would "give me something for myself."

Feeling, however, a great desire to sift further into the matter, I
feigned to withdraw, but kept my eye upon the boy, and followed him
for nearly two hours, until I saw him join two other boys, one of whom
I had not seen before, and who had a bag with something very heavy in
it, which, I have every reason to believe, were weights, or something
which they had obtained in a similar manner. Wishing to ascertain the
fact, I approached them, but they no sooner perceived me, than the
little fellow who had been the principal actor in the affair, called
out "_Nose, Nose_,"--a signal-word, no doubt, agreed upon amongst
them,--when they all ran down some obscure alleys. I followed, but
was knocked down, as if by accident, by two ill-looking fellows, who
continued to detain me with apologies till the boys had got safely
away. I have little doubt that this was an instance of that organized
system of depredation of which I have before spoken, and that the
man who took so active a part at the first, was at the bottom of
the business; and, in fact, the tutor and employer of the predatory
urchins. His activity in preventing the boy from being taken back to
the shop--his anxiety to promote a subscription for the boy,--and,
lastly, his threat of personal violence if I interfered in the matter,
by continuing to question the child,--all these circumstances confirm
me in the opinion.

It is only by the knowledge of this fact--the association of infant
offenders with those of maturer and hardened habits--that we can
account for such cases as the following.--On the 17th of July, 1823,
a child _only seven years old_, was brought before the magistrate at
Lambeth Street office, charged with frequently robbing his mother,
and was ordered to be locked up all night in the gaol-room. In the