The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-04 00:00:00

nu e. SUN, LONDON, MONDAY MORNING, NoVEMBEft wit:

the prisoner placed his son, a boy about eight years,
under her care, and agreed to pay her at the rate of
4s. weekly for his maintenance. He paid the money
for a few months, and thou left off altogether. He
never came to inquire after his child, nor took the
least interest in him. She sought for him every-
where, and being informed he had a situation on the
Southampton Railway, went there, but he had left a
few days- before. She then went to Mr. Carr's, at
Kensall-green, by whom the prisoner had been en-
gaged during the summer, but he had left that place
too. She had a large family herself, and was so re-
duced in circumstances that she was hardly able to
procure the necessaries of lifc flr her own children.
At length she was obliged to place the boy in the
workhouse.

Mr. COMDE inquired how much he owed her ?
The poor woman replied 121. 10s.
Mr. COMBE asked what means the prisoner pos-
sessed ? The woman replied 1001. a year by his
father's will.

Mr. COMBS inquired if the prisoner had any other
children ? The woman answered that he had three,
and that he had suffered his wife to die in a hospital.
Mr. COMAE—Where are the other two children ?
Prisoner—One of them is with some man at Deptford.
Mr. COM BE—Have you paid anything for the
maintenance of this child ? The prisoner owned that
he had not seen the child for five months, nor contri-
buted a farthing towards its maintenance ; in fact, he
did not know what had become of it.
Mr. COMAE —Where is the other child? Prisoner
—Dead. _

Mr hicks, the overseer, said he considered the case
so bad a one that he should certainly press for punish-
ment unless the prisoner would at once satisfy the
parish.
The prisoner, when asked if he would enter into
an arrangement, admitted that he had been entitle I
to the receipt of 1001. a year, but gave a:rambling
and most improbable account of its being mortgaged.
Mr. COMBE—Are you willing to maintain your
child, and pay this poor woman ? Prisoner—l can't.
Mr. COMBE—Why ? Prisoner—Because I can't.
Mr. COMBE—Then you will go the House of Wr-
rection for two months.

He was committed accordingly.
Henry Edwards, a stout-built young Welshman,
was charged with robbing Mr. David Jones, a con-
stable, of 1/. 10s., his baton, and his son " Davey."
The prosecutor accidentally met the prisoner on
Tuesday, and, finding that he was a native of Wales,
the place of his nativity, and that he had been at the
Welsh School in Gray's Inn-road, a companion of
some young relatives of his took him to several public-
houses, where they had drink in abundance, and of
every description ; beer, gin, ale, rum, &c. ; when
they reached the prosecutor's residence Jones was
stupidly drunk, whilst the miscellaneous liquors and
the large quantity he drank had the effect of rendering
Edwards perfectly insane. In his delirium he rifled
the prosecutor's pockets of his money and staff, and at
a late hour at night dragged his son, a boy about
twelve years of age, out of bed, and carried him in his
arms in a state of nudity to a grocer's shop, a quarter
of a mile distant ; he laid the boy, who was still asleep,
in the corner of the shop, where some humane old
woman put her shawl round him. The prisoner
fetched a cab, put the boy in the cab, and drove to
his own door, where he put the boy to bed, and went
to bed in another room himself. The next morning the
father was distracted at the loss of his child, and
searched every place for him, but at two o'clock in
the day when the prisoner awoke he brought home
the son, but was immediately given into custody for
the robbery. The staff was found on the prisoner's
person.
The prisoner, who has hitherto borne an irreproach-
able character, and whose father is a very respectable
tradesman in Store-street, Bedford-square, solemnly
declared he did not recollect anything whatever of the
matter. He must have been stark mad.

The father of the prisoner having indemnified the
prosecutor to the full amount of his pecuniary loss,
the young man was discharged by the wish of all
parties.
UNION-HALL.

On Friday, four lads were chargei with mating
a disturbance in the St. Saviour's Union Workhouse,
and refusing to do the work allotted them for a night's
lodging, and for their breakfasts the next morning,
having been admitted as casual paupers the night
before, and attempted to break the forms in th•
working shed.
They now said that the work was too severe, in
return for the bit of dry bread and so ne straw to Es
down upon.
The porter said that it was quite child's play; they
were only set to pick oakum.
The defendant said he was a sweep, but the new
Act threw him out of employ.
Mr. TRAILL—It seems easier work to pick oakum
than sweep chimneys.
Defendant—l'd rather sweep ten chimneys of a
morning than pick that stuff, it works the fingers so
dreadfully—it is not made of rope, but cf a cocoa-
nut fibre, and is so. stiff and harsh to unravel, that it
almost makes the fingers bleed.
In answer to the charge of causing a disturbance
in the workhouse, they said that when they were
turned out into the work-shed they were so bitterly
cold that they merely moved the forms out of the
way to give them room to run about and circulate
their blood to keep them warm, picking cocoa-nut
fibre being a very cold description of work.
They were committed for seven days each.
John Weston, a cooper by trade, was charged with
inflicting a severe wound on the head of his wife with
a candlestick.

The poor woman, although so ill, expressed a wish
that the prisoner might be discharged, saying that she
was equally as much to blame as he on the occasion,
for she irritated him by contradicting him.
Mr. TRAILL said that it was a miracle she had not
been killed, and that the case should go before a jury.
The wife again supplicated that she might not be
compelled to appear.
Mr. TRAILL, finding the complainant so desirous of
screening the prisoner from punishment, remarked
that it would be of no use sending the case for trial.
The prisoner must find bail to keep the peace, and in
default he would commit him to gaol.
The wife exclaimed that she would like to suffer the
imprisonment instead of the prisoner.
Henry Matthews, toll-collector at Waterloo-bridge,
was summoned at the instance of Joseph Stubbs, a
letter-carrier, for unlawfully detaining his hat in the
toll-house.
The complainant stated that on Monday last he, in
company with another letter-carrier, went to the
Surrey side of the bridge, and paid the toll. The
other letter -carrier followed, and at the moment the
defendant called out and said that witness had not
paid, but he contended he had, and, as he refused to
pay again, the defendant snatched off his hat, and
took it into the toll-house. Complainant, determined
not to pay over again, instead of passing through the
gate, tied-a handkerchief round his head, and went
over Westminsterihridge.
Charles Mason, the other postman, confirmed the
complainant's account as to the fact of hearing him
apnudt ditowbanvitnhge hbaeelfnpetnankyen
tipbyn the
o table of the wicket,
the defendant.
The defendant, however, denied that the toll had
been paid by complainant (a policeman and another
man connected with the bridge bearing out his as-
sertion), and that he then seized the hat for the toll.
He believed the complainant would not have held out
had not the crowd urged him on by saying his hat
could not be seized for toll, for that he was in the
Queen's service, and that the clothes he wore, hat
and all, belonged to her Majesty. He was glad to
hare an opportunity of stating that postmen in the
Metropolis, in fancying they had a right to pass the
bridge toll-free, like soldiers and policemen, were
mistaken.
Mr. TRAILL said that there must be perjury in the
case, the witnesses flatly contradicting each other.
The toll-keeper said that his two witnesses were
standing up close to the wicket at the time as a pro-
tection to him, as it was the day of the Queen's
opening the Exchange, and in four hours 9,000 per-
sons had passed through. Not long since a case of
nearly a similar description came before Mr. Trani,
who decided in his favour, showing that he was quite
justified in seizing the hat of any man who did not
pay the toll,
Mr. TRAILL told him he had better be careful how
he performed his duty, and not to act with rudeness
to the pasBettgers,
The Magistrate,
trouble. otherwio would got himself into
con., at length dismissed the summons, but refused to
having heard a great deal pro and
allow the defendant hi§ dd§t§s
GREENWICH.
FOWLES AGAINST BREDOR BECK.—This case was
argued as to the legalitiy of enforeing..an award made
by the arbitrators appointed by the upper Watergate
Turnway and Burial Society. of Deptford.
Mr. Taylot, Who appeared for the Sooloty, directed
attention to the 11th and 25th rules of the Society,
made by virtue of the statute 10 George IV., cap. 50,
as amended by the 4th and sth William IV., cap. 40,
and produced the certificate of their enrolment by
Mr. Tidd Pratt, the barrister appointed to certify
that the rules were in conformity with the law. He
then produced the award made by the arbitrator, and
proved the defendant to be a member of the Society.
The defendant was then adjudged to pay 14s. 6d.
to the complainant, as senior steward of the Society,
and in default to be committed to Maidstont gaol for
one calendar month.
The defendant, who was exceedingly violent, and
would neither take the advice of his solicitor to abide
by the award nor abide by the judgment of the
magistrate, was left in custody to reflect on the cir-
cumstances.

WOOLWICH.
Oa Friday a poor widow named Rivers appeared
).lefore the magistrate and said, she lived at Lime-
house, but not being able to pay her rent she was
Icompelled to walk the streets or go into the union.
Her husband had worked in Messrs, Young and