The Sun.
London, England, 1844-09-19 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
MANSION-HOUSE.

Edwin and TVilliam Hartlidge, brothers, were
brought before the Lord Mayor, in the custody of In-
spector Waller, charged with robbery in the house of
Mr. Sarl, jeweller, of the Poultry, and Cornhill.
Mr. Humphrey appeared for the prosecutor, and
Mr. Hobler attended for the prisoners.
William Brown, shopman to Mr. Attenborough, a
pawnbroker, stated that he knew Edwin Hartlidge,
who called at the shop on the sth of August, and
pledged a gold watch for 2/. 10s, A few days afterwards
the same prisoner called and offered another gold
watch, asking the loan of the same sum upon it. 'Wit-
ness handed over the watch to a fellow-servant, and
said he would accompany the prisoner to the address
which was given with it, and which was different from
that given with the former article. They accordingly
went together to the neighbourhood of Dorset-street,
Clapham-road, where, at No. 15, Edwin Hartlidge
said he resided. When they approached the house
the prisoner told the witness he (lid not wish to let his
parents know anything about the watch, and he must
therefore decline calling at home, but he requested
witness to go with him to his brother, who resided at
a little distance. As they went along, Edwin Hart-
lidge met a man who seemed to be waiting for him,
and after exchanging a few words, the man ran off,
and the prisoner asked the witness to go elsewhere
with him. The witness refused, and ultimately re-
turned with him to Mr. Attenborough's shop. On
the way Edwin Hartlidge told witness that he had
purchased the watches for 71. a piece, and that one of
them was his brother's, and the other his own, but he
could not tell where he had bought them.
William Sarl, jun., stated that Edwin Hartlidge
had been in the service of the house about four years,
and had left about nine months ago; and William
had also been in their service two or three years, and
up to the time of the robbery. It was the duty of
William Hartlidge lib attend to the shop in the Poul-
try, and his general instructions were to prevent any
one from going upon the premises who did not be-
long to the concern. The watches were kept in a
glass case on the counter, the keys of which case wit-
ness locked up in an iron safe. He saw one of them
on the night before the robbery was committed on
the premises in the case. It was one of those pro-
duced which Edwin Hartlidge had taken to the pawn-
broker's shop. The other watch was also the property
of the firm, and had been stolen. Witness was pre-
sent when William Hartlidge was questioned about
his brother Edwin, who, he said, crying, had slept on
the premises on Friday night, and had attempted to
rob them, and that he had snatched from his brother
two watches which the latter had taken from the
case, which was opened by him with a pair of scissors.
The witness not only identified the watches, but two
breast pins and brooches, which Edwin Hartlidge
had sold or made presents of, and which hacl been
stolen.

Mr. fiobler submitted that the suspicion of the par-
ticipation of 11'illiam Hartlidge was very weak.
The LORD MAYOR, however, after a very scrupu-
lous examination of the evidence, said he considered
there was quite enough to show that William Hart-
lidge aided and assisted his brother.
It appeared that there was no mark of any attempt
to open the watch-case with any instrument.
Inspector Waller, after a great deal of exertion,
ascertained that Edwin Hartlidge had stolen two
other watches, and pawned them at the shop of an-
other pawnbroker. The watches were produced and
identified.
The prisoners were both committed for trial ; and
bills were ordered to be laid before the grand jury
against them at once, so that probably a very few
hours will intervene between their committal and
their trial.
Robert Walker, a well-dressed, smart-looking young
fellow, was charged by Mr. Kemp, broker, of Ab-
church-lane, with having robbed him of a purse, con-
taining 141. and some silver.
The prosecutor stated that as he was passing
through St. Paul's Churchyard on the preceding day,
his attention was attracted by the appearance of a
man who was looking sideways at him. He imme-
diately turned round, and saw the prisoner, whose
face he recollected, and who ran off upon finding him-
self observed. Witness, upon putting his hand to his
coat pocket, missed his purse, which contained
fourteen sovereigns, and five or six shillings in silver,
and he at once followed the prisoner, crying, " Stop
thief!" The prisoner was secured by a porter and a
policeman, and the purse, containing the money, was
taken out of his right hand.
The LORD MAYOR asked the prosecutor how he
happened to know what sort of person the prisoner
was at the moment ?—Mr. Kemp said it was rather
singular that a few days previously his wife, while
passing in a carriage, saw him surrounded by a set of
fellows, who were all, no doubt, thieves, and called
out to him that one of them was trying to pick his
pocket. He turned about and saw the prisoner, and
made a blow at him. One of his companions, however,
was taken and conveyed to Guildhall, from which the
magistrate committed him to Bridewell for seven days,
upon the evidence of his (prosecutor's) servant.
The prisoner said the gentleman was mistaken
about having seen him before.
Gooch, the turnkey at the Giltspur-street Compter,
stated that the prisoner Was well known as the com-
panion of thieves, but had been particularly lucky in
escaping committal.
The prisoner was then committed for trial.
GUILDHALL.

This morning Mr. Smith, a surgeon, in Moorgate.
street, was summoned at the instance of Messrs. Robin-
son and Co., pianoforte makers, in the same street, to
show eause why he should not return an instrument,
which had been lent for hire for a period, as they al-
leged, of six months.
A professional gentleman appeared for the defendant.
Mr. Cooper, of the firm of Robinson and Co., said that
the pianoforte in question had been lent for six months,
at the hire of a guinea a month, with a proviso that if,
at the end of that period, it should be purchased by the
defendant, three guineas should be returned. The value
of the instrument was fifty guineas. They (Robinson
and Co.) had been referred to a Mr. Goold by the de-
fendant, but that gentleman had, since that reference
had been given, himself taken out proceedings against
Mr. Smith ; and he had also informed them that Mr.
Smith had executed a bill of sale, to some individual, for
his household effects. The complainants, under these
circumstances, were very naturally anxious as to the
safety of their property ; and as the defendant would
neither pay the hire nor return the instrument, they
were obliged to have recourse to those proceedings.
The solicitor for the defence was of opinion that the
matter was out of the jurisdiction of the court. If he
had been properly instructed, the case, as he would
state it, would assume a very different aspect. The
hire was, according to Mr. Smith, for twelve months,
and not six, as had been stated by Mr. Cooper.
Alderman HUGHES questioned how far he could inter-
fere• in the case. He thought that the property could
only be recovered by an action of trover. He did not
see how his authority extended over the matter, and he
would, therefore, let the parties proceed at common law