The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-29 00:00:00

letter, who said she lived with the person to whom it was
addressed, but was not married to him. From further infor-
mation, he proceeded to Liverpool, and there at St. Nicholas
Church procured a certificate of marriage between Ralph
Chillingworth and Anne Archbold, dated September 5, 1840,
being 14 months' subsequent to his marriage with Mrs. Smith.
The constable also ascertained that the prisoner's first wife,
who was supposed to be living when he intermarried with the
widow Smith, had actually died at the time he mentioned—
namely, 1837. The constable went back to Bristol with the
certificate, and, on sho zing it to the writer of the letter, she
admitted that she was the Anne Archbold named in the docu-
ment, but, though complaining of being the most aggrieved,
she refused to come up against the prisoner. As Mrs. Smith,
or rather Chillingworth, was now proved to be the legal wife,
her evidence could not be taken against her husband, and the
case was further remanded for the purpose of procuring evi-
dence of both marriages, Anne Archbold still refusing to
attend.

Yesterday Thomas Browne, clerk of St. Alban's Abbey
Church, Herts, proved the marriage of the prisoner with Mrs.
Smith (both of whom he identified), in 1839, but ►here was
no evidence of the second marriage, except the admission made
by Anne Archbold to the constable, and the letter found upon
theprisoner.

The only witness who could prove the second marriage
was at present in Ireland, and under these circumstances Mr.
Broderip remanded the prisoner for three weeks.
The prisoner begged that the period of remand should be
abridged, as the long confinement would materially injure him
in his business.

Air. 13 RODE Rir said that remanding him for a shot ter period,
would not do him the slightest service. It was his (the
magistrate's) intention to commit him for trial to the
next session of the Central Criminal Court, which would not
be held until the 18th of August, and to remand him for a
shorter period would be but to bring him unnecessarily
down to the Court, for the mere purpose of sending him back
again.

SOUTH IVA I?K.
Yesterday a young man, named Higgins, was brought be-
fare Mr. Cottingham fur examination, charged with com-
mitting a very daring robbery in the Mint.
It appeared that on Sunday, the 13th instant, a Mr.
Haines, of the Birmingham Railway Company, happening
to pass along the Mint, was attacked by several thieves, and
amongst them the prisoner, who frequent that part of the
town. The gang were standing together near a public-house
called the Duke's Head, and when the complainant was
walking along, the prisoner and several of his associates
rushed upon him, and before he had time to defend himself,
snatched the watch out of his waistcoat pocket, the chain
having been broken asunder, owing to the violence of the pull.
A policeman coming to the spot, he pursued the prisoner,
whom he had known as a bad character, but he escaped, and
was not taken into custody until within the last few days.
The prisoner, a shrewd fellow, commenced cross-examining
the complainant with all the ingenuity of a practised hand.
He asked him if he had not been previously in the company of
women to his walking up the Mint ; and whether they might
not have taken the watch out of his pocket ?
The complainant admitted that he had spoken to a woman,
but that she was not the thief ; that he felt his watch in his
pocket safe a few moments before he was deprived of it.
The prisoner was proceeding to put other questions of a
similar tendency, when the complainant was suddenly seized
with illness, and obliged to be led out of the Court.
The prisoner denied the charge, and said that seeing a crowd
near the Duke's Head, he ran, and was pursued as the thief.
A policeman stated that the prisoner was a man of very bad
character, and had been in custody several times for robbery,
and that on the night in question he pursued him from the
Mint into the Borough, where he escaped.
Mr. COCTINGIIAM sad that he should remand the prisoner,
to give an opportunity for apprehending some of his associates.
A notice:was affixed at the doors of this Court cautioning the
public against several men who are in the daily habit of loiter.
ing about the entrance, for the purpose of procuring profes-
sional assistance for those who may require it. The notice re-
ferred to goes on to state that those persons are quite uncon-
nected with the court, or with any attorney, and that it has
been ascertained that they take upon themselves to give ad-
vice, and in this way not unfrequently mislead the parties who
have the misfortune to apply for information from such a source.
The public are therefore requested to apply for information to
the clerks or officers of the Court, or to any constable of the
metropolitan police, who have received directions to look
sharply after those persons lurking about in front of the court
for the above purpose. It is to be hoped the above notice will
have the effect of removing a set of lazy, shabby fellows, :rho
are eternally loitering about the doors, and are to be seen fol-
lowing up suitors of the court, and constantly in and out of the
public-houses in the neighbourhood.