The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-19 00:00:00

THAMES.

Mr. Daniel Ferguson, master of the ship China, and Hyam
Levy, a Jew slopseller in High-street, Shadwell, appeared
before Mr. Broderip to answer a charge under the " Act for
the protection of seamen entering on board merchant ships,"
the Bth and 9th Victoria, cap. 116, which enacts among
other things, that the Board of Trade shall license such per-
sons as they may deem fit to procure seamen for merchant
ships, and that no person not duly licensed, or not being the
owner, part owner, master, or person in charge of a ship, or
the ship's husband, shall be concerned in procuring seanien
to be entered. The 4th section enacts that no owner, part
owner, master, or person in charge of any merchant ship; or
ships's husband, shall knowingly receive, or accept to be en-
tered on board, any seaman who was procured contrary to
the Act. The penalty for each offence is 201.
In this case Mr. Wells appeared as solicitor for the pro-
secution, at the suit of a person named Ward, of Albert-
street, Shadwell, who has procured a license from the Board
of Trade to " hire, engage, supply, and provide seamen." Mr.
Pelham was for the defence. The summons against Levy
charged that he not been duly licensed by the Lords of the
Committee of her Majesty's Privy Council for Trade and
Foreign Plantations, and not being the owner, part owner,
master, or person in charge of a merchant ship, or a ship's
husband, did unlawfully supply and provide two seamen for
a certain merchant ship, called the China. The summons against
Captain Ferguson charged him with knowingly receiving the
two seamen so procured by an unlicensed person contrary to
the provisions of the Act.
Mr. Wells stated the case, and said this was the first pro-
secution under the Act, which was one of great importance
to the shipping interest. He called two seamen, from whose
evidence it appeared they went on board the China to obtain
berths, and were referred to Levy. Upon going to his shop
they saw Mrs. Levy, who said she wanted to engage hands
for the China, and a card of recommendation was given to
them, which they were to present to the defendant Ferguson.
At bat time Levy's son was on board the China, but Levy
himself was not there, nor did he appear to have had much
to do with the transaction. On the first occasion, when the
sailors went to the shop, they asked Mrs. Levy if she had to
engage the hands for the China, and she replied in the affir-
mative. Her husband, who was standing by, did not say
anything. The men called at Levy's shop, and also on board
the ship, several times, but, after all, were not engaged.
Mr. Pelham urged there was no providing of seamen, as
contemplated by the Act, and that Levy had nothing to do
with the affair. There was really no case for him to answer.
Captain Ferguson said he had not received any seamen
provided by Levy.
Mr. BRODERIF said it was easy to see there had been an
attempt to evade a new Act of Parliament, which was likely
to be a very useful one, and wan passed to protect sailors
from a class of persons termed " crimps," who were guilty of
gross impositions. If a conviction was to be made, it must
be founded on good evidence, and there was none before
him. He was under the necessity of dismissing both sum-
monses ; but he begged it might be distinctly'understood that
when a case was made out he should enforce the law, and if
any one offended they must expect to be visited with a severe
penalty. The Act of Parliament was passed most righte-
ously to put down a very bad system of engaging seamen
by crimps, slopsellers, and others, who exacted large gratuities
from seamen. The new law prohibited any unlicensed per-
son interfering with the engagements of seamen, except
owners, masters, and ship's husbands; and the Act expressly
prohibited any person whatever from receiving any remu-
neration from seamen, either directly or indirectly, on ao-
count of their being hired. He would discourage any at-
tempt to revive the old system, which the law was passed to
put down. The licensed agents were under the control of the
Board of Trade, and they alone had the right to procure sea-
men for merchant ships, with the exception of the persons
he had named.
The summonses were then dismissed.
HAMMERSMITH.
Edmund Ankens, a lad in his fourteenth year, the son of
Mr. Joseph Ankens, a bricklayer, of No. 1, South-street,
Hammersmith, was chargedwith having stolen:a silver watch,
a pair of silver spectacles, a gold ring, and a tortoiseshell snuff-
box, the property of his father.
The prisoner has been repeatedly charged at this Court
with robbing his parents and other relatives. About six
weeks since'he was committed for trial at the Middlesex
Sessions for stealing a pistol, the property of his uncle, to
which he pleaded guilty, and the witnesses not being in at-
tendance at the time, he was sentenced to twenty-four hours'
solitary confinement, and then discharged.
Mrs. Ankens deposed that she was the mother of the pri-
soner, to reclaim whose vicious propensities every possible
effort had been made. On the morning of the previous day
the prisoner left home about eight o'clock, and some time af-
terwards, on having occasion to go to a chest of drawers, she
missed her husband's silver watch, silver spectacles, gold ring,
and snuff-box produced. The value of them was 3/.
Other evidence having been given, the boy was committed
I for triaL

GREENIVICH:
John Brelsfon4 keeper of a beer-shop, New Kent-road,
appeared to an information, charged with selling beer by
retail in a booth at Hatcham Races, without being duly
licensed so to do, on the 22d of Sept. last, whereby he had
incurred, under the Acts of 7th and Bth Geo. IV., a penalty
of 201.
The information was laid at the instance of Mr. Sly, su-
pervisor of the district. Mr. Evans, solicitdr, of Lee, ap-
peared for the defendant.
The evidence was, that he supplied a pint of porter to
William Bennett, an Excise officer, on the day and at the
place mentioned, and that he was, therefore, amenable to
the penalty, Hatcham Fair not being chartered for such
purpose. The defendant had been cautioned previously not
to act as he had done. A plea of mitigation, on the grounds