The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-04 00:00:00

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME ClRCUlT—tlertford, March 1.
CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron ALDERSON.)
Magaret MConnell, 25, was indicted for feloniously
uttering at the parish of Tring, a certain pass of a dis-
charged prisoner, or order for the payment of money
with intent to defraud the guardians of the poor of
that union, well knowing the same to be forged and
counterfeit, and Constance Scott, 44, was charged with
counselling and procuring the other prisoner to commit

the felony:
Mr. Thesiger, with whom was Mr. Ogle, conducted
the prosecution on behalf of the Crown, and Mr. W.
Payne and Mr. Charnock appeared for the prisoner.
Mr. THESIG3tR addressed the jury, and from the
statement of tlie Learned Counsel and the evidence ad-
duced to support it, it appeared that on the Ist of De-
cember the prisoner, M‘Connell, went to the house of
Mr. Blake, the relieving officer, at Tring, and presented
a pass, which purported to be signed by two justices of
the borough of Sandwich, and which represented that
the prisoner, her husband, and eight children, had re-
ceived the pass in question on their discharge from
gaol, and that they were on their way home, and were
entitled to a sum of elevenpence a mile. Mr. Blake
having some suspicion that all was not right, questioned
the prisoner relative to her husband and the children,
when she at first told him that he was very ill of fever,
and that he had gone on the road in a waggon, but she
afterwards said that he was drunk, and told many
other contradictory statements, which eventually induced
the relieving officer to have her taken into custody. The
prisoner Scott was in company with M'Connell in the
town, and was seen to be watching outside the house
when the pass was presented, and she was also jaken
into custody, and while, ,being conveyed to gaol she
'told the constable that she knew the pass was
forge+ and that she was -Pieient when a man named
Stewart, wrote it out in Buckeridge-street, St. Giles's,
and that he had accompanied them to Tring, which was
the first town where they presented it. There was very
little doubt that, the prisoners were part of the London
gang of begging-letter impostors, and that but for their
ingenious plan of fraud being nipped in the bud, they
would have made a tour all through the country, plun-
dering every union as they passed along.
Mr. PAYNE took some technical objections to the in-
dictment, contendins that the document in question
could not be viewed in the light of an order for the pay-
ment of money • and, also, that it was not in the form
prescribed by the Act of Parliament.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON said the objections were worthy
of consideration, but he should not take upon himself to
stop the case.
Mr. PAYNE then addressed the jury, and observed that
he was instructed by thci prisoner M'Connell, for whom
he appeared, to state that she was quite innocent of any
fraudulent intention, but, being in liquor, she was in-
duced
by the other prisoner to present the pass. When
she was taken into custody she was placed in a solitary
cell for several days, and suffered a great deal from ill-
ness ; and when her sister went to see her, her head
swiss° much swelled that she could not recognise her.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON here interfered, and remarked
that-this was really not matter of defence. What had a
big head to do with the question whether the prisoner
littered the document, knowing it to be false and coun-
terfeit ? Counsel ought to exercise a little common
sense, and apply their address to the jury to the facts.
Here was a woman, who presented a pass ad-
mitted to be forged, who, when questioned, told
all manner of contradictory statements about
it, and thus, instead of showing. or endeavouring to
show the jury, by argument, that such conduct was
consistent with her innocence, her counsel talked about
her having her head swelled. If such argument was
worth anything, it came to this, that if a man had turtle-
soup, and was well-treated before his trial, he ought to
be convicted, but if he -underwent any hardship, he
should be acquitted.
The Learned Counsel then made some further obser-
vations to the jury on behalf of his client.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON having summed up the case, the
jury immediately returned a verdict of Guilty.
His LORDSHIP then said he entertained some doubt
whether the' indictment could stand ; and, in order to
avoid the necessity of the prisoners remaining in gaol
until the next Assizes, if the objections taken should
turn out to be valid, upon consideration by the judges,
he would pass upon them the sentence of two years im-
prisonment and hard labour ; and if the decision should
be in their favour, they would then at once receive a
pardon, and be set at liberty.
William Budd, 39, and Richard Dennett, 21, two
athletic fellows, described as boatmen, were indicted for
a burglairy, accompanied with violence, in the dwelling-
house of Elizabeth Field.
Mr. RYLAND stated the case for the prosecution, and
said that Elizabeth Field, the person named in the indict-
ment, lived with her niece in a lonely cottage id the
neighbourhood of Hemel Hempstead, and on the night of
the robbery they were observed by some men forcing
their way into the bed-room occupied by Mrs. Field,
and they used considerable violence and took away
the money that was in the house. Mrs. Field,
upon the prisoners being taken into custody,
swore positively to their identity, but since
their committal, • Mrs. Field, who was an elderly
woman, .had died, and, therefore, he should be com-

pelled to put in her deposition, and have it read, and
under the circumstances it would be legal evidence. He
should also show that the prisoners were in the neigh-
bourhood of Hemel Hempstead on the night of the
robbery.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON inquired of the Learned Coun-
sel if there was any evidence to confirm the deposition
of the deceased person relative to the identity of the
prisoners ?
Mr. RYLAND said there was not. No persons were in
the house but Mrs. Field and her niece, and the latter
could not identify the prisoners.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON expressed his opinion, that un-
der these circumstances thdcase ought not to be proceeded
with. The deposition of the deceased person was un-
doubtedly legal evidence, but where it was entirely un-
corroborated, and where the question was one of identity,
which was almost always one of difficulty, he did not
think it would be safe to convict a party upon such tes-
timony ; for, although the witness might depose posi-
tively to the fact, it was very important that a prisoner
should have an opportunity, by cross-examination, of
testing his accuracy.
The jury said they perfectly concurred in the obser-
vations that had fallen from the Court, and as there was
no evidence to corroborate the deposition of the deceased,

they should feel it their duty to return a verdict of Not
guilty.

NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Carlisle, Feb. 29

(Before Mr. Justice CourmAN.)
Walter Graham, the younger, aged 23, and John Hornsby,
aged 20, were indicted for stealing a quantity of yarn, the
property of 'W. B. Proctor, Walter Graham being at the time
servant to the said W. B. Proctor.
Graham, who was well and somewhat stylishly dressed,
but whose appearance betokened early dissipation, had been
foreman to Mr Proctor, who is a sail-cloth manufacturer in
this town, and the other prisoner carried on, in a small way,
a similar business to that of Mr. Proctor.
His LORDSHIP having summed up, the Jury retired for a
short time, and returned into Court with a verdict of Guilty
against both.—To be transported for seven years.
(Before Mr. Baron ROLFE.)
Isaac Angus was indicted for cutting and wounding Wm.
Sterling, with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm.
The prosecutor:was a police-officer, and, seeing the pri-
soner quarrelling with another man, interfered for the pur-
pose of putting an end to the affray. Though an officer, he
had not at the time the dress of an officer upon him, and the
prisoner resenting his interference, a struggle took place, in
the course of which both fell several times. The prisoner
then endeavoured to make his escape, and in doing so threw
something at the prosecutor, what it was did not precisely
appear, which cut him severely on the head.
His LORDSHIP having summed up, the jury found the pri-
soner guilty of a common assault.
To be imprisoned for eight calendar months.
William Smart and Charles Corley were indicted for at-
tempting to discharge loaded fire-arms at one William Hall,
with intent to prevent the lawful apprehension of Charles
Shipley.
The prisoners and Shipley were shooting in a rabbit-
warren in the occupation of the prosecutor, who, with two
persons besides himself, on horseback, and three on foot,
went in pursuit of them. On the approach of the pursuers
one of the prisoners told the other to load his gun. This was
done; and some threatening bravado took place on the part
of the prisoners, with the view, apparently, of deterring the
prosecutor and his companions from following them. The
party were, however, pressed on pretty closely ; and the pro-
secutor was about seizing Shipley, when the prisoner Gorley,
pointed his gun towards him. The gun went off, having re•
ceived at the moment a blow from a stick, doing, however,
no damage to any one. Whether prisoner had actually pulled
the trigger did not exactly appear. The poachers were then
overpowered and treated with considerable violence.
Mr. 'Wilkins addressed the jury for the defence, contend-
ing that the gun went off by accident, in consequence of the
blow of the stick, and that the prisoner had no intention of
firing at the prosecutor. Verdict—Not Guilty.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(SATURDAY.)
GUILDHALL.

A careworn young man, of respectable appearance,
solicited the assistance of the magistrate, under the fol-
lowing circumstances: He had brought upon himself •
the animosity of all the gamblers in the metropolis; by
publishing a short pamphlet, entitled the " Gamester's
Warning." He was lately attacked and assaulted on
Waterloo-bridge by strangers, who were, no doubt, in-
stigated by the individuals he had given offence to. He
had, since that, received an anonymous letter, which
clearly must have emanated from some of the parties he
had offended. It reminded him of the fate of Mr.
Weare, who gave offence to Thurtell and his compa
nions, and intimated that he was a marked man.
Mr. Alderman HUGHES asked if he had published his
" Warning" upon his personal observance? The appli-
cant said he had. He had lost many thousands of
pounds 'at play.
The ALDERMAN asked if be bad any means of tracing:
the anonymous letter to any individual? The applicant:
(whose name did not transpire) said he had no proof,
but he suspected a person.
Mr. Alderm-an HUGHES said he could not assist him'
until he could, in some way, identify the writer. At the,
same time, he did not think that any real mischief was;
contemplated. He should recommend him to keep the
letter, as it might turn out to be of importance if any
attack should be made on him. The information he
was in possession of was too vague to be acted upon

present.
The applicant, who left a copy of his " Warning"
with the Alderman, then retired.
CITY POLICE COMMITTEE.
Mr. Allison,jun., of the Black Boy and Camel public-
house and booking-office, in Leadenhall-street, City,
was summoned before Sir J. Duke, M.P. the sitting Al-
derman, for allowing persons to meet in his house on
Sunday morning last, before the hours allowed by Act
of Parliament, and also for unlawfully serving beer and
spirits, &c., to which he pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Deputy Mitchell, of Lime-street Ward, attended
for the purpose of describing the character of the house.
From the evidence brought forward on the part of the
prosecution, it appeared that on Sunday morning last,
at about ten minutes to eleven o'clock, the police-con-
stable on duty in Leadenhall-street, in passing the de-
fendant's house, saw the door open, which induced
him to go in, and in the parlour and tap he counted no
fewer than nine persons, all males.
Mr. Newman, the clerk, inquired what character of
persons they were, and if they appeared to be travellers?
Those in the tap-room were not drinking, but others,
who were standing in part of the bar and in the parlour,
were served with gin and ale. Lie had frequently be-
fore seen the door opened on a Sunday morning, but this
was his first visit.
The defendant, in answer to the charge, said the house
being a booking-office for coaches to all parts of the me-
tropolis and adjacent country, he was compelled to open
it on a Snnday morning, and had done so for a consider-
able period past. He did dot deny serving customers on
last Sunday morning, but the circumstances were, hav-
ing to open the door to receive three parcels which had
been brought by the carrier from the Great Western
Railway, two gentlemen, who had come from Chelsea in
an omnibus, and were going to Blackwall, asked him if
they could be accommodated with some refreshment.
Considering them travellers, he assented, and, while
serving them, other omnibuses drew up to the door, and
the conductors and drivers came in, whom he was serv-
ing also, when the police-constable made his appearance.
lie assured the Alderman he would not have served any
of them but for the impression he entertained that they
were travellers.
Mr. Deputy Mitchell said the house was the most re-
spectably conducted in his ward.
Sir JAMES DUKE observed that in consequence of the
good character of the house, he would not enforce a
penalty, but directed the defendant to pay the amount,
of the summons' expenses.
(A few weeks since a similar case was heard at this
Court, wherein the Blue Posts booking-office in Hol-
born was concerned, and the magistrates dismissed it on
the grounds that they considered " an omnibus conductor
and driver, who bad come with an omnibus from High-
gate before eleven o'clock in the morning, were, to all
intents and purposes, travellers to the full extent of the
wording of the Act of Parliament.")
BOW-STREET.
Eliza smith and Maria Acock, keepers of two houses
of ill-fame, Nos. 1 and 3, Strand-lane, were placed at
infamous s houosefs St. of C
lthe bar before Mr. Twyford, being brought up on bench
warrants, for the purpose of entering into sureties to be
of good behaviour until the next Aiddlesex Sessions,
when they would be tried together with no less than 17
other females, o
alei kmee ntd e
sertin
'
Danes residing in the neighbourhood had made great
ip de-
scription, wkheieepher thes of
parishioners init
plaints as being public nuisances.
Mr Corder, Clerk to the Board of Guardians of the
Strand Union, attended to watch the cases, and to exa-
mine the persons who offered themselves as bail. The
bail being respectable publicans, Mr. Corder said he was
satisfied as to their solvency, and could see no objection
to their being admitted as sureties.
The females were then diseharged.
Mr. Corder informed the Magistrate that the guav-
dians of the poor, acting upon the representations of
several respectable householders in the various locali-
ties, had determined to root out all the dens of iniquity
in the several parishes belonging to the Strand Union,
and that the females who had been brought before him
on various occasions formed but a very small portion of
the gang against whom the union intended to proceed.
Mr. TwvFonia replied that he was very glad to hear
this, as he was sure that the property in the neighbour-
hood of such houses must be much deteriorated in value,
and he hoped the efforts of the guardians would be at-
tended with success.
Mr. Corder then withdrew.
CLERKENWELL.
Alfred Beevis and James Beevis (brothers), and John
Murray, were finally examined on a charge of attempt-
ing to murder Mr. Neville, a boot and shoemaker of
St. John-street, while they were endeavouring to steal
the goods in his warehouse.
'The prosecutor, an elderly man, who appeared very
ill, and had his head bound up, stated that between six
and seven o'clock on the morning of the 7th of last
month, he was awoke by his wife, who said that she
fancied that there was a movement of chairs in his shop.
He immediately left his bed and encountered in his
warehouse three men, two of whom he could positively
identify—they were Alfred Beevis and John Murray.
He had a doubt about James Beevis. On seeing Alfred
Beevis, whom he knew well, he said "For God's sake
what do you do here?" Murray immediately struck
him on his head with an instrument loaded with lead,
until he fell from the loss of blood from the severe
wounds inflicted, after which the prisoners escaped. The
prisoners were seen by a policeman running away from
the complainant's house.
An application was made that James Beevis might
be admitted to bail, which Mr. Greenwood allowed, and
two sureties in 100/. each were accepted.
Alfred Beevis, in his defence, said as I was a party
concerned, I must tell you that my brother had nothing
to do with it. The prisoner Murray reserved his de-
fence. They were committed for trial.
On Saturday Edward Thompson and William Green
were finally examined on various charges of burglary
and robbery in dwelling-houses.
Mr. Wolff appeared for the prisoner Green.
On Saturday, the 3d ult., police-constable Williams,
31 E, beim; on duty at King's-cross, between six and
seven in the evening, saw the prisoner Thompson run-
ning out of the house, No. 2, Chesterfield-street, Gray's
Inn-road, with a quantity of wearing apparel on his
shoulders. The officer arrested him, and the property
was found to belong to the Rev. Mr. Barton, who re-
sided there. At the prisoner's residence, No. 3, Sea
Lion-place, Lambeth. were found fifty-seven duplicates
relating to various descriptions of valuable property,
which had been pawned by both the prisoners. Under
a floor board in Thompson's sleeping apartment were
found a crowbar, twenty seven skeleton-keys, and
thirteen picklocks. On the Friday night immediately
preceding Thompson's arrest the house of Mr. Shirwall,
a professor of music, residing in Stamford-street, Blackr-
friars, was entered in the night time, and a considerable
amount of property abstracted, and amongst other things
found in Sea Lion-place the writing-desk, dressing-case,
and chimney ornaments were identified by Mr. Shirwall
as his property. The prisoner Green was in the em-
ployment of Mr. Evans, a boot and shoemaker,, re.
siding in Paddington-street, Marylebone, buv-vas
discharged" tibout a fottaght ago. On the night

after his departure, the house of Mr. Evans was
burglariciusly entered, and a very large quantity of
shoes and boots stolen. In a day or two after the bur-
glary Green was arrested in endeavouring to dispose of
a portion of the plunder. In Green's residence at Drum-
mond-crescent, numerous, duplicates were found, and
most of them related to property which had been stolen
from the house of Mrs._ Rathbone, a lady residing in
Swan-street, Stoke Newington, where a most daring
robbery had been committed. In the middle of the open
day two well-dressed men drove up in a cab to the
house, which was furnished but uninhabited, and stripped
it of every valuable article it contained, beds and -bed-
ding, chimney and toilet glasses, carpets, rugs, fenders,
&c., to the value of 3201. They forced open the street-
door by a crow-bar, and the bar found in Thompson's
house exactly corresponds with the marks in Mrs.
lathbone's door ; they were seen going into the house
y several, but as no one could imagine that at such a
time and place thny could be engaged in such a purpose,
they were suffered to carry off their booty unmolested.
'orty yards of the carpeting had been sold to a trades-
Man by the prisoner Green, which Mrs. Rathbone iden-
tified. The looking-glasses and the other things were
fiound in the shops of various pawnbrokers, who produced
them in Court, and were likewise identified. Thompson,
it was proved, had been convicted at the Surrey Sessions,
under the name of Peter Munro, and sentenced to 12
months' imprisonment, which he underwent.
The prisoners, who reserved their defence, were fully
committed for trial.