Star.
London, England, 1812-09-17 00:00:00

• • I

. - -
01,0184ILEr.
Yesterday, at ten o'clock, the Old Bailer Sessions
were opened in the Justice Hall, with the customary
formalities. Justices HUAtlii BAYLaY, and Gram,
tppeared on the Bench.
_. J. Wertbrooh,Elisalseth PliiptiOnsannah Phipps, and
Irovuel Westbrool, who good indicted at the last 50..:
..: don, for having burglariotoly broken and entered the
dwelling-house of Joseph Covington, in Angel and
c.Porter.court, Golden-lane, but whose trial was put off
a consequence of the absence c f a material witness,
were first put to the bar.
it appeared from the deposition of the prosecutor,
that he was a hawker and pedlar; that in the month
of April last, he left his house in Angel and Porter-
court, in which J. Westbrook and Elizabeth Phipps
lodged, and proceeded to the country to vend his
•• goods. On his return, he found that one of his rooms
• :had been broken open, and property to the amount
' of €l2O stolen. From Patrick Cochrane, another
' lodger in the house, he obtained such information as
' enabled him to recover a part of his property.—
' Cochrane also acquainted him, thr-.• he heard the
mem broke open, and saw J. Westbrook and Eliza-
• beth Phipps, quit the house a few minutes after-
wards, with several bundles in their possession. He
also saw Susannah Phipps waiting in Golden-lane,
and saw the other two prisoners deliver tie her part of
the property which they carried with them. It fur.
ther appeared, that J. Westbrook and E. Phipps sub-
- lequently went to lodge in Whitechapel. They pass-
ed for man and wife, and went by the name of Smith.
In these lodgings were found several duplicates, one
of which was fur a shirt, pledg,ed with a• pawnbroker
• is Whitechapel, which preyed to be the'proper'ty of
ttie prosecutor. The only way in which S. West-
brook was stated to be implicated, was in having
been seen to receive a bundle from his brother, three
hours after the robbery, in Gdlden-lane. In refuta-
tion of this charge, howcver, his landlady, a Mrs.
Price, proved, that on the day on which the robbery
' was committed, he remained at home the whole of
the morning. The first two prisoners were found—
Guilty—J. eath ; and the latter two were acquitted.
Henry Moth was next tried on an indictment, char.
ging him with burglarionsly breaking and entering
file house of Mary Tyler, in the parish of Isleworth,
on the night of the 25th of July last, and stealing
therein several articles of wearing apparel.
From the testimony adduced in support of the pro.
secution, it appeared, that on the night in question,
Wm. Tyler, the son of the prosecutrix, happened to
be out. At l 1 o'clock, Mrs. Tyler and her daughter-
la-law retired to rest, having so previously fastened the
front-door, that it could be opened by W. Tyler,
when he returned home. • Shortly after they went to
Led they heard the door open, and some person enter
and walk about the rooms beneath ; after which the
, person seemed to go out of the house and walk away.
A. few rainutes subsequently, Wm. Tyler came home,
and finding the door open, be went to his wife to as-
certain the cause, who informed him of her suspi-
cious that- the house had been robbed: he immediately
Went into the parlour to examine, and on looking be.
hind the door missed the pelisses of his wife and mo-
ther, and other articles of wearing apparel. Having
met a man about 40 yards before he came to his mo-
ther's door, with a bundle iihis hand, he at once
suspected him to be the thief; and the man having
asked him the way to Acton, which he toll him, he
had no doubt of the road he had taken ; be therefore
instantly went in pursuit, and in a short time overtook
him; when he proved to be the prisoner. He accu-
sed him of the robbery, upon which he made no re-
ply, but knocked him down. Tyler on getting up
again pursued him, and again seized him by the col-
• lar, when he -igain knocked him to the ground, and.
threatened if he did not leave him that he would must
der him. Tyler, however, persisted in his determi-
nation to secure him, and although knocked down six
several times, he kept byliim until a man named Smith
came to his assistance. The prisoner was then sect].
red, and in his possession was found the property laid
in the indictment.
The prisoner in his defence said, that he was go-
ifiLfrom Hampton-court, where he had been at work,
tolleptford, to see his daughter, and as he passed
through Breutford, he picked up the bundle which lie
wassharged with having stolen. The prisoner' was
found Guilty of the Larceny, but acquitted of the
burglary.
Jirsilient roung and William Lewis were capitally
convicted £.r a burglary, in the dwelling-house of
Edward Hollwell, and stealing two glass givandoles.
• Thomas Cutter stood capitally indicted, un;.:er Lord
Ellenborough's Act, for maliciously cutting and
maiming John Hedges, on the night of the 6th .of
444 last.
The prosecutor deposed, that he was a gardener,
resident at Hampstead; that on the night stated in
the indictmeat, abut ten o'clock, he observed the
prisoner, whose person he knew, stealing creumbers
in his garden. He went towards him, arid the priso-
ner ran off. Prosecutor pursued and overtook him
at a stile, a short distance from the spot where he first
saw him, and on his endelvouring to get over, he
(the prosecutor) pulled him clown. A scuffle ensued,
when the prisoner drew forth a knife, with which he
inflicted two severe wounds on the prosecutor's left I
hard, and another on bis throat, which prevented him
from making further exertion.
The prisoner was taken into custody the same night
at his own lodgings. He at first denied all know.;
sedge of the transaction ; but on being told, that the i
prosecutor would in all probability make it up with
Lim, he agreed to go to a neighbouring public-house, I
where Hedges was, and on being there searched, a
clasped knife was found in his possession.
s
• A Surgeon proved the injury sustained by there:-
seentor, who, he stated, was under his care for three
'weeks.
The prisoner, In his defence, said. that the prose.
tutor lead 'struck him first, and that whatever he had
done was in his own defence.
• Mr. Justice Hum asked the prosecutor whether
this was really the case or not ? He replied, that-he
telieved he did strike-the prisoner with a small stick
which he held in his hand, at the time he pulled him
from the style.
The Learned Judges on the Bench having then
consulted together fur a short time, Mr. Justice
lizern addressed the Jury, and observed, that both
his Learned Brothers and himself Were of opinion,