The Sun.
London, England, 1842-03-30 00:00:00

WORSHIP-STREET.

IMPUDENT ROBBERY.—lsabella Lucas, a demure look-
ing elderly woman, was charged with having stolen-a
pocket-handkerchief from the shop door of Mr. Lucas, a
haberdasher in ChurchTstreet, Shoreditch.
It appeared from the evidence, that on the preceding
evening the prisoner went up thedoor of the prosecutor's
shop, and deliberately tore off a • handkerchief from a
piece that was hanging there for sale, and she was quietls,
walking away with the property, when she was stopped
by police constable, H 89, who took her into custody.
The prisoner dropped the handkerchief on being taken,
and it was found lying at her feet.
The prisoner (who declined saying anything) was re-
manded to give time for inquiries to be made respecting
her.

All the other night charges were destitute of interest,

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

HOME ClRCUlT—Kingston, Tuesday, March 29.

CROWN COURT.

Baron GURNEY tooChiaseat-inihis Court soon after
ten o'clock. His Lordship, in charging the Grand Juiy,
expressed his gratification at seeing so numerous an as-
semblage of gentlemen in attendance ready to fulfil the
important duties of grand jurors ; not only was the num-
ber of twenty-three that was actually required by the
law, present, but a great many others also, and this
showed the interest taken by the gentlemen of the county
in the due execution of the law, which was of so much
importance to them all. With respect to the calendar
before him, he regretted to see that it contained two
charges of child murder, and in both of these the most
important question for them to take into their consider-
ation in the first instance was, whether the child was
born alive. He perceived by the depositions that in one
case the medical gentleman gave a decided opinion that
the child was born alive ; but he must observe, that
some of the signs that were urged in support of this
opinion had been long exploded ; and he was, indeed,
surprised that medical gentlemen of the present day
should place any reliance upon those tests. In the
other case, there was evidence of the child having been
born alive, and it also appeared that there were wounds
upon the child's throat and head that would amply ac-
count for death. His Lordship then proceeded to say,
that they were now assembled :o perform a most pain-
ful and important duty, that of discovering and punish-
ing the authors of crime, and it behoved them to look
about them and endeavour to discover the causes of
crime, and to see whether they could not do
something that would tend to put an effectual
stop to it. Much had, no doubt, been done
by improvement in the law, and in its administration,
and also in the improvement of prison discipline, but it
was very evident that very much still remained to be
accomplished, and they should never lose sight of the
importance of giving instruction and education to the
people, not mere education only, but a moral and re-
ligious education, which was alone calculated to teach
the lower orders of society their duty to God and to
their neighbours, and by this means only would they
be taught to recoil from the commission of crime,
and to believe that it would lead to their destruction
in this world and in the world to come. When they
were aware of the scenes of vice and debauchery in
which many of the unhappy persons who appeared
before them had been brought up, the result was
not to be wondered at, and it was their duty, there-
fore, by every means in their power, to remedy such an
evil. He therefore prayed them to use their influ-
ence, in whatever capacity they might be placed,
to exert themselves, to improve and instruct the young ;
and, in accordance with the terms of the proclamation
that had just been read, to discourage the vicious ;' and
also, he begged of them to do all that lay in their power
to put down that odious vice of drunkenness, which his
experience taught him contributed so much to swell the
calendars at the different assizes. His Lordship con-
cluded by stating that there was one other vice most
dangerous in its results, viz., gaming ; and he observed,
that, if in any part of that county it was allowed, as was
alleged, to be carried on openly, publicly, and shame-
lessly, he was compelled to observe, that the Magistrates
of the county neglected their duty in not putting the law
in force to suppress it.
Sarah Smith, 24, Sarah Conollq, 15, and Ann Clines,
16, wire indicted for stealing two hats, the property of
Sarah Cox.

Mr. Clarkson conducted the prosecution, and. Mr.
Charnoek defended the prisoner Smith.
It appeared in evidence that on the 17th of February,
Conolly and Smith, accompanied by a man, went into
the shop of the prosecutrix, who carries on the business
of a hatter in the Borough, and the man asked to see
some of the best hats, and a number of them were
shown him.. He made various objections to the hats,
and while the shopman's attention was engaged, each
of the two women contrived to secrete a hat under her
clothes, and when this had been effected, the other o-
man came in and asked the way to Blackfriars-bridge,
and the other prisoners then left the shop. The hats
were missed directly, and the prisoners were traced to a
public-house in Redcross-street, and under the table at
which they had been sitting, a piece of tissue paper, that
had been round one of the hats, was found crumpled up.
The Jury found all the prisoners Guilty, and Smith
was proved to have been before convicted of felony, and
it appeared that she w as sentenced to be transported for
seven years.

Baron GuaNEY sentenced Smith to be transported fur
life, and the other prisoners for seven years.
When the sentence was delivered, Smith, who several
tin e 3 prayed the Court earnestly not " to give her life,"
cal-el out " Good bye all, I have only got life,"- and sl:e
continued to vociferate the same expression until she was
removed from tffe-Hbek.

CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron Alderson.)
DARRITT V. THE DUKE OF NORMANDY.
This was an action to recover the sum of 2381. fcr
goods sold and delivered.

Mr. Platt and Mr. Wordsworth were for the plaintiff ;
Mr. Thesiger and Mr. Sergeant Channell for the de-
fendant.

Mr. PLATT said the plaintiff was an upholsterer,
residing at Camberwell, and the action was brought to
recover the sum of 2381., for furniture supplied to the
defendant, whilst residing in that neighbourhood. The
defendant claimed to be King of France, but was residing
in, this country as a private individual, and if und(r
such circumstances, he incurred any debts, he was
bound to pay them as any other person. The
defendant at first resided at Camberwell-green,
but subsequently removed to the Old Kent-road,
and then applied to the plaintiff to furnish his house.
Goods were supplied according to his wish, but in
August last the plaintiff, having reason to suppose that
the defendant was about to return to his hereditary
estates in France, sued him for the balance of his ac-
count, which amounted to the sum in question.
After some witnesses had been called to prove the
delivery of the goods and their value,
Mr. Baron ALDERSON suggested that as there we s
a cross action, it would be better to have both cases
deferred, when their merits could be inquired into
together:

The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the
amount claimed, subject to a reference.

TILE DUKE OF NORMANDY V. BARRITT.
The nature of this action did not transpire, a verdic t
being taken by consent upon the same terms.

STEPHENS V. EMILY AND ANOTHER.
Mr. Platt and Mr. Petersdorff for the plaintiff ; Mr.
Thesiger and Mr. Swann for the defendant.
The plaintiff, who is a builder, sought to recover thQ,
sum of 521. 15s. Od., for work done at the Alliance i_;lub-
house, Pall- mall, of which the defendants Mr, :Emily and
Mr. Hastings were members.
It appeared that in the early par. of the year 1837, a
ILshed a club, which they
number of gentlemen estab
called the Alliance, and
wok suitable premises in Pall-
mall, the lease of ':;:nich was granted to the defendants
and two other. gentlemen. The affairs of the club were
conducted by a Committee selected from the general
body a members, whose duty it was to give orders,
audit the accounts, &c. The defendants were on
the Committee from its first appointment to the final
breaking up of the establishment, in 1839. The
Club did not answer the expectations of the founders,
and was abandoned in consequence of want of funds to
meet the necessary expenses. Orders to tradesmen were
given by the Committee, through the Secretary, and
payment made by cheques signed by three of them. The
work, which formed the subject of the present action,
was ordered to be done in the usual manner, and at va-
rious times ; but it was not distinctly shown that, on
-any occasion when such orders were given, both the de-
fendants were present. One of the items was for erect-
ing a platform in front of the building, at the time of
the Coronation; and it appeared that Mr. Emily objected
to such an outlay being made, in consequence of the
state of the funds of the Club, but as the question
was decided against him, he refrained from attending
the Committees from that period (June 1838) till Feb-
ruary in the following year, when it was found that the
receipts were totally insufficient to meet the expenditure,
the, affairs were wound up, and the Club was found to be
in debt several hundred pounds. The defendants, feel-
ing that the Committee were bound to pay the out-
standing debts, suggested that each member of the
Committee should subscribe a certain sum for that pur-
pose A few paid their portions, but others refused to
do so. The plaintiff, being unable to obtain the amount
of his bill, brought the present action.
On the part of the. plaintiff, it was contended that the
defendants being members of the Committee by whom
the orders were given, were liable for the amount ; and
some letters, written by them jointly, were put in, in
which they expressed their fears that they (the Com-
mittee) would be compelled to pay- the outstanding debts.
Mr. THESIGER; on behalf of the defendants, com-
plained of the hardships of, their being alone called 1:11-01-1
to liquidate the debts of the Club, after they had f.lene all
in their power to induce the other members CO raise a
sufficient sum to meet all demands upon ;
no proceedings should be taken again,;, those who had
refused to accede to so reasonable '..nd..equitable a propo-
sition. The Learned Counsel contended that the de-
the present instance, as it
fendant not l
had nots been were
found iable
~fat they were present when the
order in question -dere given. The question was not to
whom credit v;as
given, but with whom the contract was
made; if it was found that the Committee made the con-
tract e.:,ther personally or by their agent, they would be
llfole, but if the order was given by the Committee gene-
rally, the defendants would not be liable.
Mr. Baron ALDERSON, in summing up, said the question
for the consideration of the Jury was, whether the
work, the order for which was given by the Secretary,
was ordered by the defendants, or either of there. If
they were satisfied that Mr.,Hastings was present When
the order was given for erecting the platform at the tithe
of the Coronation, he would undoubtedly be liable, but
not under the present action. The members of a club