The Sun.
London, England, 1827-09-15 00:00:00

OLD BAILEY.-SEPT. 14.

John Donovan, aged 27, was indicted for assault-
ing Ephraim Dawkins, a watchman, and inflicting a
mortal wound upon him, by throwing a stone, on
the morning of July 24, whereof he died.
Hannah Gray stated, that the prisoner accosted
her about one o'clock on the morning in question, in
Whitechapel-road. After some conversation be-
tween them, the witness applied to the watchman
(the deceased), who desired the prisoner to let the
poor woman alone. The watchman accompanied
the witness a little way, when a stone was thrown,
which knocked the watchman down, and killed him.
The prisoner, who was beside the watchman, ran
away.

On her cross-examination, the witness said the
whole began and ended in less than 10 minutes; the
prisoner was not in liquor, but as sober as a Judge.
James Henry Dolman, a silk-weaver, saw the
woman, the watchman, and the prisoner; the woman
was first, the watchman next, and the prisoner be-
hind. They stopped near the workhouse, and wit-
ness stopped also, in advance of them. The watch-
man then said to the woman, " You had better
follow that man" (meaning the witness), " and
then you will be safe." The woman said to the
prisoner, "Go about your. business." The pri-
'Boner said the watchman should not follow her.
Both the prisoner's hands were behind; he brought
forward his left, and threw a stone at the deceased,
who was two yards distant, which struck him above
the ear, and he fell on his face. The prisoner di-
rectly ran away, and witness followed him. The
prisoner was taken to the watch-house; he was
sober; the deceased, who never spoke, was con-
veyed to the hospital.
The Jury found him, " not guilty of murder,"
but " guilty of manslaughter."
The prisoner was called up for judgment, and
the REC0111;•ER sentenced him to be transported
for life.

Mary Ann White, alias Dove, and Elizabeth
Dove were indicted for stealing, on the sth of
August, a quantity of woollen cloth and other
articles, value 1001., the property of G. D. Hobson
and John Hobson, tailors and woollen-drapers, 26,
Cornhill. The Jury acquitted both prisoners.
It would be worthy the attention of the city to
exercise some controul over the behaviour of the
door-keepers at the entrance to the Old Court.
One of them yesterday displayed a degree of
violence and insolence at the door which leads to the
body of the Court and to the reporters' gallery,
which was entirely uncalled-for, and disgraceful to a
Court of Justice.

Mary .Arsts .ire. Ely was indicted for etesling seven
yards of printed cotton, the property of Robert
Roberts, and a veil, the property of Caroline Jane
Monk.

Witnesses were called to speak in behalf of her
character, which they represented so favourably, that
the Jury, after finding her guilty, recommended her
to mercy.

John- Tomlinion was charged with having stolen
50s. iu copper, the property of Charles Richardson.
The Jury returned a verdict of guilty, but recom-
mended him to mercy.
Osborne! Panton was indicted for embezzling six
sovereigns, six shillings, and five 5/. Bank of Eng-
land notes, the property of Mr. Robert Stone, his
employer.—The Jury found the prisoner Guilty.
Mr. CL.taxsox called witnesses who gave the pri-
soner an excellent character.

Caroline Brown, a very respectable and interest-
ing young woman, was charged with pawning some
articles of bedding from her furnished lodgings in
the house of Mrs. H. Rowell, situate in Somers-
Town.

The facts adduced in evidence appeared to bring
conviction home to the prisoner in a satisfactory
manner; but before the Judge (Mr. Sergeant ARA-
BIN) summed it up,
Mr. BODKIN, on the part of the prisoner, submit-
ted to the Court, that he had an objection to make
to the form of the indictment.
The indictment involved a doubt relative to the
construction of one of Mr. Peel's late Acts for im-
proving the Criminal Law, a name which deserved
honourable mention.

The learned gentleman. then contended, that the
offence charged against the prisoner was not a lar-
ceny at common law, but was created by the statute
of William and Mary, chap. 9, which statute was
wholly repealed by Mr. Peel's act, and that there-
fore the operation of the common law revived. The
question, therefore, for consideration, was, whether
the words in Mr. Peel's new act were sufficient to
make the present charge a felony. The words to
which he (Mr. Bodkin) alluded were as follows :
" If any person shall steal any chattel, &c. &c., from
a lodging, such person shall he guilty of felony,
&c. &c." Now here (said the learned gentleman)
is a presumption that felony has already been com-
mitted, for no person can come within the meaning
of the clause until he has stolen the articles. The
learned gentleman proceeded to argue (citing as he
went along several legal authorities), that according
to the wording of the act, a conviction could not be
sustained.

Mr. Sergeant ARAI3IN differed from the learned
gentleman who had raised the objection, and argued
it so ingeniously on behalf of the prisoner. As the
point was, however, new (and he, for one, was
glad that it had been raised), he would reserve it,
and mention it to the Judges, and if they thought
the objection good, the prisoner would have the be-
nefit of it.---A verdict of " Guilty" was then re-
corded, and the prisoner was removed from the bar.
A long
bar and the bench, between the various members
discussion then took place between the
whereof we understood considerable difference of
opinion to exist. It was finally settled, that as the
point was of importance, an early intimation of the
objection should be made to the Judges.
t'lieh:eobpjoeienttio-in should
s'indeed' an important one ; because
if l
bedeenied valid, it will affect
several other provisions of Mr. Peel's Acts which
are similarly worded, and as, in some instances, sen-
tence has been passed, no little confusion will be
created.