The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-06 00:00:00

THE - SUN, LOMDON,

minutes and four seconds too late, and I was obliged to
make the demand.

Brown—My Lord, the landlord wants to get rid of
her, for she is a bad 'un.
Complainant—l refer you to the respectable gentle-
men, my Lord, who have employed me for years for my
character. I had paid my landlady four shillings but
the night before, and I never expected such cruel treat-
ment.

The LORD MAYOR —This broker has acted with great
inhumanity to you, and I very much regret that I cannot
punish him upon this charge. However, I think I can
secure you from the apprehension of any violence. I
call upon you, defendant, to find bail to keep the peace
towards this poor woman for twelve months.
Defendant—Find bail for what !

The LORD MAYOR —For having threatened the com-
plainant; and if you do not find bail you shall go to
prison.—(Laughter.) his Lordship then gave ss. 6d. to
the complainant to relieve her, and the advance of rent
for a week, at the end of which he desired she would
remove to some place in which there was no such inhu-
manity existing.
Robert Henry Drover, a young man who was stated
to be the partner of Dorey, the unfortunate husband of
Mrs. Dorey, who is now undergoing her sentence of two
years' imprisonment in the Giltspur-street Compter, as
one of the accomplices of Barber in the will forgeries,
was charged with having assaulted the servants of Mr.
Martin, of No. 38, Gutter lane, Choapside, Manchester
warehouseman.

The defendant was apparently in a state of great ex
citement.

Mr. Martin stated that having heard a scuffle below
in the warehouse, he went down and saw the place in a
state of the greatest confusion, of which it was quite
evident the prisoner was the author,for he was struggling
with and striking one of the establishment. It was ne-
cessary to place the defendant in the custody of an
officer of police to prevent a further breach of the peace.
James B. Rogers, warehouseman to Mr. Martin, stated
that the defendant entered the shop for the purpose of
inspecting some goods, and selected some, which were
made up in a parcel for him. The invoice was at the
same time made out, but the defendant wished the arti-
cles to be put down to the credit of the house. This the
witness refused to agree to. He said he expected the
money to be paid down, and that the defendant could
not have the goods without immediate payment. The
defendant's house had an account with the firm, and the
defendant, upon being told that Mr. Martin did not wish
to extend the credit of the house, seized the parcel and
wanted to take it away with him, but the witness and
other people belonging to the prosecutor, resisted the
attempt, and the defendant then proceeded to blows.
The defendant said that having kept an account at the
prosecutor's warehouse, he went thither to get some
goods, which appeared to be very cheap, and he took
them upon cash terms, which signified one month's
credit. The warehouseman snatched the parcel out of
his hand, although he offered to give him a cheque in the
course of the day:fox the amount, and then a sort of dis-
agreeable encounter took place.
The Loan MAYOR said that the attempt to take away
a parcel of goods which it was intended should be paid
for, might be subject to a very awkward sort of con-
struction, and actually become a subject of more se-
rious investigation.
The defendantwas then held to bail.
GUILDHALL.

A few weeks ago two summonses were granted by
the magittrates of this Court, at the instigation of Birch,
the coraifii informer, calling upon two women of the
name of Roberts and King, who kept houses of ill-fame
in Ship-yard and Chancery-lane, to make their ap-
pearance for having sold exciseable liquors on their
respective premises, without being provided with a duly
authorised license to do so. For a length of time the
hearing of the cases were adjourned at the request of the
party who laid the information, until it came to the ears
of Roe, the officer of this Court, that they were not
likely ever to come on, as Birch had compounded with
the defendants to forego the prosecution, on the pay-
ment of 51, which had been made. Roe immediately
made his suspicions known to the sitting magistrate,
Nlr. Alderman Copeland, M.P., who ordered that the
case should be called on for hearing as last Saturday,
and which was accordingly done. The defendants were
not present, but Birch was, and assured the Bench that
he should be ready to go into the cases at a future day
if the Alderman adjourned the hearing. Roe then in•
formed the magistrate that it would be a complete waste
o' time to again adjourn the investigation, and which
fact the complainant very well knew. He could assure
the Alderman that there was a nest of informers who
frequented the City of London, and were in the habit
of receiving salaries from brothel-keepers, pawnbrokers,
and others, as a kind of consideration for overlooking
any offences that might have been committed in their
houses against the laws applicable to their trades.
Alderman COPELAND expressed himself warmly
against such a nefarious system, and was surprised that
tradesmen could lend themselves to uphold it. Why
not observe the rules and regulations laid down by the
law, and not place themselves under the power of such
despicable characters?

Birch dented all compromise in the matter, and said
that, on Wednesday, he should be fully prepared to go
into the cases.
Roe retorted that he could have no interest in mis-
leading the Alderman; but, when he saw defenceless
individuals pounced upon, with a view to pecuniary gain,
by parties who professed to be acting for the public good,
he should be to blame if he had neglected in bringing it
before the notice of the Court.
Alderman COPELANp was inclined to believe the
statement of Roe, but time would elicit the truth, and
on Wednesday he hoped the officer would be prepared
to go on with the case in question.
Accordingly, on that day, Roe had one of the females,
Mrs. Roberts, in attendance ; but, when the case was
called on, no one appeared to prefer the complaint.
The summons was, therefore, dismissed, and an award
made, calling upon Birch to pay 21. 2s. for the loss of
time of Mrs. Roberts and the officers of the Court,
besides other incidental expenses.
On Saturday, Mr. Lewis, the solicitor, attended with
Birch, and a large posse of the fraternity, at the Court,
before Aldermen Copeland, M.P., and Kelly, to show
cause against the award. Mr. Lewis referred to the
various Acts of Parliament, and said he could find no
provision empowering magistrates to allow costs to either
party in cases where no adjudication had taken place ;
and he contended that the Aldermen had absolutely no
jurisdiction in the matter. __ _

Mr. Humphries, who attended for Mrs. Roberts, en-
tertained a different opinion, and addressed the Bench
on the injustice that had been practised towards his client.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND, after consulting with his
brother magistrate, said the case was of so much im-
portance that he should not give any decision until he
had taken the opinion of the City law officers. Both
parties concurred, and next Saturday week was appointed
for the settling day.
Mr. Lewis remarked that if the Bench would bind over
all parties who gave information to prosecute, they would
have the power of inflicting the amount of costs on the
party who made the charge.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND thanked Mr. Lewis for the
hint, and said it was his intention, in the ensuing week,
to move in the House of Commons for a return of all
informations laid by common informers and not pro-
ceeded with.

BOW-STREET.