The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-20 00:00:00

TELLERS.

- -
THE PRICE OF GOLD.

The quotation of gold at Paris is about 3 per mille prem.,
and the short exchange on London is 25.40 per £1 sterling.
On comparing these rates with the English Mint price of £3
175.100. per ounce for standard gold, it appears that gold is
about 6-10ths per cent. dearer in London than in Paris.
By advices from Hamburg the price of gold is 427 per mark,
and the short exchange on Loudon is 13.74fper £1 sterling.
Standard gold at the English Mint price is, therefore, about
• 7-10ths per cent. dearer in London than in Hamburg.
The course of exchange at New York on London for bills at
60 days' sight is 105 i to 106 for first-class bills. Although this
shows the exchange to be against England, the high rate of
interest in both countries, and the loss of time before the
gold is received back from the American Mints, render it
doubtful if any profit can be made at the present rates by
sending gold to the United States.

[ADVERTISEMENT.] Pills and medicine invariably ag-
gravate and perpetuate diseases; their annoyance,
3, be avoided by dis-
appointment,persons
in and
indifferent expensehealthsendinmg may
their address to E.
S. Barry, Esq., 77, Regent-street, W., London, and they
will receive gratis and free by post the "INVALIDS' Owit
GUIDE," or Natural Restorer, without medicine or ex
ofrp:inreses,hin g sleep,perfect
to
mostenfeebled,strong
nerves, sound lungs, and
insuring the remova.
of indigestion (dyspepsia), constipation, liver complaints
nausea, epilepsy,paralysis, debility, nervousness, palpitation,
cough, asthma, consumption, dropsy, flatulency, diarrhata,
digestion,
the
dysentery, biliousness, fevers, sore throats, catarrhs, colds,
noises in the ears, rheumatism, gout, impurities, eruptions,
hysteria, neuralgia, irritability, sleeplessness, acidity, palpi-
tation, heartburn, headache, despondency, cramps, spasms,
sinking, fits, bronchitis.—"Unquestionably the safest Quide
tp health.".

HOME CIRCUIT.—LEwis, March 19.
The business of the assizes for the county of
Sussex commenced on Monday by the opening of
the Commission, and both courts sat this morning,
Lord Chief Justice Erie "presiding on the Crown
side, and Mr. Justice Wightman at nisi prius.
The gaol calendar contains the names of 47 pri-
soners, but none of the offences appear to be of a
serious character. There appears to be one charge
of murder, but the prisoner who is charged with
the murder of his wife cannot be tried, as he
is insane, and has been removed to the county
lunatic asylum, by order of the Secretary of
State. The cause list contains 13 entries, of which
six are special jury cases.
Mr. Justice Wightman disposed of the whole of
the common jury cases during the day, and none
of them presented any features of public interest.

CROWN SIDE.
(Before Lord Chief Justice Erle.)

Edmund Shepperd, 39, a respectable-looking
man, described as a beershop keeper, and a man of
good education, was charged with wilfully and
maliciously setting fire to a stack of hay, the pro-
perty of Ralph Walker.
Mr. Roupell conducted the prosecution. The
prisoner was defended by Mr. Ribton.
The circumstances of this case were rather of
a peculiar character. It appeared that the prosecu-
tor is an extensive farmer in the neighbourhood of
Chichester, and the prisoner • had been in his ser-
vice, but in July last there had been some dis-
agreement between them, and the prisoner left his
employment without giving notice, and the prose-
cutor summoned him before the magistrates for 40
doing, but the summons was dismissed. There
did not seem to be any ill-feeling between the pri-
soner and the prosecutor on account of this pro-
ceeding, and the former took a beer-shop, at
Chichester, called the Alma, and was following that
occupation at the time this affair happened. After
seven o'clock in the evening, on the 29th of Octo-
ber, a large stack of hay upon the prosecutor's farm
was discovered to be on fire, and on the prosecutor
proceeding towards the spot, he met the prisoner
coming in a direction from the stack, and he told
him it was on fire, and said it was a bad job, and
he went back with him and rendered assistance to
extinguish the fire. On the same night the pri-
soner met a police-constable named Frogden, in the
city of Chichester, and told him that Mr. Walker's
stack had been set on fire, and he said it would be
a " good go" for the old man if it was not insured.
The constable remarked that it was very poor spite
for any one to do such an act, and the prisoner then
went away. No clue could be obtained as to the
guilty party until about a fortnight afterwards,
when the prisoner met the same constable,
and asked him whether he had heard anything
more about the fire, to which he replied that he
had not. The prisoner then said to the constable,
"You can take me down to the police-station."
The constable asked him what for, and he then
said, " For setting fire to Mr. Walker's rick. I
am the man that did it, and no other man. I can-
not live here, and I must go somewhere else. I
have got the same dress on now that I had when I
set fire to the rick. If I had known that he was
insured I should not have done it, and I should not
have done it if Mr. Walker had !behaved to me
like a gentleman." The prisoner, when he made

this statement, appeared io be slightly the worse
for liquor, and the constable took him to the police-
station, when he informedlMr. Everett, the super-
intendent, what the prisoner had stated, and he
cautioned the prisoner, and told him to be careful
what he said, as he should have to repeat it to the
magistrates. The prisoner, after this caution,
made the following statement :—" I am the man
who set fire to Mr. Walker's rick about a fortnight
ago ' • that is all the evidence I have to give ; and
if Mr. Walker had been there, I would have set
fire 'to him if I had had half a chance." The
superintendent took down this statement in writ-

ink, and then asked the prisoner if he had any
objection to sign it, and he said he had not, and
without any hesitation, put his name to the state-
ment. The prosecutor, in answer to questions put
by Mr. Ribton, said that the prisoner worked as
hard as any one else to extinguish the fire, and
that he gave him some money for his services, and
he also said that since the prisoner had been in
custody upon this charge there had been another
incendiary fire upon his farm.
Mr. Ribton made a very ingenious address to the
jury on behalf of the prisoner, and said he was
instructed, that notwithstanding the statements
the prisoner was alleged to have made to the police
officers, in reality he was entirely innocent of
the offence imputed to him, and that at the time
he made those statements he was in a state of
excitement from drink, and did not know what he
was saying. Of course, if they believed the story
told by the prisoner, there could be no doubt of
his guilt, and there was an end of the
case, but, he said, in the annals of crime
frequent instances were recorded of persons who
had confessed themselves guilty of crimes of the
most serious description, even that of murder, when
it was satisfactorily established afterwards that they
were entirely innocent; and in a recent very cele-
brated case, that of the Road murder, a man had
given himself up as the guilty party. when it ap-
peared that he was at Portsmouth at the time the
murder was committed. He then called the atten-
tion of the jury to the fact that there did not appear
to be any between the prisoner and the pro-
secutor, and it was admitted that he was the worse
for liquor at the time he made the extraordinary
statements upon which alone he was now sought
to be convicted. And there was also this extra-

ordinary circumstance in connection with the case,
that it appeared that since the prisoner had been in
gaol another incendiary fire had taken place upon
the prosecutor's property, which he could not pos-
sibly have had anything to do with.
Lord Chief Justice Erle, in summing up the case
to the jury, said, that undoubtedly the principal,
and, indeed, almost the sole evidence against the
prisoner, consisted of his own confession, and cer-
tainly where a confession was made by a person,
knowing at the time what he was about, it was as
conclusive evidence as could possibly be given.
They had heard the circumstances under which the
prisoner had made statements to two different
officers, and they must deal with the evidence as
men of common sense, and see whether there were
any circumstances that would tend to induce:them
to believe that when the prisoner made these
statements ho did not know perfectly well
the effect and nature of what he was saying.
It was very true, as had been stated by the
learned counsel for the prisoner, that there had
been many instances where persons had accused
themselves of offences of which they were innocent,
but in almost every case of the kind with which
he was acquainted there was always some motive
or object for such a proceeding. It did, however,
frequently happen—and it was for the benefit of
the honest and well-conducted portion of the commu-
nity that it was so—that persons sometimes found
the consciousness of guilt such an uncomfortable
companion in their bosom, that they could not help
relieving themselves of it ; and it was for them to
decide whether this was not one of those cases.
The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a
verdict of guilty.
Lord Chief Justice Erle said they had come to
the same conclusion that he had himself formed
from the evidence, and he had no doubt that, either
from the influence of drink or from the feelings that
operated in his own mind, the prisoner had truly
confessed himself guilty of this most serious offence.
It was a crime of the most dangerous description,
and, as an example to deter others, he felt it his duty
to pass a severe sentence, and which was that he be
kept in penal servitude for 10 years.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.--YORK, MARCH 19.
(Before Mr. Justice Hill and a Special Jury.)
THE QUEEN V. GROWTHER.
The defendant was charged with receiving bri-
bery at Wakefield.
This case was tried yesterday, and the jury re-
tired to consider their verdict at 20 minutes to six
o'clock. They were locked up all night in consul-
tation together, but failed to agree upon a verdict.
At the opening of the court this morning the jury
made their appearance in the box, when
Mr. Justice Hill inquired if there was any pro-
bability of their agreeing to a verdict.
A Juror—None whatever, my lord.
The Judge—None whatever—is that so?
A Juror—Yes, my lord. We cannot agree.
The Judge—There is, then, no prospect ?
A Juror—No, my lord.
The Judge—l am sorry to hear this in so plain a
case, because it is my duty to detain you until it
becomes necessary for the health of any one of you
that the jury should be discharged.
d cannotprod
uce
unanimity of opinion.
The Judge, after a short pause, said—l feel that
so strongly that I will take upon myself the respon-
sibility of discharging you.
Mr. Bell, the judge's associate—Gentlemen, you

(Before the Assistant Judge.)
Jacob Demolins, 40, described as a pianoforte
tuner, was indicted fur stealing a picture, the pro-
perty of George Henry Christie and others (Messrs.
Christie and Manson).
Mr. Platt was counsel for the prosecution:

The prosecutors were the well-known auctioneers,
of King-street, St. James's, and the case, as proved
by the evidence against the prisoner, was, that he
frequented their auction-room, and stole two pic-
tures, one of a pair by C. Ruysdael, which had been
sent for sale to Christie and Manson's, but which,
having been stolen, had not been put in the cata-
logue. The prisoner sold the picture to a dealer,
and information having been received, he on offer-
ing another painting for sale, was given into cus-
tody, when he said he had been employed as an
agent to sell them for a man named " George" of
whom he could give no further account, name, nor
address. That the pictures were stolen from Christie
and Manson's rooms was admitted, but the prisoner
declared that he did not steal them, but was em-
ployed by " George" to dispose of them. It appeared
that the prisoner had frequented auction-rooms for
the purpose of examining and testing pianos. He
was found guilty, and he then said he could produce
witnesses as to his former good character, and to
show that he had worked at pianoforte tuning, and
the learned judge postponed the sentence until the
end of the week, to afford him an opportunity of
doing so if he could.
Anaise Chantegrenill, 28, was i.,dided D' steal-
ing four yards of silk and other articles, vaite £2O,
the property of Joseph Ruttens, her master. Mr.
F. H. Lewis prosecuted; Mr. Cooper and Mr.
Gresham appeared for the defence.
This case occupied a considerable time, but the
circumstances were very simple. The prisoner, it
appeared, escaped from a place in the South of
France, called Oreillac, having defrauded a num-
ber of creditors, and went to live for a while in the
Rue [St. Honore, Paris, whence she came to Lon-
don, via Havre-de-Grace, with passports in false
names. Being a first-rate milliner, she was em-
ployed by the prosecutor, or rather by his wife,
Madame Ruttens, milliner, 64, Berners-street, at
£52 a-year with board and lodging. It was proved
that she had been making up bonnets, &c., with the
prosecutor's materials, on her own account, and a
great number of remnant pieces of silks, ribbons,
lace, &c., sworn to be the prosecutor's property,
were found in her possession. The proof of identity
of some of the articles was singular. Some of the
ribbons had been purchased of a Coventry firm, on
account of the distress prevalent among the wea-
vers, and Madame Battens produced the corres-
ponding pieces, also a piece of silk, a portion of
which her own bonnet was made of, and was of
peculiar manufacture, and value, cost price 163. a
yard. The prisoner said she had these things in
lieu of wages. but that was not only denied by the
prosecutrix, but her wages book was produced,
which showed that she had been paid. Suspicion
having fallen upon the prisoner she was watched.
and was detected carrying off a bundle which she
had secreted, and which contained portions of the
property laid in the indictment.
The jury found the prisoner guilty, and the As-
sistant-Judge sentenced her to 12 months hard
labour, and observed, that in her own country with.
her antecedents she would no doubt have received a
sentence of a severely penal character.
Mr. Albert, interpreter in the case, communi-
cated the sentence to the prisoner, and she again
said she was not guilty of felony.
The prisoner was the mother of a child by a gen-
tleman in Paris, who had settled upon her 10,000
francs for its maintenance, to be paid in monthly
sums, and the bond, by which it was secured, was
ordered by the Court to be given up to her friends.
Charles Keen, a young man of very respectable
appearance, and stated to be well connected, was
indicted for stealing six bracelets, the property of
George Hooper Stone, and another two brace-
lets the property of Adolf Jahn and another,
his partner; and further for stealing two
bracelets, the property of the said Adolf Jahn and
another. He pleaded guilty.
Mr. Kemp appeared for the prosecution, in-
structed on behalf of the Clerkenwell Precious
Metals Protection Society, and stated that the pri-
soner was undoubtedly well connected, bat had
availed himself of his respectability and character
to defraud tradesmen of valuable jewellery, brace-
lets chiefly, which he either pawned or sold to re-
finers. Some he disposed of to Mr. Bryer, of Bar-
bican, at 655. per ounce, which were afterwards
sold at 70s. One was produced out of five sold
there, and two Mr. Bryer said had been sold to a
Mr. Levy, of South-street, Finsbury ; two, his
assistant thought, had been melted. The Assis-
tant Judge said refiners ought to be very careful in
receiving such property, and ordered the one brace-
let produced by Mr. Bryer, and two produced by a
pawnbroker, on which £l5 had been advanced, and
any other which could be found and identified, to
be restored to the owners. His lordship sentenced
the prisoner to 12 months' hard labour.
Mr. Bryer produced a testimonial of a first-rate
character of the prisoner, by whom he said (and
produced the account) he had lost £167.
The prisoner, who seemed much dejected, and
said not a word, was then removed.

" TOUTING" IN PRISONS AND POLICE

COURT&

At the Guildhall Police-court, yesterday, Isaac
Sturt, a porter in the employ of Messrs. Hutton
and Co., Berlin wool and fancy warehousemen, of
Newgate-street, was brought up for final examina-
tion before Sir J. Musgrove, relative to the charge
of robbing his employers, in whose service he had
been for 30 years, of property to the value of about
£2OO ; and Mary Winter, described as a char-
woman, was charged at the same time with receiv-
ing the property knowing it to have been stolen.
Mr. Humphreys, jun., conducted the prosecution;
Mr. Wontner appeared for Winter ; and Mr. Lewis,
jun., for Sturt.
The circumstances of this case have already been
reported, and the depositions being now complete,
the prisoners were fully committed for trial. After
which,
Mr.Wontner said, now that the case was disposed
of, he wished to draw the attention of the magis-
trate to a system of " touting" for business in the
prisons by persons representing themselves as soli-
citors, which was at once disgraceful to the parties
acting in that manner, and prejudicial to the in-
terests of the prisoners under remand. Having
already appeared for the prisoner 'Winter on seve-
ral previous examinations, he, after the last hear-
ing, had occasion to send his son to Holloway pri-
son, where females under remand are confined, for
the purpose of taking further instructions for her
defence at the next examination ; and he was very
much surprised to find that his client had already
been visited by a " Mr. Bramwell," of 17, South-
ampton-buildings, or some one representing him-
self as Mr. Bramwell's clerk, and that, consequently,
his (Mr. Wontner's) son could not be permitted to
see her. He could not at first conceive how Mr.
Bramwell could have been introduced to her, but it
afterwards occurred to him that this person might
have been retained by the other prisoner in the
case to defend them both, and he accordingly insti-
tuted inquiries at Newgate, where Start was con-
fined, and there ascertained that a man of the name
of Empson, who called himself Mr. Bramwell's
clerk, there being no solicitor of the name of Bram-
well of 17, Southampton-buildings, either in the
" Law List" or " Post-office Directory," had seen
Sturt and asked if he had a solicitor, or if he should
act for him. Sturt, he found, had not employed
this Empson to appear either for him or for the
female prisoner, and he therefore thought it his
duty to expose the system, as such a mode of ob-
taining business was contrary to the practice of the
respectable portion of the profession, and most dis-
reputable in the parties adopting it; and he hoped
the aldermen of London would assist him in putting
a stop to this obnoxious system by preventing the
practice of it in the City prisons. It was within
the province of the visiting magistrates to prohibit
such persons from continuing to obtain business in
that way.
Sir J. Musgrove asked Mr. Wontner if he could
suggest any plan which would have the effect of
suppressing the evil ?
Mr. Wontner said the evil might be prevented if
the gaolers were instructed to refuse admission to
such persons, unless the prisoners stated they had
engaged them.
Sir J. Musgrove said there was an order of the
Court of Alderman, that none bat their solicitors
' and articled clerks should be allowed to practice as
advocates before the magistrates of the City police-
courts, and he, for one, would never allow that
order to be infringed; but to prevent persons visit-
ing prisoners was quite a different thing, as they
must be tender of the rights of the party accused,
and take care that no unnecessary obstacles are