The Sun.
London, England, 1842-09-15 00:00:00

SURREY SESSIONS.

(Before Mr. PUCKLE, the Chairman, and a bench of
kagistrates.)
TIIE BRIGHTON RAILWAY PROSECUTIONS.— Win.
Neal, aged 46, a respectable looking man, was charged
with felonionsly stealing, at Croydon, a quantity of
broken stone, value 165., the property of the Brighton
Railway Company.
Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Locke conducted the prosecu-
tion, and Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Wallinger defended
the prisoner.
From the evidence for the prosecution it appeared
that the prisoner was a servant in the employment of
the London and Brighton Railway Company, and that
it was part of his duty to take care of certain trams
and stone-heaps, the property of the Company, which
were placed on the old tramway leading from 'Wands-
worth to Croydon, on which the prisoner had been
employed before the purchase of the tramway by the
Brighton Railway Company. These trams and
stones had formed a part of the tram-road which had
been broken up. On the morning of the 9th of April
the prisoner was engaged in stacking some stone, when
Mr. H. Overton, a crewer, residing at Croydon, whose
house was near the old tramway, joined the prisoner, '
and asked him if he had any stone to sell ; to which
tha prisoner replied in the affirmative, and ultimately
sold him a quantity of stone for 16s. The prisoner
at the time of the sale did not say that the stone was
the property of the Company ; and from the evidence
of Mr. Coomb, the engineer of the Company, it ap-
peared that the prisoner had never accounted for the
16s. to the Company. The engineer, on his cross-
examination, stated that the prisoner claimed wages
to April, but that he had only been paid up to De-
cember, as there was a dispute as to his right to the
wages claimed.
Mr. CLARKSON, in defending the prisoner, com-
plained of the unfair treatment which the prisoner
had experienced at the hands of the Company, in
being put upon his trial on this indictment, of which
he had not before heard a word, for the offence for
which he had been committed by the Magistrates
was of a totally different nature. He suggested,
that as the prisoner had kept the gate .of the old
tramway prior to its purchase by the Company,
he might have supposed that these broken
stones were his perquisite, and have disposed of them
accordingly ; besides, as lie claimed wages up. to April,
and had only been paid to December, he might have
imagined that he had a right to pay himself in this
way; and if such were the case, there was no felo-
nious intent, and they must acquit the prisoner.
Mr. Penfold, a solicitor of Croydon, and the clerk
to the Magistrates, then gave the prisoner a good
character.

The CIIAIRMAN summed up, and the Jury found
the prisoner Not Guilty.
The prisoner was again indicted for stealing 100
blocks of stone, vale 101., and 1 cwt. of stone, value
101., the property of the London and Brighton Rail-
way Company.
Mr. BODKIN having stated the case for the prosecu-
tion, called

Mr. James Coomb, the resident engineer of the
Company, who stated that the prisoner had charge
of the old tramway as a servant of the Company,
and that he was employed to lift the old tramway,
to cart the iron plates to the station, and to stack the
stones. The prisoner had no authority to dis-
pose of any stones. The witness in passing
through the. streets of Croydon saw a quan •
tity of stone employed in paving the streets,.
which he recognised as having formed part of the old
tramway. He applied to the prisoner on the subject,
and prisoner said they were the blocks which the
parish had claimed. The parish had claimed some
portion of the stone, but it appeared to witness that
there was more stone used than the parish had claimed.
The prisoner never said that he had sold any. On
his cross-examination, the witness admitted that he
could not tell what quantity of stone he had allowed
the parish to take, nor could he venture to swear that
there was more stonein the street than he had allowed
to be taken by the parish.
Mr. Willoughby, assistant-surveyor of the parish of
Croydon,_ deposed, that a portion of the stone used in
paving Croydon had been claimed by, the parish, and
a portion purchased by him of the prisoner on the 2d
April for V. The stones were delivered by the pri-
soner on the 4th April, and were carted by the
prisoner f.-orn his dwelling-house near the tram-road.
Cross-examined—All the stones purchased from the
prisoner were broken stones. It was deposited _in the