The Sun.
London, England, 1850-02-09 00:00:00

Saul Lorio, Bernard Gordon, and Sodiah Fader-
men were placed at the liar to take their trial upon
an indictment charging them with feloniously en-
graving certain plates, purporting to bear upon them
portions of a note of the Bank of Russia.
Mr. Clarkion and Mr. Ballantine prosecuted; Mr.
Huddlestone, Mr. Parry, and Mr. Matcalfe were for
the prisoners.

When they were called upon tl plead, Mr. riud-
dlestone demurred to the indictment-, and took a
number of t€ clinical objections to the form in which
it was penned.
Mr. Clarkson having been heard in answer to the
objections, and Mr. Ballantine having also addressed
the Court at considerable length.
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS said the points that had
been raised were of too much importance for him to
take upon himself to decide them without considera-
tion. Ile, therefore, suggested that he should be
allowed an opportunity of consulting the Learned
Judges in the Court of Criminal Appeal, and upon
their decision it would depend whether the trial
should proceed or not.
After a short discussion this suggestion was agreed
to, and the trial was postponed, an application to
admit the prisoners to bail being refused.
Thomas Smith, an aged man, was placed at the
bar to receive judgment.

The prisoner was convicted a few sessions back of
sending a letter to Messrs. 'Terries and Co., bankers,
demanding money with menaces. The letter was to
the effect, that if a certain sum of money was placed
in a spot in the park, which was indicated, the writer
would give information which would save the prose-
cutors from great danger and mischief. A point of
law was reserved in the case, which was decided
against the prisoner.
Mr. Justice WILLIAMS said that he was directed
by the Learned Judge who tried the prisoner to pass
the sentence which he considered applicable to the
offence he had committed. Taking into consideration
his age, and the lengthened imprisonment he had un-
dergone, the punishment that would be further inflicted
upon him would be imprisonment and hard labour for
twelve months.

and Frederick
23,,we t
were Margaret
indicted llfibbrrg in
robbing 22,
t
of a watch, a ring, and several articles of wearing
apparel, his property.
larSdymic
Mr. Ballantine prosecuted.
The facts of this case will be fresh in the recollec-
tion of the public, as they have appeared very recently
in the police reports. The prosecutor, who is the son
of a respectable solicitor, was returning home from
his father's office on the night of the 10th January,
and while passing along Whitechapel High-street,
he was suddenly assailed by some person whom he
was unable to recognise, who placed a rag or hand-
kerchief steeped .in chloroform upon his face, the
effect of which was to render him completely insensi-
ble ; and while in that state he was dragged to a
house in Thrale-street, close by, where he was de-
spoiled of the whole of the property about his person.
fie did not recover his senses until the following
morning, and when he did so he found himself in
dreadful pain, and in a wretched apartment, upon a
dirty bed covered with rags, and with nothing on
him but his stockings. In addition to the suffering
which was the immediate result of the outrage, it ap-
peared that the prosecutor had been in a very dan-
gerous state ever since, and that his memory and
senses were still affected by the treatment he had re •
ceived, and it was doubtful whether he would ever
permanently recover. The prosecutor was unable to
speak in any way to the identity of the persons by
whom he was assailed ; but the evidence was given to
shnw that the prisoners occupied the room *here be
was found, and a variety of other facts were proved,
which left no doubt that they were the persons who
committed the outrage.
The jury returned a verdict of Guilty, and the
prisoners were sentenced to be transported for 15
years.

THIRD COURT.
(Before Mr. BULLOCK.)
Charles Thompson,
alias Christopher Barber, 29,
an engineer, and Sarah Thomas, alias Thompson, alias
Amelia Parish, 39, spinster, were indicted for stealing
in the dwelling-house of Charles Edwin Hyde, nine
sovereigns, a bank bill for 10/., and some jewellery,
valued at 81., the property of Charles Chippendall
the younger.
The female prisoner pleaded guilty. The male pri-
soner pleaded not guilty, and defended himself.
Mr. Thompson prosecuted.
This was the case where the male prisoner was in
the habit of obtaining admission to houses under the
pretence of being a suitor to the maid-servant; the
female introducing herself as his landlady, to give
him a character. On the second or third visit the
house was plundered.
The jury found Thompson Guilty.
The prisoners were again indicted for stealing a
gown and other articles, valued at 3001., the property
of Charles John Fox, in his dwelling-house.