The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-04 00:00:00

IN RE BLACKET REDESDALE HARRISON,

The insolvent appeared on his petition to be dis
charged, and Was opposed, on behalf of his detainin:
c: editor, by 4:Tr.:Nib:lolls.

Mr. dom.' rnissionQr BOWEN, after hearing very detailed
evidence, ordered him to- be' remanded for eight months
from the date of his vesting order _at the suit of his de-
taining creditor, for vexatiously defending an action,
whereby a large and unnecessary amount of law costs
was accumulated.
IN THE MATTER OF RUBEN MARNER.—PERJURY.
Mr. WOODROFFE nude an application to the Court
that it would order• the schelule of the insolvent to b 2
given up to Mr. Lingrishe, the Clerk of the Peace for
the county of Sussex, as the grounds for sustaining an
indictment for perjury against the insolvent. It appeared
that on the 3d of last September he had been before the
Court and filed the schedule to which he (Mr. Wood-
rofTe) alhided, and from which was omitted certain pro-
perty to which he was entitled, when he was remanded
for three months. Circumstances had transpired since
by which they were enabled to establish the charge of
wilful and corrupt perjury on the schedule, and proceed-
ing.; were now about to be taken.

egninii3sioner BOWEN at once acceded to the
application, ordering that an office copy should be filed
of the schedule before it left the office.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.

ROBBERY AT A BARRISTER'S CHAJIBERS.—Louisa
Stan fieti was indicted for stealing a considerable quan-
tity of plate, consisting of silver spoons and forks, of
the value of 40L, the property of James M'Donald.
Mr. Adolphus appeared fur the prosecution, and Mr.
Chadwick Jones for the prisoner.
The prosecutor is a barrister, occupying chambers in
the Temple, and had employed the prisoner as his laun-
dress, and her husband in waiting on him at his cham-
bers. The prosecutor goes the Northern Circuit, and
on his return to town at the conclusion of the long vaca-
tion, he discovered that his forks and spoons had been
taken from his chambers and transferred to the shop of
Mr. Walmesley, a pawnbroker, residing at No. 100,
Drury-lane, by the prisoner at the bar, and a quantity'
of imitation silver substituted in its stead. The pri-
soner, during the prosecutor's absence, had been en-
trusted with the keys of his plate chest.
On behalf of the prisoner, Mr. CHADWICK JONES,
having elicited from the prosecutor that he had been left
a legacy under his father's will in which document he
was called James Benassa M'Donald, contended that the
indictment was bad, on the ground of the misnomer.
Mr. ADOLPHUS contended that the objection was in-
valid. The prosecutor, who was born in India, had come
to England at a very early age, and had always gone by
the name of James M'Donald only, and the circum-
stance of his having once signed his name as James Be-
nassa M'Donald, was not sufficient to prove that he had
received the name of Benassa at his baptism.
The RECORDER said that, in his opinion, the evidence
in support of the misnomer was so slight, that it scarcely
amounted to anything. That, however, was a question
of fact which he should leave to the Jury. The case
must go on. •
Mr. CHADWICK JONES having addressed the Jury for
i the prisoner, who had hitherto borne a good character,
The RECORDER, in summing up, said that the Jury
would have two questions to determine—first, did Mr.
M'Donald bear any other Christian name than that of
James; and, secondly, did the prisoner take the property
in question with the intention of stealing it.
The Jury found the prisoner Guilty.
Mr. ADOLPHUS said there was another indictment
against the prisoner, which, however, under the circum-
stances, it was not his intention to press. He felt bound
to say that no person could have behaved better than the
pawnbrokers had in the present case—they had afforded
every facility to the prosecutor.
Mr. M'Donald recommended the prisoner to mercy.

The prisoner was then removed.

John Stanfield, 27, the reputed husband of the female
prisoner, was then indicted for stealing a shirt and some
other articles of wearing apparel, the property of the
same prosecutor, his master.
Mr. Doane defended the prisoner.
It appeared that the prosecutor upon making the dis-
covery of his former loss, instituted a further search,
which led to the apprehension of the prisoner, and upon
his person there were found some articles of wearin g
apparel, the property of the prosecutor. There was
every reason to believe, that although the prisoner and
the woman represented themselves to be man and wife,
that they were not married, and it appeared that it was
in a great measure owing. to his solicitation that the

former prisoner had committed the offence of which she
had been found guilty.—The Jury convicted the prisoner.
The RECORDER directed the prisoners to be brought
up for judgment, and after observing that they had been
convicted of a very serious offence, said that as there ap•
peared to be good reasons for believing that the woman had
acted under the control and solicitation of the other pri-
soner, the sentence upon her would not be so severe as it
otherwise would have been, lie then ordered the man to
be transported for seven years, and the woman was sen-
tenced to be kept to hard-labour for twelve months.
WiTam Cooke, 19, was indicted for stealing a cash-
box, fifteen sovereigns, and some silver, the property of
William Finch, and John Hardman, 23, was indicted for
feloniously receiving part of the money, knowing that it
had been stolen. Mr. Prendergast defended Hardman.
Mrs. Fanny Finch deposed that her husband kept the
Cock public-house at Clapham, and on the 29th of Oc-
tober, a quarter before twelve at night, she placed a cash-
box on a chair in the tap-room. It was locked, and con-
tained about twenty pounds in gold and silver. She let
some people out of the house, and having secured the
door she went up to bed, leaving the cash-box in the
tap-room. The prisoner Cooke had been employed in
the house occasionally, and he came backwards and for-
wards after the loss of the eash-bOx was discovered.
The cash-box was missed on the following morning after
she had left it in the tap-room.
James Knowles, a labourer, proved that on the 18th
of November, he was at work at the prosecutor's cow-
house, when he found a cash-box. It had been covered,
but a dog that was with him, scratched it out of the
ground. It was half open, and all the money was gone.
A police constable proved that while he was on duty at
the Clapham Police Station, he heard a man named
Laing ask the prisoner Cooke what he had done with the
money, and he replied that he took the cash-box out of
:he tap-room, and
.carried it into the yard, where he
broke it open, and he took out the money and gave five
sovereigns to Hardman, and some more of the money to
his sister, and he kept the rest, and afterwards hid the
cash-box in Mr. Finch's cow-shed. Another police-con-
stable proved that the prisonerllardman came to him and
told him that he wished to deliver himself up, and he said
that he knew nothing of the robbery, but that Cooke, as
they were walking together, pulled a bag of money out of
his pocket and gave Min two sovereigns, and he was at
first afraid to take them, but he ultimately did so, and he
afterwards gave him two more, and lie then accompanied
Cooke to his sister, and he gave her some money, and
they subsequently vent to Kent -street, in the Borough,
where they staid till they spent all the rest of the money.
Mr. PRENDERGAST, on behalf of Hardman, submitted
" to the Jury, that although it appeared to be clear taut he
Lad received some of the stolen money, there was.not the
least proof that he knew it had been stolen ; and he
called witnesses, who gave him a good character.
The prisoner COoke said nothing in his defence..
The Jury fi aind Cooke Guilty, and acquitted Hardman.
The REcoanna having ascertained that Cooke was in
a very ill state of health, and under the care of the-sur-
geon or the gaol, ordered the judgment upon him to be
respited until next Session.