The Sun.
London, England, 1857-01-02 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—Jan. 1,

GUILDHALL.—RIOT IN IVIIITECROSS-STREET PRI-
SONS—John Ford, James Eglinton, John Rackmoor,
Wm, Stuckfield, Alfred Badman, George S. Flood,
George Elkin, Win. Wiltshire, and about 20 other per-
sons, appeared before Sir Francis G. Moon, some upon
summonses, and others by habeas, from the debtors' pri-
son in Whitecross-street, to answer a charge of riotously
assembling, on the 31st of July last, in Whitecross-street
prison, to the terror of her Majesty's liege subjects, t)
disturb the public peace; and, being so riotously assem-
bled, for assaulting Mr. James May, an attorney-at-law.
The Right Hon. the Lord Mayor and Sir R. W. Car-
den were on the bench during a portion of the time ; and
Captain Williams, the Inspector of Prisons, was present
through the whole of the inquiry.
Mr. Charles Pearson, the City Solicitor, said he at-
tended to prosecute on behalf of the City of London ; and
the object he had in view was that of suppressing a prac-
tice that was subversive of the discipline of the prison,
and detrimental to the administration of justice. Mr.
May visited the prison on professional business, and it
was in consequence of the treatment he received on that
occasion that he complained, and that the magistrates
had ordered the prosecution. Ho would not introduce
any exciting remarks upon the case ; but after adducing
the necessary facts, he would ask the aldermen to send
the matter to be dealt with at the sessions of the Cen-
tral Criminal Court.

Mr. Lewis, jun., appeared for the defendants, and
asked that all the witnesses for the prosecution might be
ordered out of court, and his request was acceded to.
Mr. Jas. May said—l am an attorney of 22, Prince's-
street, Spitalfields. On the 31st July I went into White-
cross-street prison to see a man named Ford, on seeing
whom I told him I came to make inquiries about a bill
of exchange, which Mr. Evans, a client of mine, had
been sued upon, for the purpose of preparieg a defence
to the action. The name of Thos. Ford was upon the
back of the bill as indorsee. Ford said he was not the
man, as his name was John, upon which I went out ;
but meeting Mr. Evans I returned, and he then pointed
out Ford as the person he was in quest of. I had previ-
ously told Mr. Ford I had no process to serve upon him.
When I advanced with Mr. Evans towards Ford he
mixed with a crowd of prisoners, and I lost sight of him.
Immediately afterwards oue of the prisoners came for-
ward and said, "Do you come to serve Ford with a copy
of a writ ? If you do, you will be served out." I told
them I came to make inquiry relative to the negotiation
of a bill of exchange ; but almost immediately after I
was hustled and jostled about, and completely smothered
with flour, which had been thrown at ins from all direc-
tions, in small bags containing about half a pound of
flour. I was also saturated with water, and, when near
the gate, I received a quantity of scalding water upon
me, which had been thrown from the windows of the
ward. I was soon after rescued by one of the turnkeys ;
and, as I was passing through the gate, followed by the
crowd, I was kicked twice in the breech.

Cross examined—l have been many times in the prison
on professional business, but never served write. I had
the copy of the writ I have mentioned in my hand at the
time I spoke to Ford, and also when I went into the
prison again. When the other prisoners advanced towards
me I showed them toe copy of the writ, and explained
to them that it had already been served upon Mr.
Evans, but they would not listen to me. Several
persons called out, "Put him under the pump ! "
" Serve him out !" and other exclamations of that kind.
Some of the bags of flour struck me on the face ;
but I cannot say where I was struck first, as the flour
and water came from all directions and so simultane•
ously. I heard no cries of "Let him alone."
Mr. J. Evans said—l am the person upon whom the
copy of a writ spoken of by the last witness was served,
and I met Mr. May at the door of the prison as he was
coming out the first time. I went in with him again, and
pointed out Ford. This was on the Middlesex side of the
prison. I heard Flood say, "If you have any process to
serve you will not be allowed here ;" and directly after a
person brushed past me calling out, " A. rat ! a rat !"
There were 30 or 40 persons assembled at the end of the
yard, and on our approaching Mr. May inquired for Ford.
Flood said, " You have a writ i❑ your hand." Mr. May
held the writ up for them to look at, and at the same
time I heard some one exclaim, " your eyes, we will
put you both under the pump." Blackinoor was sitting
on a stool, and, knowing him, I appealed to him to ex•
plain the nature of my visit ; but• on my turning round
again to Mr. May, I saw a bag of flour strike him in the
face, and immediately after he was smothered i❑ flour
and water. I received about a quart of flour on my breast,
and a portion of the flour thrown at Mr. May.
Cross-examined—Flood did not say, "Take my advice
and leave the yard." I saw the turnkey come to Mr.
May's assistance, and I went out soon after him and was
bonnetted as I was passing through the gate.
Mr. Albert M`Kenzie Russell Kinahan was then called,
and on the oath being tendered said he objected to be
sworn on the ground that he was under duresse, having
been brought up from the Queen's Bench Prison, and
that it was repugnant to his feelings to give evidence in
this matter ; but after some objections made by Mr.
Lewis, to the effect that the witness was not bound to
criminate himself, and an intimation from the bench that
he would be committed to prison if he refused to answer
the questions put to him, the witness was sworn, and to
the surprise of the City Solicitor, who appeared to have
received information previously as to the nature of the
evidence he (witness) could give, denied all knowledge of
the parties implicated in these proceedings, and although
present and taking no part in them, was unable to name
a single person who took any active part in pelting Mr.
May. _

Tne City Solicitor said, in the exercise of his discretion,
he should not ask any more questions of this witness,
but leave him to be dealt with by the judges, and see
what evidence he would then give.
Benjamin Constable, one of the turnkeys of White-
cross-street prison, corroborated the evidence of the
prosecutor and Mr. Evans as to the riotous conduct of
the prisoners on the occasion in question, but his memory
was equally treacherous with that of Mr.
and his replies of the same non nsi recorclo character.
Sir F. G. i‘loon inquired if such riots were of frequent
occurrence ?

Constable said they happened on an average about
once a year, and sometimes even worse than on the pre-
sent occasion. Iu ono instance, while the whitewashers
were at work, the prisoners, out of pure mischief, took
up the pails and threw the whitewash over each other.
. Mr. Lewis said that the generality of the prisoners
went thereto be whitewashed. (Laughter.)
Constable said he believed they did. The cry alluded
to was "Hie rat," and originated with a man named
Towler, about 17 years ago.
The City Solicitor said he was disappointed in the evi-
dence of two of the witnesses, and he via.s not prepared
to carry the case any further, and he therefore applied
that those who had been identified in this riot might be
committed to take their trial at the sessions.
Sir F. G. Moon said there was no case legally made
out against any of the defendants before him sufficient
to send them for trial, and the summonses were there-
fore dismissed ; but, in the event of the City Solicitor
obtaining fresh evidence the parties would still be liable
to be proceeded against.
Sir R. W. Carden said there was no doubt about the
insubordination of the prison, but the evidence did not
implicate any of the parties before the Court in the in-
fliction of the injuries upo❑ Mr. May.
The court was then cleared, and those parties who had
been brought from Whitecross-street and the Queen's
Bench were escorted back to their quarters in those
prisons by a strong body of officers.
Henry Frank Carr, whose extraordinary account of a
large quantity of stolen property found in his possession
no imposed upon Sir R. W. Carden and Mr. Thwaites,
chairman of the Board of Works, was again brought up,
charged with robbing his employers of property to the
value of about 1001.

Mr. Morgan appeared to prosecute, and Mr. Wontner
conducted the defence.
Some further evidence was given relative to a part of
the property i 9 pledge, identified as belonging to Messrs.
Meeking, of Holborn ; after which evidence in a fresh
case was given, in which the prisoner was charged with
robbing Messrs. Greenwell, of the Blackfriars-road, in
whose employ he had formerly lived. About 90 pairs
of gloves were found in his box, which were identified
as Messrs. Greenwell's property.

The prisoner was committed for trial on both charges.
It having been stated on a former occasion that the
prisoner entered Messrs. Meeking's establishment upon a
false character, written by Mr. Alex. Hans, a draper,
of Wimbledon, a summons was issued against him for
that offence, and he accordingly appeared yesterday to
an-war it.

From the evidence it appeared that, in accordance
with a custom in Mr. Meeking's establishment, the pri-
soner Carr, filled up a form stating among other things
that he had lived in the employ of Mr. Alexander
Hans, of Wimbledon, from June, 1855, until Decem-
ber in the same year. This statement was forwarded
to Mr. Hans for authentication, and he returned it
with a note, dcclarirg the contents of that statement to
be correct, and adding that while Carr was with him
" he found him strictly honest, sober, industrious, civil,
persevering, and obedient." It appeared, however, that
Carr was in the employ of Mes,rs. Sewell and Cross
during that time.

Wontner, for the defence, said he knew, upon
the facts of the case, that a conviction must follow, and
he was only addressing
the Court in mitigation of the
penalty. This was not an ordinary case of sham cha•
racter, where the parties, as is usual in such cases, are
strangers to each other, and have a fraudulent object in
view for their mutual gain ; but on the contrary,
although the prisoner Carr bad not lived with Mr.
Hans during 1855, he had done so for the same period
in 1852 or 1853, on which occasion his character was
all that Mr. Hans could desire, and it was rs,erely a
wish to oblige a deserving young man, who had suf-
fered much from illness, to enable him to get a situation,
that he had given the character in question.
Sir R. W. Carden said this was a very important
h haveav e
had takenth
e Carro
p.
portunity of robbing them.
question • for it the defendant had not given this false
character' Messrs.
M'
ed
k hn eg couldwould not not
into their employ, an
Sir F. G. Moon quite concurred in the remarks made
b Sir R. ;
W. Carden • and he did not consider this
y .
was a case that called for any muigation of the penalty.
He therefore fined the defendant 201. and 103. costs, or,
in default, three months imprisonment.
Mr. Morgan said that, under the Act of Parliament
governing these proceedings, half of the penalty was due
to the informer ; and Messrs. Meeking being entitled to
that moiety were desirmis of placing it at the alderman's
disposal for the benefit of the poor,
The fine and cotta were immediately paid.

BIRTHS•
01 A 00116_

--
On the 28th tilt., at Green Bank, Farnworth, the wife
of Alfred Barnes, Esq.
On the 29th ult., at Biddleswade, Bods, the wife of
Charles Palmer Stevens, Esq., F.R.C.S.