The Sun.
London, England, 1861-08-14 00:00:00

Mr. Sleigh—Was the public thoroughfare obstructed ?

Witness—lt was.
Mr. Sleigh—So much so as to be difficult for passengers
who passed through ?
Witness—Yes. Very much near the steps at the back
of the church. The defendants usually remained in the
lane from twelve to two. On Tuesday, the 7th of May, I
saw Newcome, Powter, and Wales in the lane. There
were others in the lane on that day. I should think on
that occasion there were about 500 persons present. The
defendants were making bets and talking to people. From
about a quarter to one till half-past the crowd is the
greatest, so as to make it very difficult for passengers to
pass through at all. On Wednesday, the Bth of May, from
about 12 o'clock till 20 minutes past one there were between
400 or 500 people there as before, and also on the 9th and
10th of May. Scarratt had not been there " making a

book" until the 4th of July, and was with the other de.
fendants then daily acting as before.
Mr. Metcalfe objected to Mr. Sleigh going into the new
case in which Searratt was concerned.
After a discussion the Alderman decided that the evi-

dente should proceed, and the witness identified the four
defendants as having been in the lane on several days be-
tween the 4th and 12th of July, On the Bth of July the
lane was completely crammed up. People could not get
along the pavement. I have been on duty in the lane up
to the present time, and speaking generally I have seen the
whole of the defendants there. They were engaged making
bets. The lane is exceedingly narrow. There is not room
for more than one carriage to pass through. I have
had many and frequent complaints made to me by the in-
habitants of the place of the obstruction caused by the
crowd.

By Mr. Metcalfe—Mr. Hawkes, the builder, has com-
plained two or three times a week. He lives near the bend.
Mr. Thomas, the clergyman of St. Bride's (the Rev. Mr.
Marshall), Mr. Jewell, the hotpresser, and Mr. Anderton
have also made frequent complaints. I bought the book in
which I made the entries about the lane for that purpose. I
was sent there by my inspector upon special-duty. I have
known the bookmakers when they get too many persons
round them run away for a few minutes to get rid of the
crowd. Inspector Mitchell was not the person who sen
me to the lane. I have reported all I saw to an attorney.
I don't know why the summons was not taken out before.
Between 12 and 2 I should think 20 persons, independent
of betting men, go down the lane. There are 27 houses in
the street. I have but very seldom seen the defendants on
the pavement. Generally they walk in the road.
By Mr. Sleigh—chave seen persons I know, not to be
betting men, incommoded in passing through the lane.
Mr. James Anderton—l am one of the Common Coun-
cil of Farringdon Without. I have often had occasion to
go through Bride-lane, and I should pass through it much
more frequently if it were not for the betting men. I
always found the lane in a state that was a disgrace to the
city of London.
Mr. Metcalfe—This is a summons for obstructing the
footway—not for betting, so you will please confine your
remarks to that point.
By Mr. Sleigh—The lane is quite impassable for females.
These proceedings were instituted by resolution of the
vestry of St. Bride's. I have frequently made complaints
to the police about the state of the lane.
Mr. Sleigh—Can you recognise any of the defendants as
those frequenting the place.
Mr. Anderton—No; they are no friends of mine.
(Laughter.)
By Mr. Metcalfe—l consider it a disgrace to the City to
allow the lane to remain in such a crowded state. I don't
live in the parish, or you may depend I would not have
allowed the evil to go on so long.
The Rev. C. Marshall—l am vicar of the parish of St.
Bride's. I have had frequent occasions lately of passing
through the lane. I have always found the lane unplea-
sant to pass through owing to the number of persons pre-
sent, I mean unpleasant because it is not pleasant to be
jostled. I mean by "jostled" to be pushed first on one
shoulder and then on the other—not being able to walk
straight. This has happened hundreds of times. I have
complained of the obstruction frequently to the police. I
have often asked the policeman to make way for me down
the lane—the passage being blocked up. I am unacquainted
with matters of betting, but I have seen many persons
there with books in their hands. On the 6th May I should
think I passed through the lane five or six times. The
parochial schools are in Bride-lane. About 250 children
attend the schools. The building is very near what
is called the bend. The children leave at 12, and return at
two daily. I have frequently seen the men opposite the
school door.
By Mr. Metcalfe—The occasional duty of the church
generally occupies us until 1 o'clock daily. There are
prayers daily in the church, and they conclude about 12.
There is not what is called full service daily.
Mr. Robert Hawkes, builder, of Bride-lane, said—Since
the 6th of May, excepting Sunday, the placehad been very
much crowded. The crowd begins to become inconvenient
in the spring of the year. In the winter nobody comes
there. During the racing season the lane is crowded by
persons betting on horse races, receiving and paying
money, making entries in their books, and talking about
horses.
Mr. Metcalfe—l suppose Kettledrum would be one of
the horses talked about.
Witness—l saw some of the defendants present en the
occasions 1 have referred to.
Mr. Metcalfe—Yes, paying money.
Mr. Sleigh—l did not say they did not. No doubt they
are all honourable men.
Examination continued—l have had to complain to the
police of the crowded state of the lane. I have seen per-
sons compelled to struggle through the crowd in order to
get to their residences, I have measured the lane, and

computing two persons to the square yard, I have seen, I-
should think, between 600 and 700 persons there in one day
during the present month.
By Mr. Metcalfe—l have seen ladies with crinolines
there struggling to get through the lane. I have seen What
are called " lists" posted in the window of the Sunday
Times office. I don't think those lists attract the people.
I have seen people leave the lane, go and look at those lists,
and then return to the lane and recommence betting.
Mr. Sleigh said he had a number of other witnesses,
but he thought he had made out a case quite strong
enough to justify their being sent to a higher tribunal for
trial.

Mr. Metcalfe said no doubt a great deal of evideaco
had been offered concerning the crowded state of Bride -
lane, but as far as regarded the defendants very little in fart
had been said.
The Alderman said the evidcnco of the police constable
was conclusive.

Mr. Sleigh—That is all the evidence I shall call.
Mr. Metcalfe—Then am I to understand that you have
given all the evidence you intend to offer against the defen •
dants. It is important that they should know what they
have to meet ?

•
Mr. Sleigh—l shall only produce corroborative evidence.
Mr. Metcalfe—Well, that is what I should like to hoar.
The Alderman said he thought the evidence of the police-
man important, as he spoke to all the defendants.
The case was then adjourned till to-morrow afternoon at
three for the production of corroborative evidence.
The defendants were then liberated on giving their per-
sonal promise to attend again to-morrow afternoon.
The court during the proceedings was crowded to excess •

A SOLICITOR AND CORONER CUTTING:

DOWN A TELEGRAPHIC POST.

BEACONSFIELD, TUESDAY.
The quiet rural town of Beaconsfield, in the
county of Buckingham, was yesterday thrown into
a state of ferment in consequence of the magistrates
in petty sessions having to adjudicate in a ease
where a solicitor and one of the coroners for the
county, Mr. Frederick Charlsley, of Missenden, vga°
charged with aiding and abetting several labouring
men to cut down one of the posts recently erected
in Beaconsfield by the United Kingdom Electric
Telegraph Company.
The case was heard before J. Du Pre, Esq.?
chairman ; James Palmer, Esq., and R. R. Clay'
ton, Esq. The court was held at the Saracen's
Head Inn, the large room of which was literally
crammed.
The defendants were Henry Rolfe, George Rolfe,
Richard Bernard Baylis, and Robert Butting, who,
were charged with cutting down the post, ape-,
Frederick Charlesley charged with aiding and
abetting them to commit the act.
Mr. Tindal Atkinson appeared on behalf of the
Telegraph Company, and Mr. Keene on behalf of
the defendants. .
Mr. Atkinson said that the facts of the case were'
simply these :—On the 4th July last the defendant,
Mr. Charlsley, who was at the White Hart Ins'
Beaconsfield, with the other defendants, offered to
give any one half-a-crown who would climb to the
top of the telegraphic post erected in the publiV,
highway opposite the White Hart Inn. As this'
offer appeared to be insufficient, Mr. Charlsleii
said he would give 10s. 6d. to any one who viol,'
fetch an axe and saw, and cut the post down. 1115
had the desired effect; the saw and axe were fetched?
and the post was cut down by the defendants, Mr'
Charlsley standing by and abetting them. In
addition to this, Mr. Charlsley had previously
said that he would have a mile of the telegraph
down. The effect of cutting down this post wag
that all communication was cut off, and the will
were thrown in front of the premises of Mr. Hard
ing, a chairmaker. Admitting, for the sake of are'
meat only, that the post was a nuisance, the ordi'
nary remedy was by public indictment, and awe!
had no right to take the law into his own liana
and remove it.
Mr. Atkinson having called a host of witnesses
in support of his case,
Mr. Keene maintained that the post in questioU
was a nuisance, and a dangerous nuisance, as be
should prove by evidence, and that he had a right'
to remove it. He denied that the Board of Health
or the Road Trustees had any power to give per
mission for the erection of these posts, as the rilOP
was vested in the lord of the soil, Mr. Hargreaimer
whose consent had not been asked,nor had any wt.
dente been adduced to show that the plaintiffs hat'
obtained the consent of any party. The land well'
given up for the benefit of the highway, and not fo:t
the benefit of any speculating telegraph company- ,
The first witness for the defence was the Rev.
S. Major, curate of Beaconsfield, who expressed
opinion that the post was in a dangerous positie
On cross-examination by Mr. Atkinson, however',
he admitted that he had been getting up affidavit: I
against the telegraphic company, and that he har
been induced to do so through some parties fror a
the firm of Messrs. Wilson, Bristow, and Carpnel 1,
solicitors to the old telegraphic company, who w,e re
opposing the present company.
The magistrates, without requiring the room to
be cleared, said that they were of opinion that there
was not sufficient danger caused by this post to
justify Mr. Charlsley in employing persons to eif
it down ; at the same time they would inflict mil
such a penalty as would meet the case.
The defendants were then convicted in the pen aity
of Is., and ordered to pay the damage, £5, and all
the costs in the case, which it is estimated wilt-
amount to about £5O.