The Sun.
London, England, 1845-12-15 00:00:00

had to decide was, whether the defendant had converted
this Bible to his own use ; they had nothing to do with
the casual loss. It was enough for them to determine if
he had been guilty of a conversion ; and if they thought
he had, their verdict must be for the plaintiff.
The jury found a verdict for the defendant.

Unless Mr. Loftus was a per-
suffered himself to be so
of the brothel at Boston.
per-
fect id. iot he could not hays
were the result of
blinded! ar to the real character of these persons. It had
been a, and vested that all these charb,e'le. Loftus and other
a cons Piracy, in which the wife of Sys re a sentence of
parties. had engaged, in order to proms'
adultery. But
divorces 'against him by reason of his
where w as the proof of anything like cons.virticY ? Some
parts I >f Ilse case were in themselves extr, "InelY impro-
bable, when considered with reference to etherparts,
and the, • whole res gesaa proved beyond all d. the,
"
improts4 bility vanished. The occurrences at Mr. L.'s 3
own hoe se took away the improbability of the tran.`aes
dons el sewhere, which the Court could not treat e'
mere it .ventions. But what took place in September, 1
1844 !! The Bishop of the diocese, being informed of the
conduct of Mr. Loftus, sent for hint, and, according to
Mr. Lcd tus's own acknowledgment to Mr. Arthey, he
expresla id to the Bishop his hope that he would be lenient
toward i him, and allow him 2001. a year out of his
living. Mr. Loftus, moreover, applied to Mr. Arthey
for the certificate he had promised to give him, to the
effect I..hat the criminal indulgence be had been charged
with st as requisite in his state of health. It was sinful.- ;
tunate that Mr. Loftus had carried this suggestion,
givers, as Mr. Arthey says, half in joke, to an extent
whirl that gentleman had never intended. It had been
urged in behalf of Mr. Loftus, that a good character,
such. as he had received, should weigh in a doubtful
case::; but this was not to his (the Learned Judge's)
mit its Se doubtful case ; there was no doubt in his mind
tie- tht' facts had completely established most profligate
co aduct on tine part of Mr. Loftus ; that the articles
heed been most sully and substantially proved ; and it
had been admitted that, if proved, nothing short of
a sentence ot' deprivation would be adequate to
meet the justice of the case. He (the Learned
Judge) had, therefore no hesitation in pronouncing that
Mr. Loftus had incurred
the penalty of deprivation of
whatever preferment he posses-lied, either in the diocese of
Norwich or elsewhere in the p,sovince of Canterbury,
and he condemned him in the costs olf the proceedings
He directed the sentence to be announs'ed in the usual
manner on Sunday week, the 21st Deem/his..
The Proctor for Mr. Loftus prayed that ths: sentence
might not issue till after 14 days, in order that be might
appeal.
It was afterwards decided, in conformity with the case
of Dr. Free, that the sentence should be signed (which
was done), and ordered to bo transmitted to the regis-
trar of the diocese, but not to issue till 15 days ; and
that it be not published till Sunday, the 28th December.
THE OFFICE OF THE JUDO PROMOTED BT BROOKES

he had purchased the gin "to encourage hir-, to kill his
wife," and told him where to find the bottl,„ The bottle
produced was a half-pint glass bottle, 'a ith a little gin
left in it. Prisoner appeared to be ''...ffected by liquor,
but knew what the was saying at Glen time. He after-
wards talked rationally, and on the Monday next, the
deed having been committed on the; Friday, he made an
assignment fur the benefit (f hia creditors. He made
two attempts to get his throat open, it having been
sewed up, and actually did that ‘)11 the following Tuesday.
George Lowther, constable of Selby, proved that the
deceased had said, when wider the impression that she
could not recover, that " he laid one hand on her shoul-
der, and then banged the other hand against her' belly."
She referred to her husband when saying this. This
witness said he had given a copy of what he could say
about it to the prisoner's attorney.
'Thomas Hemingborough had been nine years and a
half with the prisoner as journeyman shoemaker, but did
not live in the same house. Had heard prisoner charge
deceased with having had improper connexion with him
(the witness). Witness declared there was not the
slightest foundation for the accusation. lied heard pri-
soner himself say that he did not believe it.
Cross-examined by Mr. HALL—Witness knows one
lloby, a sliti.ernaker, who has a stall in Selby. Has seen
deceased near lloby's stall, sitting there, while he and
Roby were talking together.
_ _

ARCHES' COURT, Dee. 12.
THE OFFICE OF THE JUDGE PROMOTED BY CLARKE
♦GAINST HEATHCOTE.
This was a proceeding against a clergyman named
Heathcote, who had been convicted of an attempt to
commit a certain offence, and sentenced to six months'
imprisonment. He had given an affirmative issue to
the articles exhibited against him in this Court (that is,
he had pleaded guilty), and the sentence stood over, in
order to ascertain whether this Court had power to
degrade, the counsel for the promoter pressing fur a
sentence to that extent.
Dr. PHILLIMORE (with whom was Dr. R. Phillimore)
—who had argued that the Judge of this Court, as offi-
i cial Principal or Dean of the Arches, could inflict de-
gradation—now admitted that he could find no prece-
dent, and suggested that it was a fit case fur the Court,
under the 122 d canon, to invoke the presence of the
Archbishop of Canterbury, to pronounce the sentence.
Tile form of the sentence porrected in this case was
founded upon the only instance that could be found in
this Court or the Consistory Court—namely, Johnson's
case, in 1692, when three bishops had pronounced the
sentence, in the absence of the then Bishop of London,
Rho was under suspension at the time. In that case
the party was deprived of his orders, and reduced to a
layman.
Sir 11. JENNER FusT—Under the ancient canon law,
six bishops were required to deprive a clerk of his offi-
cium. If this is to be a case of degradation from orders,
it is a very different thing from depriving of office.
I am not prepared to say that, if the Court should
be of opinion that it is a case for degradation,
there should not be a certain number of bishops
present. I am, however, of opinion that in this case
justice will oe satisfied by deposing this gentleman from
the ministry, and the Court would be entitled to pro..
nounce that sentence of itself. If you correct a sentence
to that extent—namely, deposing him from the ministry
—that is depriving him of authority to officiate—l will

Mr. John Birkett, the medical man, described the
wound given to eeceased, It was in the lower part of
the belly. A portion of the omentum was protruding
from it, and deceased died of that wound at about eight
o'clock on the evening of Saturday the 2d of August.
At eight in the morning of that day he had to'd her he
had no hopes of her recovery. Sac said, "I'm a mur-
dered woman, but I freely forgive him, and don't allovs
him to come into my presence." She did not mention
any name. The wound was such as the knife would
produce, about one inch long, and three inches in depth.
That on the prisoner was about one inch deep, and three
inches long, but of less depth towards the windpipe. At
about nine: o'clock on the Ist of August the prisoner
said he was sorry for what he had done. He said he had
got the gin a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes
before he had done the deed, and that it was to "stimu-
late him to do the act." He added something about his
jealousy, and said that Hemingborough and his wife
were too friendly, and that was the cause of his doing it.
Witness had attended him for some years. Was not
aware of his ever suffering from an aberration of mind.
Attended him in June, and he had then been very in-
temperate ; he was excited, and had pain in the head
anti fever, for which witness had bled him, and given
him aperients. He was capable of judging of Lis own
conduct. Never knew of his having delirium tremens.
Mr. HALL„ this being the case for the prosecution, in
addressing the jury for the prisoner, which he did in a
speech of considerable length, contended that the charge.
of murder was not made out ; that at most it was bis, a
case of manslaughter, from the absence of premedita:Lion ;
but that it was rather a case in which the prison:,e ought
to be acquitted, on the ground that he was ins,ane at the
moment of committing the act.
His LORDSHIP differed with the priscAter's Counsel in
imply
could
maic e b e a
in t e
prisoner,he o f
Thihse lane wsinogultdhathist
from the
deadly nature of the weapon. were employed. As to the
question of insanity, if tl.se.% jury believed that although
the prisoner had been voluntarily a drunkard, yet that
his habits of intemperstnce had so affected his mind as to
have rendered him a person of unsound understanding, it
would be for them to acquit him upon that ground ;
otherwise it would be their duty to convict bins' if they
believed the facts stated of the crime with which ho was
charged.
The jury retired for nearly thirty-five minutes, and
then Acquitted the prisoner upon the ground that.he was
insane at the time he gave the wound.
The case occupied the whole day, till past seven in the
evening.
_ _ _

sign it.
THE OFFICE 01 THE JUDGE PROMOTED BY KITSON
AGAINST LOTTUC.
Sir H. JENNER FIST gave his sentence in this case,
in which the office of the judge had been promoted
by the registrar of the diocese of Norwich against
the Rev. .Arthur Loftus, vicar of the united vicarage
of Fincham St. Marton, and rectory of Fincham St.
Michael, and also vicar of the vicarage and parish
church of Holghton, otherwise Helhoughton, with
the vicarage of Rainham St. Martin annexed, all in the
county of Norfolk. The case came before this Court by
letters of request from the Bishop of Norwich, and the
articles (which the Learned Judge read in detail) in
substance charged Mr. Loftus with frequenting houses
of ill-fame ; having intercourse with prostitutes ; hiring
women of that description as domestic servants, and,
whilst retaining them in his service, having carnal inter-
course with them. In his defensive allegation he had
denied these charges altogether. It could not be doubted,
the Learned Judge observed, that the offences imputed
to Mr. Loftus were exceedingly grave, and, if proved by
credible testimony, it had been admitted on all hands,
that nothing short of deprivation would be a sufficient
censure to be inflicted upon him. It unfortunately hap-
pened in these cases, that the witnesses produced in sup-
port of the. charges were mostly persons of
bad character, upon whom the Court could not
place implicit reliance, coining as they did
to confess their own infamy ; but they were
competent witnesses by law, and the Court was not at
liberty to reject their testimony, though it must look
carefully to see how far their testimony was credible
per se, and how far it was confirmed Ely the evidence
of other witnesses, or by the general circumstances of
the case. It had been argued, that in a case like this,
the unblemished character which Mr. Loftus had
enjoyed up to the spring of 1844, according to the testi-
mony of eleven or twelve gentlemen, including clergy-
men, magistrates, and Members of Parliament, ought to
have great weight; and undoubtedly those gentlemen
had deposed that they never had a suspicion or surmise
unfavourable to his moral character, and that he was a
person least likely, in their estimation, to be guilty of the
acts with which be was charged. Mr. Loftus, therefbre,
came before the Court with all this testimony in his
favour, in addition to the presumption of innocence which
every person was entitled to until his guilt was proved.
But it might appear that, notwithstanding the character
given of him by these respectable witnesses should be
true, a change in his conduct had taken place, and that
such high character may have been forfeited by him.
Before entering upon the evidence in support of the
articles, the Learned Judge adverted to the statement
made by Mr. Arthey, a medical attendant of Mr. Loftus,
that in the year 1141 the health of Mr. Loftus was highly
deranged; that in consequence of proceedings in the Ec-
clesiastical Court of Norwich, in which Mrs. Loftus had
sued her husband for a divorce on the ground of cruelty,
in which she had failed, he was in a highly excited
state; and that he had advised Mr. Loftus, on the occa-
sion of his leaving home in September, 1843, on account
of his health, to cohabit with some decent female, of-
ferin,,, though half in joke, it' he "got into a scrape"
thereby, to give him a certificate that should extricate
him. The articles charged Mr. Loftus with being in the
habit of resorting, in October, November, and December,
1843, and in many of the mouths of 1844, accompanied
by Henry or Harry Twiddy, his footman, or butler, to a
house of ill-fame, kept by Mrs. Sconce, in Birdcage-row,
Lynn, and there committing adultery with ene or more
prostitute or prostitutes; and that, on one occasion of
his resorting to this house, he sent for a prostitute
named Chilvers. Mr.. Sconce, the keeper of this bro-
thel, had been served with a compulsory summons; but
she was confined to her bed at the time, and had not been
examined. Mary Anne Chilvers, however, had been
examined, and she proved that she had been sent for by a
person passing as Mr. Loftus ; but the Learned Judge
considered that the evidence did not establish this charge
against Mr. Loftus. The next charge imputed to Mr.
Loftus, that, on a day shortly before Christmas, 1843, he
and Henry Twiddy accompanied a woman of ill-fame,
named Mary Foreman, in Boston, Lincolnshire, to her
residence, a common brothel; that they passed that night
there, each with a common prostitute ; that Mrs.
Foreman, at the express instance of Mr. Loftus, hired
or engaged two prostitutes, named Jemima Cross and
Sarah Warsop, of Boston, to enter his service in the
ostensible capacities of housemaid and cook; that these
two women accordingly went to the vicarage house at
Fincham, in December, 1843; and that, during the time
they remained in his service, Mr. Loftus and Twiddy,
with Mr. Loftus's privity, had habitually criminal inter-
course with them, and committed adultery, or fornica-
tion. Upon this charge Mrs. Foreman had been
examined, and she proved her meeting with Mr. Loftus
and Twiddy in Beston, their visit to her house, their
sleeping at it with two womem, the wish expressed to
her by Mr. Loftus that she would engage two women
for him as cook and housemaid; and that, in accordance
with a letter from Twiddy, she sent Cross and Warsop
to Fincham. Cross, one of these women, of the age of
19 or 20, had also been examined, and proved that she
was hired by Mrs. Foreman, that she proceeded to
Fincham, and that the evening of their arrival at the
vicarage Mr. Loftus came down to the pantry, where they
were, and said to Twiddy, " Remember, Henry, I am to
have the housemaid (Cross), and you the cook ( kVersep)."
She further stated, that for the first month she slept, with
Mr. Loftus, and after that with Twiddy It had been said
theft this story was so improbable that it destroyed the
credit of the witness; that it was inconceivable that a
gentleman in the position of Mr. Loftus, with so high a
character, should have been guilty of such an atrocious
act; and at first blush it did appear to be most improbable
and scarcely to be believed. But this story did not de-
pend upon the single testimony of the woman Cross, for
the other woman, Susan Warsop, had been examined,
and she, though actuated by feelings favourable to Mr.
Loftus, confirmed the evidence of Mrs. Foremen as to the
hiring of these two women, as well as that of Cross as to
what took place on their arrival at the vicarage. She
admitted that ;she had been connected with Twiddy, but
she refused to answer the question whether she had had
carnal connexion with Mr. Loftus. Upon this point,
therefore, she did net affirmatively corroborate the testi-
mony of Cross, who stated that when she began to sleep
with Twiddy there was an interchange of night cona• 1
panions, and that Warsop slept with Mr. Loftus; but she
did not contradict Cross upon this point, and upon other
points she confirmed her. Here, therefore, were two girls,
one le or 20, the other 22 or 23, hired by the keeper of a
brothel, admitted into the parsonage house of Mr. Loftu-,
the incumbent of a parish, with whom he and his butler
were cohabiting, his family then consisting only of these
women, Twiddy, and Emanuel, a page. For a fort-
night after the arrival of these two women, Mr. BeEs,
flee curate of Mr. Loftus, resided in the house ; but at
the end of a fortnight Mr. Balls quitted the house, for
what reason did not appear. Now, it was a most ex-
traordinary circumstance, that Mr. Bells, the curate of
the parish, who had actually resided in the parsonage-
house whilst these women were there, and was so com-
petent to give evidence, had not been examined by Mr.
Loftus in support of his allegation as to character ; for
he would have been a most important witness to show
the propriety of the conduct of Mr. Loftus at this
time. There was another important circumstance. It
appeared that about Christmas, 1843, Twiddy, and
the women Cross and Warsop were infected with a
loathsome disease, for which they were attended by a
medical person, Mr. Gent. Mr. Loftus could not
hare been ignorant of this fact, and, therefore, it was
established, that a person in holy orders, the rector of
a parish, allowed these three persons to remain in his
service after he knew they were all infected with this dis-
ease. From the interrogatories, it did not appear that
Mr. Loftus himself was infected, and it had been argued
that this fact afforded a presumption that Cross's story
was altogether untrue. But the interrogatories had been
expressly confined to the three persons, Twiddy, Cross,
and Warsop, and the medical witness stated that he did
not attend Mr. Loftus at this time. Although, there-
fore, there was no affirmative evidence to show that Mr.
Loftus participated in this disease, there was nothing
in this absence of proof which contradicted the evidence
of Cross. But what happened in March, 1844? Cross
was, or considered herself to be pregnant, and she had
recourse to some medicine to procure a iscarriage, or
an abortion ; and, although he I
not
(the Learned Judge)
believed that Mr. Loftus was ytaitioenthi; act, 101 l
knew of the fact after the result hParr
yet when, owing to the scandal her case had created
Cross was obliged to be discharged from his service, he
gave her the following certificate:—" Fincham R,ectorY
Downham-market, March 21, 18.14.—Jemima Cross has
lived with me about five months, and is honest and un-
derstands the duties of housemaid; she left from the
situation being too much for her strength.--Arthur
Loftus." Was this proper conduct on the part of a person
like Mr. Loftus, who could not be ignorant of the real
facts? But this was not all. When Cross was discharged,
another girl, Maria Ward, was hired to replace her, by
the intervention of the same Mrs. Foreman, the keeper

(Before Mr. Justice Thule).
William Lyon, aged twenty-five, was indicted for
havi❑b, on the Ist of July last, at Bolton, in the East
Riding, feloniously assaulted Mary Ann Leak, and vio-
lated her person.
Mr. Matthews and Mr. Pickering were counsel for
the prosecution ; and Mr. Dearsley defended the pri-
soner.

Convicted—Sentenced to be transported for life.
Adam Farrand, aged twenty-five, was charged with
a similar offence upon Elizabeth Clegg, at Qeick, on the
30th of November.
Mr. Pickering and Mr. Hardy appeared to prosecute ;
and Mr. Bliss defended.—The prisoner was Acquitted.
(Before Mr. Justice Williams.)
PIRACY.—Thomas Sheazle, John Copplesion, Herman
Hinka, Thomas Boyle, J. M'Cann, and Heary Matthews,
were indicted for making a revolt in the ship in which
they were employed as mariners.
The captain of the vessel, John Dodd Peat in, stared
that the Champlin, the vessel in question, left St. John's,
New Brunswick, on Thursday, the 21st of August last,
with a cargo of timber, bound to Dungarvan. The pri-
soners were part of the crew. They had received 5/.
advance, the half of their wages, for the trip. The
weather for the first two days was fine, but the vessel
made a little water, not more, however, than ten mi-
nutes' pumping in the two hours would clear. On the
Saturday morning, about nine o'clock, when the mate's
watch was summoned on deck, all the crew except Hinka
(who was at the wheel), the mate, and the cook, came
in a body to the quarter-deck and told the captain the
ship should go no further, but must return to St. John's.
Boyle was the chief spokesman, and called to Hinka to
put the helm up, while the others proceeded to square
the yards with the intention of bringing the ship round.
Matthews, who was the carpenter, said the ship would
make more water, and they would go no further. The
captain called to Hinka to keep the vessel in her course,
and Hinka obeyed. The men then went forward and
went below. They were almost immediately followed
by Hinka, who, when asked by the captain what he was
going to do, said he would do as the rest. The men re-
mained below, and refused to do duty for thirty-two
hours. Shortly after they had gone below the wind fresh-
ened, and it became necessary to shorten sail. All hands
were called for this purpose, but did not make their ap-
pearance. Both the captain and mate went to the fore-
castle, and desired them to come on deck, but they re-
fused. The captain, mate, and cook, after great labour
and some peril to the ship, succeeded in ahortening sail,
though of course in an imperfect manner. On the Sun-
day morning Boyle came aft with the bread-kit in his
hand, and asked for some bread. The captain, who had
all the provisions below, and had put out the galley fire,
said they should have nothing until they would turn to
and pump the ship. Boyle then said they would let the
water come up to the forecastle deck ; that they would
then take to the boats, and leave him to walk the plank.
On the afternoon of Sunday, the Noble, of Lubeck, in
the ;United States, came in sight. The captain of the
Champlain hoisted a si4nal of distress, and was boarded
by the captain of the Noble. He stated the condition of
his ship and crew, and was advised to go into Machias,
in the state of Maine. The second:mate of the Noble
was put on board, and on the vessel being put about the
crew returned to their work and pumped the vessel.
She was quite clear six hours before she got to Machias,
which was on the afternoon of the Monday. On the
Sunday afternoon the captain observed two plugs stick-
log out of the vessel's bow, a short distance under water
—these were shortened by some one before the vessel
got to Machias, and were then found to be flush with the
sheathing and blackened over. On an examination at
Machias they proved to have been thrust from the inside
into two holes, which had been bored through the bot-
tom of the vessel from the forepeak.
Two of the revolters escaped at the Madeiras, and the
others were sent home under the treaty with the United
States.
shiTphery found the prisoners Guilty, and his Lord-
ship sentenced Boyle to twelve months' imprisonment,
Matthews to nine, and Hinka and the other to six.
PeasoewrENG • VOTER.—Richard Bent was indicted
for personating a voter at the late municipal election fur
the borough of Bolton.
It wail clearly proved that the prisoner, who is a shoe-
maker at Leigh, handed in u voting paper in the name
of John Malden, and alleged that he was the party there
described.

IThe prisoner was convicted.
A motion was made in arrest of judgment, on the
ground that, in the first four counts, framed on the pro-
visions. of the Act, which make it penal " wilfully', to
give false answers to the question specified in the Act,
to be put to persons tendering their votes, the word wil-
fully was not inserted, but the words " falsely and ma-
liciously ;" a hick it was contended would not supply the
omission. As to the last two counts, in which it was
charged that the party personated a voter with intent tr,
contravene the provisions of the Act of Parliament, this,
it was alleged, did not amount to a description of any
offence at common law.
His LORDSHIP, after hearing a lengthened argument,
said judgment would be postponed, to allow time for a
more mature consideration of the objections, the de.
fendant remaining out on bail.
The business of the assizes concluded to-day.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.
CHARGE OF ARSON.—John George Ford was again
brought up for further examioation, charged with
setting fire to his house in Braimes• buildings, Beech-

lane, Barbican.
A report of this case appeared in our paper yester-
day, when the Magistrate declined proceeding further,
and the officer was told he might convey the prisoner to
Newgate, under the coroner's warrant.
At a later period of the afternoon the Coroner being
informed of the decision of the Alderman, arrived, and
said that having heard the result of the proceedings be-
fore the worthy Alderman, he wished to explain to the
magistrate the reason why he had sent the ease before
him. The prisoner had caused two houses to be burned
down, one of them his own. The burning of this was a
felony by statute, but not by common law, therefore. he,
as Coroner,
sent it before the magistrate for inquiry. At the same
could take no cognizance of that °fierce, and
time he must be permitted to express his surprise that
the solicitor for the Imperial Fire-office had stated that
he had no evidence to offer, or instructions to prose-
cute. He certainly expected the fire-office would be the
first to support a prosecution, and take care that the
ends of justice were secured, and he was surprised to
fine] the solicitor was not prepared to say what course
neintended to pursue. He had committed the prisoner
for burning the house next to his own, which was an
offence by the common law as well as by the statute.
The solicitor for the fire-office said, the Company
were not indifferent to the subject, but really had nut
determined what course to pursue. He thought the
remarks were most uncalled fur by the Coroner,, as the
Queen was the prosecutor.
The Alderman said, that under these circumstances
he had heard enough to justify a remand for further
examination.

Alderman HUNTER now wished to know how they in-
tended to proceed against the prisoner ? A clerk from
the firm of Messrs. Le Blanc and Co., solicitors to the
Imperial Assurance Office, said that the Company were
not aware of the proceedings that had taken place before

in, '6"- /It lk.T Ai ir%
-I NG IjRCEMBER 15, 1845.
THE • 2
T 4.1 IN 1J A.-1 Av kl IN DAV MORN
_ ,

the Coroner until the previous day. They now came
forward to prosecute on public grounds.
Mr. Wakeling, on behalf of the solicitors to the Com-
pany, conducted the prosecution; and Mr. Wolfe, from
Mr. Flower's office, appeared for the defendant.
A number of witnesses were called; but as the sub•
stance of their evidence has already appeared in our
columns, there is no occasion for repetition, as there was
no new feature developed.
Mr. Wakeling applied for a remand, as there were two
witnesses absent who might give material evidence.
Mr. Wolfe contended that there was not the slightest
occasion for a remand, in consequence of there not being
a tittle of evidence against the prisoner. In fact, he
ought te. be discharged.
Alderman HUNTER thought he should remand the
prisoner for further examination until Tuesday next, for
the pr oduction of the other two witnesses.
Mr . Wolfe applied for his client to be let out on bail.
Al Berman HUNTER said he could not ceneent to that,
and • the prisoner was removed from the dock.
BO W-STREE
i Friday Charles Shannion alias Vineeet, a lock-
emit h, was charged bethre Mr. Jardine with breaking
and entering the dwelling-house of Mr. Rivers, in
Gott er-place, Tottenham Court-road, and stealing a
desk and other articles, value 201., the property of a
lode er.
Me. Rivers stated that, on Thursday evening he was
sitting with his family in the front kitchen, when he
heard some person walking about in the room above;
a•ad being aware that his lodger, Mr. Burch, a medical
Fto dent, was not ut bane, he proceeded up stairs. On
am-tering the parlour he discovered that the desk
produced had been taken away. He then went to the
hall door, which he found open, and cried " Stop thief !"
w'oich attracted the attention of a number of boys,
among whom was his son; and having gone in pursuit,
they overtook the prisoner near the gate of the Univer-
sity College, with the desk in his possession, which he
threw on the pavement, and tried to make his escape,
but was overtaken in a short time, and given in charge.
The constable who apprehended the prisoner stated
that when he asked the prisoner why he was running
away, he replied, that hearing a number of boys crying
out he wanted to deceive them by running away, but
he could give no account of the skeleton keys found
upon him.
Several boys were in attendance to confirm the above
account, but as their evidence was dispensed with till a
future day, the prisoner was ordered to be remand, d.
GiteuteE OF FORGERY.—Thomas Caiske was brought
lip for final examination, charged with uttering a forged
cheque for 401., with intent to defraud Messrs. Drum-
mond and Co., bankers.
Mr. Bush conducted the prosecution.
The prisoner entered the banking-house of the prose-
cutors on Wednesday morning, with a letter, purporting
to be written by Mr. Thomas Edwards, his uncle, who
resides at Straden House, Chelsea, requesting to be fur-
nished with a cheque-book, as be kept an account at the
house, which was furnished him, and in the course of an
hour and a half he called again with the cheque produced
for payment, but upon comparing the signature with the
paid vouchers of Mr. Edwards, it was discovered to be a
forgery, and the prisoner was detained until a constable
arrived, who found in his pocket a book from which the
cheque had been extracted, and which he had received a
the bank the same morning.
Mr. Edwards said that he had not seen the prisoner
for the last two years. The signatures to the cheque
and the letter applying for the cheque-book were both
in the handwriting of the prisoner, with which he was
well acquainted, and he never authorised him to sign
his name.
The prisoner was committed to Newgate for trial.
William IVakei ow, Robert John Bradheer, William
Bradheer, Richard Bradheer, 'Thomas Leadgrove, and
Thomas Watkin Wynne, all of whom appeared to be
mechanics, were charged with creating a disturbance at
the Palace Court, in Scotland-yard, and with assaulting
the officers in the execution of their duty.
It appeared from the statement of the officers con-
nected with the Palace Court, that a case was tried in
which the defendant happened to be a friend of the pri-
soners. After the case had been tried, the jury were
allowed to retire from the Cour: for a thort time under
the protection of an officer. Previous to their retiring
for the purpose of considering the verdict, and on going
outside the Court one of the prisoners attempted to
speak to a juryman, which Kelly, the officer in charge,
prevented by pushing him away. The circumstance
drew the other prisoners to the spot, and they not only
attempted to rescue the one who was taken into caetody,
but also ill-treated Pinner, another officer, who inter-
fered. On the termination of the cause the confusion in
the Court became so intolerable that the Judge directed
one of the prisoners to be given in charge.
One of the prisoners said that the officers were deter-
mined to take revenge on him, because about six weeks
back his goods were seized by them for a debt due by
another person, for which he brought an action against
them in the Court of Exchequer, and they were deter-
mined to persecute him.
Mr. JARDINE said that the charge was of too serious a
nature for him to deal with, and as it would occupy a
considerable time to take the whole of the depositions
preparatory to sending the prisoners to the sessions,
they should find two sureties in 10!. each to appear again
to answer the charge on Tuesday next.
WORSHIP-STREET.
Three men, named John Se-utt, Win. Wren (both of
them in the employ of Mr. Twogood, proprietor of the
Blue Boar Inn, at Ahlgate), and Joh Bates, a railway
porter, were brought up for examination, charged with
stealing several parcels of property.
Mr. Nobler, the solicitor, attended for the prosecution,
and Mr. IV. Heritage for the prisoners.
James Reeve, a carrier between London and Col-
chester, who had been repeatedly robbed of parcels en-
trusted to him for transmission by the Eastern Counties
Railway, was at the Blue Boar on the day in question,
and after his waggon had been loaded he insisted on
having it unloaded again for his own personal inspection
of the contents, and he then discovered a paper parcel
was missing from one of the hampers. On searching
about he found the parcel in a shed on the premises, and
then packed it and five other parcels together in one
wrapper, and the waggon being again loaded it was
driven to the railway, and the contents there deposited
in a railway truck. Reeve, who had followed, went him-
self by. the same train to Colchester, keeping the truck
with his goods in sight all the way; but when he, assisted
by a railway porter, unloaded the truck at Colchester, he
found only four parcels in the package in which he hod
himself packed six, and upon his return to London he
caused the apprehension of the three prisoners who bed
been employed in loading and unloading the waggon be-
fore he started.
Sergeant Barker, 11 H, produced some pieces of
woollen cloth, waistcoating, &c., and also some fine green
tea, which had been found on searching the residence of
the prisoner Strutt. Nothing material was found in the
possession of the others, except that Bates had two
savings' bank books, containing entries of two sums of
301. and 201., to the credit of that prisoner and his wife
separately on one day.
Two of the clerks in the employ of Messrs. Nash,
woollen merchants in Cheapside, stated that the pieces
of woollen, &c., produced, found in Strutt's possession,
corresponded precisely with goods contained in a parcel
made up by them for a Mr. Bryant, at Colchester, and
sent to the Blue Boar, to be conveyed by Reeves, the
carrier, to the railway.
John Bunnings, clerk to Messrs. Wyley and Co.,
wholesale grocers, in the City, stated, that on the 16th
of October, he sent to the Blue Boar a parcel, containing
51b. 6os, of tea, directed to Mr. Rowe, at Ticklebury,
in Norfolk, but it had never been delivered to the latter.
He believed the tea now produced to be a part of the
same, but he could swear positively to a paper bag pro-
duced, as having been made by himself.
Sergeant Barber requested a further remand to con-
tinue his inquiries.
Mr. Heritage submitted that against Bates there was
no case whatever.
The Magistrates remanded Strutt for a week, but ad-
mitted both Bates and IVren to bail.
HORSE STEALING.—John Trindle, formerly a cabri-
olet proprietor, was charged with stealing a bay mare
belonging to Robert Webb, a general dealer at Hackney.
The latter took the mare to Smithfield yesterday se'n-
night, but did not sell it. The prisoner, who offered to
procure a customer, walked home with him, and saw
him turn the mare to graze in the London field. On
Thursday the mare was missed, and the prisoner being
apprehended at a public-house on Thursday night, the
animal was found in a cart at the door.
He was remanded.

LAMBETH.
Miss Selina Sainfield, the daughter of the principal
engineer in her Majesty's dockyard at Portsmouth, who
had been charged at this Court, on Monday last, with
having made two attempts to commit self-murder by
swallowing large doses of arsenic, was brought from
Lambeth Workhouse for final examination before Mr.
Henry.
The prisoner, on her last examination, attributed her
attempts at self-destruction to her having been obliged
in the first instance to leave her home in consequence of
her father getting married to a second wife, and refusing
to contribute to her support ; and she herself not being
able to earn a subsistence at stay stitching, at which she
had been employed. Her brother, on the contrary, de-
clared she and her sister had left Portsmouth with two
common vagabonds, and had subsequently been leading
dissolute lives in town, and that this was the real cause
of his father withdrawing his support from them. He
(the son) however undertook to see his father on the
subject, and the prisoner, instead of being committed to
prison, was sent to Lambeth Workhouse.
Mr. Steel, residing at 19, Brunswick-street, Stamford-
street, deposed that Miss Stanfield had occupied an
apartment of his house for fifteen or sixteen months,
and while there had conducted herself with strict pro-
priety. Her father paid her rent of ss. a week, but ul-
timately withheld it, in consequence of some represen-
tation, or rather misrepresentation of her conduct by a
lady, " a friend to the family." The prisoner, while at
his house, used sometimes to work at dressmaking with
his (witness's) daughter, and at other times at stay-
stitching, and, in so far as he had observed, seemed
anxious to earn a living.
Mrs. Garrett, at whose house the prisoner more re-
cently lived, also gave her a good character for pro-
priety of conduct.
Mr. Henry Stanfield, the prisoner's brother, who is an
engineer, here said that, in accordance with his promise
on Monday last, he had visited his father in reference to
the present charge against his sister, and had received
his assurance that whatever the law compelled him to
pay for the prisoner's support, he should do. so, or he
should be perfectly satisfied to pay any sum his Worship
should, under the circumstances, consider sufficient for her
maintenance. The brother went on to say, that, not-
withstanding all that had been said by Mr. Steel and
Mrs. Garrett, he was sorry to say the prisoner's habits
were far from moral or proper, and in confirmation of
this, he begged to hand to the magistrate for his
perusal two letters he had selected out of a number
of a similar description.
Mr. HENRY, after looking at the letters, desired that
they Weis t P t banded to the prisoner.

This was done, and Miss Stanfield acknowledged she
knew the writers of both, and that one was addressed to
her sister and the other to herself.
Mr. HENRY remarked that the contents of the letters
went to show that their conduct was not strictly proper.
He, however, suggested, as the best course, that the pri-
soner should be allowed ten shillings a wesk by the
father for her support.
Her brother said that this sum should be carefully con-
tributed; and, after much crimination and recrimination
between brother and sister, the latter agreed to go back
to Mrs. Garrett's for the present.
SOUTHWARK.
Wm. Gila, the man who has been for some time prac-
tising the most gross imposition, by pretending to be
dumb, owing to his having his tongue severed from his
mouth by a ship's crew who mutinied while he was on
board, was brought up for re-examination, on the charge
of committing a violent assaalt on a young man named
John Kearns, the particulars of which have already ap-
peared.
The prisoner had been an inmate of St. John's Work-
house, into which he was admitted in the early part of
last week, having been found in a destitute condition in
that parish, and supposed to be deaf and dumb. As the
parochial authorities were anxious to discover where he
had been previously living, he was accordingly taken
from the workhouse en Saturday last, and on the way to
the Vine-yard he got into a violent rage, seized the officer
who was conducting him to the place, and attempted to
throttle him. A sailor named Kearns, on interfering,
was attacked by the prisoner, and rendered insensible by
a blow of a stone. In the course of the examination on
Wednesday last, the circumstance of the prisoner being
suspected as a most gross imposter was mentioned by a
Mr. Owen, the landlord of the Yorkshire Grey, in
Thames-street, to which house he was sent by the French
Consul, under the supposition that he was a native of
Boulogne, and that his loss of speech arose from his
tone ue being cut out in order to prevent the pos-
sibility of his giving information relative to a
mutiny in a vessel on board of which he was at the
time, and which was afterwards scuttled. In the
course of Mr. Owen's narration, he stated that when
the prisoner was sent from his house, over to Boulogne,
it was ascertained that although the prisoner, by
signs, had intimated that he was a native of that place,
the authorities there discovered that he did not belong
to that country, and the fact of his hiving the perfect
test! of his tongue was also proved beyond all question.
For the purpose of putting the fact beyond all doubt,
the Magistrate (Mr. COttinghtim) directed that the pri-
soner should be remanded until this day, for the purpose
of giving the captain of the City of Boulogne steam-
vessel an opportunity of attending to give evidence of
the fact of the prisoner being gifted with the faculties of
hearing and of speech. Yesterday Capt. Tune, of the
above vessel, accordingly attended, and up to his arrival
the prisoner still assumed to be deprived of the loss of
speech, and when he was led from the cell into the Court,
on seeing the captain of the City of Boulogne, he held
doe n his head and tried to conceal his face, but said not
a wo:d.
Mr. `Name, addressing Capt. Tune, asked him if he
had ever seen the prisoner before ? The captain said
he had, and that by direction of the French Consul he
took the prisoner to Boulogne on the 27th of July last ;
that at that period he was supposed to be deaf and dumb.
arid a native of France. On the passage the prisoner
continued to be mute, and upon his arrival he was handed
over to the French authorities.
The prisoner was here observed to smile, but he stil
remained silent.
Captain Tune proceeded to state that, on the day fol-
lowing that on which he delivered the prisoner into the
hands of his supposed countrymen, and had given then
a relation of his sufferings in being deprived of his
tongue, he (the captain) attended an examination
during which it was discovered that the prisoner had
the perfect use of his tongue, for, on being threatened
with being sent to the galleys, he became quite out-
rageous, and abused all present, announcing himself an
Englishman, and that he had committed no offence
against the laws of France. On this discoveoy the pri-
soner was returned to his (the captain's) charge again,
and he brought him back to London, where he was
landed, and he heard no more of him until he was ap-
prised of his being in custody at this Court, and that he
still assumed to be deaf and dumb ; that his name was
not Giles, but Sharpe, and that from his dialect he was
supposed to be a Scotchman.
Mr. TRAILL, to the prisoner—Now ynu have heard
Captain Tune's statement of what occurred at Boulogne,
what have you to say?
The prisoner, for the first time, then gave ample proof
of his having the power of speech by saying, " I have
got nothing to say, your Worship."
Mr. TRAILL—Then there is no truth in the circum-
stances you made known by signs, of your tongue having
been cut out by the crew of a ship which was afterwards
scuttled ? Prisoner—None, Sir.
Mr. TRAILL—What could have been your object, then,
in practising such a gross deception on people, and pre-
tenereess, also, to be a Frenchman ? Prisoner—l only
did it, Six, to see a little of the world. I have seen
France.—(Laughter.)
Mr. TRAILL—How long have been assuming the
character of a deaf and dumb man ? Prisoner—For
some time, Sir. I was let into the secret by a woman
in Scotland, who taught me to put away my tongue, so
that people might think I had none in my mouth. I had
not spoken a word for weeks until I got over to France ;
and, thinking they were going to punish me, I thought
it best to announce my country.
Mr. TRAILL—Where do you come from ; what part of
Scotland, for you speak in a strong Scotch dialect ?
Prisoner—l am not a Scotchman at all, your Worship.
I am an Irishman, and was born in the county of Antrim,
but have been a long while in Scotland, in Aberdeen,
and in Glasgow. Do let me go this time, your Worship,
and I shall never be deaf and dumb again as long as I
live.

Mr. Corner, the clerk to the guardians of St. John's
parish, trusted the magistrate would not let the prisoner
escape punishment, for although it was not deemed ex-
pedient by the parochial authorities to go to the expense
of a prosecution, still they were desirous that he might
be summarily dealt with for the violence he had ex-
hibited in the workhouse, where he had smashed the
windows, and actually armed himself with an iron
scraper, and threatened to hew down any person who
approached him.
Mr. Mena. said that he never knew of a more artful
impostor. He then imposed fines on the prisoner for the
assault and the wilful damage he committed, and in de-
fault he was sentenced to two months' imprisonment,
and at the expiration of that period he was to find sure-
ties for his good behaviour, or be further imprisoned for
six calendar months.
The prisoner was thee locked up.
THAMES.
MURDEROUS ASSAULT ON A POLICEMAN.—Dennis
Driscoll, an Irish coal-whipper, was brought before Mr.
Ballantine, charged with committing a very aggravated
assault on a police-constable named Blake, No. 137 K,
who is at present in the London Hospital.
Eneas M'Allen, a policeman, stated that about two
o'clock in the morning, he was in nigh-street, Shadwell,
and heard the cries of murder, and upon going to the
spot whence the noise proceeded, he saw the prisoner
standing over Blake, and kicking him as hard as he was
able. He went in pursuit, and took him into custody,
and on returning to Blake, he found him in a most de-
plorable condition, with a severe cut over the left eye,
from which the blood was streaming profusely. There
were several contusions on his face; and he also com-
plained of pains in the limbs caused by the blows and
kicks he had received from the prisoner. He assisted
Blake to the hospital, and the surgeon dressed his
wounds, and advised him to remain there.
Police-sergeant Townson stated that Blake's face was
very much disfigured when he came to the station-house,
and in making the charge, said he found the prisoner
very drunk, and making a disturbance with a female;
that he interfered, and told him to go on about his busi-
ness, and that the prisoner then struck him a violent
blow, knocked him against the shutters of a house, and
then beat and kicked him in a dreadful manner.
The prisoner, in reply, said Blake was drunk, and
knocked him about with his staff; and that he hit him in
self-defence.
Mr. BALLANTINE—Was Blake intoxicated? Town-
son—No, Sir, he was quite sober. He is one of the most
steady and quiet men in the force.
Mr. BALLANTINE asked if the wound on the forehead
appeared to have been inflicted by a kick, and was an-
swered in the affirmative.
The prisoner, when called on for his defence, made a
very plausible one. Ile said he was going home from
the Borough, and went into a night-house to light his
pipe. As he was coming out he met the police-constable
Blake, who was intoxicated and had not a leg to stand
upon, that he asked him for liquor, and because he refused
to treat him with any he struck him with his " baton"
over his head and legs, and as he could not stand that
he hit him again.
Mr. BALLANTINI—You are a very promising man in•
deed to be asked for liquor. One would think you had
not much to spare.

The prisoner, whose rags would not fetch sixpence if
offered for sale, said he was well to do in the world, and
that when he told the policeman not to hit him, he raised
his staff a second time, and then he put his hand out,
and the policeman fell down.
Mr. BALLANTINE—And you wish "me to believe all
this. Did the policeman kick himself while he was
down ? The Prisoner—He fell on his hands and face
and wounded himself, and I left him where he was.
The prisoner was then remanded.
GREENWICH.
EXTENSIVE ROBBERY BY A CONFIDENTIAL SERVANT.
—William Thomas, alias Henry Williams, was brought
before Mr. Grove, charged with the following daring
robbery :
Police constable Evans, 190 R, of the detective force,
drp:+sed that having heard that a young man in the em-
ploy of a pawnbroker at Swansea, had robbed his master
of a large quantity of watches, plate, jewellery, and wear-
ing apparel, he was on the look out, and on the pre-
vious night, in the Broadway, Deptford, he overheard
the prisoner at the bar inquiring for an omnibus tq Lon-
don. Witness got into conversation with him, and in
answer to a question, the prisoner said he was from
North Wales, and that his name was Harry Williame.
that he was residing at the Spotted Dog in the Strand,
and had been a pawnbroker's assistant. From the pri-
soner's accent, and the description given of his person,
he took him into custody. On searching the prisoner at the
station, he found two valuable gold seals, a duplicate
of a new suit of clothes, and a silk purse containing
IL Ss. Witness afterwards went to the Spotted l)og in
the Strand, and there found in the apartments in which
the prisoner slept, a large carpet-bag, filled with wearing
apparel, two more gold seals, and numerous duplicates
relating to watches and other property, portions of
which had been pledged at Gloucester, Swansea, and
London.

Mr. David Davis, an auctioneer at Woolwich, deposed
that John Moss, his brother-in-law, carried on the busi-
ness of a-pawnbroker at Swansea. From information,
communicated by letter, from that gentleman, he was in-
duced to wait on the Commissioners of Police at Scot-

_. _.. __s