The Sun.
London, England, 1845-12-13 00:00:00

LAMBE,TH.

SERIOUS CHARGE. AGAINST A RAILWAY POLICEMAN.
William Moore, late a policeman on the South-Western
Railway, was charged before the Hon. G. C. Norton
with violating the person of Sarah Prevett.
Mr. Dalby, the superintendent of policeon the South-
Western Railway, said that three weeks ago a repre-
sentation had been made to him by one of his sergeants
with respect to the misconduct of the prisoner towards
the young woman, which he felt it to be his duty to
place before the manager, and the result was, that the
prisoner was ultimately dismissed from his situation.
The Directors felt, from the prisoner having been em-
ployed by them to protect the public, his conduct had
been such that, in addition to his dismissal, they ought
to send him before a magistrate, and had instructed him
(Mr. Dalby) to state that should his Worship be of
opinion, after a full investigation of the circumstances,
that the case was one for prosecution, they would be
accoantuble for all the expenses.
The complainant, a rather pretty-looking young
woman, who gave her evidence with some reluctance,
upon being sworn, stated that on the day before ( Wed•
nesday) three weeks, she obtained leave from her mistress
to visit her father and friends at Kingston, and had paid
her fare to go by the South-Western Railway. When
about to enter the train, the prisoner, who opened the
carriage-door for her, asked her where she was going,
and what time she should return, and she told him, and
said she would be hack by the six o'clock train ; upon
which he said he should be on the look out for her. She
did not return so early as she intended, but on arriving
at the Nine Elms-station she saw the prisoner. He ex-
pressed a great desire to see her home or part of the way
home, and she, at his request, waited in front of the
station for him until he had done duty for the night.
The prisoner and herself then proceeded as far as Tower-
hill, on her way to her mistress's, when Moore re-
quested she would go into some public-house with him,
that he might have an opportunity of taking down her
address, in order to write to her. She went into a public-
house with him, when they had a pint of ale, and where
he kept her till half-past eleven o'clock at night, though
her proper time to be home was ten o'clock. The
prisoner then told her it was no use her attempting
to go home that night, arid said that if she accompanied
him to his lodgings in Battersea-fields, his land-
lady would procure her a bed for the night, and she could
get home on the following morning. Upon his promise
that a bed should be provided for her, she accompanied
the prisoner to Battersea, but on getting there he said
the people at his lodgings were all asleep, and there was
no use disturbing them. He also said he knew of a house
in Battersea-fields, where they could sit until the coffee-
shops were opend in the morning, and not suspecting he
meant anything wrong, she went with him until they
reached a shed and some haycocks, and here for the first
time he commenced taking improper liberties with her. She
succeeded in defeating two attempts upon his part to vio •
late her person, but in his third attack he effected his pur-
pose. Her clothes and bonnet were much injured by
the muddy state of the field, but after cleaning them as
well as she could, she, on the Thursday morning, went
to the house of her mistress, said she had unfortunately
missed the train, and could not get to town on the night
before. Her mistress, however, refused to take her back,
and discharged her. She removed her boxes to the
house of her aunt and uncle, and on the same evening
went to the Nine Elms terminus to see the prisoner.
She spoke to a _sergeant of the railway police, who
questioned her about her intimacy with the prisoner,
whom he represented to be a married man, and she told
him what had happened, and by his directions she went
before the superior officers of the railroad on the follow-
ing day. Upon being closely questioned by the Magis-
trate, the witness reluctantly admitted that, after coining
out of Battersea-fields, she had accompanied the prisoner
to his lodgings, and that there a repetition of the act took
place without her making any resistance; but added, that
this was in consequence of the prisoner making the most
solemn promise of marriage, and declaring he would
never forsake her.
Mr. Dalby here said, that upon being spoken to in the
first instance by the manager of the railway, the prisoner
had offered to marry the young woman, provided it was
found that she was respectable, and that her character
was good. The manager in consequence kindly insti-
tuted an inquiry, from which it appeared that the father
of the young woman was a very decent man, and had
been for some years in the service of the Woods and
Forests; and the young woman herself was also found to
be a person of good character; but the prisoner, notwith-
standing., did everything to evade his promise.
Mr. NORTON observed, that the conduct of the pri-
soner was most disgraceful, and the case was a very
proper one for the directors of the railway to take up.
The prisoner was employed to protect the public, and
particularly those travelling by the railroad, and should
be the last to be guilty of such disgraceful conduct. The
prisoner was remacded.

THAMES.

Malmshury,p
un
laaptena rae de
atrog
oa
osummonswci ht
ha
or gu t
payment of the duty, whereby he forfeited a sunsDUTY.—William not
exceeding 5?.
woifthh
The City Solicitor supported the summons; and Mr
Ballantine, jun., with whom was Mr. Pen, of the firm of
Laurence and Pen, Bucklersbury, defended.
The case was considered important, as many others of
a similar nature will be finally governed by it. It was
before the Court on the 17th ult., and was adjourned to
allow time to consider the arguments pro and con. The
article on which the question arose, by one party called
coal, and by the other fuel, is a large brick-shaped black
mass, with a surface like granite. It was admitted to
be for the most part composed of coal and coal tar, with
a slight admixture of peat ; but the coal being, as
alleged, deprived of its sulphuric acid gas, which formed
one of the elementary qualities, it WAS contended it was
no longer the same substance commonly known as coal,
and therefore did not come under the description of any
of the three substances mentioned in the Act as liable
to dues—namely, coal, culm, or cinders. Yesterday it
was proposed by the defendant that the summons should
be withdrawn, and the case tried by action. Mr. Pear-
son refused to accede to this. He would first take the
Magistrate's decision, and if that went against him, pro.
ceed by action. Mr. Ballantine, the Magistrate, pre- I
sided.
Mr. Ballantine, jun., after reverting to what took place
on the previous occasion, said he had Mr. Marsh and
Dr. Ure now present to support the argument which
he had formerly urged, namely, that the coal had
entirely changed its character and become a new sub-
stance by the process it had undergone. The Magis.
trate's decision on the case vviii looked for as a matter of
great importance. One of the questions to be settled
was, whether the substance in question was coal or not.
When coal was spoken of, it was generally as the na-
tural product of the mine without any alteration, but
the article had been materially altered bond fide, and not
with a view to evade the City dues, and moreover, the
cost per ton was more than the cost of coal. It should
always be observed that the law was averse to taxation.
and always construed the Acts favourably to the parties
liable to it. He would show this by two cases from
Barnwell and Aldersen's reports. The first was the case
of Casher against Holmes, where harbour dues were
claimed on gold as coming under the head of " all other
metals." Lord Tenterden, in that case, said "all other"
in the Act of Parliament must be understood in the com-
mon popular sense, and in that sense they certainly did
not include gold and silver ; and Judge Littledsle agreed,
saying they were always distinguished as precious
metals. The other case was the " Kingston-on-Hull
Dock Company v. Browne and others," when Lord Ten.
terden used the phrase, " according to the popular and
general meaning of the word, which is the general
meaning of the words used in Acts of Parliament not
relating to matters of science."
Mr. BALLANTINE, sen., said the words of the Act
were coals, coke, and cinders. These were then from
the same substance, yet each was specified. He would
not call science to analyse the substance then in gees
Lion, but simply ask himself, was it not within the terms
of the Act, and as the word was colloquially understood?
He could not say it was, and entertaining that doubt, he
would not inflict a penalty ou the defendant.
Mr. Pearson—ls that your decision, sir ?
The MasaisTasaTE—Yes. I have considered the sub-
ject much since the vase was here before. I do not
think them coals under the term used by the Legislature,
and entertaining that doubt, I will not exercise a sum-
mary jurisdiction.
Mr. Pearson—Then it is your opinion that these are
not a sort of coal which the City should claim dues on.
The MAGISTRATE—I am not in Parliament to give an
opinion. I merely construe the Act as I understand it.
Mr. Pearson—l understood the case was adjourned to
obtain the opinion of scientific men. Here are Dr. Ure,
Mr. Marsh, and others.
Mr. BALL4NTINE—No ; it was adjourned that I might
satisfy myself. I should always be happy to converse
with these gentlemen. I have spoken to several on the
subject, and I find it is still a vexata qucestio.
Mr. Pearson—Your opinion seemed to incline the
other way on the last occasion, had. we then pressed for
a decision.