THE CHELSEA FIRE-RAISER.—James Butler was indicted for setting fire to

Mr. Downing's floor-cloth manufactory, in the King's-road, Chelsea. 'Mr. George Downing gave evidence, that on the 15th May, he saw the prisoner opposite the manufactory : on the 16th it was quite safe ; and there had been neither fire nor light in the building on the 16th, nor for at least a fortnight before. He was the first person on the spot after the alarm was given on Sunday the 17t ha, acid then the premises seemed on fire at two places. The first fire was observed in the wanit- factory, and the second- in the carpenter's shop, between thirty and forty feet distant. There was a ferocious dog on the premises, with which the prisoner was familiar, as he used to feed him. He found several brimstone matches upon the premises, nine days after the fire. Henry William Russell, a boy twelve years of age, had looked through a crevice in the paling, and seen the prisoner inside : this he remembered distinctly. He observed him run very fast from the back of the factory to the stable, where he halted. He also saw him get over the paling about ten minutes before the tire broke out. Isaac Ryde and James Jackson saw the prisoner near the premises between one and two o'clock. One of them said that he was running in all haste in an opposite direction from the manufactory. 'William Graham, one of Mr. Downing's servants, said that on the Friday before the fire, he was watering the garden, when time prisoner came up, and addressing a gross observation to him, said, 5' Graham, water away ; you shall want plenty of water soon." This was the principal evidence for the prosecution.

In his defence, the prisoner merely said that he was imument, and had wit- messes to prove it. William Butler, the prisoner's brother, was in his house in Francis-street, Chelsea-common, at ten minutes past one o'clock. The prisoner • dined with him, and remained with him till the alarm of fire was given, when he got up and went to the street. He had not been out of his brother's sight more :than five minutes, and that only when he went for some beer. He never saw riny of his sisters with a phosphorus-box. Another brother, his brother-in-law, and sister-in-Jan', spoke to the same effect. James James, a boy aged eleven, when examined ffir the prosecution, had spoken to the fact of selling a phosphorus-box to the prisoner's sistersmn the t-1;aturday. Mary Butler,aged about twelve, when examined for the defence denied that either she or her sister had bought a phos- phorus-box on that day. • The boy James was then confronted with the girl, and positively asserted that she bought the fire-box. Time girl persisted in her denial. She, too, dined with her brcaher (the prisimer) on Sunday. Mr. Sellers, chemist, remembered two girls coming for a phosphorus-box on the day before the fire; but though Mary Butler was about the size of one of them, he would uot swear positively to her identity. Elizabeth Perry said, that Mary Butler had told her that her brother had waited tea minutes for the prisoner to come to dinner. She heard Elizabeth Butler say, in the presence of Mary, that they had bought a box at Mr. Sellers's. Mary replied, "You tell stories." • The Jury deliberated for a few minutes, and then returned a verdict of Guilty. The prisoner exclaimed, " An innocent man, then, is found guilty." . • FoRGERIEs.—Charles Jones was found guilty of having uttered a forged 5/. note of the Bank of England, in payment of some shoes. • Edward Martelli and Henry Conway were convicted of having uttered a forged -('heck for 1004 with the intention of defrauding Messrs. Drummond and Co., bankers. The prisoners had by some means contrived to get cheeks belouging to the establishment ; and to one of these they forged the name of " Benjamin Worthy Horn," presented it for payment, and received the money. The case was proved by George Coombe, an accomplice.

The prisoners were afterwards tried for having forged the name of Mr. Hamlet, .-:eweller, to a check for 2001. with the intention of defrauding Messrs. Coutts and Co. bankers. Coombe was again the principal witness. This fellow, en his

cross-examination, admitted that he could not count the number of crimes he had committed. He had come to give his evidence against the prisoners from a "pare love of justice." The case was clear against Martelli, who was found guilty ; but Conway was acquitted on this charge. The prisoners appeared to be in the deepest state of mental depression during the trial. When the verdict of Not Guilty was heard by Conway, who is quite a boy in appearance, he fainted.

SILK-CurrING.—Five Spitalfields weavers were indicted for destroying silk in the loom. On account of the privations which they had suffered, theiremployers, whose silk was destroyed, declined to offer any evidence against them. They were then discharged, under the usual recognizanoes.

MANSLAUGHTER,—EdWill Martin Van Butchell, surgeon, was charged on the coroner's inquisition with the manslaughter of Mr. William Archer. It will be

recollected that Archer died soon after Van Butchell had performed an operatiou

upon him ; and that the evidence on the inquest went to show that his death hall been accelerated by the unskilful manner in which the operation had been per-

formed. No evidence to the effect was offered on the trial; and Mr. Baron Hidh lock stopped the case, on the ground that a man could nut be subjected to a pro- secution because an operation which he had performed to the best of his judgment proved unsuccessful. Verdict, Not Guilty.

ArrEmerEo CIIILD-MURDER.—Ann Chapman was found guilty of having at. tempted to strangle her child, which she left in a ditch, as mentioned in our

Police Report last week. The surgeon said that the attempt at strangulation was to the greatest extent he could conceive short of what would cause actual death. She had confessed to a constable, that she had left the child in a ditch, in the hope that some humane person would find it, but she did not tie the nband round its neck with the intention of strangling it. Site was much distressed during the trial, and fell down in convulsions.

nORBEEIES.—Edward Turner, Thomas Crowther, and Mary Stephens, were indicted for robbing Thomas Davis on the New Road. The prosecutor picked up the woman on the street; and she seems to hzeie decoyed hint to the spot where the robbery was committed, as, on her toughing, he was immediately surrounded by four or five men. They treated him with great violence ; one of them brandished a knife over his head, and another cried " Stab him, stab him ; stifle him." They robbed him of his hat, handkerchief, some money, and his watch: The .prisoners were sworn to as two of the robbers; and an additional point of circumstantial evideuce was, that their shoes agreed with the foot-prints at the spot where the crime was committed. The men were found Guilty. Punishment Death. Mary Stephens was acquitted, but she was yesterday found guilty as an ac- cessary before the fact. On the fatal verdict being returned, she was led from the bar; but in a minute or two one of the Jury objected to the verdict, as there was not, in his opinion, evidence to show that she counselled the robbery. The wo- man was again placed at the bar ; and the Jury- having considered their verdict anew, found her Not Guilty, It is a singular fact that this woman had twice been found guilty of a capital offence by Juries, who, after re-consideration acquitted her.

Richard Ellis was indicted for having, on the night of the 20th May, robbed the shop of Mr. Foulks, mercer, Little Russell-street, Covent-garden, of silks to the value of 100/. A quantity of the silk was found in his possession ; but there was no other evidence that he was concerned in the crime. He said that he bought the silk; but he did not attempt to prove the assertion. He was found Guilty. Punishment, Death.

Thomas Devine was convicted of having robbed his master of twenty sovereigns, at different times- The prisoner, said a constable, confessed that tile highest sum he had taken at one time was 6/. Prisoner—" I never told you that I took 6/. at one time. I said I took only 41." Avis—" I am sure he said 61. ; and I made a minute of it attheatime." Prisoeer-'"My mastes_Jackeri me up three days in the warehouse to make me confess, and he said if I would he would for, give me." This was denied. Puuishment,Death. TitErrs.—There were a.great many cases of theft. Among the convictions, was that of a woman for having stolen Spanish dollars to the amount-of 12/. from an old soldier; of a Spaniard who from distress stole an umbrella and great-coat ; of a man who is to be transported for seven years for seeding a live fowl ; and of a woman who was subjected to the same punishment for stealing a watch.

Mary Hewitt was found guilty of stealing some fancy articles saved from the late destructive fire at the Oxford-street Bazaar. She pleaded distress, as she had no means of purchasing bread for four starving children. A man having been found guilty of stealing a shirt, value 2s., a parish constable applied to the Common Sergeant for his expenses. Mr. Denman—" Were you examined upon the trial?" . Constable—" No, my Lord, I was not; but I went before the Grand Jury, and my name is on the back of the bill." MI...Denman- " The Court cannot allow you the expenses." Constable—"! hope your Lord- ship will order me payment: I have lost a deal of time in the business." Mr. Denman—" What do you call a deal of time ?" Constable—" Seven days, my Lord." Mr. Denman—" And pray what do you want to be allowed for the seven days ?" Constable—" I believe it is usual to allow 3s. 64 a day, my Lord." Mr. Denman—" Then that will amount to 1/. 4s. 6d. Now do you think that the County ought to allow you that sum of money for attending here seven days? and for what? (Here the learned Sergeant turned to the depositions) merely to give us this important piece of information—' I was un duty at the wa.tehlsoisse when the prisoner was brought in. I searched him, but found nothing upon him.' It really is too had, and ought not to Ice borne. I will not allow you one farthing ex- penses; and it should be understood, where constables unnecessarily force them- selves as witnesses, that the Court will not countenance such a species of fraud." A respectable young man was accused by Mr. Gwynette of having stolen his handkerchief. The prosecutor was drunk when Ice gave the young man into custody ; and for his riotous conduct he too was locked up. His witness had also been drunk, but not so disorderly. The Common Sergeant—" And were you locked up in the watchhouse for being in a state of intoxication ?" Mr. Gwynette

It is true, I was locked up." The Common Sergeant—" You cannot swear the prisoner stole your handkerchief ?" Mr. Gwynette—" I cannot, my Lord." The witness. in answer to the Common Sergeant—" I had also been drinking with Mr. Gwynette on the evening in question." The Common Sergeant—"Then, Sir, being in liquor, can you tale upon yourself to swear that the prisoner is the man who took the handkerchief from your friend's pocket ?" Witness (after some hesitation)—"! certainly should not like to swear that I clearly saw him do it." The Common Sergeant therefore directed his acquittal, and the prosecutor and his witness were refused their expenses.