The Sun.
London, England, 1845-01-23 00:00:00

SUN, LONDON, THURSD'A'Y EVENING, JANUARY 23, 1845,

world as free from the imputation of any dishonourable
or improper action as any man possibly can be. The
Benchers, however, with respect to this particular trans-
action, appear to have entertained a different opinion ;
but my character is as unblemished as asy character can
by possibility be. With regard to these bills I may be
allowed to state that I knew nothing about their exist-
ence until now.

Mr. PETERSDORFF having replied,
Mr. Baron ROLFE told the jury the question was one
upon which they alone could decide. They would have
to say to which of the two witnesses they were inclined
to give the greater credence.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.—
Damages, 241. 3s.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
MANSION-HOUSE.

A respectably-attired female, who gave her name
as Mary Keele, and stated her age to be thirty-nine
years, but whose appearance denoted that she had seen
some twenty summers more, was placed at the bar
before the Lord Mayor, charged with bigamy. The
facts of the case are somewhat novel and curious, the
charge being preferred by the mother of the husband
by the second marriage, a young man who only at-
tained his majority in the month of August last.
Mrs. Sarah Keele, the prosecutrix, stated that she
was the wife of George Keele, who was not in any
business, and that she resided at St. Stephen's, near
Canterbury. The prisoner at the bar had contracted
marriage with her (the witness's) son some time about
last Michaelmas. Witness had known the prisoner
for about a fortnight before the marriage took place.
The prisoner's husband by the first marriage was a
man of the name of John Weller, who went to Aus-
tralia about three years ago, and there, as the pri-
soner had stated, died. Weller has a sister living at
Canterbury, who had informed the witness that her
brother (the husband) was still living, and in perfect
health, in Australia, and that a letter had recently
been received, which could be proved to be in his
handwriting. On learning this, the witness came up
to town and gave the prisoner into custody as she
was getting out of a Hackney omnibus in Bishops-
gate-street.
The LORD MAYOR—Is there anybody here to
prove the former marriage ? Witness—lt can be
proved by the first husband's sister, who resides at
Canterbury.
William Gurney Keele, who appeared to give his
testimony with great reluctance, stated that he lived
in Back-lane, Hackney, rand was in the service of
Messrs. Marnett and Manley, nurserymen. He was
married to the prisoner some time in the month of
October last (he could not remember the day), at St.
George's, Hanover-square, which was the church in
which the first marriage was solemnised. He had
become acquainted with the prisoner from going to
her house on the business of his employers at Canter-
bury. Witness believed her to be a widow—indeed,
he heard about three or four months ago that her first
husband was dead. He heard this from the prisoner
who told him that some person had called upon her
and told her that her husband was dead, and that in-
formation had been corroborated to her by a gentle-
man, who had stated that he had seen " the last of
her husband" in Australia. This the prisoner told
witness before the marriage, or he would not have
proposed to her a marriage. He had engaged to
marry her about a fortnight before the marriage ac-
tually took place.
John Dixon, 619 City Police, proved that he took the
prisoner into custody yesterday morning on a charge
of bigamy, preferred by the prosecutrix, Mrs. Sarah
Keele. He had not had time to obtain a certificate of
the first marriage from the register of St. George's,
Hanover-square.
The prisoner, when called upon for her answer to
the charge, and when questioned by the Lord Mayor,
manifested the most perfect self-possession, and

evinced, both in manner and deportment, that she had
moved in a superior station in life to that into which
she had descended by her marriage with the son of
the prosecutrix. She stated that when she mar-
ried the young man Keele she fully believed that her
first husband, Weller, had died, and her belief had
been founded upon the information of a female, four
years ago, and also of a seafaring man, who had
called upon her about the same time, and stating he
did so at the dying request of her husband, of whom
he had seen the last in Australia. She did not know

the name of either of these parties, nor could she pro-
duce them ; the last told her he was going back im-
mediately on a voyage to Australia, and she had never
seen him since.

The LORD MAYOR—Have you any objection to
state when it was you were married to your first hus-
band? The prisoner—Not the least, my Lord, as
far as I recollect it. I think it was in the month of
June, twelve or thirteen years ago. I forget the pre-
cise day. My maiden name was Mary Frances
Witham.
The LORD MAYOR directed the constable to search
the register of St. George's, Hanover-square, for
the certificate of the first marriage.
The LORD MAYOR, intimated that the prisoner
must be remanded, in order to procure the attendance
of the witness from Canterbury, and inquired from
the prisoner if she had any friends in London who
would be answerable for her appearance.
The prisoner replied that she had been out of
London for many years, and she had been so unex-
pectedly taken into custody that she had not had an
opportunity of communicating with any person. She
had, however, friends to whom she could send.
The husband (Keele) hereupon came forward, and
expressed his readiness to be answerable for his wife's
appearance on any future day the Lord Mayor might
appoint.
The LORD MAYOR, addressing the young man,
said—Well, as you are the aggrieved party, I will
take your recognisance in 501. that the prisoner shall
appear here this day week to answer any charge that
may be then preferred against her.
The parties then withdrew.

Sinop s Kent, charged with sending a threatening
letter to Messrs. Prescott, Grote, and Co., was
brought up for re-examination. No further evidence
was adduced, but the depositions taken on a former
day having been read over to the witnesses, they were
bound in recognisances to prosecute, and the pri-
soner was committed for trial at the next session of
the Central Criminal Court.
LAMBETH.

James Jennings, Patrick Ford, and Henry Robin.
son, were charged before Mr. Henry, by police-con•
stable P 112, with a robbery under the following cir.
cumstances

The constable stated that on Tuesday night he was
on duty at Mill-row, Brixton, when he heard the
creaking of a basket, and on putting his lamp over
into the garden he saw the three prisoners, and on
going up to them, he asked them what they were
doing, to which the prisoners replied that they were
going to sleep in an open shed ; they had been to
Croydon, and had no money, and were quite tired.
He took the prisoners to the station-house, and went
back to search the garden, when he discovered a
basket full of lead ready to be carried away. On
examining the premises of No. 8, he found there was
a bed-room which projected from the building, and
on examining the roof he ascertained that upwards of
two cwt. of lead had been cut from the roof, rolled
up, and ready to be carried off.
The gardener of Mrs. Whittaker stated that yes-
terday the lead of the roof was all right, and the
garden-gate was bolted ; and the prisoners must
have climbed over the fence.
Remanded for a week.
SOUTHWARK.

Cato Fernando, a seaman belonging to the ship
Taglioni, lying in the West India Docks, was charged
before Mr. Cottingham with stealing three cotton
shirts, the property of Joseph Frowski, a Jew crimp,
residing in East Smithfield. _

Complainant stated that the prisoner was in the
habit of lodging at his house on his return from sea.
About eleven months ago, previous to the last voyage,
he sold the prisoner some clothing, and lent himis. 6d.
After he was gone he missed several shirts, but had
no suspicion of the prisoner. Yesterday he heard that
the vessel had arrived in the docks, and that the pri-
soner, instead of coming to his lodgings, had taken up
his quarters with a prostitute in Martin-street,
Borough. He, however, proceeded on board the
vessel yesterday afternoon, to seek payment for the
debt due to him, amounting to 1/. 12s. 6d. Although
the prisoner had been paid, he refused to settle with
him. At a latter part of the evening he came for his
chest, when it was searched, and the shirts were found
therein. He identified them as his property.
The prisoner (a coloured Portuguese) gave quite a
different version of the story. He said that the
shirts had been placed in his chesb without his know-
ledge ; in fact, he did not discover that they were there
until he arrived at sea, when he thought the com-
plainant, who packed up his chest, had placed them
there in return for a quantity of cigars which he gave
him. As for the money, he certainly should have
paid him, but he was drunk last night. The com-
plainant had been in the habit of robbinif him for
many years, which made him quit his lodgings ; and
he believed the charge was made through spite.
Frowski said he did not think he should have given
him in charge if he had paid him, and returned to his
house as usual. He denied robbing him ; he treated
the prisoner as he would one of his children.
The prisoner paid the crimp the 1/. 12s. 6d. and was
discharged.

WORSHIP-STREET.
A LIBELLOUS PLACARD.—Mr. Phillip Meedon
Hewitt, a respectable elderly-looking person, residing
in Gloucester-street, St. John-street-road, appeared
on summons before Mr. Broughton, on the complaint
of Mr. John Stewart Kipling, a solicitor, charged
with having, on the 14th instant, caused to be written
and publiihed a false and scandalous libel concerning
the said John Stewart Kipling, with intent to excite
him to a breach of the peace.
Mr. Smith, a solicitor, attended for the defence.
The complainant stated, that in May a stock-job.

bing transaction took place between Mr. Heseltine
and the present defendant, and the latter came to con-
sult complainant, stating that he had deposited Spa-
nish bonds to the nominal value of 9,0001. in the
hands of Heseltine, and could not recover them. Com-
plainant commenced an action of trover for him against
Heseltine, and another action against Messrs. Master-
man and Co., the bankers, for 841., which had been at-
tached in their hands, in the Lord Mayor's Court. The
result of the latter action was the recovery of the 841.,
minus Messrs. Masterman's expenses (about 91.), and
complainant handed over the proceeds to Mr. Hewitt,
the present defendant, his own costs (about 81.) being
paid. The action against Heseltine is still pending.
It is a special jury cause, and the costs out of pocket
in bringing that to trial will amount to about 30/. for
counsel's fees, fees in court, &c. The plea set up was
that the bonds did not belong to Hewitt, and that he
did not sell them. The present complaint against his
late client, the present defendant, was for publishing
an infamous libel in a paper which had been stuck on
the wall of the workhouse, and was now produced,
and which he said was in the handwriting of the de-
fendant.
The writing on the produced paper was as fol-
lows :
" NOTlCE.—Unless Mr. Kipling, solicitor, 8, City-
road, makes his appearance, and give up Mr. Hewitt's
property (9,0000, he will be advertised as a rogue
and vagabond, and there will be a reward offered
(1001.) for his apprehension.
" JOHN HEWITT."
Mr. James Whitehouse, a grocer in the City-road,
stated that between three and four o'clock in the after-
noon of the day above-mentioned, he saw a person
who appeared to him to be in the act of putting up
a paper against the wall of the workhouse, and he had
little doubt that the defendant was the person, but he
should not like to swear to it. The prisoner went
away directly, and the witness went and read the
paper that had been posted up, and then knocked at
the workhouse lodge and pointed it out to the porter,
who also read it and tore it down.
Richard Morgan, clerk to Mr. Kipling, the com-
plainant, said he had seen the defendant write, and he
believed the paper now produced to be in the de-
fendant's handwriting.
The complainant being recalled, said that about
three weeks ago the defendant came to him in an ex-
cited state, and told him that if he was an honest man
he would, without delay, conduct the cause to trial.
He replied, with some anger, that the defendant was
already in his debt, and that it would take a consi-
derable sum out of his pocket to carry the cause to
trial. The defendant then said he would never pay
him his demand, and would give him an ill name, or
word's to that effect. All the money he had had of
the defendant was 151., which paid the costs of pro-
ceedings against Messrs. Masterman, and left about
Si. in hand.
The solicitor for the defendant said he could say
nothing as to the produced document, but he was in-
structed by his client that the paper had not emanated
from him, but from his brother.
Mr. BROUGHTON said the evidence left no doubt on
his mind that the defendant was the author, who had
stuck up and published the libel, and that a breach of
the peace was highly probable. The paper contained
what was no doubt a most gross and wicked charge
against the complainant, accusing him of defrauding
defendant of 9,0001., and threatening to offer 1001.
reward for his apprehension. He should therefore
hold the defendant to bail to answer any indictment at
the sessions.
The bail required was two sureties in 150/. each,
and the defendant's own recognisances for 2001.

Prisoner—l only want to test his evidence as to the
time ; because I don't recollect a syllable about it.
Mr. BORRER (to Sergeant Smitl, who attended to
charge the prisoner)—l suppose you have no reason
to believe that the man would have done anything if
he had not been under the influence of liquor ?
Sergeant Smith—No.
Mr. BORRER (to the prisoner)—The sentinel has
done nothing more than his duty. Tie has a eat-o%
nine tails hanging over his head. What have you to
say for yourself ? Prisoner—Why, I'd been having
a little, and a little's too much for me. That's a fact.
But I can't think how it was. I must have tumbled
over some friend.—(Laughter.)
Mr. BORRER—I think you have been here before ?
Prisoner—Yes, I have, that's a fact. I was taken up
drunk, and I was fined ss. Drunk, and drunk I was
—there's no denying it.
Mr. BRINIER (to the sentinel)—l suppose he didn't
mean to do you any harm ?—No, Sir ; he was only
drunk.

Prisoner—Do any- harm to a soldier I Lord bless
you, Sir ; I wouldn t do any harm to a soldier for the
world.—(Laughter.) I love the army, and can
shoulder a musket with any of them. Look here,
comrade (and prisoner, who is a little spare man, with
anything but a soldierly demeanour, went through
the imaginary process of shouldering arms, presenting
arms, and firing, with a rapidity that would have
startled a drill-sergeant). Look at that, comrade,
and say whether I'd harm a soldier. Nature intended
me for a soldier myself, only father bound me to a
shoemaker.

Prisoner was running on in this way, when loud
sobs were heard in the Court, and, looking round, we
saw a neat little body, who, with her hands up to her
face, made her way towards the dock, ejaculating in
her progress, " Oh, Field—oh, Field ?" This inter-
ruption put a stop to prisoner's military exercise, and,
turning to the female, " Oh, be quiet," he said, " It's
all right now—it's all settled. I'm coming, my dear."
Mr. BORRER—YOU must pay ss. for being drunk.
Prisoner put his hand in his pocket, and then turned
to the little sobbing lady below—" You've got ss. my
dear ?"—Yes, I've brought 55."
" That's right. Pay the ss. Be quiet. It's over
now."

But the little woman continued to sob until Mr.
Field had been let out of the dock, and then, as she

took his arm, she gave a little stamp with her foot,
and, with an indescribable look at the culprit, who
still kept up a little of the military air, she exclaimed,
" Oh, Field, how can you make such a fool of
yourself ?"
" Hush, hush, my dear," responded Mr. Field to
this ejaculation, and, with a somewhat crest-fallen
look, made the best of his way out of Court.—
Brighton Herald.