The Proceedings of the Old Bailey

 

2142.   THOMAS STOKES was indicted for stealing, on the 19th of August, 200 yards of canvas, value 5l.; and 200 yards of Hessen, value 5l.; the goods of the   West India Dock Company, his masters; and   JAMES HALLEN, alias HALLEM , alias SMITH , for feloniously receiving the said goods, well knowing them to have been stolen; against the Statute, &c.—3rd COUNT, for receiving them of an evil-disposed person.

MESSRS. CLARKSON and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.

  RICHARD WILLIAMS . I am warehouseman in the employ of the West India Dock Company. They have a warehouse in Fenchurch-street—I am stationed there—the prisoner Stokes was one of the workmen, and has been so about two years—there was a considerable quantity of canvas in the ware house where he was, which was under his especial care—it was given out by him, and the receipts recorded by him—I have found between two and three hundred yards of that canvas, which is a quantity that could not have been taken without his missing it—he never made any complaint or representation of missing any up to the time of his being taken into custody—I have seen a man of the name of Ridler at the warehouse in Fenchurch street speaking with Stokes—that was after the Company had received, (through a person of the name of Morris,) some intimation of some of their property being stolen by some of their servants—I desired one of our people, named Cooper, to follow Ridler when he went away—it was Stokes's duty to send out from the warehouse bags containing samples of indigo, and to accompany them as far as the outer gate, where the gate-keeper was stationed—that would give him an opportunity, if he were disposed, of putting canvas or any thing else into the bags containing the indigo—the gate-keeper would put his hand on them, but not examine them narrowly—that would not enable him to detect canvas in the bag—on the 18th of August, Stokes sent out some indigo in the way I have mentioned—I should say this is a part of the canvas under Stokes's care—(looking at it)—it corresponds with cloth we have on the premises made specially for our use—there is no mark on it, but I should say it is the property of the West India Dock Company—I should say it has not been made up thus for the honest purposes of the Company—this bag which was found on Wagstaff is also the Property of the Company—some of their canvas bags which were found on Wagstaff have the appearance of having rubbed against indigo.—(See page 662.)

Cross-examined by MR. PAYNE. Q. How long had Stokes been in the employment of the Company? A. Two years or a little better, from June two years—I don't speak to any particular marks on that found at Hallem's house—I speak to it from its general appearance and from comparison with the other cloth—there have been from twenty to two hundred persons in the employ of the West India Dock Company—this canvas was in a room set specially apart for the stores—the doors of the warehouse are open during the hours of business—there are two doors to that in Stokes's department; one is open during the hours of business—Stokes has been employed in taking samples of indigo, which would take him off the premises—other people would have access to these rooms in his absence—they would go there to draw stores, but in his absence another man would be left there in charge—there is a carriage way through the yard used by the public—I cannot say what quantity of the canvas we had at one time—the whole quantity that was manufactured for the Company was 30,000 yards, but it was not all delivered at once.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Supposing any persons to have stolen these articles, would Stokes have known it? A. Yes, he would have known if a triffing article had been taken away.

COURT. Q. Why must Stokes have missed it? A. Because it was done up in bolts of seventy, seventy-one, or seventy-two yards, and therefore he must have missed it—the arrangement of the rolls round the room is such that he must—they begin at one part, and go on regularly through it—Stokes kept an account of all that came in, not of that that went out—he never made any statement of any being lost.

  ALEXANDER PATTISON . I am in the employ of Mr. John Murray, of No. 46, Church-street, Minories, a canvas merchant. My master is in the habit of manufacturing canvas for the West India Dock Company—it was of a peculiar description for their purposes—(examining the property)—we manufactured 30,000 and odd yards of this sort for the Company—the date of the contract was 1st March, and it was all delivered by July—I should say this is a part of it—it is the same width and weight—I do not think this (a piece of that found at Hallem's) is a part it.

Cross-examined by MR. PAYNE. Q. Have you any particular means of speaking to this except the general appearance of it? A. From the width and weight—there are the marks of our house on it—we make for other people as well as the West India Dock Company, but this was marked and numbered expressly for that Company, and these are their marks on some of them—there are not on this piece (a piece found at Hallem's house)

MR. CLARKSON. Q. In your judgment is it the same? A. Yes.

  MARMADUKE LOVELL (police-constable G 144.) On Wednesday, the 16th of August, I apprehended the prisoner Hallem—I met him in Old street, and took him—I was in plain clothes—I said, "Your name is Hallem, ain't it?"—he said, "No"—I said, "Yes, it is; don't deny your name"—I said, "I am an officer, and I want you, for a robbery committed at the West India Dock Company's warehouse"—he said, "I don't know any thing about it"—"Well," I said, "I will take you for Hallem, and you must go to the station-house"—I said, "What is the use of your denying your name; it will make it all the worse for you"—he said, a person being pounced upon as he was might say twenty things—he said, "I can soon correct my error; my name is Hallem"—I took him to the station house—nothing else passed—I afterwards proceeded to his house—I had been three or four days watching his house, which is No. 71, Phillip-street,

Commercial-road, thinking he would come home—I never saw him come home—I went to the house, and searched it, the same evening—I there found some of these articles in a cupboard on the second floor, and these bags down below in a shed under the stairs, and these other pieces of canvas in the second-floor back room—they are what the witnesses have spoken of.

Hallem. Q. Where was I when you said you wanted me for a robbery? Witness. In Old-street—I told him it was for a robbery when I took him into custody.

  ELIZABETH ELLEN LOWE . I am the wife of Joshua Reed Lowe, a working optician, living in Glover's-hall-court, Beech-lane. A man of the name of Wagstaff lodged in the same house, in the second-pair front room—I do not know whether he was acquainted with the prisoner Hallem—I saw them together on the 8th of August, between ten and eleven o'clock, at my place—they went away together—Hallem came in the morning first, at a quarter before eight o'clock, and my husband answered him—Wagstaff was not up—I saw him going away from my door, with Wagstaff, between ten and eleven o'clock—Wagstaff returned about a quarter past twelve o'clock—he brought a bag on his shoulder—it was shown to me yesterday—it was such a one as this, and bulky—he went up stairs with it, came down again, and went out, he returned shortly after with a porter, and carried it away—this was on the 8th.

  GEORGE MILLER . I am a porter. I was employed by Wagstaff, on the 8th of August, to carry a bag from No. 4, Glover's-hall-court, Beech lane—I carried it in the direction I was told, and was stopped by an officer—the officer took the bag, and took Wagstaff into custody—the bag continued in custody—this is the bag—it was taken by Peak the officer—I met Hallem the next morning—I had never seen him till the day before—he was quite a stranger to me—I was in Whitecross-street—he said, "Was not you the man that carried that load yesterday?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "How has he got on?"—I do not think he mentioned the man's name—I said, "I got discharged, he was remanded till Friday"—he said, "It is all right, he will get off on Friday"—nothing more passed—I never saw him again.

Hallem. Q. Did you ever state this before? A. No—I was not asked before the magistrate.

Hallem. It is false—you were asked, and said you never saw me before.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Were you ever asked if you saw Hallem? No, not till this morning.

  THOMAS COOPER . I am a watchman at the West India Dock. I remember being directed to watch a man there—I know Ridler—I did not see him come to the docks, but he was pointed out to me by Mr. Williams, and I followed him from Fenchurch-street, just by the warehouse, a very little way from the gate, to the Minories—when I got to the Minories, I saw Hallem, and they went into a gin-shop together, and then they came out and went into an oil shop together, where they sell mats and other things—Ridler came out in about twenty minutes—then they separated.

  MATTHEW PEAK (police-constable G 198.) I was on duty, on the 8th of August, in Bath-street, City-road. I saw the porter carrying a bag—I stopped, and asked him questions—I took the bag, and took a man named Wagstaff into custody—he was about twenty or thirty yards from the man who was carrying the bag—that was the man who was tried here yesterday

—I attended before the magistrates—Wagstaff, and Hallem, and Stokes were jointly charged before the magistrates.

  WILLIAM BRAND . I am a deputy marshal of London. On Saturday, the 19th of August, I took a man of the name of Ridler—I searched his lodgings the same day, and found thirty pieces of canvas, small and large, these are five of them.

  ALEXANDER PATTISON re-examined. These five pieces, I believe, form part of the canvas that was manufactured for the West India Dock Company—here is part of the seventeenth piece of it among them.

  RICHARD WILLIAMS Cross-examined by MR. PRICE. Q. Are you acquaint ed with Mr. Morris? A. He first introduced himself to me in May—Mr. Tyrrell introduced the name, not the man—Morris stated that he could afford me information of a robbery being carried on at the West India Docks warehouse, by a man of the name of Stokes—Morris did not engage me to employ a person to purchase stolen commodities belonging to the Company, for the purpose of detecting the thief—I never made any offer of a bonus to Morris at any time, for doing any thing towards a discovery of any robbery on the Company, nor did any body in my presence to my re collection—I had an interview with Mr. Tyrrell—he informed me that information had been communicated, that the East India Dock Company had been robbed by one of their servants, which did not apply to them, but as we had a man of that name it must apply to us—I am not able to say whether Morris was employed by some official gentlemen, to use what means he thought proper for detecting robberies on the Company—he had an interview with me, and I took him to Mr. Longlands, the secretary, to afford the information.

Q. Did you tell Morris, at any time, that any servant in the employ of the Company, who was suspected, should have the opportunity of robbing the Company, for the purpose of detection? A. That he should not be interfered with.

Q. Was that for the purpose of affording Mr. Morris greater facility in using his measures for the detection of robbery? A. I know nothing of that—it was Mr. Morris's observation that he might not be interfered with—I did not propose at any time to absent myself for the purpose of affording facilities; on the contrary, I was more about the warehouse and the yard—I had not suspicion of any of the servants at that time—I had no suspicion after the communication made by Morris, and have not at this moment—the Company have been robbed, but the prisoner is no longer their servant—I have had this suspicion since I saw Morris—in con sequence of seeing him I entertained these suspicions slightly; but they were shaken very shortly after having seen Morris—I did not believe it—I believe it now—Mr. Dixon is the inspector of our Company's police—I have seen Morris in his company—he was not called in to a conference between me and Morris—Mr. Dixon is here—I did not give Mr. Dixon instructions to look out after any of the servants of the Company—by virtue of his office he took what measures he thought fit—he had no instructions from me—he directed me that a man would be sent up to watch the premises—I had nothing to do with it—I was desired to allow him to proceed as he thought proper under Mr. Dixon's direction—I afforded him the facility of residence on the premises, for their placing themselves on the premises—I mean Cooper and Mr. Dixon—I know nothing of Morris being employed—he was to be referred to Mr. Dixon—I do not know, of my own knowledge, that any sum of money was offered

Morris—Mr. Forrester was not employed, to my knowledge—I do not know the man—Morris asked that he should not be interfered with—we were from May till August before we discovered any delinquency in the servants—we abandoned all idea of detecting them after May—we discovered that depredations had been committed on the 11th of August, and our suspicions had been attempted to be excited in May; but they were not confirmed in August—when I was told of it in May I did not believe it—after the detection in August I began to think there was something in it—that proved there was some ground for my suspicions, and that I was mistaken in May.

MR. CLARKSON. Q. You say that you first saw Morris, after having heard him spoken of by Mr. Tyrrell; did he stipulate that he should be paid money by the Company on the apprehension of the party, and more on the conviction? A. He stated that he had been promised a sum of money—that he had had some engagement with Mr. Tyrrell to be remunerated for the information—I took him up to Mr. Longlands, and he referred him to Mr. Dixon, the principal of the police—Morris was under an engagement to furnish the West India Dock Company with information till the 19th or 20th of May, when they declined to have any more to do with him—he came to me to state why he had not detected the party, and said that the man should be forced to commit the robbery, if I would be a consenting party—he said the party should see Stokes, and tell him, if he did not make the supply of cloth that was required, that the man should come down and make the disclosure to me—I told him there was a probability that the man had seen his error, but I would never be a party to force a man to commit a crime, it should be on his own head, and he should take all the responsibility, but I could not lay my head on my pillow if I did—I do not know that Morris has been repeatedly charged with thefts—I did not know that at that time he had been charged with burglary, or I would not have admitted him into my presence—he came to me as a person who could give information—I did not know that he had received 200l. or 300l. from the Custom-house—I know he had presented himself to Mr. Tyrrel under the name and pretence of an attorney—I was not present at any thing that Morris said about the receivers—I did not know that he had made a stipulation that his men, the receivers, should be protected—I received Morris, and acted under the direction of my superior, under a belief that he was able to detect a robbery on the Company by some of their men, and I referred him to Mr. Longlands, the secretary, and then to Mr. Dixon—the discovery of the robbery on the 8th of August was totally unconnected with Morris, and unknown to him.

MR. PRICE called

  JOHN MORRIS . I am an artist's colour-man, and live in Angel-court, Throgmorton-street. I know the prisoner Hallen—I know Mr. Tyrrell, the East India Dock Company's solicitor—I was introduced to him on the subject of the prisoner Hallen—I cannot say when—it is a good many months back—I gave Mr. Tyrrell to understand that I had an intimation given me that the Dock Company had been robbed—he asked me to pro duce some of the articles—I produced some pieces of canvas—he said he should like to see a bolt; and some time afterwards I produced a bolt to him, and after a great deal of inquiry, he said he believed this person was not in their employ, but the West India Dock Company's, and he gave me a note to Mr. Williams—I saw him on the subject, and Mr. Williams desired

me to see Mr. Dixon, and said I had better go on the coach to Blackwall—I said I had some business to attend to, but I went down soon after, and saw Mr. Dixon, and there was an agreement—Mr. Williams and Mr. Dixon said that my men whom I employed in the affair should not be hurt—I told them I did not know this myself, that I had it from another per son who produced to me some portions of canvas, and I produced them to Mr. Tyrrell and Mr. Williams—I had employed Hallem for the purpose of obtaining that canvas—Mr. Tyrrell gave me two sovereigns for the purpose of getting it, and I left a bolt of canvas at his office—Hallem was employed by me to purchase canvas of this description of the Company's servants, for the purpose of detection.

MR. CLARKSON. Q. Which of the servants? A. I believe the man's name was Stokes—I have been an artist's colourman, I suppose, eighteen months or two years—I have lived at No. 16, Angel-court, four or five months—I have the lease of the house—I have likewise a manufactory in Moorfields, where I keep several men at work—I get my living as a tradesman—I got a bolt of canvas from Hallen—I cannot tell on what day, but I produced it, as soon as I got it, to Mr. Tyrrell—I have been in custody, but the Magistrate would not hear the case.

Q. Have you ever been in custody for felony? A. I do not under stand what you mean by felony—I have never been in custody for picking pockets—I have never been in custody for burglary—I know Lee the officer—I have never been locked up an hour—there was a man taken up, who was walking with me, but the Magistrate would not hear any thing against me—I may have had a glass of grog too much, and have been fined—I never was locked up—I never was detained an hour for felony—if I have been in custody half a dozen times, it has only been as I have stated, in an evening—I do not know that I have been in custody half a dozen times—I would not swear that I have—I have not acted as an attorney in the course of this prosecution—I was not taken to Mr. Price—it was done through the channel that introduced me to Mr. Timothy Tyrrell—I do not think the gentleman would like to be named—it was Mr. Hobler.

Q. Was it arranged between you and Mr. Hobler that you should go and instruct Mr. Price? A. One of Mr. Hobler's clerks—if you can prove that I was in custody before that, it is more than I can recollect—I never was in custody for felony—I was taken in custody to Lambeth-street, and charged with felony by a policeman, for being along with a man, and the Magistrate would not hear any thing against me—I cannot tell when that was—it was six or seven years ago—I have never been locked up an hour since then—I do not recollect it—I say that I have not, upon my recollection—there is a great deal of prejudice between me and Lee.

Q. Did you not get 400l. for affecting to give information on the subject of the Custom-house robbery, and then you did not give a word of it? A. That has nothing to do with it—the government were well satisfied with what I did, and paid me very handsomely—Mr. Hobler paid me, I do not say what—Mr. Williams urged me to urge Hallem to urge Stokes to commit a felony—I might have said that Hallem was the man to manage these things, and would always come it it me—I do not recollect saying that there was no fear of his being taken into custody, as he was too downey a cove to be caught with any property in his possession—I have applied to be let into Newgate to confer with Hallem—I have known Hallem eight or nine years, but I do not think he was acquainted with me—I knew a person of the name Jordan, the

thief who was transported for robbing the Custom-house, and Sullivan—I do not know what you mean by his being a friend of mine—I have been in his company, and in Lords' company, and members of parliament—I have known Hallem some years—I never knew any dishonest action of him—I do not recollect saying there was hardly a good old thief left in London, and if Hallem was convicted, my work would be stopped—I do not like to swear anything that is wrong.

MR. TYRRELL examined by MR. PRICE. I am solicitor to the East India Dock Company—I introduced Morris to the West India Dock Company for the purpose of detecting some robbery—I did not know Hallem's name, but Morris called, and said the person had got into difficulty, and as I had introduced him to Mr. Williams, he hoped I should interfere—this was a very short time ago.

MR. PAYNE. Q. Was the prisoner Stokes in the employ of the East India Dock Company? A. No.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Is there a person of the name of Stokes in the East India Dock Company? A. There is—the first introduction of Morris to me was on the 19th of April—he was to have money—he produced to me a piece of canvas, which he represented as part of the pillage, and upon that I transferred him over to the other Company.

MR. CLARKSON to MR. WILLIAMS. Q. Did you ever tell Morris to urge Hallem on, that Stokes might commit a robbery? A. Decidedly not—nothing of the sort.

HALLEM— GUILTY . Aged 34.— Transported for Fourteen Years.

STOKES— GUILTY . Aged 33.—(See Page 666.)