The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-09 00:00:00

NEW COURT.

(Before the C.immoN SERGEANT and Mr. Aid. Gums.)
OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENCES.
Ann Maria Tqfrey, a respectable And lady-like look-

ing woman, was indicted for obtaining, under false pre!
ttnees, from Win. Henry Richardson, the sum of 351. ,
Mr. lluddlestone appeared fur the prosecution, On
Mr. Ballantine defended the prisoner.
Our rea lers will, doubtless, recollect well the fapts of
this case. The prosecutor is a shoemaker, carrying ee
business at 19, Sun-street, Bishopsgate, and about
eighteen months since became acquainted with the Rri•
Boner (vs ho resided at that time in the house of a wine
merchant in Coventry-street), through the introductiou
of his sister. It appeared from the evidence of the
prosecutor that he had lent his sister 501., in order
to carry on an action for a breach of procniee
of marriage, in which she obtained 2501. damages ; 'bet
upon the repayment of that 501. to him the prisoner
told him if he would give her that amount she would
obtain him a Government situation, as she was well
known to Lord Alfred Paget and several other noble
men and gentlemen who had interest with the Govern'
ment. Tee prosecutor, Rho does not appear to be the
brightest individual in the world, was caught in the
snare, and after one or two interviews with the prisoner,
sent her, by his sister, 151. After the receipt of the
money the prisoner wrote to the prosecutor, requesting
to see him and stating that she had good nee
for him. On the prosecutor calling upon her she
stated that she bad obtained a situation for biel
as a port,,r at the Home•office, through the interest of
Lord Alfred Paget, who was a personal friend of her
late hu.,bilid, and to whom she was personally known.
In order to crirry on "the deceit, she produced a note,
purporting to be written by Lord Alfred Page., in whir°
he stated that he had procured the situation for her'
From the prisoner's repreSentation and the note pro-
duced by her, the prosecutor was induced to give her se.
other 101., shortly atter which she told him that he WI
to go to his situation on Monday week. This induced
him to give her another 101., but finding that the Pd.'
soner was continually putting off the day on which be
was to enter upon the duties of his office, the prosecutor
refused to let her have any more money, and the prisoner
decamped.
Lord Alfred Paget, who had been in court all the
morning, denied any knowledge of the prisoner.
Mr. BALLANTINE having addressed the jury for the
prisoner, and
The COMMON SERGEANT having shortly summed UP,
The jury found the prisoner Guilty, and
The COMM 'N SERGEANT sentenced her to eightou
months' impri,onment and hard labour.

MARLBRO'-STREET.-(THIS DAY*)
A NOVEL THEFT.— Charles Crisp was placed at the
bar before Mr. Bingham charged with stealing a cage
containing a blackbird under the following circumstance.;
Police-constable 39 C stated that about a quarter-Pc.'
four this morning he was on duty in King-street, 501)0:
when he saw the prisoner join two long poles together
and go up to a house, in the front of which a cage con-
taining a blackbird was hanging. After lookicg
stealthily round, the prisoner put the pole up to the first'
floor window of the house and lif,ed the cage from the
hook where it was hanging. Witness rushed forward tea
collar the prisoner when the latter dropped the cage an
ran away. Witness pursued him as far as Newport'
market, where he came up with him and took him into
custody.
Mr. Frederick Meyer, 36, King-street, proved that the
cage and bird was his property, and worth ten shilling,'
A constable stated that latterly numerous complaints
had been made to him by parties who had lost their
birds, and no doubt the prisoner had stolen them, as be
(the constable) had frequently met him at an early WI?
in the morning with the poles in his possession, be
thinking he was a bill-sticker, he took no further notice
of him.
The prisoner, who did not deny the charge, was fully
committed for trial.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, July 8.
HARRIS V. HEWITT.
In this case, which had not concluded when our repol
left, the jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff, with 400
damages.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, July 8.
(Nisi Prius, before Sir F. POLLOCK, C. 8., and a Logloll
. _

Special Jury.)
RICHARDS AND ANOTHER V. GLEDSTANES.
bus This case was resumed at 11 o'clock this morning,
it was not concluded at five o'clock, when the Court 1111
adjourned to this morning at 10 o'clock.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, July 8.
(Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD.)
IN RE BIDDITLPH, WRIGHT, AND CO.
the
To-day was appointed fur a dividend meeting -fl
case cf these bankrupts, bankers, of Henrietta-80°A_
Covent-garden. Some new proofs having been admillel
the meeting was confined to the declaration of a divid
on them to the same amount, 7s. in the pound, as had
alrvady been paid on the original proofs.

IN RE THOMPSON.
In the case of this bankrupt, a linendraper, of Pic;
cadilly, his HONOUR today gave judgment at s°ll/4
length upon a point which bad been raised a sbtf
time back. The question was as to the right -a
priority betwixt two mortgagees. The ground
upon which the second mortgagee claimed prioril
was, that the first mortgage was bad, through usury 04
through want of notice to the trustees. The mortes
had been executed on the premises in Cockspur-street,
9,
The amount secured by the mortgage, dated May, 18
,hi
was 5571. Thompson because bankrupt six In°ll`,'"r
afterwards, and then informed the second mortgages 'e,
the first time that there was a previous mortgage 10 °,„",'"o
Hodgkinson for 2001. The bankrupt's interest in 110
property under will was a chattel interest; it must
treatud as real property, and notwithstanding the WilZs
of notice, Hodgkinson cannot be entitled to priority
to the question of usury, the mortgage deed was execote,
in usury, and was consequently void. The second snort
gagee, Mr. Hipwell, was therefore entitled to priority.