The Express. — 1866-01-31 (London, England)

THE POLICE COURTS.  BOW-STREET.  Mr. John Davy Wakes, of Rumen-street, Covent-garden, solicitor, appeared so answer a summons, charging him with obtaining by false and fraudulent pretences • bill of exchange for 301. Mr. H. G. Carew appeared for the prosecution ; and Mr. Begley, the barrister, for the defence. Mr. Charles Batty, of Howard-place, Kennington, stated that be had knows the defendant for some time, and on the 17th August he met the defendant in the street. Defendant asked him if he wanted any money ? Witness replied that he did. He would like to raise about 301. Weeks. said he o•uld get a bill discounted for 30/. by a friend of his who had some money. Witness was to give his bill foe 301., and that amount was to be paid, less N. for discount, sod 10e. for the person who discounted it. Witness went with the defendaot to a coffee-room in the Strand, where Weekes drew • bill at two months for 301., and witness signed it. Weeks. was to get the bill cashed, and hand the money over to witness. If he did not get it cashed, he was to return it to witness. Witness applied repeatedly for the return of the bill, but could sot get it back. The defendant repeatedly said he had not got it cashed yet. There was no understanding that defendant was to apply any portion of the proceeds to his own use. Mr. Alfred William Bailey, of Cumberland-row, Walworth-road, photographer, stated that on the 17th august the defendant called upon him and asked him to discount a bill for 301., drawn by himself (Weekes) and accepted by Mr. Betty. He asked witness who Batty was. Weekee replied that he was au engineer, stating his address, and adding that his bill was as good as gold. He said that Batty was in his debt, and that was how the bill cams into his possession. Nothing was said about his being entrusted with the bill for the purpose of getting it discounted. The bill was banded over to witness for the payment of 101. claimed by him. Witness was to pay 201. to Weekes, but no time was specified. Weeks had said nothing about any mom claim to set against the 101. Mr. Seeley said that Mr. Weekes's account of the transaction was that he entrusted the bill to Bailey for the purpose of getting it discounted, and that Bailey had no bathe:telly to apply it to soy other use. If that was so, Bailey was the person against whom these proceedings ought to be takes. But certainly there could be no case against Weeks. —for this was hie own bill, drawn by himself on Batty. Mr. Vaughan oommitted the prisoner for trial, but admitted hint to bail in one surety of 1001.  A sad case, which looks like murder, was, says the Western Morning News, disclosed at Devonport on Monday. A domestic servant at a pnblic-bonse being encumbered by an illegitimate child a year and a half old teas appareetly destroyed the little roe, conoealing the body in leer baboon natil the 'teach attracted attention. The father being a soldier, so order could be made against him for the child's maintenance, which this fell solely on the mother, and proved more than she could bear. The guilty woman at present treats the serious charge with ictldtwreees,erm with levity.