The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-25 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
HOME ClRCUlT.—illairlbile, July 24.
(Before Mr. Juaticc COLERIDGE.)
Frederick George Jones, 20, described as a clerk, a youug
man of genteel appearance, and who was said to be respectably
connected, was indicted for feloniously forging an acquittance,
or receipt, for the payment of the sum of 12/. 13s. Sd., with
intent to defraud her Majesty, and in a second count the pri-
soner was charged with an intent to defraud the Collector of
Customs of the port of Rochester.
Mr. Sergeant Channell, Mr. Montagu Chambers, and Mr.
Bodkin appeared for the Crown. The prisoner was defended
by Mr. Sergeant Jones and Mr. Bsllantine.
From the evidence adduced for the prosecution, it appeared
that the prisoner had been engaged as second clerk in
the Customs department at Rochester for upwards of
five years, and down to the period of this transaction lie
was always considered, by his superiors an honourable and
well-conducted young man, and at the time of his apprehen-
sion upon this charge it appears that he was under an en-
gagement of marriage to a young lady who, upon her coming
of age, will be entitled to 8001. a year. The circumstances
under which the offence was committed were these. In Au-
gust last, some repairs were required to be done to one of the
revenue tenders called the Fly, and Mr. Simmons, A. ship-
builder, at Gravesend, was employed to perform them, and his
bill for the work amounted to the sum mentioned in the indict-
ment. He applied to the prisoner for the amount, and he told
him that he had not received any order for the payment, but
that. if he left the receipt he would get the money for him.
Mr. Simmons decliwed to do this, and shortly afterwards the
prisoner went to the collector of the customs, and gave him
a receipt for the sum in question, telling him at the same
time that Mr. Simmons hail applied to him, and that he
had paid him the amount. The collector, upon this, handed
him over the sum mentioned in the receipt, and it was
very soon afterwards ascertained that Mr. Simmons had
never received the money. When the prisoner was asked
for an explanation, he at once admitted that he hail
himself signed the receipt, and he wished Mr. Simmons to
receive the money from his father, or make some arrange-
ment respecting it. The authorities of the Customs, however,
would not, of course, allow any such proceeding to be adopted,
and the prisoner was given into custody and eventually com-
mitted for trial upon this charge.
Mr. Sergeant JONES made a very forcible and feeling appeal
to the jury on behalf of the prisoner, and called several respect-
able witnesses, who gave him an excellent character.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE having summed up,
The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict of
Guilty, coupled with a strong recommendation to mercy on ac-
count of the prisoner's previous good character.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE, in passing sentence, observed that
it was very painful to pass sentence upon a young man in the
position of the prisoner, and who appeared previously to have
borne so good a character. He had, however, committed a
very serious offence, and it was impossible, for the sake of the
example to others, that it could be passed over without a severe
sentence. He then ordered the prisoner to be transported for
seven years.
There was another indictment against him for a similar of-
fence, but it was not proceeded with.
George Richardson, '24, was indicted for stealing from the
person of Eliza Marshall a purse containing six sovereigns and
some silver.

Mr. Ballantine defended the prisoner.
It appeared from the evidence that the prosecutrix was
walking upon the pier at Margate, where the prisoner, who is
supposed to be an expert London thief, was seen to delibe-
rately lift up her gown, put his hand in her pocket, and take
out her purse. He was observed by another lady, who gave an
alarm, and upon the prosecutrix laying hold of him, he thrust
the purse into her hand.

The jury found the prisoner Guilty, and he was sentenced to
be kept to hard labour for nine months.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—Exeter, July 23.

Win. Marchant was indicted for having stolen, from the
club-box of the Ridgeway Friendly Society, a large amount
of moneys, the property of the members of the scoeiety.
Mr. Stone conducted the case for the prosecution, and Mr.
Slade defended the prisoner.
Mr. SLADE stated that this prosecution must fail, because on
the facts there was no larceny.
Mr. STONE said he would first state the facts. The pri-
soner was charged in the first count with having stolen the pro-
perty of James Berry ; in the second count it was described as
the property of Toll ; and in the third it was alleged to be the
property of John Smith. The prisoner and Toll were stewards
of a friendly society, the rules of which were not enrolled. A
meeting of the club Was held, at which Berry was president ; he
kept one key of the box containing the club money, the prisoner
another, and Toll had the third. At that meeting, on Whit-
Monday, the money was safe in the box at the public-house; no
one could open the box unless he h d the three keys. On that
occasion the other two left their keys with the prisoner, who
was in the club-room. On their return the prisoner was gone,
and the box was locked with his key. Another meeting was
then called, and notice was sent to the prisoner, requesting him
to attend that meeting. He did not do so, but sent his key, and
it was then found that the money was gone. Smith, the land-
lord, had the custody of the box.
Mr. Baron PLATT said, the landlord had no custody against
the trustees.

Mr. STONE said, he might have a property against all others,
but here the prisoner had an interest. If the money was taken
out by the prisoner at all, it must have been in the absence of
the other trustees.

Mr. Baron PLATT said, this wa. no larceny; it was, there-
fore, no use to go on. A man could no,. steal from himself ;
therefore, the prisoner mast be acquitted.
The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
The grand jury have just returned eight true bills for murder,
and one for piracy, against the pirates.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
MANSION-HOUSE.
Richard Jarvis, the clerk in the Bank of England who
some weeks ago absconded from that establishment, taking with
him an Exchquer-bill for 20. q., the property of the Governor
and Company, was brought before the Lord Mayor, in the cus-
tody of John Forrester, the officer. The prisoner had been fol-
lowed to France by Forrester, and upon ascertaining ssho was
on his track, attempted to commit suicide.
Mr. Weir, of ;the office of Messrs. Freshfielil and Co., the
solicitors to the Bank of England, attended for the prosecution,
and Mr. Haler appeared for the defence.
Mr. Alexander Wilson, an accountant, carrying on business
at No. 8, in the Old .Jewry, stated that he had kept for several
years, and he at the present time kept an account at the Bank
of England. On the Ist of April he went to the Bill-office,
at the Bank of England, and delivered to Mr. Jervis, whom he
for some time had known by sight as a clerk there, an Ex-
chequer Bill for the sum of 2(0., dated June 18, 1844, and
numbered 869, desiring that it should be placed to his credit on
his pass-book, which he delivered at the same time. The
prisoner soon afterwards returned the pass-book, with the neces-
sary entry, signed " R. Jervis," and retained the Exchequer-
bill, which the witness never afterwards received, nor ever
authorised any person to receive. He never had applied for
the Exchequer-bill since.
In his cross-examination by Mr. Hobler, the witness stated
that he was sure the prisoner was the person to whom he
had handed the Exchequer-bill, and that he had found the
prisoner's name often in the pass-book previously to that
transaction.
Mr. Brooks, the principal acting clerk in the bill•office of
the Bank of England, stated that he had known the prisoner
for thirty years. It was the duty of the prisoner, upon the
receipt of an Exchequer-bill, and the entry of the particulars
in the journal, to take the bill into the treasury of the Bank,
deliver it to the cashier, and receive that officer's acknowledge-
ment, at the foot of the entry, of the due delivery of the bill ;
but no such acknowledgement or receipt appeared at the foot of
the entry.
In his cross-examination by Mr. Hobler, the witness said
that in the event of the absence of the prisoner, one of the
senior cashiers would have performed the duty, but there was
no receipt of any one of the cashiers.
Mr. J. B. Harrison, stock-broker, of Bank-buildings, stated
that he was acquainted with the prisoner, whom he knew to
be a clerk in the Bill-office of the Bank of England. On the
4th of April last, witness was applied to by the prisoner to sell
an Exchequer-bill, represented as belonging to C. M. Brown,
for the sum of 2001., dated the 18th June, 1844, and numbered
869, and payable a year after date, together with interest. Ile
accordingly sold the bill on the same day, and gave the prisoner
a cheque for the proceeds, amounting to 209/. Bs. 9d., upon
Fullers and Co.'s banking-house. That cheque had been re-
turned by the banking-house to witness.
Mr. Weir stated that he had no further evidence to offer on
that day, and, at his request,
The LORD MAYOR remanded the prisoner till Monday next,
Mr. Nobler having offered no objection to that course.
Mr. Thomas Cleghorn, a gentleman who resides at Iloilo-
, way, and has offices in the City, was charged by Mr. John
Crump, a clerk in a banking or mercantile house, under pecu-
liar circumstances.
The complainant stated that, on Tuesday last, he came from
Holloway in ,n omnibus, and when he alighted at the Bank he
received a blow with a stick from the defendant, who appeared
to him to be looking out for somebody. The defendant ac-
cused him at the same time of having improper views towards
some of his family, called him a d—d rascal or scoundrel, and
pledged himself to break his hones. Witness thought necessary
to declare that he knew nothing whatever of the defendant or
his family, and never had given him the slightest provocation ;
and that even the finding of the defendant's name, for the pur-
pose of making him responsible, was a matter of difficulty.
Defendant—You say that I am quite a stranger to you.
Did you ever sit in the next pew to mine at church ?
Complainant—Yes. It was from that circumstance I re-
collected your face, but I do not know you, nor do I wish to
know you.
The conductor of a Holloway omnibus confirmed the state-
ment that the complainant had received a blow from the de-
fendant, and without any visible p:ovocation.
The defendant assured the Lord Mayor that what had taken
place had been most seriously provoked. The complainant had
fur some time very much annoyed the females of his family by
staring at them in church, and at the windows of the house.
In fact, in order to avoid the disagreeable alternative of a col-
lision he (the defendant) had found it necessary to withdraw
from the church about a year ago. The complainant, however,
had thought proper to continue his system of annoyance, and
constantly kissed hands and stared at the windows, and his
the (defendant's) wife at length reluctantly stated what was so
often occurring, and desired that the defendant would watch his
movements. Defendant went home earlier on Monday evening
last, and saw the complainant pass, and observed quite enough
to convince him that the report of the nuisance was by no
means exaggerated. Under these circumstances he (defen-
dant) addressed the complainant at the Bank on Tuesday, and
accused him of inflicting the annoyance, and a denial and
mutual blows took place.
The complainant—l am willing to take my oath, that I have
never done anything of which the defendant accuses me. I
deny all knowledge of him or his family further than I have
stated. I never stared at his family or at his windows, and I
solemnly declare that his conduct has been wholly unprovoked.
The defendant said he was able to bring forward adequate
psoof, if the Lord Mayor would consent to postpone the case.
There was no doubt whatever as to the identity of the party.
Mr. Crumps, solicitor, who conducted the case, said that the
case was either a case of extraordinary delusion or of mistaken
personal identity.
The defendant—l can show that there is not a shadow of a
doubt as to the identity.
The Loan Mayn't—The assault is distinctly sworn to, and
I call upon the defendant to enter into his own securities to the
amount of 50/. to appear to answer it at the sessions.
Two well-dressed females, named Maria Evans and Mari-
anne Adams, were charged with having endeavoured to substi-
tute a gilt sixpence for a half sovereign, in obtaining change
from a shopkeeper.
The prisoners, it appeared, went into a hosier's shop, pur-
chased a pair of cotton stockings, for which they paid with a
sovereign, received a half sovereign and 9s. in change, and it
was stated that they returned what appeared to be the half sove-
reign, but what really was a gilt sixpence, assuring the person
who served them that she had made a mistake, as the gold was
too light.
The prisoners were remanded till Saturday.
WORSHIP-STR EE T.

A Max STABBED BY HIS WlFE.—Yesterday, Annette
Hobbs, a married woman, twenty-seven years of age, was
placed at the bar, before Mr. Bingham, upon a charge of felo-
niously cutting and wounding her husband, a boot and shoe-
maker, living at No. 3, Hackney-road.
The proLicutor, who had a wound in the face covered with
strapping, stated that about twelve o'clock he went Ware, and,