The Sun.
London, England, 1845-10-21 00:00:00

WORSHIP-STREET.

A young man named Charles Gibson, described as a
lawyer, was placed at the bar, before ;:tr. Broughton, on
the charge of stabbing
a nr...-o named Moses Isaacs, and
also with cutting and 'wounding the police-consthble who
had taken hie-
Pol;- into custody.
....e.constable Davis, II 36, whose upper lip was
,overed with adhesive plaister, stated that while on duty
in Keate-street, Spite Melds, at one o'clock that morning,
he saw the prisoner engaged in a violent struggle with
the man Isaacs, who called loudly for assistance, and
exclaimed that he had been stabbed with some sharp
instrument. Witness instantly hastened to the spot; and
observing a stream of blood gushing from the nose of
Isaacs, he attempted to seize the prisoner, when the
latter made a blow at him, which disabled him in a
moment, and he found that the back of his hand had
been laid open to the bone. Witness then attempted to
secure him with the other hand, when the prisoner made
a sudden blow at his face, and he felt his upper lip com-
pletely cut through with some sharp weapon, which
struck violently against his teeth, and filled his mouth
with blood. Findin.); that he was unable, from the
injuries he had received, to retain his hold of the
prisoner, the complainant Isaacs took the rattle from his
pocket and sprung it, but, before any assistance could be
procured, the prisoner had succeeded in effecting his
escape. Sergeant Barker and other officers shortly
afterwards came up, and, after an active pursuit, the
prisoner was at length traced to a coffee-house in
Norton-folgate, and taken into custody, but no knife or
other instrument was then found in his possession.
A certificate was handed to the Bench from Mr.
Meeres, the divisional police surgeon, which stated that
the officer had received a wound through the upper lip,
penetrating into the mouth, which had evidently been
inflicted with some cutting instrument, and
.that he had
also sustained a second wound upon the band, inflicted
apparently with the same weapon.
Sergeant Barker stated that, on reaching the station-
house that morning, the man Isaacs was bleeding pro-
fusely from a terrible gash on the lower part of the nose,
so he immediately sent for a police surgeon, who, upon
dressing the wound, pronounced that the cartilage had
been completely divided. The complainant was then
directed to attend in Court that morning, and prosecute
the charge, but he had not yet made his appearance ;
and as it was known that he was on intimate terms
with the prisoner, there could be no doubt that he had
voluntarily kept out of the way to avoid giving evidence
against him. _ _ _

In answer '0 the charge, the prisoner said that a
quarrel having arisen between him and his friend
Isaacs, the policeman had most unnecessarily interfered,
and although he admitted having struck him several
times with his fist, he positively denied having made use
of a knife or any other weapon of that description.
Mr. BROUGLITON said that he should commit the
prisoner for cutting and wounding the policeman, with
intent to do him some grievous bodily harm, and should
issue a summons to compel the attendance of the man
Isaacs, on whose appearance the depositions would be
taken for his final committal to Newgate upon both
charges.
Edward Putland, recently employed as town-traveller,
in the service of Messrs. Lewis, Parke, and Co., muslin-
manufacturers, in Cheapside, was brought up for further
examination on the charge of embezzling various sums
of money, the property of his employ ers.
Mr. Wilkins, the barrister, who conducted the prose-
cution, briefly stated the facts of the case, and called
Mr. James Chapman, a linendraper at North Brixton,
who proved having paid to the prisoner a sum of 11/. 6s.
6d. on behalf of his employers, on the 26th August, and
produced his receipt for the amount.
Two other cases of a similar description having been
established,

Mr. J. Douglas, managing clerk of the prosecutors
proved that neither of the sums in question had been ac.
counted for.

Mr. Wilkins then said that a most serious imputation
having been made by the prisoner at the previous exami-
nation against the last witness, to the effect that the
charge had only been preferred in consequence of the
indignant rejection by the prisoner's wife of immoral
overtures made to her by Mr. Douglas, he would now
call upon him to state, on his oath, whether there Was
the slightest foundation for such a charge.
Mr. BROUGHTON, however, said be could not receive

any voluntary statement upon a subject which might
form the grounds of a substantive charge against the
witness, and which was also wholly irrelevant to the
present case.
The matter was not, therefore, further pressed, and
the depositions in three cases having been completed, the
prisoner was ordered to be brought up again next week
for the production of further evidence.
LAMBETH.

Mrs. Ellen Lavien, alias Evans, alias Edwards, who
has been in custody for several days, on a charge of
victimising several surgeons, in the vicinity of Clapham,
as well as in other parts of the metropolis, was brought
before Mr. Henry for final examination.
Mr. Games, as on the previous examinations, attended
on behalf of the prisoner.
In addition to the cases already taken against the pri-
soner, the following witnesses were called :
Miss Ann Cockrane, an assistant to Miss Richards,

who keeps a lace warehouse, 153, Cheapside, deposed
that early in the month of April last, the prisoner
drove up to the shop in a cab, and on entering in-
quired for Miss Richards. She (witness) told her that
Miss Richards was then engaged, but that as soon as
she was disengaged she should see her. She then said
she was going out of town by the Layton coach,
and feared she should be too late if she stopped any time,
and that having unfortunately forgotten her purse, she
had called to ask Miss Richards, who knew her, for
3s. to pay her cab-hire. Witness asked what name she
should give to Miss Richards, and the prisoner replied,
" Miss Evans, Grove-house," and she sent one of the
young persons in the shop to Miss Richards. The
answer returned from Miss Richards was that she knew
no person of the name of Evans, of Grove-house, and
therefore could not give any money. The prisoner,
upon hearing this, expressed much astonishment, said
she was sure that if Miss Richards saw her she would at
once comply with her request, and expressed a wish to
see her. Her manner was so urgent that a second
message was sent to Miss Richards, but the latter
peremptorily refused to give her any money. The pri-
soner then stated that she was sure if the pretty-
looking young woman was then in the shop who used to
serve there, she would at once have given her the
money, and described a young woman who had previ-
ously lived there so accurately, that witness thought her
representations were correct, and also fancied Miss
Richards might have known and forgotten her. Under
this impression, and influenced also by the highly re-
spectable appearance of the prisoner, she (witness) gave
the prisoner 35., one of which she had to borrow from
her fellow shop-woman.
Miss Margaret Clayton, an assistant to Miss Richards,
corroborated the whole of the evidence of the last wit-
ness, and said she had lent a shilling to Miss Coekrane
to give to the prisoner.
Miss Pricilla Richards declared she had never to her
knowledge seen the prisoner before that day, and that
she never had a customer, nor had she been acquainted
with a Miss Evans, of Grove-house.
This concluded the evidence against, the prisoner,
and Mr. Henry committed her to Newgate to take her
trial at the Central Criminal Court, upon three distinct
charges of fraud, and obtaining money upon false repre-
sentations.
The prisoner, who is evidently altered since her ap-
prehension, on hearing the decision of the magistrate,
dropped in the dock, and was obliged to be carried on
of court.