The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-17 00:00:00

CEN2RAL CRIMINAL COURT, June 15,

NEW COURT.
(Before the Common Sergeant.)
The Silk Roberry from the St. Katherine's Dock
Cony.—The trial of the four prisoners, William
Crane, 41, Joseph Barker, 29, shoemaker, Peter
Debock, 35, silk dealer, and John Newton, 59, silk
dealer, for stealing and receiving a large quantity
of silk, the property of the St. Katherine's Dock
Company, was resumed on Saturday.
Sergeant Ballantine (specially retained), with
Mr. Metcalfe and Mr. F. 11. Lewis, were counsel
for .Newton ; Sergeant Parry (also specially re-
tained), with Mr. Kibton, Mr. Lloyd, and Mr.
Rosher, appeared for Debock ; Mr. Sleigh and Mr.
Orridge for Crane; and Mr. Cooper for Barker.
After the case for the prosecution had closed on
Friday evening, Sergeant Ballantine and Sergeant
Parry addressed the jury, with their usual ability,
on behalf of their respective clients, Newton and
Debock, and the answer they endeavoured to set
up to the charge made against them was, that
Newton had purchased the property of Agg, with
whom he had had dealings for a considerable time,
in the ordinary way of business, and that Debock
was merely the agent of Agg, who was iu reality
the guilty party.
A host of witnesses were examined as to the cha-
racter of the prisoner Newton, and their evidence
was of the most favourable character. It seemed
that he had originally filled a very humble posi-
tion, but by industry and assiduity he had attained
one of considerable importance, and at the time of
this unfortunate occurrence he had 130 persons in
his employ, and his business returns were £40,000
a year. It also was proved by the evidence of seve-
ral eminent persons engaged in the silk trade that
the price he was represented to have paid Agg for
the silk in question, 13s. a pound, was a full price
for an article of that description.
Mr. Giffard, when the case for the defence was
concluded, made a most able reply on behalf of the
prosecution, and his speech was not concluded until
near nine o'clock at night.
The Common Sergeant then addressed the jury,
and said, if they wished to go on at that late hour,
he was ready to do so, but at the same time re-
minded them that it must necessarily take him a
considerable time to sum up, and that, as it was
Saturday night, if they did not very speedily agree,
he could not take the verdict after 12 o'clock, and
he suggested that it would perhaps be as well to
adjourn at once.
The Foreman of the Jury, after consulting with
his colleagues, said they would rather go on with
the case, and ;they did not think they should bo
very long deliberating upon it.
The Common Sergeant, upon this intimation
from the jury, at once proceeded to sum up, placing
in a most clear and concise manner all the impor-
tant points in the evidence that had been adduced
in support of the prosecution, and for the defence.
The jury retired at 11 o'clock to consider their
verdict, and in about half an hour they returned
into Court, and gave a verdict of not guilty in the
cases of Newton, Crane, and Barker, and convicted.
Debock upon the count charging him with feloni-
ously receiving the property knowing it to have
been stolen. They at the same time recommended
him to mercy on account of his previous good cha-
racter.

All the prisoners seemed quite overcome when
the verdict was delivered, and Newton in particu-
lar cried most bitterly. Debock was also very much
affected, and he exclaimed in an excited manner,
" I am innocent."

After Newton, Crane, and Barker had been re-
moved,

Debock was called up for judgment, and he then
addressed the Court, and declared that he was en-
tirely innocent in the transaction, and that Agg had
placed the silk in his possession as security for the
sum of £2OO, which he had lent him, and that he
took the silk away without his knowledge. He said
that when he found that it was going to Derby he
thought that Agg was trying to shuffle him, and he
went down to Derby, in order that he might get
his money back, and he asked his brother-in-law to
accompany him. He added that Agg and Hunter
were trying to get away from them, but they
watched them, and at six o'clock in the evening
Agg gave him the three £lOO notes, and he saw no
more of him. He also said, that not being able to
read or write he was still fearful that Agg was, de-
ceiving him, and this was the reason he questioned
Mr. Rowbotham, the landlord of the public-house,
whether the notes were genuine.
The Common Sergeant, in passing sentence, said
that if the statement made by the prisoner was true
he should have made it to the police at first, and
then inquiries might have been made, and possibly
he would not have been placed in his present posi-
tion. Instead of this, however, it was clear that he
had told a great many falsehoods, and upon all the
facts he quite concurred in the verdict, and did not
see how the jury could have returned any
other. It was a very serious offence, committed
with great ingenuity and deliberation, and but
for the recommendation to mercy he should have
passed a much more severe sentence than the one he
was about to pronounce, which was that he be im-
prisoned and kept to hard labour for 18 months.
At a quarter to 12 o'clock the court was ad-
journed to Monday, July 8.