The Sun.
London, England, 1829-04-28 00:00:00

upon them severe vengeance in the shape of crimps
and agents.
One of the officers of the parish of Bishopsgate,
a parish remarkable for its humanity, in a conversa-
tion with Mr. Hobler, the chief clerk at the Man-
sion-house, yesterday, describAl some of the decep-
tions resorted to by paupers for the purpose of ob-
taining money. It is unnecessary to state that many
of the claimants upon parish bounty, instead of ap-
plying in the manner generally expected by the
authorities, that of a beggar, knock boldly at the
gates of the overseer, his eyes, and frequently
break his windows, if he refuses to supply their
wants. Complaints to that effect have often been
made and substantiated in the city; but we have
often witnessed gloat acts of cruelty and oppression
upon the part of parish officers in the harsh and in-
sulting rejection of real anti suffering claimants.—
Amongst other cases which caused much laughter
was that of an accomplished but idle fellow, named
John Alsept, who has always acted with the greatest
humility, and even taken refusals with unbounded
thanks. This pauper writes a beautiful hand, and
it will be seen from an extract of a letter of his to
one of the officers that he is not destitute of educa-
tion :—" May I most humbly entreat that you will
in your kindness be pleased to give me a little help ?
A shilling would make a man of me, for which words
must ever be-wanting to express my deepest sense of
gratitude. Pray be not angry, benevolent Sir; I
should be sorry to offend. I wait your kind answer
at the bottom of the hall door, where I shall stay
till it waits yourpleasure to favour me, and I re-
main, &c." The officers find it difficult to resist
such an appeal, although the applicant has always
refused to go into the work-house, having a most
unconquerable aversion to work of any kind. About
two years ago this pauper called upon one of the
overseers with tears in his eyes, and said, " You know,
Sir, that I have been a bad husband, and ill-treated
my poor wife. I now repent it, but it is too late,
she is dead—a dreadful death." " Indeed !" said
the overseer, " It is odd that we never heard of it."
" No, Sir," said the pauper, " she fell in the fire
down in the country, and I want to go down to do
the last offices. It is now I feel bitterly for my
past conduct ;" and he cried aloud. " Well, my
poor fellow," said the overseer, " I am sorry to
hear this melancholy circumstance—what can we
do for you ?" " Oh, if you would only let me have
what would bury her decently, I'd turn my thoughts
to industry, and never trouble you more." The
overseer gave the poor fellow two sovereigns, and
soon *afterwards they were obliged to take into the
workhouse the pauper's wife, who walked up to
town in perfect health.
BOW-STREET.

Yesterday, William Young, upon whose evidence
the three unfortunate men• found guilty and exe-
cuted oa Monday week for the Teddington-lock
robbery, was brought before Sir R. BIRNIE, in order
to he re-examined, several charges of burglary having
been brought against him.
Before any evidence was gone into, the prisoner's
solicitor urged upon the -Magistrate a legal objec-
tion to his client's detention. It was a principle, he
said, of English law, that an admitted approver for
the Crown, upon whose evidence a conviction had
taken place, was entitled to a free pardon for any
offences, short of murder or high treason, which he
might have committed prior to the perpetration of
the crime of which his accomplices were convicted.
This rule of law was mentioned in Ilfagnl Charta,
and was so continued to the reign of `William 111.,
when it was enacted, that if two persons were found
guilty upon the evidence of an approver, such ap-
prover should be pardoned of all offences which he
might have committed up to that time. By the
sth of Anne, the principle was extended to horse-
stealing, which, prior to that period, was an offence
for which no such exemption could be claimed. 'I he
great cases of Dr. Dodd and Mfrs. Rudd fully esta-
blished the principle that an approver was ex •

. .
empted from the consequences of 'his own guilt by
having brought others to justice. In the former
ease, Lord Mansfield distinctly said, that a person
giving evidence for the Crown ought himself to be
hn•ld harmless. In the case of Mrs. Rudd, who was
the approver against the two brothers named Peroux,

who were convicted of forgery, and underwent the
sentence of the law, the principle was also recog-
nsed. After the Perour had been tried and found

guilty, Mrs. Rudd was herself indicted for having
forged a bond for 7,5001., upon which her Counsel
urged that the trial ought to be postponed, as no
time had been given the prisoner to apply for his
Majesty's pardon. The objection was argued before
Mr. Justice Goold and Mr. Justice Ashburton, who
held, however, that the trial ought to proceed, inas-
much as the prisoner had not been indicted with
those who were convicted upon her evidence, and
that in case of a verdict of guilty, she could apply
for his Majesty's pardon as well after her conviction

a- before the trial. The jury, however, found Mrs.
Rudd " not guilty," and, consequently there was fro
onasion to apply for the King's pardon. In Jacob's
Law Dictionary, as well as in other books of refer-
ence, the point was clearly laid down, that an ap-
prover was entitled to a free pardon up to the time
‘N hen his evidence was admitted by the Crown.
Under these circumstances, the prisoner's solicitor
contended that his client (Young) came within the
rule of law which he had laid down, and was there-
fore entitled to be discharged.

Sir R. BIRNIE admitted, that so far as regarded
the actual offence, to prove which the prisoner was
allowed to give evidence, he was not liable; but he
considered that the case was different with respect
to other crimes not connected with that specific
charge. At all events, he (Sir R. Birnie) had made
up his mind to commit the prisoner, let his ultimate
disposal be settled how it might.
The witnesses in the case of Mr. Parker, whose

house had been broken open on the night of the 6th
of December last (prior to the Teddington-lock
robber,), were then bound over to appear against
the prisoner at the next Surrey Assizes. The evi-
dence against the prisoner in this case relates to a
saw, identified by the prosecutor as one which had
been stolen from his house on the night in question,
and which was sworn to by another witness as one
which he had purchased from the prisoner on the
' 7th of December, the day after the robbery. Seve-
ral silver spoons and other property, amounting in
all to upards of 101., were stolen from the prosecu-
tor's house. Charlotte Dalby (who stated that she
lived housekeeper with Kite, one of the wretched
men who were executed) also identified the saw;
anti another witness deposed to his having been pre-
sent at the house of Charles Kite on the 7th of De-
cember last, in company with the prisoner and the
three men who were executed. lie saw them

divide the property stolen from Mr. Parker's house,
and amongst other things the saw, which he swore
to, fell to the prisoner's lot.
Elizabeth Purdoe deposed, that on the 20th of
November last, the house of her master, Mr. Crouch
of Hampton, had been broken open, and a quantity
of hosiery, pork, pickles, &e. stolen. The two.
penny piece now produced was amongst the articles
otoler►. She knew it from a mark upon the edge,
and also from having seen it occasionally for the
space of two years.
Mr. Cooke, the high constable of Isleworth, de-
posed to his having found this identical coin at the
house of the prisoner.

The witnesses in this case were also bound over,
An accomplice, named Sturrick, was then brought
for' rd. He had stated to one of Mr. Cooke's
constables that he wished to make a confession, but
upon being brought before the Magistrate, he de-
nied that he had any confession to make, eith.n-
plicating the prisoner Young, or any other person.
The constable stated that he was sure the man
was too .trw,-...h frightened to confess. It was the
generatjielief around Hampton and Hounslow that
Young- could not be detained 3 and, under the
dreadof being murdered if he regained his nerty, this
and severai others, were induced to keep silent,
The prisoner was then removed, ind the Magi-
sirate directed that he should be brought forward
once more previous to his being finally committed.
The prisoner's brother, Robert Young, was exe-