The Sun.
London, England, 1868-08-28 00:00:00

LAW AND POLICE.

THE EXTRAORDINARY CASE OF CHILD STEALING.—At
the Middlesex Sessions Charles and Bertha Miller, man
and wife, were charged with stealing a child of tender age.
The case, it will be remembered, was before Mr. Tyrwhitt
at Marlborough-street Police-court, when evidence was
given to shew that a Mrs. Chard, who lived en unhappy
terms with her husband, was in a dramshop with the child
in question, which she left for a few minutes, but on
returning found it had gone. Four years afterwards the
father of the child happened to hear of its whereabouts,
and on visiting the house was at once recognised by it. It
appeared that the child had been exceedingly well treated
by the prisoners. The jury returned a verdict of acquittal,
believing that the prisoners stood in the light of bailee
when the child, as they alleged, was left in their vosses-
sion. . _

ALLEGED PERJURY BY AN INFORMER.-At the Thames
Police-court, a summons was granted against Sbaski, the
man who acted the part of informer in the late forgeries of
Russian notes. Mr. Lewis, solicitor, who applied for the
summons, said that Sbaski swore that upon the 6th March,
1868, Rewman sent him by post an envelope in which were
enclosed two ten-rouble notes. He also swore to various
interviews between Rewman, Harris, and Frankel with
reference to the post letter. He should be able to prove
the letter had never been sent to Sbaski by Rewman,
but that upon an occasion when Rewman happened to
go to Harris's shop to purchase goods, Sbaski asked
Rewman to write his name and address upon the envelops
in question, stating that he wished to give it to some
friend. Rewman did so, never for a moment imagining
the use to which the envelope was to be applied, and
Sbaski must have himself posted that envelope, and after-
wards produced it to the police as if it had been forwarded
to him by Rewman. It was by such base artifices the
police had been deceived.
THE ROBBERY FROM THE HAVELOCK TURF AGENCY.—
At the Lambeth Police-court, Thomas Walters, late
manager to Mr. Joseph Wood, the proprietor of the
Havelock omnibuses, and also of the " Turf Agency,"
Walworth, was brought up on remand on the
charge of having stolen £4Ol 103. from letters
which he was alleged to have undertaken to despatch
to the winners upon the Chester Cup, in May last.
The case had been remanded for the attendance of Mr.
Wood and the production of a letter said to have been
written by the prisoner acknowledging to his having taken
the money. At the conclusion of the case the magistrate
said that justice had been defeated by both parties wilfully
withholding evidence, and this being so, he had no alter

native but to discharge the accused.
ALLEGED EMBEZZLEMENT OF £4,000.—At the Mansion
House, Robert Cecil Ewen was charged with converting to
his own use £4,000, which he had received on account of
Messrs. Stead and Co., his employers. The prisoner had
the management of the London business of the prosecu-
tors, and great confidence was reposed in him. He had
been employed in this capacity since 1864, but some
time back it appeared that some suspicion was
entertained that the prisoner was not acting honestly,
and inquiries were made, and he absconded. It was then
ascertained that there was a very considerable sum deficient
in his accounts, the gross total of the deficiency amounting
to close upon £4,000 ; and it appeared that the prisontr
wrote a letter to his employers, in which he admitted that
he had misappropriated very large sums of money belong-
ing to them, and he at the same time informed them that
he had employed their money in some mercantile specu-
lations of his own. It seemed that the prisoner had spe-
culated on his own account with his employers' money,
and had been unsuccessful. The accused was remanded
nrior to being sent for trial.

SHORTHAND WRITERS' CHARGES. -In the Lord
Mayor's Court, two cases were heard in which the
plaintiffs were shorthand writers. In the first case,
Duckett v. the General Iron Screw Collier Com-
pany (Limited), the plaintiff sought to recover
£7 25.---25 for 100 folios at ls. per folio and £2 2s.

for attendance. Mr. Anderson, for the plaintiff, called
his client and other shorthand writers to shew that it was
not at all unusual for reporters who went to meetings of
mercantile companies to charge large sums for taking
notes of difficult or stormy meetings. One of the plaintiff's
witnesses said he had been paid without any demur as
much as £lO 10s. for taking the notes at a meeting which
only lasted one hour, but in that case the notes were
required in a great hurry. It was deposed generally that
£2 2s. was the usual charge for attendance, and is. per
fall° the recognised price for the transcript. The defen-
dants contended that £1 10s. for attendance, and Bd. per
folio was the usual charge. Both in this and the succeed.
ing case, where £5 was charged, the jury allowed the full
amount.

LONDON PASTURES.—A remarkable illustration
of the forcing character of the late rains may be seen in
some of the more retired spots in the metropolis. lii
Oakley-square, for example, large and beautifully green
patches of grass have sprung up to the height of two er
three ir eles, so that sheep m;ght obtain a better feed
there than could be hal a few diy ago ilk-Paany parts of
Ewalt