The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-27 00:00:00

POLICE INTELJIGENCE.-Aug. 26.

GUILDHALL.—Mr. Pagden attended before
Alderman Carter, with Mr. Richard Bentley, of
New Burlington-street, ,nd Mr. Joseph Bentley, of
Paternoster-row, bookselers and publishers, to com-
plain of the following Ennoyance, and to put the
public on their guard "pith respect to certain im-
positions which were bang practised in various
parts of the country in 41eir names.
Alderman garter inqui'ed if the party complained
of were present, and on being answered in the ne-
gative, said he should behappy to forward the ends
of justice in every way consistent with his duty as
a magistrate, and if the }hied Messrs.:Bentley had
in view was for the pubic benefit he would hear
the statement they wished to make.
Mr. Pagden said he represented Mr. R. Bentley
and Mr. Joseph Bentley in this matter, but per-
haps the magistrate bid better hear what Mr.
Joseph Bentley had to slate, as it was a case of per-
sonation.

Mr. Joseph Bentley said he had,been very much
annoyed during the lasi five years in consequence
of a person of the name of W. H. Garrett having
taken offices at 13, Paternoster-row, where he (Mr.
Bentley) carried on business, and issued circulars
to all parts of the country, with the view to raise
subscriptions to enable him (Garrett) to publish
portraits of popular clergymen ; • but he (Mr. Bent-
ley) more particularly complained of the course
adopted by Garrett, who directed all applications
respecting such subscriptions and portraits to be
made to Messrs. T. Bentley and Co., 13, Paternoster-
row, and in the name of Ar. Richard Bentley, as
well as in his (Mr. J. Bentley's) name. He (Gar-
rett) had since been ejected from the premises, 13,
Paternoster-row, for non-payment of the rent, and
he had written to the Postmaster-General, request-
ing all letters addressed to T. Bentley and Co. to
be forwarded to some otter address, which the
Post-office authorities refused to devulge. The
consequence was that as Garrett never published
the promised portraits unless he got sufficient sub-
scriptions, the disappointed subscribers were con-
tinually applying to hits and Mr. R. Bentley
on the subject, Garrett laving represented that
he came from their firms. The system pursued by
Garrett was that of running down to the most re-
tired parts ha the country, where there happened to
Ina popular preacher, and miler() he readily obtained
subser4tions for the publication of the portraits,
Messrs. Bentley's name being used as a guarantee
fer the due publication of the portraits, but thetv
were in no way connected with either Garrett or
the portraits. He (Mr. Bentley) wished to know
why, when such a person was fairly driven out of
his usual haunts, the post-dice should afford him
such facilities for carrying cn the system he com-
plained of, and refuse to give any information that
might aid him in putting a stop to the annoyance.
Alderman Carter thought it a pity that the con-
venience of the Post-office mould be prostituted to
such a purpose, but he was quite sure the press
would give every facility to the complainant, in
order to suppress transacticns of such a character.
He believed publicity was the only means by which
the system could be effectually stopped, but at the
same time, were he in Mr. Bentley's place, he
would indict the man for fraud whenever he found
him.
Mr. Richard Bentley made a similar complaint,
and said the annoyance became so great that he at
length put an advertisement in the newspapers
cautioning the public against the imposition.
Alderman Carter said the public exposition of
such a practice would no doubt have its effect, but
that was all the assistance he could render them in
the case.
The matter then dropped, and the parties retired.

LAMBETH.—ONE OF THE BENNETT QUACK
DOCTOR GANG.—William Charles Allen, a young
fellow, who described himself as a medical student,
and who appeared, in discharge of his bail, to meet
a complaint preferred against him on a former day,
of assault and riotous and disorderly conduct in
Westminster-road, at an unseasonable hour of the
morning, was again charged before the Hon. G. C.
Norton, with being concerned with two persons
named Waters and Edwards in defrauding several
persons by representing themselves as doctors, and
undertaking to cure all conceivable diseases, while,
like their former associates, the Bennetts, the stuff
they dispensed as medicine was of the most dis-
gusting description.
Mr. Benjamin Thomas Jones, of 75, Mount-
street, Grosvenor-square, who had been the prose-
cutor in the case of Dr. "Wafters, and Edwards, his
confederate, identified the prisoner Allen as one of
the persons he had seen at Dr. Wafters' in Mount-
place, Westminster-road, and as the individual to
whom he had paid ss. on his first visit. On the
apprehension of \\ratters and Edwards the prisoner
absconded, and though Inspector Young had spent
much time in endeavouring to trace and apprehend
him, he managed to keep out of his reach. He was,
however, included in the indictment with his com-
panions, and a true bill was found against all
three, and on the Bth of July last Watters and
Edwards were tried at the Old Bailey, convicted
and sentenced to 18 months' hard labour each.

The prisoner, who offered nothing in defence to
the charge, was remanded to give time to obtain a
copy of the bill of indictment as found by the
grand jury, preparatory to his being sent to take
his trial at the Central Criminal Court.
Mr. Jones informed the magistrate that it was
by mere accident he saw the prisoner, his attend-
ance at the court being for a different purpose than
that of, giving evidence, and he had not the
slightest idea of meeting Allen. He then brought
to his worship's recollection the fact that, on last
Saturday week, he had waited upon him respecting
the expenses he had been put to in prosecuting to
conviction the former prisoners, Waters and
Edwards—no less a sum than £6l 35., while all
he received for his expenses was £1 45., when his
worship kindly expressed a strong hope that the
medical profession as a body would not allow him
to be at a loss, but would subscribe a sum sufficient
to hold him harmless. The press had as kindly
noticed his worship's expressed opinion in reference
to his case; but he was sorry to say that, with the
exception of the £5 so very generously subscribed
by Dr. Smith, of the National Ear Institution,
Pall-mall, he had not received more than £3. He
had waited, he said, on a number of gentlemen
holding high stations in the medical profession,
to solicit their subscriptions, but the reply of these
gentlemen (though they spoke of his exertions
in the matter as most deserving and entitled to
their thanks) invariably was, that the fee for re-
gistration was so high that they could give no
more, that the registration fund amounted to at
least £50,000, and that his losses should be made
good from that fund or by the public.
Mr. Norton said he was very much surprised and
disappointed at the result (:)f so reasonable and
just an appeal to the liberality and generosity of
a profession so liberal and respectable as that of
the medical community, as he had hoped from the
very kind and proper notice taken of the case by
the press that the appeal would have been at once
liberally responded to.
Mr. Jones said that had he had the least idea
that lie should have to pay so exorbitant a sum for
the prosecution -of the parties, he' should not have
undertaken it, and the offenders would have es-
caped. The matter had placed him in great diffi-
culties. •

Mr. Norton was decidedly of opinion that the
Medical Council should
.pay Mr. Jones out of the
large sum they had received for fees.

Mr. Smith fiere said he did not think the regis-
tration fee fund was so much as £50,000, but it
might be half that sum, and it was possible that
the Council might still act on the suggestion of his
worship,

Mr. -Norton hoped they would do so, as it was
only just, and if they did not, he felt satisfied a
generous public would not se• Mr. Jones at a loss,
and all he :could say was that he would be happy
to receive subscriptions for the purpose.

TIIAIES.— STEAM NAVIGATION UPON THE
THA 31 ES.— THE SMOKE NUISANCE ACT.---Mr.
John Walker, the master of the steam-tun called
the:Tam o'Shanter, belonging to the Caledonian
Steam Towing Company, appeared before Mr.
Solfe, upon an information and adjourned sum-
mons, which charged him that while he was in
charge of the steam-vessel Tam o'Shanter he did
unlawfully use in the working of the said steam-
vessel.On the river Thames a certain steam furnace
not constructed so as to burn or consume its own

smok c.

Mr. Hosaelc, barrister, prosecuted on behalf of
the Government ; Mr. Shigh, Minister, instructed
by Mr. Forsyth, a solicitor, of Lombard-street, de-
fended Mr. Walker.
Mr. Hosack said the summons was taken out by
Mr. Evans, superintendent of the Thames Police,
by direction of the Secretary of State, and that an
amended act, the 19th and 20th Vic , cap, 107, was
passed in July, 1856, which enacted "that all
steam-Vessels plying to and fro between London-
bridge and any place on the river Thames west-
ward of the Nore Light shall be subjected to the

provisions of the Smoke Nuisance Abatement Act
relating to steam-vessels above London-bridge."
Inspector Cox. stated that on the 10th. of June
last he saw the Tam o'Shanter steam tug, and the
defendant in charge of her, upon the river. She
was towing the Kentish Knock, Trinity light-ship,
from Blackwall.reach Up to Barking Creek, and she
returned to the Folly-house, Blackwall, where she
anchored and let ofeher steam. The time occupied
was 70 minutes. There was a good deal of smoke
issuing from the funnel of the steamer•. Sometimes
it was black and sometimes of a dirty yellowish
hue.
In cross-examination by Mr. Sleigh, the witness
said the Tam o'Shanter was simply a steam towing
vessel, and used for no other purpose. She did not
carry passengers, like the Greenwich, Woolwich,
Gravesend, Margate, and Ramsge.te steamers. He
had seen the Tam o'Shanter in all parts of the river
as low as Gravesend, He could not say of his own
knowledge that the Tam o'Shanter ever went
beyond the Nore Light, and as far as the Downs
and Deal.

By Mr.. liosack—The Tam o'Shanter was cer-
tainly engaged in the river Thames below London-
bridge, and between London-bridge and the Nore
Light.
Inspector King, of the Thames Police, gate
similar evidence ; and
Mr. William Sandison, Government inspector
and civil engineer, said he had examined the fur-
naces of the Tam o'Shanter. No apparatus had
ever been applied to the furnaces to consume or
burn the smoke.

Mr. Sleigh contended that the information must
fail, and that it would be against the letter and
spirit of the act to convict in such a case as this.
The Tam o'Shanter did not ordinarily " ply to
and fro between London-bridge and any place on
the river Thames to the westward of the Nore
Light." The act of Parliament was intended to
apply only to the steamboats conveying passengers
between London-bridge and Greenwich, Woolwich,
and Gravesend. The Tam o'Shanter was used for
mercantile purposes only, and often proceeded east-
ward of the Nore Light. The information was so
utterly at variance with the letter and spirit of the
act that he was surprised the case was ever brought
into court. There was another case upon all points
with this, and heard before Mr. Burcham at the
Southwark Police-court, when he decided that the
steamer did not come within the meaning of the
act. He was aware that his worship was not
bound by any decision of another magistrate, but
Mr. Burcham's decision, given after mature deli-
beration, might be a guide to the magistrate he
had now the honour of addressing. If the act was
to be applied to all sea-going vessels coming into
the river Thames, it would interfere materially
with the operations of commerce, and entail an
enormous expense on steamboat companies.
Inspector Cox was recalled, and said that he had
repeatedly seen the Tam o'Shanter towing ships
and vessels between Blackwall and Limehouse up
and down the river.

Mr. Sleigh—Don't you know that she tows ves-
sels out to sea ?

Cox—l do not, sir,
Mr. Sleigh—She has been as far as the Isle of

Mr. Hosack—Yes, that may be, but she plies on
the river.

Mr. Sleigh was ratisfied that the act was only
intended to be applied to steamers running up and
down the river. Steamships from all parts of the
world were continually coming into the London
river and going out again, and it was never in-
tended they should be interfered with. He would
appeal to Mr. Sandison himself, whether the power
of marine engines was not decreased, and the speed
of the vessels lessened by the application of an ap-
paratus to consume or burn the smoke. The Tam
o'Shanter towed ships eastward of the Nore, as well
as westward of the Nore. Steam navigation at sea
was very different to steam navigation in our
rivers. If towing vessels in the practice of going
to sea were compelled to apply apparatus to their
furnaces, the Rotterdam steamers, the Irish and
Scotch steamers, and the fleet of the General Steam
Navigation Company must all come within the ope-
ration of the act, and the expense and trouble would
be incalculable. If any person applied his plain
common sense to the act he would be convinced it
was only intended to apply it to vessels ordinarily
engaged in the passenger traffic, and the passenger
traffic only, between London-bridge and the Nore,
and that it was never intended to apply the Smoke
Consuming Act to towing vessels which proceeded
eastward of the Nore.

Mr. Thomas Forsyth Watson, manager of the
Caledonian Steam Towing Company, said their ves-
sels towed vessels as far as the Downs, and some-
times only as far as the Nore.
In cross-examination by Mr. Hosack, the witness
said the Tam o'Shanter went as far as the Nore

within two days of the summons being taken out.
The Nore was 23 miles from Gravesend.
Mr. Selfe asked if there had not been convictions
before under the amended act, as regards vessels
plying between London-bridge, and the answer was
two ; one was the Victoria, a passenger boat, and
the other the Magnet, a towing vessel.
Mr. Sleigh said the question was never raised
before in that court.
Mr. Ilosack maintained that all steamers navi-

gating. the river, whether they proceeded to sea or
not, ought to burn or consume their own smoke.
Mr. Selfe admitted the great importance of the
case, and thought the question raised. ought to be.
settled by a higher tribunal. He believed it would
be the most convenient course to convict, and then a
case could be stated for the opinion of the Court of
Queen's Bench. If he was to dismiss the case, it
could only be on the ground that he had no juris-
diction, and then the onlp remedy would be au ap-
plication for a mandamus, which was a most expen-
sive course to adopt. His own impression was that
the act did apply to a ship circumstanced like the
Tam o'Shanter. As to the remark of the learned
counsel, that the steam tug was only used for com-
mercial purposes, there was nothing in that, be-
cause the Smoke Nuisance Act for factories on land
related only to the furnaces of manufacturers, sugar
refiners, alkali works, glass works, chemical works,
and other trades, and was not applicable to private
houses at all. The object of the Legislature, in his
opinion, was to purity the Thames, and prevent
the people living in houses, cottages, and farms on
either bank from the annoyance of dense volumes
of smoke continually issuing from the funnels of
the numerous steamers navigating the stream.
There was no question about the facts of the case,
and he should formally convict the defendant.
Mr. Sleigh then asked the magistrate to state a
case for the opinion of a superior court.
After some discussion between the learned coun-
sel, Mr. Selfe, and Mr. Forsyth, who said a nomi-
nal penalty would suffice, if the magistrate was
determined to convict, a penalty of ss. only, and
costs, was inflicted.
Mr. Selfe then agreed to state a case for the
opinion of the Court of Queen's Bench.
The recognisances usual in cases of this nature
were then ordered, and the parties retired.
Mr. Forsyth said there were ten vessels belong-
ing to the Caledonian Company, and an. apparatus
must be applied to each if the decision of the'Court
above was adverse.