The Sun.
London, England, 1861-01-25 00:00:00

necessary before he could make an order on the
det‘ndant, and dismissed tl le summons.

SOUTHWARK.---Ho 11RIBLE CRUELTY TO
CHILL REN BY THEIR FATLY ER.-Wm. Dearmer, a
powertul-looking man, fore ierly in the M division
of police, but at present em ployed as a carman by
Messrs. hick-ford and. Co., I vas brought up for fur-
ther examit2ation charged IA -ith cruelly beating and
keeping without food his two children, Edward
Dearmer, 14, and Sarah Dearmer, 11 years of age,
but who did not appear to be more than eight and
five respectively. The poor children, when brought
into the court, excited tb e commiseration of every
one present. They were covered only in part with
rags, exposing their uud:Ay and large wounds and
bruises. The boy, who w as rather intelligent, told
his worship that his int-eier died in 1851, and his
father got married again a few years ago. They
now lived in Union-street , Borough-road ; and after
his father was dismissed the police force he got a
situation at Messrs. Pickford's. He generally went
out at six o'clock in the n corning, when they were
locked up in a room and. supplied with bread
soaked in water for breakrast, dinner and tea ; but
on Sundays they had a little rice boiled in water.
The little fellow said he had almost forgotten the
taste of meat, as he had hat none since his mother's
death. They were washed about twice a month,
and never had any underclothing. They
slept in the passage on a piece of old carpet,
and had an old shirt and two sacks to cover them.
On being questioned by -the magistrate, the lad
said that they got out of the rooms sometimes and
went to the lodgers downstairs, who gave them
bres-.d. When their father came home he ordered
them uptairs, and to strip, when he beat them un-
mercifully- with a heavy ca.rt-whip.
The magistrate remanded the prisoner, so that
some communication could. be made with the parish
authorities, who, in such a brutal case, ought to
prosecute.
Mr. Jay, one of the relieving officers of St.
George's, Southwark, now attended, and said that
he had seen the children, and a worse sight he
never saw. He should lay all the particulars before
the Board of Guardians that evening, and he had no
doubt they would prosecute.
The prisoner was accordingly remanded until
Tuesday next.

HAMMERSMITH.—CONVICTION OF A VOLUN-
TEER MESS MASTER UNDER THE EXCISE LAWS.
—Mr. Charles Frederick Biglin, the mess master of
the iSouth Middlesex Rifle Volunteers, appeared
before Mr. Dayman to answer an information at the
instance of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue,
for selling beer and spirits, by retail, without a
licence, whereby ho had incurred penalties amount-
ing to £l2O.
Mr. Dwilly appeared in support of the informa-
tion, and Mr. J. Bird attended for the defendant.
Mr. Dwilly said the information contained three
counts, one for retailing beer, for which the defend-
ant was liable to a penalty of £2O, and for selling
wines and spirits, the penalty being £5O in each
case. The defendant resided at Beaufort House,
North-end, Fulham, which was the head. quarters of
-the South Middlesex Volunteers, and in consequence
of complaints, from persons in the district of wines,
spirits, &c., being retailed there without a licence,
an officer was sent to Beaufort House for the pur-
pose of ascertaining the fact.
Mr. Henry Best, an officer of Excise, stated that,
on the Bth of Nov., last, he went to Beaufort House.
There was a concert on behalf of an institution
in the neighbourhood. He had previously pur-
chased a ticket in Hammersmith, and with it he was
admitted. There was a great- number of persons,
and people were turned away. in the course of the
evening he went into a lower roooa, where refresh-
ments were being served. He purchased a pint of
ale which was served by a waiter, and he paid 4d.
He afterwards had some sherry, for which he paid
Bd., and it was served by the defendant. He also
had a glass of brandy, and he paid 3d. for it.
In cross-examination by Mr. Bird, the witness
said he was not asked upon entering if he was a
member of the volunteers. A volunteer was stand-
ing there: He did not observe any notice inside
that none but members of the corps would be served
with liquors. The defendant was sitting behind
the bar.

Mr. W. Jones, the supervisor of Excise for Ham-
mersmith, was called to prove that Beaufort House
was not licensed. He also stated that Mr. Best
went to the concert by his directions, and a day or
two afterwards he (witness) called at Beaufort
House and told defendant that he had been retail-
ing wines, spirits, and beer, and he at once admitted
that he had. The defendant further told him that
he came into Beaufort House with the express
understanding that he should have a licence, and
that he had both spent and lost money upon the
place.
Mr. Bird, in defenee, stated that the South Mid-
dlesex Volunteers had formed a club at Beaufort
House, and directions were given not to serve any
persons who were not members. The defendant
had no recollection of serving the witness, there-
fore he must submit to .be fined, andhe would
have to make a representation to the board for
mitigation.
Mr. Dayman inquired the position of the case
if the witness had been a member of the rifle com-
pany.
Mr. Bird said in that case the Excise could not
have laid the information. _

Mr. Dwilly differed with the learned gentleman.
Mr. Bird contended that as the defendant was
only the servant of the club, therefore the informa-
tion could not have been laid.

Mr. Dwilly said the defendant was the seller
and kept the profits, therefore he was liable.
Mr. Dayman then convicted the defendant, and
mitigated the penalties to one-fourth, namely,
£5 for the beer, and £l2 10s. in each of the other
counts.