The Sun.
London, England, 1861-01-11 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE--Jan. 9.

WESTMINSTER.--THE Two THOUSAND
POUNDS JEWEL ROBBERY.—James Thomas, a
well-known thief, stated to have undergone four
years' penal servitude, was brought up for further
examination before Mr. Arnold, charged with
breaking into the residence of the Dowager Lady
Talbot de Malahide, 3, Lowndes-square, and steal-
ing therefrom £2,000 worth of jewellery and other
valuables.

The short facts of the case, as detailed on the
previous examinations, and to which it is necessary
to advert, are briefly these ;—At six in the evening
of the 30th November, her ladyship's maid dressed
her for the theatre, at which time everything in the
house was safe, but in an hour and a half afterwards
one of the domestics, on entering her ladyship's
bedroom, found everything in great confusion,
and it was then discovered that the drawers
had been ransacked, and her ladyship's jewel-case
carried up-stairs into one of the attics, where it had
been broken open and rifled of its valuable contents.
Information was given to Inspector Rolls of the B
division of police, and the result of his examination
of the premises left no doubt that the roof of her
ladyship's residence had been gained from an unoc-
cupied house under repair three or four doors off,
and an entrance effected by breaking open one of
the attic windows. Prisoner was apprehended only
a fortnight ago, on the charge of committing the
robbery, the evidence against him being that a hat,
which was clearly proved to have been recently
worn by him, was found on the roof; that he had
been at her ladyship's house on the day before the
robbery, inquiring whether a letter which he held
in his hand, and of which nothing was known, was
directed there ; and further, that he had become, on
the 3d of December, the depositor of £lOO in a false
' name, at the London and Westminster Bank, all of
which had been since drawn out.

Mr. Wontner again appeared for the prosecution,
and Mr. Sleigh and Mr. Beard for the defence.
Mr. Wontner having stated that the case had
stood over in order that the police might complete
the course of inquiry in progress, said he was now
in a condition to close the evidence against the pri-
soner, and should ask for his committal for trial.
He then called—

Sergeant Huddy, 2 B, who said that on the
evening of the 30th November (the night of the
robbery) he saw the prisoner about five o'clock at
William-street, Knightsbridge, in conversation with
another man, the place where he saw prisoner being
about 200 yards from Lady de Malahide's house.
Prisoner wore a hat at the time ; had said to Ser-
geant Potter in prisoner's presence, when he was
apprehended, " That's the man I saw opposite
Albert-gate," to which accused made no reply.
John Yeatman, hackney carriage attendant at
Pont-street, Cadogan-place, said that between seven
and eight on the evening of the robbery three men
came to the rank from the direction of Lowndes-
square, and hired a cab. Two of them wore hats.
The third had his head enveloped in a shawl.
Cross-examined—They were walking, not running.
He did not see any portion of the third man's face
or hair. They were hidden by the shawl.
Wm. Ewes, cab-driver, said that, to the best of
his recollection, the three men, as stated, hired his
cab, and ordered him to the Great Northern Rail-
way in the hearing of last witness ; but when they
got to the Haymarket one got out and went into a
hatter's, whence he returned in two or three minutes
with a hat, and they proceeded as far as Bedford-
place, Russell-square, where they got out and dis-
charged him.
In reply to a question from Mr. Arnold,
Witness said he never saw the face of the man
without a hat.

Abraham Corbett, shoemaker, 38, Great Cam-
bridge•street, Hackney-road, said he knew the pri-
soner as living opposite, at No. 40. On the night of
Nov. 30, at 20 minutes to nine, he saw the prisoner
come home, and get in at the window. To the best
of his belief he had on his bead what is termed a
" wide-awake;" had frequently before seen him in
such a hat as the one produced (that found on the
roof). Had never seen him in that or one like it
since Nov. 30.

In cross-examination witness said he remembered
it was Nov. 30 by ;a business transaction of that
day.
Isaac Glase, foreman to Messrs. Allen and.
Walker, pawnbrokers, &c., London-terrace, Hack-
ney-road, said he had handed a diamond ring, pro-
duced, to Inspector Rolls. He received the diamond,
which was now in that ring, from the prisoner,
on Dec. 22, to set in gold, and did so. Since the be-
ginning of December prisoner had purchased a
great many articles of furniture at the shop. (The
diamond spoken of was stated to be worth £30.)
The prisoner's advocate urged that if papers in
possession of the police—taken from ' prisoner's
lodgings—were examined, it could be shown that
he bought the diamond in question.
Mr. Arnold said it was only fair to the accused
that all papers not used for tie purpose of this pro-
secution should be immediately given up to him.
Mr. Wontner expressed his perfect willingness
to do so.

Eliza de Lechery, lady's maid to Lady do Mala-
hide, said that to the best of her belief the diamond
in the ring produced belonged to her mistress. It
had been part of her duty to clean her ladyship's
jewellery for the last 15 years, and she had often
particularly observed it. The diamond produced
was a great beauty and peculiarly cut, and to the
best of her belief it belonged to a necklace of her
ladyship.
Thos. Maherty, 43 N, proved that prisoner passed
by the name of Arnold while at 27, Hyde-place,
Hox ton.

Some receipts were produced by this witness,
who had assisted in the search of prisoner's house;
one of these was for a diamond ring value £7 55.,
which was alleged to be the one spoken of for the
prosecution.

This evidence closed the case for the prosecution,
when a long conversation occurred respecting the
detention by the police of a gold watcb and other
articles found upon the prisoner. Mr. Beard
strongly urged that they ought to be given up, as
the receipt produced proved that prisoner had pur-
chased them with his own money, and
Mr. Arnold said that if the police found upon
inquiry that this was so they ought to be restored.
Indeed the course he now suggested should have
been earlier taken.

The case was remanded until Thursday, when
Mr. Seigh will address the magistrate on the pri-
soner's behalf.

HAMMERSMITH.—A NIGHT WITH A CABMAN.
James Storey, a young man, who wns described as
a coachman in the service of a gentleman at Ken-
sington-square, was summoned before Mr.Dayman,
by Edward Watson, the driver of a Hansom cab,
for the non-payment of 4s. 6d., being the remainder
of his fare.

The complainant stated that at half-past eleven
o'clock on the night of the 20th ultimo, the defen-
dant came to him at the Trevor cabstand at
Knightsbridge, and told him to draw off the rank,
and wait for him while he went into the public-
house. He then went into the Trevor, where he
stopped for above an hour, and when he came out
he ordered him to Godfrey's pie-shop. He stopped
there some time and partook of pies and stewed
eels with a young woman. He aterwarde ordered

him to a night-house in Sloane-street, where he
also stopped some time. When he came out he
said, " Now Cabby, drive to Kensington Church."
Witness set him down at the place at 25 minutes
to three in the morning, and he gave him is. 6d.
for his fare. He told him he had been with him
three hours and five minutes, and that his fare
was 6s. He refused to give%him any more, and
also his address until a constable came.

Tho defendant denied telling him to draw off
the rank. He told him as he was the only Hansom
on the rank that he should want it when he came
out of the Trevor. He also said he should not want
it.fofan hour, but the defendant persisted in waiting,
and he said he would wait for him for a month.
The complainant called for a cigar without his
authority, and for which he had to pay, and he had
something to drink as well. He admitted stopping
at Godfrey's for an hour, and twenty minutes at the
Goat, in Sloane-street, and that he only paid him
ls. 6d.

Mr. Dayman said that, according to his own
account, the cabman was entitled to 2s. 6d. more,
which he ordered him to pay, and 9s. 6d. costs, as
the complainant had been there three times.
The defendent asked for time to pay it, as he had
lost his situation through the cabman.
Mr. Dayman said he had no doubt he had lost his
situation through his conduct on that occasion. If
he did not pay the money he would be committed
for 14 days' imprisonment.
The defendant said he had no money, but as soon
as the gaoler proceeded to show him the way to the
cell, he called a friend, and the fare and costs were
at once forthcoming.
THE CONDUCTOR AND HIS TAILOR.—Thos. Good-
man, an omnibus driver on the Bayswater-road, was
placed in the dock before Mr. Dayman, charged
with stealing a piece of cloth, value £l, the pro-
perty of Mr. George Skinner, a clothier, of High-
street,
Notting-hill.
James Freeman, an assistant to Mr. Skinner, said
that on Wednesday afternoon the prisoner jumped
off his " bus," and took a fancy to a coat on the
block at the door. He bought the coat, and paid
255. for it. He returned some time afterwards, and
said the coat was too large, upon which witness
offered to make him one at the same price. He left
the coat, and in the evening he returned again, and
asked for his money back. Witness told him that
he was unable to do that, as Mr. Skinner was not
at home, upon which the prisoner commenced /bus-
ing him and the firm, and then took the piece of
cloth and went away with it upon his omnibus. He
followed him, but he refused to deliver up the goods.
The prisoner asked him if he did not say he
would return the cloth in the morning if his
money was given up.
The witness said he did not.

In answer to the questions from the Bench, the
witness said he understood the prisoner took the
cloth because he did not return the money.
The prisoner, in defence, said the understandir g
was, that if the coat did not fit him the money
would be returned. When he.got to Mile•end-gate
he tried on the coat and found it was no use to him,
as it was too large. He afterwards returned with
the coat, and the complainant then said that when
they got people's money they never returned it.
He asked him what he should do to obtain his
money, and he said that he might take what he
liked, and he took the piece of cloth as security for
his money.
The complainant denied having made that state-
ment.
Mr. Dayman said there was no criminal charge,
although the prisoner had done wrong to take the
cloth. His course was to sue Mr. Skinner, and
not take the law into his hands.
The prisoner was then discharged, and the wit-
ness took possession of the cloth.