The Sun.
London, England, 1845-08-27 00:00:00

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.
(Before Mr. Sergeant ADAMS, the Assistant-Judge, and a

Bench of Maiistrates.)

Yesterday the August general sessions for the county of
Middlesex were opened :at the Sessions-house, Clerkenwell-
green. ;The attendance of magistrates was more numerous
than usual.
The calendar presents a list of 70 prisoners, of whom 57 are
charged with felony.
The Learned JuncE briefly addressed the grand jury.
The grand jury having then retired,
Mr. PAYNE said he appeared on behalf of the parochial au-
thorities of St. Andrew's, Holborn, and had to apply for the
judgment of the Court upon James Lawson and his wife Jane,
who had been convicted in the month of February of having
been the keepers of a house of ill-fame.
The Learned JUDGE asked how it was that so long a period
had elapsed between the present application and the conviction ?
An inquiry was hereupon made, when it was found that
the conviction had been in the month of February, in 1843.
fhe defendants had then promised to abate the nuisance, and
had entered into recogniaanees to appear to receive judg-
ment when called upon. It appeared, too, that for a short
period the defendants had not merely shut an the house, but
hail left the place altogether. They, however, returned
alter some length of absence, and not only resumed their
former occupati.m, but became so prosperous that in the course
of time they became the owners, or occupiers at all events, of
eight houses, in which they continued to carry on their usual
business. The locality in which these houses were situate was
George-court, Gray's Inn-lane.
Mr. PAYNE now said he was instructed to urge that the
Court would mark its sense of the bad conduct of the defend-
ants by a severe visitation in the shape of punishment. The
case was attended with very aggravating circumstances.
The Learned JUDGE was greatly surprised at this applica-
tion being made after so long a time had passed from the day
of the conviction—namely, between two and three years. It
was absolutely necessary that there should be some bar as to
the time at which persons convicted of an offence were to be
held amenable to their recognisances. In this particular case,
too, it furthermore appeared—and indeed it was admitted by
the Learned Counsel for the prosecution—that the nuisance of
which the defendants had been convicted had been abated.
tinder all the circumstances of the case, he could not but re-
gard this application as one of an extraordinary character.
Mr. PAYNE was anxious to explain the circumstances con-
nected with this matter. The present application had been
made in consequence of a communication having been made to
the parochial authorities by Mr. Greenwood, the magistrate,
who had suggested the propriety of the parish instituting pro-
ceedings against these houses because of the many and dis-
graceful robberies which were constantly being committed in
them. An investigation was set on foot after the receipt of
these communications by the parish, when it was found that
the occupiers of the houses complained of were the very per-
sons who were already under recognisances. That being the
case the parish had, therefore, with a view of saving expense,
made the present application, rather than incur the costs of a
fresh indictment.

The Learned JUDGE said that the parish authorities had
clearly been guilty of a neglect of duty if they had been aware
that these parties had again opened the houses, for they ought
at once to have indicted them. At all events, they ought long
before to have brought the matter under the notice of the
Court. It was manifest that the defendants, after having
abated the nuisance, had returned and renewed it with ap-
parent impunity, and that it was not until the magistrate at the
police court had called attention to the subject that any sub-
sequent steps had been taken. If this practice were permitted,
it was clear that the prosecution of these houses would become
a mere farce, whilst the most unncessary and useless expenses
would have been incurred. He found that the parish had not
been bound over to prosecute, but if they had, he should have
considered it to have been his duty to have entreated the recog-
nizances. He should, however, refuse the present application,
and leave it to the parish authorities, should they think proper,
to prefer another indictment.
This was accordingly done directly.
THE PRISON AT PARKHURST.
William Carter, aged 12 (who pleaded " Guilty"), and
David Higgins, aged 14, were indicted for having stolen. a
pair of boots, valued at 55., and ether articles, the property of
George Buller.
_ _

The prisoners had accosted the youthful prosecutor upon his
landing at Hungerford-market from one of the steam-boats on
Sunday evening, the 10th instant, and soon induced him to go
with them to the dark arches of Hungerford••market. Here
they met several other boys, friends of the prisoners, with whom
a game at " touch" was commenced. During the proceed-
ings the prisoners contrived to rob the lad, and on the following
Saturday they were secured. The case against Higgins being
clear, he was found Guilty.
The Learned JUDGE said, that this was just a proper case
for the Parkhurst Prison, but he could not send them there be-
cause he had received; a communication from the Secretary
of State for the Home Departinent, wherein he was re-
quested not to send any juvenile offenders to Parkhurst ex
eept where their cases were of an aggravated character. The
consequence of this communication, therefore, had been to
place the Court in a position of great embarrassment, from the
fact that nearly all the cases which came before it were of a
trifling nature. There was another point, too, wherein a
difficulty had also arisen, and that was that that Court had
upon all occasions formed its opinion as to whether prisoners
ought to be sent to Parkhurst from the nature of their general
character and habits.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MAN SION-HOUSE.
A well-dressed female, named Margaret Scott, was
charged with having robbed a country gentleman of a
purse containing seven sovereigns and six half-sove-
reigns.
The case proved to be one of those robberies which
nightly take place with the assistance of men, who are
always at hand to receive the money stolen, sometimes
by violence, sometimes by ingenuity, from respectable
persons.
The complainant was returning to his inn from New-
gate-street, at about eleven o'clock the night before,
when the prisoner began to caper and dance before him.
His amazement at such an exhibition was so great that
he never observed the lady touching his person until hi.
watch was half out of his pocket. A policeman (Kinsey,
656) however had silently observed her pranks, and
suspecting that there was method in them watched her,
and soon was convinced that she was manoeuvring the
gentleman out of his property, The policeman had seen
a shabby genteel fellow, with whom she had been im-
mediately before whispering, suddenly quit her com-
pany, and then saw her " acting a scene," as above
described. At length she turned up a court, and the
policeman ran forward and took haid of her, and asked
the gentleman whether he had been robbed. "No,"
replied the latter, but upon putting his hand into his
pocket he at once missed his purse, and then told the
policeman for God's sake to hold the woman fast. The
prisoner then dropped the purse which contained the
sovereigns and half-sovereigns at the policeman's feet,
rind was conveyed to the station-house.
The prosecutor informed Sir John Pirie that he was
perfectly sober at the time of the occurrence, and that
he was completely deceived by the antic tricks of the
woman, so different from the usual system adopted by
persons of her character.
Sir J. Pram applauded the conduct of the policeman,
and said that he must send the prisoner for trial. He
knew that robberies were committed in great numbers
every night by the assistance of the male companions of
the most abandoned women of the town.
The prosecutor wished to avoid the inconvenience to
which attendance at the Central Criminal Court would
subject him, but
Sir J. PIRIE said that in such a case it would be
most criminal to forego a prosecution, and committed the
prisoner fur trial.