The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-20 00:00:00

7/, 4
\

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
(YESTERDAY.)
BOW-S77REE7.
MORE PERSECUTION.---Mrs. Elizabeth Chapman,
Somers-town, appeared to answer a summons pre-
ferred against her for exhibiting an inflammatory
placard.
Police sergeant S 15, proved the charge.
The defendant, however, alleging her utter igno-
rance of the mischievous tendency of the placard,
was discharged.
Mr. R. Chulow, butcher, of Somers-town, pleaded
guilty to the same charge, and passed his word not to
publish, or cause to be published, inflammatory pla-
cards in future.—lle was discharged.
Mr. Cubitt, turner, of Brunswick-street, St. Pan-
cras, was similarly charged.
Police constable John Park, 5 E, proved the case,
and added that.the defendant told him that he meant
to attend the meetings advertised in the placards.
The defendant said, if the bills were illegal, he
should think the policeman ought to have told him so
and have given him the opportunity of taking it down,
instead of summoning him here.ile should be obliged
if the Magistrate would tell him under what Act the
bills were made illegal ? It could not be under the
late Police Act.
Mr. Twrroun said it was not under the Police Act.
This was an offence against the peace.
Defendant said, till he saw the reports in The Sun
newspaper, he had no idea that the bills could be
called illegal; he was not aware of it at the time he
put them up. If the bills were illegal, 1444.0u1d
think the meetings were illegal also.
Mr. Twyronn—So they.are. 4
Defendant—And yet the. meetings were held, and
resolutions were pifssed, and everything went off
quietly:
Mr. Twyrertp—l shall bind you over in your own
recognizances in the sum of 301., to answer the
charge at the next Quarter Sessions, and to keep the
peace till that time.
The required recognizances were then entered into.
Within a few days two cases have been investi-
gated by the sitting 'Magistrates at this Court, WhiMr. ,
for some reason or other, have been conducted wl4:
the greatest possible secresy, the proceedings havii,
taken place in the Magistrates' private room, in the
absence of every person except those immediately con-
cerned.
Of the two cases the following brief particulars we
have every reason to believe to be correct :
The first case, in which the Marquis of Conyngham
was the complainant, and a pawnbroker (whose name
we could not ascertain) residing in Oxford-street, was
the defendant, was heard on the 10th ult.
The defendant was called upon to show cause how
he became possessed of, and why he detained,' a casket
ofjewels of the estimated value of 2,0001., the property
of his Lordship.
The affair was first brought under the notice of the
Magistrate about a week previous, and on each occa-
sion Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Petersdorff attended as
counsel for the respective parties.
From the statement of the Noble Marquis, it ap-
peared that the property in question consisted of a
diamond star of the value of 1,0001., a necklace worth
600/., a pair Id earrings 3001., and other articles of
minor value; they were all safe at his residenee at
Richmond t. short time before they were missed, and
informatior, was subsequently received that they were
in the possession of the defendant. •
Tbe defendant at once admitted that the Articles in
question, were in his possession, and that he received
them in the regular course of his business, and had
advanced, upon them a fair and reasonable sum. He
at the same time stated that he could identify the
person who pledged the property with him, and ex-
pressed his willingness to do so whenever called upon.
Under such circumstances the Magistrate did not
consider himself called upon to make any order
respecting- the restoration of the property, and the
Learned Counsel having expressed themselves satisfied
with the explanation given, the affair terminated.
The parties then retired by the Magistrates' pri-
vate entrance.
The second case alluded to was heard on Thursday
last, a,s,d was a charge of assault preferred by a grocer,
residing in Drury-lane, against a young female of
the name of Jane Priest.
Mr. Bodkin attended on behalf of Ale complainant.
The defendant had been in the service of the com-
plaimard, and a particular intimacy it appeared had
existed between them for some time, which at length
ended im the defendant becoming a mother, and she
was consequently removed from the house. Shortly
after, the complainant took unto himself a wife, which
of course had the effect of stopping the visits of the
defendaat to her late master's ; at length having be-
come vite destitute, she entered the shop with her
child in ber arms, in the hope that some relief would
be afforded her, when high words were used, and the
compla'inant, attempting to eject her from the shop,
in orde r to prevent his customers taking notice of the
circumstance, she lifted herhand, and slapped his face.
The, defendant admitted having struck the corn-
plainrcnt, and alleged that he owed iher a considerable
sum for wages, which she could not obtain, neither
could she get any thing from him for the support of
her child.
Mr. Twrroan considering that the assault had
been proved, ordered the defendant to find bail to
answer any charge which might be preferred against
her at the sessions, and to keep the peace towards the
'complainant in the interim.

9

I'