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

COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Dec.ll.

S./tins in Guil.ihati at Nisi 13rius, before tile DAM.
CIIIkF JUSTICE and a Common Jury.)

GOODWIN V. COLLINS.

was an action of as,uatpit for a breach of con-
I, vlarati,in al!eging that the plaintiff's wife
heel, at which the defendant formerly had two
nob.{ qtwntly to.}k thf,m away without
usual gnat-tees notice, whi,:h forted the

tract, t:le

gi'% !n Ii

breach of contract.. The defendant had pleaded the ge-
neria awl that the plaintiff was not ready and
wn-u4; to proce.:4l with Cie schooling of the two children.
Mr. James appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Ser-
grAnt.GazAee fur the defendant.
3111'. JAM es stated the plaintiff's case. The plaintiff was
a nwre!4lnt's clerk, and he sought by the present action to
recover 13/.24. 61 for a breach of contract of the usual and
ordinary character, The plaintiff some short time ago
naurried a lady named Hogg, who for some years pre-
virinsly hid kept a school at Bel rave Lode, Merton
place, Till nham-green. At Easter, 1842, the defendant,
who was a gentleman of considerable property residing
at Sunbure, placed tao of his daughters, together with
a young lady named Matthews, at Miss Hogg's school.
The' children remained at school till the Christmas of
1844, when they went borne fur the usual vacation. In
the .l'oiving January, however, only one of them re-
tained, and the consequence ara,, that the plaintiff, who
was now married to Miss Rugg, wrote a letter to the
defendant; complaining that he had neglected to give the
wrist quarter's notice of his intention to remove his
daughter from the school, and intimating that either the
notice or the quarter's selloolinz money would be in-
sisted upon. The defendant refused to give either, and
the:present action VV6B brought in consequence of that
refusal. The contract alleged t: have been broken was
contained in MiAti llogg's prospectus, which stated that
there was no entrance fees required on entering the
school, but it was expected that parents would give a
quarter's notice before they removed their children from
the estahlit:hm, nt.

Miss Ifo:g, the plaintiff's sister in-law, was called
to prove the facts stated by the Learned Counsel. She
said she was one of the teachers of the establishment,
and could state positively that it was an invariable cus-
tom to give a quarter's notice before any of the scholars
were removed from the acal-my. The defendant was
mailer aware of this custom at the time his children en-
tered the sch,ol, and it was up- !hese terms that her
sister consented to undertake their tuition.

The witnsa was cross•examined at some length by
Mr, `F,ergeant Gazelee, with the view of showing that
the'Systtin -of education pursued at the plaintiff's school
was both defectiv:i and immoral. She admitted having
read a serin..n produced by the Leal ned Sergeant in the
presence of cone ( f the defendant's daughters and a
Junior tutor of the academy, a young lady between 14
and 15 years of zge, and said she saw nothing objec-
tionable in it.

Mr. JAMES Said he was sorry to interrupt his Learned
Frienn, but really he could not for the life of him see
villa this sz.rrzon had to do with the case.

Mr. Sergeant GAZELE"E insisted that it had every-
thing to do with the case, for he intended to read it for
the. purpo at of showing that the plaintiff's wife was un-
willing to teach the defendant's children in the ordinary
and proper way. His Learned Friend had mis-
taken the defendant's plea. It was not that
the plaintiff 's wife was unwilling to take
back the children, but that she was unwilling to teach
them with propriety and decorum. The Learned Ser-
geant then read the objectionable sermon, amidst the
laughter of a crowded Court. It wa the copy or note
of a sermon purporting to have been preached by the
Best. -C--•C--. who took his text from the 29th
chant; of Genesis, the 10th verse:—" And Jacob kissed
Rachel." The sermon opened by asserting that it was a
universal practice among 4 the ancients to indulge in
the-practice of kissing, and declaring that the practice
was strongly recaminernied by the Scripaires. It was
honourable to the present age that this example of the
ancients was enthusiastically and strictly followed, and
the preacher proposed to !Ake up }n himself the task of
considering, first, the meaning of the term " kissing ;
secondly, the important duty of kissing ; and thirdly,
to represent or describe the pleasure attendant upon
the performance of the duty of kissing. The sermon
then proceeded to contend that kissing was not to be
taken in the ordinary acceptation or the term, as mean-
ing A simple salute or smacking of the lips, but it was
used iu the text as intending to convey, and did in fact
invariably convey, the idea of embracing. The ser-
mon extended to a great length in this strain of argu-
ment, and after d:velling upon the pleasures derivable
from the practice 'of kissing or embracing, wound up with
a general recommendation that it was a duty incumbent
upon every lady never to lose an opportunity for in-
dulging in the practice of kissing. The witness said she
allowed one of the defendant's daughters to copy this set.
mon and take it home with her.
The LORD CHIEF BAIION—WouId it not have been
better had the th:f-ndant tick 11 his daughter from the
school on the first receipt of this letter ?
Mr. Sergeant GAZELEE —3O be did, my Lord, and
this is our answdr to the action. The children never
returned after this sermon went home.
Mr. JAMES—I d•aibt that. You admit that one of
them did return at all events. Now, Miss Hogg, when
did this effusion go home to Mr. Collins ? Witness—l
think it was before Christmas, 1844.
Mr. jAMES—When was it written ? Witness—At
the end of 1844.

Mr. JAmEs—We
...teyou the author of the sermon ?
Witness—No, it was
brother-in-law.
Mr. JAMES— Ch plaintiffen.to me by my
? Witness—No ; another
brother-ii:-law.
Mr. JAMES—Did the defendant ever make any objec-
tion to -this sermon ? Witness—No,did not. I never
heard one word of complajnt upon 'he
that point till to-day.
Mr. Collins himself read it to me when
house, and he appeared to he muchamuseldcal.lteld at his
A Juror asked the witness if she had anywideaito.f the
object Mr. Collins had in view in reading it to her ?
Witness—No, ;uiced I have not. He read it over tome
in the presence of his wife and his two children, andae
they all laughed at it most heartily.
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. Serjeant GAGELBE then addressed the jury,
commenting upon the licentiousness of the sermon,
and declaring. that it was one of the causes
-which induced the defendant to remove his
children from the school. But he had another defence
to the action. At the time Mr. Collins placed his children
and Miss Matthews at the plaintiffs school, it was under-
stood that the defendant was to be at liberty to remove
them $4 ithout giving th t usual quarter's notice.
A witness wasc;-Alled to prove this fact ; after which

Mr. JAMES replied.
'llie,Learned LORD CHIEF BARON then summed up,
retnatking that there were two questions for the con-
sideration of the jury. Firstly, did the defendant
remove his cilldren from the plaintiff's school
coneequenee of the sermon ? If so, he had made
out his_ second plea, and their verdict upon it
must 'be-, in his favour. Secondly, was the quarter's
notice dispensed with by the plaintiff, and if it was, then,

again, the verdict must be for the defendant ; if not, it
must be for the plaintifE
The jury retired, and after an absence of about
half an hour, returned into Court with a ver-
dict for the defendant on the first issue ; and,
with regard to the second, the jury found
that there was no evidence to show that the defendant
removed his children in consequence of the sermon, and
therefore his Lordship directed the verdict to be entered
for the plaintiff on that issue.

SHERIFFS' COURT, Dec. 11.
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff Buncumt..)
BRYANT V. PILCHER.

The plaintiff in this case is a surgeon and apothe-
cary, and the defendant pleaded her coverture.
Mr. Csaallocs., for the defendant, said the case was
settled.

Mr. Tsomss, for the plaintiff, said that he was pre-
pared to go on, and had not received any instructions to
the contrary.
The attorneys, however, not being in attendance, the
case was struck out of the list.
In the next case,
Mr. CHARNOCK begged it might stand over for a
short time, as his witnesses had to come from Reading.
The UNDER-SHERIFF said he could not grant any in-
dulgence; unless parties were prepared the causes must
be struck out.

WLEOD V. BRADY.
This was an action to recover the sum of ,17/. 4s.
under the following circumstances:—
The plaintiff resides in Quicker-row, St. Pancras, and
was tenant of a house of which the defendant was lessee.
Plaintiff paid her rent, but defendant not paying the
superior landlord, the latter put in a distraint, and
plaintiff had to pay the rent again, and 51. I7s. for
expenses.
Mr. Tomes said the broker was in possession for
twelve days, to the great inconvenience of the plaintiff,
who was no doubt entitled to some compensation. How-
ever, she would be content with a verdict for the rent
and expenses.—Verdict for 171. 4s.
GANEO V. HUGHES.
This was an action to recover the sum of 101. on an
lOU. The defendant denied the signature.
The plaintiff's attorney gave evidence that the plaintiff
was a diamond merchant, carrying on business under the
firm of Day and Co., to whom the lOU was addressed.
A witness was called, who said that he had seen the
defendant write a great number of times, and did nut
believe it to be his handwriting.
The attorney said the witness was evidently adverse,
and plaintiff would submit to a nonsuit.
LEE V. DREW.
This was an action on a bill of exchange, of which
the defendant was indersee.
Defendant pleaded that he had not had due notice of
dishonour.
The facts were these:—The defendant, who is a pub-
lican, residing in Stationers-court, Ludgate-hill, had
indorsed the bill. The drawer had notice of dishonour
the day the bill was dishonoured, and went next day to
' defendant's house, and left word with the barmaid that
the bill was dishonoured.
The UNDER-SHERIFF held that a verbal notice to a
third party was insufficient.
In another case, between the same parties, a boy was
called to prove that a notice of dishonour had been sent
by post. He, however, could not read, but was tuld by
his master after he (witness) had posted it.
For the defendant it was contended that the contents
of the letter must be proved.
The UNDER-SHERIFF left it to the jury to say whether
the notice was good, and whether it had reached de-
fendant ; leave, however, would be given to set aside the
verdict, whichever way it was.
In the first case, plaintiff was non-suited. In the
second, a verdict for the plaintiff.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
NORTHERN CIRC Ul T.—Liverpool, Dec. 9.
(Before Mr. Baron PARKE.)
MANSLAUGHTER.—WiIIiam Charnock, aged 52, Was
ndicted for the manslaughter of John Radcliffe.
It appeared from the statement of the witnesses for
the prosecution that the deceased had formerly resided
at Upholland, in this county, and that Mary Charnock,
a daughter of the prisoner's, had had a child by him.
On the 21st of September last he called at the prisoner's
house. There were no persons there but Mary Char-
nock and the prisoner, who was up stairs; Mary Char-
uock was in the parlour below. She requested the de-
c3ased to go away, expressing her fears that her father
and he might quarrel, but the deceased, who was some-
what intoxicated, refused to leave. The prisoner came
down stairs and desired him to go out of the house, but
the deceased said he would not, and boasted that the
prisoner was not able to put him out. The prisoner
took up the poker, and the parties struggled together,
both falling to the ground, and the scuffle wAs finally
put an end to by some of the neighbours, who had
been called in by the prisoner's daughter. They tot .k
the deceased away. He did not then complain of
having received any injury, but shortly after said he
was hurt on the left side and right leg. He was
taken to his residence in Liverpool in a car, and
was attended by a surgeon. There was a mark
of a considerable bruise upon his leg, and another
upon his chest. The appearance of these bruises conti-
nued unfavourable, and they finally resulted in abscesses.
About a month after he was removed to the Northern
Hospital, and at that time the abscesses were very ex
tensive, and his case, in the opinion of the surgeons,
hopeless. tie died on the 9th of November. On a post
moltem examination it appeared that the abscess in the
leg extended a great way up the thigh, and round the
knee joint, and that that on the chest communicated
with one within the cavity, through a fracture in one of
the ribs of some standing, which must have resulted
from external violence. The deceased was of a very
scrofulous constitution, but for which circumstance the
injuries he received would probably not have had such
serious consequences.
From a statement made by the deceased, in the pros-
pect of death, it would appear that the prisoner, when he
came down stairs, had the poker in his hand, and that I
he struck deceased with it.

Mr. AnuNsort addressed the jury for the defence, and
his Lordship, in summing up, left it to the jury to say,
undor all the circumstances, whether the prisoner, in
ejecting the deceased, who was intruding on his premises,
had used any more violence than was necessary.
Verdict—Not Guilty.
STABBING.—John Carrington was indicted for cutting
and wounding James Bingham, with intent to do him
some grievous bodily harm.

Mr:-Brancit conducted the prosecution ; the prisoner
was defended by Mr. Green. _

The occurrence, which resulted in the present indict-
ment. took place on the 24th of November last, in
Manchester. The prisoner was, on the night of that
d ty, between the hours of eleven and twelve o'clock, in
a public-house, where a quarrel took place between him
and a person of the name of Taylor, which resulted
in a scuffle. The prisoner was turned out of the house;
and, having obtained a knife from a woman whom be
met in the street, came back to the public-house, and
forced his way in, having the knife open in his hand.
The landlord ran into the bar parlour, in which the pro-
secutor and several other parties were assembled, and
gave an alarm. The prosecutor was going out of the
parlour to see what was the matter, when he met the
prisoner, who struck him several times with the knife,
and inflicted a severe wound on his arm. Several per-
sons present seized him, and he was finally secured.
On the floor was found a clasp knife open. The prose-
cutor's coat being taken off, the blood spurted out se-
veral inches. The persons . present endeavoured to
staunch the blood, and took the prosecutor to a surgeon,
who found him suffering from a wound which- had
passed in the immediate vicinity of an important ar-
tery. It was not, however, of a dangerous nature, and
soon healed.

He was tried upon another similar charge and con-
victed.—Sentence, to be transported for ten years.
Thomas Steward, aged 23, convicted of stealing a
gelding, the property of John Boocock, of Shelf, was
sentenced to be transported for ten years.
HOUSEBREAKING.—John Graniley, aged 22, was con-
victed of having, on the 22d of July last, at Bilborough,
broki-n into the house of Jonathan Shepherd, and stealing
therein ; and also of a similar offence on the same day,
in the house of Jonas Schofield, at Monk Tryston.
The prisoner had been previously convicted of felony,
and was now sentenced to ten years' transportation.
Cornelius TO, aged 20, pleaded guilty to an indict-
ment charging him with burglary in the house of Francis
Hainbrim, at Sherborne.

Sentence, two years' imprisonment, with hard labour

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

On Wednesday the conductor of an omnibus, No.
5,236, running from Stratford to Chelsea, was summoned
before Alderman Hunter, charged with unlawfully de-
manding Is., that being more than the legal fare for con-
veying the complainant from the Mile-end-road to St.
Paul's-churchyard.
Hr. Henry Cox, of Regent-street, Mile-end-road,
stated that on the 4th of December, about three o'clock
in the afternoon, he hailed the defendant's omnibus, but
found that there was no room inside. He got up out-
side, and told defendant when there was a vacancy to
let him know, and he would get in. No remark was
made at the tine as to the fare, but on witness getting
down, after a passenger had alighted, for the purpose of
taking his seat inside, he was told that he would have
to pay double. The fare for the whole distance was but
Is., and halt' way 6d. On alighting in St. Paul's-church
yard, defendant insisted on the double fare, which he
(witness) paid.
The defendant said he only followed the instructions
of the company of which he was a servant, and that was
in all cases to charge extra if a person changed his seat
from the inside to the outside, or outside to the inside.
There were several persons employed for the purpose of
counting the passengers, and thus keeping a check on
the conductors. For instance, when he came half-way,
the gentleman would have been counted as an inside
passenger by the time-keeper, and he (defendant) would
have been obliged to make good his fare outside, as he
would be counted as such by the previous time-keeper
they had passed.
One of the time-keepers here stepped forward, and
said what the defendant had stated was perfectly true
with reference to the legality of the charge. They (the
c.mductors) were constantly watched by persons em-
ployed by the company to detect any attempt at fraud;
and if the defendant had not compelled the gentleman
to pay, he certainly would have been obliged to make
good the deficiency. It was only a short time since that
he was suspended for sevea days in consequence of
neglect of a similar nature.

Defendant said, that on the gentleman getting outside
he told him he would have to pay double on going in-
side, which complainant denied.
Alderman HUNTER, after looking at the Act of Par-
liament on the subject, said that he should defer his de-
cision until Saturday, when there would be other Ma-
gistrates to assist him in deciding such an important
q,:estion.

The prisoner was found Guilty, and, having already
been convicted of felony, was sentenced to b.; transported
for seven years.

York, Dec. 9.
(Before Mr. Baron PLATT.)
HORSE STEALING.—Thomas Horsfah 25, John Smith,
22, and Joseph Hodges, 13, were indicted with having,
..n the 16th of August last, at Saddleworth, in the West
Riding, stolen a mare, the property of Isaac Wrigley.
Mr. Hardy conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Dears-
leydefended the prisoners.

The prosecutor is a farmer, residing at Broadmeadow,
in the township of Quick, and on the day in question, at
about one o'clock, his son had put the mare into a field
very near to the prosecutor's residence. In the evening
the animal was looked for and missed. A young woman
had seen two men and a boy come to the gate of
the field in the interim ; the boy carried a bundle,
and went into the field. He soon after came out,
bringing the mare, when one of the men put something
over her neck and led her off. Another witness had
seen two men and a boy, resembling the prisoners,
shortly before the robbery, on the road to Delph,
and near the prosecutor's house. They were at first
going towards Delph from Quick, but 'directly after
turned and went across some fields, towards the house of
Mr. Wrigley. It further appeared that early on the same
afternoon the boy now at the bar was seen riding the mare
through Delph, on the road to Ashton-under-Lyne, fol-
lowed by two men on foot, one of the men then carry-
ing a bundle. Another witness subsequently saw one
of the men, Horsfall, on the mare, and on the 19th he
was apprehended at Liverpool, with the mare in his
posss-sion in a stable. The prisoner Smith and the
boy Hodges were taken in Manchester on the day after
the robbery. Horsfall was shown to have been formerly
engaged as a cotton-piercer ; and in the pocket of
Smith there were found a number of printed cards,
addressed " to the public," signed " Thomas Orfield,
John Smith ;" and recommending these two as appli-
cants for relief, being "out of employment, and cotton-
spinners by trade, from Ashton-under-Lyne, Lanca-
shire."

The prisoners made several contradictory statements
as to the possession of the mare, and one account was
that she had been purchased by Horsfall, at Suwerby-
bridge, from two men who there offered her for sale.
Ntr:Bearsley, after addressing the jury, called James
E tstwood, publican, at Sowerby-bridge, and another
person, to give the two men a good character. East-
wood said that the men had lodged for some time at
his house ; that they were " race-runners," being in
the habit of running foot-races ; Horsfall was called
the
" Lancashire Hero " and Smith the " Lancashire
Youth."

The case occupied greaterthesum med partup!
tohfethe u
rdyayrientitrreydi nfogr
about an hour, and on
.
After his Lordship
had a
returning into Court found the
pribonors Guilty, with recommendation to mercy in
favour of the boy.
Sentence—Horsfall and Smith to heseverally
trans-
ported for ten years ; the same sentence upon
Hodges.
His Lordship intimated that he should
recommend that
pri,oner to be so imprisoned as that he might have the
best chance of reformation.
Isaac Frankleton, aged 19, pleaded guilty to a charge
of horse-stealing.

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY MORNING, DECEMBER 12, 1845

paper, the property of Mr. Kirton, a coffee-house keeper
in the City-road.
The complainant said the prisoner had taken break-
fast at his house every morning for a fortnight, and was
in the habit of collecting upon his table the papers of
the preceding evening, some of which were, on every
occasion, missed directly after his departure. Com-
plainant himself had watched pretty closely, and had di-
rected the waitress also to watch the prisoner, but could
neverdetect him in the act, although they always missed
the papers afterwards. On Saturday morning last the
prisoner came, and had breakfast as usual, and was ob-
served to place two evening papers under a morning
paper that he was reading, and the moment he went out,
complainant, discovering that one of them was gone,
followed the prisoner and asked him what he had done
with it. He replied that he had handed it to another
gentleman in the room ; but being asked to go back to
the house, he was then told that the paper was not in
the roam, and that he must have pocketed it, on which
he took the paper out of his pocket, and giving it to
the complainant, said he had never taken one before,
and he hoped the matter would not be further proceeded
with. lie was, however, handed over to the police.
Police-constable 226 G said, on the way to the station-
house the prisoner told him that, having much leisure
for reading at his office in the City, he took the paper
with him for that purpose, and that if Mr. Kirton
pressed the charge against him he should be a ruined
man.

The complainant now said he took in twelve news-
papers daily, and had to send several of them (including
the one in question) into the country by post on the day
after publication, so that, besides the actual value, the
loss of them was a serious inconvenience. He could
swear that some of them were missed every time that
the prisoner had been there. He also said there were
several other coffeehouse-keepers present who knew the
prisoner, and had always lost papers in the same way
when he visited their rooms, and not at other times. The
complainant wished the Magistrate to dispose of the case
summarily, but
Mr. BROUGHTON said he could not do that, and the
depositions were taken for the committal of the prisoner,
who, however, was admitted to bail for his appearance
at the sessions for trial.
Thomas 'Warwick a licensed cab driver, was charged
before Mr. Broughton with assaulting Robert Justice,
one of the Eastern Counties Railway police.
The defendant, it appeared, had driven to the railway
booking-office with a lady, who, on alighting from the
cab, expressed herself thankful to Providence for having
arrived there in safety, as the driver had, on the way
thither, nearly upset her several times. The defendant,
hearing this, addressed some obscene language to the
lady, and on being censured for that by the police,
grossly abused all present. The complainant seeing
that he was drunk, demanded the number of his badge.
which he not only refused, but commenced violently
horsewhipping the complainant, and others, who de-
tained him, and the horse rearing, struck one of the
police on the chest with his feet. At length the defen-
dant was dragged from his box, and lodged in the station-
house.

➢ir. BROUGHTON sentenced him to pay 50s. fine, and
in default committed him for two months to the House
of Correction.

to the charge of assaulting the sailor then present, and
also the parish officer ?
The defendant, however, was silent, merely opening
his mouth and pointing with his finger to it, as if to im-
press a belief that he had no tongue.
Mr. Owen said that the defendant had a knack of
doubling up his tongue in such a manner as to make
it appear that he had only a small portion of the root
left.

Some other questions were put to the defendant by
Mr. Cottingham, from which it was apparent enough
that he heard them, a fact which drew from the Magis-
trate an observation that he was satisfied the defendant
was not deaf, and that he heard and understood every-
thing that was said to him.
The defendant shook his head.

LAMBETH.

Mr. CorrxNonam said, that the movement just made
by the defendant strengthened the fact, and, in order
that the utmost publicity should be given of the gross
impositions practised by the defendant, and that he
should not escape the punishment he so richly deserved,
he (the Magistrate) should remand him until Friday, for
the purpose of procuring the testimony of the captain of
the Boulogne steamer.

Mr. Smith, the proprietor of the Rosemary Branch
Tavern, in New Peckham, appeared before Mr. Norton.
to answer to an information laid against him by order
of the Commissioners of Police, for keeping his house
open for the sale of exciseable articles on the forenoon
of Sunday, the 30th of last month, contrary to law.
Mr. Child, of the firm of Messrs. Wire and Child, at-
tended for the defence.

The defendant was then removed from the bar to one
of the cells, where he had not been long before he began
to roar out, and finding that no notice was taken of it he
proceeded to undress himself and threw his clothes down
the sewer. He then tore up the seats of the cell, and
being possessed of almost Herculean strength, he pro-
ceeded to smash away at the door, which, although of
amazing thickness, he would have broken through had
he not been at length overpowered by four policemen,
who with difficulty restrained his fury, and after putting
on other garments they conveyed him in the van to the
county gaol.
On Tuesday three ragged boys were brought before
Mr. Cottingham, charged with committing an outrageous
assault on another boy in the union workhouse of St.
John's, Horslydown.
It appeared that the complainant, a poor destitute boy,
was admitted into the casual ward of the above workhouse,
in which were a number of other destitute persons, like
himself. When the hour for retiring to rest arrived
the three defendants attacked the complainant, divested
him of his clothes, which they intended to dispose of for
a few pence, and he was forced to remain in a state of
nudity the whole night, being prevented by his assail-
ants from leaving the ward to give intimation of the
treatment he had experienced. The above circumstance
having come to the knowledge of Mr. Cottingham, he
sent for some person from the workhouse, and soon
afterwards one of the guardians attended, to whom the
Magistrate described what had occurred there, and at the
same time expressed it as his opinion that a good deal of
mismanagement was apparent, according to the com-
plainant's statement. There (added the Magistrate) was
a poor boy, admitted into the casual ward, and had not
been there long before he was stripped of his garments
by others in the same place, and forced to remain naked
during the whole of a cold night. There ought (added
the Magistrate) to be some person appointed to attend
the casual ward to prevent outrages of the kind from
being committed ; and that it was for the purpose of
ascertaining whether such scenes could not be avoiled in
future that he thought it requisite to send for some one
connected with the workhouse.

Mr. William Chambers, an inspector belonging to the
P division of police, deposed that at half-past twelve
o'clock on the forenoon of Sunday, the 30th of last
month, he visited the house and premises of Mr. Smith,
the defendant, and in a part of the building which he
believed was ca'led the tap, he found four men with two
pots on the table, and beer in each.
In reply to the questions of Mr. Child, the witness
said that the premises of Mr. Smith were exceedingly
extensive, and he admitted that one of the men he had
seen in the tap had said he was a traveller. He also
admitted having seen two flys in Mr. Smith's premises,
and that there were a number of men employed on the
premises as horse-keepers, helpers, &c.
Mr. Child, in reply to the information, said that the
premises of Mr. Smith were the largest, perhaps, in the
metropolis, and were bailt upon a portion of forty acres
of ground, the freehold of their proprietor, and Mr.
Smith, so far from opening his house on Sunday fore-
noon, or wishing to violate the law, would himself be
the first to discountenance such a practice. The fact,
however, was, that Mr. Smith had on his premises ex-
tensive stabling, into which horses were taken to bait.
and he (Mr. Child) was in a condition to show that two
of the men whom the inspector had seen in the tap
were persons who had come there with two flys, and
were preparing to start with them to Hammersmith, and
the other two were the servants of the defendant.
William Belman, the ostler of Mr. Smith, corroborated
the statement of Mr. Child, and
Mr. NoTnox dismissed the complaint.
Mr. Taylor, the owner of the Waterman's Arms beer-
house, North-fields, Peckham, was charged with keeping
his house opsn for the sale of beer on Sunday, the 30th
of last month.
It was admitted by Mr. Games, on behalf of the de-
fendant, that he had served two bargemen who had been
up all the night, and were taking their barge to the
mouth of the Thames, with a pint of beer, and a second
pint he gave to a man who had been doing something
for him.

The guardian, who expressed himself with a good
deal of warmth, said that he repudiated the term mis-
management, as applying to the internal regulations of
St. John's workhouse. He then described the way in
which they were inundated with casual paupers, and he
said that every means had been adopted to make the
situation of those unfortunate persons as comfortable as
consistent with the regulations of the house ; that it
was quite impossible, however, that the Magistrate's
suggestion could be carried into effect, and that the
Poor-law Commissioners had approved of the manner in
which the duties were performed.
Mr. COTTINGHAM mid that he did not send for the
guardian to enter into any disquisition relative to the
internal arrangement, of the workhouse, with which he
had nothing to de. But he sent for him in order to ex-
press his disapprobation that such an outrage had been
permitted to take place in one of the wards of the work-
house, and that in such a place as a casual ward, he
would repeat, some man ought to be employed as a kind
of watchman, to prevent such conduct as that com-
plained of.
The MAGISTRATE then inflicted a nominal fine on each
of the defendants, and, in default, committed them for a
month each to the House of Correction.
CHARGE OF VIOLATION.—James Berson, described as
a French merchant, was charged with violating the per-
son of Susannah Paine, a girl between 15 and 16 years
of age.
The complainant stated that she went to live with the
prisoner, who was a married man, in the capacity of nur-
sery maid on the 13th ult., and that, in a week aft"r-
wards, during the temporary absence of his wife, he
committed the alleged offence. The complainant de-
scribed the particulars of the assault, which are unit for
publication ; that it took place in the drawing-room,
and that she called out as loud as she could, but no one
heard her, owing to the position in which she was held
during the perpetration of the offence. She admitted,
however, that she did net c unmunicate what occurred to
her mother until a week afterwards.

The recipient of the last pint was called as a witness,
and

The complainant was strictly examined by the Magis-
trate as to the cause of her not divulging what had hap-
pened to her until a week afterwards, and her reply was
that her father was a passionate man, and she was afraid
on that account.

Mr. NORTON dismissed the complaint on the payment
of costs.

The prisoner, in the most emphatic manner, declared
that he wai innocent of the offence, and that the charge
was trumped up by the girl and her mother in order to
,vietmise him.

After a lengthened examination, during which a me-
dical certificate was produced, describing the injuries
sustained by the complainant, the Magistrate said that
instead of sending the prisoner for trial on the capital
charge, he should hold him to bail for the assault with
intent, &c., and should call upon him to enter into his
own recognizance of 1001., and find two sureties of 50/.
each, to answer the charge at the ensuing sessions. The
prisoner not being prepared with the requisite bail, was
committed.

Mrs. Harstead, the landlady of the Tiger, a respect-
able licensed house near Camberwell-green, appeared to
a summons, charging her with serving on Sunday
morning.
The case was a ljourned for the purpose of producing
a witness on behalf of the defendant, but on the applica-
tion of Mr. Games,

Mr. NORTON consented to dismiss the case upon Mrs.
Harstead putting 10s. in the poor box, and paying the
expense of the summons.
SOUTHWARK.

Win. Giles, a young man who was described in the po-
lice charge-sheet to be deaf and dumb, was brought before
Mr. Cottingham, charged with committing a violent
assault on John Kearns, a sailor, who had been con-
fined in St. Thomas's Hospital owing to the injuries he
received.

Mr. Corner, the vestry clerk of St. John's, Horsly-
down, attended, and stated that the defendant some days
ago was admitted into the workhouse of that parish,
having been found in a destitute condition in the streets.
He assumed to be deaf and dumb, but by signs made it
appeared that he was recently living in Vine-yard, a
place in the immediate neighbourhood. For the purpose
of ascertaining the latter fact with certainty, Mr. Waller,
one of the parish officers, was sent with the defendant,
on Saturday last, from the workhouse to Vine-yard, and
on the way he was attacked in the most furious manner
by the defendant, who seized him by the throat, and en-
deavoured to throw him down, and would have effected
his object, being a very powerful young man, had it
not been for the interference of a sailor, who happened
himth e
defendant, to be passing at the time. The moment, however, the
sailorendtaonet, took
who,part inse thezin seizing
upa
affray,
large he
flintw as
stone, attacked by
struck
a blow on the head with it, and inflicted a severe cut, and
the wounded man was obliged to be conveyed to the
hospital. The defendant was at length overpowered,
and taken to the st ition-hovite, and the sailor, having
recovered in a great measure from the hurt, was now in
attendance to press the charge. Mr. Corner then pro-
ceeded to represent to the Magistrate, that within the
last few days it had been discovered that the defendant
had succeeded in practising tee most gross imposition.
Mr. Owen Owen was then called, and he stated that
about four months ago the defendant was sent to his
house, the Yorkshire Grey, in Thomas-street, by the
French Consul, in order that he might be provided with
lodging, until a passage was procured for him to France' •
he at that period being supposed to be a native of that
country. The defendant was at the time supposed by the
Consul and others to be deaf and dumb, and that the
latter affliction was produced in consequence of a hor-
rible mutilation that was perpetrated upon him on board
a vessel to which he belonged. The defendant's account,
which was rendered intelligible by .signs, and with the
aid of his fingers, was to the following effect:—That he
was born at Boulogne, and that a few years ago he
went to sea, and having joined a vessel that. was recently
bound to St. Petersburgh, the crew mutinied, and to
prevent him from giving any information of what had
taken place, they proceeded to cut out his tongue, and
that the vessel Was shortly afterwards scuttlA, and he
was, with some others, placed in a boat, and after
having been tossed about for some days, was
landed on the coast of Scotland, and that he made
his way to Edinburgh. The above account, Mr. 0 wen
said, was believed to be true, and the case of the
" unfortunate foreigner" excited a considerable sensa-
tion at the time in Scotland, the result of which was
that the French Consul at Leith sent the defendant up
to London with the view of his being taken over to
bseendte,bify
and
France, so that an investigation of the circumstances de-
tailed might be speedily entered. into for the. pur-
pose of detecting and bringing to justice. the parties al-
leged to have perpetrated such an atrocious act. Upon
gringThehal f
s
the defendant's arrival in Londtuihe
French Consul to his (Mr. Owen's) house, and during
wtoas
his stay there he was always supposed
dumb, only making signs with his fingers, accompanied.
etannisertaenakeeinsgennnoniseec,tewdhwenithhethreeqseniprpednsaeondnsstuhhifinrs he
had endured created much sympathy
while living at the Yorkshire Grey, the frequenters of
which liberally supplied him with money. At length a
passage was procured for the defendant to Boulogne, and
he was accordingly conveyed acrassito that place in the
City of Boulogne steam-vessel, the captain of which had
instructions to take him to the Consul of that place,
and to narrate the circumstances under which he was
sent there. Soon after hit arrival an inquiry was in-
stituted on the subject, during which it was ascertained
that the whole story of the mutiny and of the scuttling
of the ship was a fabrication from beginning to
end; and that instead of his being a Frenchman, it was
discovered beyond a doubt that he was a native of Scot-
land ; and so far from his being deprived of his tongue,
he had the perfect use of that organ, and in Captain
'rune's presence gave an undeniable proof of the fact by
abusing the persons appointed to inquire into the case.
On this discovery the defendant was brought back from
Boulogne and landed at the Tower, and he wanted to
return to the Yorkshire Grey, but admission was re-
fused on the ground of the gross impositions he had
practised. Mr. Owen aided that he had not seen the
defendant since the above period until he was informed
he was in custody at this Court for the desperate assault
on the sailer.
Mr. COTTINGHAM, addressing the defendant, said
there was no use in his pretending to be deaf and dumb
any longer, and asked him what he had to say in answer