The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-08 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY IVT,ORIgING, .TANITAR''' 8, 1844.

WINTER ASSIZES.
CHESTER, Wednesday, Jan. 4.
(Before Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN.)
CHARGE OF MURDER.—SamueI Maddocks, ageds3, was
charged with the wilful murder of one Matthias Bailey, game-
keeper to Mr. Wilbraham, at Cuddington.
The Attorney-General, Mr. Townsend, and Mr. Egerton,
were for the prosecution ; the prisoner was defended by Mr.
Temple.
It appeared that the prisoner was a tailor, and lived with his
brother, who is a farmer, in the vicinity of the place where the
murder was committed. The deceased was gamekeeper to
Mr. Wilbraham, of Delamere-hall, and had f:equently suspected
the prisoner of poaching. On the 28th of July, the deceasesd
went out about 4 o'clock with his gun, and John, the brother
of the prisoner, was sees soon after running without a gun, the
deceased running after. It was the habit of the deceased. to
pull off his coat and throw down his gun on those occasions, to
enable him to run faster. The prisoner had a gun, and when
the deceased was running after his brother, it was alleged that
the prisoner came behind the deceased, and discharged the gun,
the charge of
_which penetrated the nape of the neck ; he in-
stantly fell and died. The principal witness in the case was
Joseph Clarke, who, upon examination before the Magistrates,
had sworn to have been an eye-witness of the murder. Several
witnesses were called on to prove the state in which the body
was found.

Joseph Clarke then deposed—l am a labourer, residing in
Noxley. I remember getting up on the 28th of July to get
turnips ;it was about half-past three o'clock. I met Matthias
Bailey at Smallbrook, about four o'clock. I knew Bailey be-
fore, and I asked him to give me leave to get some turnips
from Mr. Wilbraham's field that was alongside Camomile-lane,
where the murder was committed. Bailey and I parted at
the turnip field gate. Bailey went along the woodsicle when
he parted from me. I heard the report of a gun shortly after ;
it came from the direction in which the body lay. In five
minutes I saw Samuel Maddocks coming down the lane into
the turnip field. He had a gun with him. As soon as he saw
me he laid himself down. I was then 100 yards from him, and
then I saw Bailey running down the lane, and as he was going
past Samuel Maddocks, the latter rose up, clapped his gun to
his shoulder, and shot him. He was about two yards past him
when the prisoner fired. He was running very fast. He did
not run above a yard or two afterwards, but the hedge inter-
cepted my view, and I did not see any more. The prisoner
then jumped over the hedge, and ran down the lane. I did
not speak at all. I stopped about five minutes, pulled a few
plants, and then went home. I did not say anything about it.
I have known the prisoner a great while. I did not attend th•
inquest. I heard of a reward being offered soon afterwards. I
gave no information of what I had seen. I first gave informa-
tion three weeks ago last Saturday. I did not give informa-
tion at the time, as I wanted to let it stop till near the assizes.
I gave it to Mr. Wilbraham. I went myself. I heard of the
Maddockses being taken up about a week after the murder. I
have never had any quarrel with either of them.
Cross-examined by Mr. TEIIPLE.-1 never told any person
until I told Mr. Wilbraham. I don't usually get up at 3.
I got up to pull some plants without leave. I have never shot
before 3 o'clock in a morning in my life upon my oath. I will
swear I went on picking turnips after I saw the shot fired. I
walked home and did not speak. I did not go to the place. I
saw the gun fired. I know Humphreys; he went with my
brother Samuel to Mr. Wilibraham's, and I know the account
they gave of it. Ido not know who told me ; my brother did
not. They said I did it. I did not tell my brother that the
keeper was running after me, and I then charged my gun with
shot out of my pocket. I did not tell him that the keeper
called out my name. I did not say that when the keeper said
" You must come and go with me," that I then walked down
the lane, that the keeper walked first a little, and I then put a
cap on, and shot him, and that the keeper dropped when he
was shot. On being asked whether he had given information
on account of the reward, he said, " I do care about the re-
, ward, it belongs to me already for telling the truth. Ido care
about getting myself out of the scrape. lam out of it. I was
taken up and confined half an hour in a public-house, and then
released."

Thomas Pickering deposed to hearing a gun fired about 4
o'clock, and on looking in the direction saw a man come
out of the wheat, but could not tell who he was, on account
of the distance. He heard a shout from the deceased ; he
said, " That's you, John." He could not undertake to swear
that it might not be " Joe," instead of " John."
James Rowland, a shepherd, saw tracts out of the lane into
a turnip field. The prisoner and his nephew were working
there.
Frederick Baker, special high-constable, apprehended the
prisoner on the sth of August. On the road the prisoner said
he could clear himself from this. He could prove he was
never out cf his bed until after six that morning. He said
that neither himself nor any of his family had borrowed a gun.
Three witnesses were then examined, who swore that on
going to work that morning at about half-past five o'clock they
met the prisoner, and spoke to him.
Catherine Lewis remembered the deceased and the prisoner
meeting at her house, where they had words. This was not
long before he was shot. The deceased d—d the prisoner, and
said he was the worst poacher he had about. The prisoner
as soon as he was gone, said he would shoot him if ever he
came across him. He repeated his threat twice.
Mary Robinson examined—The prisoner came to her house
to do some tailoring. Whilst there the prisoner saw the de-
ceased in a field. He said he wanted shooting. Prisoner said
he was once lying in a ditch, and the deceased and his dog went
over him. If he had had a gun then the would have shot him.
Maria Gresby—Recollected John Maddock's daughter
coming to her father's house. She asked her to go to Thomas
Cook for her. Thomas Cook brought out a bag and gave it to
her, and she gave it to Maddocks's daughter.
'Thomas Cook remembered the last witness coming to his
house. There was a gun in the bag. "haddock's daughter
wanted to borrow it for her father. The gun was retur,,ed on
the 4th of August, by Mary "haddocks, and she said her father
was much obliged for it.
Samuel Smith, surgeon, deposed to an examination of the
body, and finding a gun-shot wound on the nape of the neck.
The orifice was as large as a crown-piece. He afterwards made
a post modern examination when the body was much decom-
posed, and extracted two shots from the spinal marrow, between
the first and second vertebrm. Death, he should think, would
be instantaneous, from paralysis. The wound must have been
received :rum behind.

„... ....
James Bland, surgeon to the Macclesfield Infirmary---A per-
son might run several yards, even if the spinal marrow was
divided.

This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. TEMPLE addressed the jury in a long and powerful
speech for the prisoner, contending that the evidence was most
vague and unsatisfactory ; and, with regard to the witness
Clarke, not to be relied upon for a moment.
The Learned JUDGE then went into an analysis of the whole
of the evidence, commenting upon the discrepancies as they
arose. He said, the whole weight of the testimony rested with
the witness Clarke, and it was for them to consider what credi-
bility, if any, attached to his evidence.
The jury retired, and were absent for about 20 minutes,
during which a statement was made by Mr. Wilbraham, who
was in Court, which affected materially the truth of Clarke's
statement.

Mr. TEMPLE, for the prisoner, hoped his Lordship
.would
interrupt the deliberation of the jury, so as to give the prisoner
the benefit of this piece of evidence.
Joseph Clarke was recalled.
By the JUDGE—Did you go to Mr. Wilbraham's in Sep-
tember last ?—I don't know what part of the year September
is in, and I never told Mr. Wilbraham that I knew nothing
about the matter.

Mr. Wilbraham examined—Did the witness come to you in
September about the story which his brother had told the night
before ?—I think he came voluntarily. I asked him if he knew
anything about it, and he replied that he knew nothing about it.
The jury then again retired, and, after an absence of an
hour, returned with a verdict of Not Guilty.
The announcement was received with loud cheers, which
were promptly suppressed.
John Ready, a collector of rents in Macclesfield, was ar-
raigned for divers embezzlements, of the moneys of James
Frost, and others. He pleaded Guilty.
The Counsel for the defence wished to recommend the pri-
soner to the merciful consideration of the Court. He had been
a Captain in the army for 23 years, and had risen from the
ranks to be Captain and Adjutant by his merits. He had also
been a collector for 20 years, and his friends had offered to
make good the default. He was 66 years of age.—Sentence
defers ed.

CHARGE OF MURRER AT STOCKPORT.— George Fox, a bai-
liff at Manchester, was then indicted fur the wilful murder of
his wife Charlotte, by kicking and otherwise abusing her, which
caused her death.

The Attorney-General and Mr. Trafford were for the pro-
secution ; Mr. Temple was retained for the defence.
It appeared that the deceased was a bonnet-maker, residing
in Stockport. On the Ist of December the prisoner went out
from home early in the morning, and did not return until ten
o'clock at night ; he was somewhat intoxicated. His conduct
was brutal. When he came home he said to deceased, " You
have been drinking at the Robin Hood." She denied it. He
said he would fetch a Bible, and make her swear to it. Dur-
ing his absence, finding him infuriated, she ran out of the
house, and her mother persuaded him to go to bed. She then
came in, thinking the prisoner would be asleep; but he then
came down stairs again, and she again left the house, and,
being very cold, went into the Robin Hood and called for a
noggin of gin. When she was about to return home, the pri.
soner was waiting for her at the door, and he commenced beating
her. She ran away screaming, and went into the house of a
neighbour. The prisoner followed and beat her drsidfully,
and kicked her brutally several times; and in her endeavours to
release herself by going up the steps, he caught hold of her gown
and pulled her backwards, and, falling on the stones, shestruck
her head, and never afterwards spoke. The prisoner after-
wards with great brutality would not go for a doctor, and said
she was not dead. He had been heard to say, when an inquiry
was made for his wife, that he wished she was stiff.
Betty Day, mother of the deceased, proved the whole of
these allegations, which were mainly supported by the testi-
mony of other witnesses.
The Jury returned a verdict of Manslaughter, and
The Learned JuDGB sentenced him to two years' imprison-
ment with hard labour.

CARMARTHEN ASSIZES, Jan. I.
THE REBECCA RIOTS.

His Lordship entered the Court at nine o'clock this morning.
Thomas Hand, David Thomas, David Gower, David
Williams, and William Thomas, were placed at the bar,
charged with riotously and feloniously demolishing a house at
Kidwelly. There was a second count in the indictment for a
riot only. All the prisoners pleaded "Not guilty."
His LORDSHIP addressed the jury, and said that this was an
indictment that had been found at the quarter sessions and re-
mitted to the assizes for trial. The case had been carefully
examined, and counsel and he also had read over the deposi-
tions, and it was thought that the evidence did not bring home
the charge. Ho had therefore been applied to to allow the
prosecution to be abandoned. This, he thought, could be done
without prejudice to public justice, and the jury would, there-
fore, return a verdict of acquittal.
The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty accordingly, and
the prisoners were discharged.
SENTENCES ON THE PRISONERS.
John dones, alias Shony Scybor-fatvr, and David Davies,
alias Dai-y- Cantwr, were then placed in the dock. Jones
immediately handed up a letter to his Lordship.
His LORDSHIP, addressing them, said that the prisoner John
Jones had been convicted of shooting at a fellow-subject with
the intention of doing him a grievous bodily harm, and had
also pleaded guilty to a charge of riotously and tumultuously
demolishing a house. The Court had but too much reason to
suppose that he was implicated in other offences of the same
character as both of these. The prisoner David Davies
had pleaded guilty to a charge of demolishing a house with
others, and his Lordship knew from his own statement
that he had been guilty of many similar outrages. As far
as the Court was able to judge from the facts that had been
laid before it, they were both strangers to this part of the
country. What induced them to visit it his Lordship knew
not, but it was rather curious that their appearance was noticed
here not long after the commencement of those outrages by
which this county had been disgraced. Whatever had been
the motives that had actuated them, they appeared to have
been willing agents, and had not been seduced into a breach of
the law. The prisoner John Jones might feel grateful that
the shot he fired did not take a fatal effect, as, if it had, instead
of the Court passing on him a sentence of banishment from
the country, it would have been obliged to pass the dreadful
sentence of a violent death ; but after the proof the poisoner
had given of the disregard he entertained for the safety of his
fellows and the rights of property in this country,
it would be utterly impossible for him ever to return to it. The
prisoner David Davies would not be banished for so long a

term, but still for a very long period of time ; although pro-
bably the greater portion of his life would be spent in a
foreign land. The sentence of the Court was that John Jones
be transported beyond the seas for the term of his natural
life, and that David Davies be transported for twenty years.
The prisoners, who had been very attentive to the Learned
Judge's address, were then removed from the dock, which they
left laughing.
Philip Phillip and William Phillip were then brought up to
receive sentence.

His LORDSHIP said, that the prisoners Philip Phillip and
William Phillip were now to receive sentence for the very
serious offence of which they had been found guilty—of a riot
and assault on the person of a bailiff who came to a distrain on
the premises of William Phillip. It was a sad thing to see
such an old man, the father and his son, brought up together
to receive sentence for an offence of this description. It ap-
peared to have been committed, not hastily or unadvisedly,
but it seemed that the prisoners prepared to do it deliberately,
and even threatened the bailiff on the day before. The sen-
tence of the Court was, that William Phillip be imprisoned for
twelve months and kept to hard labour ; and that Philip Phillip
be imprisoned for twelve months.
David Evans and James Evans were then placed at the bar
to receive sentence.
The JUDGE said—That the prisoners David Evans and
James Evans were brought before the Court to receive sen-
tence for a riot—a riot attended with circumstances of very
great cruelty to a very old man, who had since in some man-
ner or other lost his life. They armed and disguised them-
selves, and conducted themselves in such a way as to excite
terror and alarm in the minds of all peaceable subjects, and
proceeded to drag the old man out of his bed in the dead of
the night, and James Evans personally ill•used him. The jury
recommended him to mercy, and his Lordship strongly wished
he could think it was on good grounds. One reason was that
James Evans was a servant, and might have been influenced
by his master. He knew not, however, how the jury could
consistently recommend him to mercy on the ground that, as he
was a servant, he might have been influenced by his master,
and could then recommend the master himself to mercy.
Some of the jurors said they had always heard he possessed a
good character. If he had hitherto possessed a good charac-
ter, it was, his Lordship feared, because the truth was not
known of him. The defence he had set up proved his charac-
ter anything but good. The exhibition of his poor little trem-
bling brother and sister in the witness-box was most revolting
and shocking. The act of violence was bad enough, but the
betrayal of his relatives into such a position was much worse.
His Lordship was sadly afraid that people did not look with
sufficient abhorrence on the crime of perjury. There was no
crime more injurious to society, or mere perversive of the pro-
per administration of justice. Who could be safe if witnesses
would come to a court of justice, and call on Goal to bear wit-
ness to a falsehood? The Court did not punish him for this,
however, but his Lordship mentioned it to show why he did
not take the recommendation to mercy into consideration. The
sentence of the Court was, that each of the prisoners be impri-
soned and kept to hard labour for twelve calendar months.
David Morgan, James Morgan, George Thomas, John
Lewis, and Evan Walters, were arraigned on a charge of bur.
glariously entering the dwelling-house of Evan Davies, of
Llanarthney, and feloniously stealing a sword.
No evidence of the felony was offered on the part of the pro.
secution, and a verdict of Not guilty against all the prisoners
was recorded.

The same prisoners were then indicted for the misdemeanor
of a riot. All of them, except David Morgan, pleaded guilty.
No evidence was offered against him, and he was discharged;
the others were also discharged, on being bound over to keep
the peace, and to appear to receive judgment whenever called
upon.
Thomas Davis, a smith, charged with having broken into
the house of William Thomas, of I%laesbaeh, Llangendeime,
was acquitted.
David Jones, a farmer, was charged with attempting to
suborn and instigate one Daniel Lloyd to commit wilful and
corrupt perjury. There was another count for attempting to
suppress evidence.
It appeared that Daniel Lloyd was about to give evidence on
a charge of assault preferred against John Thomas ; the pri-
soner, David Jones, gave Lloyd a sovereign to withhold his
evidence against John Thomas.
'f he prisoner was found guilty of attempting to withhold evi-
dence, and
His LORDSHIP, in passing sentence, said the jury had taken
a very merciful view of his case. Had they found him guilty
of attempting to persuade the witness to commit perjury he
would certainly have been transported. It was of the utmost
importance to the administration of justice that witnesses
should be allowed to state fully and freely the whole truth on
their oaths. It was of the utmost importance to the welfare of
society that such should be the case. The prisoner had en-
deavoured to subvert the the due performrnce of that duty, and
should be made an example of. He was then sentenced to 12
months' imprisonment.
James Evans INas then placed in the dock to receive sen-
tence for assaulting his wife in Newcastle Emlyn. He was sen-
tenced to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for twelve Ca-
lendar months. _ .

William Williams was sentenced to six months' imprisonment
fora riot at Pentrebach turnpike-gate.
David Jones was brought up to receive sentence for haying
sent a threatening letter to Mr. T. Williams, of Llanegwad.
His Loansuir said that the jury had recommended him to
mercy on account of his ignorance of the consequences of send-
ing such a letter. On a consideration of the case, his Lord •
ship could not think that it was well founded. He had com-
mitted this sort crime before, and h.id used threats in the pre-
sence of Mr. H. Lloyd Harris, a solicitor, who very kindly
cautioned him. It would be well for him had he attended to
his advice. The sentence of the Court was, that he be impri-
soned for nine calendar months.

Bridget Williams was brought up to receive sentence for
sending a threatening letter.
His LORDSHIP said that the verdict and recommendation of
the prisoner to mercy were very proper and just. She could
neither read nor write, and he was disposed to believe that
some wicked and ill-natured persons put it into her I,ead to
send it, she not knowing the consequences. She was then
sentenced to three months' imprisonment.
Lewis Henry, for the robbery at Gaterven, near Abergwilly,
was sentenced to ten sears' transportation.
His LORDSHIP observed that the prisoner had had the hardi-
hood deliberately to tell the policemen that he would commit
the robbery. He was unfit for the society of this country, and
must therefore be removed.

Several prosecutions for breaking down gates and for riots
were abandoned.

His LORDSHIP then dismissed the petit jury, and the assizes
terminated. His Lordship left town that night.

SURREY SESSIONS.

Frederick Herbert, a stout athletic young man, and a member
of a formidable gang of thieves, whose rendezvous was in the
neighbourhood of Lock's-fields, was indicted for feloniously
stealing, on the 18th of Deteember last, a boa, the property of
Solomon Aarons. In the course of the trial, however, it was
discovered that the boa was only part of one, and upon that
technicality the prisoner was acquitted. The prisoner was
about rejoicing on his lucky escape when it was intimated to
him that there was a second indictment Against him for stealing
a pair of trousers, a circumstance which the prisoner seemed
to have entirely overlooked. On this indictment the prisoner
was again placed at the bar, when he was convicted on the
clearest evidence.
In answer to a question from the CHAIRNIA N, the police-
officer stated that the prisoner had several times been in cus-
tody on a charge of felony, but had escaped conviction at the
Old Bailey. He had been an associate of thieves for years,
and was a most desperate character. When taken into cus-
tody he went very quietly until he got to a very lonely and
unfrequented part of Lock
and made a signal for the assistance
cpeoriiceman springing his rattle, his com-
's-fields, when he made a most v,o-
venture, several of them '° being wanted."
of
fanntt
ihoaens ssga,avunal tgr
eo;
an
fbrtuahited t othof fie
Mr. Keene, the governor of the county gaol, said the pri-
toner's name appeared on the black list.
The prisoner was sentenced to seven years' transportation.
t was found guilty, and sentenced to three
labour at Brixton, for feloniously stealing, in the
moCnthhasr,le hsar Dd
Noe:hv-ecsuatai,eLsmamanbe.th, a cap, the property of Charles Paddon,
el
James Einu was also found guilty, and sentenced to 21 days'
solitary confinement in the county gaol, for stealing a hat, the
property of the same prosecutor. 3
The CHA IRMAw—Pray M Ir. addon, were not these goods
exposed for sale after dark ? Mr. Paddon—Yes, Sir.
The Cir aI Is MAN—At what hour? Mr. Paddon—Near upon
twelve o'clock.
The CrrainMAS---"Wilat .at midnight? Mr. Paddon—
Yes, sir.
A /11.aorsTRATE—Which is clearly illegal, and contrary to
the Act of Parliament.
Mr. Johnson-1 think, Mr. Paddon, you had one or two
eases here last sessions? Mr. Paddon—l had, Sir.
Mr. Johnson—And, if my. memory serves me right, there is
scarcely a sessions but you have a prosecution ; this practice
mu't be discontinued ; it is holding out a temptation to commit
crime.
Mr. Paddon—i am compelled to do it ; the competition in
trade is so great ; and if 1 did not, I should be forced to close
my shop. Aly losses by robbery are severe. It is only re-
cently I transported three men at Kingston.
A MAGISTRATE—You are doing an illegal act, Sir, and en-
gendering crime.
The CHAIRMAN eventually told Mr. Paddon, if he came to
this Court again, under similar circumstances, he should not
have his expenses. There was no occasion for any tradesman
to expose their goods but butchers.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(SATURDAY.)

MANSION-HOUSE.

A French gentleman, who resides in King William-street,
was summoned by a -cab-driver, before Sir John Key, for
having refused to pay four shillings fare, after having traversed
a much greater extent of ground than he could have demanded
to be conveyed if an agreement had not been made.
The cabman stated that as the day happened to be a frosty
one, and there was no " cab life a moving," he consented to
take four shillings for driving the defendant a six shillings'
distance, and he was to put the gentleman down at the exact
spot where the hiring took place. He just did as he promised,
but the defendant refused to pay for the long jaunt, and the
summons was the consequence.
Sir JOHN KEY, having very scrupulously investigated the
,
charge, and ascertained that the cabman had actually:taken
the defendant further than four shillings would have paid for
under the usual circumstances said—Well, Sir, this man seems
to have performed his part of the contract—what is your objec-
tion to pay ? Defendant—You see, sare, I often go in de cabs,
and I see him vid de cab, end I ask him vot he take me fort
so he say six shilling. I say four shilling, no more, and I
walk on. Ver well, he come up again, and he open de door,
and he say jump in ; and I say four shilling, and he say, yes,
yes ; and I jump in.—( Laughter. )
Sir Jour; KEY—This was near your own house? De-
fendant—Yes, yes. Dis was near my own office. Ver well ;
he ride me round to de places vot I vanted to go, but he stop
at public-house to drink himself and his hoss in Oxford-street,
though I was in a much hurry to march on.—(Laughter.)
Yell, Bare, I don't tink nothing of dat, so he drive on.
Sir JOHN KEY—He drove you back to King William-street?
Defendant—Yes, sare, he drive me in King William-street,
but he say he would not drive me in my own office. Vell, when
he come in de street he fling open de door, and he say, " Come,
you jump out."—( Great laughter.) So I say I won't jump
out till you take me in.my office. " Aha," he say, " I won't
drive you no more." Den I say, I won't give you no more
four shilling.—(Laughter. )
Sir JOHN KEY—But it appears that he had driven you to
the spot at which you engaged him. The cabman—Jist so,
your Worship. I driv the gent to the wery place vere he hired
this here wehicle of mine; and had'nt I a rum go •to bundle
rich a big-un as him a long six shilling fare for four shillings on
such a starving day ? _ _

—befendant---Alla, I vould'nt care for forty-four shilling.
Four shilling ! no, no ; dese cabsmen be sheats—common
sheats ; and 1 was intend to come to de Mayor, for I often
jump in de cabs. Aha (shaking his hand at the cabman), you
shoat.—(Laushter.)
Sir JOHN KEY was astonished to learn that the defendant's
office was actually within two doors of the spot at which the
cabman stopped his cab and demanded his fare. " How did it
hapren, cabman," said Sir John, " that you did not drive the
gentleman a couple of yards further ?" The cabman7-Please
your Worship, our agreement was, that I should drive him
back to the very spot where I shoved his body in ; and as he
wouldn't stand a farden more than four bob for that precious

yarn of a drive, how could I, in honour to myself, drive him the
eighth of an inch furder ?—( Great laughter. )
Defendant—Ah, Sare I He know I don't speak de English
much well, and so he sheat me—(Laughter)—lam glad I hate
come here, for I wish to have punish dese cabsmen.
Sir JOHN KEY—The cabman has not acted with proper
consideration, certainly ; but he has performed his contract.
You must pay him the four shillings for the fare, half-a-crown
for his loss of time, and two shillings for the serving of the
summons.-

The defendant, who evidently did not care a farthing about
the money, but was shocked at the rudeness of his adversary,
then paid the amount demanded, and said he would take the
advice of Sir John Key, who told him he would never be
cheated if he invariably gave a cabman whatever he demanded,
and summoned him before a Magistrate for overcharge.
CII Y POLICE CO3I WITTE E.

Mrs. Jones, a widow, proprietress of the Bull's Head public-
house, Wood-street, Cheapside, attended before Mr. Alderman
Kelly, the presiding Magistrate, to answer a charge laid against
her by the police, for having her house open, not for refresh-
ment of travellers, after the hour of twelve on Saturday night
last, whereby she incurred a heavy penalty, and endangered
the license of the premises. She pleaded not guilty. Mr. Wire,
the solicitor, appeared on her behalf.
The police-constable, No. 101, deposed that at about twenty
minutes before one o'clock on Sunday morning last he passed
the defendant's house, and found the door ajar, and on pushing it
open saw a man standing near it with a pot of beer in his hand.
He went in and found three others in front of
.the bar, and two
in a passage leading to the tap-room. There were pots on the
bar counter, but he could not swear that they contained any-
thing. It was for having persons in her house after twelve
o'clock that he summoned the defendant.

Mr. Wire said he should clearly prove, to the Magistrate's
satisfaction, that no offence had taken place whatever, and
proceeded to question the officer.
Mr. Wire—Among those in front of the bar, and in the
passage, did you see Mrs. Jones ? Witness—Yes, I believe
I did.

Mr. Wire—Was she not standing at the foot of the staircase
with a candle in her hand ? Witness—Yes, she was.

Mr. Wire—Had you any conversation with her on the sub-
ject of persons being in the house at that hour of the night?
Witness—Yes.

Mr. Wire—What did she say to you? Witness—She told
me they were her own people and were going to bed.
Mr. Wire—Have you:any doubt that they were otherwise ?
Witness—No, I have not.
Mr. Wire—This, your Worship, is the case. Mrs. Jones ad-
mits they were there when the officer entered the house. The
house is much frequented by travellers and mercantile men
from the country, and several were sleeping there that night,
which assertion she was ready to substantiate, if requisite.
Mr. Alderman KELLY inquired of the police-constable if he
saw any beer or liquor drawn or paid for. The officer replied
in the negative,
Mr. Alderman KELLY said he did not consider the case of
that importance to call for a conviction, and therefore dismissed
the summons.

Mr. Mottry, the landlord of the Rose and Crown, in the
same street, also appeared in answer to a summons charging
him with a similar offence. In this instance the same officer
laid the information. His evidence went to show that on
Sunday morning last, about twenty minutes after twelve, see-
ing a light in the shop, he listened and heard several persons
talking. He knocked at the door, but received no answer, the
lights being put out, and apparently great confusion in clear-
ing pots and glasses off the counter. He knocked again, call-
ing out, " open the door, it is the police." It was then opened,
when he entered and discovered several persons congregated
together in front of the lar. He saw three immediately leave
the house, but the remainder stopped inside.
The defendant assured the magistrate it was not his inten-
tion to infringe the law, and would explain the cause of their
being in his house after the proper time. A few minutes before
twelve o'clock a party called for some liquor, which he refused
to serve them with on account of the hour. This occasioned
some conversation, and they refused to go until the police en-
tered. The rest of the persons whom the police saw were
lodgers, which they knew to be the case, having seen them
some time before.

The Magistrates dismissed this summons also, but ordered
the defendant to pay the amount of costs.

BO W-STREET.

John Harris, alias John Aldridge, was examined before
Mr. Twyford, for keeping a house of ill-fame and a common
brothel, in St. Clement's-lane, St. Clement Danes. One of
the parish officers swore to the prisoner as a person keeping a
house of ill-fame, and Mr. Twyford ordered the prisoner to
find bail, two sureties in 201. each, and to enter into his own
recognizances to answer the charge at the Westminster Ses-
sions. The required bail was immediately procured, and the
prisoner was liberated.
The parish authorities are vigorously endeavouring to abate
the nuisances which exist in the neighbourhood of Long-
acre, and so thickly pervade the parish of St. Clement Danes.
About twenty persons have already been indicted, and warrants
and summonses a-e now out against others, who will be in-
dicted at the next sessions.