The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-24 00:00:00

PARISH OF MARYLEBONE. CITY POLICE COMMITyr-E,
inne.brushi ushmg. The
On Friday, at the weekly meeting of the directors and LICENSED VICTUALLEng
r nguphas already
guardians of the poor of St. Marylebone, F. W. Bushill, Esq., Mr. Thomas Po
in the chair, a report was brought up in answer to the gene- ci,.---
inmissiQueamnd :Id
ral order received from the Poor-law Co
respect to the employment of paupers in bone-^— . ......i ,
substance of the order prohibiting
the Committee
broughteefo
l ITo
wf i
ioongN
reportthe
Secretary, rteht
appeared in our columns.
the following
Board, as a reply to the communication from adoption by the
Commissioners ; the Poor-law

.t.:4

St. Marylebone, 21st Nov., 1845.
"At the Board of Directors and Guardians of the Poor,
present, F. W. Bushill, Esq.. in the chair, a communication
from the Poor•law Commissioners, accompanied with a
general order, prohibiting bone-crushing in workhouses,
having been read, it was resolved :--
"That the directors and guardians of the poor of St. Mary-
lebone, in acknowledging the receipt of the communication
from the Poor-law Commissioners, accompanied with a gene-
ral order prohibiting bone-crushing in workhouses, feel sur-
prised that such communication should have been forwarded
to them, as implying the possibility of such practices having
taken place in the workhouse under their control. They dis-
tinctly disclaim having been parties to the employment of
the poor in any such inhuman and disgraceful manner, and
deprecate in the strongest terms the accumulation of bones
and other putrid matter in union workhouses, densely occu-
pied by half-starved human beings, who are set to the re-
volting work of crushing and pounding the same," &c.
Mr. PcrrrEn moved the adcltion of the report, which was
carried unanimously, and a copy thereof ordered to be sent
to the Poor-law Commissioners.

...ND THE CITY POLICE.--
_...ason, the landlord of the Mitre Tavern,
...eery-lane, was summoned before Alderman Wilson
and Hooper for refusing t.) admit one Amos Bennett, a
police-constable, into his premises on the morning of
Sunday, the 9th inst., during divine service.
Mr. Child, of the firm of Wire and Child, who ap-
peared for the defendant, wished, before the case was
gone into, to know under what Act the information was
laid. He found that the only one which in any way
could relate to it was the 4th and sth William IV., and
which had express reference to beer-shops, and not to
licensed victuallers. The preamble of the Act clearly
stated for what purpoae it was framed, via., to affect
houses that retailed beer, ale, porter, and cider, which
were beer-shops. The penalty clause would also more
fully bear out the interpretation he put on the Act, and,
therefore, he trusted his objections would be sufficient
to satisfy the Bench they had no authority to entertain
the information.

Mr. Alderman WILSON, after consulting with his bro-
ther Alderman, observed that the seventh clause of the
Act mentioned houses opened for the sale of spirits, mid
therefore the Bench considered that the case ought to
proceed. The objection was of such onsidera.ble im-
portance that, in the event of a conviction, he would re-
commend Mr. Child to appeal against their decision to
the Sessions. The Bench, however, were not prepared
to allow Mr. Child the meaning he put upon the Act.
The constable, Amos Bennett, No. 353, was then
called.—He said that about ten minutes before twelve at
noon on Sunday, the 9th instant, he went in private
clothes to the defendant's house. and knocked at the door
for admittance. After staying about a quarter of an
hour, the defendant's wife put her head out of an up-
stairs window, and asked who was knocking. He re-
plied that it was the police, who had come to visit the
house. He remained a short time longer, and finding
that his application was perfectly useless he left, but
heard the defendant say inside, h e would be d—d if he
would open his house to the police.
Mr. Alderman WILSON wished to know by whose
order the police went to licensed victuallers in private
clothes ?—The constable replied that it was at the
direction of his inspector, who got his orders from the
Ccmmissioner.
Mr. Alderman HOOPER asked if there was discrimi-
nation used? Did the police visit houses only that were
suspected of carrying on Sunday trading, in private
clothes, or indiscriminately ?—The constable answered
that they were sent out in private clothes, with a view
of better detecting Sunday trading.
Mr. Alderman HOOPER thought such a proceeding per-
fectly unnecessary, and he considered that it ought to be
discontinued. Was the defendant suspected of opening
his house on a Sunday morning for the sale of exciseable
liquors ? Surely there. ought to be some reason why
policemen went in disguise to licensed victuallers in the
way the defendant had been visited.
The constable said he had' never detected anything
wrong in the way the defendant conducted his house.
There was a side-door up a court to the premises, how-
ever, which excited their suspicious, as frequently seve-
ral persons had been lurking about.
Mr. Alderman WILSON did not see that a number of
persons strolling about a publican's door would show
that it was opened for Sunday trading ; in fact, it was
quite the reverse. It showed that they would not be ad-
mitted, and were waiting until after divine service, when
it would be opened.
Mr. Child did not deny the charge that bad been laid
against the defendant, but he would contend that his
client was perfectly justifiable in the course he had pur-
sued. His door was knocked at by a man in private
clothes, who said that he was a policeman ; but what
proof had the defendant of such being the fact ? Even
if he had been in uniform, and had not his band round
his arm, which alone showed that he was on duty, his
admittance could not have been legally demanded ; at
least, if it had been complied with, and a policeman
was found on his premises by constables who were on
duty, the defendant would be liable to be brought to
that Court for a similar offence as he was now charged
with. Would the Bench countenance such a system as
the police prowling about as spies, dressed in disguise,
for the express purpose of entrapping licensed victual-
lers? What security had the defendant that the police-
man was not an impostor, and that he mentioned his
being of the police to get into the house to obtain re-
freshments; and suppose that he really was an impos-
tor, and the defendant had incautiously admitted him;
his client, in the event of being visited in reality by the
police, would be summoned to that Court for a like
offence he was then charged with. He trusted, there-
fore, that the Bench would dismiss the case; for, view
the evidence in any way that was most likely to press
against the defendant, it could not be denied that the
defendant had acted in the most proper manner. He
had his house locked up, and he took the most secure
step in not opening it.
Mr. Alderman WiLsoN having had a short consulta-
tion with Mr. Alderman Hooper, said he did not ap-
prove of the plan of policemen going to licensed vic-
tuallers in private clothes, and seeking admission ; and
he had not heard any reason why they had adopted such
a system of detection. The Bench believed that the
defendant did not think that the party knocking was a
policeman, and therefore the case was dismissed. As
regarded the objections made by Mr. Child, at the com-
mencement of the inquiry, the Bench did not give an

opinion.
Mr. Alderman HOOPER entirely coincided with his
brother Alderman's remarks, and he begged to state that
a publican had no right to open his house to any per-
sons but those attired in the pulice uniform. The sum-
mons was accordingly discharged.

POLICE IN TELLIGEN CS.
BOW-STREET.

On Saturday two men, named Carey and Davis, were
placed at the bar, before Mr. Twyford, on a charge of steal.
ing a marble figure of a cow, value 201., the property of Mr.
Brown, a sculptor, in University-street, Tottenham-court-
road. _ _ _ _ _ _

It appeared, from the evidence of a workman in the employ
of the prosecutor, that the figure was placed for show in the
sculpture room of his house, which was open all day, and,
about a fortnight ago, was missed. It was so heavy that it
would require two men to carry it away. He had since seen
the same figure at the shop of Mr. Whistler, a pawnbroker,
in the Strand.

kshopman in Mr. Whistler's house proved that the cow
was brought to his master's shop by the prisoners on the
let instant. They placed it on the counter, and said they
wished to pawn it. Witness lent them 30s. on it. A day
or two afterwards Davis called again, and inquired whether
witness could not advance more money upon it. He gave
him another sovereign, and told him that, if he would call
again, he would ascertain its value, and, if possible, grant
him a further loan upon it. In the meantime, however, they
were both taken into custody.
Joseph Thompson, a police-constable, stated, that from in-
formation he received, he apprehended Clarey about a week
since. He told him he was charged with stealing a cow,
upon which he declared he knew nothing of it. He subse-
quently took the ether prisoner into custody, and, he on learn-
ing the charge, said he had been employed by Clarey and a
man called " Jerry " (a well known thief) to pawn the cow,
and that he had received only two shillings as his share of the
proceeds.
The prisoners, who declined making any defence, were corn
mitted for trial.

QUEEN-SQUARE.
On Saturday, George Banham, 84 B, was charged before
Mr. Burrell with breaking a poor girl's arm.
Sarah Brady, the complainant, who was very poorly and
wretchedly clad, said, that on the evening of Saturday week
she had occasion to come to Westminster, and was returning
towards home at about 12 at night,when she met a man with
whom she had been acquainted. She was walking by his side
up Tothill-street, engaged quietly in conversation with him,
when on arriving at the corner of a court, defendant came up,
and,ordering her to go on,shoved herdownthe court. She told
him that she did not live that way, and was going home.
Defendant, however, would insist upon her going that way,
in consequence of which she remained in the court for a
minute or two, until he had gone on another part of his
beat, when she came out and joined her friend, and they pro-
ceeded to the corner of Dean-street, where she was bidding
him good night, when defendant came up again, and, with-
out speaking a word, seized her by the arm, turned her
round, and pushed her some distance up the street, and then
left her. She leant up against a hoarding, and finding her-
self in great pain, and her arm useless, she informed her
friend, who recommended her to go immediately to the
Wesminster Hospital, which she did. It was there found
that her arm was broken, and the house-surgeon having set
it, she went to the station and complained of defendant's
conduct.
The young man alluded to, and another who was in com-
pany with him at the time, confirmed the girl's account of
the defendant's violence.
Inspector Forbes was then called, and said that when com-
plainant came to the stati,n to prefer a complaint against
the policeman she was drunk. Defendant had been in the
force six years, and bore a very fair character. There had
been some trivial reports against him, and one for drun-
kenness.
Mr. BURRELL observed that, after the distinct evidence
which had been given for the prosecution, it would be very
difficult for him to come to any other conclusion than that
the girl had bden treated with great violence. She might
have been obstructing the way, but that would not justify
of great violence towards
such treatment as she had received. He did not impute to
defendant for a moment that he had intended to break the
girl's arm, but he had been guilty
her, and he must convict him in the penalty of 51.
The fine was paid.
WANDSWORTH.
On Saturday four labouring men applied to Mr. Clive for
summonses against a man named Davis, who is a " gauger"
on the Richmond Railway, for the non-payment of wages.
John Nagle, the spokesman of the party, stated that he
went to work on the Richmond Railway, at Barnes, on Mon-
day week. A man named Davis, who is the gauger on that
portion of the line, engaged him and others, and agreed to
give them 2s. 6d. a day for their labour. When they asked
for the money Davis gave them what he called shilling
tickets, and tell them to go to his shop. Having no money
they were obliged to go to his shop and be satisfied with what
was given: them. He, with eight or nine others, asked
Davis on Friday morning to let them have money instead of
tickets. He said he could not settle with them then, and
kept them waiting until twelve o'clock, when they were told,
as they had broken the day, they were not allowed to go to
work ; so that at the present time they were without work
or money.
Mr. LIVE—I am afraid you can make nothing of it.
You have consented to be paid in tickets, and it is very
probable that-there is little or nothing coming to you. If,
when you first went to work, you had refused to accept
tickets, but required money, and the party had declined
giving it you then, I would, upon your applying to me, have
granted a summons instantly. Even now I will grant you
one, but I fear you will be throwing your money away.
The applicant then said he would take a summons out,
but on being asked for the court fees, two shillings, he de-
clared that he had no money.
Mr. CLIVE observed that he should not grant the sum-
mons unless the fees were forthcoming.
The applieant and the other men declared that they had
not a farthing in the world, and left the Court.

- -
AYLESBURY, Nov. 20.—The adjourned Sessions for
this county were held yesterday before Sir Thomas Aubrey,
Bart., Chairman, and a bench of magistrates. Baron Meyer
Rothschild took the oaths, and qualified as a magistrate for
the county. At these sessions, Grenville Pigott, Esq., re-
signed the situation of deputy-chairman, in consequence of his
having been appointed one of her Majesty's Puor•law Com.
mizsioners.