The Sun.
London, England, 1845-09-12 00:00:00

SURREY SESSIONS.

On Wednesday George Paul Fitt was indicted for defrauding
Isaac Thomas Pearman of sums amounting to 2/. 12s. 6d.,
under ♦arious pretences, he at the same time acting as attorney
to that person.
From the evidence of the prosecutor and his wife it appeared
that their son had been in the county gaol for some weeks pre-
♦ious to the last Surrey assizes, on a felonious charge, and that
wishing to have professional assistance on his behalf, they em-
ployed the defendant to act, and supplied him with money to
retain Mr. Charnock, the barrister. This occurred a few
weeks previous to the assizes. On a subsequent occasion he
proceeded to the prosecutor's residence at Thames Ditton, and
informed him that the charge against his son had assumed a
more serious aspect than had been at first anticipated, and that,
in consequence, Mr. Charnock had desired him to say that he
would require another Counsel to assist in conducting the de-
fence, as he could not possibly talk and write against three,
who had been retained for the prosecution. The latter words
the defendant particularly ascribed to the Learned Counsel
mentioned. Owing to such representation the defendant
received the sum of two guineas, though at the time the
prosecutor and his wife were suffering from great distress.
On another occasion the defendant said that he would require
the sum of 10s. tid. for drawing up a petition to a society
which he said was established for the purpose of assisting poor
prisoners, and which he was confident would award the sum of
101. on presentation of the said petition by Mr. Charnock. He
obtained the sum of 10s. 6d. under such pretence, and on
seeing the prosecutor and his wife a few days afterwards in-
formed them that the application was successful, and that he
would receive the 101. at the termination of the trial. The
prosecutor, however, soon found that there had been no truth
whatever in any of the defendant's statements.
Mr. Charnock, who sat in the barristers' box, was sworn,
and stated that he received a brief on the occasion of the last
Surrey sessions on behalf of the prosecutor's son, with the
sum of one guinea marked on it. He found that the bill sent
before the grand jury was ignored, and the matter ended so.
The brief passed through his clerk. He had no recollection of
ever seeing the defendant then at the bar at all on the subject;
he certainly never told him that three counsel were engaged for
the prosecution, and that he would require another gentleman
to assist him ; and he (Mr. Charnock) did not believe that any
such society existed in the county as the one referred to.
The defendant addressed a few remarks to the jury, and as-
sured them that he had acted properly throughout the trans-
action. _ _ _

Some witnesses were examined, who gave him a good cha-
raster for honesty, Icc.
The jury immediately returned a verdict of Guilty, and
The CHAIRMA N, in passing sentence, observed that, after
receiving the proper sum for conducting the defence of the
proscutor's son, the defendant thought proper, by gross misre-
presentations, to exact other amounts, which he was informed
were actually the proceeds of the sale of the poor man's very
bed. In justice to the class to which the pre,ecutor belonged,
as well as to the public in general, he would pass the commen-
surate sentence of twelve months' imprisonment in Brixton
House of Correction, with hard labour.

James Douglas Gordon and Robert Owen Walton were in-
dicted for obtaining two half-sovereigns from a Mrs. Jane Cal-
vert, of Ockley, Surrey, by means of false pretences.
The case came on for hearing the previous day, when a ver-
dict of Not Guilty was returned on the indictment preferred,
owing to some legal omission.
A second bill was sent before the grand jury, and a new in-
dictment preferred; but on the case coming on for hearing this
morning,
Mr. CHARNOCZ, on the part of the prisoners, submitted
that the indictment was similar to the one preferred on the
previous day, and, consequently, that no further proceedings
could be legally adopted against the prisoners.
Mr. WALLINSER was heard on the part of the prosecution,
and a discussion, which last?d several hours, ensued.

The Couax, however, overruled the objection.
It appeared that in August last, the prisoner Walton went
to the house of Mrs. Calvert, and being then dressed in livery,
represented himself to be the servant of the Hon. and Rev.
J. E. Boscawon, and produced a letter, directed to Mrs.
Calvert, which recommended a supposed object of charity to
her consideration, and which was written as if coming from
Mrs. Boscawon. By means of this letter the prisoner Walton
obtained two half-sovereigns. On being taken into custody,
the livery was found in Gordon's possession, and ho had els•
been seen in Waltcn's company.
The prisoners were found Guilty, and were each sentenced
to six months imprisonment, with hard labour.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HO USE.

THE EXTENSIVE DEPREDATIONS BY PORTERS ON THEIR
EMPLOTERS.—Edward Brazier and Joseph Hincks, porters,
late in the employ of Messrs. Fincham and Potts, wholesale
grocers, of Martin's-lane, Cannon-street ; and Robert Way-
wood, late in the employ of Messrs. Miller and Locock, whole-
sale grocers, of Queen-street-place; and John Williams, a
retail grocer and tea-dealer of Whitmore-road, Horton, all of
wham were remanded from last Saturday, were all brought up
for re-examination before the Lord Mayor.
The three first-named prisoners were charged with having
jointly robbed Messrs. Fincham and Potts of a parcel contain-
Inc, about 161 b. of tea, and one of about Jill). Williams was
chargedn with receiving the same, knowing it to be stolen.
All four prisoners were formerly in the employ of Messrs.
Fincham, and it would appear from the partial confessions of
some of the prisoners, that extensive and systematic plunder
has long been carried on, but it is only within these three weeks
that the deficiency of an unaccountable nature in the stock of
Messrs. Fincham induced the latter gentleman to consult Mr.
Inspector Waller, of the City police force, who directed
Russell and Cumbs, two of the detective, to keep a
watch on the premises ; but it was not till Friday last that
they succeeded in discovering Williams in the act of placing
the stolen property in a cart, which, with smaller parcels not
identified, as also the horse and cart, were taken possession of,
and the four prisoners captured and conveyed to the police-
station.

Mr. Clarkson, the barrister, appeared on this occasion for the
prosecution ; Mr. Humphreys, as solicitor for Brazier, Mr.
Hobler for Hincks, and hir. Pelham, for Williams.

The whole of the evidence was read over which was taken
on the former occasion. The chief additional evidence was
given by Mr. John Potts, of the firm of Fincham and Potts.
That gentleman stated that himself, Mr. Loeock, and Mr.
Young, the solicitor, went on the previous day to Giltspur-
street Compter, where Waywood, without any inducement
being held out te him, confessed that about half-past seven
o'clock on the morning of Friday last be called upon Hincks at
Messrs Fincharn's warehouse, and asked him (Hincks) to
" put a little up," who accordingly weighed up the large bag
of about sixteen pounds weight, which was first put in a canvas
bag, and conveyed by Waywood to his own house, and there
transferred into a large paper bag belonging to his employers,
Messrs. Miller and Co. (This was the parcel which the
odfaireccetrisousaowf
wWailyliwaooms bring enclosed
d,shouse,and in a blue b
lace
intohisaf from the
William's)
cart, where it was afterwards seized. )
After the ease had lasted several hours, the Lord Mayor re•
mended the whole of the prisoners till Friday.