers and other witnestes gave evi-
dence in faivour of the complainant, and the &-
fence set up was that the property had been pur-
clEoe4 for £26, money advanced to Wilcox, and a re-

ceipt was produced purporting to have been signed
by him for that amount, and also an inventory of
the goods•
The complainant declared that all this was colour-
able, and got up to meet her claim, and added that
between Wilcox (who, however, declared he had not
received anything for the goods) and defendant she
had been most scandalously treated and brought to
perfect beggary.
Mr. Solomon offered a compromise of £lO to com-
plainant, but she refused it, and the case was ulti-
mately adjourned to a future day for the production
of further evidence, Mr. Norton remarking that it
might ultimately assume a much more serious cha-
racter than defendant was aware of.