The Sun.
London, England, 1859-02-17 00:00:00

course of business payment was applied for several
times, but without success. Ultimately an action
was brought against the prisoner for the debt in the
Sheriffs' Court. The action had just been tried,
and to the utter surprise of Mr. Tallerman, the
prisoner, who had assured him he was nearly 24
years of age, had pleaded infancy in bar of the
claim. As his brother swore that he was only 19
years and four months, and the prisoner swore posi-
tively that he was under 21, the jury were reluc-
tantly compelled to give a verdict in his favour.
He (the learned counsel) apprehended there could
be little doubt that the prisoner's misrepresentation
of his age, when pointedly asked the question,
amounted in law to a fraudulent representation,
and inasmuch as the goods would not have been
parted with except for that misrepresentation, Mr.
Tallerman had considered it his duty to give him
into custody. The learned counsel then proceeded
to say that he intended to put in evidence the pri-
soner's own statement as to his age when examined
in the Sheriffs' Court, and then, if the Lord Mayor
thought any further evidence was necessary, to ask
for a remand for the attendance of witnesses from
South Shields, who would prove what the age of
the accused party was.
The Lord Mayor said he was of opinion, accord-
ing to this statement of circumstances, that there
was no proof of any legal fraudulent representa-
tion, for although the prisoner might have told a
lie with regard to his age, for the purpose of facili-
tating his dealings when he went into business, he
might at the same time have really intended to pay
for the goods.
Mr. Doyle contended with great ability that the
prisoner had been guilty of a fraudulent repre-
sentation.

The Lord Mayor said that after the circum-
stances mentioned by the learned counsel he did
not consider it his duty to go into the case, as
he believed that no jury would convict. His
lordship then discharged the prisoner, and observed
that as the alleged fraud had taken place at South
Shields, Mr. Tallerman could institute a prosecution
against him if he thought proper to do so in that
town.
The prisoner was then discharged.

GUILDHALL.—Thomas King, a .young man,
by trade an umbrella maker, was charged with
having posted up some quack-doctors' bills on the
outside of a public wall, erected at the north end of
Shoe-lane by the Commissioner of Sewers.
Police-constable 230 stated that he found the
prisoner defacing the wall in question by plaster-
ing bills on it. Great pains were taken to keep
the inside and outside as clean as possible, and he
took the prisoner into custody for defacing the wall
without the consent of the owners of it.
The prisoner said he was a poor man, and he had
no idea there was any law to prevent him from
doing so.
Sir F. G. Moon asked if this was the first com-
plaint of the sort ?
The officer said he believed it was.
Sir F. G. Moon said, as it was a first offence, he
would discharge the prisoner, but he must let him
distinctly understand that the law prohibited such
acts, and that if he offended again, he would not
only be taken into custody, but fined.
John Green, a deformed lad, about fifteen years
of age, was charged with stealing a roll of flannel,
value 10s., from the shop of Mr. Spice, an oilman,
of No. 2, Little Britain.
William Augustus Barman stated that he was
behind his master's counter on the previous even-
ing, when he saw the prisoner walk out of the pas-
sage by the side of the shop with roll of flannel on
his shoulder. He followed him, and called " stop
thief," upon which he threw down the flannel and
ran away. He ran after him, calling out "stop
thief," and he was soon stopped and given into cus-
tody.
Edward Brett 272 said he had made inquiries
into the boy's character, and found that he had been
twice in custody in the G division. He was re-
manded from the 4th to the 9th inst., and then dis-
charged. He was then charged with stealing
brushes.

The prisoner, in answer to the worthy alderman,
said his father was dead, and his mother• had run
away and left him nine months ago, since which time
he had worked as a wood cutter in Golden-lane,
but had been out of work for the last three months.
Springatt, the gaoler, said he knew the prisoner
well. His mother had been twice brought to this
court for deserting him, and as soon as she had an
opportunity she ran away from him again. The
poor fellow was considerably deformed, and was left
totally destitute by his unnatural mother.
Sir F. G. Moon directed the officer to make further
inquiries into the prisoner's antecedents, and he
would see what could be done for him. He then
remanded him till Monday.

CLERKENWELL—Afargaret Sullivan, a girl
about 18 years of age, a servant out of place, was
charged with stealing £2O, the moneys of Mrs.
Augusta Gough.
The prisoner was formerly in the employ of the
prosecutrix, but in consequence of some irregula-
rities she was discharged. As soon as she left two
sovereigns were missed, and upon a further search
being made the remaining money was found to
have been stolen. Information was then given to
the police, and the prisoner apprehended by Stain-
mers, 136 N, when she denied any knowledge of
the transaction. The prisoner had left three sove-
reigns with a tradesman in the neighbourhood,
which she said she had saved, although she was only
in the receipt of a very small sum weekly.
The prisoner declined to make any defence, and
was remanded for a week.

LAMBETH.—Thomas Haden and James Rook,
the trustees, and Nathaniel Airs, the treasurer, of
the Friendly Society called the " Friendly: Codgers,"
held at the Bird-in-Hand public-house, in Garden-
row, London-road, appeared in answer to a summons
taken out by Charles Tuckey, a free member, and
calling on them to show cause for illegally dissolv-
ing the said society, contrary, to the provisions of
the statute.
Complainant stated that for some years he had
been a member of, and contributed to, the society,
but had lately become ill, and had been compelled
to claim relief under its sick-fund rules. On being
paid his weekly allowance on Saturday last, he was
told that the society was dissolved on the 31st of
last month, and that it was the last money he would
receive from its funds. He complained of the
society having been dissolved without his being
furnished with the usual legalnotice, and was told
that the members refused to continue in the society
if he was allowed to remain in it; so twat they not
only dissolved the old society to g'a rid of him, but
refused to allow him to join or participate in the
benefits derivable from the new. In reply to the
questions of the magistrate, the witness repeated
that he had received no notice whatever of the in-
tention of the defendants to dissolve the society and
form a new one, and that he had not, either by
writing or verbally, given his consent to such a dis-
solution.

The defendants, in reply, said that owing to
their rules their members dwindled so rapidly that
at last there were only 17 remaining, and the
funds, consequently, were not sufficient to pay sick
members. They therefore sought to reform the
society, and so far as the complainant was con-
cerned, he had not even applied to be re-elected
into the new society.
Mr. Elliott (to the complainant)—Is that true ?
Tuckey—Certainly not, your worship. When I
went to the society they all got round me like bull-
dogs and kept saying and shouting out and
striking o'lhe table, "You have no demand on this
board—you have no demand on this board," and I
told them that I had no demand on the board, your
worship—and that was the table they was a strikin'
on—but I had on the funds of the society. Their
abuse was scandlous, particlar when I axed them if
I wasn't to be a member of the new society.
Mr. Elliott told the defendants that the whole
of their proceedings were not only irregular, but
perfectly illegal. He then read a clause in the act
to show them that they, could not legally dissolve society without having the consent of the com-
plainant in writing. And, further, that they, as
officers of the society, were liable to be sent to the
House of Correction for three months, on conviction
before a magistrate, for having aided and abetted
in the dissolution of the society. The magistrate
added that the most scandalous injustices were done
by the officers of these societies, by disqualifying
superannuated members without the slightest legal
grounds, after taking their money for many years,
and he wished it to be understood that, in all cases
coming before him where he found such injustice
practised, he should punish the offenders to the ut-
most limit of the law. In the present case he should
adjourn the summons fora week to give defendants
an opportunity of doing justice, and at least elect
ting complainant a member of the new society.

HAMMERSMITH.—A young man named Un-
derwood Males, whi) has frequently been summarily
convicted, was charged with the following outrage-
ous highway robbery upon Mrs. Sarah Pembridge,
a married woman, residing at No. 17, James-street,
Notting-hill.
The complainant stated that shortly before 12
o'clock on the night of Tuesday, the Bth inst., she
was returning home from Oxford-terrace, when
the Mallwhen she
saw the prisoner as she was passing
out of
at Notting-hill. He Came behind her and took her
forcibly round the neck by her cloak, and dragged
her back into the Mall, where there were some carts
standing, She struggled to relieve herself, and told
him that he was mistaken in the person. He re-
plied that he was not, and that she was the person
he wanted. She then caught hold of some railings