The Sun.
London, England, 1845-12-20 00:00:00

case as it appeared before the Court. If there was any
ground for it, an application might be made to the Se-
cretary of State.

The prisoners were then called up for judgment, and
upon being asked whether they had anything to say in
arrest of judgment, they made no answer.
Chief Justice TINDAL, on passing sentence, said they
had been convicted of a most grave and serious offence—
that of forging the notes of the country to which they
belonged, no doubt with a view to their own benefit, but to
the injury of the community at large. If they had been
successful it was difficult to say what might have been
the injury to individuals and to general credit, and as a
warning to others, he felt it to be his duty to pass upon
them the full penalty fixed by the law, which was that
they be transported for 14 years.
Mr. BODKIN then applied for the costs. lie said that
he did so formally, at present, because he believed that
when an answer was received to a communication that
had been made to the Norwegian Government, it would
be found that they would not receive the expenses.
The COURT granted the application.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION-HOUSE.

BLACK FRIARS•PIER—WARR V. KINCHIN.—As early
as ten o'clock yesterday morning a considerable number
of persons connected with the steam-boat companies
were in attendance at the justice-room, in expectation
that some cases would be brought before the Lord Mayor
relative to the proceedings which are creating so much
public excitement at Blackfriars Tier.
The Lord Mayor and Aldermen Musgrove sat to ad-
judicate. Mr. Ryland, the senior City Pleader, and the
City Solicitor, were present, together with Mr. Bedford,
the Chairman, and Mr. Hall, Mr. Corder, Mr. Bower,
Mr. Joyce, Mr. Charles, &c., members of the Naviga-
tion Committee. Mr. Newbon, the Secretary to the
Waterman's Steam-packet Company, attended on behalf
of that Company, for whom Mr. Clarkson, the barrister,
had been retained. As Mr. Clarkson was obliged to
conduct an important prosecution at the Old Bailey, the
weight of the defence lay upon the shoulders of Mr.
Newbon. The Chairman of the Waterman's Steam-
packet Company was also present. The interest excited
was extreme.
Mr. Ryland said he had the honour to appear before
his Lordship under the 52d of George ILL, which autho-
rised the Lord Mayor to adjudicate in all matters affect-
ing obstructions in the Thames, according to the provi-
sions of the 50th of George 111., under the 16th section of
which an information had been laid by the pier-master
of Blackfriars-pier against the captain of the Waterman
steamer, No. 8, for having, in the language of the Act
of Parliament, so managed his vessel as to impede the
regular passage of other vessels in the river. He should
prove, to the satisfaction of the magistrates, that, on the
16th of December, the captain of No. 8 steamer drew up
alongside of the pier at Blackfriars, and, apparently
by preconcert with the master of another boat belonging
to the same Company, and also lying by the
aide of the pier, effectually blocked up the gang-
way, so as to prevent all access to the pier
from other boats, which, by observing the regu-
lations passed for the protection of the public, had
a right, at stated times, to land and embark pas-
sengers at the pier. It would be proved in evidence
that the Syren and Niobe, two other steamers, the one
going up and the other coming down the river, arrived
at the pier, with several passengers desirous to land, and
that they were effectually prevented by the Waterman's
steamers, which occupied the whole length of the pier—
sometimes making a feint to leave the pier, but, the mo-
ment the other bOats attempted to get in, backing their
vessels so as to keep the others out altogether. That
was clearly such an obstruction of the navigation of the
river as was contemplated by the Act. The Niobe and
tee Syren were prosecuting their voyage from their
starting to their arrival-p Lice at the time when they
were thus obstructed, and to impede them in their pas-
sage to the pier was as clearly a violation of the provi-
sions of the statute as if they bad been impeded in any
other part of the stream. lie understood that the soli-
citor for the defendant would attempt to bring into the
case matter which had nothing whatever to do with it.
It was pretended that the Waterman's boats had a right
to ply at the pier. If they had any such right, or if
they fancied they had any such right, they ought to
assert it in a proper manner, and in a proper court, and
!lot, by obstructing the river Thames, expose the public
to danger and inconvenience, as was now the case. That
the Legislature did not intend that the Thames should
be made the scene of contests of such a nature, was very
apparent from the omission in the Act of clauses which,
in statutes relating to tre:.passes, and assaults especially
and in words, excluded the jurisdiction of the magis-
trates in all cases where it appeared that they took
place under circumstances which involved questions of
right or title, either real or assumed. There were no
such words in the present case, and the only real ques-
tion before the Court was, whether the passage of the
Niobe and Syren had been impeded, and whether the
obstruction hal been occasioned by the defendants. The
Corporation had no vindictive feelings against the Wa-
terman's Company, or against the defendant ; all that
was required was, that the Waterman's boats should ob-
serve the regulations, and keep the agreement into which
they had entered. Mr. Mend here read the agree-
ment, which was, he said, signed by Mr. Newbon.
as secretary or solicitor to the Company, and bound the
Company to observe all such regulations as the Naeiga-
Von Committee had made, or should hereafter make
It further stipulated that they should
.pay sixpence each
for every time they stopped at the pier. That was to
constitute a fund for tlse payment of the pier-master and
others in charge, and for such repairs as necessity might
require. It appeared that the Corporation erected the
pier at a cost of nearly 4,0001, in substitution of an old
floating pier, which was so faulty in material and ?true
Lure that persons were constantly in danger who landed
or embarked there, and on two or three occasions fatal
accidents had ensued. The Corporation did not seek to
gain a shilling by the pier. They made the outlay for
the accommodation of the public, and they endeavoured
to afford equal accommodation to all, but, unless they
maintained the regulations, nothing but confusion would
prevail. The Learned Counsel then called
Mr. Thomas Joyce, who stated that he was a member
of the Court of Common Council and of the Navigation
Committee, and a large shareholder in the Waterman's
Steam-packet Company. He was on board the Water-
man's steamer No. Bat the time stated. There was also
another of the same Company's boats (No. 6) alongside
the pier at the same time. They continued there up-
wards of ten or twelve minutes, and occupied the whole
length of the pier, ro that no other boat could get in.
The Syren and Niobe shortly after came up, but they
were effectually excluded from the pier, and, after hay
ing waited some time, they continued their voyage with-
out being able to land or embark passengers. Upon their
departure the Waterman's boats also left the pier.
In his cross-examination by Mr. Newbon, Mr. Joyce
said he had put himself forward in this case, if possible,
to terminate the disgracerul proceedings which were
going on, and which would prove seriously detrimental
to the interests of the shareholders, whose true interest
required that as much as possible should be done to in-
crease, by increased accommodation, the means of cheap
and expeditious transit on the river, and not by obstruct
ing and impeding each other. The agreement entered
into by Mr. Newbon on behalf of the Company, had
been put an end to by the Corporation in consequence
of the infringement of the regulations.
Mr. Newbon called for the order of the Navigation
Committee prohibiting the Company from using
the pier.
Mr. Ryland said that no notice had been given to pro-
ducts the order. It was, of course, in the Company's
possession, and if Mr. Newbon wanted the entry in the
Committee's books, it was in the room, and might be
read by that gentleman as part of his evidence.
Mr. Newbon submitted that the whole question turned
upon the order. It was necessary in such a case that
the whole proceeding should be conducted in a legal and
impartial manner, and it was not because the Navigation
Commmitee chose to make an order, that such order must
necessarily be such as the law recognised.
The LORD MAYOR—I do not consider that the ques-
tion before me has anything at all to do with the order.
I shall have nothing whatever to do with what Mr. New-
bon is aiming at, but proceeed to hear the evidence as
to the obstruction on the river.
Mr. Russell (examined by Mr. Ryland) said he was
on board the vessel referred to. Our boat could not get
to the pier to discharge its passengers in consequence
of the defendant's boat and another belonging to the
same Company being alongside. Our boat was detained
upwards of ten minutes more than she need have been
had it not been for the obstruction, in consequence of
which he was too late for the railroad train by which it
had been his intention to go.
Richard Wheeler and George Cruise, captains of the
Niobe and Syren steamers, confirmed the testimony of
the former witnesses as to the alleged obstruction, and
stated that the two Waterman's boats, Nos. 8 and 6,
used every exertion to prevent them from landing or
taking in passengers.
Mr. Newbon declared that, if the captains of the
Waterman's boats endeavoured to accomplish anything
of the kind, they acted in disobedience to the orders of
e tw e showut lawfuleny pretenceexcuse—what
for a the directors. He then called upon the Lord Mayor to
look strictly into the Act of Parliament, which stated
that the party liable to penalty must have been at the
placet
r
itho
levidencealleging
t
iwasit
ht
the defendant was there without lawful excuse ?
He could prove that the defendant had been
exercising a right, and had been infringing no law
and no regulation. The magistrate could in such a case
know nothing except what would be proved formally and
judicially before him, and the defendant claimed, as a
right, an adherence, upon the part of the prosecution, to
the established rules of evidence.
Mr. Ryland declared that in the Act upon which he
was proceeding there was not one word about lawful
excuse."

The LORD MAson, after having conferred with Alder-
man Musgrove, repeated that he should consider nothing
but the obstruction to the navigation, the charge under
the Act of Parliament. He had nothing to do with the
right of the Corporation to erect the pier, and the right
of the Steam-boat Company. These rights they must
contest before another tribunal. He had but one duty to
perform, which was, to preserve the public peace, and to
prevent the navigation of the river from being ob-
structed.

111 r. Ware, the pier-master, who laid the information,
wai then examined, and he confirmed, to the fullest ex-
. .

ent, the evidence of the former witnesses.

- - ----- ---
The Loan MAYOR—It has been proved to my satis-
faction that the defendant in this case did wilfully im-

pede the passage of the Syren and the Niobe, and I,
therefore, fine him in the mitigated penalty of 51.
Mr. Newbon said he understood that the Act gave him
the power of appeal, but he wanted some little time to
consider whether he should take that course.
Mr. Goodman (the Chief Clerk) said the latter Act
required that the penalty should be forthwith paid, dor
the defendant should be oummitted to the House of
Cor-
rection,

Tea Cit Mioitor said, as on* of the statutes under
which the tuation 11:84 11 1,,i4 tho right of