The Sun.
London, England, 1844-09-07 00:00:00

BOW-STREET.

Yesterday, a miscreant, respectably-dressed, who
refused to give kis name, was brought before Mr. Jardine,
to answer the charge of having indecently exposed him-
self to a little girl, 13 years of age, in St. James's-park,
shortly after two o'clock in the afternoon.
The charge was fully established, it being proved alio
that the offence was committed in the presence of two
still younger children than the one to whose care they
were entrusted.

The defendant said he had no reason to dispute the
evidence which had been given, but he assured the magis-
trate that everything he did was with the unqualified
consent of the girl. lie would not attempt to justify his
conduct in a moral point of view, but he denied that he
had offended against any law. He added that he was a
gentleman living upon his fortune, and moving in a station
that would save him from the imputation of having in-
dulged frequently in habits of this nature.
Mr. JARDINB, after some hesitation, expressed his
regret that he was compelled to believe that the child
was a consenting party to all that he did and said in her
presence, so that it was impossible to convict him of an
outrage upon her. But, as the act of exposure in a pub-
lic place, frequented by persons of high respectability,
was an offence for: which he thought it probable he might
be proceeded against, without reference to the child, he
should mark his abhorrence of such disgraceful and im-
moral conduct by requiring him to find two sureties in
40/. each, and to enter into his own recognizances of
100 L to answer any charge that might be instituted at
the next sessions, and in the meantime to keep the
peace, See.
[Surely neither of the younger children or the park-
keeper, all of whom witnessed the disgusting offence,
were consenting parties ? Could not a charge for the
offence as against them be supported? If it can possibly
be procured, we shell certainly publish the name and ad-
dress of this disgrace to human nature, that his crime
may not go wholly unpunished.]
QUEEN-SQUARE.
Yesterday Michael M'Donough, police-constable B 66,
was brought before the magistrate, charged with having
apprehended Mr. James Lambden, a boot-maker, residing
at 39, St. John-street, Cler.kenwell, aid dragged him
through the streets in broad daylight, without the slight-
est excuse for such conduct.

Complainant stated that on Tuesday afternoon, about
four o'clock, he was walking through lielgrave-square in
company with a friend, when defendant came up, and
pointing. to his (complainant's) little dog that was fol-
lowing him, said he must go with him to the station, as
he believed the dog to be tke one which had been lost by
a gentleman a short time ago. Complainant assured
the defendant that the dog was his property, and offered
to give him his name and address, but the defendant in-
sisted on it that the complainant should go to the station
with him. Complainant refused unless it was in the
road he was going, when defendant replied, that if he
did not he should take him into custody and make him
go. Defendant then forced him along by the arm, and
on complainant stating that he was a respectable man, and
did not like to be so handled in the public street, de-
fendant replied that he did not care what he was, and
taking bim by the collar, used him more roughly than
before. After being treated in this way for some time,
in the presence of a number of persons who had as-
sembled, complainant insisted upon having a cab, and
rode to the station with the constable. On arriving there
to his great surprise, defendant did not say a single word
about the dog, but informed the sergeant that there had
been a robbery of four pairs of boots and a pair of shoes,
that afternoon, by a man wearing a Taglioni coat, and
he thought complainant resembled the description of the
man, as the person in the boot and shoo case was des-
cribed as being about 5 feet 4 or 5 inches and complain-
ant was 5 feet 10 inches? and defendant said, he thought
he answered the description. Complainant was liberated
and considered it his duty to bring the complaint, to do-
ter others from committing such an outrage.
Defendant, in a strong Irish accent, observed—lie
said he'd knock my head off.
Complainant—I was much excited at being treated as
a felon in the neighbourhood where several gentlemen
for whom I work reside, and I did say, when he was
handling me roughly by the collar, that if it was not for
his being a policeman I would knock him down. I made
use of no bad language at that or at any other time.
Complainant's friend confirmed the greater part of
his statement.
Defendant, in reply to the charge, said he was never
told the height of the person who wus wanted for the
boots; and as complainant and his friend loitered about
the square in a suspicious way, and answered the des-
cription, he took him.
Complainant and his friend denied most positively that
they had loitered.
Defendant said—Yes, they did ; and looked in at shop-
windows.

This was denied in equally positive terms ; and com-
plainant said, he would show defendant's incompetency
to be a policeman by his own admission. He (defendant)
bad galled at his house that morning to entreat forgive=
am, and said, " I have been a policeman for 12 months,
and you are the first man I ever took up."

Mr. BURRELL said that defendant had clearly, and
without knowing what he was about, apprehended com-
plainant on two charges without there being a shadow of
foundation for either. He should nut impose a fine, but
commit him for one month to the House of Correction.—
Committed accordingly.