The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-27 00:00:00

CLEIIKEN WELL.

W illiam Stokes, aged seventeen, dressed in a light
Taglioni, was charged by James Evers, of No. 5, Old
Ivers-street, Hoxton, with having picked his pocket of a
silk handkerchief. The prisoner was also charged by
Mrs. Maria Dent, of Charles-court, St. John-street,
Clerkenwell, with having stolen her pocket, containing
two half-crown pieces and other articles.
It appeared that on Monday afternoon the prosecutors
were induced to enter an exhibition of wax-work and
legerdemain, on Clerkenwell-green, and whilst there they
were both robbed by the prisoner, who was observed to
throw the handkerchief and the pocket away, on being
taken into custody.
Mr. Evers and Mrs. Dent identified the prisoner as
having been close to them and fumbling at their persons
when they missed their property ; their attention at the
time was fixed on the gentleman who was performing
legerdemain tricks ; they made an alarm, when the pri-
soner was given into custody. He threw a pocket hand-
kerchief, a pair of compasses, and a bottle away, and
he dropped Mrs. Dent's empty pocket on the floor. On
being searched two half-crowns were found in his pos-
session.

James Taylor, the proprietor of the exhibition, who
described himself as a " comedian," a " legerdemainist,"
and a performer of " dexterity illusions," stated that ho
had engaged the place on Clerkenwell-green for the ex-
hibition of wax-work figures, and he conducted the "es-
tablishment" in a respectable way. He was performing
his "deceptions" when an alarm was made that some
persons had been robbed by the prisoner, who was
pointed out to him. He immediately jumped over the
table before him and collared the prisoner, who threw
the handkerchief, &c., under the table, and he dropped
Mrs. Dent's pocket.
Mr. GREENWOOD—What is the price of admission ?
Taylor—Only the small charge of one penny.
Mr. GREENWOOD—What sort of tricks do you per •
form ? Taylor—Exactly the same sort as Mr. Ander-
son, the Wizard of the North.

Mr. GREENWOOD—Are you as clever as that per-
former ? Taylor—l leave that to the judgment of my
audience and the public. There is a great advantage in
having a name.
Mr. Mould (the clerk) said he had noticed the exhibi-
tion. Taylor appeared to be an itinerant competitor of
Madame Tussaud, for he had already wax effigies of
Tawell, 'locker, and Tapping in his collection.
Mr. GREENWOOD—Is that the fact ? Taylor—Yes,
your worship ; I try to cater for the amusement of the
public. It is the duty of managers, and I trust my col-
lection is not inferior to some of the best. _

The prisoner, in his defeuee, denied the robberies. A
person whom he " know'd" was the thief, but he did not
like to expose him. He merely went to see the wax-
work like other people, without intending robbery. He
was out of work.

.•
Mr. GREENwooD inquired of the officers whether the
prisoner was known ?
Waddington and Duke, the officers, did not know him;
but on examining his taglioni they discovered that the
pockets were out at each side of the garment, to enable
him to put both arms through the holes, and when in a
crowd to use his hands freely with the pockets of parties,
and after extracting the property he could remain in a
deliberate position with it in his hands, as if he had not
disturbed them from his pockets.—(Laughtcr.) This,
they said, was an old and common trick with pick-
pockets, and they had no doubt as to his being a thief.
Tho prisoner denied all this, but he was fully com-
mitted for trial on both charges.
SOUTHWARK.

HEARTLESS ROBBERY OF A PARENT.—DanieI Law-
rence, a young man, the son of a wheelwright, was
charged with robbing his father of six sovereigns and a
half, under the following circumstances:—
The father, an aged man, stated that by dint of hard
work he had saved up six sovereigns and a half, which
he deposited for safety at the bottom of a box, which he
kept in his bedroom ; but on Monday he discovered the
box had been forced open, and the whole of his savings
taken, which were intended to have kept him out of the
workhouse. Finding his son had left home and pro-
ceeded to Greenwich fair, when he returned from that
place it was ascertained he was the person by whom he
had been robbed, and that the money was nearly all ex-
pended in profligacy at the fair. Tho poor man seemed
to be very much affected while giving his evidence, and
admitted that it was not the first time he had been robbed
by his son.
Policeman 178 said that ho went into a coffee-shop
that morning, near the Surrey Theatre, and observed
the prisoner with some women exhibiting money, and
throwing it about as if it was valueless. That under the
impression the money was improperly come by he took
the prisoner into custody, when he at once confessed that
the money was taken from his father, under the circum-
stances already described, the greater portion of which
he had squandered away in dissipation at the fair.
The prisoner expressed his contrition for the offence,
said that he was led astray from the paths of honesty by
lmid companions, whom he should for ,ever renounce, and
that he should alter his conduct in future.

The Magistrate characterised the conduct of the pri•
Boner as bad in the extreme, and that he should stand re•
mended.

WANDS WORTH.

ROBBERY BY A SERVANT.—Esther 1, a genteel-
looking young woman, 19 years of age, was charged with
committing several robberies whilst in service as house-
maid in the family of Lionel 011iver, Esq., of Wimbledon-
common.

It appeared that the prisoner went into the service of
the prosecutor on the 13th instant, with a character
alleged to have been given her by Mr. Mount, of 55,
Lower Grosvenor-street. She bad not been in the situa-
tions week before the family had occasion to regret her
introduction into the house, and they determined to get
rid of her as quickly as possible. On Tuesday week the
prisoner, seeing that she would be discharged, gave her
mistress notice that she intended to quit her service in a
month. Mrs. Oliver informed her that she could leave
then, and she would pay her wages up to the end of that
week. These terms did not suit the prisoner, and she
would not accept them. The next day she sent her box
by the coachman to town. On Friday Barbara Stretton,
tho cook, missed a night-dress ; she asked the prisoner
if she bad seen it, but she denied all knowledge of it. On
the following day the cook acquainted her mistress of
her loss, and it was then discovered that several pairs
of French shoes and satin slippers, lace collars, and
other articles of baby's attire, were missing. The pri-
soner was taxed with taking these articles : she first
declared her innocence, and then admitted that the pro-
perty was in her box in London. She begged earnestly
for forgiveness, and said she would restore all the arti-
cles. The prisoner was discharged from the service, and
went off to town. The box had been taken by the coach-
man to the town residence of the family in Half-moon-
street, and thither Mr. 011iver:at once proceeded, lest
prisoner might get the box away. The prisoner having
given up the money and property, was suffered to take
her box away. On the day subsequent to the prisoner's
departure from Wimbledon, the cook discovered that she
had been still further robbed. Several lace collars, a gown,
some pieces of ribbon, and other property had been taken
from her boxes. Having mentioned this to the family,
she was instructed to go to town and give the prisoner
into custody. The cook procured the services of Police-
constable Mount, 128 C, and they proceeded to-
gether to No. 8, Snead's gardens, Piccadilly, where
the prisoner was lodging. The constable took her
into custody, and upon searching her box found the
cook's lace collars, ribbon, and gown ; she was wearing
one of the collars at the time of her apprehension. Ile
also found in the box a pair of mosaic gold ear-rings
and a gold brequet seal, the property of Miss Diana
011iver, besides other valuable articles belonging to the
family, who, however, declined to prosecute, leaving the
prisoner to be dealt with for the robbery of her fellow-
servant.

The prisoner, who said she would reserve her de-
fence, was fully committed for trial.
Mr. PAYNTER desired the constable to make some in-
quiry respecting the genuineness of the character which
Mrs. 011iver had received with the prisoner.
DISGRACEFUL EXPOSURE.—CaroIine Bradford and
Charlotte Young, two respectably-dressed girls, about 18
years of age each, the former evidently enceinte, were
charged on a summons with assaulting Mr. John Stone-
hill, a pattern-designer, residing at Somers-town, Wands-
worth. The complainant, who is about forty years
of age, stated that on Good Friday evening he was
in the parlour of the Plough public house, Wim-
bledon, enjoying himself with some friends, when
the defendants, and another woman whom he did not
know, came into the room, and commenced making
certain charges against him. He sat still and said
nothing, The charges were to the purport that he--had
seduced Caroline Bradford. After a time he rose from
his seat for the purpose of leaving the house, when
Caroline seized him in the front, Charlotte attacked him
on the right, and the unknown lady on the left. Between
them they pinned him to the wall, and shook him so
that he thought all his clothes would have tumbled off.
He at last contrived to slip out of their clutches, and
ran out of the house, the women following him, crying
" Stop him, stop the villain I
A solicitor, who appeared for the defendants, cross-
examined the complainant, and compelled him, with the
magistrate's interference, to acknowledge that he had
kept company with the defendant, Caroline Bradford,
that he had seduced her, and promised to marry her
when his wife had been dead a twelvemonth, and that
he had deserted her after he had ascertained that alio
was enceinte.

Mr. PAYNTEA said the conduct of the complainant was
both disgraceful and cruel, but still the law was bound
to protect him. The defendants must enter into their
own recognizances, and not go near him again. The
defendant Bradford had her remedy elsewhere.

Ikrd Stanley left town yesterday, for Knowsley Hall,
Lancashire.

* The evil of such language, when spoken by a Mem-
ber in the House of Parliament (unless he be prepared to
show that the Organic Theory of the Faculty, about
which Doctors themselves are all at sixes and sevens, is,
beyond doubt, correct), must be obvious to all. The
people, as a body, are totally ignorant of medicine, and
therefore language such as that used by Sir James is not
only beside the question, but tends to perpetuate a false
theory, by which h Ong with the root, stre sufferers.