The Sun.
London, England, 1827-12-22 00:00:00

ilotVeroft. On Thursday the child was returned upon Ms
hands, in a most singular' way. He was found in the pas-
sage of his house, with his bundle of clothes, and he said he
had been left there by one of the ushers. The child's fa-
ther lived at Calcutta, and six months ago he was placed
under his care, at the rate of fifty guineas a year for board
and education. He imagined that Mr. Rowcroft had dis-
covered the child to be illegitimate, and fearing that he
should not be paid, bad returned him.
Mr. RavninsoN said, he understood the meaning of
selling the good-will of a school, but he never before heard
of selling boys like a flock of sheep. He inquired whether
a list of them had been given.
Mr. Wall said the little boy, whose name was Robert
Evans, had been enumerated in a list that he had prepared.
The child's father possessed an income of 7001. a year, and
if he (Mr. Wall) had the means, he would provide for
him, for he had no doubt that the money which was to be
paid, would be duly remitted at the expiration of twelve
months. A Mr. Gatfield, an attorney at Maidstone, was
the father's agent, but that gentleman, with the unfortu-
nate youth's other friends, had refused assistance, and he
had no alternative but to place the child in the workhouse.
Mr. RAWLINSON considered that the parish ought not
to receive such a burthen.

The little fellow, who is only six years of age, said that
Mr. Dobson and Mr. Curling brought him to town. Mr.
Dobson waited at the corner of the street whilst Mr. Cur.
ling rushed him and his bundle into the house.
Mr. Rawurtsort said, the conduct of the parties had
been cruel in the extreme, and desired Mr. Wall to take
him back to Streatham, and tell Mr. Rowcreft, that if he
did not receive him, measures would be taken to compel
him, and in the mean time, to treat him with peculiar
kindness.

LAMBETH-STREET.—Matthew Wharton, jun., Esq.
district surveyor, v. John Snelling, pork butcher, No.
157, Whitechapel-road. This was an information against
the defendant, charging him with having built, or caused
to be built, a certain addition to a building of the second
rate or class of building, " to-wit, a shop front and
window, the stall-board of which projects two feet instead
of 10 inches, and the cornice or covering thereof projects
two feet six inches instead of 18 inches from the upright of
the building, contrary to the act, &c, called the Building
Act." Plea, not guilty, and thereupon issue was joined.--
Mr. Wharton conducted the information, and the defence
was stated by Mr. Dean, also a surveyor. Mr. Wharton re-
lied upon the 49th section of the Act, which enacts that no
bow-window or other projection shall, after the passing of
the act, be built with or added to any building of the
first, second, third, or fourth rate, or class of build-
ing, next to any public street, square, court, or way,
so as to extend beyond the general line of the
fronts of the houses in such public street, square,
court, or way, of which such bow-window or other pro-
jection is made, except such window to any shop or shops
on the ground-floor story of any such building, the stall-
board of which window shall not, in any street or way 30
feet wide or more, project above ten inches, nor in any
street or way less than 30 feet wide above five inches from
the upright line of the building, in such street or way
respectively."
For the defence it teas submitted that the shop-front
and window in question did not fall within the meaning
of the clause so relied upon, that what the defendant had
done was merely a rebuilding of that which had existed
before, and upon the same foundation, and formed part
of the freehold of the defendant's lessor ; and the 52d
section of the same Act, especially excepted buildings
or erections such as the defendant's, from the opera-
tion of the Act, by enacting, " that no bow-win-
dow or other projection, made or built before the 24th
day of June, 1774, shall be at any time thereafter re-
built, except such projections as are in and by this Act
allowed, unless such bow-window or other projection was
built at the same time the house or building to which the
same belongs was built : or unless such bow-window or
other projection be within the original line of the street,
square, place, court, or way, in which the same is erected."
Evidence of that fact being given, the Magistrates recom-
mended Mr. Wharton to withdraw the information, inti-
mating at the same time, that as there did not appear to
be any ill feeling between the parties, and that Mr. Whar-
ton had done no more than his duty in bringing the matter
before them, he ought not to bear any part of the expences ;
and Mr. Dean, for the defendant, agreeing in the recom-
mendation, and at the same time complimenting Mr.
Wharton for his gentlemanly conduct in the business, the
defendant paid the feu, and the business terminated.