The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-13 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER, May 12.
'Before the Lord Chief BARON and a Special JUrY.)
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. BOIER:

This was a prosecution by her Majesty's Commissioners
of Customs to recover penalties for unduly unshipping
tobacco.
Mr. Jarvis and Mr. Wilde appeared for the Crown, and
Mr. Chambers for the traverser. After the case had been
opened by Mr. Jarvis,
Mr. CHAMBERS consented to a verdict for the Crown for
2931. 115.6 d.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. WALTER HENRY ACSTIN.
Mr. Jarvis and Mr. Wilde appeared for the Crown, and
Mr. Humfreys, Q.C., and Mr. Chambers for the traverser.
Mr. WILDE opened the pleadings, and Mr. JARVIS stated
the case. This was a prosecution instituted by her Ma-
jesty's Commissioners of Customs against the traverser
for defrauding the Customs revenue. Amount of
penalty 1,0001. The circumstances of the case were these :
It appeared that Walter Henry Austin was a clerk in the em-
ployment of a firm named Robinson and Co., of Water-lane,
Custom-house agents; that in the month of July, 1842,
Messrs. Robinson received a consignment of a case of foreign
silks, weight 741 b. 3 oz., the duty payable upon which would
amount to 851. ; they the traverser with the money to pay
the duty ; but he contrived to substitute a case weighing
only I Ilbs. of inferior quality, the duty payable upon which
was 71. its. 9d., which traverser paid, thereby defrauding
the revenue of the difference. When the fraud was discovered,
the prisoner was brought before the Lord Mayor on a charge
dfelony, and his employers, Messrs. Robinson, entered into re-
cognizances for his appearance at the Old Bailey. But when
the session opened, he did not appear, and therefore the pre-
sent prosecution was instituted against him for the recovery
of the difference and the penalty.
Several witnesses were examined to prove preliminary
matters, and the party to whom the case was consigned to
prove the fraudulent substitution. When the case fur the
prosecution closed,
Mr. HumFilxvis spoke to the evidence at considerable
length. He contended that his client was a young man of
good character, who had, in fact, no charge against him ex-
cept his having had the misfortune to be a clerk to a house
that was now broken up, and had for a long time been
mixed up in those Custom-house transactions. He con-
tended that no case had been made out against his client, for
the evidence only went to prove that he paid a certain sum
for duty at the Custom-house upon one out of a number of
packages. Having commented upon the evidence at great

length,
Mr. JARVIS replied. After which
The Learned CHIEF BARON summed up, and in the course
of which he told the jury they had to consider two questions ;
the first of which was, whether any fraud had been com-
mitted at all upon the revenue ; and, secondly, whether the
defendant, Austin, was the party who committed the fraud.
Having recapitulated the testimony of the witnesses,
The jury consulted together for a few minutes, without
leaving the box, and found a verdict for the Crown-3341.
damages.

THE SAME v. THE SAME.

Mr. JARVIS said he was anxious to have the damages in
this case assessed now. He would be willing to fix the
amount at 200/.
Mr. HUMPHRIES said he had no objection to consent to a
verdict for the Crown for that amount.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
The seventh session of the present mayoralty commenced
yesterday, in presence of the Lord Mayor, the Recorder,
and several of the Aldermen.

After the grand jury had been sworn, •
The RECORDER proceeded to address them. He said that
the calendar contained the names of 168 prisoners, but that
number would be considerably increased before they had
done with their labours. Among many very serious offences
in the calendar, there were several of manslanghter, one of
• . .

false personation for the purpose of obtaining prize money,
three charges of sacrilege, a case of forgery and uttering
forged instruments, and two charges against females
for murder ; the first against a mother for the
murder of her new-born child, and the latter
against a nurse for the destruction of an infant en-
trusted to her care. With respect to the last of these
charges, it would be their duty to examine the evidence, and
to decide upon it, whether the party charged had really
committed the 'warder, and in the event of their coming to
the conclusion that she had done so, then it would be their
duty to put the case in course of further examination. The
gentlemen of the grand jury must understand that it was not
their province to determine the motives which might have
actuated the person in the commission of such a crime, or
the state of mind in which she might be. That would be
matter for another tribunal, their duty would be simply to
ascertain that such a crime had been committed, and by the
person charged with the offence. With regard to the first of
these charges, he should particularly direct the attention of
the grand jury to the evidence of the surgeon, and it would
depend upon the weight they-attached to that evidence, whether
that case also should be referred to the full Court. Should
the capital offence not be made out, it still rested with them
to indict the prisoner for the concealment of birth. There
was a charge of false personation with intent to defraud the
proper party of his share of the Chinese batta, and that
offence, if proved, would come under the provisions of the
Act having reference to prize money. The remaining
charges, with the exception of that of sacrilege, which would
turn upon the question of fact, were of a minor character ;
and he would not detain them from their duties by enlarg-
ing upon them. With these few remarks, therefore, he
would dismiss them to their onerous duties, and if the assist-

ance and advice of the Court were required in any stage of
their proceedings, that advice or assistance would be:readily
accorded.

The petit jury were then sworn.
Henry Hays, a person of respectable appearance, sur
rendered to answer an indictment for misdemeanour in
having unlawfully contravened the statute referring to
the registration of births, &c.
Mr. BODKIN, who appeared for the prosecution, briefly
stated the circumstances under which- the charge was
made against the defendant, and said that the offence
imputed to him was having wilfully given 9. wrong de-
scription of the infant to the registrar, but under the pe-
culiar circumstances of the case he did not intend, if
such a course met with the sanction of the Court, to offer
any evidence in support of the indictment-. The defen-
dant had been on intimate terms with a young female,
and the result of that int( rcourse was the birth of the
child in question, and it was in reference to the descrip-
tion given of that child by the defendant to the registrar
that the present indictment was framed. The defendant
had since made all the reparation in his power to the
young woman, and as there was an entire absence of
anything like fraud or fraudulent intention on the part
of the accused, it was considered better, in order to
spare the feelings of all the parties, that the circum-
stances should not be gone into publicly, and that no
evidence should be offered in support of the charge.
Mr. BALLANTINE, who was instructed for the defen-
dant, said he should be perfectly satisfied with the adop-
tion of this course, but he at the same time remarked,
that in his opinion it was very doubtful whether the
charge could have been legally made out, and whether
the defendant had in point of fact committed any offence.
He was charged with having given false information re-
specting the child to the registrar, but in reality he be-
lieved it would appear that he had given the true Chris-
tian and surname of the mother, and had not given any
false statement whatever, although the real connexion
between the parties might have been concealed.
After some further conversation the Recorder con-
sented to the course proposed by Mr. Bodkin, and a ver-
dict of Not Guilty being returned, the defendant was
discharged.
Pierce Wall O'Brien, Thomas Maunde, and Thomas
Rawlings surrendered to answer to an indictment for
misdemeanour in having unlawfully entered into the pos-
session of a house in Fetter-lane, the property of Thomas
William Reeve.
Mr. Clarkson prosecuted, and Mr. Allen appeared for
the defendants.
After a long and uninteresting legal argument, the
Court ruled that the precise charge contained in the in-
dictment ceuld not be sustained, and the defendants were
therefore acquitted without any evidence being gone into.
William Joseph May, 37, clerk, pleaded guilty to two
indictments charging him with stealing two cheques, one
for Si. 175., and the other for 5/ 3s. 4d., the property of
his master, William Temple.
The prosecutor, in answer to questions from the
Court, said that the prisoner had behaved honestly
while in his service, with the two exceptions referred to
in the indictment. He had frequently sent him with
considerable sums of money to his bankers, and he had
always found him convey them safe. He begged to re-
commend him to the mercy of the Court.
The Recorder sentenced the prisoner to be kept to
bard labour for six calendar months.
John Jackson, 31, pleaded guilty to a charge of steal-
ing an apron from the person of William F. Inglis.
The offence was committed at the execution of
'locker, on the 28th April.
The prisoner was proved to have been before con-
victed of felony.
The Recorder asked the prisoner whether he wished
to say anything. It was proved that he had been be-
fore convicted of felony, and the second offence was
committed at an execution.
He made no reply, and the Court sentenced him to
hard labour for one year.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
MANSIOIV-HOGSE.

A young man, named Robson Bctterall, was brought
before the Lord Mayor for final examination, upon the
charge of having robbed his employers, Messrs. Boyd
and Co., of Friday-street, warehousemen. Mr. Hum-
phreys attended for the prosecution, and Mr. Pelham
for the defence. The brother of the principal witness
for the prosecution, it appeared, was the discoverer of a
system of plunder carried on by another servant of the
prosecutors, against the house of Cooke and Co., of St.
Paul's Churchyard, as well as against the prosecutors
themselves, and the individual so charged had been
committed for trial, at the present sessions, by the Lord
Mayor.
Mr. Walker, of the firm of Boyd and Co., stated that
when the prisoner was taken he made a confession, upon
being told that he should be confronted with the pawn-
broker to whom he bad parted with the goods ; at the
same time, no promise whatever had been made to him
The prisoner- said he had taken altogether seventeen
pieces of lawn, and two dozen of handkerchiefs, to New-
man, the pawnbroker, in Drury-lane ; and that he had
also taken to the same place twenty-six or thirty yards
of vesting satin, and a quantity of satin scarfs, but he
had had the vesting satin and satin scarfs from a friend
in Lancashire, who bad sent them to him in payment of
a debt of honour.
The LORD MAYOR—Did he give you the name of
that friend ? The witness replied that the pri-
soner refused to disclose the name because, as
he stated, the friend was a junior partner in a
a house in Manchester, and the disclosure would ruin
him. Witness sent for an offieer (Inspector Waller),
and the prisoner told witness to take the keys from his
coat pocket in the linen warehouse. The prisoner said
to witness, as the latter was going to look for the
keys," I may as well tell you you will see there a dozen
handkerchiefs in my pocket, which I have taken."
Witness declined to go to search the coat-pocket with-
out being accompanied by the officer. Inspector
aller eXcompanied hint and found the handkerchiefs,
but not the li_yes.
Walker.MPr Witikr corroborated the statement of Mr.

Mr. Avant, who is in the house of Mrs. Newman o