The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-25 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Nov. 24.
(Sittings in Banco.)
QUEEN V. SIIARPNELL. _

JUDGM:

The ATTORNET-GENERAL moved for the judgment of the
Court, upon the defendant. Charles Needham Scrope Sharp-
nell, who bad pleaded guilty to informations that had been
filed against him for a misdemeanour under the 45th George
111., which prohibited' any sale or traffic in public situations
or offices held in the service of the East India Company. It
appeared, by:the informations, that the defendant had written
a letter to Major-General Robertson, one of the East India
Directors, in which he proposed that he would make an
arrangement with the General for an appointment as a cadet,
which was in the General's gift. Defendant also wrote to Mrs.
Robertson, stating that she would be paid an annuity if he got
the appointment. The defendant was also accused of having
written similar letters to other East India Directors and their
wives. The Attorney-General said he wished to leave the
punishment to the merciful consideration of the Court, as
the defendant, when he wrote the letters in question, was
labouring under severe domestic affliction and pecuniary
embarrassment, to such an extent as to affect his mind ; for
he had lost his father and four children in one and the same
day. It also appeared that he was the sole support of his
mother, and was in expectation of a situation, which he
would lose if he were to be imprisoned.
Counsel for defendant prayed that he might be let out on
his own recognizance to appear when called on.
The ArronNET-GENERAL said he would not oppose that
course.
The COURT, after observing upon the impropriety of de-
fendant's conduct, sentenced him to four months; impri-
sonment.

BAIL COURT, Nov. 24.
(Sittings in Banco.)

THE QUEEN V. THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.
' Mr. FEANCILLON applied for a rule to show cause why a
mandamus should not issue, commanding the Great Western
Railway Company to issue a writ requiring the Sheriff of
Gloucester to assemble a jury and assess the damage sustained
by a person named Cliff, from that Company.
It appeared that the applicant had, in 1837, purchased a
piece oflaud, on which stood five houses, and he had a right
of way expressly given to him in the deed as far as Russell-
street. He called the place Bath-place, and built five mere
houses on it. On the commencement of the formation of a
junction line with the Great Western the works materially
mpeded the way claimed by Mr. Cliff, and the only means
of communication with the town was blocked up. That junc-
tion line had since been incorporated with the Great Western,
and the line of rails crossed the way to which a right was
claimed, and in consequence of the danger incurred by per-
sons in crossing the rails several. of his tenants had left, and
the value of the houses was materially decreased.
Application granted.
THE QUEEN e. DAVID THOMAS WILLIS.
The-ATTORNEY-GENERAL applied for a rule to show cause
why a mandamus should not issue, directing David Thomas
Willis, clerk to the guardians of the poor for Winslow and
Buckingham, to render up for inspection certain accounts
lie held in his possession. It appeared that a Mr. Cowley
had been auditor to the two workhouses mentioned, but
by a recent Act; the Bth Vic., c. 101, it was made lawful
for the Commissioners to place the poor-houses of many
parishes into one class or district and with one common
auditor. The Commissioners had thought proper to classify
the tWo poor-houses above-mentioned with many others into
one district, and they had appointed Mr. Alfred Heyward
additor. The guardians of the poor for Winslow and Buck,
ingham entertained the idea that the power of the Commis
sioners could not depose Mr. Cowley, as he was already
the auditor of the two unions, and which constituted a
sort of district, and on those grounds he refused to submit
the accounts to the inspection of the new auditor.—Rule
granted.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.

Mary Elliott surrendered to answer an indictment, charg-
ing her with keeping a house for the reception of lunatics
without having the same duly licensed according to the pro-
visions of the statute.
_.
_

-... --
The defendant— pleaded guilty, but upon the understanding
that the house should not be carried on by her in future,
she was discharged upon entering into her own recognisance
to appear and receive the judgment of the Court in case the
terms of the agreement were not complied with.
Mark Glazier, late a porter in the service of the Great
Western Railway Company, surrendered to take his trial upon
an indictment charginghim with stealing a dressing-case, con-
taining a gold chain and other articles, the property of a
gentleman named Husband, who was a passenger upon that
railway in July, 1843.
In another count the desk was laid to be the property of
the Company.
Mr. Clarkson conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Ballan-
tine appeared for the prisoner.
From the evidence adduced for the prosecution it appeared
that on the Ist of July, 1843, Mr. Husband came to London
from Bristol by the train. His dressing-case, which formed
part of his luggage, was seen to be placed safely in the lug-
gage carriage at Pe istol, but on the train arriving at the
station at Paddington it was missing, and although placards
and advertisements were issued, giving publicity to the logs,
nothing was heard of it until a short time back, when it was
found in the possession of a man named Morse, who was
formerly also employed as a porter upon the Great Western
Railway. and who was now the principal witness against
the prisoner. According to his statement, shortly after the
robbery he met the prisoner at a public .house in White-
chapel, in company with another person, named 'Williams,
and the prisoner there produced the case in question, and asked
"Williams to sell it, and also a gold chain which he produced at
the same time. Williams took the articles away with him, but
brought them back to him the next day, and he sold the chain
to a refiner and retained the proceeds, and eventually also
retained possession of the dressing-case. He admitted on
cross-examination that the prisoner had eever received any
benefit: from the proceeds of the articles stolen, and that he
was himself employed on the goods side at the railway at the
time the train from which the case was stolen arrived at
Paddington. It also transpired that he was himself taken
into custody and charged with stealing the case when it was
found in his possession, and it was not until thee that he made
the charge against the prisoner. In order to coroborate Morse,
the other prisoner Williams was examined, and deposed that
be was present when the prisoner produced the case, and
he undert,ok to sell it for 91. 135., but he said that upon find-
ing the next day that the case had been forced open, his
suspicions were aroused, and he therefore took the dressing-
case and the chain back to Morse. These witnesses, how-
ever, contradicted one another in some particulars, and the
account they gave of the transaction was of a most unsatis-
factory character, and it was very evident that Morse's
share in it was, according to his own showing, of a very
doubtful description. It was admitted that the prisoner had
borne an excellent character.

At the close of the case for the prosecution, Mr. BALLAN-
TISK applied for the opinion of the Court as to whether there
was sufficient evidence to go to the jury, taking into conside-
ration the character of the witnesses. .

The RECORDER said, that if the charge rested upon the j
evidence of Morse, he did not think the ary would be likely
to'convict, hut as his evidence was corroborated by Wil-
liams, it was a question for the jury whether they believed
his evidence.

Mr. BALLANTINE then proceeded to address the jury; but
he had hardly commenced his observations when they
stopped him, and stated that they had made up their minds
to acquit the prisoner.
The REconDER said that, if they disbelieved the witness
Williams, that was the only conclusion they could come to.
The foreman of the jury said they did not believe Wil-
liams's testimony.
In answer to an observation from Mr. CLARKSON,

The REcour)Eß said it was a very proper prosecution, and
the Directors of the Company had done no more than their
duty to the public compelled them by instituting the present
inquiry. Tim public were very much interested in the safety
of their property while travelling upon railways; and the
Di-rectors acted most properly in taking care to have full
inquiry into every case where there was the slightest sus-
picion against any individual.
The jury were understood to state their opinion, that the
prisoner was entirely innocent, and expressed a hope that
the Company wotNld reinstate him in his siteation.
_ _

A verdict-of Noi Guilty was then recorded, and the pri•
:loner was ordered to be immediately discharged from custody.
Mr. CLARKAON applied for the expenses of the prosecution.
The Itmccattwit said, certainly, they ought to be allowed.
It was aprosecutiou of cousiderable importance to the public.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
GUILDHALL.

A bill-sticker, of the name of William Burgess, was
charged with posting immense bills in the City during
divine service.,
Police constable 109 stated that yesterday morning he
observed the prisoner sticking bills in Farringdon-
street, against the Fleet Prison walls. Defendant had
been posting other bills up about nine o'clock, relating
to the Adelphi, Haymarket, and other theatres. Ile
had several times. told him not to do so; but during
church time on Sunday he put up one of the largest bills
he ever saw, with the words " Covent-garden, M.
Jullien's Concerts." The bills 'were more than nine
feet long.
The defendant said; the bill he had put up was the
largest he ever saw. It contained 170 sheets of paper,
and the letters were three feet long. It took him nearly
three, hours to put up the bill, but as yet could not tell
what he would be paid for so doing.
Alderman HUGHES said that although it might be
discreditable for a person to follow his trade on the
Sabbath, still there was no law to prevent it. He wished
to know whether the prisoner bad received the sanction
of the. Corporation to stick bills up against the Fleet
walls? The defendant said he had not.

Alderman HUGHES said that under those circumstances
he should fine the defendant in the mitigated penalty of
five shillings,
The fine was immediately paid and the defendant re-
leased.

A middle-aged man, named Richard Riley, was
brought up for examination, charged with forging a
cheque for 161. 75. 7d.;in the name of Arthur Morgan, of
Staffordshire, and uttering the same to complainant.
From
the statements of the various witnesses it ap-
peared that the prisoner lodged for a few days at the
complainant's (Mr. Grimell's) house, when he got the
latter party to take a bill signed " Arthur Morgan," in
lieu of money due ; this Mr. Grinsell
in having re-
sided Staffordshire knowing Mr. Morgan. Before
it became due the prisoner called for the purpose of
taking it up, when Mr. G. told him he had paid it away
to his brewer. Ile was then given into custody.
The policeman gave evidence to the effect that the
prisoner, when taken into custody, saidlhe should be a
ruined man.
Mr. Perry, the counsel for the prosecutor, called Mr.
Jarvis, the solicitor on the same side, to prove the con-
fession of the prisoner that " he didit, and there was
no help for it ;"and also that Mr. Morgan, who i$ 8
years of age, was unable to come to London to disprove
the signature to the bill.
Mr. Perry applied far a warrant to compel either Mr.
Morgan, for some one who knew his
handwriting, to
come forward, and see if he could identify it.
After some further discussion, Alderman lIRGUEs
said he had no objection to certify for costs in
.bringing
either Mr. Morgan or a witness up from Stafford, and
he Should for that purpose remand him (the prisoner'
until the 15th of December.
BO W- S TR EE T.

Ireelerdav, three young men, of respectable appear-
anes named Bclius, lie Costa, and Felling, were placed at
the bar, before Mr. Hall, charged with creating a dis-
tarblinee at the promenade concerts in Covent-garden
Theatre, and with obstructing and asl.aulting the officers
in the execution of their duty.
Inspector Martin, A division, stated that shortly after
nine o clock on Saturday night, a numbor of young men,
among whom Were the defendants, commenced forming
themsclires into circles, to the great announce of the