
    The People vs. Ann Lolly.
    The statute of prisoners does nofeEE tend to misdemeanors.
    
      —Receiving stolen goods, Jmowin they were stolen.
    
    ~ Ann Lolly, a colored woman, was put to the bar for charged with receiving, knowing they were stolen, a number of silver spoons, sugar tongs, and valuable articIes of siIver ware"
    These goods were found secreted in the trunk and gariet 0f jpg prisoner, by the vigilance of the police officers t they were taken to the police-office, identified and claimed by William B. Hyer, and the prisoner committed for trial,
    
      Price, counsel for the prisoner,
    called witnesses to show, that a colored man by the ‘name of Davis, who it appears frequented her house, in Banker-street, had sold her the articles : that she had asked Davis before she received them, how he came by them, and that he had satisfied her they were not stolen. Some of the witnesses testified that they had been left with her in pledge, and that Davis had never returned to redeem them. The money advanced to Davis, however, bore no 'proportion to the value of the articles, whether considered as a pledge or sale.
    
      Maxwell, District Attorney,
    
    offered to read the examination of the prisoner, taken before the committing magistrate!
   Price objected, and contended that the statute under which examinations of persons charged with crimes were taken, did not extend to the present case before the court, The court decided that the examination could not be read; and there not being sufficient testimony without it, the jury acquitted her. ^  