The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-15 00:00:00

WORSHIP-STREET.

Mr. John Lyon, a country gentleman, residing at
Lee, in Kent, was- charged before Mr. Broughton
with having wilfully broken a pane of glass at the
dwelling-house of Mr. Yule, a manufacturer of
preserved provisions, in Wilson-street, Finsbury-
square.
The complainant stated that he was sitting, in
his drawing-room about ten o'clock that morning
when a pane of glass in the window was suddenly
demolished by some one outside, and on going to the
door he observed the defendant, who instantly avowed
himself to be the author of the mischief, and he ac-
cordingly sent for a policeman, and gave him into
custody.
In reply to the charge, the defendant, who was in a
state of violent excitement, said that he had just
arrived from the country, and was passing the pro-
secutor's house when he was compelled by an urgent
requirement to turn towards the side of a gate lead •
ing to the warehouse, and which bore every appearance
of having been publicly used for a similar purpose, but
the moment he had done so a torrent of water descended
upon him from an iron pipe communicating with the
premises, and he was instantly deluged from head to
foot. As soon as he recovered the shock produced by
the suddenness of the ablution, he went round to the
front door, where he saw the complainant, who at
once admitted having erected the apparatus for the
purpose of administering a sound ducking to every
one who 'made a temporary stoppage under such cir-
cumstances, and that he had given general orders to
his servants to turn on the water whenever they saw
any one so engaged. On hearing such an avowal, he
(defendant) immediately repaired to this Court, with
a view of obtaining redress, but finding the bench
unoccupied he returned back, and in the irritation of
the moment broke the window, in order to bring the
matter in a, tangible shape under the notice of the
Magistrate.
In answer to questions from Mr. BROUGHTON, the
complainant said that the nuisance which existed be-
fore he erected the water-spout was the subject of in-
cessant complaints from the opposite inhabitants, and
was rendered more intolerable from the peculiar na-
ture of the business which he carried on ; but that no
one might be taken by surprise, the words " Beware
of the pipe," were legibly inscribed immediately over
the spot.
The defendant said that he conceived he had been
most injuriously treated, and the thorough drenching
he had rceived would probably be the death of him,
as he had been long suffering from a severe rheumatic
affection.

Mr. BROUGHTeN said that- the want of proper
places of convenience in this crowded metropolis was
a inost crying evil, and necessarily gave rise to innu-
merable offences against pUblic decency. Without
deciding on the question as to whether the com-
plainant was justified in the course he had adopted to
suppress the nuisance, there could be no doubt that
the defendarit was entirely wrong in taking the law
into his own hands, and he should therefore require
him to pay the amount of theAaipage.
The defendant, with manifest- reluctance, produced
the amount, 4nd was discharged. .
UNION-HALL.

John Shields, jun., described as a wire-worker,
carrying on, business in the Westminster-road, was
brought before ,Mr. Cottingham, charged with com-
mitting forgeries on Aaron Smith, ship-owner and
bill discounter, to the amount of between 601. and
7001. The prisoner underwent a' short examination
on Wednesday, and was remanded in order to give
the complainant an opportunity of producing the ne-
cessary evidence to establish the alleged charges.
The complainant stated that he had been acquainted
with the prisoner's father for some years, when that
person was connected with the (now defunct) West-
'minster Loan Society, in the Adelphi; that he (com-
plainant) employed that person, his son (the prisoner),
and Sarah Shields (his daughter), in. collecting the
money Ork bills when they.bilWne due, In the month
of February last a bill of 1514 which helooMplainant)
discounted for the prisoner, purporting to. have been
drawn by James Dubmirk,and accepted by that per-
son's mother, was discovered .to beta forgery, and
inforination of the circumstance being' given at the
station-house, the prisoner -had since .kept :out of the
way._ The bill in question was here produced, when
the witnesses, Dubourk, proved that their signatures
as drawer and acceptor were forgeries.
The complainant, on his cross-examination by Mr:
Wolff, said that he was in the habit of- discounting
bills, and had discounted bills to the amount of be-
tween 30,0001. and 40,0001. for the Westminster
Loan Society. Had bronght actions against Tom
Steele,- and also against,,,Kß:of.Mr. O'Connell's sons,
for money advanced! tn :them on bills. That he had
frequently discounted bills for-the- elder Shields, and
received one shilling in the pound'for the loan. Never
Charged him at the rate of 251. in.:301. per cent.
Ne'ver employed Mr. Holmes, the solicitor, of Fen-
church-street, to negotiate with the prisoner on the
subject of the bills now referred to. As soon as he
discovered the bill in question was a forgery he gave
information at the station-house. The bills were not
what-is termed accommodation bills. I endeavoured
to find the prisoner's father and sister, but have ascer-
tained they have fled to the continent.
Another bill kik 101. was proved, purporting to
have been drawn and accepted by the same person as
in the former case, but upon examination of the sig-
natures, they were also proVed to be forgeries. This
bill was also given by the prisoner to the complainant
to discount, the formerlsaying -at the time that he
saw the drawer and acceptor sign their names to it.
A third charge was. also entered upon against the
prisoner. - A bill for 181. was discounted by the com-
plainant, purporting to have been accepted -by Henry
King; This bill, the complainant said, he had no
doubt was in the prisoner's handwriting; but he
Would not undertake to swear whether it was given
to him by the prisoner or his father.
A fourth case was then selected, from which it ap•
peared that the complainant received a bill of 251.155.
of the prisoner, purporting to have been accepted by
John Clarke, a hair-dresser, of Great Suffolk-street.
This bill complainant discounted, and when it became
due it was then ascertained to be a forgery. Clarke
himself attended and proved the fact.
The complainant here produced several other bills, _
which he_had-discounted for the prisoner, and which
hesaid were also forgeries, but at present he was not
We-pared to -enter into them,? Its- the -witnesses were
not in attendance. He therefore requested that the
prisoner might be. further remanded. -
Air. Wolff contended that the prisoner, being
merely the agent •of his father in those bill transac-
tions, could not, -therefore, be brought within the
scope of the Act relating to the alleged offence. On
a future occasion it would be shown that the elder
Shields and the complainant were connected together
in the discounting of bills' and that the bills in ques-
tion 'Were accommodation bills.

The complainant, howeVer, contradicted the latter
assertion, saying he discoupted them as bana fide
bills, not having the slightest suspicion they were for-
geries until recently. •
Mr. COTTINGHAM said that he should remand the
prisoner until Thursday, refusing, at the same time,
to accept of bail for his appearance.

HAMMERSMITH.

Tlrm. Preston-, a short, thick. get young fellow, well
known to the police as a notorious smasher, was
brought before Mr. G. Clive for re-examination on
the following charge :
It appeared that on Thursday, the 4th inst., the
prisoner went into the shop of Mr. Pummel', fish-
monger, High-street, Kensington, and, in payment
for half a pint of shrimps, gave a good half-sovereign,
receiving 95. Elid. in change. On the cluinge being
put into hiS.hand he immediately said, " Oh, this is a
bad half-CroWn," and Mrs. Pummel!, being engaged
with other customers, gave him 2s. 6d. for it. After
he had left the shop, she, however, bethought her-
self that he must have " rung the hanges," and she
sent the foreman in pursuit of the 'prisoner, with di-
rections to give him into custody. The foreman
traced him to the Castle beer shop opposite Kensing-
ton Church, and he was instantly transferred to the
station-house, where, while the charge was being
entered, he quietly took up the bad half-crown,
which, with the half sovereign, was lying on the'
charge room table, and said here it goes, and threw
it as quick as thought into his mouth, and gulped it
down before any of the officers could prevent him
swallowing it.
Mr. Powell, the Mint solicitor, for whose attend-
ance the prisoner was remanded,' said he had before

been convicted of smashing, and had performed a
similar feat only six weeks ago, at Hammersmith.
The case was, however, incomplete, by reason of his
having swallowed the half-crown, and he must be
discharged.—The prisoner was discharged.