length, addressed the jury. He proceeded to state to them the particulars of the case, which he could prove by evidence On the 4th September last, a party of so diers belonging to H. M. 16th Regiment, with their wives, came down to Calcutta from Chinsurah, where they were quartered. On their arrival in Calcutta, the whole party proceeded to a liquor shop, where they remained Bome time, and on their return to the boat, some words ensued between the wife of the deceased and another female, about a lantern, which ended in blows, and in the scuffle the deceased was pushed overboard by the prisoner, who prevented his returning to the boat. Perhaps, during the investigation, it will be stated tha the prisoner was in a state of intoxication, but the learned judge, who will preside upon the trial, will inform them, (the jury,) that that was no extenuation for the crime with which the prisoner stands indicted. The prisoner ought to have taken his trial last sessions. but was prevented doing 80, owing to the severe illness of a material witness, that witness is since dead. Having made these observations, he should at once proceed to call the witnesses on behalf of the prosecution.

Mrs. Hutchinson sworn. Is Charles Hutchinson's widow; we both belonged to H. M's 16th Regt. which is quartered at Chinsurah; recollects coming down to Calcutta on the 4th Sept. last, and landed at the ghât where the steam engine is (Chandpai ghat). The party consisted of prisoner, the deceased, John Clancy, witness's husband. Mrs Green, Mrs. Sullivan and Mrs. Caldwell, who is ill in the hos pital, at Chinsurah, and unable to attend. On arriving at Calcutta we all went on shore, from whence we proceeded to a liquor shop, but I don' know where it is. My husban and I each had a glass of beer, but I don' know what the rest of the party drank

On returning to the boat I observed that Sullivan and Green were a little the worse for liquor they had drunk, and Mrs. Sullivan and Mrs. Clancey had some words about a lan tern, and Mrs. Green then joined them. Sullivan grew angry at the conduct of his wife, and jumped overboard, Mrs. Sullivan and I then left the boat and went on the beach, I did not again see Sullivan.

Cross examined by Mr. Clark-Mrs. Sullivan, on returning to the boat was

the worse for liquor, I never saw her before or since in that condition We came down to Calcutta to get some necessaries. We had a pass for four days from the Colonel. The night was very dark, and the boat was about the lengta of this table (pointing to the table in the Court House, which is about twenty feet long.) The party that returned to the boat consisted of three men and four

women.

Two other witnesses were called, whose evidence corroborated the above.

The evidence for the prosecution having closed, the prisoner was called on for his defence, but at the desire of his counsel he declined making any.

Several witnesses, two of whom were officers in H. M's 16th, were called to speak to the character of the prisoner, the whole of whom gave him a very excellent one, during the period they each knew him, some so long as sixteen years. The learned judge then charged the jury, and after recapitulating the evidence, the jury retired, and after a few minutes had elapsed, returned with a verdict of not guilty.

After the above verdict had been recorded, Sir John Franks, addressing the prisoner, observed, that two of his commanding officers, much to their credit, had come forward and given him 2 good character for sobri ty and respectful conduct, and he strongly recommended him to abstain from going to the liquor shops, by frequenting which, he would lower himself in their estimation. The prisoner seemed to be per. fectly conscious of the narrow escape he had just had, and after bowing to the Court was discharged.

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1832.

BEFORE SIR JOHN FRANKS.

Teen Cowrie, Jalloo. Kookonee, Zynoo, Hussa Moodeen, and Khadeem Houssein, were indicted, the former for stealing a mahogany box, a Bank note, No. 789, for Sa. Rs. 250, of the Bank of Hindos tan. a horse phleme, a seal, a box of leads for patent pencils, and various articles contained in the above box, the property of Mr. Charles Scott Hadow, and the remaining five prisoners for receiving the above property, knowing it to be stolen.

The following are the particulars of the case, as appeared from the evidence

of the prosecutor and witnesses. On the evening of the 21st December last, the prosecutor's buggy was, as usual, taken to his office, to convey him home; but upon this occasion he did not proceed in it, and having placed his office box, the one in question, in the buggy, together with his hat and some papers, gave directions to his syce to take the buggy home. On the return home of the prosecutor; having taken an airing in his carriage, he was informed by his coachman, that the box had not reached its destination, in consequence of which he sent his syce to his office to make inquiries after it; but the latter was informed by the office peons that the box had been placed in the buggy, together with his hat, &c. Not being able to gain any intelligence of his box, he went and gave information of his loss at the Police, where, two days after the robbery, he saw the contents of his box, among which were several valuable papers, of no use to any one but himself, literally torn to pieces. On the evening of the robbery a peon attached to the Military Board, met the first named prisoner, who he knew, carrying something concealed under his chudder, and on be ing questioned as to what it was, replied that it was a box belonging to his brother-in-law. a Moonshee, to whom he was going to take it; in consequence of this explanation, the peon took no further notice of the transaction at that time, but on the following day he heard a tomtom beat, announcing the loss of a box, which, from the description, struck him as being the same he had seen with Teen Cowrie, and he gave information of the circumstance at the thanna. Owing to this information, several of the thanna people went to the residence of Teen Cowrie, where they commenced a search, and in the compound discovered a tiu cash box buried; while searching the premises of Teen Cowrie, the thanna people observed Jalloo, who is the former's concubine, take something out of the fence which surrounds the house. On examining which, the bank note, for Sa. Rs. 250, the seal and horse phleme, were found. A chokeydar, belonging to the Colinga thanna, then went to the house of Hussa Moodeen, in searching which some brass clamps, belonging to the box, were found; but Hussa Moodeen was not at home, and, on the chokeydar resuming bis search

the following morning, Khadeem Houssein, the foregoing prisoner's son, offered to point out where the stolen property was; and after taking the chokeydar to various places, none was forthcoming. The chokeydar then sent for Zynoo, who was confined in an adjacent thanna, and after some threats had been held out to her, she pointed out the spot where the papers were; they had been torn to pieces, and were covered with rubbish. She also informed the chokeydar, that Teen Cowrie had brok en open the mahogany box and afterwards burnt it.

The prisoner, Teen Cowrie, stated in bis defence, that he, on the evening of the 21st December last, found the box lying in the road near the General Post Office. He carried it home openly, and not in the concealed manner stated by the peon. He added, that he had been in the service of the late Mr. Birch, and also that he was for four years a chokeydar.

Jalloo observed, that she was perfectly innocent, and that Teen Cowrie had been endeavouring to throw the blame off of his shoulders on her's.

Hussa Moodeen stated, that he was ignorant of the offence with which he stood charged. He was a Moonshee, which Mr. Macfarlane the chief magistrate could testify. He was for some years in the service of Dr. Breeton, and subsequently in Dr. Tytler's, at a salary of Sa. Rs. 25 per mensem, consequently he had no occasion to become a thief for the purpose of supporting himself, and has, since the age of fifteen years, sup◄ ported himself by his own exertions. The other prisoners also denied the charge.

Three witnesses were called on behalf of Hussa Moodeen and Teen Cowrie, to speak to their characters; but their evidences were not of the slightest consequence.

The learned judge, at some length, delivered his charge to the jury, in which be recapitulated the whole of the evidence that had been adduced on behalf of the prosecution. The jury then retired, and after a long consultation, which lasted about an hour, returned a few minutes after 5 o'clock with a ver dict of guilty against Teen Cowrie, and acquitted the rest of the prisoners.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1832.

Muddosooden Ghose, and Mudden Mohun Ghose, on being arraigned at the bar, were indicted for having burgla riously entered the dwelling house of one Joysing Doss, on the night of the 26th December last, and feloniously carried away two strings of pearls value £10, a gold champa value £15 two large pearls value £10, two rings set with brilliants, value £7.10 and divers other articles, the property of the aforesaid Joy Sing Doss. Each of the prisoners pleaded "not guilty." The prosecutor resides in the Burra Bazar, where he keeps a shop for the sale of cloths. On the night of the 26th January last, about half past 9 o'clock, he left home, first giving directions to some servants to close his premises, for the purpose of attending a wedding which was being celebrated in the neighbourhood. On his return home about gun fire on the following morning, he observed the outer gate, belonging to the compound, closed but not locked. On entering the compound he observed several articles, his property, lying scattered about. He then proceeded up to his shop, which was in the second story, where he saw the padlock which had secured the door the previous evening broken; the staple was attached to the chain. On entering his shop he immediately proceeded to a chest which contained a small box in which the jewellery had been deposited, and found it had been taken away with its contents. An almirah, which stood in the shop of the prosecutor, was also broken-open, and the contents,consisting of various pieces of piece goods, carried away. The prosecutor recollected having seen Mudden Mohun Ghose, on the evening of the robbery, at his house; he went under the pretext of looking for one Money Loll.

On the night of the 26th January last, after Jheteen Sing, a naib of Cubbadanga thanna, had gone his rounds, he was standing at his post, and saw three men approaching him from the west; on challenging them, as to who they were, they replied that they were subjects", and proceeded on their way. After they had advanced a few paces, the naib observed something bulky about two of them, and on calling to them to stop, they all ran away down a lane, but

Rahomet Ally, another naib attached to the Cubbadanga thanna, deposed: That on the morning following the robbery, about 1 o'clock, he heard a noise of "thief! thief!" and ran in the direction from whence the noise came. He was informed that the thief had run up a lane; he was followed and subsequently taken into custody. On being taken to the thanna, he gave his name Cossinauth Ghose, but at the Police, said his name was Mudden Mohun Ghose. Some of the property produced was also picked up near where the second prisoner was taken into custody. They were searched at the thanna, but only two keys and six pice were found on the person of Mudden Mohun Ghose.

Moodosooden stated in his defence, that on the above morning he was going from Garatollah home, and on his way he heard a cry of "thief, thief," and the naib caught hold of him, and shoved him in a stable, and afterwards pulled him out, and charged him with the robbery. The naib, he stated, bought some time ago, a piece of silk from him for two rupees eight annas, and had only paid him a rupee in part. The other naib, he observed, also, wanted a piece of silk, and on his remarking that he was a poor man, and unable to give him any, he threatened to make him suffer for his refusal.

The second prisoner made a similar defence.

Sir John Franks, in charging the jury, passed a high encomium on the thanna people for their vigilance in stopping and challenging persons who appeared to be of a suspicious character, and having recapitulated the evidence, ob. served, that it was for them to dispose of the case. The jury then retired, and, after an absence of about a quarter of an hour, returned with the following verdict:

We find Mudden Mohun Ghose and Muddosooden Ghose guilty of stealing the property of the prosecutor, amounting to upwards of fifty rupees, but acquit them of the burglary with which they stand indicted.

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 1832.

BEFORE SIR JOHN FRANKS.

Zohoran and Zyphoo, were ere respectively indicted with having, on the 28th October last, feloniously stolen in the dwelling house of John Muffin, a silver watch with appendages, value £15, and divers other articles of valuable jewellery, the property of the prose cutor's son, Joseph Lief Muffin; a second count in the indictment charged them with stealing a pair of gold earrings, value £6, a gold neck chain, value £20. a pair of gold bracelets, value £12, a fifty rupees bank note, No. 248, of the bank of Hindostan, and one hundred and fifty rupees in silver, and divers other articles, the property of the aforesaid John Muffin.

The particulars of the case being of an interesting nature, we have given the proceedings verbatim.

John Muffin sworn: I live in Colingah; Zohoran lived in my house for four years previous to the committal of the robbery; she has a child that was, and is still living in my house. On the night of the 28th October last, I went to bed a little after 10 o'clock, and rose about 4 o'clock on the following morning. On getting up, I went to the room adjoining my bed room, where Zohoran used to sleep, but she was not there. I made inquiries after her, but could not gain any intelligence of her. I returned to my room, to know the hour, and on looking under my pillow, found my son's watch, with its appendages, missing, and also a bunch of keys belonging to various drawers, my property. On going to a chest which was in my bed room, I found it open, and the contents carried away. On inspecting my premises, I found a back door in my compound, which had been nailed up, forced open. The keys and my son's watch, and also mine, were always kept under my pillow. I went and gave information of my loss, to Mr. Andrews. the Magistrate.

The pro

perty missing, consisted as follows:Two pair of gold earrings, a gold neck

chain, a pair of gold bracelets, a pair of gold bangles, a pair of gongorovs, two English imitation shawls, a piece of American sheeting, a pearl ring, and sundry clothes, the p roperty of my late wife; and also two pairs of gold earrings, a gold neck chain, a pair of gold bracelets, a Cashmere shawl, and a pearl ring, the property of my son.

I made every search for the prisoners, but without success, and on the 15th November last, I learnt from a chokeydar, that the prisoners had proceeded to Berhampore. Since the robbery had been committed, neither of the prisoners ever returned to my service. Zyphoo was a kitmutgar in my service, and had been with me about three months.

The prisoners were taken into custody at Berhampore, and I saw them at the Police on the 8th January last, when I charged them with the robbery. I subsequently saw a portion of my property at the Police.

Cross-examined by Zohoran.-In what capacity did I live with you? As a house keeper.

Who is the father of the child you have spoken of? I am.

Did you not give me the things, as I was in your keeping? No, I did not, you stole them.

Did you not entice me away from the house where I was living? No, I did

not.

When you wrote to Berhampore, did you not describe me as a female slave? No, I described you as a female wo

man.

By Zyphoo-Did not I accompany Zohoran as her servant? No you are in my service.

Was I not as much subject to her orders as yours? No.

Why did you destroy all my property in my house? The chokey dars searched your house, but I was not present.

Mr. Blackquire deposed. That the prisoners were sent down to Calcutta from Moorshedabad. No hopes or threats were held out to either of them. Zohoran admitted that all the property produced was found upon her. She acknowledged having taken away the whole of the property, but denied having stolen it; but on the contrary said it was given to her. The remainder of the property was lost in a gale or storm on her way to Berhampore. She had lived with the prosecutor for four years as his con