The Sun.
London, England, 1829-03-30 00:00:00

THE KING V. EDW ARDS, GENTLEMAN.

This was an indictment against the defendant, an
attorney of this place, for a violent assault upon a
watchman named Tomlinson, in September last. The
case, which had been removed into the Court of
King's Bench by certiorari, excited considerable in-
terest in this neighbourhood.
The circumstances, as they appeared in evidence,
were briefly these :—On the night or rather morning,
in question, the prosecutor heard a great noise and
disturbance in the streets, and finding the defendant
and another person named Mason active in creating
it, he took the latter, who was a stranger into custody,
intending to summon the defendant, whom he knew,
before a justice next morning. As they were pro-
ceeding to the watch-house, Mason called out, " Go
at him ;" to which the defendant replied, " No, not
yet." The latter had a bludgeon in his hand at the
time. He offered to be bail for Mason at the
watch-house, which was refused, and that person
was therefore locked up. In about half an hour
afterwards (between two and three in the morning),
when the prosecutor was in another part of the
town, he suddenly received a blow on the head,
from behind, which brought him to the ground
completely stunned. He could not tell at the
moment whether it had been given with a stick or a
stone. The blood flowed copiously from the wound.
In a few minutes afterwards some people having
collected about him, the defendant came behind, and
stretching his head round to look the prosecutor in
the face, said, " Are you hurt ?" " Yes," replied
Tomlinson; and " you are the hand that did it."
The defendant made no reply, but subsequently
asked him, " would 50.'. be of any service to you ?'
To which the prosecutor answered, "No, nor 5001."
These were the principal grounds on which the
charge against the prosecutor rested.
The Learned JUDGE having summed up the evi-
dence, the Jury, after a short deliberation, returned
a verdict of Guilty.

CAMBRIDGE, MARCH 27.

Win. Osborne, aged 23, was indicted for felo-
niously assaulting one David Durwood on the King's
highway, in the parish of Elsworth, on the sth of
December last, putting him in corporal fear, and
stealing from his person 12 sovereigns and a 5/. note.
David Durwood.—l am a farmer at Warboys.
On the 3d December I was at the Three Tuns pub-
-Ik-house, at Knapwell, about four in the afternoon.
I stayed there about two hours. The prisoner was
there also, sit! Mg opposite to me. He had a dib-
bing-iron with him. The landlord wished me to
stop all night ; but I said, in the presence of the
prisoner, that I would go home. The landlord
gave me four sovereigns and a :5/. note, which I put
in my left-hand breeches pocket, with eight other
sovereigns. He left the Three Tuns a quarter of
an hour before I did. Master Holben, of Elsw•orth,
accompanied me as far as the road leading to Els-

worth, when we parted, I going to Conington.—
When I had got about a furlong, I met a man on the
road, whom I saluted with " Good night," and he
tame and caught me directly by the collar, and said
" Stand, deliver your money." That man was the
prisoner. tie had on a light waistcoat and a frock-
coat. I said " I have no money ;" and he replied
" but I know you have, and I'll hare it." He then
struck me a great many blows with a large heavy
club or dibbing-iron. I have the scars on my head
now. Part of my ear was., cut off by one of the
blows. He beat me till he got me nearly to the
dike, and there he throwed me across the dike, put.
his hands into my left-hand breeches' pocket, End
took out the eight sovereigns and the 51. note. lie
did not feel in any other pocket. After he had
robbed me, he hit me a desperate blow, seemingly
with his fist, on the face, and ran off. This was a
mile from Conington. On the next day but one I
went to see a man who was in hold ; he was with
two others, and I picked him out, and said, " That's
the man as robbed me." I have no doubt the pri-
soner is the man.

John Holmes, landlord of the Three Tuns, cor-
roborated the prosecutor as to the prisoner and pro-
secutor being at his house on the sth.
The Jury, after two minutes' deliberation, found
a verdict of Guilty.
The Learned BARON then put on the black cap,
and, in an earnest and most solemn address, passed
the awful sentence of death upon the unhappy cul-
prit ; exhorting him to lose no portion of the short
remaining period of his mortal career in the vain
hope that mercy could be extended to him on this
side the grave.

LAUNCESTON, M kRCIf 26.
THE APOTHECARIES' COMPANY V. SERGEANT.

Mr. Serjeant WILDE (with whom were Mr.
C. F. Williams and Mr. Follett) stated the case to
the jury. He said this was an action brought by
the masters, wardens, &c. of the Apothecaries' Com-
pany, to recover of the defendant certain penalties
for his having acted as a surgeon and apothecary, he
not being a competent person, or having passed the
examinations required by the Act 55 Geo. 111. It
was there enacted, that all persons, from the passing
of that Act, before they should be enabled to carry
on the art which they professed, should undergo a
certain examination as to their ability ; the defend-
' ant, knowing this, tendered himself, and on exami-
nation he was found not to have the knowledge
which was required. Some time afte-, he again
applied, and the result was the same—he was again
rejected. From that time till a little while since
nothing was heard of him, and then the plaintiffs
received information that he was practising in this
county ; and it was found that he had set up at
Carrington, and being a man of some address, he
had managed to get into considerable practice, and
it would appear was employed by the parish autho-
rities to administer medicine to the poor of that pa-
rish. The defendant was not present to defend
this action ; he (the Learned Serjeant) should
therefore
rlimit the inquiry, and ask for two pe-
nalties only, the object being to stop the mischief.
Peter Stentiford examined—l had occasion for
medici.l attendance from July, 1827, to July, 1828.
Dr. Sergeant attended me. He gave me medicine,
especially pills for the loosening of my body.—(A
laugh.)
Mr. Sergeant WILDE—We will not inquire into
the effects of his medicine.

Dr. Neal examined—l attended as physician to
the late Mr. Procter ; Mr. Sergeant attended as
apothecary. I prescribed, and the defendant sup-
plied the medicine.
Mr. Justice GASELEE summed up. There could
be no doubt that the defendant came within the
meaning of the Act, and they ( the Jury) would give
a verdict for two penalties of 201. each.—Verdict
accordingly.

YORK, MARcii 27.

REED V. BOWMAN.

Mr. MATTHEws opened the pleadings. The de-
claration stated, that the defendant had seduced
the (laughter of the plaintiff, whereby the plaintiff
lost her services.

Mr. BROUGHAM stated the case. The plaintiff was
a respectable shopkeeper at 011erton, in the North
Riding of Yorkshire ; the defendant was the son of a
tradesman, residing at the same place. The parties
had for some time bees acquainted, for the de-
fendant had concealed the design which he enter-
tained on the person of the plaintiff's daughter
under the presence of an honourable attachment ;
and had visited her, with the avowed intention of
making her his wife. The consequence of such a
profession had been, that the parties had (as was
always the case) been suffered to be much together ;
and the defendant had availed himself of the oppor-
tunities which this confidence afforded him, to ac-
complish the real object of his attentions. The
daughter of the plaintiff had, unfortunately, trusted
to the man whom she bad supposed would soon be-
come her husband, and an intercourse bud ensued,
which ended on her part in the birth of a child. It
was for the injury thus inflicted that the plaintiff
now sought a compensation in damages.
Mary Reed—l urn the daughter of the plaintiff.
1 resided with my father for the last four or five
years. I have known the defendant since he was a
child. There has been a considerable intimacy be-
tween us for the last five years. I expected that his
intentions were honourable. In March, 1827, an
improper intimacy took place between us. I be-
came pregnant in consequence, and in November, in
the same year, I was delivered of a child. The de-
fendant visited me all that time, and after the child
was born. The defendant lives with his father,
who is a blacksmith at 011erton. He is an only sea.
His father is in good circumstances.
Cross-examined—l was 21 years of age last May.
The defendant was 23. It was about a month since
my father failed in business. His affairs arc now
managed by two persons. I have sworn the child
to the defendant. He pays ls. 6d. a week. He
paid the expence of my confinement.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY summed up the case.
The Jury, after a short deliberation, found a ver-
dict for the plaintiff—Damages, 5/.
Mr. Justice BAYLEY—Gentlemen, the defendant
thinks he ought to pay that sum, for he offered it
before the trial began.