CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
Taken in Short-hand
JAMES DROVER BARNETT
Rolls Chambers, 89, Chancery Lane.
SESSION I. TO SESSION VII.
GEORGE HEBERT, CHEAPSIDE.
On the Queen's Commission of the Peace,
OYER AND TERMINER, AND GAOL DELIVERY
The City of London,
AND GAOL DELIVERY FOR THE
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, AND THE PARTS OF THE COUNTIES OF ESSEX, KENT, AND SURREY, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,
Held on Monday, November 24th, 1851, and following Days.
Before the Right Hon. WILLIAM HUNTER, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Right Hon. John Lord Campbell, Lord Chief Justice of Her Majesty's Court of Queen's Bench; the Right Hon. Sir James Parke, Knt., one of the Barons of Her Majesty's Court of Exchequer; Sir William Henry Maule, Knt., one of Her Majesty's Justices of Her Court of Common Pleas: Charles Farebrother, Esq.; Samuel Wilson, Esq.; Sir George Carroll, Knt.; John Kinnersley Hooper, Esq.; and Sir James Duke, Bart, M.P., Aldermen of the said City: The Right Hon. James Archibald Stuart Wortley, Q.C., M.P., Recorder of the said City: Thomas Challis, Esq.; Thomas Sidney, Esq., M.P.; Francis Graham Moon, Esq.; William Lawrence, Esq.; Sir Robert Walter Carden, Knt.; and William Cubitt, Esq., Aldermen of the said City: Edward Bullock, Esq., Common Serjeant of the said City; and Russell Gurney, Esq., Q.C., Judge of the Sheriffs' Court: Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and Gaol Delivery of Newgate, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
THOMAS COTTKRELL, Esq.
JAMES JOSIAH MILLARD, Esq.
JOHN STEPHEN S. HOPWOOD, Esq.
LIST OF JURORS.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
HUNTER, MAYOR. FIRST SESSION.
A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—An obelisk (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, November 24th, 1851.
PRESENT—The RIGHT HON. THE LORD MAYOR; SIR GEORGE CARROLL, Knt., Ald.; Sir JAMES DUKE, Bart. Ald.; Mr. RECORDER; Mr. Ald. MOON; Mr. Ald. LAWRENCE; and Mr. Ald. CUBITT.
Before Mr. Recorder and the First Jury.
MESSRS. BALLANTINE and RIBTON conducted the Prosecution. The COURT doubted whether this was a matter in which it had jurisdiction; the indictment stating that "it became necessary and proper" to make the declaration in question, whereas it. was a mere voluntary act of the prisoner.
MR. BALLANTINE contended that although it was a voluntary act, the declaration was necessary, in order to obtain the object which he had in view. The COURT would not decide the point, but would proceed with the case, and reserve it if is became necessary.
THOMAS HOLT . In the early part of Nov., last year, Mr. Stafford was acting as my solicitor—I went with him on 5th Nov., in consequence of an appointment, to the prisoner's residence—some conversation took place between the prisoner and Mr. Stafford on the subject of an advance of 320l.—I was to receive security for 350l., which I was to receive back, the additional 30l. being a bonus for advancing the money—a declaration was read over in my presence, and the prisoner's—the negotiation was not completed, as my solicitor did not get there in time to meet me.
Prisoner. Q. Was that declaration read over in your presence? A. Yes; by Mr. Stafford—I have not the least doubt of it.
WILLIAM STAFFORD . I am a solicitor, of Buckingham-street, Strand. Mr. Thomas Holt is a client of mine—I have known the prisoner twenty-five years, but not to be on terms of communication—on 31st Oct., last year, he applied to me to know if I could raise 500l. on the furniture and household effects of a gentleman of first-rate standing—after some little debate, I told him I had no doubt I could—he then said, "Then it is for your humble servant"—I made some little hesitation, but he had got his carriage at my door, and urged me to go over and look at the property—I went with him in
his carriage to Holly-house, New Kent-road—I was shown the furniture, and from my previous knowledge of the prisoner, I was perfectly staggered to see him in such a position of life—it was a large house, elegantly furnished—he said it contained twenty-two rooms—I did not go over them all—I agreed that 350l. should be advanced—I in point of fact agreed that the 500l. should be advanced, but he was to produce his plate first—he made a communication to me the following day, saying that 350l. would answer his purpose; and, as I had no doubt about the value of the furniture, I assented—I told him that as this must be a matter strictly conducted on principles of business, I should require him to make a solemn declaration, under the Act of Parliament, that the property was not in any way encumbered—(on my first going to his house, I asked him if the property was not settled on his wife—he said, "Oh! no, my dear fellow, I have been doing excellently, I have been getting 3,000l. a year for the last three years")—he appointed to call at my office, in Buckingham-street, on the Tuesday morning prior to the appointment to make the declaration at the Bow-street police-office—he did not call—he agreed to make the declaration—it was prepared, and he was to have sent me the inventory of the furniture—on the Tuesday morning, instead of calling on me, he sent his carriage for me, and I took the declaration and other papers with me to his house, and found him there waiting, Mr. Holt had not arrived—he arrived afterwards, and in his presence I read the declaration over to the prisoner, who had gone out in the mean-time between my arrival and Mr. Holt's, to declare to it at the Southwark police-office—I had read it over to him first—he brought it back to me—I said, "We can't complete the business to-day, you never sent me the inventory of the furniture"—he said he had sent it by a friend of his, and he concluded that I should come with the securities perfect—I did not go with him to the Southwark police-court—he returned with the declaration, and said he had been—he said, "Here is the declaration"—I examined it, and it appeared to have been perfectly made—after Mr. Holt arrived, it was read over again in his presence and the prisoner's—320l. was advanced on that day on the urgent application of the prisoner, he giving me his assurance that the deed should be executed as soon as the inventory was attached to it—this is the bill of sale (produced)—I have not got a farthing of the money back.
Prisoner. Q. Are you quite sure you read that declaration over to me? A. Most decidedly, and I read it over in your presence when you came back—you did not bring the declaration back to my chambers and tell me there was no Magistrate there, and would not be for two hours, that he was gone to take the statement of some man who was dying in St. Bartholomew's hospital; on the contrary, you gave me the declaration complete and perfect on your return.
NICHOLAS EDWARDS . I am chief clerk at the Southwark police-court. This declaration was made there when I was acting as clerk—this is Mr. A'Beckett's signature—he is one of the metropolitan police Magistrates, acting for that district, and in that court.
Prisoner. Q. Do you remember what time of day that declaration was made? A. I do not, nor do I recollect it being made, only by the Magistrate's signature, and my handwriting to the date, which is 5th Nov., 1850—I do not recollect Mr. A'Beckett going to one of the hospitals on 5th Nov. to take the declaration of a dying man, and that the business was postponed for two hours—it is very probable, if he went, Mr. Noake's, the second clerk, went with him, and he can tell—there is no book which will show whether Mr. A'Beckett was absent from 12 to 2 o'clock that day—his usual
tours are from 10 to 5—I make no note if the Magistrate goes away for two or three hours, but if he went to take an examination I should have the examination itself.
MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Whose initials are these on the declaration? A. Mr. A'Beckett's; here are two instances where his attention has been called to interlineations, these are his initials to them, "G. A. B.," and this "G. A. B." is in my writing—I do not generally put the Magistrate's initials myself, but my attention was called to it a few minutes after the declaration was made—Mr. A'Beckett was absent for a few minutes, and I changed the county from Middlesex to Surrey, and put the initials, but he disapproved of it afterwards—these other two are in the Magistrate's writing, and this is mine—sometimes declarations are brought signed, the Magistrate then asks the party if it is his signature, and certifies to it on its being admitted.
MR. STAFFORD re-examined. The word "Surrey" is in my writing, I altered it—it was originally to have been sworn to at Bow-street—the signature to this declaration is the prisoner's—as far as I know he dust have signed it at the office.
The declaration being read, was by John Simpson, of Holly-house, to the effect that he was absolutely possessed of, and entitled to, in his own right, all the furniture, plate, and goods, horse, carriage, wines, &c, at Holly-house, and that they were not the subject of any other deed of settlement, charge, or incumbrance whatever. Signed "Geo. Simpson." Declared before me, Nov. 5,1850, G. A'Beckett.
THOMAS WILLIS . I produce a bill of sale of the household furniture of the prisoner to Messrs. Bullock—I was attesting witness to it—it if for 640l., and for further advances—it was executed by him (This being read, was a bill of sale by the prisoner to Messrs. Bullock, of his furniture and effects at Holly. lodge for 640l., with a provision that it should be void upon the prisoner repaying the 640l., with 16l. for interest, before February 16th.)
RICHARD HENRY BULLOCK . I am one of the gentlemen who advanced money to the prisoner on this bill of sale—we advanced 790l., and were called upon at different times to pay rent, taxes, and executions, amounting to about 100l. more—in the beginning of this year we sold the furniture—it did not realize the amount of our claim—we were in possession of the house in the intermediate time—we had not a party in possession all the time; but after—wards we thought it safer to put a party in to take care of the things, which we did two or three months afterwards.
Prisoner. Q. What sum did you advance in the first instance? A. 600l. in cash, the 40l. being a bonus; we afterwards advanced you 150l., of which you paid off 100l. in cash, on 30th Dec—we had to pay 45l. for half a year's rent—18l. 10s. 1d. to a sheriff's officer, for several articles seized—paving and lighting rate, 3l. 8s.—assessed and land taxes, 11l. 18s.—property-tax, 2l. 0s. 10d.—gas, 3l. 13s. 2d.—also, the keep of two horses, filing affidavit, and other things—this (produced) is the account copied from our ledger—the property realized 526l. when sold; more than 200l. is owing to us now—I have heard you say that the two days of the sale were exceedingly wet—I think the things sold very well; that was the general opinion.
COURT. Q. Had you a valuation made before you advanced the money? A. I went over the property myself, and estimated it at something like 800l.—I did not tell the prisoner what I estimated it at—the price I put on it was not the invoice price of the goods; they were not new, but were very nice goods—the rent was due at Christmas; we paid it on 14th Feb.
Prisoner's Defence. It was not till 11 o'clock to-day that I knew the case was coming on; I am taken by surprise, and deserted by my friends; my attorney is not here; my intention in raising the second mortgage, which I admit having raised, was covered by the consideration that I had paid upwards of 3,000l. for the goods, which form the subject of it, which I have my receipts to show; they were of the best quality, and I paid ready money for them, to Taylor and Sons, Alderman Hunter and Sons, and firms in that eminent position which only sell articles of very considerable value; and I considered that if the furniture went to sale, it would, at least, realize 1,200l. or 1,400l.; the auctioneers of whom I bought them were all ready to depose that they were of a fair and reasonable value; that they had received the money for them, and would take them back at a loss of 25l. per cent.; the things sold for 526l. on two days, during the whole of which it rained incessantly; the curtains which had cost 25 guineas sold for 3l.; and a table which cost 30 guineas sold for 7l.; and other articles which cost 20l. or 30l. sold for 3l. or 4l.; it is quite true I made the declaration, but it was never read over to me; the arrangement had been, that I was to be at Mr. Stafford's chambers at 11, to go to the police-office to make it; circumstances rendered it impossible for me to go, and I sent to ask Mr. Stafford to come over to me, and I would make the declaration at Surrey, instead of Middlesex, which would save his time also; he came, and brought the declaration, handed it to me, and I took it to the police-office; I got there about a quarter past 12, and found the Magistrate had gone to the hospital to take the deposition of a person not expected to live; he did not return till 2; the declaration, therefore, could not have been made in the way suggested by Mr. Stafford; it is a failure of memory with him; the declaration was not read over; I took it to be a declaration showing ownership, possession, and payment; I told my attorney it was not necessary to read over the warrant of attorney, as it came from the office of Stafford and Son; he said it was his duty to read it over, and he did; but I was looking at the fire, and amusing myself, thinking it perfectly unnecessary; it is quite true, I ought to have read it over, and if I had I should never have made it; bills being posted about saying that it was a forced sale, is another reason why the property did not realize its value, and 90l. being deducted for accounts paid after I left Holly-house, took me by surprise; I was not dependent on the sale of the property for the amount; I had a large professional income, and could have paid the amounts from sources of my own; but in consequence of executions against me, I was obliged to leave my office, or I could have paid it, and been perfectly free; I had no knowledge of the existence of the indictments against me; they were preferred without going before a Magistrate, and Mr. Stafford met me in Pall-mall, and gave me in custody; it is perfectly true, that I concealed from Mr. Stafford the fact of money having been raised on the goods, but I had other resources out of which I intended to pay him.
COURT to MR. STAFFORD. Q. What business was the prisoner? A. He was in the office of Richards and Waller, of New Inn, solicitors—I only knew him through his principals—I have seen him at intervals for twenty-five years—he was an agent for all manner of things—he has taken the benefit of the Insolvent Act twice.
Prisoner. I paid 20s. in the pound.
GUILTY . Aged 43. [See next trial for punishment.]
MESSRS. BALLANTINE and COCKLE conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM STAFFORD . I am solicitor to Mr. Thomas Holt. On 31st. last year, the prisoner applied to me for an advance of 600l.—he proposed the security of the household furniture, plate, &c, of the gentleman upon whose behalf he professed to apply, which he afterwards declared to be himself—he had his carriage at the door, and at his solicitation I went with him to his house, called Holly-house, in the New Kent-road—I went over the principal rooms of the house, the drawing-room, dining-room, chief bedrooms, and so forth—I then told him. that my opinion unhesitatingly was that the property had cost him more money, but I could not advise any client to lend 600l. upon it without the valuation of an auctioneer an to what it was likely to realise—he had spoken of having a large amount of plate, and I said, "If you will let me see the plate, I shall be able to judge without any difficulty"—he said the plate was locked up previous to his wife going out of town, and she was then at Herne Bay—I saw the furniture, linen, china, glass, and other things, except the wine—I said to him, in rather a familiar manner, "Why, my dear fellow, you have got into a very splendid position here; it this at all settled on your wife?"—he said No; that be had been doing a very successful business, amounting to 3,000. a year, for several years past in the law agency, and that he had got far above the world; but he explained to me that the alterations then in progress in the law had rather interfered with the coming off of some negotiations which he had on hand—he distinctly Stated that it was his own property—I asked him; and he stated that after applying the money an he proposed, which he was seeking to raise through me, he should not owe 20/. in the world; when I asked him if there was any settlement upon his wife and family, and when he declared there was nothing of that kind, I afterwards told him that I must treat his application strictly as a matter of business, and I must request him to make the usual statutory declaration that the property was free from any incumbrance whatever, and he said, "Oh, my dear Sir! I will make it with the greatest pleasure, without any hesitation whatever; when I apply the money an I propose, I shall not owe 20/. in the world"—it was in consequence of the representation that he was possessed of this property, and that it was not subject to any charge or incumbrance, that I got the money for him.
COURT. Q. But he had not, at that time, told you that there was no encumbrance upon it? A. No; he bad not in direct terms told me that, but on my proposing the declaration he distinctly stated that there was not any encumbrance of any sort or character—the words he used were, "Oh my dear Sir! there is not any encumbrance, no man has a claim of a shilling upon it; and when I have applied the money I am seeking to raise through you as I propose, I shall not owe 20l. in the world"—in consequence of that I advanced him 320l., in one 300l.—note and one for 20l., that was the money of Mr. Holt.
Cross-examined by MR. WORSLEY. Q. Do you know whether any of this money which you so advanced to Mr. Simpson, has been repaid by him? A. Not a farthing, either to me or Mr. Holt—I think it was about 12 o'clock in the day that I went to the prisoner's house—I saw four or five servants there, and one or two children—the conversation took place in that principal drawing-room—no one was present besides the prisoner and myself, the prisoner's great object was secresy; he did not want his establishment to know that he was raising this money, he told me so—I did not ask for any third party to be present—the question at that time was merely an to the security—I remarked to him, "My dear fellow, you have got into a very splendid
position here;" I did not say that the property was worth more than the sum he asked me to advance upon it—I said it had no doubt cost him more—the property appeared to be in very good condition; but I spoke of his splendid position with reference to my knowledge of his previous state of things—I went there to satisfy myself as to the value of the property, and I refused to lend him 500l. on it—I dare say it might have cost him more, but I did not think it would realise 500l.—I did not employ an appraiser, but I suggested so doing, and he in consequence abated the amount of his demand from 500l. to 350l.—at our first interview, in answer to my observation with regard to the furniture, he was to have made arrangements to let me see the plate—it is not for me to say why he did not carry out that arrangement, but he called on me next day, and said he should only want 350l.—he did not wish the property to be seen by an appraiser, bnt he said, "My dear fellow, when I show you my plate you will be perfectly satisfied"—that was when I told him I could not advise any client of mine to advance 500l. on the furniture without the appraisement of an auctioneer—he did not tell me that he did not wish to have an auctioneer—he deemed it unnecessary—he said so—in answer to my suggestion, that I would not advise any client to advance 500l. without the valuation of an appraiser, he said, "Oh! my dear Sir, there is no occasion for that when I show you my plate"—he did not on that day, or the next, express any desire that an appraiser should be sent.
MR. COCKLE. Q. Did you, in point of fact, see the plate at all? A. Never; it was in consequence of not seeing the plate that the proposed advance was abated from 500l. to 350l.
THOMAS HOLT . Mr. Stafford was acting as my solicitor in the early part of Nov. last year—I saw the prisoner at his own residence, in the presence of Mr. Stafford, on 5th Nov.—Mr. Stafford said that the inventory of the furniture, plate, &c, had not arrived at his office when he came away, and in consequence of that nothing could be done respecting paying the money,. but he would read over the declaration to me in his presence, which he did—I then told Mr. Stafford, to save me the trouble of coming again I would pay the money to him, which I did in the prisoner's presence—I gave 320/. to Mr. Stafford—I have never received a farthing of that money back again—(looking at the declaration) I do not remember this paper; it appears to be the same that was read over to me—if I were to hear it read I should know whether the contents are the same (read)—it is quite the same—it was read over before I handed over the money.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you ever applied for any of the money back again? A. Certainly I did when it came due in Feb. and March—I have pot had an indemnity from Mr. Stafford for the amount.
MR. STAFFORD re-examined. This is the declaration which I read over to Mr. Holt, and I read it over as an inducement to obtain from him the money—this is the prisoner's handwriting—I read it over to Mr. Simpson, previous to the arrival of Mr. Holt, and I read it over to Mr. Holt audibly, in the presence of Mr. Simpson, explaining to him that the absence of the inventory which prevented my completing the bill of sale, would prevent the completion of the business, then and there; but the matter had so far progressed that he might venture to leave the money with me, and I would forward him the security—at the time it was read over to Mr. Holt, it was already signed and declared—it is precisely in the same state now as it was then; it has never been out of my possession since.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you with the prisoner before the Magistrate when he made the declaration? A. No; he left the house to go there—I
waited, expecting Mr. Holt to come there—the prisoner returned with the declaration signed by himself and the Magistrate, as it it now—I should not have ventured to ask Mr. Holt for the 350l.; but for the fact of the declaration being in my possession.
COURT. Q. Can you tell how long he was absent? A. I should think about twenty-five minutes, not more—certainly not two hours.
GEORGE TURNER . I am the attesting witness to this document—I saw it executed by the defendant on 5th Nov., 1850—possession of the property was afterwards given to Mr. Stafford—(The deed was here put in and read in part as before.)
Cross-examined. Q. When was possession given? A. On the same day, 5th Nov.—I was not the man in possession—possession was given to Mr. Stafford, by the delivery of one chair in the name of the whole; I saw that done.
RICHARD HENRT BULLOCK . I remember the execution of a bill of sale by the defendant—after which I advanced him at first 640l.—that was in Aug., 1850—it was 600l. in cash, and 40l. for the advance, which was to be deducted in the event of our making a sale of the property—I afterwards advanced him 150l. more—I cannot exactly tell the amount of our liability—the amount secured by the bill of sale was 790—we occasionally made disbursements to protect ourselves and the property; I should say about 100l.—a cheque for 100l. was paid back by the prisoner—the property was afterwards sold at the beginning of this year—I was not in London then—the property was in our possession all the time until the sale—two different parties were taking care of it for us.
Cross-examined. Q. When did the sale take place. A. In March, this year—the 100l. was repaid on 30th Dec. 1850.
MR. BULLOCK re-examined. I think the first person was put in possession on the 12th Oct.—that was a woman—she was withdrawn, and a man was put in possession on 7th Dec.—(The bill of sale was here read in part as before)—the furniture realised, I think, 526l. under the sale—there were some articles of plate and jewellery sold afterwards, which amounted to 135l.—they were sold under the same bill of sale.
MR. WORSLEY. Q. Did you attend the sale yourself? A. No; my brother acted as auctioneer—the property that sold for 135l. was deposited with us in the first instance—that was sold at our rooms—it was property that was named in the bill of sale, but we did not wish to dispose of it until we saw no chance of the money being repaid—we sold that on 11th April.
MR. COCKLE. Q. From 16th Aug. till the plate was actually sold, was it in your possession at your office? A. Yes, all the plate sold in that sale, with the horse and carriage—the plate was never out of our possession after 16th Aug. till it was sold.
COURT. Q. I think you said there was some plate included in the goods sold for 526l.? A. No; we only sold a portion of the plate.
JURY. Q. What amount in nett money had you advanced before 5th Nov.? A. 750l.—the 100l. was repaid on 30th Dec.
The RECORDER expressed a doubt whether the declaration had been strictly, proved so as to be received; the Act of Parliament required the best evidence of the signature, and it was a question whether the proof of the handwriting was sufficient, without. calling the Magistrate's clerk. MR. COCKLE did not propose to use the document as a declaration, but as a means made use of by,
the prisoner to obtain the money, although he contended that the prisoner having produced it as a declaration made by him before a Magistrate, would render is receivable, it having been recently held that an admission by a party of the contents of a document was sufficient, MR. WORSLEY contended that some person should be called who saw the prisoner sign it. The RECORDER, upon consideration, received it, upon the admission made by the prisoner, and would reserve it if necessary,
(The prisoner received a good character.)
GUILTY . Aged 43.— Confined Twelve Months, and One Week upon the former indictment.
Before Mr. Recorder, and the Second Jury.
MR. BRIARLY conducted the Prosecution,
ELLEN ELPHINSTONE WALKER . I am daughter-in-law of the person who keeps the Punch coffee-house, Bishopsgate-street. On Tuesday, 7th Oct., the prisoner and Young came to the coffee-house—they left a carpet-bag and basket or bundle, and the prisoner said they would return for them in the evening—the prisoner afterwards returned alone, and left a small bundle.
Cross-examined by MR. COOPER. Q. I suppose you have a great many people in and out in the course of a day? A. Yes; there was one other person there at the time, but I cannot say whether there were more—I am not there every day, only on this day on account of the party being out—I had never seen the prisoner before—I was not called on to see the prisoner again for about a week.
MR. BRIARLY. Q. How long did they stay? A. Ten minutes or a quarter of an hour—I am quite sure the prisoner is the man.
MARY CONNOLLY . I am servant at this coffee-house. On Tuesday, 7th Oct., between 7 and 8 o'clock, the prisoner came and asked for a cup of coffee—I served him, and he asked me for a carpet-bag, basket, and bundle—Mr. Walker, the master of the house, delivered them to him and he went away—I have not the least doubt he is the man.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you ever seen him before? A. No; numbers of persons come in day after day—I cannot speak to every one who has been there in the last three weeks—I was taken to the Mansion-house to see the prisoner about a week after that—there was a policeman at his side—I did not pick him out from a dozen others.
MR. BRIARLY. Q. Did you recognise him immediately? A. Yes; he was not pointed out to me—I have no doubt about him.
JAMES WALKER . I keep this coffee-house. On 7th Oct., between 2 and 8 o'clock, the prisoner came with a parcel tied up in a handkerchief, and requested it might be put with the others he had left previously—I had not seen him before—my son took the bundle and put it down—he came again between 7 and 8, called for a cup of coffee, and asked for the parcels he had left—I inquired of him what they were, and he said a carpet-bag, a basket, and a bundle in a handkerchief—I gave them to him, and he put down 6d., stating that was for my trouble in taking care of the things, and he then put down a 4d.—piece, and told me to take for the coffee—I returned him the 4d., saying I was satisfied with what he had given me.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you ever seen him before? A. No; I cannot recollect every one who comes, but he attracted my attention in particular—I identified him on the next night at the station—I have never sworn to any one before, and was never before on a trial—the prisoner had then a quantity
of hair under his chin, but I swear to him by his features—I once got into a mess in giving up parcels, and was always very particular about it afterwards.
MR. BRIARLY. Q. Did any other persons leave parcels with you that day? A. Not that day—I was very particular before I gave them op in asking him what he had left.
COURT. Q. Had he the hair under his chin when you saw him at the station? A. Yes.
THOMAS YOUNG . I was lodging at the Cock, New-street, Bishopsgate, on 7th Oct. I came up with the prisoner from Newcastle—on Tyne to see the Exhibition—I knew him very well, we came up together as friends—we went to the Punch coffee-house early in the afternoon—I bad a carpet-bag and a basket with me, containing wearing-apparel and books, and six sovereigns and six half-sovereigns—the prisoner said I might as well leave my things there, and when the servant Connolly brought the coffee, the prisoner said, "Will you take care of these things? we shall be here and call for them again presently"—she took them away—I and the prisoner then went to different places, and we went to near Astley's Theatre to inquire for a friend of mine—I went into a shop to inquire, leaving the prisoner waiting outside, and when I came hack he was gone—I inquired for my things at the Punch coffee-house about 9 o'clock the same evening, and they were gone—I have not seen them since—the prisoner had more hair on his chin then than now.
Cross-examined. Q. You knew him well in Newcastle? A. I have known him about five or six months—I do not know much about his character—when we went to the Punch coffee-house we had not fixed where we were to sleep—the prisoner said be knew where we could lodge, but did not tell me where—we were at Astley's about half-past 6 o'clock—I do not know if we went there straight from the coffee-house—we did not go into any public-house on the way—we did see the Monument and different places, and had our hair cut and curled—I should say it was half-past 6 when we were at Astley's, because the people were just going in—the hairdresser dressed the prisoner's hair—I do not know whether he dressed his chin.
COURT. Q. Who was this friend of yours that lived near Astley's? A. Robert Rain—I did not find him—I did not know exactly where he lived—I did not ask the prisoner anything about it—he took me there, and said, "This is near the place where your friend lives"—he said he bad seen a letter my friend had written to a friend of his at Newcastle, and that he knew from that that he worked near Astley's, and he thought that was the shop—it was a confectioner's shop—my friend is in that line of business—I was in the shop about three minutes, inquiring for my friend—I have not found Rain since—the prisoner told me before we left Newcastle that Rain lived near Astley's—none of the prisoner's things were in my carpet-bag—he had a bundle of his own done up in a handkerchief—I gave him no authority to get my things from the coffee-house.
WILLIAM BURGESS (City-policeman, 670). On Wednesday, 8th Oct., about 3 o'clock, I took the prisoner into custody in the Exhibition—he was alone—the prosecutor was with me and pointed him out to me, but the crowd was so great I lost sight of him—I asked the prisoner if he knew Thomas Young—after hesitating he Raid, yes—I took him to the station, searched him, and found on him six sovereigns, six half-sovereigns, 8s., some coppers, and a book, several memorandums, and a railway return-ticket from York to London—I told him he was charged with stealing a carpet-bag from a coffee-shop in Bishopsgate-street—he said he knew nothing about it—I had
received information from the prosecutor at the station, about half-past 10 on the Tuesday night.
Cross-examined. Q. What station was it? A. Bishopsgate-street station—I could walk from Astley's to our station in three-quarters of an hour—I took Young to the Crystal Palace, expecting to see the prisoner there—I was not examined before the Magistrate.
(The prisoner received a good character.)
GUILTY. Aged 25.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury. — Confined Three Months.
NEW COURT.—Monday, November 24th, 1851.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. FAREBROTHER; Mr. Ald. LAWRENCE; and Mr. COMMON SERJEANT.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant and the Fifth Jury.
GUILTY . Aged 17.— Confined Six Months.
GUILTY . Aged 20.— Confined Six Months.
ANN SHADBOLT . I am a widow; I carry on the business of a carrier, at Edmonton. The prisoner was in my employ about two months—he took orders from ladies and gentlemen, and took money to purchase them—on the evening of 5th Nov. he had been out on my business—he did not come back—he gave me no notice—he was a weekly servant—he did not account to me for 3s. received from Mr. Cowan, nor pay it to me—for 8s. received, he said he had not taken it, and I gave him 5s.—he denied receiving it—he did not pay me 1s. 6d., nor say anything about it—he ought to have paid me at the week's end—we settled once a week—if he had received money he ought to have paid it me then.
Cross-examined by MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Did you hire the prisoner? A. Yes; I hired him, myself and my daughter—he was hired on weekly wages, and he accounted once a week—on Monday morning he balanced accounts—he never paid me the 8s.—he said he had not got it—I told him I knew Miss Tate had sent the money—he said he had no money at all—that was on Wednesday, 5th Nov.—he went away that evening—his wages were 15s. a week—he is not married.
ISABELLA SHADBOLT . I am daughter of the last witness. The prisoner was in her service—she engaged him to take parcels, and deliver them, and take money for the goods when he delivered them—he used to account to me—he ought to account on the following morning, but he absconded on 5th Nov.—I did not speak to him on that Wednesday morning about his account and his receipts—he never paid me the sum of 1s. 6d., or 8s., or 3s.—he said he had not got the 8s.—he said Miss Tate had not sent the money for the goods, and had not given him the money.
Cross-examined. Q. When was it he said that? A. On Wednesday
morning; I hare the day-book here—the It. 6d. ought to have been entered on 27th Sept.—the 8s. was not to be paid to roe—he received that from Miss Tate, on 5th Nov., to purchase goods in town for the Rev. Dr. Tate, and he said he had not received it—he went away without making op his books; therefore, it is not down.
JOHN COWAN . I am a gardener, at Edmonton. The prisoner came to me on 5th Nov., between 10 and 11 o'clock in the morning—he saw my daughter first—he said he came from Mrs. Shadbolt for 3s., due on the Saturday previous, for the carriage of two boxes—I said it was very unusual for her to send for money in the middle of the week, but it was no consequence—I said to my daughter, "Caroline, pay him"—I did not see my daughter pay him, but I said to him, "I suppose that is right"—he said, "All right, master."
JESSE LAWRENCE (policeman, N 898). On 10th Nov. I apprehended the prisoner in the street, at Edmonton—I told him it was on several charges of embezzling money of Mrs. Shadbolt's—he denied the charge, and then he said it was all settled—I took him to Mrs. Shad bolt's—I saw her daughter first—the prisoner said he was very sorry he had done it, and if she would take him back again he would work it all out—on the way to the station, he said it was a paltry sum, only 11s. 11d.
Cross-examined. Q. What did yon tell him? A. That it was for embezzling several sums of money belonging to Mrs. Shadbolt; he said it was not so, and said it was all settled—he said if I would let him go he would go and settle it all up—I took him to Mrs. Shadbolt's.
MR. BALLANTINE to ANN SHADBOLT. Q. Was it the prisoner's duty to account on the Monday, or on the day after he received the money? A. On the Monday; be gave an account on Monday—the receiving-book is not here—I had no occasion to look in it when ha had not put it down—he hat never been to put it down—he did not come on the Friday—I never saw him at my place—there was another book in which it was his business to enter the money received—that is not here.
(The prisoner received a good character.)
NOT GUILTY .
The prisoner was again indicted for obtaining money by false pretences, upon which no evidence was offered.
MR. RYLAND conducted the Protection.
FREDERICK SKIPTON (City-policeman, 114). On the evening of 28th Oct., I saw the prisoner in London-wall, on a grey mare, galloping as fast as it could go—I saw him attempt to turn the corner of Coleman-street—the horse fell down, and the prisoner endeavoured to run away—in a few seconds there was a cry of "Stop thief!"—I was holding the horse, and gave it to a gentleman, and went and stopped the prisoner—several persons came up and said in my presence that he had stolen the horse—the prisoner said,: It is a bad job; I got on the horse, and he ran away with me.",
Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Q. Where was be when you first saw him? A. Fifteen or twenty yards from where the horse fell—I took him to the hospital, and the doctor gave me a certificate that he had sprained his ankle—I don't know that he broke his leg—I did not raise a cry of "Stop
thief!"—I was at the corner, and caught the reins of the horse—the prisoner and the horse got up as near together as possible.
JOSEPH NUTT . On 28th Oct., I bought a grey mare—I had not been upon her—I led her to the door of Mr. Abbott's public-house, in Coleman-street—before I went in, I saw the prisoner—he asked me if he might hold the mare—I refused; but I could not open the door to go in; and I said to him, "You can hold it, if you please, for a moment"—I went in, and I was not in two minutes before I heard the horse go—I ran out, and gave an alarm, "Stop thief!"—I saw the horse about twenty or thirty yards off, and the prisoner on it, going very fast—it was stopped; it was my mare—I had given 21l. for it—they tell me it is worth about 6l.
Cross-examined. Q. You did not get on this horse? A. No; I am no horseman—I have had horses in the country—I have not inquired into the prisoner's character—I don't pretend to swear that he went away with the mare designedly—I said that I could not swear that it was not a lark; I may have said I thought it was a mere joke—I do not come here to tell a lie—I did not give the prisoner any direction what he was to do.
JOHN CAMPBLE . I was near Mr. Abbott's, in Coleman-street, on the evening of 28th Oct. I saw the prisoner go to Mr. Nutt, and ask him if he should hold the horse—Mr. Nutt refused, and said he was only just going inside—the prisoner asked him again, and he let him have it—Mr. Nutt went in, and the prisoner jumped on the horse, and rode away—I did not cry, "Stop thief!"—I heard other people cry it. (The prisoner received a good character)
GUILTY. Aged 43.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury. — Confined Four Months.
GEORGE LOWE (police-sergeant, T 32). I produce two marriage certificates, which I got at the Registrar-General's office, at Somerset House. I compared them with the Registers; they are correct—(read)—the prisoner was given into my custody on 30th Oct.—I told him he was given into custody for bigamy—he said, "It is not so"—he afterwards said, "The woman I am living with will not come up against me"—his first wife gave him into custody.
ROBERT BEACHER . I live at Hammersmith. I was present at the marriage of the prisoner with Johanna Parry, at the Convent chapel, Hammersmith, about two years ago—I do not swear to the exact time—she is in Court now.
MARY RING . I live at Windsor-Cottage, Kensal New Town. I remember the prisoner being married on 24th Feb. to Johanna Shea, in St. Mary's Church, Paddington—I am sure the prisoner is the man; I know him well—Shea is now in her confinement, in Kensal New Town—the prisoner was living with her till he was taken—she was confined on 16th Nov., and cannot come here.
Prisoner's Defence. About seventeen months ago, I and my wife had high words on a Sunday night; she left home, and did not return that night; next morning, I went to my usual employment, and locked the door; on my return at night, I found she had forced open the door, and carried away all my furniture and wearing-apparel; I was compelled to, take other apartments; I then went to the station; the police would not interfere, because I could not swear who were the parties that carried my goods away; she went the following day for a summons against me; the Magistrate found that she had sworn falsely; after this, she made an application to Hammersmith Union,
where they gave her 3s. 9d.; the officers of the parish took out a warrant to apprehend me, for leaving her unprovided for; the Magistrate arranged that I was to pay the 3s. 9d. at 1s. per week, and allow her and the child 4s. per week; I continued paying this sum up to the period when I was taken.
GUILTY . Aged 36.— Confined Six Months.
HENRY ALLEN . I am in the service of the Hon. Mrs. Bathurst, in Grosvenor-square. On 17th Oct. the prisoner came to her house—he brought some china, which he said was from the Exhibition—I paid him the amount of the bill, 1l. 7s.—he gave me this receipt.
JOHN WHITEMAN . I am book-keeper to Messrs. Cottam and Co. I saw the prisoner on 27th Sept.—I paid him 1l. 5s. for porcelain purchased at the Exhibition—he gave me this bill and receipt—I paid him the 1l. 5s. for Baron du Tramblay.
BARON ALEXIS SYLVIAN DU TRAMBLAY (through an interpreter). I am a manufacturer in France, of china. I was an exhibitor at the Great Exhibition—I sold articles of china to the Hon. Mrs. Bathurst, of Grosvenor-square, and to Mr. Mortan—I had employed the prisoner for three months to take out goods, and to deliver them, and bring back the receipt if the money was not paid—he ought always to receive the money if persons were in the way—he did not bring me 1l. 7s. from Mrs. Bathurst—I believe he did not bring this bill back (looking at it)—he never gave me any account of these moneys received from Mrs. Bathurst and Mr. Mortan—he told me he did not receive it—when he received money for me, he ought to pay it me on the same day, or on the following morning if he did not return in the evening—he speaks and understands French perfectly.
Prisoner. Q. Can you swear that these bills were delivered by you to me? A. Yes; you had a porter with you to carry the goods—there was one bill delivered to you in my absence—all these bills were delivered to you to receive money, of which you have returned none—I have a list of the debts and the money I received from the prisoner—this is my book—there is no entry, of this 27s. from Mrs. Bathurst, and 25s. from Mr. Morton—you stated that the persons were absent, and would not be at home for some time—in consequence of that I did not enter them—I believe it was not to me that you made the observation that the money was not paid, because I was continually at the Exhibition.
Q. Have you Madame Verrell's receipt? A. Yes; every day's account—I made the account myself—I arrived from France on 2nd Oct.—I have the book which was delivered to me when I came back by Madame Verrell—she received money also, and she was to account to me—she put down the goods that were sold—she gave an account what money she received—I put it down in my book—I alone was to receive the money—Madame Verrell paid you your last commission on 23rd Oct.—it is down in this book, and was 5s.
COURT. Q. Have you any partner? A. No; Madame Verrell was entitled to receive money for me when I was in France—I was to receive it when I was at home—even when I was in England she might receive money on my account—there was no one beside her that might receive money from the prisoner for me.
Prisoner's Defence. I received the bill of 1l. 7s., and paid it to Madame Verrell next morning, when I went with my porter to take more goods out; she has kept the whole books; Cottam and Mortan's I received, and paid to Madame Verrell previous to the Baron arriving in England; he has never
asked me for these moneys; I have seen him two or three times a week; the last time I saw Madame Verrell, I paid her 10s., and she asked what she was indebted to me; I said 4s., and she said it was only 3s.; I said it was a poor commission, when I had to pay a man 2s. a day; I said I would rather have my 10 per cent, than go on so; she said, "Very well, we will have somebody else," and I went away; I was told by the policeman that the prosecutor wanted to speak to me; I went, and he was not at home; I went to the station, and he came; if Madame Verrell were here, it would appear that I have not been a felon; all I have to say about these two sums is that I paid them in.
NOT GUILTY . (See page 38.)
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, Nov. 25th, 1851.
PRESENT—Sir JAS. DUKE, Bart, Ald.; Mr. RECORDER; and Mr. Ald. CUBITT.
Before Mr. Recorder and the Third Jury.
MR. ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.
RICHARD SHARP . I am a cutler, of 4, Gough-square, Fleet-street, in the parish of St. Bride. On the morning of 16th Oct. my house was broken into—the kitchen window was shut the night before, but not fastened, my servant told me she neglected to fasten it—she is not here, I only know what she told me—she was the first person up in the morning—I came down about 7 o'clock—she has not left my service—she was not before the Magistrate—I missed two hats, one of which belonged to my son a boy nine years of age, also an oyster-knife, a great coat, three pairs of boots, my servant's gowns, some tablecloths, pinafores, and other things, worth upwards of 5l.—on the 31st Oct. a second attempt was made, in the night of 31st Oct, and on the morning of 1st Nov. the prisoner came to me and said, "Is your name Sharp?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "You have had a robbery at your house a week ago?"—I said, "Yes, what do you know about it?"—he said, "I called to give you information as to who the parties are, and where they live"—I said, "Really you must be one of the party, for the hat you have got on now belongs to my son, and is part of the property that was taken away on 16th Oct."—he took it off, and said, "Yes, it is, it is the only thing they would give me, and therefore I have determined to come and peach, I don't care what becomes of me, so long as the other parties are taken"—a policeman coming by at the time, I gave the prisoner in charge—I saw this oyster-knife taken from him at the station(produced) and this duplicate—this is the hat he had on, I swear it is my son's I know it by marks inside it—I missed such an oyster-knife as this, it is one of my make—these boots are mine—I had gone to bed about 12 o'clock the night before—I cannot say where I saw the hat last—I saw the knife on the Sunday, and the boots a day or two before the robbery.
Prisoner. At the office you said the hat had no mark on it. A. I said it had no name in it—these two red marks have been put in it since, I do not go by them, I go by a square stain in the hat, it is a different colour—my son had it six months—I swear to these boots, I bought them myself—I know them by the position of the buttons—I had worn them four or five months, or more.
ALFRED AGLAND (City-policeman, 315). I took the prisoner into custody—I went to Mr. Sharp's house, and he said he had come to inform Mr. Sharp of his house being broken into and robbed on 16th Oct.—I asked him how he knew that, and if he was there at the time—he said he was—he mentioned the word "robbery," and said they would not give him any of the property and he would inform upon them—he said he would go and show me where they lived; that he had been in prison, and when he came out they would not give him anything—he went and showed me a room where he said the parties lived, but I could not find them—he did not know their names—when I said, "How do you know there was a robbery there; were you one of them?"—he said, "Yes, I were."
GUILTY . * Aged 36.— Confined Six Months.
MR. LOCKE conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN PRICE . I am clerk to Mr. Swainson. On 27th Oct. the prisoner came to the warehouse with an order which he put into my hands, and the invoice to correspond; it is signed "J. Walmsley"—we had sent goods to Mr. Walmsley before—he is a fringe-manufacturer—I had seen the prisoner at Mr. Walmasley's, and at our Warehouse—(order read, "I gross 17 1/2 in. orris to match, 27—10—51., J. Walmsley"—the prisoner took away the goods with him—that is the customary form of order in the trade.
GERARD PITMAN . I am clerk to Mr. Walmsley of 12, King-street, Cheapside. The prisoner was in his employ from the middle of April to the middle of June this year, when he left—I manage the business in part—this order is not Mr. Walmsley's writing or mine; myself and one other clerk sign Mr. Walmsley's name—this is not the writing of that other clerk, or of anybody in the establishment authorised to make out orders—no such order was given—this order is in the same form as Mr. Walmsley sends them—while the prisoner was there it was his duty to take out such orders, obtain the goods, and bring them home; he never wrote orders—he knew how we did business, and how to make an order of this sort—no goods answering to the description in this order were brought to the establishment, on or after 27th Oct.—he was partly errand-boy, and partly in the warehouse—he frequently saw Mr. Walmsley's writing, and that of the other persons who used to sign orders; it is not at all like the writing if any of them.
GEORGE SMITH . I was applied to to take the prisoner into custody—I took him to the station, searched him, and found on him these three similar orders, with these samples pinned to them (produced)—they are all signed "J. Walmsley"—Mr. Swainson gave him in charge, and he said, "I am guilty of all"—that was before I found the orders on him.
Prisoner's Defence. I had been out of employment ever since I left MrWalmsley's; I met a young man where I used to have dinner; we lodged together; he got out the orders and asked me to go and get them, and I did so.
GUILTY . Aged 18.—He received a good character.— Confined Four Months. There was another indictment against the prisoner.
MR. CLARKSON conducted the Prosecution.
JAMES BRETT (City-policeman, 13). On 10th Nov., about half-past 2 o'clock, I was on duty on Ludgate-hill, in company with Rowe—it was on the occasion of the celebration of the fete on Lord Mayor's-day—I saw the prisoners on Ludgate-hill, in company with another man—I did not know them of my own knowledge, I had never seen them before—I saw them all in conversation together—I watched them for about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour—I saw them hustle against several gentlemen—my attention was drawn to them from their appearance and manners—at the bottom of Ludgate-hill by Bridge-street, I saw Rogers look towards the waistcoat-pocket of Mr. Williams, the prosecutor—he immediately turned and spoke to the other three who were behind him—they then all rushed on Mr. Williams; Smith in front, and the other three pushing Smith up behind—that was at the corner of Ludgate hill, on the footpath—I saw Smith put his left arm up against Mr. Williams's breast, with his right hand underneath—he did not lift up Mr. Williams's arm, be pressed it against his breast, and was pushing him backwards, and the other three were pushing him behind—I should say the effect of that would be to take away the use of Williams's arm; I mean it would confine his arm—I then saw Smith with his right band take a silver watch from Mr. Williams, and push immediately into the crowd with Rogers—at the same moment Lind put his band into Mr. Williams's waistcoat pocket—I collared Lind, and took him into custody—he said, "I have not got the watch, let me go, I will show you the man that has got it, they are all gone up there"—he did not point anywhere—I had bold of his hand—he was looking up Ludgate-hill at the time; with that I took him out of the crowd with some difficulty to the station, where I searched him and found 2s. 11d.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Q. There was a great crowd, was there not? A. Yes, a very great crowd indeed—I was not stationed there, I was anywhere about the procession—there was a greater crowd there than almost in any other part—it was about half-past 2 o'clock when I first observed the prisoners—I was in plain clothes—I was as close to the four of them as I could possibly be at the time this transaction took place, I was touching them—Rowe was somewhere near me—I could not say exactly his position, because in the crowd we were moved about—we were constantly hustled about in the crowd, although this did not take a minute or two altogether, it was. all done directly—I was on Mr. Williams's right hand, I cannot say whether I touched him, I might sometimes have touched him, I was very near to him—I kept close to the prisoners while they were committing the robbery—I saw Smith lift up his left arm—I saw what he did with his right band—I swear that I saw the watch in his right hand—it was a silver watch—I have been in the police just upon ten years.
COURT. Q. Are you a detective officer? A. Yes.
HENRY ROWS (City policeman 14.) I am a detective officer, I was on Ludgate-hill, on the day of the celebration of Lord Mayor's day—about half-past two o'clock, I saw the prisoners on Ludgate-hill—I had been in company with Brett, all day—the prisoners were not personally known to me—I watched them something like a quarter of an hour, they were together, with a fourth one—we were induced to watch them from their manner and appearance—after watching them, they went down to the corner of Bridge-street, where they were in conversation together—at that time the prosecutor was turning the corner with a lady on his arm—I saw Smith rush against the prosecutor with his arms up, and the other three pushing him behind—the moment they left him, I saw that his guard was hanging with the swivel of
a watch hanging outside his waistcoat—Smith and Rogers went up Ludgate-hill on the footpath, wedging their way through the crowd—I followed them—I got hold of Smith first—Rogers was a little above my grasp, I pulled him—I got hold of Smith, as he was working his way through the crowd—we had a struggle for three or four minutes, they trying to get away—I seized Smith with one hand, and Rogers with the other—a gentleman came up and took Smith from me, or I should have been obliged to let him go—I took him and Rogers to the station, with the assistance of an officer in uniform, who came up—on searching Smith at the station I found this pair of silver spectacles upon him.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Where were you standing when you saw this? were you with Brett, the whole time? A. Yes; we were shifting about in the crowd—I was standing close behind Smith, when he went up to Mr. Williams—we had been standing close by the side of him, at the corner of Bridge-street.
COURT. Q. You were in plain clothes, I suppose? A. I was.
MARY COX . I am single, and assist my father who is postmaster, at Plumstead-common—I was with Mr. Williams, on Ludgate-hill, on 10th Nov., but I had been on business at St. Paul's-churchyard—I was with him at the corner of Bridge-street, there was rather a crowd there—the prisoner Smith was in front of us, and he pushed me about two or three times very much indeed—he moved again, pushed me backwards and put his hand to the pocket of Mr. Williams, and I saw the guard and ring of the watch spring from his hand—his hand was closed at the time—I turned and took hold of Lind, thinking Smith had passed the watch to him; and before I accused him of anything he said, "I have not got it, but if you will let me go I will show you the man that has, he has gone up there," pointing at the same time up Ludgate-hill—I held him by the wrist till an officer came up—I did not at first know that he was an officer, as he was not in uniform, and would not let him go till a gentleman came up, and then I gave him into the officer's hands.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Were you standing by the side of Mr. Williams? A. I had hold of his left arm.
COURT. Q. Do you know which pocket the watch was taken from? A. I am not certain but I think it was the left, it was the side next to me—Smith was in front of him and me, and he put him back and put his hand across him—we were next the houses, and he was in front of us with his back towards Bridge-street.
GEORGE WILLIAMS . I am a carpenter, and live in Prince's-row, Plumstead-common—I was on Ludgate-hill, near Bridge-street, with Miss Cox, on 10th Nov.—I had a watch with me, secured by an India-rubber guard—I carried it in my left waistcoat pocket—while passing the corner of Bridge-street, the prisoners commenced pushing me about—I then saw the ring of my watch spring towards me—I remember Lind and Smith, pushing me about, but not Rogers—I caught hold of Lind, he said "I have not got it, but if you will let me go I will show you the man that has got it, he has run up there"—he then said, "Search me if you like"—Smith said to me while they were pushing against me, "This is like pushing, is it not, governor?"
SMITH— GUILTY . Aged 22.—He received a good character.— Confined Twelve Months.
ROGERS— NOT GUILTY .
LIND— GUILTY .
Lind was further charged with having been before convicted, in Aug. 1850, to which he pleaded GUILTY. Aged 17.— Transported for Seven Years.
MR. BIRNIE conducted the Prosecution.
ISADOR ABRAHAMS . I am a native of Holland, and am a ship agent, living in Scarborough-street East, Goodman's-fields. On Monday, 10th Nov., between 11 and 12 o'clock in the morning, I was in Princes-street, near the Bank, during the procession of the Lord Mayor's show—there was a very large crowd—the prisoner stood next to me—I felt something in my pocket, and felt something go from it, and I saw the prisoner go with my watch from the place: it had been in my right hand waistcoat pocket—I am quite sure I saw it in the prisoner's hand—he ran into the crowd—I ran after him—he stopped, and turned back of his own accord, and I asked him for my watch—he said, "Oh, I have not got your watch!"—he called out several names, "Bill, Tom, and so on; and several people came up, and said, if the man has got your watch, why don't you search him?"—and they came between us, and stood in front of me—they said to the prisoner, why don't you run away?—he ran away, and one person, a little fellow, came in front of me, to give the prisoner the opportunity of running away—I ran after him, and called "Stop thief!"—he was seized by a policeman—I did not lose sight of him—he made a very pitiful face, and said, "I never took your watch;" and coming from the station to Guildhall, he said, "If you will go with me to my house, I will give you 2l., and you must drop the matter"—I gave more than 2l. for my watch; it was a silver one; it has not been found—this ring (produced) was found on the ground—the prisoner found it about three yards from the place where he took my watch—he said, "Why don't you look round, may be you will find your watch?" and before we moved from the place, he said, "There is your ring on the ground"—I picked it up—he saw it—it was not possible for him to have seen it on the ground, because I stood before him.
Cross-examined by MR. COOPER. Q. I suppose the crowd was very thick there? A. Yes; the people were standing as close as they could—the prisoner was not standing by me a minute before he ran away—he was about a yard from me at the time I lost my watch—I went up to him, and said, "I want my watch"—he directly ran through the crowd—I ran after him, and he came back again—he could have run away—some person said, he is not the man that stole your watch, another man did it—I should recollect that man if I were to see him—I called out that I had lost my watch—the people about heard me, but they took no interest in my loss—I saw 7d. and a little comb found on the prisoner.
MR. BIRNIE. Q. Was it one of the persons who answered to his call of Bill and Jack, that said he was not the man that took your watch? A. Yes; I am quite sure of that.
ROBERT JOHNSON (City-policeman, 812). On Monday, 10th Nov., I saw the prosecutor in Princes-street running after the prisoner, calling out "Stop thief!"—I took the prisoner to the station, searched him, and found 1s. 6d. in silver, 11/2 d. in copper, and a comb—in coming from the station to Guildhall, he said to the prosecutor, "I will give you 2l. if you will say no more about it."
Cross-examined. Q. Was the prisoner walking when you took him? A. He was running from the prosecutor—there was a great crowd.
GUILTY . ** Aged 23.— Transported for Seven Years.
Mr. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM GREEN . I am waiter at the Queen's Hotel, St. Martin's-le-Grand. The prisoner came there on 14th Nov., near 8 o'clock in the evening, and asked for a glass of gin-and-water—he was sitting on one of the tables of the coffee-room—there were some coats on the coat-rack—I do not know how many—when I came back with the gin-and-water, he had got a light-coloured coat on, and two or three others—I told Roberts, my fellow-servant—he handed me three coats—I kept them while he went to the bar, and gave them to him again in two or three minutes—he gave them to a policeman, in my presence, about five minutes afterwards—there were three or four gentlemen in the coffee-room, but they did not notice it.
DAVID ROBERTS . On 14th Nov. I was porter at the Queen's Hotel. I was standing in the hall, looking through the coffee-room window, and saw the prisoner close to the coat-rack, looking at a coat—he had five coats on previously—Green came out and spoke to me, and I went in to the prisoner—he was in the act of pulling off the top coat of the lot he had on—I asked him if that coat was his—he said, "Yes"—I said, "How can that be? this coat has been hanging on that coat-rack all day long, and you have only just come into the house; how can it be yours?"—I had not seen it there, but I said so to confute him—he said, in a faint voice, "It is not mine"—I said, "It seems to me that you have several more on, and I do not think they belong to you; here is a coat here don't fit you, I can almost swear it don't belong to you, and the best thing you can do is to take them off"—he said they were his and dared me to touch them, and then he took two more off—they were great coats—these are them (produced)—I gave three of them to Green while I went to ask the housekeeper's advice—I then called the police and gave the prisoner into custody—Edward Sherman is the proprietor of the hotel—the gentleman this coat belongs to was staying at the hotel.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Q. Is that gentleman here? A. No; this other coat is Mr. Hugh Jones's—he appeared to have been drinking—I cannot say he was intoxicated—he appeared to know what he was doing perfectly well—this brown coat is the one he was pulling off—the one he had on belonged to Hugh Jones—he had four great coats on besides that.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
(MR. ROBINSON, on behalf of the prisoner, applied to the COURT to be allowed to plead autre fois acquit, the prisoner having already been in jeopardy on account of the coat in question, although not included in the former indictment, for which purpose he requested that the case should be postponed for a day; and that as no evidence had yet been given, that course need not prevent the JURY from separating. The COURT considered it had no power to discharge the JURY without their giving a verdict; and that even in cases where a prisoner is allowed to withdraw his plea, and plead guilty after the JURY are charged, the JURY are directed to find a verdict of Guilty.)
HUGH JONES . I am landlord of a coffee-house, 75, Little Britain. On 14th Nov., about 7 o'clock in the evening, the prisoner came and bespoke a lodging for the night—he had a cup of coffer, and I showed him to the necessary in the yard—there were some coats at the back of a settle inside the bar—he had to pass through the bar to the back-yard—he came back and stood in the bar a little while—I was in the coffee-room—I missed the coats,
and found the prisoner had gone out, leaving the passage-door wide open—I went after him—he turned into Crosskeys-square—I met him coming back with my coat on his arm—I collared him, and took them from him—I thought be had got all the coats, but I only missed my own—this is it (produced).
Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Q. Is there any mark on it? A. Yes; I soiled it here.
I took the prisoner there with this coat on and others over it—it was the bottom one, or the next to it.
JOHN ELLARD (policeman, A 126). I produce a certificate of the prisoner's former conviction (read—Convicted at Clerkenwell, May, 1851, of stealing from the person; confined one month)—I was present—he is the man.
GUILTY . ** Aged 21.— Confined Six Months.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, November 25th, 1851.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. FAREBROTHER; Mr. Ald. LAWRENCE; and Mr.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant, and the Sixth Jury.
(MR. ELLIS offered no evidence.) NOT GUILTY .
WILSON pleaded GUILTY . Aged 29.
MEREDITH pleaded GUILTY . Aged 22.
Confined six Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.
JANE WILLEY . I am the wife of Robert Turner Willey. a fishmonger in Tottenham-court-road. On 23rd Oct. the prisoner came there a little before 12 o'clock in the evening—he had some oysters, some ginger-beer, and bread-and-butter—they came to 1s. 6d. or 1s. 8d.—he put down a half-crown on the table—I gave it to my husband—he bit it, and returned it to me—I gave it to the prisoner, and said, "This is a bad one"—he laid down another half-crown which was bad—I gave that to my husband, and he said to the prisoner, "Why do you give me such money as this, knowing that I know what you are?"—the prisoner began swearing, and took up a fork—while he and my husband were talking I fetched an officer, and he had both the half-crowns.
me a half-crown—I examined it and bit it, and found it was bad—it was handed back to the prisoner—he put it in his pocket and laid a second one down—I examined it—it was bad—I bent it, and asked the prisoner how he could have the impudence to offer such money as that, knowing that I knew what he was—he said, "If you knew me to be a smasher, why did you trust me?"—he took the first half-crown out of his pocket, saying the second was the same coin as the first—I seized his hand and took the two half-crowns out of his hand—my wife fetched an officer and I gave him into custody—I gave the half-crowns to the officer—these are them (produced.)
Prisoner. Q. Which was the first that I presented? A. This; they are not both alike—the reign of the first is George the Fourth—when I gave you the second back you disputed that that was the one you gave me, and you took the first out of your pocket, saying that the second was the same as the first—I think you were quite sensible of what you were doing—I would not swear yon were sobers—you had been drinking.
WALTER TODD (policeman, E 154). I took the prisoner into custody at Mr. Willey's shop—Mr. Willey gave me these two half-crowns—the prisoner said had he not been drinking they should not have catched him this time—he was a little drunk—I do not think he rightly knew what he was about.
HORATIO CHARLXS HIPWELL . I keep the Running Horse public-house. The prisoner came there on the 4th Oct. and had a glass of stout—it came to 1 1/2 d.—he tendered me a crown-piece—I gave him 4s. 69d., four penny pieces, and a halfpenny—after he was gone I cut the crown piece, and kept it till the Monday morning.
Prisoner. Q. On the first examination you stated that it was on the 11th that I offered the 5s. piece? A. I said it was the 11th, being called away in a hurry from business; but when I went home, referring to a memorandum, I found it was the 4th—you did offer to prove an alibi, and to bring witnesses to prove that you were not at my house—I did not detect that the 5s. piece was bad till you had gone—I gave it to a friend of mine who was at the bar—I never lost sight of it—I gave it to the policeman on the Monday morning—this is it.
(The prisoner, in his defence, repeated the substance of his cross-examination.)
GUILTY . Aged 29.— Confined Eighteen Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.
EMMA TAYLOR . My sister keeps the Ship and Star public-house, at Ratcliffe. While I am there I assist in the business—on 2nd Nov. the two prisoners came in together, about a quarter before 3 o'clock in the afternoon—Brennan called for a pot of beer—Gorman was standing by him—I served the beer, and Brennan gave me a shilling—I thought it was good, and put it in the till, where there was no other shilling—the prisoners went into the tap-room, and took the beer with them—in five or ten minutes after, Brennan came and had a pot of beer of my sister—after that, Gorman came to the bar and wanted a pot of beer—he gave me half-a-crown—I looked at it, and thought it was bad—I took it to Mrs. Smith, my sister, who keeps the house—she examined it, and went to the tap-room and told Gorman it was bad—Gorman said, "If it is bad give it to me"—she gave it him, and told him to give her good
money—he said they had no money—I told Brennan he must have more because I had given change out of the shilling—in consequence of this, my sister went to the till—I saw her take two shillings out of it—they were the only shillings that were there—they were looked at, and both turned out to be bad—my sister went to the prisoners in the tap-room, and told them the shillings were bad, too—Gorman sounded the half-crown on the table, and my sister took hold of it and kept it.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. You are not the barmaid? A. No; I went there on a visit—Brennan asked for the first beer, and gave the first shilling—I put it in the till—there were two or three sixpences in the till, but no shillings—I looked when I put the shillings in—I gave him a sixpence and 2d. change—the prisoners then went into the tap-room to drink the beer—there was another man in the tap-room—Brennan came out in about five minutes for more beer—he did not speak to me, but to my sister—no other person came in—Brennan remained in the tap-room for some time after the money was discovered to be bad—I do not know that there was anything to prevent him from walking out.
SARAH TAYLOR . I am the sister of the last witness—I was at the public-house that day—I saw the two prisoners come in—my sister served them with a pot of beer—some time after, Brennan came to me for a pot of beer—he gave me a shilling, which I put into the till—I noticed that there was one other shilling and two sixpences in the till—a little while after, I saw Mrs. Smith with a half-crown, and she accused Gorman, in the tap-room, with passing bad money—he said it was not bad, and he would not give it up—I asked him to sound it on the table—he did, and I instantly caught it from the table, and gave it to my sister, and asked her to try it in the "detector"—I suggested that she should look at the two shillings—they were bad—she would not give them up—a policeman was sent for—the prisoners were given into custody.
Cross-examined by MR. O'BRIEN. Q. You say Gorman said the half-crown was good, and you told him to sound it, and he did? A. Yes; I told him he would know by the sound whether it was good or bad—my sister said she was sure Gorman did not know the half-crown was bad, as she had known him so long.
ELIZA SMITH . I am the wife of William Smith, who keeps the Ship and Star public-house, at Shad well. On 2nd Nov. Emma Taylor brought me a half-crown—I took it to Gorman and told him it was bad—he said it was not—I gave it him back, and asked him to give me good money for it—he said he had none—my sister said he had, she had given them change—I went to the till and found two shillings, they were bad—I went back to the prisoners and told them they had given two bad shillings.
Cross-examined by MR. O'BRIEN. Q. Did you know Gorman before? A. Yes; he has been in the habit of frequenting our house—he has borne the character of a hard-working, respectable man in his class of life—I do not think he knew the half-crown was bad.
Cross-examined by MR. O'BRIEN. Q. Have you known Gorman? A. Yes, seven or eight years—he is a coal-whipper—I never heard any other character of him but a hard-working, honest man.
THOMAS BURNS (policeman, K 255). I was fetched to the Ship and Star—I found Brennan in the tap-room—I went in the yard and found Gorman in a stooping position, as if he was looking for something, and I
found near that place a shilling with a piece broken off it—I took Gorman into custody—I found on him one penny, and on Brennan, 4d. and a tobacco box—these are the two shillings I got from Mr. Smith—this is the shilling I found in the yard, and here is another shilling that was found in an adjoining yard.
WILLIAM WEBSTER . These two shillings that were uttered are counterfeit, and from the same mould—this half-crown is counterfeit—this shilling that was found in the yard is bad, and this one that has a piece broken off it is bad.
Gorman's statement before the Magistrate was here read, as follows: "I was not in the tap-room five minutes—when I got the half-crown; Brennan gave it me; I did not know whether it was good or bad."
(Gorman received a good character.)
BRENNAN— GUILTY . Aged 27.— Confined Twelve Months.
GORMAN— NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant, and the 7th Jury.
MESSRS. BODKIN and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN CHARLES REYNOLDS . I produce a copy of the record of the conviction of a person at this Court—(read—Thomas Ryan convicted on 20th Jam., 1849, of uttering counterfeit coin, and imprisoned twelve months.)
Cross-examined by MR. HORRY. Q. When was it you were present at the trial? A. In Jan., 1849; I have attended a few trials—I have been a policeman ten years—I have been a witness many times since Jan., 1849—I cannot say whether I have been thirty or forty times—I had been a witness a number of times before that—the prisoner and another person were convicted on that occasion for passing bad money—I know the prisoner was one—I took him into custody—I have taken a good many persons into custody since then—after I took the prisoner, I took Carney, who was tried with him, and convicted—I cannot tell the name of the next charge after them.
MR. BODKIN. Q. Were you the officer who took the man who was then charged with uttering a crown-piece? A. Yes; I went before the Magistrate, and saw him there—he was examined twice—I was present both times—I took him to the police-court—he was tried in this Court—the prisoner is the same man.
WILLIAM SLADDEN . I am barman at the Oxford Arms, in High-street, Camden-town. On 15th Nov. the prisoner came, between 2 and 3 o'clock, for a pot of beer—he gave me a sixpence—it was bad, and I told him so—he gave me another, and that was bad—I told him of that, and he said he had plenty more—he gave me a third sixpence, and that was bad—I called my roaster—I put the three sixpences on the counter, and the prisoner took them up to his hand—an officer was sent for—I saw him take the three sixpences from the prisoner's hand.
SAMUEL STOKES (policeman, S 384). On 15th Nov. I went to the Oxford Arms—the prisoner was there—Mr. Sugden had hold of his left arm—I wrenched his band open, and took three sixpences from it—some man in front of the bar gave me another sixpence—he said, "I picked this off the floor"—I searched the prisoner, and found in his right hand three half-crowns, a shilling, and a 4d.—piece, and in his trowsers-pocket 1s. worth of coppers—these are the four sixpences—the other money was all good.
Cross-examined. Q. I believe he told you he had changed a sovereign the night, before at the White Lion? A. Yes; he said he took the sovereign for his wages the night before—I have made inquiries, and find he has been at work at the gas-house for a short time.
BENJAMIN JAMES SUGDEN . I keep the Oxford Arms. On the afternoon of 15th Nov. my man called me—I went to the bar, and found the prisoner—my man told me he had been attempting to pass three bad sixpences—I sent for an officer—when the prisoner heard that the officer was coming, he put his left hand up to his mouth, to attempt to swallow the sixpences—I took hold of his wrist, and held his hand from his mouth till the officer came—he opened his hand, and took out three sixpences—I saw one sixpence fall on the floor, right at the prisoner's feet—some man picked it up, and gave it to the officer—the beer that the prisoner had came to 4d.—he had no occasion to change.
Cross-examined. Q. I dare say you have been often out, and had money to pay for what you wanted, but yet have changed? A. have done that.
GUILTY . Aged 42.— Confined Eighteen Months.
MR. BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.
AGNES SARAH ENTWISTLE . I am assistant to Mr. Lawson, who keeps a coffee-house, in High-street, Whitechapel. On 31st Oct., between 8 and 9 o'clock in the morning, the prisoner came and asked for half a pint of coffee—it came to 1d.—he gave me a shilling—I gave him 11d. change—I put the shilling into my pocket, where I had two half-crowns, but no other shilling—I am quite certain of that—in about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour afterwards I gave the shilling to Mr. Lawson, and be told me it was bad—in the evening, about a quarter after six, the prisoner came again—he called for half a pint of coffee—it came to 1d.—he gave me a shilling—I looked at it particularly, and found it was a bad one—I said nothing to him, but took the shilling to the bar, gave it to Mr. Lawson, and asked him what I had better do—he told me to send for a constable—I kept the second shilling till the constable came—I said the prisoner had given me two bad shillings—the prisoner first said he was not there in the morning—I said he was—he then said he was certain it was a good shilling that he gave me in the morning—I gave the second shilling to the policeman.
Prisoner. You say I was at the coffee-shop in the morning; it is false; I was in bed. Witness. He was.
WILLIAM LAWSON . On 31st Oct. I saw the prisoner at my shop, between 6 and 7 o'clock in the evening—I gave him into custody, in consquence of what the last witness told me—she gave me a bad shilling, which I kept till the officer came, and I gave it him.
WILLIAM WEBB (police-Sergeant, H 42). On 31st Oct. I was sent for to Mr. Lawson's, and the prisoner was given into my custody—Entwistle gave me one shilling, and Mr. Lawson another—the prisoner said he was not there in the morning—the second shilling he said he received from a gentleman for whom he carried a parcel to Islington—I found on him a phial of white mixture; nothing else.
Prisoner's Defence. I went into the coffee-shop in the evening, and gave
the woman a shilling; there were two more men in the same box, each of whom gave her a shilling; she had three shillings in her hand; she put them into her pocket; she afterwards pulled out one, and gave it to her master, and he put it into his pocket, and they sent for the officer, and had me taken; I was not there in the morning, I was in bed; I got the shilling in the afternoon for carrying a parcel; I work in a garden, and was selling some things; the shilling might be bad in the evening, but I believe it was good.
GUILTY . Aged 22.— Confined Twelve Months.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, Nov. 26th, 1851.
PRESENT—Lord Chief Justice CAMPBELL; Mr. Justice MAULE; Sir JAMES DUKE, Bart., Ald.; Mr. Ald. CUBITT; and RUSSELL GURNEY, Esq.
Before Lord Chief Justice Campbell and the Second Jury.
24. GEORGE WILLIAM WARMAN , stealing whilst employed in the Post-Office a post letter, containing a half-sovereign and an envelope; also, a letter, containing a sovereign, 1s. and 4 postage stamps; also, a letter, contraining 1 tassel, and 3 orders for the delivery of goods; the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General: to all which he pleaded
GUILTY . Aged 27. (He received a good character.) Transported for Seven Years.
MR. HUDDLESTON For the Prosecution offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. PARRY conducted the Prosecution.
EDWIN EARTHY (police-sergeant, T 19). On Wednesday night, 8th Oct., about 8 o'clock, I met police-constable Bailey, at East Acton, in Middlesex. In consequence of information that I received of a highway robbery, I was on the look out for the parties that evening—I proceeded with Bailey down a lane, which leads into the Uxbridge-road, from East Acton—when we had got down the lane about two hundred yards, I saw two men standing under the shade of the trees; I went towards them—as I drew near, I could see from the light of the moon that their faces were covered with something black—I instantly seized one of them, which proved to be the prisoner, Round, by the collar with my left hand, and with my right hand I stripped the mask from his face—I said, "Halloo! what are you doing here, with your facet covered?"—at that instant a shot was fired, and I fell down—I could not swear which of the two fired the shot; I supposed it to be the prisoner, Round.
COURT. Q. Must it have been fired by one of them? A. It must have been fired by one of them.
MR. PARRY. Q. Upon your falling did you feel anything? A. I felt a numbness coming over my leg, all up my left side—I heard a scuffle behind me, and rose on my knees—as I turned my head, I saw fire, as if from the flash of a pistol—I instantly threw myself over the body of what proved to be the prisoner Harris, and seized a pistol which he held in
his right hand; I was not able for a second or two to wrest it from him—Bailey then drew his staff, and struck Harris across the right hand, which held the pistol—from the blow, he let go with his right hand, and seized it with his left—after that, I got the pistol from him—I never saw Round after the shot was fired until I saw him in custody—I and Bailey then secured Harris; we took him up the lane, and got farther assistance—I then got into an omnibus, and went home—I felt pain from the wound I had received—I have been confined to my bed ever since; I am far from being recovered now—a medical gentleman attended me.
Round. I was not there at the time. Witness. I cannot swear to Round, except from his height.
MR. PARRY. Q. Were you able at all to notice his dress? A. Yes; I thought it was something of a light slop he had on, from the light of the moon; but it was so short a time.
COURT. Q. Do you speak merely from his stature, or likewise from his dress? A. I speak more from his stature than his dress—when he was taken in custody, he was not dressed as the person had been whom I saw at the time in question,—I thought he had something lighter on than he has now—I have nothing to go by, except his height.
MR. PARRY. Q. You say you stripped off his mask? A. I did; I saw his features, but not for a sufficient time, under the circumstances, to identify him—I do not speak from his features.
HENRY BAILEY (policeman, T 250.) On Wednesday, 8th Oct. about eight o'clock in the evening—I met Earthy, at East Acton—I went with him down the lane, leading to the Uxbridge-road—it is called East Acton-lane—I had received information of a highway robbery, which induced me to watch—when we had got about 200 yards down the lane, I saw the two prisoners standing by the side of the road, on the pathway, with their faces covered with something black—I saw Earthy go to one of them—he laid hold of him by the collar, and pulled the mask from his face, and said, "What are you doing here, with your faces covered?"—I then observed the flash, and heard the report of a pistol—I am not able to say which of the men fired the pistol—one of them decidedly did—I immediately sprang upon Harris, and threw him to the ground—I was struggling with him on the ground, and sergeant Earthy called to me to mind the pistol; at that very instant, I noticed a pistol in Harris's hand—he had it close to my belly, he pulled the trigger, it flashed, but missed fire—I saw the flash—Earthy then caught hold of the barrel end of the pistol—I drew my staff, and hit Harris across the wrist—and Earthy, wrested the pistol from him—this is it (producing it)—I was not able to see the other roan at all during the struggle, he got away—I am only able to speak to Round from his general height and appearance—Harris was never out of my hands, I took him to the station, we got more assistance at the end of the lane—Earthy went home—when we got Harris to the station at Acton, I searched him, and found on him three new silk handkerchiefs, three bullets, a piece of rough lead, a knife, 1s. 4d. in money, and a canister containing some gunpowder, which I produce—the bullets are not regularly cast, they are pieces of rough lead cut with a knife, and then chewed—these are the bullets which were in the pistol, and these were found in Harris's pocket—they are all made in the same way—I examined the pistol that Earthy wrenched from Harris, it was loaded with powder, and the two bullets I have produced—on the Saturday following, from information I received, I got a bundle from a person of the name of Squires, a barber of New-street, Houndsditch.
Harris. Q. Do you remember what evidence you gave against me at Hammersmith police court? A. Yes; I did not swear that you, and you only, shot the sergeant—I said, "To the best of my knowledge,"—I swear that you flashed a pistol at me—that is not false.
JAMES SQUIRES . I am a hairdresser, and live at 37, New-street, Houndsditch—on Thursday night, 9th Oct., the prisoner Round came to my shop about half-past twelve o'clock in the day, to be shaved—I shaved him—previous to his going out, he asked me whether I would allow him to leave a bundle in my shop till the evening—I allowed him to do so—he left the bundle, but never came for it—on the Saturday following I gave that bundle up to Bailey.
HENRY BAILEY re-examined. The bundle that I got from Squires contained a jacket, waistcoat and trowsers, which I believe Harris has on now for the purpose of his being identified in another case—I opened the bundle at the time I found it on Squires's premises on the Saturday—in the jacket pocket I found a knife, a razor, a flask of powder, a piece of rough lead and two black silk masks—I produce them.
WILLIAM LEE . I am a sergeant of police on the Great Western Railway. On Thursday night, 9th Oct., about half-past 8 o'clock, I took the prisoner Round into custody, at the Paddington terminus, for uttering a medal for a sovereign—I searched him, and found on him this loaded pistol (producing it), it had in it a piece of paper, two slugs, or bullets, another piece of paper, and some powder—I gave the pistol to Mr. Collard, and saw him unload it next morning, and take these bullets (produced) from it—the bullets are not made in a mould, they are similar to the others produced—I also found on Round two sovereigns, a shilling, three halfpence, and some cards—he had put down the medal at the station in payment for a ticket going to Southall station—I believe that is the nearest station to East Acton.
JURY. Q. Is there not a station between Southall and the terminus, at Paddington? A. There are two stations between Paddington and Southall, Ealing and Han well—I am not myself aware whether the Hanwell station is the nearest to East Acton.
JOSEPH COLLARD . I am superintendent of the Great Western Railway police. Lee handed me this pistol on Friday morning, 10th Oct.—I have compared this pistol with the one found on Harris, it exactly corresponds, they appear to be a pair—I recognised it directly I saw it as the fellow to the one I bad seen the day previous, produced by Bailey—I went with Round to the police-court on Friday morning, 10th—I was in t cab—I stopped the cab, and told him I had a much more serious charge to prefer against him than that for which he had been detained all night, he must use his own discretion as to whether he said anything or not, if he did it would be my duty to repeat it to the Magistrate—I then said, "I am about to prefer a charge against you of being concerned with a man named Harris, now in custody, with shooting at and wounding a police-sergeant, at Acton, on Wednesday evening last"—he appeared startled, and said, "I? do they say I did it?"—I replied, "That is the charge I have to prefer against you"—he then again said, "And they say I did it?"—he then immediately, or very shortly after, said, "Where is Harris?"—I answered, "Where I expect you will be before the day expires"—he asked, "Is the police-sergeant dead?"—I replied, "No"—I afterwards withdrew the charge from the pistol, and found in it, powder, paper, two bullets, and paper again—I took these two bullets from the pistol, which correspond with the other bullets that were in the pistol that was taken from Harris.
JURY. Q. Is Southall the nearest station to Acton? A. No; Ealing is the nearest—Lee is not acquainted with the line—the Ealing station is about four miles from the Southall station—Acton is about half-way between London and Ealing, or rather more perhaps.
WILLIAM ALEXANDER DOWLINO (policeman, T 97). On Friday, 10th Oct., when Round was brought to the station, at Hammersmith, I was placed in the cell with him—prior to my going into the cell, the station-sergeant, in my presence, had cautioned him two or three times—he told him that he might answer no questions he put to him as regarded his asking what his name was, and so on, but anything he did say would be taken down against him—he asked me, when in the cell, if the sergeant was dead—I said, "No"—he said it was his own fault his being shot, as it occurred from the constable knocking up his hand, and when it fell, the pistol went off; that he was not aware it was on the full cock, that it must have been low down in the body that the sergeant was shot; that he thought it useless to remain to assist his comrade as his pistol was discharged, as he bad no means of making any defence, although he heard his mate call after him, that he went a short distance and reloaded his pistol (MR. PARRY here stated, that what further passed related to another charge. LORD CAMPBELL asked the prisoner Round whether he wished the witness to state all that passed, or whether he desired him to stop here; and the prisoner saying he wished him to stop, it was not proceeded with.)
Round. I never said any such thing to him; he kept bothering me in the cell whether it was me that shot the sergeant or not, and I told him no. Witness. I did not ask him whether it was he that shot the sergeant—he said he did not wish Harris to be accused of firing at the sergeant, that it was he fired the shot, and not Harris—I said, the less he had to say about it the better; he said it made no matter, as he supposed Harris had told it, and he expressed a wish to see Harris before his going to the police-court.
Round. Q. Did you not keep telling me that you had seen things, and try to get me to make a confession? A. No, I did not—I did not promise you some beer—I did not tell you that I had seen chaps doing things, and had passed by them and said nothing to them because I knew them—I did not ask your where you bought the coat you had on, as I wanted to buy one just like it.
Round. And I told you where I bought it, at Mr. Aaron's, in Petticoat-lane. Witness. That is the clothes—the officer asked me to inquire of him where the clothes were purchased, or what he had done with the old clothes—that was after he had confessed all to me about the robbery of the two gentlemen, as well as the shooting at the sergeant.
COURT. Q. Who was it that asked you to inquire of him what he had done with the old clothes? A. Bailey—I asked him that, but he gave no satisfactory answer—he said he was drunk at the time, and he did not know where he had bought the new clothes and left the old, whether it was in Petticoat-lane or Houndsditch.
Round. I told him that Harris would prove I was not there that night, because I left him outside the King's Arms, and went across the fields to Hammersmith, and did not know that the policeman was shot. Witness. I have never beard that said before.
CHARLES DRUCE . I am pot-boy to Mrs. Hands, of the King of Prussia public-house, at South all-green. I know both the prisoners, they lodged at the King of Prussia, and slept in the same room with me—they lodged there upwards of three months—I heard of the sergeant being shot—the prisoners
left the King of Prussia on the Monday night as this happened on the Wednesday—I did not see them till they were in custody—I was taking the beer out one day, and saw Round shooting birds in the lane with a pistol—I saw the pistol in his hand—I did not have it in my hand at all—I have seen tap pistols in the possession of Round—I could speak to them again (looking at the pistols produced)—if these are not the pistols they are just the same, and the same shape.
JAMES MILTON . I am a labourer, living at Harefield, Middlesex. On Wednesday, 8th Oct., I was at the King's Arms, Acton Bottom, between 4 and 5 o'clock in the afternoon, and saw the two prisoners there—I had known them before; they came in and had a glass of gin and water between them—I was in the same room—they were there about half an hour—I am sure they are the two men.
HENRY DAY . I am a surgeon at Acton. On Wednesday night, 8th Oct., I was called on to attend sergeant Earthy—I found he was wounded in the left thigh—the wound passed from the front of the thigh inwards—it crossed the large vessels, but did not go deep enough to injure them—had they been injured it would most likely have been fatal; had the main artery been injured he would probably have bled to death before assistance could be procured—the bullet passed through the trowsers of the right leg, grazing the right thigh in its posterior part—about ten days afterwards I extracted from the wound a piece of cloth which was a portion of the trowsers that bad been forced in by the ball—he has been under my care from that time to the present—I should hope he would ultimately perfectly recover from the injury—at present he is suffering from various pains, the result of that injury, and he is likely to do so for some little time.
Harris's Defence. I have nothing to say.
Round's Defence. It was not me that was there that night, for I parted with Harris at the King's Arms door, and went across the fields to Hammersmith, and from there I went to Brentford.
HARRIS— GUILTY . Aged 23.
ROUND— GUILTY . Aged 20.
(There were two other indictments against the prisoners for highway robbery. The Court directed a reward of 15l. to be paid to the witness Earthy, and 5l. to the witness Bailey.)
Before Mr. Justice Maule.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, November 26th, 1851
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. WILSON; Mr. Ald. HOOPER; MR. RECORDER; Mr. Ald. CARDEN; and Mr. Ald. CUBITT.
Before Mr. Recorder, and the Fifth Jury.
GUILTY . Aged 32.— Transported for Seven Years.
MR. PLATT conducted the Prosecution.
GEORGE AMOR . I am a packing-case maker, and live in Ring-street, Kingsland-road. On Friday, 31st Oct., between 11 and 12 o'clock at night, I was going home along Kingsland-road—a woman spoke to me, and wanted me to treat her with drink—I did not stop with her—she asked me to turn down one or two bye streets, which I refused—we got over the bridge to Dunstone-street—I turned down there, and she followed me, and wanted to pull me about, which I would not allow—I was instantly pulled by a person from behind, not knowing any one was near me, and pulled violently down on my back; and he placed his hand over my mouth the moment I was down—the woman kneeled on my knees, unbuttoned my coat, and tried to get my watch—I felt her try to draw it out of my fob, but I think my fob was twisted, and she could not get it—I struggled bard to get the man's hand from my mouth, which I succeeded in doing, and called "Police!" as loud as I possibly could—the man said to the woman, "Step it Emma, step it!" I caught hold of the woman's visite, thinking she had my watch—I held her so tightly that she left the whole visite in my hand—the woman got away—the man ran away as hard as he could—I jumped up and ran after the woman—the man held me for an instant or two, till the woman got away, and then he ran in the opposite direction—I jumped up and ran after the woman, and called "Police!" as loud as I could—while this was taking place, I bad not an opportunity of seeing the man—I could not see him at all, he was behind me—I saw the policeman take him, he could not escape, the policeman was coming down the turning—I had him in view the whole of the time from when he left me, till he was brought back—the distance was very short—I never lost sight of him from the time he jumped up—the prisoner is the man—I was sober—I had had part of two glasses of gin and water.
Cross-examined by MR. O'BRIEN. Q. What time was this? A. little after 11 o'clock—I might have been in company with the woman a quarter of an hour—we walked half a mile together—I met her almost as soon at I entered into Kingsland-road—we walked together till we got to this place—this was a dark place—it was my direct way home—I did not stop with her—we did not walk arm in arm, but side by side—she wanted me to treat her, and to go down two or three turnings, which I would not do—I had not had an opportunity of seeing the man at all who pulled me down—I ran after the woman as soon as I saw that the man could not escape from the policeman—the man held roe for an instant, while the woman got a little distance—I had not seen the policeman before I got up—I heard footsteps running as I laid on the ground—I did not follow the man at all—I saw it was impossible for him to get away, and immediately I saw it was impossible for him to get away, I turned my back and ran after the woman—I followed the woman about fifty yards, and another policeman came that way, but she took a different direction to the man—I could not then discern whether the policeman that took the man was a policeman—I lost nothing—he either threw me on my hat, or kneeled on it himself, for when I picked it up it was all crumpled—when I struggled to get away, he scratched my face with his finger-nails—I carried the marks for a fortnight.
MR. PLATT. Q. When you saw the policeman coming towards the man, what distance was he off? A. About ten yards—he was coming towards the prisoner; and then I ran after the woman—it was all the work of two or three moments—I turned to go after the woman when I saw the man taken by the policeman—I actually saw him taken.
COURT. Q. Do you mean that he was not only so near that he could not escape, but that he was actually in the hands of the policeman? A. Yes, he was.
CHARLRS CARPENTER (policeman, N 477). On Friday, 31st Oct., I was on duty in Queen-street, Kingsland-road. I heard a scuffle at the rear of Acton-place, on the stones—I turned the corner, and saw the prisoner in a kneeling position, with his hand apparently on the prosecutor's face—I saw that before I got to them—the prisoner is the man—there was a woman there.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you lose sight of the prisoner at all? A. Not at all—I was twelve or fourteen yards from him when I first saw him—I saw the woman rise and run away.
GUILTY . † Aged 28.— Transported for Ten Years.
MR. CLARKSON conducted the Prosecution.
JAMES COLQUHOUN . I carry on business as a stock-broker, at 1, Shorter's-court, Throgmorton-street. The prisoner was my clerk—on 17th April, I had occasion to sign a check for 5l.—it is the practice in my business almost invariably for my clerk to prepare the check, for the purpose of my signature—when this check (looking at it) was produced to me for signature, it was not in the state it is now—it was for 5l.—this is the counterfoil of the check, which is in the prisoner's writing—I believe the check was prepared for his own salary—I am quite certain that on 17th April I gave bin no check for 25l.—when I signed it, it was for 5l.—I was not aware of this circumstance till the prisoner was apprehended—I took the prisoner myself, and delivered him up at the station at Whitechapel—this check it in the prisoner's writing, and when brought to me was for 5l.; the twenty which is now in it before the word five, I believe is the prisoner's writing—I have no doubt of it whatever (looking at five other checks)—these are entire forgeries, signatures and all—on this 10l. bank-note (produced) is the name, "Robert F. Mackrill," which I have no doubt is the prisoner's writing.
COURT. Q. In whose hand-writing are those five checks? A. I believe, the prisoner's—I have no doubt of it whatever.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. When did, the prisoner enter your service? A. I believe about Aug., 1850, and continued till the 28th or 29th Oct. last—he was the only clerk in my office, with the exception of a young man I had on trial for a few days in April—I had a character with the prisoner—he was in the habit of filling up the body of the checks, and when he presented them to me, I signed them—it might happen that I had a great many checks to sign in a day—I generally signed them in my office—the prisoner filled up the body of the check, handed it to me, and I signed it, looking generally at the margin; except it came from another member of the house, and that was a crossed check generally, which had been filled up by the prisoner for another member of the Stock Exchange—on these occasions, I had not an opportunity of examining it with the counterfoil—this check was for 5l.; I know that by looking at the counterfoil; and, besides, I never gave the prisoner a check for 25l. for himself—this is made payable to himself; the word "Salary" is on it.
Q. How is it that in the counterfoil the figure seems to have been erased? A. That may have been a mistake in the number—the counterfoil is made to correspond with the check—I did that a few nights ago at my own house,
and I did it in blue ink, that I might know it—no doubt he had filled up a wrong number—I had no idea that the check had been altered; I never was indebted to him 25l., and never gave him a check for 25l. for himself—I have given him a check for 25l. for other parties—I was in some difficulties in May—I did not go out of town, I remained in London—I did not go to Glasgow at that time—I might go after the temporary difficulty I was in—I have no recollection of it; in fact, I don't remember going there at all—I was often in Glasgow this year, but I don't remember being in Glasgow in May—it was not while I was in difficulties that I went—the prisoner was at my place—he never drew a check for me—the prisoner drew my checks under a special provision—I gave him authority to draw for James Colquhoun, signed Robert F. Mackrill; but signed by Mr. Lermitte, another member of the Stock Exchange, without which they were not to be paid—he had authority under these conditions—I think that was during the latter end of March, or the beginning of April—it was necessary that some one should give checks.
COURT. Q. Did you tell him that they would not be paid by the Bank, unless they were signed by Mr. Lermitte? A. Yes; I directed him to get the signature of Mr. Lermitte—he had authority to sign the checks, and there were instructions given to the Bank not to pay them till they were signed by Mr. Lermitte.
MR. RIBTON. Q. That was a sort of check on the prisoner? A. Yes; there have not to my knowledge been complaints by the bankers, of difference between the pass-book and the cash slips of paper—the prisoner would frequently take those slips to the Bank, and frequently I have taken them—I never made any erasures in the cash-book, or the banker's book—this erasure in the counterfoil was done a few days ago, because the numbers did not correspond—it may have been an error, or a figure badly made, that I have put right—I am not in the habit of letting my books go for some considerable time, without looking into them—I generally do it once a fortnight, and oftener, if I can find time—no one has ever complained of my not examining my books, or letting them go a long time without examining them—no one had a right to make such a complaint—I have not offered that if a certain sum of money were handed to me, that I would forego this prosecution—I know Mrs. Harris—I have understood she is the prisoner's aunt—I have not made such an offer to heir—I made no offer if I could get money, to stop the prosecution.
MR. CLARKSON. Q. Had you placed implicit confidence in the prisoner? A. Most unbounded confidence—I give a great many checks—it was the prisoner's business to fill up the checks, and put the amount in the counterfoil—the alteration I have made in the check-book is the alteration of the number, and that was done since the prisoner has been committed—that alteration would not alter the date nor the sum—this sum of 5l. has not undergone the slightest alteration—there is no other sum of 5l., or 25l., dated 17th April—my transactions in a day very often amount to thousands.
JOHN PRINCE LEMMON . I am clerk to Martin, Stone, and Martin, bankers, Lombard-street. Mr. Colquhoun banks with that house—on 17th April I paid this check, for 25l.—I gave 15l. in money, and a 10l.—note, No. 99530, dated 10th Jan., 1851—this is the note (looking at it.)
custody from the prosecutor—I searched him, and found these five checks in the left sleeve of his coat.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you hear the prosecutor offer to forego this prosecution? A. He did not say he would forego the prosecution, he said, if he restored his property, he would have him dealt with as leniently as the law would permit.
(The checks found on the prisoner were here read: three were dated 16th Aug., and were for 2l. 10s., 5l., and 4l. 13s. 9d.; and the other, 23rd Aug., for 10l.; and 27th Aug., for 7l. 10s., all signed Jas. Colquhoun.)
COURT to MR. COLQUHOUN. Q. What was the prisoner's salary? A. 50l. a year—it was not so much at first, and it has been reduced lately—I never saw these five checks at all till they were found in the prisoner's sleeve—I am satisfied they came from my check-book—I find the counterfoils torn away in several places.
(The prisoner received a good character from Mary Ann Parry and Elizabeth Harris.
GUILTY . Aged 19.— Transported for Seven Years.
MR. BRIARLY conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN OXENFORD . I have a literary occupation, and live in John-street, Bedford-row. On 10th Nov. I was walking from St. Paul's Churchyard to Farringdon-street—I arrived at the corner of Ludgate-bill, but was not in Farringdon-street—the crowd pressed against me—there was a lady with me, who was parted from me by the crowd, and we were trying to get through singly—the prisoner and another woman drove against me—I do not know whether they came of their own accord, or were pushed against me, the crowd being behind, which was increased by carts coming round the corner—the procession had passed about twenty minutes—there was no ostensible reason why the crowd should be there—the lady who was separated from me was just behind me—presently I observed that the prisoner and the other woman held my coat, the prisoner on the right, and the other woman on the left—I said, "My good women, if you are pushed by the crowd, there is no reason why you should hold me by the collar"—they said a man pressed behind them—I said, "I don't 6ee any reason for your holding me in this way," but I could not shake them off—I had a gold watch and chain in my waistcoat-pocket, and presently the lady with me said, "Your watch is gone, and this is the woman, I saw it in her hand," pointing out the prisoner—the prisoner was the woman who had held me on my right aide—the other woman, who had held me on the left side, was completely gone, vanished in an instant—there was a cry of "Police!" and the policeman came up—the prisoner was taken to the station—I valued the watch at 5l.—I had had it many years.
Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. How long before bad you looked at your watch? A. I cannot remember, because I am in the habit of looking at my watch frequently—the chain was left as if the watch had been cut away—I was going from Ludgate-hill to Farringdon-street—I was trying to get round the corner to get out of the crowd—there was a confluence of people—I do not say I was wedged in; I was more driven about—it was between half-past 4 and 5 o'clock—I bad been to see the show from the first-floor of the Cathedral coffee-house, and I came from there round St. Paul's Churchyard and down Ludgate-street—I was not at all crowded in the room where I was—I cannot say when I had seen my watch; I think it had not been an hour, because I am in the habit of looking at it to keep appointments
and so on—the lady who was with me was not leaning on my arm at the time I lost my watch; she was then just behind me—the prisoner and the other woman had not hold of the collar of my coat, it was the breasts of my coat which they spread out—my watch was in my right-hand waistcoat-pocket—that was the side on which the prisoner was—I spoke more to the other woman than to the prisoner; but I said to them both, "Why do you push so?"—I think the other said the crowd was pushing behind.
MR. BRIARLY. Q. Was there any pressure on you till you got to the end of Farringdon-street? A. Not at all; it seemed like a pressure for that purpose—I should think the whole pressure was about five minutes—it was, I should say, about a minute or two before I lost my watch—I think I did not see my watch in the coffee-house—there was a clock there.
ALICE M'KELLER . On 10th Nov., between 4 and 5 o'clock in the afternoon, I was in company with the last witness—I accompanied him from the Cathedral coffee-house to the end of Farringdon-street—I was on his arm till I got to the bottom of Ludgate-hill—I got separated from him, but was very near him—I was before him, and did not see him for a moment till I turned back—I then saw the prisoner with his watch in her hand—I saw her hand take it from his chain—I said, "She has taken your watch"—I laid hold of the prisoner—I cannot say how long I held her—I gave her to the policeman—she gave the watch to the other woman—I saw the other woman go away—I laid hold of the other woman.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you lay hold of the other woman first? A. No, of the prisoner first—I was before the prosecutor, I think about half a yard before him—I turned round, because I did not see him near me, and I thought I had lost him—my name is Alice M'Keller—I live now at No. 3, Adelphiterrace, but I live at Gillingham when I am at home—at the time this charge was given I lived at No. 3, Adelphi-terrace—I am stopping with my uncle, the superintendent of the Ant and Bee Steam-boat Company—I sleep there, and live there now—if inquiries had been made there, persons would know I lived there; but there are two No. 3's, where my uncle lives is one No. 3, and there is another No. 3, the large house at the corner—I came from Adelphi-terrace this morning—I came in a cab—I am sure I came from there—I will swear it—I do not know Dudley-street, St. Giles's.
Q. Do you state, on your oath, that you came from the Adelphi-terrace direct here this morning in a cab? A. Yes; I came with the gentleman who has just been examined—I did not come from Dudley-street, I do not know it—I do not know Monmouth-street, I might have passed through it; I do not know it by name—I did not say I came straight from Adelphi-terrace in a cab—I do not know where I got in the cab—it was in the street—I got in a cab on my way—I do not mean that I came from Adelphi-terrace in a cab—my uncle's name is Colletti—there was a considerable crowd at the place where we were—I do not know the name of the street we were going into—I did not hear any screams in the crowd.
MR. BRIARLY. Q. Did you walk part of the way this morning, and come in a cab part of the way? A. Yes; I do not know a great deal of London—I know Holborn—I have not been often there—I do not know Middle-row.
JOHN CROLEY (City-policeman, 617). I took the prisoner into custody—I asked the last witness on what charge she was to be taken—she charged her with taking a watch from the person of a gentleman, and handing it to another female who had taken it away—the prisoner said she was not guilty, and how cruel it was of them to make such a charge.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you hear screams in the crowd? A. I did—when
I came up, the last witness was holding the prisoner—there were very loud screams from more than one person—the last witness screamed, and the prisoner screamed; there was a great noise altogether—the last witness complained of being struck on the back of the hand by one of the females, I think by the one that went away.
COURT to ALICE M'KELLER. Q. At the time you interfered in this matter, did you receive any blow on your hand? A. Yes; I do not know what it was with—it cut my band—the skin was taken off, and it swelled very much (the witness showed her right hand, which was strapped up and very much swollen)—the blow was not struck by the prisoner, but by the woman who ran away—I cannot tell what she struck me with—I received the blow when I held the other woman, to whom I saw the prisoner give the watch—it was the blow that caused me to let her go.
MR. PARRY to MR. OXENFORD. Q. Where was this young lady? A. I said she was behind me; but it is probable that at different moments she was in different parts.
GUILTY . * Aged 21.— Transported for Seven Years.
MR. BIRNIE conducted the Prosecution.
JAMES BRIDGES (policeman, N 372). On 27th Oct. I was on duty at Ponders'-end, between 1 and 2 o'clock in the morning—I saw the prisoner come into Mr. Nicholls's, his master's, yard—he went in the stable where his horses were standing—he might be in there from twenty minutes to half an hour—I then saw him come out of the stable, and go up the granary stain—he then returned with a sack on his shoulder, which appeared to have a bushel of corn in it—he took that in the stable and went back and up the granary stairs again, and came down again with about the same quantity—he took that in the stable, and came out and went up in a loft where there was some hay, and I saw him throw out a great bundle of hay out of the loft window into the yard—he then went in the stable, remained there a short time, and came out, and brought out something in a sack and placed it on his cart—he then went back, brought out the horses, and put them in the cart; and as he was going through the yard, he stopped and took up this hay—he left the yard a little before 4 with his cart and two horses—he came up the ride into the main-road—I and my brother constable followed him; my brother constable stopped him—I searched the cart, and found a sack containing oats and chaff, and another sack with about a bushel of oats and chaff in it, and two nosebags, and about forty-two pounds of hay—the two sacks contained about five bushels of oats and chaff mixed—I took the prisoner back and called up the steward—I asked him if the prisoner had any business with so much oats and chaff and hay—he said he had got a great deal more than he had any business with—I asked the steward if he had any business up the granary stairs—he said no, he had no business at all—I asked the steward about his allowance, and he said they were allowed a peck a day—I went into the stable and found the oat-bin locked—the steward said the prisoner had the key—I asked the prisoner for it, and he gave it me—we unlocked the bin—there were about six bushels of corn in it—I asked the steward if he had any business with so much—he said no, he gave him some oats on Sunday—I found some oil-cake and some beans—I locked the bin and took the prisoner away in custody—that was on the Monday, and on Wednesday Mr. Nicholls came down, I went to the stable with him, and found the staple of the bin had
been drawn—I have got what I took from the prisoner now in Court—here is about five or six bushels—these sacks were lying in front of the cart, against the other sacks of potatoes—when the steward said it was more than he had a right to, the prisoner said, "It is no more than they ought to have; if I have more I bring it back"—the steward said, "I never saw you bring any back"—the nosebags contained about one peck each.
Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. This was at 4 o'clock in the morning? A. Yes; the prisoner was going to market—I know the prisoner—he gets back the same afternoon at 3 or 4—I found this corn on his master's premises—he takes up potatoes to market—this sack was not concealed; it laid up in his cart with the other sacks—there was nothing over it—he might have gone nearly a quarter of a mile before he was stopped—at that time he went away every morning—I know him very well; he has seen me several times of a morning.
HENRY HAYES (policeman, N 349). I was with the last witness—I have heard his statement—it is quite correct—we were both in the yard—I went into three stables—there were about six bushels of corn in the prisoner's bin.
Cross-examined. Q. Does the prisoner know you? A. Yes, very well, I believe; he knew me to be on duty at that part—he has seen me at 4 o'clock in the morning.
COURT. Q. How long have you known the prisoner? A. I should say these ten years.
RICHARD BARRETT . I am foreman to Mr. John Nicholls, of Ponders-end. On that Monday morning I was called up at 4 o'clock—I went with the officers to the yard-gate, and saw the prisoner and his two horses and cart loaded with potatoes standing outside the gate—I did not know that the policemen were on the premises that night—I saw the hay and corn and chaff—I allow the prisoner a peck of oats a day, and they have as much chaff as they can eat—that is a very good allowance—on the Saturday I had given out the usual allowance to the prisoner, a bushel and a half for three horses for two days—he was to have gone to Spitalfields Market and to the dairy at Islington that morning—I told him he had got almost half as much again at he ought to have—the policeman opened the bin in the stable, and I was surprised to see so much corn—the prisoner said he had saved it, he did not feed his horses always alike, they had plenty of grains—they have what grains they like to bring from the dairy when they go there.
Cross-examined. Q. How long has the prisoner been in your service? A. I think it was last Feb.—I have known him seven years—he has always borne a good character—he has been out on bail—I did not get the police to watch.
COURT. Q. Did you give him in charge? A. Yes; the policemen said they should take him in charge, and I said, "Very well, you must take him;" and I sent another man to London with his horses—I do not suppose there was a peck and a half of oats in the sack—in the sacks and the nosebags there was about two bushels—that was what he ought to have had, but he should not have had so much chaff.
NOT GUILTY .
34. SUSANNAH BASTIONGS and WILLIAM BASTIONGS , stealing 21 cigars and 1 1/2 lb. of tobacco, value 3s.; the goods of William McDonald, the master of Susannah Bastiongs.—2nd COUNT, William Bastiongs feloniously receiving the same.
MR. CAARTEEN conducted the Prosecution.
9 and 10 o'clock in the evening, I went down-stairs to my back-parlour—I saw William Bastiongs there—I asked him to walk with me into the bar-parlour—I there asked him to give me the parcel he had in his coat pocket—he said he had no parcel—I said, "You have; and if it is too much trouble for you to take it out, I must assist you"—I took it out, and found in it eight or nine cigars, thirteen screws of tobacco and some bread and meat—I took him into the back-parlour and called the female prisoner down—I asked her if she knew the man—she said, "No"—I asked her if she bad ever seen that parcel before (that was the parcel that I had taken from the man's pocket, it was then lying on the table) she said, "No"—I had seen this man once before—Susannah Bastiongs met with an accident and went away—I did not take her wages, and she sent this man for her wages, 20s., which we gave him.
Cross-examined by MR. O'BRIEN. Q. You gave the man in custody, and the woman?—A. No, she followed us to the station-house and I gave her in custody there—I knew she would follow us—when I said I should give this young man into custody, she said, "I shall go and see him righted"—she had been in my service about five months—I heard her say that these were cigars that had been left by her brother-in-law to be given to this man—her box was searched afterwards and some more cigars were found there—I think eighteen.
CHARLES DOWDING . I am a meat-salesman, and live in Newgate-market—I am brother-in-law to Mr. M'Donald—I was at his house on the evening of the 9th of Nov.—I saw the female prisoner come down from the kitchen to the back-parlour—she went to a settle and gave a parcel to the man prisoner, who was sitting there—my brother-in-law came down in about twenty minutes—I heard him ask the male prisoner for the parcel—I did not see it taken from him—I saw it afterwards, it was the same parcel.
Cross-examined. Q. I suppose you knew this woman? A. I have seen her—she knew me—there were several persons there.
EDWIN PINNY (City policeman, 286.) I received the male prisoner in custody, on the evening of the 9th of Nov.—this parcel was given to me, this is it—it contains what was given to me then, and the cigars found in the box, fifteen in number.
WILLIAM M'DONALD re-examined. These cigars are the same as others I have—here are some papers of tobacco—they are the same that I have, but other persons might have the same—the woman said that her brother-in-law, who had left them, had gone to sea.
COURT. Q. Where do you keep your cigars? In a cigar-box in the bar-parlour—I had a large quantity, something like twenty pounds of them, but I keep one box filled on the parlour table, which held, perhaps, one pound or one pound and a half—I kept that filled from the stock boxes—I have lost half a pound at a time from the box, and altogether I have lost fourteen or fifteen pounds of cigars—the female prisoner cleaned that room every morning.
Cross-examined. Q. Have yon no bar-maids? Yes, two—they had access to that room.
SUSANNAH BASTIONGS— GUILTY of Stealing. Aged 39.— Confined Six Months.
WILLIAM BASTIONGS— GUILTY of Receiving. Aged 28.— Confined four Months.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, November 26th, 1851.
PRESENT—Sir JAMES DUKE, Bart., Ald.; Mr. Ald. SIDNEY; Mr. Ald. LAWRENCE; and Mr. COMMON SERJEANT.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant and the Seventh Jury.
GUILTY . Aged 55.— Confined Six Months.
BARON ALEXIS SYLVIAN DU TRAMBLAY (through an interpreter). I am at present living at Southampton-street, Bloomsbury-square; I carry on business in France, as a manufacturer. I came over to the Exhibition, and, while here, sold some china—the prisoner was in my employ while I was here—hit duty was to take out goods, and receive the money for them, which he ought to have paid over to me the same day, or the following morning—he did not on 20th Oct., or any day after that, pay me 3l. 16s., or any sum of money, on account of Captain Robertson, and he has not accounted for it—I saw the prisoner on 20th, 22nd, and 23rd Oct., and received some payments from him.
Prisoner. Q. Did you receive a note from me between the 20th and 28th Sept.? A. Yes; this is it (produced—this was dated 24th Oct., written in French: part of it was interpreted, as follows: "To Mr. Baron Du Tramblay. I shall not be able to come before Monday, at 9 o'clock. I went into the City to see the Captain"—the note proceeded—"et toucher,' or 'touchais,' the money"—the writing was here so illegible as to render it uncertain whether the words were "a toucher," to receive, or "et touchais," and received; the prisoner contending that it was the latter, and that he thereby had accounted for the receipt of the money)—I was not present on the 20th, 22nd, or 23rd, when any goods were delivered to you.
ERIC CARRINOTON SMITH . On 20th Oct. the prisoner brought me some china for Captain Robertson, and I paid him 3l. 6s. for it—two of the articles he had to take back—he brought them back again in two days, and I paid him 10s. more—he wrote this receipt to the bill (produced)—I saw him write it.
ROBERT CRUWYS (policeman, E 112). I took the prisoner on 4th Nov., and told him he was charged with embezzling various sums of money, amounting to 40l., of Baron Du Tramblay—he said it was nonsense; whatever was between him and the Baron was a debt, and the Baron had his remedy by suing him in the County Court.
(The prisoner, in defence, admitted having received the money, but contended that he had accounted for it in the note he wrote to the Baron; after which he was confined to his bed for three days.)
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. BODKIN and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN BURROWS . I am landlord of the Grapes public-house, St. MaryAxe. On Thursday, 20th Nov., the prisoner came and asked my barmaid for 1d.—worth of gin—she served him—he put down a sixpence, which she immediately said was a bad one—I stepped forward, took it up, and broke
it—I said, "This is really too bad; it was only last Thursday night you came and served me in the same way"—I remembered him again immediately—on that occasion he gave me a sixpence, which I broke, and returned to him, and he took it away—my wife said, in his presence, that he had offered her a bad shilling two days before—I gave him into custody—I had laid the two pieces of the sixpence on the counter—the prisoner took them up, and when the policeman came he gave them to him, saying, if he had known it was bad he would not have uttered it.
Prisoner. Q. Did I change a sixpence at your house? A. Yes; when I broke this sixpence, you produced another one, a good one, and the barmaid gave you 5d. change—you must have had a penny in your pocket when you came in—you were not drunk.
JOHN CROWLKY (City-policeman, 617). I was called to the Grapes, Burrows charged the prisoner with passing a bad sixpence, and said that he had offered him another bad sixpence two or three days before, and also a shilling to his wife—the prisoner said that the shilling was a good one, and he was not aware the sixpence was bad—I searched him, and found on him 6d. in copper, and this galvanic battery (produced)—he gave his address, 24, St. John-street, Whitechapel—a woman came up directly I took him, and said he was her husband, and asked why he was taken into custody—I did not answer her—after the prisoner was in the cell at the station, the woman was brought in, and gave an address, 2, Tenter-street, Spitalfields—I went there, and in a back-room on the ground-floor found this box, containing some pieces of metal, some bits of spoons, and 18lbs. or 20lbs. of clay, of which this is a sample (produced).
SARAH HOWARD . I am bar-maid at the Grapes. On 20th Nov. the prisoner came and asked for 1d.—worth of gin—I served him—he gave me a sixpence, which I said was a bad one—Mr. Burrows stepped forward, and broke it in half—the prisoner then pulled out another sixpence, and I gave him 5d. in coppers change—the prisoner was taken into custody.
WILLIAM WEBSTER . I am inspector of coin to the Mint This sixpence is bad—this is part of a galvanic battery, which is used for electro-plating coins—here is part of a Britannia-metal spoon, and some fused metal, but I cannot say whether it is any part of the spoon; I should rather say not—this clay is not what is generally used in coining.
Prisoner's Defence. I never lived at Tenter-street in my life, and the landlady proved it yesterday at the Mansion-house; I did not know the 6d. was bad; I had been drinking, and did not know what money I had.
GUILTY . Aged 27.— Confined Six Months.
GUILTY . * Aged 43.— Confined Eighteen months.
MESSRS. RYLAND and LOCKE conducted the Prosecution.
DENNIS SHEA . I am a tailor, and live at 8, Gunn-square, Houndsditch. On 18th Oct., I went with Timothy Shea, who is no relation of mine, to the Horns public house, in Petticoat-lane—we had a pint of beer together there—the prisoner and some others, who I do not know, were drinking there likewise—the prisoner got off his seat, caught hold of Timothy Shea, and pulled him across the form—I got up and separated them—the prisoner struck me, and I returned it—he then caught hold of my nose with his teeth, and never parted from me till he grizzled it off—I did not find the portion
of my nose again, I was in too much agony to look for it—he must have either swallowed it or spit it out—I found a policeman at the door, and gave the prisoner into custody—I knew the prisoner by sight before, but had never spoken to him—he was not tipsy.
TIMOTHY SHEA . I am no relation of the last witness. On 18th Oct., about 11 o'clock at night, I was at the Horns, and also Dennis Shea, the prisoner, and others I do not know—the prisoner came across the room to where I was sitting with Dennis Shea—I told him three times to go back to his own company, and he caught me by the breast, and pulled me across the form—Dennis came behind and tried to take him away, he turned round and bit hold of Dennis's nose—I laid hold of the prisoner, trying to take him away from Dennis, and he would not part from him till he got Dennis's nose off—it bled very much—I have seen the prisoner before, but have never spoken to him—he was given into custody.
JACKSON GOODENOUGH KENT . I am house-surgeon, at the London Hospital. On 18th Oct., Dennis Shea was brought to the hospital—I examined his face, the end of his nose was gone, and appeared to have been bitten off—it was bleeding then, but not so much as it had been—it was a dangerous wound for a man of his condition—I treated him to prevent erysipelas coming on, which it might have done—he was in the hospital till 4th Nov., and is still an out-patient.
RICHARD PLUMBLEY (City-policeman, 612). On 18th Oct. I was on duty in Petticoat-lane, between 11 and 12 o'clock—I heard a noise outside the Horns, and saw the prosecutor with his face bleeding profusely—he told me what had happened, and gave the prisoner into custody—I do not think the prisoner was in liquor.
GUILTY . Aged 26.— Confined Twelve Months.
MESSRS. RYLAND and LOCKE conducted the Prosecution.
SAMUEL EWBANK . I am a clerk, and live at 85, Bartholomew-close. I have known the prisoner two years and a quarter, and have occasionally employed him to clean knives and boots—on 30th Oct. he went with me on business to the West-end, and we came home together—it was between 12 and 1 o'clock at night when we got home—we went into the front parlour, and remained there about half an hour, when I was knocked down by the prisoner—when I recovered I made for the parlour-door, and found it locked—I then went and opened the shutters and windows, and called "Murder! and police!" and while doing so he knocked me down a second time by a blow behind the ear, and I became insensible—my wife was in the room, and my child in bed in the back-parlour—when I recovered I saw my wife was all over blood—after I was knocked down the second time, I do not remember anything till I found myself in the hands of two officers—I was hurt very much about the head and ribs—my ribs are now as black as my hat; the back of my head was nothing but bloody matter; I shall feel it all my life—my wife is about six months gone in the family way, and too ill to attend to-day—I hear my little boy was assaulted by the prisoner while I was insensible—I saw him in the hospital next day—there was nothing the matter with him before.
Prisoner. Q. Were you sober? A. Yes; we had been to 47, South Moulton-street; my wife went with us—I left you and her at a public-house while I went to this house—I came there for you, and we bad a pot of beer there—we had two pots of threepenny beer at Walker's public-house, which
my wife paid for—we then went to the Cross Keys tap-room, where I paid 1s. for a glass of brandy-and-water—my wife did not pay for anything there—there was a young man there who worked for your brother, and he shared the brandy-and-water with us—we had had a pot of beer there before the brandy-and-water—a gentleman there had a pot of hot beer and gin—neither I or my wife bad part of that—there was some of it put out of the pot into a glass for my wife, but she did not drink it—we then came down Holborn, and went to the Giant's, and had a 1s.—worth of brandy-and-water there—we did not have two glasses—we then went to another public-house facing Red Lion-court, and had a 1s.-worth of brandy-and-water, which my wife paid for—I gave a policeman a glass of ale outside the house, it was not gin—when we got home my children were in bed—I did not go into my bed-room—you were not to stand for my child at the christening on the following Sunday—I had told you three or four days before that I bad been a friend to you, and could not keep you any longer, having a wife and family to maintain myself, and I wished you to look out for yourself—I did not on this evening say I was not master of my own house, and my wife did not say, "What do you always want to quarrel for when you are drank?"—I did not pay you for what you did for me, but I gave you your food and clothes—you have slept in the same room with me and my wife—I have not laid on the floor drunk when you were there—I have been drank scores of times, but not in your presence—I took you on account of your father's recommendation, and through pity for you, your brother-in-law lived in the same house as I did—I have not been drinking this morning.
JOHN TOWNSEND (City-policeman, 261). I have been with Mr. Ewbank this morning, but he has left me several times—I cannot say whether he is sober or not—on the night of 80th Oct, I was on duty in Bartholomew-close, and heard cries of "Police!" and "Murder!" proceeding from No. 86—I went there, found the window open, looked in, and saw the prisoner there, hurling every thing out of the window he could lay hands on—I got the assistance of Templeman and Delaney—the street-door was open, we went in, and forced the parlour door—it was dark; a light was got, and I then saw Ewbank lying on the ground, in a state of stupor, I should judge from ill-usage—the prisoner was behind the door, and appeared to be intoxicated—I stayed with Ewbank till he came to himself, and then took him to the station—the prisoner had gone on there before—I saw that Mrs. Ewbank and the boy had both been ill-used; the boy was taken to the hospital—I saw a drop of blood on the prisoner's forehead, when he was at the station—on the following morning, Ewbank made a complaint of the prisoner's ill-usage—while the prisoner was at the station, he kicked Templeman in the privates.
Prisoner. Q. Was Ewbank sober? A. He was in a state of stupor; I cannot say whether he was sober or not—I was the first constable that came up, and was present when the door was forced—you then struck Templeman with the tongs on his hand, with which he warded off the blow—he was outside the door, and you opened the door partially, a moment or two before we forced our entrance—I did not see you strike any one else—Templeman and Delaney went into the parlour before me—I did not see Templeman lay hold of you by the scarf, and I did not bear him say, "This is him, drag him out."
WILLIAM MURLEY TEMPLSMAN (City-policeman, 253). I was on duty in Smithfield, early on the morning of 31st Oct., and heard cries of "Murder!" and "Police!" coming from Bartholomew-close—I went to No. 85 there, and saw the prisoner at the parlour-window, with a poker in his hand—I saw him strike a boy, about nine years old, a blow on the head, and another on
the hand; and I saw him strike Mrs. Ewbank with his fist, which knocked her down—Townsend was then in the passage—I tried to get in at the window, and the prisoner threw a dish at me, which struck me on the breast—I tried again, and he threw a glass decanter, which struck my hat on the front of my head—I had a swelling there afterwards, but the hat prevented it doing serious harm; and he threw a saucepan out at the same moment—I pulled Delaney away, and we went into the passage to the parlour-door—I forced the door, and went in first; it was dark—I turned my lantern on, and the moment I entered, the prisoner made a blow at my head with a pair of tongs; I guarded it off with my hand—he made a second blow at me, and I caught hold of the tongs, and took them away from him—I caught hold of him, and he kicked me in the legs—Delaney followed me in; he struck him; and Delaney and I secured him—Ewbank was lying on the floor quite insensible, and Mrs. Ewbank was also lying in a corner, completely smothered in blood, and almost insensible, and did not speak—we took the prisoner to the station; he struggled very violently on the way, and attempted to kick me—after we got him to the station, he was obliged to be handcuffed—I was then taking him to his cell, and he gave me a very violent kick in the private parts, which I feel now—Delaney and another constable took him to the cell, and I saw him kick Delaney several times in the legs—he appeared to have been drinking, but he was quite sensible of what he was doing.
Prisoner. Q. Did you strike me? A. Not that I am aware of—I did not see any one else strike you—they may have done so in the struggle—I did not knock you down—I was on your right side on the way to the station, and Lapworth on your left—Delaney did not go with us—the child was taken to the hospital at 2 o'clock, and remained there next day—he was not out in the Close playing that day—I saw Mr. Ewbank at the station; he was very insensible, but I do not consider he was drunk—I afterwards saw him with his wife at the hospital—I never saw him drunk, and have never drank with him.
JOSEPH DELANET (City-policeman, 213). I heard cries of "Murder!" and "Police!" and went to 85, Bartholomew-close—I saw two policemen outside the window, and saw a dish thrown out, which struck Templeman on the breast—he was trying to get in at the window—he then tried again, and a glass decanter was thrown out at him, which knocked off his hat—he turned from the window, and went to the passage—I followed him—we forced the door, and found the prisoner there with the poker, or tongs, and he struck at Templeman—he warded it off, and got hold of him—he then commenced kicking him and me also, and he struck me in the breast before I could lay hold of him—we took him to the station—he was very violent indeed, and we were obliged to handcuff him—as he was going to the cell, he kicked Templeman in the privates—I then took hold of him, and he kicked me several times—I had seen Ewbank insensible on the floor, and I picked him up, and Mrs. Ewbank was in a most horrible state—I did not see the boy.
Prisoner. Q. Did I strike Templeman more than once? A. I cannot say; you raised the tongs or poker a second time—I did trip you down—I do not know whether Templeman got hold of you by the scarf, we got you on the ground as quick as we could—neither I nor Templeman knocked you down at the station; we left you with your hands cuffed, lying on your side, in your cell—I do not know whether you laid on your face till the morning.
and heard cries of "Murder!" and "Police!" from No. 85—I went up to the parlour-window, and saw the prisoner strike the woman several times with his fist in the face—I think she was on the ground—Townsend was there, and Templeman and Delaney came—I saw the prisoner throw a dish out of the window, which struck Templeman on the breast; and then he threw out a decanter, which struck him in the front of his hat, and an iron saucepan struck me on the hand—if Templeman had not pulled me away, it must have struck me somewhere else—we went into the passage to the parlour-door—Templeman went into the parlour; the prisoner struck at him with a pair of tongs—he stepped on one side, and they struck him on the hand—I remained outside the room, and afterwards assisted Templeman with the prisoner to the station—I only remained there a few minutes—I did not see him taken to the cell.
Prisoner. Q. Did you strike me in taking me to the station? A. No; I did not see you strike Mrs. Ewbank, or the boy, with a poker or the tongs—I did not see you strike or kick Templeman on the way to the station—Templeman struck you with his staff.
Prisoner's Defence. I went with the prosecutor and his wife to the Westend, leaving the three children in bed; coming back we went to several public-houses; in Red Lion-street we had a few words about the christening, and Mr. Ewbank began to abuse me, for inviting people to his house; when we got home, the three children were all up; the eldest boy was nursing the baby in front of the fire; Mr. Ewbank began quarreling, and said he was not master of his own house; I said he was always quarreling; and wanted to get out, and found the key was taken out of the door; I interfered between him and Mrs. Ewbank, and he knocked me down.
GUILTY . Aged 24.— Confined Twelve Months.
(There was another indictment against the prisoner for assaulting Ewbank.)
MESSRS. BODKIN and BALLANTINE conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN WILLIAM NICHOLLS . I am clerk at the Hammersmith police-court. I recollect the defendant making a charge before Mr. Paynter, the Magistrate, who occasionally presides there—I have the notes here which I took down.
MR. HUDDLESTON. Q. Was there an information? A. No; there was a complaint, but not in writing—this is it—something was stated to Mr. Paynter, upon which he issued a summons, and this which I am about to read took place at the hearing of that summons.
MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Was the defendant Adams sworn? A. Yes; Mary Joseph was then the defendant—Adams stated, ("I am now an inmate of Fulham Workhouse—the defendant cut off my hair in the Convent of the Good Shepherd, the first fortnight I was there—I went there on a Monday in July last—it was on the Saturday my hair was cut off, after the Monday I entered the Convent—it was in a room on the ground-floor; two of the nuns held me while it was done—there were four persons altogether—I do not know the names of the nuns who held me, but I think I should know their persons—I left last Thursday morning,—for the last three months I have asked several people to allow me to leave, but have been refused—I asked Gregoria the Superintendent, to allow me to leave—I got out at last by climbing the garden-gate, and opening a door the key was in—I wore the dress of the inmates—I changed my dress before I left—I found some clothes in the next room; a shawl, a dress, and a bonnet—I left about half-past
eleven o'clock—there was at the door a carriage—I came from Liverpool to the Convent, by railway—a gentleman came with me; I do not know his name—I met him at Liverpool, in the new church, accidentally, two days before I came away—I had seen him before, where I was in service, in Princes-street, with Mr. Rice, a carpenter—I was eight months with him, and since I left, which is two years ago, I have lived at Mr. Roache's, 15, Lamb-street—I was lodging there when the Roman Catholic priest saw me—I had seen him at the carpenter's—I do not know his name—he said I was going to a situation—he paid my fare—the portress opened the door—he went inside and spoke to one of the nuns, and went away—I have not seen him since—I lived with my aunt, Mrs. Barry, before I went to the carpenter's—I never was in London till now—I am a Protestant—Mr. Rice was a Catholic—I have never gone by any other name—there was a great deal of hair cut off.
Cross-examined by MR. M'MULLINS. I do not know Mr. Connolly, of Moorfields—I was not at Moorfield's chapel last Sunday fortnight—I brought no letter from Mr. Connolly, to the Convent—he gave me no money—I did not tell him I was living in a bad house—I never went by any other name but in the Convent—I was not in the Convent, in 1848, in Feb. and did not leave in Sept.—I do not know a priest of the name of the Rev. Mr. Long—I do not know the Orphan School, at Hampstead—I always professed myself a Protestant—I got out of the grounds where the men are building,—the key was in the door—I have been unwell in the Convent—I did not have my hair cut off in a fever hospital, nor did I tell any girl I had—I was born at Liverpool, and never left till I came up to this Convent.") The defendant, Mary Joseph, was asked whether she was guilty or not guilty; she said, "Not guilty," and she was sworn as a witness.
Cross-examined by MR. HUDDLESTON. Q. Did you administer the oath to the prisoner? A. No, the usher did—I saw her take it—the summons was read before the charge came on—I was present when she gave the information on which the summons was issued—it was a mere statement, nothing in writing—she was sworn—it was Mr. Paynter who granted the summons.
MARY JOSEPH . I reside at an establishment called the Good Shepherd, at Hammersmith, where women who have lived in prostitution, and evince a desire to reform are received—there are other ladies beside me, who devote ourselves to endeavour to reform them—the prisoner came there, on the 15th Oct., bringing a letter from the Rev. Mr. Connolly, the minister of the Roman Catholic church, Moorfields—I believe that letter has been burnt—she came between two and three in the afternoon—no gentleman accompanied her—she was received into the Asylum, slept there that night, and was discharged on the following day, in consequence of giving a wrong Dame, and saying she had not been there before—she gave the name of Angelina Adams—it was discovered she had been in the house before—I cannot positively say when it was, but I think it was about ten months before—she certainly had not been there three months prior to 15th Oct.—I did not cut her hair, or give any directions for it to be done—no persons called nuns held her while I did it, or desired it to be done—I am called in the Covent, sister Mary Joseph—no other person there is called by that name, or by the name of sister Joseph—there is no other person of the name of Joseph there—persons are eligible to be admitted into the Asylum, whether Protestants or Roman Catholics—we understand the prisoner to be the same as ourselves.
Cross-examined. Q. Your duty is confined to being portress? A. Yes; I have nothing to do with the internal management of the house—the portresses
attend at the gate by turns, the place is never left vacant—there is no other religious service carried on, but the Roman Catholic—I had had no conversation with the defendant, my duty is confined to the gate—I knew her in the establishment, in 1848, but had no conversation with her—when she was there in 1848, she attended on our worship—there was no other for her to attend, but she always pretended to be a Catholic—all the inmates attend worship—I took no notice of her appearance when she came in, in Oct., and I did not let her out.
MR. BODKIN. Q. Is there a chapel in the establishment? A. Yes; if we have Protestants they are obliged to attend there.
MARIA GIBSON . I am a widow, and live at 47, Upper Seymour-street, Euston-square. I am a Catholic, what you distinguish by calling a Roman Catholic—I occasionally attend the Catholic chapel, in Rosoman-street, Clerkenwell—one night last Feb. I met the prisoner there—it was not service time, but I had been to see the clergyman, as a duty of our religion—I found her there, and when I left, she asked me if I was not going in her direction—I asked her which way that was, she said, "towards King's-cross," and I said I was going towards Somers-town—she told me she had been in service, and had saved a few shillings from her last service, she was then living in the neighbourhood of Tottenham-court-road; her money was exhausted, and she expected to be turned away from her lodging—I told her if that should take place, she might have a share of my room, if she had no better place to go to—she afterwards came—on 10th March I moved to another house, and she moved with me—after a little while she became acquainted with a woman in the next room, and went and lived with her—she afterwards disappeared, and I next saw her by my steps, some time in July—she asked me to take her in again—I looked at her, and saw she was looking very miserable, and said, "Where is your hair?"—she said, "I have been very bad, and they cut it off in St. Pancras workhouse"—she had a lock of it in her hand, but none on her head—she was very ill afterwards, and on 17th July I took her to the Free Hospital, in Gray's Inn-lane, and afterwards to Charing-cross Hospital—I saw her while she was. in the hospitals, every Sunday—I think I visited her four Sundays—on the next Sunday I sent, and beard she had left—I went myself on the Monday and found she had gone—that was some time in Sept.—she followed up the duties of our Church—we went to the same altar, and took the sacrament together.
Cross-examined. Q. When was it she took the sacrament? A. The very day I am speaking of, 17th July—I think it was about the end of Feb. I first knew her—that was when she said her money was exhausted—I met her in the chapel—I had not known her before—I thought, from what she said, she intended suicide, or some other bad crime, and it was nothing bat humane motives that induced me to take care of her—it is a duty of my religion to share my bread with any one—I took her into my house, but she appeared anxious to relieve me of the burden; she appeared dispirited—I do not think she has a friend in the world, which seemed to prey upon her night and day—I never saw anything but the best behaviour in her, in reading good books, and in prayers—she dwelt very much on her poverty—I did not like the language of the woman in the next room to me, and I told the prisoner if she carried on the intimacy with her she must leave me—when I found her on my steps, in July, she was crying; her legs were swollen with being on the stairs all night, and the landlady had been trying to hunt her away—the told me she had had something the matter with her head, and her hair had been cut off, her head had been very bad, and she had no knowledge how
her hair was taken off at the time it was done, and she was very cross when she found it was cut off—she was very ill when in Charing-cross Hospital.
MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Did she appear to know what she was doing and saying? A. Yes; she went through the offices of religion with me, and seemed to know what she was doing—she was distressed in her mind at night about her poverty.
ELLEN. I am called "Sister Ellen." I let out the defendant, on 16th Oct., at the gate, in the ordinary way—she did not climb over the wall—she made no complaint to me.
CHARLES HEHEAD . I am one of the overseers of St. Pancras parish—the prisoner was an inmate of the workhouse in March—on 27th March, when she had been in a day or two, I took a statement of her history—this is it—I wrote it myself, shortly—(reads)—She stated her name was Mary Ann Burke, that she was eighteen years of age; that she last resided at 47, Upper Seymour-street, Somers-town; that she was brought up in St. Patrick's Roman Catholic school, Heath-house, Hampstead; that she left there three years ago to go into service; that she went into service at 53, Clarendon-square, and remained there thirteen months; and that she knew of no friends or relations)—she remained in the workhouse till 11th July.
SAMUEL WALDEGRAVE . I am the surgeon of St. Pancras workhouse. I know the prisoner by the name of Mary Ann Burke—she was admitted into the workhouse infirmary on 11th April, when she was suffering from scrofulous symptoms, and an enlargement of the abdomen; and I apprehend from the appearances that the glands of the abdomen were scrofulously affected—she remained till 11th July, when she left of her own accord—when she came in she had her hair—it had not been cut in any way—about a month before she left, it was cut as close as it could be, by my orders—it was not shaved off—I considered that was necessary to be done from the state of her disease—her hair is now grown as much as I can expect it to be from that time.
Cross-examined. Q. Why did you order her hair to be cut off? A. She was suffering from fever, and a good deal of derangement about the brain—she had then only been suffering from it a very short time—the derangement of the brain was brought on by the illness under which she was labouring—scrofulous illness is very painful, and calculated to produce great excitement consequent on the pain—the excitement consequent on the pain produced the derangement of the brain, which induced me to have her hair cut off—there was no particular danger, but I had the hair cut off to relieve the symptoms under which she was labouring—her hair was cut off by the barber, in the infirmary on the ground-floor.
MR. BALLANTINE. Q. You have spoken of the necessity of taking off her hair, arising from the state of fever she was in; I suppose she was in a fever? A. Yes; the brain was sympathetically affected—she recovered in two days, and her brain was quite right then—there were no symptoms of delusion or insanity—having seen her before and after, I can say her mind was not at all affected after her recovery—she was able to refer to matters that had occurred previously—she was asked questions with respect to her disease, and answered rationally.
COURT. Q. Was her derangement such as to render her insensible, at the time her hair was cut off, of what was done to her? A. She was insensible at the time.
JULIA CAROLINE SMITH . I am a nurse, at St. Pancras Workhouse. I attended the prisoner part of the time she was in the infirmary, while she was attended by Mr. Waldegrave—Mr. Waldegrave ordered me to cut her hair off,
which was done by the barber, in my presence, she left on 11th July—her head was then quite recovered—she called to see me about five weeks afterwards, and knew us all again—she shook hands with us, and stayed nearly an hour: she appeared perfectly in possession of her senses.
Cross-examined. Q. Who was present when her hair was cut off? A. Several patients, as many as three or four—she was not violent at the time, but rather weak; I held her, but no one else.
MR. BODKIN. Q. Was she in bed? A. Yes; I held her head—she did not afterwards seem to grieve for it, or when she called on us—she wore a front of her own hair, which we plaited for her in the infirmary.
GEORGE FREDERICK LANE . I am resident surgeon, of the Royal Free Hospital, Gray's-inn-lane. The prisoner was admitted there on 17th July, and left on 11th Aug.—I saw her two days after she came; she then appeared to be suffering from debility, and slight fever—she is a scrofulous subject, and I treated her for that—she discharged herself—she was not perfectly well then, but very much improved in general condition of body; but was still suffering from pains in the body—I am not of opinion that they were scrofulous pains—she was very intelligent—neither her head or mind were affected—her hair was short.
Cross-examined. Q. You did not attribute the pains in the abdomen to the scrofulous disease? A. No; at first I did not make up my mind to what to attribute it; but subsequently I thought it was principally hysteria—that operates in a variety of forms—it is possible it might operate on the mind—it is the same thing as hysterics—the feverish symptom! I noticed were in the secretions of the body, and the tongue was furred, and the skin hot, and there was general constitutional disturbance—I do not think that that and the pain in the abdomen would excite the imagination of the mind—hysterics occasionally excite the imagination and mind.
MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Do you know what my friend means by exciting the imagination? A. Not precisely—I questioned her as to the nature of her symptoms, with a view to apply the remedies—her answers were very slow, and there was some degree of moroseness about her.
ELIZA RANDALL . I am nurse at the Free Hospital, Gray's-inn-lane. I remember the prisoner being there as a patient—I attended her in the female accident ward, for rather more than two weeks—her hair was cut close when she came in; I remarked it to her, and she said it was owing to having the fever so frequently; and it was done to her while she was in the workhouse—after she had left the hospital, I went to see her at the House of Detention, while she was under this charge; she recognised me in a moment—I said, "Do you know me, Mary Ann?"—she said she did—I said, "Who am I?"—she said, "My nurse;" and began to cry—I knew her by the name of Mary Ann Burke—she had first of all said that was her name, and afterwards said that it was Adams.
Cross-examined. Q. Was she abed when you saw her at the House of Detention? A. No; I asked her if she knew who I was, because she looked at me strangely—I think she had some knowledge of me at first.
MR. BODKIN. Q. Did you see anything strange or irregular in her? A. At first when she was ill, I certainly did—I only saw her that once afterwards—I do not know that I can say her conduct and conversation were not rational then—I did not see anything to induce me to say that she was irrational, or out of her right mind.
of the time she was there—she remained till 30th Sept., when she discharged herself—she had been admitted on her own application—she had some very obscure symptoms about the abdomen, and from her appearance altogether I considered it a case requiring immediate admission—I had an opportunity of observing her for some time—there was no insanity about her—I examined her as to her health, and she gave a correct account—her memory was not at all deficient.
Cross-examined. Q. Was she suffering pain? A. I think she had suffered considerable pain previously—she was not cured when she left the hospital—I did not wish her to go.
REV. JOHN CONNOLLY . I am a Roman Catholic priest and clergyman, at Moorfields Chapel. On Sunday afternoon, 5th Oct., I saw the prisoner in the chapel—in consequence of what was said to me, I asked her what religion she was—she said she did not know; she was an orphan, and had never been in any place of worship in her life; she had began an evil course on the streets at the age of thirteen, and continued it for six or seven years in and about London—I asked her if she was going on in the same course still—she said she was then living in a house of ill-fame, in Half-moon-passage, Aldersgate-street—I gave her some temporary assistance, and spoke to her two or three times between that day and 15th Oct., on which day I gave her a letter, addressed to the Superior of the Convent of the Good Shepherd, at Hammersmith—after I had questioned and endeavoured to instruct her in the elements of Christianity, of which she was totally ignorant, I asked her if she was desirous of reforming—she said she was; and I told her there was a house at Hammersmith for such, and I had no doubt I could obtain her admission—I communicated with the principals there, gained their consent, and sent the prisoner there with the letter on 15th Oct.—I did not know she had been an inmate there before—I gave her the means of conveying her to Hammersmith—I did not see her again till she was before the Magistrate.
REV. THOMAS LONG . I am a Catholic priest. I have known the defendant from her childhood—I got her into St. Patrick's Roman Catholic school, at Hampstead, where she was educated; and about four years ago, I got her into the Convent of the Good Shepherd; she remained there about seven months—when she has been in distress, she has applied to me for spiritual direction—she is a Roman Catholic.
Cross-examined. Q. Are you called "Father Long?" A. Yes; when I am addressed as a priest.
MARY HALL . I am single, and live at 76, Long-alley. On 15th Oct., the prisoner brought me a letter, and told me to see what a beautiful letter she had got from the Rev. Mr. Connolly—she had broken it open, and wanted me to read it for her—I read it for her; she asked me to seal it up, which I refused to do, and she was obliged to take it open.
Cross-examined. Q. Did she appear starving? A. Yes; she told me she had had no breakfast; I gave her some that day, and also on the Sunday before—I told her not to deny at the Convent that she had opened the letter.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Thursday, November 27th, 1851.
PRESENT—Lord CAMPBELL; Mr. Baron PARKE; Mr. Ald. FAREBROTHER; Sir JAMES DUKE, Bart., Ald.; Mr. Ald. CHALLIS; and RUSSELL GURNET, Esq.
Before Lord Chief Justice Campbell and the First Jury.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Baron Parke.
MESSRS. RYLAND and LOCKE conducted the Prosecution.
MARGARET VOSPER . I am the wife of John Vosper. On 20th Oct. I was residing at 36, Milton-street, Cripplegate—I have been an inmate of the workhouse—on the evening of 20th Oct. I went to the tap-room of the Flying Horse public-house, about half-past five o'clock, to call my husband to his tea—the prisoner, his wife, and several friends, were there—my husband was tossing the prisoner for a pot of porter, and then a young man tossed him—the prisoner pressed the young man's knuckles open, to see what he had—my husband said that was not fair tossing—the prisoner called him a b—snob, and said if he did not mind his own business he would put him on the fire—the prisoner held up his hand, as if to strike my husband—his; hands were clenched, and my husband struck him—I did not see him strike my husband with his fist—the next thing I saw was the prisoner's wife pass him a poker—it was a good-sized poker—this (produced) is it—he held it in his hand, and flourished it round the room for a few minutes, and I accidentally received a blow—I firmly believe the blow was intended for my husband, but I stepped in between them—I do not believe he intended to strike me—the prisoner was at one end of the room, and my husband at the other, with Mr. Mansel trying to part him from the prisoner—I believe the blow that struck me was aimed at my husband, and I went in between them—I received the blow across my head—it bled a good deal—I am suffering from it now—I had a baby, ten months old, in my arms—I was taken to Mr. Simpson's, a surgeon, who dressed my head—I went to the hospital on the Wednesday evening, and remained there a fortnight—I am still under the doctor's hands.
Cross-examined by MR. BALLANTINE. Q. How many persons were there in the room? A. Several; they were not quarrelling—I do not think the prisoner intended to hit me—it might have been done accidentally, in his flourishing the poker, without his intending to strike anybody—he was in liquor; his wife was not, nor was I; I will not say whether my husband was, he had been out from 12 o'clock—I did not see my husband strike the prisoner but I believe he did—I saw a little blood on his lips afterwards.
JOHN VOSPER . On the evening of 20th Oct. I was at the Flying Horse—between 5 and 6 o'clock my wife came in to fetch me in to tea—the prisoner was there, his wife, and three or four of his comrades, and I and Hackett, a friend of mine—we were sitting in the room for about half an hour, or so, and all at once the prisoner said, "I will toss any snob in the room for a pot of beer"—I tossed him, and lost; and then Hackett tossed him, and lost—the prisoner forced Hackett's knuckles open, so that he could see the coin through, and then he said, "It is a woman, that I will have"—I said it was
not fair—he said, "What have you to do with it, you b—snob? I will put you on the fire"—I said, "You had better do it"—he held up his fist to strike me, and I up with my fist, and struck him in the face—I cannot say whether I drew any blood, for I was directly dragged away—a confusion occurred in the room in an instant—the prisoner came and stood in the middle of the room, and both of us were showing science at one another with our fists—his wife directly got up, took the poker from the fireplace, and gave it into the prisoner's hand—he got hold of it by the middle, and kept swinging it round—I was about three yards from him—I stooped my head down, intending to run in and butt at him, when my wife came, and, seeing me in a confusion, ran to save me—I did not see the prisoner strike her, as my head was down—I cannot say who he was aiming at—he was flourishing the poker round (describing it), not striking down with it—my wife was a good deal hurt.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you been drinking? A. Yes; I had been there about two hours—I was a little the worse for liquor.
WILLIAM SMITH . I am a brass-finisher, of 16, Milton-street. I was at the Flying Horse—I went into the tap-room, and saw the prisoner's wife hand him the poker, which he began flourishing about—Mrs. Vosper went to step in between her husband and him, and he struck her with the poker—I think he intended the blow for her husband—he was waving it about, and then brought it forward directly, and struck with it.
Cross-examined. Q. You saw him strike it down, did you? A. Yes; I cannot say it was done on purpose.
THOMAS MANSELL . I am landlord of the Flying Horse. The prisoner was lodging at my house, and had been for some time—on the evening of 20th Oct. I was in the parlour—I heard a noise in the tap-room, went in, and saw the prisoner with the poker in his hand—it was so accidental I hardly know what he did with it—he was flourishing it about, and it went on the woman's head—I do not think he meant to do anything of the sort—he has always been a very quiet man—I directly took hold of the poker and took it from him—he was in liquor.
FREDERICK HAMILTON SIMPSON . I am a surgeon. I examined the woman's head on the evening of 20th Oct.—there was a longitudinal confused wound over the os frontis, of about an inch and a quarter in length—it divided the common integuments, not dividing the structures to the skull, nor was there any fracture—it was rather a severe blow—it came in a slanting direction, not straight down—the skin was grazed on the right side of the wound.
COURT. Q. Could you form any judgment whether it was a blow inflicted on purpose, or by accident? A. It was certainly not a direct blow with any considerable force, but was more likely to have occurred as the poker was taking a turn, in being brandished about in a man's hand.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Thursday, November 27th, 1851.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. HOOPER; Sir GEORGE CARROLL, Knt., Ald.; Mr. RECORDER; and Mr. Ald. SIDNEY.
Before Mr. Recorder and the Sixth Jury.
GUILTY. Aged 35.—Recommended In mercy. — Confined Four Months.
45. WILLIAM JONES , breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Charles Smith, and stealing 2 coats and other articles, value 3l. 7s.; his property; and 4 shirts and 1 handkerchief, value 16s. 6d.; the goods of Thomas Woodward: to which he pleaded
GUILTY . Aged 18.— Confined Six Months.
GUILTY . Aged 27.—Recommended to mercy.— Confined Six Months.
GUILTY . Aged 23.— Confined Four Months.
MR. PARRY conducted the prosecution.
EDWARD FUNNELL (City-policeman, 23). I was watching Mr. Hyam's premises on 6th Nov.—I saw the prisoner and another young man, about 8 o'clock, in Houndsditch—I followed them to Bishopsgate-street; they parted there—the prisoner went down Bishopsgate-street—he stopped, looked round, and crossed to the opposite side, and then came back, and ran into Bishops-gate Church-yard—I ran after him—he ran into a public-house, and went into the parlour—I followed him in; Graveley was there—he was not the person that I saw the prisoner with at first—Graveley had three brown-paper parcels—the prisoner and Graveley had something to drink together—Graveley then said to the prisoner, "You may as well take your parcel," and handed him a small parcel—they then left the house—Graveley was carrying two parcels, and the prisoner one—I followed them up Union-street to Whitechapel—they went and stood at Whitechapel Church, where service was going on—they then went on to Graveley's house, in Gloucester-terrace—they went in, and I saw through the window that Graveley went into the parlour, and placed the two parcels on the table, and the prisoner went down-stairs—Graveley then came out, and went towards Whitechapel Church—I followed, stopped him, and went back to the house with him—I found the two parcels on the table—the prisoner was down-stairs, and I found the prisoner's parcel on the dresser in the kitchen—I told the prisoner I was come respecting the three parcels, that I suspected there was something wrong, and that I belonged to the police, and wished him to go with me to the station—he said there was an invoice of the things—(Graveley had given it to me on the way to his house)—I took the prisoner to the station, and fetched the prosecutor—the parcels were examined, and amongst other articles in them I found a purse, 108 metal pens in one of the parcels that Graveley bad carried, and three tumblers in the parcel that the prisoner carried—this is the invoice, the purse, pens, and tumblers are not mentioned in it—I afterwards went to Graveley's house, and found this letter.
Cross-examined by MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Just show me the purse? A. This is it—there is one purse which is mentioned in the invoice—this is it—the first person I saw was the prisoner, with a person whom I never saw before nor since—I believe he is in the prosecutor's employ—he and the prisoner wished one another good night at the end of Houndsditch—Graveley said he was looking into Whitechapel Church because his wife was there—it
was on Thursday evening, 6th Nov.—the invoice applies to everything that is in the three parcels except this purse, the pens, and the tumblers.
DAVID HYAM . I live in Houndsditch, and have two partners, we carry on business as importers of foreign goods. The prisoner has been one of our warehousemen about four years—his duty was to attend to customers—if he sold goods he would make up parcels, or he might direct others to do so—if a warehouseman makes a sale to a customer, whether he makes up the parcel himself, or has it made up, it is his duty invariably to have the goods checked by the invoice by some other person in our establishment—there is no mark put on the invoice—in consequence of having had some articles stolen from us about ten months ago, we made an alteration, and prohibited our shopmen purchasing goods from us—the prisoner was aware that we had done so—I was sent for to the station, and when these parcels were opened I examined them—this purse, these pens, and these tumblers, are not in the invoice—I am quite sure of that—this invoice is the prisoner's writing, the prices here named are lower than the articles ought to have been sold at—these goods are taken out of parcels which are marked—the outside of each parcel is marked with the price in our private mark—the prisoner knew the private mark—these goods in the invoice are at lower prices than the marked price, and some of them lower than the cost price to us—I am not able to tell from this invoice, whether the prisoner bad had the goods checked to him—this purse is worth 3s. 6d.; the pens, 2s. 6d.; and the tumblers, 1s. 3d.—on opening the parcels, and finding the goods were charged under cost price, I said to the prisoner, "Mr. Hunter, did you have these goods checked?"—he said, "No, Sir, I did not"—I then charged him with stealing—the custom of our establishment is, that if a gentleman comes and purchases a parcel of goods to take with him, the person serving him would make the invoice, and then make out a ticket to his number, and call "Cashier!" and the lad attending in our shop would come to him, see that the check was signed, and take it to the cashier in the desk—the invoice would then be stamped as this is, by the cashier—each of our shopmen has a check-book—they make the amount on the check, get it signed by some person, and that check with the amount of cash is then taken to the cashier—this invoice has not been examined by any person in the establishment, because it is 17s. 11/4 d. below the worth of the articles; and if any person had examined these articles with the invoice, they must have seen these tumblers and other things, and that would have been another reason why it would not have been passed—this letter is the prisoner's writing—(read)—"To Mr. W. H. Graveley, 21, Gloucester-terrace, 6th Nov. 1851; Dear Sir, I am surprised I did not see you when you came; I was looking out for you all the morning; will you come this evening between 7 and 8 o'clock; if you do not see me ask for me, do not be afraid; the things are all looked out, the invoice is all ready; later than this evening will be useless. In haste. W. Hunter."
Cross-examined. A. Was anybody present when you spoke to the prisoner at the station? A. Graveley and the officer were there—I cannot exactly tell the words I said to him—I said, "Have you had the goods checked?" or, "Have you ticked them off?"—and he said, "No, Sir"—I am not sure that I did not say, "Have you had them examined?"—I do not think I said, "Who ticked them off?"—I cannot undertake to swear I did not say that; I am certain the prisoner did not use the words, "I don't remember, Sir"—I really cannot answer whether he said, "I can't tell you, Sir"—when goods are invoiced, they ought to be examined by some person—not any particular person, by any one of the persons in the warehouse; and if the
goods are paid for, the person who examines signs the check, but if they are entered in a book, the book is signed—our cashier would not be entitled to take money, unless a check were produced—there was a check produced when the money was paid by Graveley—I have not that check; it was destroyed the following day, as is usual after the books have been examined—the prisoner was given into custody the same day; but we close our accounts at 4 o'clock in the afternoon—what is done after that, goes into the next day's account.
Q. But if you gave this man into custody on Thursday night, why was a document destroyed which was connected with the goods stolen? A. Because we were not thoughtful enough to keep it—it was destroyed with others—the prisoner may have been in our service four or five years; I do not think it is as long as five or six—we have seventy, or seventy-five men and lads in our establishment, in different parts, and a large amount of business going on—our stock is very great—we sell a great quantity of jewellery, articles of very small bulk, but of considerable value, to the whole of which the prisoner, in common with other warehousemen, would have access—supposing the prisoner were to sell articles, it would be his duty to pack them up, unless he were busy, and then somebody under his directions would pack them up—we have not employed a person under him to pack them up—we have a person named Holgate; he is not employed to pack up things, but he might do it under the prisoner's directions—the prisoner would not say, "Pack up these," and go away—he would stand by his side while he did it—I have seen warehousemen order things to be packed op, and go away—these things do not lie about very much—each of these articles was in its proper place, or should be—one article might be taken out to show—I do not know how long these parcels were left on the counter before they were taken away—I had not seen them there—I do not know that they had been packed up and left on the counter, with the invoice on them—we have had complaints about goods getting into parcels which ought not to be there.
MR. PARRY. Q. Were those complaints from persons who purchased things in the shop? A. No; from such a house as Morrison's, who would purchase perhaps 100l. worth of goods; and they would send word that there was, perhaps, 5s. worth of goods that were not charged—there may have been such a tiling happen in a small way at times—if these parcels had been examined, I do not think it possible that these three tumblers could have been overlooked—we take out articles from parcels to show, but they are generally put back in their places—we should never take three tumblers out to show—there was a ticket taken to the cashier, which was destroyed after the prisoner was in custody—I had a search made for it, and it was not to be found.
WALTER JOYCE . I am cashier to the prosecutor; I have the cash-book here. On 7th Nov., here is an entry to No. 6, which was the prisoner's number—the amount is 18s.—it is the custom to enter all sales after 4 o'clock in the day to the day following, so that this might have been paid after 4 on the evening of 6th Nov.—that is the only amount I have on 7th Nov. to the prisoner's number—the prisoner gave a ticket, which has been destroyed—it was thrown away in the usual manner—I have looked for it, but could not find it—I recollect it was signed by Mr. Hunter—he had no business to sign his own ticket—when a person signs a cash ticket to me, I understand that it has been examined by him; and that he was not the person who sold the goods.
Cross-examined. Q. If the prisoner's number was No. G, and No. 6 was
on the ticket, and it was signed by the prisoner, why did you pay it? A. Because I did not notice it—after I heard about Mr. Hunter, I looked at the ticket, and I spoke to Mr. Davis, one of the firm; he made no reply, and I thought nothing of it—it was then thrown with the rest—they were brushed over Mr. Davis's desk, and swept away—I should not have taken—the cash for it at all, if I had noticed it at the time—I have been cashier about sixteen months—I know the counters on which these things are packed up—there is not often a great deal of goods on the counter where they generally serve, and where they tie up parcels—the persons who sell the goods tie up the parcels—it is very rarely that other persons tie them up, unless they are asked to do it.
MR. PARRY. Q. You say this ticket was swept away? A. Yes; I think on the following morning when the place is generally swept—I afterwards made a search for it by the direction of my employer—Mr. Davis complained of its having been swept away—he said, that when I told him he did not understand me, or he should have made further inquiry about it.
WILLIAM HENRY GRAVELEY . I live at 21, Gloucester-terrace, New-road—I am traveller, for the firm of Gray and Son, Engineers, at Lime house—I know the prisoner—he spoke to me on this occasion, and requested me to come and purchase a few articles for him, at his master's—I received this letter from him, on 6th Nov., and in consequence I went to Mr. Hyams, about a quarter before eight, in the evening—when I got there, I found the parcels were done up, and were on the counter—I had not been there to select the goods—I did not know what the parcels were to contain—the invoice was ready made out—I had not previously given any orders about the goods—I gave the prisoner a sovereign, which was handed to the cashier, and the cashier handed me two shillings change—the sovereign was my own—the prisoner requested me to pay for the articles when I fetched them, and he would return the money to me again—I took the three parcels away—I was not aware of their contents till they were opened at the station-house—I had arranged with the prisoner, that he was to meet me in the parlour of the public-house, in Bishopsgate Church-yard—I was to go there at once, and wait till he came—he told me that the young men were not allowed to purchase for themselves, and that was the reason be wished me to purchase these things—he came to the public-house—I was sitting in the parlour, and he joined me—he said to me, "I will help you to carry your parcels"—I had selected a doll for my child, and a pencil-case for myself, which were added to the invoice, and paid for at the same time—they were the only two articles which I had selected—we went on, and I looked into Whitechapel Church, where my wife was—I then carried home two of the parcels—one of them contained the doll—I had the pencil-case in my pocket—the other two parcels belonged to the prisoner—I saw the parcels opened at the station—I remember Mr. Hyams coming there—I don't recollect whether he said anything to the prisoner.
Cross-examined. Q. Are you married? A. Yes; the prisoner is married—he and I are on visiting terms, but not frequently—I had bought things of the prisoner at the prosecutor's place before, in the presence of other persons—as far as I am concerned, there is not the least dishonesty in this—when I got to the place these parcels were on the counter, and there were several other things on the counter, as is general in a place of business like that.
MR. PARRY. Q. You have bought things there before, on your own account? A. Yes, and the prisoner was the salesman—the prisoner had those
things checked, according to what I have understood to be the rule of the house—they were checked by another party, and then handed to me.
COURT. Q. Had you been there the day before? A. Yes; on the Saturday previous, I was passing, and I asked the prisoner how he was, and his wife and family, and he said the young men were not allowed to purchase things, would I come, and purchase some things for him—I said yes, and I called on the Wednesday, and did not see him—I then sent him a note, stating that I had called, and not seen him, but his governor; and I had asked his governor for a glass shade, which I wanted for myself, and the governor said that they did not deal in them separately—I said, in my note, "I did not like to ask for you, as if I had, they might have thought that there was something wrong;" and that was what he meant by saying in his letter, "Don't be afraid"—I did not think it wrong, if the warehousemen were not allowed to buy, to go and buy for them.
(The prisoner received a good character.)
NOT GUILTY .
MR. MCMAHON conducted the Prosecution.
ROBERT CATO . I am a seaman, and lodge in Johnson-court Shadwell. I was on board the Success on 22nd July coming from Port Philip—we were on the high seas—the prisoner was a passenger on board—on 22nd or 23rd July I was on deck playing with some shipmates—the prisoner was on deck—we generally used to call him by the nick-name of "King John "—I asked him how he would feel when he got to Kilrush—I did not call him by any name—he said he would have his revenge, and he went down below—I and my shipmates continued to play on the deck; and I happened, while we were larking, to heave myself down, and my-left-leg got over the hatchway, and before I could get my foot up again the prisoner stabbed me in the leg with a knife—I saw him do it—I did not say anything to him, but I went away after the doctor, who was dining in the cuddy—he dressed the wound—it went that depth that it cut one artery in the leg—I was bad for three months and twenty days—the inflammation flew up the leg, and I had it opened again—I was only able to work three weeks on the passage home—I think I once asked the prisoner why he did it, and he gave me no answer.
COURT. Q. What were you doing? A. Skylarking with my own shipmates—we had no cudgels or any implements in our hands—I had not been teasing the prisoner—I do not know whether any of my shipmates might—the passengers used to make game of him.
Prisoner. I went down to the cook's place, and this man ran and struck my head against the post while I was leaning down. Witness. I did not, nor did I see any one else do it—I did not put my fist in his face while his back was against the chains of the anchor—I did not catch him by the hair when he got two or three steps down the ladder, nor follow him down, nor make an action with my leg or my foot—I did not pull out my knife.
JENNINGS SINGLETON . I was mate, on board the Success. On 22nd or 23rd July, Cato came to me on the quarter-deck with his leg bleeding—as soon as we had bandaged the wound I had him taken to the forecastle—it was a very severe wound, an inch and a half long, about six inches above the ankle—he has never done duty on deck since, only little jobs I have given him to do—I went to the prisoner and took a knife and a razor from him—I asked him why he stabbed the man—he gave me no answer—there was a little blood on the blade of the knife—this is it.
Prisoner. He is one of my imposers; he has thrown things at me. Witness. The only thing that ever I threw at him was a life-buoy, when he threw himself overboard—he was laughed and jeered at—he came on board several times before the ship sailed—I thought him mad—I sent him back once, as it was blowing bard—when he did come he behaved very strange—he said he would set fire to the ship and then drown himself—he came one fine rooming looking out of the gun-port; and just as the watch was relieving, he threw himself into the water—I took the life-buoy and threw at him, as he could not swim, but he turned from it—we let down the boat, and I and three sailors got to him—he made a most desperate effort to get from us—his language was dreadful, quoting Scripture, and saying he had the disposal of every man's soul, and he would send them to hell—I certainly think he is not in his right mind.
Prisoner's Defence. If he had not meddled with me, and touched my feelings, I would not have done it; I think I am a prisoner without right; I have a wound on my head which can be seen; he made an attempt to put out my eye.
GILBERT MCMURDO . I have examined the prisoner while he has been in prison, and I come to the conviction that he has been the butt of ridicule to the sailors—he gave me a very clear account of everything—I could not think he is insane—he argued with me well, and said he only defended himself—I think he is of sound mind.
GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury, considering it was done under great provocation. — Confined Four Months.
MR. LILLET conducted the Prosecution.
CHARLES HART . I am a coach-painter, and live in Cross-street, Leather-lane. On Sunday morning, 16th Nov., I was leaving a house in Bell-court, Grays'-inn-lane, at half-past 3 o'clock,—it was a private house—I had been drinking there—I was not the worse for liquor—a person struck me on the side of the head just as I was going out of the door—I defended myself, and the prisoner came and struck me a very heavy blow on the side of the head, and then he put his hands in both my pockets—he took from my left-hand pocket three shillings and one sixpence—I seized his hand, held him till I saw a policeman, and gave him in charge—I did not see what the prisoner did with my money—I heard money sound on the pavement, but I did not see him throw it away.
Prisoner. Q. Did you not say that I struck you as you came out of the house? A. Yes; I do not know how many were drinking gin in the house—I was not turned out; I went out to go home—I was not fighting—I was defending myself as well as I could—you were not drinking with me—I never saw you before—there was not a coalheaver drinking with me, nor a coal-heaver in the house to my knowledge.
JAMES BEATTIE (policeman, G 53). On Sunday morning, 16th Nov., I was on duty at half-past 3 o'clock in Bell-court, Gray's-inn-lane—I saw a number of persons fighting in the court; Hart was one—I saw the prisoner go behind him and raise his right-hand—Hart turned round, and the prisoner struck him a very violent blow with his right-hand on the side of the head—it made him stagger—after striking him the prisoner placed both his hands in Hart's trowsers' pocket—I seized him immediately by the collar of the coat—he raised his right-hand, and threw something which I heard fall on the stones, which I
believe to have been silver coin—I searched, but none was to be found—it was dark, but my lamp was full on, and the street-lamp was there, which made it very light—as soon as he threw the coin, he turned and dealt me a violent blow on the head; had it not been for the shutters of a house I should have gone down—he got from me—I followed him very closely, and did not lose sight of him—I stopped him again, and he succeeded in getting away a second time, and ran into the passage of a house in Bell-court—I followed him into the passage—he threw the door to, which caught my knee with a violent blow—I got in and caught him again, and with Hart's assistance I got him to the station.
Prisoner. Q. Why did you not look for the money? A. It was looked for, but your companions had succeeded in getting it—I saw some persons stoop and pick up something—I made a search for it about ten minutes afterwards.
COURT. Q. When you first came up, how many persons did you see? A. About nine, all scuffling together—I saw Hart extricate himself from the crowd—there seemed to be a general scuffle altogether—they were all fighting together—that was before the prisoner struck Hart—Hart said, "What are you doing with your band in my pocket?" and he said to me, "Policeman, do you see what this man is doing?"—I saw him with both his hands in Hart's pocket—there was nothing to explain what the fighting was about—I saw some persons on the spot where I think the money fell—I saw one stoop down and pick up something—I saw the coalheaver come up afterwards.
COURT to CHARLES HART. Q. You did not tell us about eight or nine persons being fighting? A. There were four of us companions, and some persons came out of the house at the time we did—I was struck by one man, and was defending myself against him—there was one young man with me, but he did not help me—I struck the man down that struck me, and they were helping him up—I had seen the money just before I came out of the house.
Prisoner's Defence. We had been paying for gin from half-past 12 o'clock till the time we came out.
GUILTY . † Aged 25.— Transported for Seven Years.
MR. COCKLE conducted the Prosecution.
HENRY LEWIS . I live in Great Percy-street. On 17th and 18th Oct. I was in the prisoner's service at Burnham-place, Bagnigge-wells-road—on 17th or 18th Oct., on my return from dinner, I found the prisoner and his wife in the shop—his wife was crying—I think the prisoner was behind the counter—his wife was standing by the door leading from the shop to the parlour—the prisoner was not far from her: he could hear what she said—she said, "He has been beating me with a shovel," and she asked me to look at her head, as there were some pieces of comb in it—I looked at her head, and saw one piece sticking in her head—I told her so, and she said, "Don't touch it; I will go to Mr. Phillips, the surgeon, to have it taken out"—she was sitting on the sofa in the parlour when I was looking at her head—the prisoner and his wife were not on good terms all the time I was living with them—I remember one quarrel more violent than another about a fornight before that; it was at night—he was beating her in the parlour, I think with the hand-broom—when he was beating her she called out for me—she said, "Henry!"—the prisoner said, "I will Henry you!"—I remember his wife being out one night with the horse and cart; that was three or four weeks before this—she
came home about 10 o'clock—she got out of the cart at the door, and told me to go and take it to the stable—I took it, and she walked towards the stable—when I got to the corner of Great Percy-street she came and got in the cart, and told me to drive away—I drove up Acton-street, and the prisoner overtook her in Acton-street and got up in the cart, and he was beating her with his fist all the way from there to the stable, which was about 100 yards.
Cross-examined by MR. CLARKSON. Q. Was not your mistress very drunk? A. Yes; that was the only time I saw her drunk—she was sometimes going on at him—I believe the first time I ever saw any beating was with the cart—it might be a fortnight between that and any other beating—in the mean time she went about her business—he then gave her the second beating; I believe it was with the broom—I saw him in the parlour holding up his arm, but I did not see him strike her with the broom—she was on the floor—I saw him keep lifting his arm up, and like giving her strokes on the arm—I think she was passionate—I was only three or four weeks in the service: Charles Stacey was there before me—I very often took her in the cart to her mother's in Upper John-street, Golden-square—I do not think I took her there the day that I found her crying—it was either Friday or Saturday that I found her crying—she was laid up on Sunday—she was in the kitchen; I used to go through there—she died on Tuesday, 28th—I do not know whether I went with her to Covent-garden Market on that night after she said she had been beaten, or whether she stayed serving in the shop till 12 o'clock at night—I think on the Sunday morning, when I went down and saw her in bed, she complained to me of her hand—I think it was her right-hand.
HENRY HARDINGE . I am a physician and surgeon, and live in Sackville-street, Piccadilly. I saw the deceased at her own house on 22nd Oct., and she was at my house on the 20th, and my assistant had seen her—I attended her on the 22nd for an injury on the hand, from which she had erysipelas of the hand and arm—there was a black mark on the outside of the hand, which was very much swollen all round, and inflammation proceeded up the arm—on the hand there was an indentation, about the size of a half-crown: it was a bruise—she told me how it was caused—I continued to attend her from 22nd Oct. till the time of her death—the cause of her death was erysipelas, the primary cause of which was the wound on the back of the hand—I bad attended her for twelve months, and I never saw her tipsy.
Cross-examined. Q. The death, according to your judgment, was from erysipelas, which, you gather, had been occasioned by the inflammation that you found on the hand? A. Yes—supposing a woman to get her hand jammed between the door-cill and the panel, I do not think it would occasion such a mark as she had, because the wound was a round one—that round black mark must have been occasioned by some flat round substance, such as the top of a poker or the bottom part of a shovel—I have seen a flat top to a poker—I made a post-mortem examination—the internal parts of her body were not in a state of high inflammation: there was chronic inflammation—I should expect to find that in a woman given to intemperance, and a violent passionate woman—I have seen such appearances in persons of intemperate habits—intemperance would cause great debility.
COURT. Q. Was her constitution in a bad condition? A. Yes; it was in such a condition as to be more liable than usual to erysipelas—when I saw her on the 22nd leeches had been applied to her hand, by direction of my assistant, the night before—erysipelas of these skin, in a debilitated constitution, may proceed from the use of leeches—this was erysipelas of the cellular membrane
under the skin—erysipelas, in such a broken-down constitution as hers, is the result of a mere bruise or contusion—I had attended her for twelve months.
SUSANNAH OSBORN . I am a widow, and live in George-street, Bagnage-wells-road. I was called to attend the deceased on Saturday, 25th Oct.—I was with her from that time to her death—the prisoner came into the room on the 25th—pretty well the whole of the night he sat on the bed by her, occasionally sleeping between whiles—I did not hear him say anything—I saw him twice lean over her, and she whispered to him; but, besides that, she said, loud enough for me to hear, "Tom, you have done it; you promised to do for me, and you have done it"—he did not answer her—his behaviour that night was affected; it was in a cold way.
COURT. Q. What was his conduct to her that night? A. He acted strangely altogether; he leaned over her twice, affectionately rather than otherwise, but he took long sleeps after that—she spoke to him, and said, "Tom, Tom!" and he did not care to answer her—towards morning her head became affected—these fits of delirium did not last long—I could not exactly say when I first noticed them—I had no watch—when she made the observation that I have just stated she was as right as I am at this moment—the said many times, "You will not escape, Tom. "
Cross-examined. Q. Have you ever practised medicine? A. No; I have occasionally nursed persons—I did not know the deceased till I was called to nurse her—I do not know whether she was in the habit of getting drunk.
CAROLINE ESTHER EVANS . I am the sister of the deceased. Her name was Elizabeth Dorothea Davis—I saw her on the occasion of her last illness—she came to my mother's house on the 20th or 21st Oct., and I was with her for eight days, from Tuesday till the following Tuesday, when the died.
COURT. Q. Was she told that she could not recover? A. When she complained of her arm, I said she would soon be better; and she said, "No, my dear sister; he has given me my death-blow;" and in his presence she said, "Tom, you have often promised you would do for me, and you have done it"—she often said she knew she should not recover, he had given her her last blow—she said this several times, from the Tuesday till the Tuesday she died—he was present when this was said—I cannot say positively when this was said; it was frequently during those days—she said, "Tom, you will not escape," several times.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you go and take possession of the prisoner's shop? A. I did not; I remained there several days while my sister was in the house—when she was buried, the landlord put a man in possession, and took it—I do not know even the landlord's name—I have a small box, which I look with the authority of the prisoner.
WILLIAM MARTIN (police-sergeant, G 18). I took the prisoner on 28th Oct.—I told him he must consider himself in my custody, for violently assaulting his wife, whereby her life was endangered—he said, "I did not do it; I bought some pork-chops, which I was about to cook, and she must have done it with the frying-pan"—she was alive at that time.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he not say that he went to buy some porkchops, and she would not let him cook them? A. Yes; I believe he said she must have done it with taking the pan off the fire.
THE COURT called
CHARLES STACEY . I was in the prisoner's service about three months. Lewis succeeded me—I remember Mrs. Davis jamming her hand about a fortnight before I left—she did it with shutting a door—it was just on the
back of her right hand—she did not complain of it at the time—she did not seem to be hurt—I saw her hand afterwards from day to day—it appeared to me to be black in two or three days afterwards.
COURT to HENRY HARDINGE. Q. Could that injury have occasioned erysipelas three weeks afterwards? A. No; it would have come on sooner—I should say erysipelas from accident would come on in two or three days—it is a very difficult question to say when.
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, November 21st, 1851.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. FAREBROTHER; Mr. Ald. CUBITT; and Mr.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant and the Seventh Jury.
GUILTY . Aged 30.— Confined Twelve Months.
NOT GUILTY .
54. WILLIAM SESSIONS , HENRY BRAY , and THOMAS ALLUM , stealing, on 10th Oct., 5 trusses of hay, value 10s.; the goods of James Charles Shaw, the master of Sessions and Bray. 2nd COUNT, charging Allum with receiving.
MESSRS. PRENTICE and RIBTON conducted the Prosecution.
(There was another indictment against the prisoners, and Mr. PRENTICE stated that the wrong one had been given in charge to the Jury, and wished it withdrawn. Mr. O'BRIEN objected to this being done. The COMMON SERJEANT, having consulted LORD CAMPBELL and Mr. BARON PARKE, decided that the indictment which had been given in charge must be proceeded with.)
JAMES CHARLES SHAW . I am a cow-keeper, at 15, Well's-street, Oxford-street. I have a farm at Hammersmith—Sessions and Bray were in my service—on Tuesday the 11th, in consequence of something I had heard, I went with a constable to Bray's house, and asked him how much hay he had bound on the previous day—he said one load and fifteen trusses—I asked if that included four he had bound the previous Saturday—he said, "Yes"—the hay was worth 2s. a truss—I never authorised either of the prisoners to sell hay for me.
Cross-examined by MR. O'BRIEN. Q. How many trusses make a load? A. Thirty-six—I very rarely sell or buy hay myself, I consume my own—I had a large quantity at my farm, and they were trussing from the rick of which this was the last—the rick contained about twenty loads—Sessions has worked for roe three or four years—I spoke to his son about this the day after I went to Bray's—the son is in my employ—he was not living with me then, but with his mother—I have taken him to live with me since 11th Oct.—he had lived with me occasionally before, when it suited me—when he came to town in the evening with a cart, he used to remain and go home next morning with the cart—sometimes he remained all the next day—he has lived with me since 11th Oct.—he has been home one day since, last Sunday—his father was in custody when I took him to live with me—I made no fresh
agreement with his mother—I told his mother I should take him away out of the way of the riff-raff there—the riff-raff was there before that time, but they had no occasion to meddle with the boy before—I kept him for the purpose of giving evidence against the other parties, not against his father—I pay his mother 4s. a week for him now, as I did before, and also give him his victuals.
MR. RIBTON. Q. This riff-raff you speak of, what does that refer to? A. Certain persons that wished to take him out of our custody at the Magistrate's office, when the prisoners were examined—it was in consequence of something that was said to me there, that I took care of him—there was a great crowd, and they tried to pull the boy away.
JOHN SESSIONS . I am eleven years old, and live at East Acton. The prisoner Sessions is my father—I have been in Mr. Shaw's service three or four years—Bray was Mr. Shaw's hay-binder—on Monday, 10th Nov., I returned from town about 3 o'clock, Bray was then in the rick-yard, and I asked him how much hay he had bound—he said a load and nineteen trusses—my father afterwards-came, and he and Bray loaded a load into a cart for London—my father afterwards put five trusses in a hay-cart, which my father drove away about half-past 5 o'clock to the Princess Victoria—I went with him—when we got there we missed one truss, and my father chucked the other four down in the yard of the Princess Victoria to the prisoner Allum, who was there—he is the ostler there—when my father got down, he asked him why he did not bring more—my father said nothing, but backed the horse out, and turned round for home again—Allum put his hand in his pocket, and I think he gave my father 2s., and he said he would owe him 2s.—my father then went towards Bray's house, but I did not go with him—I saw Bray next day, and said to him, "Mr. Bray, did you say there was a load and nineteen trusses bound?" he said, "No; a load and fifteen trusses"—I said, "You told me a load and nineteen trusses"—he said, "No; a load and fifteen trusses."
Cross-examined by MR. O'BRIEN. Q. When did you go to live with Mr. Shaw? A. About a week, or ten days ago, to live in his house—I almost forget when was the last time I was before the Magistrate—I think it was last Wednesday week—I do not know what day of the month it was—I do not know how, I know that this happened on Monday, 10th Nov.—I do not know what day of the month it is to-day—I know the time by the weeks, and I know it was last Monday fortnight that I had this conversation with Bray—I always asked Bray how many trusses he bad bound, if my father was not at home—he was not at home when I asked him on this day, but he came directly after—I asked Bray again on the Tuesday, because I could not think whether he said a load and fifteen, or nineteen trusses, and after I did ask him, I knew that he did say nineteen trusses—no one spoke to me about it on the Monday evening—I was going to London with the load on Tuesday morning, when I asked Bray—the load was ready the night before—I took that load, as I always do, to London alone—I drive the horses myself—I wanted to know how much was bound, so as to tell my master in London—I had not seen my master, on that Tuesday morning, before I asked Bray—after Bray had helped my father to load the load, he went away, and it was then my father put these five trusses in another cart—one of the trusses fell over, and when we came back I saw it in my master's shed—the others had all been put in the loft, and my brother and sister told me that Mr. Grainger had found it—I first mentioned what I had seen, on the Wednesday, when Bayley the policeman came and took me into custody, out of the field—he said, "You
and your father is doing a pretty thing"—when he first took me, I would not say anything—he said I had better, and then he told me I must tell the truth, and pressed me—I began to cry, and then I did tell the truth—Bayley said, "Did not your father take nine trusses before, did not he take eighteen?"—and I said no, he did not take any more than these two—he said if I told the truth they could do nothing with me, and Mr. Shaw would take me; and I should get twelve months or seven years' transportation, if I did not tell the truth—Bayley took me before the Magistrate the same day—I did not give any evidence that day—on the Monday, I went up to London, with the horse and cart, and saw Bayley at my master's; he then asked me if I knew anything of the two trusses that went up the village—I had not spoken to him between the Wednesday and that day—my master was at my side, and Bayley kept asking me, and I made him no answer—he said come along with me, and I went with him to Brook-green Police-court, and he put me along a lot, and then we met the police omnibus and two horses, and he said, "There Jack: there is a nice pair of horses, and a pretty coach for you to ride in"—I was very frightened—that was the second time I was going before the Magistrate (the 17th)—I was examined that day, after that I came home with my master to London.
Cross-examined by MR. WOOLLETT. Q. You did not give any evidence when you first went before the Magistrate? A. No; I was in Bayley's custody—I had not had any conversation with my master about it—I have had no conversation with him at all—once when I said, I wanted to go home he said what for—I said, I wanted to get my trowsers mended, and to put my new ones on—I said I wanted to go home, and I would go—I was going to get on the cart with my brother Tom, and he said "You ain't going" said, "I will go"—he said, "You must mind not to get along with them Tom the ostler's chaps, as they would not mind sporting a pound or two to put you out of the way; mind and not have anything to drink along with them chaps at Tom's, lest they put something into the beer to make you a little stupid, and will get out of you what you said at Brook-green."
MR. RIBTON. Q. When was it you were at the police-court first? A. On Wednesday fortnight—I then recollected that this had happened the Monday before—Bayley told me I should be transported, if I did not tell the truth—I have told the truth to-day.
CHARLES GRAINGER . I am a fishmonger, at Turn ham-green. On Monday 10th Nov., about six in the evening, I was going towards East Acton, and saw the prisoner Sessions coming up Long-field, with a cart—I did not notice any one with him—I afterwards saw a truss of hay lying in the track the cart had gone—I did not touch it, and do not know what became of it—I went to Sessions' house to tell his wife, but she was not at home—the cart was coming out of the field, going towards the Uxbridge-road.
Cross-examined by MR. O'BRIEN. Q. Would that take him to London? A. Yes, or Oxford, or anywhere.
HENRY BAYLEY (policeman T 250.) I went to Allum's house repeatedly for a week, but could not find him there, or anywhere else—he afterwards surrendered at the police-court—I took Sessions on Wednesday the 12th—I told him what it was for—he said, "Well; I am a fool, and I was drunk; I have made a bad job of it, and must suffer the law"—he said he took five trusses, dropped one on the road, the other four he sold to Allum for 2s., and they had a pint of beer together—I took Bray on that evening—he denied all knowledge of the transaction.
Cross-examined by MR. O'BRIEN. Q. Was any one present when you had this conversation with Sessions? A. No, it was in the parlour of the
Bull's Head, East Acton—I did not take him into custody then, as I made all the haste I could to find the property on Allum—I did tell him the charge—I left him at the beer-shop, and arrested him at his own house the following day—I had seen Mr. Shaw in the meantime—I saw the boy Sessions in a field at East Acton—I did not take him in custody—I said, I should require him to attend at the police-court—I did not tell him he and his father had done a bad job—Mr. Shaw was with me, and I said that his father had done a bad job—I questioned him concerning the transaction—he did not answer me immediately, he hung back—I swear I did not on that day speak to him of imprisonment, or transportation—he was not examined that day—I saw him on the Thursday morning, at his master's house in town—I came to town to make general inquiries—I did question the boy—his master was present—I told the boy if he did not speak the truth he would be liable to imprisonment, or transportation—I saw him on the following Monday at the police-court—he came with his master—it is not true that I came up to town and took him down—I am not aware of meeting a police-fan, while he was in my custody—we might hive, but nothing occurred to call it to my mind—I did not say to him, "Jack, there is a nice pair of horses, and a pretty coach for you to ride in"—on my solemn oath, I said nothing of the kind, either on the Monday, Wednesday or Thursday.
Cross-examined by MR. WOOLLBTT. Q. At the first examination, whose custody was the boy in? A. Ko one's—his master was taking care of him—I swear he was not in my custody.
MR. RIBTON. Q. What was it you said to him about transportation? A. I said, "Now you mind and tell the truth when you get before the Magistrate; you must not tell one story one time and another another time, because you will be liable to imprisonment, or perhaps transportation"—he had told me his story before I said that—the boy was not examined at first—a solicitor conducted the prosecution—there is a police-van at the police-court every day—I meet it repeatedly—it it such a common occurrence, I should not recollect it—my memory is quite clear that I bad no conversation with the boy about it—I have been three years in the force—I have not been promoted—I was examined yesterday in the Old Court.
(Sessions' statement before the Magistrate was read as follows: "I know nothing of the nine trusses; I acknowledge to taking five.")
SESSIONS— GUILTY. Aged 37.—Recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor. — Confined Three Months.
ALLUM— GUILTY . Aged 33.— Confined Four Months.
BRAY— NOT GUILTY .
(Upon which MR. RIBTON offered no evidence).
NOT GUILTY .
GODFREY GRIME (through an interpreter). I was going to leave England in a vessel called the Southampton—I had this linen jacket (produced) safe in my box on board that ship at dinner-time last Sunday.
LORENZO MIXHRILER (through an interpreter). I was going out in the Southampton—these shirts (produced) are mine—they were safe last Friday in my box, which was in a barge alongside of the Southampton.
WILLIAM POLARD DELO . I am a Customs' officer. Last Sunday, 23rd, Nov. I was stationed on board the Southampton, in the East India Dock—the emigrants' baggage was on board—about 3 o'clock, while the ship's officers were ashore, I heard a noise like the breaking of boxes or the smashing of glass—in consequence of what three foreigners told me, I went between-decks, and found two chests broken open—there was a mark of a marlingspike on one, and it appeared to have been broken open from the hinges—the secondmate came on board, and I told him.
FREDERICK PRATT . I am a seaman of the Southampton—the prisoner was one also. On Sunday afternoon, he asked me for a marlingspike—I did not give him one—I afterwards saw him go to his chest, and take something out—I do not know what it was—about half an hour after I saw him putting the things which have been produced into his bag.
WILLIAM KENTLER . I am second-mate of the Southampton. On Sunday evening, when I came on board, in consequence of information I went to the forecastle, and found the prisoner lying there with a bag under his head—I said, "Whose is this?"—he said it belonged to him—I found two or three shirts and the jacket in it, and gave the prisoner into custody.
Prisoner's Defence. I do not know how the things got into my berth.
GUILTY . Aged 44.— Confined Four Months.
Mr. O'BRIEN conducted the Prosecution.
THOMAS DIXON . I am assistant to Mr. John Dale, ironmonger, of 18 and 19, Chiswell-street—Mr. Walford is a customer of Mr. Dale's. On 29th Oct., the prisoner brought this order, and I ordered Thomas Smith to deliver him the goods (order read—"Oct. 29, 1851. Sir, please send by bearer 1 cwt. 4d. cut-nails, and 141b. copper nails. J. Walford.")—I had never seen him before—I have no doubt he is the man—I saw him a few days after, in custody.
Cross-examined by Mr. PARRY. Q. What is the value of the nails? A. 32s.—I saw him for about ten minutes.
JOHN EDWARD WALFORD . I am a carpenter, at 43, Old Fish-street. The prisoner is my brother-in-law, and has been in my employ—he left about 11th Sept.—I deal with Mr. Dale—this is not my signature to this order—I never authorised any one to write such an order—I did not send the prisoner with it—I have not received the nails—I cannot say that the signature is the prisoner's writing—it is not so much like his writing as the order is.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know of any circumstance which could have led him to think he might have done this? A. No; I do not think I have ever sent him to Mr. Dale—I have no doubt he knew I dealt there—I did not wish to press this charge, but I thought it had better be brought to light in case it might be thought I had anything to do with it.
EVANS (policeman, G 145). I took the prisoner on 11th Nov., and said to him, "You are charged with presenting a forged order to get goods"—he said, "Very well"—he afterwards said, "Can't we go to Mr. Walford, and have the matter settled?"
GUILTY of uttering Aged 21.— Confined Six Months.
There was another indictment against the prisoner.
MR. CLERK conducted the Prosecution.
PHILIP LOCKIE . I am a labourer, and live at Hither-row. On Saturday night, 8th Nov., I was at the Marquis of Granby, Hounslow-heath, drinking with the prisoners—I knew them before—I left them there, and went to the Rose and Crown, where I only had one pint of beer—I left there about 12 o'clock, with Shortland and Issey, and went along the Bath-road—after we had got a little way from Hounslow, I saw both the prisoners behind us—they came up to us, and Wilson said I had stolen a handkerchief, with two half-crowns in it—I told him he was wrong, it was not me—I was not aware one had been lost—Wilson searched me, and then hit me with his fist on the side of my head, as hard as he could, and knocked me down, out of the footpath into the road—Todd was searching one of the boys at the same time—when I got up, I started on again to go home, and the prisoners kept on along with us—they then stopped and searched us all again, and Wilson said, "Let us take him back to Hounslow"—they collared me, brought me back about 200 yards, and told the boys they could go home, and they went on—they then knocked me down again, and Todd took my watch, chain, seal and key, and a knife, from my pocket, while Wilson held me down—they then ran away—I got up and followed them, and when I got within four or five yards of them, Todd turned round, knocked, me down, and kicked me—they then ran away again—I ran after them, overtook them, and they knocked me down again—they ran away again—I ran after them again, they knocked me down again, and kicked me again while I was down—I then lost sight of them—I was knocked down four times—I was quite sober—I had not drank above a pint and a half—I am sure I had my watch at the public-house—I also had 3d. in my pocket, but they did not take that—I gave information on the Sunday morning, and saw Wilson again on the Tuesday morning—I did not see Todd till the following Saturday.
Wilson. Q. When did you first see me on the road? A. About half-past 12 o'clock—I swear you are the person—I have seen yon scores of times at Arlington.
MR. CLERK. Q. How long were you drinking together on the Saturday evening? A. About an hour—we drank out of the same pots—I paid for two pints between the two prisoners and myself—I have no doubt the prisoners are the persons—I knew them before that.
JAMES SHORTLAND . I live at Hither-row, and work for a farmer there. I was at the Rose and Crown with Lockie and Issey; we left about 12 o'clock—Lockie was not the worse for liquor; he was not at all fresh—we were going along the Bath-road, on our way home, the prisoners came up, and Wilson said there were three chaps who had gone along the Bath-road, and one of them with a red cap had taken a handkerchief out of his pocket with three half-crowns in it—Lockie said he had got no handkerchief; he had heard nothing about it; and Wilson then searched him and Issey, and Todd searched me—Wilson hit Lockie twice on the side of the head, and said they would take us to sergeant Duggins, and have us locked up—we went on a little further, and they stopped and searched us again; and Todd said to Wilson, "Let us take the one in the red cap back to Hounslow"—that was Lockie—and they took him back, told us we might go home, and bid us good night—Issey and I went home—we could not see how far they took Lockie, as it was dark—I know Lockie had his watch and chain, because he
pulled it out when they first searched him—I never saw the prisoners before that night, but I swear they are the men.
Wilson. Q. What time was it when I came up to Lockie and you? A. About half-past 12 o'clock; it was just by the Traveller's Friend—you followed us out of the Rose and Crown.
Todd. Q. Where did you first see me? A. In the public-house, at very near 12 o'clock—it was about half a mile out of Hounslow where you over took us.
WILLIAM ISSEY . I left the Rose and Crown with Lockie and Shortland, and we went along the Bath-road. The prisoners came up to us, and Wilson said the sergeant had told them there were three chaps gone down the Bath-road, and the one in the red cap had stolen a silk handkerchief out of his pocket—Lockie said he had no silk handkerchief about him, and Wilson searched him—we went on a little further, and Wilson hit Lockie in the head, and knocked him into the road—Lockie got up, and walked with us, and then Wilson knocked him down again—we went a little further, and they searched us again; and Wilson said, "Let us take him with the red cap back to Hounslow"—they took Lockie back, bid us good night, and told us to go home—I saw Lockie's knife and watch, chain, key, and seal, in his hand, when they first came up—I had seen the prisoners that night at the Rose and Crown.
Wilson. Q. Did you see me take the watch out of his pocket? A. No; I saw you knock him down—it was about half-past 12 o'clock.
Todd. Q. What time was it when you first saw me in the town? A. About half-past 11 o'clock; you left the Rose and Crown at the same time that we did, and stood against the door; we went on towards home—you overtook us about half a mile out of Hounslow.
JOHN SCOTNEY (policeman, T 18). On the night of 8th Nov., I was on duty at Hounslow, and at a little after 12 o'clock I met the prisoners in the street—I knew Todd, but had never seen Wilson before—I had before that seen the prosecutor and the two boys go down the Bath-road—the prisoners went in the same direction—I am the sergeant on duty at Hounslow—I had not made any charge against three persons who had gone down the road—I said nothing about one of them having taken a handkerchief with three half-crowns; I did not speak to the prisoners—I received information of this robbery from Lockie on the Sunday morning, and in consequence of the description he gave, I apprehended Wilson on the Monday night, at Cranford—Todd was taken on the following Saturday by the parish constable of Burnham.
Todd. How many of us were there when you saw us? I was with my brother, and left him and went home. Witness. The prisoners were walking together, and there were three or four more behind—Todd's brother was on the footpath some distance off Wilson—the prisoners were in the road.
WILSON— GUILTY . Aged 27.— Confined Twelve Months.
TODD— GUILTY .
(Todd was further charged with having been before convicted.)
GUILTY. Aged 25.— Transported for Seven Years.
MR. RYLAND conducted the Prosecution.
and met four sailors at the bottom of London-street, Ratcliffe—they were all very much in liquor, walking two and two, and the prisoner and the man who is dead were the last two—I had never seen the deceased before—I saw him afterwards before he died, and since he has been dead, and know him to have been one of the last two, and the prisoner the other—they were about a dozen yards from the other two—I did not see the prisoner do anything, I did not see any knife, but they were in a noisy, drunken state—one of the two last had a very thickish voice, like a foreigner, like a Scotchman—I think that was the deceased—I got a-head of them, as I was afraid they might insult me—I got to my own door, and then saw them go in at the wicket-gate at the coal wharf—that was the last I saw of them—my daughter afterwards asked me to come to the public-house to see a man who was stabbed—I went, and there saw the deceased—he was in a very weak state, sitting on a bench, and leaning forward—the prisoner was lying outside on the cellar-flap, incapable of taking care of himself, in a state of beastly intoxication—he was sick, and had not the power to discharge the contents of his stomach, it gurgled in his throat.
JOHN BERNARD HARRISON . I am house-dresser at the London Hospital—the deceased was brought there on 29th Oct.—I found a wound in his back opposite to the fifth and sixth ribs, descending obliquely, and entering the thorax between the ninth and tenth ribs—the wound was about three inches long and one wide—such a knife as this (produced) might have produced such a wound—he lingered till 4th Nov., when he died—I was present on 30th Oct, when he made a statement to Mr. Yardley, the Magistrate—it was taken down, read over to him, and he put his mark to it—he was then in a hopeless state—I had not told him so, but he seemed to be aware he could not recover—the prisoner was present, and heard the statement—the deceased was intoxicated when he was brought in. (James Brebar's deposition read: "I was stabbed the night before last at 9 o'clock—it was dark—it was in a street leading to the Regent's Canal Basin—the man that stabbed me, a shipmate, and two men, had been drinking with me at the Liverpool Arms—we were all coming away together, and the man that stabbed me asked me to go with him to his ship in the Regent's Canal, and as we were going along the street he pulled out his knife—I asked him what he was going to do with it—the prisoner is the man—he said, 'You will see what the mate will say to me when you get on board'—I said, 'If you do not put up the knife, I will not go with you'—the prisoner said, 'I will let you see what I will do to the mate with it,' and on that he plunged it into my back—I fell down, and was carried into the public-house—I had had no quarrel with the prisoner, not a word—I was a little the worse for liquor—the prisoner was much more drunk—before the prisoner stabbed me in the back he was flourishing the knife about—I am quite sure when he stabbed me he struck at me purposely—I have no more to say—we were in the same house the night before, and parted on friendly terms, like two brothers—there was no cause of quarrel between us."
THOMAS SEAICH (policeman, K 300). In consequence of information on 28th Oct., at half-past 9 o'clock, I went to the Three Foxes, and found the deceased there, with a wound in his back—I afterwards found the prisoner on board a ship in the Regent's Canal, in a helpless state through drunkenness—he recovered in two or three hours, and I asked him if he knew what he had been doing—he said he did not know that he had done anything—I got this knife from the captain of the ship—the prisoner belonged to the ship, but the deceased did not—it sailed next morning at half-past 2.
in the evening, I was in Pump-yard, Ratcliffe, and saw four tailors, two a-head and two about a dozen yards behind—the deceased and a tall man, something of the prisoner's build, were the two last—the deceased had hold of the other man's arm—the deceased said, "You always stick up for me"—the other said, "And so I always will"—about a quarter of an hour after, I saw them go in at the wicket gate, and heard one of them say, "If you don't, you know"—I afterwards saw the deceased, who was wounded, and I afterwards saw him dead.
Prisoner's Defence. On 28th Oct. I came ashore with the deceased, and me and four more had some drink, and got intoxicated; we met two soldiers, and then had some more drink; I am entirely ignorant of what happened.
The prisoner received an excellent character.
GUILTY. Aged 21.—Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury. — Confined Eighteen Months.
OLD COURT.—Friday, November 28th, 1851.
PRESENT—Mr. BARON PARKE; Mr. Ald. FAREBROTHER; Mr. Ald. HOOPER.
Before Mr. Baron Parke and the Third Jury.
MESSRS. CLARKSON and BALLANTINE conducted the Prosecution.
FREDERICK HALE THOMSON . I am by profession a surgeon; I purchased a share in a patent for silvering glass; Mr. Varnish was my partner. In the autumn of 1849 I engaged the prisoner Hellish for the purpose of carrying out some views I had, some methods of making glass for the purpose of employing the silvering process—I had strong recommendations with him, and believed he understood perfectly the directing the making glass at Powell's glass-works—I knew nothing of engraving or staining glass, and Mellish was engaged to superintend that part of the arrangements, to overlook the men engaged in that portion of the business—there was an agreement in writing (The agreement was here produced by Mr. Cookney, the attesting witness; it was dated 26th Dec., 1849, between Messrs. Thomson and vanish and Thomas Robert Mellish, by which Mellish engaged to give his services to them in the business of silvering glass, they agreeing to pay him 6l. 6s. per week for the same as long as he continued to employ himself in the business eight hours a day)—after that agreement Mellish came and took the sole control and management of the glass-cutters and mounters—he engaged them, and paid them their wages; he arranged their rate of wages entirely—I never saw them until after they were in our employment, and I knew nothing of the rate of wages he engaged them for—I engaged Douglas at Mellish's particular desire, about April, 1850—he said he wanted a clerk to be under his care in his office, and he knew a most desirable young man for it in Birmingham, and he would send for him—he fixed the rate of wages that Douglas was to have, without reference to me; and when he had done that, he told me he had concluded the arrangement, and produced Douglas—I believe he told me the amount of Douglas's wages, but I do not recollect what the exact amount was—it was between 25s. and 30s. a week, but some months afterwards he raised his wages, I cannot speak positively—the premises where the work is carried on are in Wells-mews at the back of Berners-street, and the establishment
where the articles are sold is in Regent-street—the glass-cutters and mounters engaged by Mellish were placed by him in shops on the premises; and he employed, for various purposes, several outdoor workmen, who I did not even know by sight—I was not acquainted with the proper rate of wages for articles of that kind, and I engaged Mellish on that account—Douglas and Mellish had at first one office between them, with a large double desk, at which they sat side by side—some months afterwards an inner room was prepared by Mellish, what he called his own room; a large table was got, and it was fitted up as his private room—he had boxes made for the purpose of keeping the vouchers and bills in, as he said, when they were returned to him—I have frequently been through the room in which the double desk was when Douglas and Mellish were both there—I have done so daily, from July to Sept., but more frequently even than that—I used to go and see how the work was carried on—Mellish was continually at the desk, and Douglas likewise—I saw the wages-book constantly on Mellish's desk—he had the workmen's names entered in it, and the rate of wages—this is it (produced)—I have seen it daily on the double desk—it was the rule to enter in that book the amount of wages earned by the out-door servants, and the in-door likewise—my instructions to Mellish were, that as he undertook the sole management of the wages-book, and paying the wages, he should be answerable to me for the accounts and documents, which he undertook to be—I used generally to go up the first thing in the morning, and inquire how he was getting on, what return he was likely to have for the men, who were in considerable numbers at work, and what return the business was making—he invariably told me the business was going on most satisfactorily, be only wanted time to carry on the thing; and if I would leave the matter to him till the World's Fair opened, I should have ample remuneration for what we were doing; and I left it entirely to him—I have remarked to him that the accounts were very heavy, that a great expense weekly was incurred—he always said it was essential that such expenses should be incurred before returns could be expected, and I should be satisfied if I left it to him—I do not recollect that I spoke to him about the vouchers—I did not know of there being a couple of bills made out by the men who work out of doors, I knew nothing at all about it—I am speaking of the first period when Mellish was in my employ; the second period was after it was discovered that frauds had been committed—I had not been informed of the two bills, up to the time Douglas was given into custody.
Cross-examined by MR. MONTAGUS CHAMBERS. Q. You say you are a surgeon? A. Yes; I have been in considerable practice—I was very much engaged in professional business until I embarked in this silvering of glass—I then gave up my practice to a considerable extent, but was still engaged in it at 48, Berners-street, Oxford-street, closely adjacent to the premises—I made an agreement to carry out the patent with a man named Thomas Drayton, about Oct. 1848—I had commenced working the patent, and had silvered a great many things before I was introduced to Mr. Mellish—the cause of ray introduction to him was not some ink-bottles or inkstands being sent to me by Mr. Lund, of Fleet-street, it was my speaking to Mr. Powell, the owner of Whitefriars glass-works, telling him I wanted a man to carry out the silvering—that must have been in the summer of 1849—I recollect Mellish bringing some inkstands from Mr. Lund to be silvered; that was previous to my entering into a written agreement with him, but he had been with me a good deal in my silvering-room—I learned afterwards that a person had suggested the idea of silvering inkstands, and that Mr. Lund had an interest in the patent—I
did not learn from Mellish that Mr. Lund had made him a present of his interest—I have not silvered any ink-bottles myself of that construction; my first experiments with Mr. Lund's inkstands were perfectly successful, as far as the silvering went; they were perfectly silvered, but the ink being poured in upon it, took off the silver—Mellish did not invent the plan of a double glass—I took out a patent for that very purpose; that was not the patent in which I had purchased an interest in the first instance—I never knew Mellish make any experiments in putting the silver between two glasses, he took my directions to make glass suitable for my patent which I had been at work at months before I knew there was such a man as Mellish in the world; I hired him for the purpose of going to Powell's glass-works, and making hollow glass for the purpose of the patent which I had been at work at for months—the first patent in 1848, was for silvering glass and other surfaces—I got the second patent for introducing silver between two glasses, in Dec. 1849, two months after Mellish had worked for me—previous to getting out that patent, I had tried the experiment, and had shown it; it was perfectly well known—Mellish was engaged in making those experiments before I took out the patent—the inkstands sent by Mr. Lund were not with a double hollow—I do not remember that a second set of inkstands were sent by Mr. Lund when the silver was introduced between two plates of glass so as to prevent the operation of the ink—Mr. Varnish was the active man, and looked after the mercantile part, but had nothing to do with the silvering, he knew nothing about it—I knew something about it; I was the only person who did, I patented it—I suggested after conversing with Mr. Varnish, that we should take out a second patent to protect the silver entirely, by hermetically sealing it from the atmosphere, introducing it between two coatings of glass; but I want to explain to the Court, if I were to take this inkstand, silver it, and then drop this little glass-holder into it, it would be an inkstand silvered between two coatings of glass, but that is totally distinct—preventing the air from getting to it is what I call hermetically sealing it—I took out a third patent in the conclusion of 1850, in my name, and that of Mellish—it was for improvements in staining and cutting glass for the purpose of silvering cutting it in a peculiar manner—I did not make articles under that patent—I am not aware that any were in the Exhibition. I exhibited some articles of double hollow work of every description—Mr. Deane has got the list of articles exhibited from our firm—Mellish had no joint-interest in any manufacture connected with the silvering of glass, that I am aware of; it was never carried out—I saw the patent that I and Mellish took out; the agent who took it out for us was Mr. Cartmell—I believe I and Mellish saw him previous to taking it out; we asked him his opinion; it was in the autumn of 1850—I cannot swear which of us described the patent to Mr. Cartmell, it was taken out conjointly—it was described as a patent for cutting, staining, silvering, and fixing articles of glass—I cannot speak to the very words—I believe I understood the invention thoroughly when I went to Mr. Cartmell—I thought I did at the time—I had gone through the matter myself—I do not know that anybody told me what it was—I swear Mellish did not tell me the whole process, he might have suggested some portion of it, and I believe he did; he suggested some portion of the cutting, as a practical man—he had not been engaged in the silvering of glass for eighteen months; he had nothing to do with the scientific part—I did not direct Mr. Cookney to draw up a paper and present it for the signature of Mellish; the matter was talked over by Mellish, myself, and Mr. Cookney, but I am not aware that I gave any special instructions on the subject—Mr. Cookney did draw up a
paper for Mellish to sign after I bad got the last patent; Mellisb refused to sign it—I did not tear it op, I believe it is in Mellish's possession—I did not present it to him, I cannot say whether Mr. Cookney did—Mellish eventually refused to me to resign his interest in that patent, after telling me two or three times that he would—I was present when the agreement was presented to him, but whether it was tendered to him to sign, I do not know—I was not present when it was thrown on the fire—I did not say I had thrown it on the fire—it was about the spring of 1851 that he refused to relinquish his interest in the patent; it was at Berners-street—I think it was in May this year that he left my service, about a month or six weeks after he had refused to relinquish his interest—after he bad refused to sign a paper, in Berners-street, I believe another paper was drawn up for him to sign—I really do not recollect whether that was presented to him for signature, or whether be refused to sign it—I do not remember being present when it was presented to him—I believe a second was presented two or three weeks before he was discharged—the second paper was not prepared with a view of my taking Mr. Cookney in as a partner in that patent, not that I am aware of; no such understanding ever came to my knowledge—Mr. Cookney had an interest in the glass silvering long before that patent—I never made any proposal to take him in as a partner in the patent which I and Mellish had taken out; but I believe it was understood thus, that as he had an interest in the patent of the silvering, he must have an interest in the patent now—it was not proposed that Mellish should relinquish his interest in the patent of Thomson and Mellish, and that Cookney should be introduced—it was not arranged that as soon as Mellish relinquished his interest, Cookney should be a partner; I know nothing of it—Cookney had an interest in it previous to the two prisoners being taken up—I never heard of its being proposed that when Mellish relinquished his interest, Cookney should become a partner in Mellish and Thomson's patent—it was not proposed that Cookney should come in at all—it had long before 1851 been understood that if a partnership was drawn up, that Mr. Cookney's name would be included with mine, and Mr. Varnish's—I never heard that it was proposed in 1851, that we three should become partners and get the relinquishment of Mellish's right in the patent of Mellish and Thomson—Mr. Lund has two shops, one in Fleet-street, and the other in Cornhill—he spoke very well of Mellish to me—he said he had known him some considerable time, and he was a very painstaking man—Mr. Powell, of Whitefriars glass-works, recommended him to me as a man who would carry out what I wanted—I do not know where Mellish lived at the time be entered my service in Oct.—I believe he had workshops in Great Portland-street at the time he first came to me—I have been to them two or three times—I believe he continued to have them the whole time he was with us, and that was one of the grievances why I wished to part with him—I never went there latterly—I understood that workmen were sent by him from the one house to the other—I do not know how many workmen he had; at one time he had between thirty and forty on the premises at Berners-street—I am not speaking with certainty—there was not a steam-engine erected—he brought a great quantity of machinery when he came into my service, and put it up at my expense—he afterwards employed a carpenter to erect some machinery for the glass-cutters, Mellish attended to the account!—a shop was also taken, and Mrs. Mellish was sent there to keep it—I really do not know exactly when that was—Mellish and his wife managed the shop—it was not me that made that arrangement; Mr. Varnish, I believe, can tell you all about it—the shop was kept in the name of Mrs. Mellish—I used
to send glass there invoiced to her, and she and some assistants attended to keeping the accounts and selling the goods at the Regents-street shop—Mellish lived there, he went there in the evening—I do not know that when he undertook that his wife should go there on my account that he relinquished his residence in Great Portland-street, and sold off his furniture—the real accountant in the business was Mr. Deane, Mr. Varnish attended to the mercantile part, he went to mercantile men about the shipping and the sales—Mellish regulated the cost and selling-price of the goods; he put a profit on as the selling price, that all belonged to his department; I believe he consulted with Mr. Varnish on the subject—I do not recollect his going three times to Paris in our service—he was absent a fortnight in Paris once, I believe—I cannot say whether he went twice or three times, I believe he went twice, I am uncertain about three times—he was absent about a fortnight each time—Mr. Varnish was with him once, I believe—Mr. Deane, the accountant, kept the books in Berners-street—I cannot positively swear that I know the cost-price book when I see it, I believe I do—the books were not in my department, and I did not examine them—I believe I can tell the sale-price book when I see it—I must have looked into the books—I am convinced that I did occasionally—I can swear I looked into the book where the entries were made of goods that went abroad to different people—that was during the eighteen months Mellish was with me—there are so many books that I cannot say whether that was the only one I looked into—it does not belong to my department to look into the books, mine is the scientific department—Mr. Varnish conducted the commercial department, assisted by the clerk—it was not my duty to examine the books till I discovered the frauds—it was about four or five months after Mellish left that I caused Douglas to be taken into custody—I swear I heard Mellish say he wanted a clerk—I believe Mr. Varnish was present—I am not aware that Mellish was in ill health from his attention and labour at the time Douglas came—I am not aware that he had worked for us continually, day and night, and that his health was affected—it was not proposed then by me and Mr. Varnish that he should have assistance, not in that department—I will not swear it was not said to Mellish—I am not aware of it—I am not prepared to swear that I proposed it, or that I did not—Mellish proposed Douglas as his clerk—I had not proposed that he should have assistance, not as a clerk—I should say Mr. Varnish was present when Mellish spoke about Douglas; I do not positively recollect, but he was there every day—it was at Berners-street that Mellish mentioned it—I cannot recollect in what room—I suppose it must have occurred in my library, or in Mellish's room—I believe it must have been in my library, that is my impression—I cannot say whether it was night or day, it was some weeks before Douglas came—I left it to Mellish to make inquiries as to who Douglas was, and I believe Mr. Varnish left it to him—I think. Mrs. Mellish was keeping the shop at the time Douglas was spoken of, but upon my word I cannot be positive on that point—I do not recollect having a conversation with Mellish about his health, about May, 1851, just before he went away—I do not remember his saying he did not feel inclined to sacrifice his own and his wife's health any longer by remaining—I cannot swear distinctly that he did not—I believe just before he went he desired me to send some person to take charge of the stock in Regent-street, on the following Monday morning; in consequence of which Mr. Varnish and Mr. Deane sent somebody to take charge of the stock in Regent-street—I believe that conversation was at Berner's-street—I believe his wife left on the following Monday—I do not know the exact day, for I did not go near the
place; Mr. Dean and Mr. Varnish were the persons—I know they left about that time, but I cannot say it was on a Monday.
Q. Was the wife ever paid for her services for keeping that shop in her own name, and having the goods invoiced to her? A. She was paid by having the house-rent free, and coals and candles—I do not know that they had removed their goods on the Saturday from Regent-street to a lodging in Great Portland-street—I do not recollect going to Regent-street on the Saturday previous to the Monday; I know Mr. Varnish did—I do not recollect hearing him say, "Well, Mellish, then you have made up your mind to go?"—I will not swear I was not at Regent-street with Mr. Varnish when he said so—I do not remember hearing Mr. Mellish say, "Yes, people are better parted that cannot agree"—I do not remember Mellish saying to me, "Mr. Thomson, have you anything more to say?"—I remember no conversation of the sort—I do not recollect being there on the Saturday before Mellish left with Mr. Varnish, or being there that day at all—I do not recollect anything at all on that Saturday—I did not see the scattered furniture of Mr. Mellish, nor did I say, "This looks shocking"—I did not hear Mellish say in my presence, "If it shocks you, what must those feel who have suffered so much by their connection with the business?"—before Mellish left, I had a conversation with Douglas about Mellish's patterns (Mellish used to draw the patterns for the glass)—I may have said to Douglas, that now Mellish was going, he would see a great improvement in the patterns; I do not remember it—I spoke continually to Douglas, of course—I have no doubt I said there would be an improvement—I am not aware that Mellish said, "If so, you shall begin afresh for yourself, and shall not have my patterns (or sketches) to work with," and throw them into the fire—to the best of my belief nothing of the kind passed—nothing certainly was said about Mellish's patterns; they were not his, they were mine, and if he had thrown them into the fire I should have given him into custody—I afterwards improved upon those patterns very much indeed—I said, three weeks before be went, that I should have a scientific person to improve the work, and that he was incapable of it—it was one of the great causes of his leaving, that I required a higher person to carry out the thing in a higher grade of art—I believe that might have been after his refusal to sign either of the papers—persons did not pass through his private room to go the workshop, only through the office where the double desk was—I occasionally went into his private office—persons used to see him there and in the office—he used to be attending to the workmen during the day, continually—he occasionally worked, with his own hands, some of the finishing, in a very slight degree—I never saw him in a working-dress—one of the artists worked in that private room for a few weeks before Mellish left—he placed him there—I believe a carpenter on the premises made the boxes for Mellish—he told me he had had them made to keep the bills and vouchers in—that was months before he left me—they were left behind when he went, and Douglas took charge of them—Dean came in the spring of 1850, some time after Mellish had been there—before that, Mr. Varnish used to do the business of the accountant—he hired Dean by my consent—Mr. Varnish directed the office business—I used continually to go into the room where the double desk was, to see the work as it progressed, day by day, under Mellish, to see what quantity was done—as the workmen finished it, they brought it to Mellish—Mellish had a large mahogany table, with drawers in it, in his private room—he was very frequently at the double desk—I saw him examining books in which diagrams and patterns were kept, and the wages book—those were the
only two books I saw—I first looked into the wages book when it was first established, which was in the beginning of 1850, soon after Douglas came.
Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. Was Douglas a clerk under Mellish? A. Yes; he was entirely under his control and direction—it was Douglas's duty to obey implicitly any directions Mellish gave him; he had no option—he had 25s. or 30s. a week at first, and afterwards Mellish raised him to 35s.—Dean, the cashier, was under the control of the firm, Mr. Varnish especially—I believe the cashier gave the money weekly to Douglas to pay the men—it was Mellish's duty to see that the vouchers for the wages were correct; that was what he was hired for—Mellish purchased glass for us at Messrs. Powell's, the large glass-dealers.
Q. Do you know that Mr. Douglas, by any steps he took, was the means of reducing your expenditure at all? A. I know he has checked Powell's bills, and after Mellish left he did the same, and he reduced the bills certainly—we dealt in a small way with a person named Sago—I cannot say whether or not that it was at Douglas's suggestion, that we should save a considerable percentage, but we did get some things there, and saved a considerable percentage—I do not know that we got them seventy per cent below the price we were paying Powell's, but it was considerably less—Douglas had no authority to reduce the expenditure while he was under Mellish; but after Mellish left, I remember an instance of his checking a bill of Powell's, when there was a mistake of 20l., and it was immediately allowed, and I believe he was the means of reducing other expenditures after Mellish left.
MR. BALLANTINE. Q. The first agreement, do you know anything about the destruction of that, or is it still in Mellish's custody, as far as you know? A. I know nothing about it; I believe it is in his custody entirely, and I believe a copy of the second agreement proposed is in Mellish's possession, and a copy in Mr. Dean's—Mellish was discharged a few weeks after that last negotiation; and when he had been discharged four or five months, we gave Douglas into custody—that had nothing on earth to do with Mellith—at that time we did not at all contemplate giving Mellish into custody; but a few days afterwards one of my assistants brought me some bills, with Mellish's initials to them, which I found had been altered to a very great extent before they were paid; and after that we gave Mellish into custody—we had not the most remote intention of doing so before—the papers were vouchers of accounts which had been altered—I gave Douglas into custody after receiving a letter, which I have got, and after examining the books—the expenses which Douglas saved us were all after Mellish bad left—he did not save any, to my knowledge, before Mellish left—the firm paid the expense of putting up the machinery, and also of the journeys to Paris—the patterns belonged to the firm—he did not bring them with him when he came—they were drawn in the office, after he came into our service.
WILLIAM BENSON LEE . I am an engraver on glass, and live in James-street, Kennington. I know Mellish, and have known him fifteen or sixteen years—I formerly worked at Mercian's, the pencil-case makers, not on the premises—I lived in the country then—at the time I worked for them, Mellish was a traveller for the house—that is more than twelve years ago—in consequence of something I heard with reference to Messrs. Thomson's establishment, in Berners-street, about two years ago, I went to the premises in Wells-street—I there saw Mellish, and he employed me to work for the prosecutors—Mellish arranged the price of the work that I was to be paid—I never saw Mr. Thompson on the matter until this job happened—when I did
the work I took the bill in with it, and was paid—I only took one bill in, but I signed another, which was made out for me afterwards—I was asked to do so by Mr. Mellish, and Douglas as well—I believed it to be the system of the firm—I believe Douglas made out the second bill upon every occasion—I expected it was the system of the firm to have one to remain in one room, and the other to go to the counting-house—the other remained with Mr. Mellish, I expected, but I knew nothing of their arrangements—Mr. Mellish gave me directions to make oat two bills; I cannot say when—I have not done any work for the firm for above a year—it was upon each occasion for about three months, or something of the kind, which was about the extent of the time I worked for the firm—on 14th Sept., 1850, I carried in an account to Wells-street—this produced is it—it is for 1l.—if this was the last account, it was delivered by my son to Mr. Mellish—I went on Monday, and Mr. Douglas paid me the money—this account is in my writing—it is dated 14th Sept.—I had no further demand on the firm on 14th Sept. but that pound—when I went on the 16th to Wells-street, I saw Douglas in his office, where the desk was—I went up the steps on the outside—Douglas told me that Mr. Mellish said the work was not done as it ought to be, and he would not pay me for it—Douglas said he would willingly pay me, but I had better go and see Mr. Mellish—I then went to Regent-street, to see Mr. Mellish—I saw Mrs. Mellish, but not Mr. Mellish—I did not see Mr. Mellish at all on the subject matter of that account—I returned to Wells-street, and saw Douglas—I asked him to go and fetch the pattern he had shown me, and compare mine with his, and say which was the better—he said certainly he must say mine was, but Mr. Mellish said it was bad, and he had no voice in it—Douglas paid me that pound—before he paid me, I signed a second account, besides the one I had brought with me—that was at Douglas's request—the signature to this account for 4l. 10s. is mine, but when I signed it it was for 1l. only—that second account does not contain the items—I did not write the second account; it was written for me, and I signed it—after signing it I delivered it to Douglas—I first saw it was for 4l. 10s. at Messrs. Thompson and Varnish's manufactory, seven or eight weeks ago—the initials "T. R. M." are upon this account—they were not there when I signed it—I never authorised Douglas, or anybody else, to alter that account from 1l. to 4l. 10s., nor was I aware there bad been any such alteration made until I saw it, seven or eight weeks ago, at Messrs. Thompson's—I never received any such money—I never received more than li. at any time—that was the greatest amount I ever received from them at any time—I received 1l. on two occasions, and never more than that—this account of 30th July, 1850, for 8s., is in my writing—I took that to Wells-street—I took all the others but the last one, and I saw Mr. Mellish and Mr. Douglas on all other occasions—I was paid 8s. on that occasion—the prisoners were both present at the time I was paid—I also signed this second account—it was then for 8s.—it is Douglas's writing—I signed it the same as on all occasions; it was put before me, and I signed it—I cannot say either the one or the other requested me to do so—Mr. Mellish was present when I signed it—it is now an account for 2l. 18s.—there are the same initials to this account as the former one—they were not there at the time I signed it—I never received any other sum than 8s. in respect of that account, either at the time I was paid, or at any subsequent time—I delivered these two accounts to Douglas, in Mellish's presence—this account of 17th July, for 1l., is in my writing, and signed by me—I handed it to Mr. Douglas or Mr. Mellisb, I cannot say which; they were both there—this second account was prepared
for me by Douglas on that occasion, which I signed—it was then for 1l.—it is now for 4l. 10s.—I never received more than 1l. in respect of that transaction, or ever claimed more—the same initials are on that account, and also two that I never saw before—Mr. Dean's is one—these initials, "T. R. M." were not there when I signed it—on 19th July, 1850, I carried this other account to the firm—it is for 8s.—it is in my writing—here is a second account, in Douglas's writing—I signed that—it was then for 8s.—it is now 2l. 18s.—that account has no initials on it, except Mr. Deane's—I never claimed or received more than 8s. in respect of that account—on 27th July I carried iq this account for 10s., in my writing—Mr. Mellish and Douglas were present when I presented it—I signed a second account on that occasion—this is it—it was for 10s. when I signed it—it is now 2l. 10s.—that was prepared by Douglas—I received my money in the presence of Mellish and Douglas—I never authorized anybody to alter that account in my name to 2l. 10s., nor did I claim or receive more than 10s. upon it.
Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. As far as you know, had Mr. Mellish the control of the business there? A. Yes; I know nothing as to whether he was a partner in the firm—I was not led to any idea that he was, or was not; he appeared to have the general control and management; for what I knew he might have been a partner—I had known him for some years—I did not know him in reference to this business, until I heard they were busy, and applied for work—he had not, to my knowledge, been previously connected with the trade—I had not known Douglas at all before he was there—I am not a Birmingham man.
Q. Are you at all aware of this circumstance, that at times when certain workmen have been employed, and either gone away from illness, or others substituted for them, that the wages have been entered to the names of the first men that were employed? A. No; I know nothing of that—I worked out of doors—I never worked on the premises.
MR. THOMPSON re-examined. The initials, "T. R. M." on the second of each of these three accounts of 14th Sept., 30th July, and 17th Aug., are Mellish's writing—I am well acquainted with his writing—I have seen a great many bills.
BENJAMIN DEAN . I am clerk and cashier to the prosecutor—I became so after Mellish was employed—it was my duty as cashier to pay the amount of money necessary for the wages—for the purpose of ascertaining the amount that would be required, a wages book was produced to me; it was the custom to have the wages book produced; this is it (produced)—Douglas was in the habit of producing that book to me; he paid all the workmen—this book includes both the in-door and out-door workmen; Douglas paid them both; I gave him the money to pay with—the book was handed to me after the money was given—I gave the money on Saturday, and the book was produced on the Monday or Tuesday probably—it is in Douglas's writing—I suppose it would be Mellish's duty as general manager to look over it, and see that the men were paid properly—I have never seen him looking over the book—I sat in another office, in a different part of the building—the book was produced to me with vouchers; the receipts from the different persons—(looking at the receipts produced)I find here a receipt for 4l. 10s. on 16th Sept.—I can tell that that was produced to me; it has my initials on it; it also has Mellish's initials to the best of my knowledge: that is to certify that the voucher is correct—I should not have passed it without his initials after July or Aug., '50—previous to that time, the accounts came up I thought rather loosely; and either Mr. Thompson ordered the initials, or it was done at my
suggestion; I cannot now recollect which, but for regularity's sake, I said I would rather the manager signed them first—I cannot recollect whether I said so to Mellish; but after a particular period I would not pass the bills without those initials, without inquiry—that 4l. 10l. is entered in the book as paid—I have seen all these receipts, except the one of 30th July for 2l. 18s. that has not passed through my hands, or it would have the folio of the wages book upon it, which it is my habit to put—I find in the wages book the sum of 4l. 10s., entered on 16th Sept., in Douglas's writing—it is charged as having been paid to Lee—on 17th Aug., I find 4l. 10s. charged as having been paid to Lee; and on 27th July 2l. 10s., all in Douglas's writing—on 19th July, 2l. 18s. is charged, as paid to Lee—I "do not find 2l. 18s. on 80th July entered in the wages book—I am not able to point out that item—the other items were paid by me to Douglas included in a lump sum—I never saw any of these other bills for the smaller amounts; the only vouchers produced to me contained the altered amounts.
Cross-examined by MR. CHAMBBRS. Q. Are you the accountant to the firm now? A. I am: I first became so at the beginning of April, 1850; there was no accountant previously, I believe—I believe one of the partners had acted as such; I occasionally used to sign vouchers—I did not put my initials against any vouchers or bills, except as to their examination, not as to their correctness, only in comparing the bill with the book—if Douglas brought me a bill not vouched by Mellish, I should return it, and ask why it was not so—there are two accounts here which do not bear Mellish's initials—they have been passed and paid by me; my initials are upon them, as having passed them—one is dated 19th July, and the other 27th July,'50—I put my initials to them, because they agreed with the wages book which Douglas brought to me; finding they agreed with that, I put my initials—I cannot recollect the circumstance of passing these two, or when I paid them—I have no recollection of having done it—I have put my initials to several others which had not Mellish's initials, previous to a certain date, upon finding that it agreed with this book—I put my initials for my own satisfaction, to vouch that it was a correct payment, as represented by Douglas, that it agreed with the book—if I had had any idea that there was anything wrong in the representation, or in the book, I should certainly not have put my initials to the vouchers—I did not keep that set of vouchers in the counting-house; when I had looked at them, and compared them with the book; I returned them in the book—in consequence of the irregular way in which the accounts had been kept, a new arrangement was made somewhere about July or Aug., 1850—I did not keep or attend to the cost-price book—Mr. Mellish did, and the sale-price book also—those books are here—I have not looked at them lately; it is not my business to look at them; I have seen them, but not examined them; they were left behind when Mellish left the service—I do not know enough of the business to know how the entries are made in the cost-price book—I should think the mode of doing it is, to know the cost of the labour, and what has been paid—I cannot recollect who was present when the new arrangement was made about July; I cannot recollect the circumstances of it; I have tried to do so.
Q. Was it not arranged that Mr. Mellish should have a set of detailed accounts, so as to make out the cost-price book? A. Yes, they were kept back for that purpose, I believe—he kept back one set of the detailed accounts to make out his cost-price book.
COURT. Q. I do not quite understand this; what was to be kept back?
A. One copy for the price-book; I believe the arrangement was, that two sets of Touchers were to be mode out, one a detailed account.
MR. CHAMBERS. Q. Was not Mr. Mellish to have the detailed account to make out the cost-price book? A. That was what he kept the account back for—there was a detailed account, and a bill delivered.
COURT. Q. Was it pursuant to an arrangement made on behalf of the firm, that there should be two sets of documents kept for every workman's bill, a detailed account, and a general account? A. That was Mr. Mellish's arrangement.
MR. CHAMBERS. Q. Was it in July that Mr. Mellish made that arrangement? A. Either July or Aug.—he said he was to keep back one of those accounts, for the purpose of making out the cost-price book—one of the accounts was handed to me as a voucher—the one in a lump sum was sent to me—I believe this small account is a detailed account, such as it was arranged Mellish should have delivered to him.
Q. Is not the other one that has had the figures altered the general account, which it was arranged should be delivered to Douglas to pay on? A. it was the arrangement of Mr. Mellish; he stated that he would do it in July—I always received the general accounts from Douglas in settling the books with him from the commencement—the double accounts were put there before that time; it was only regarding the initials I spoke.
COURT. Q. How early were the double accounts? A. I think almost from the first commencement of my term—the double account was not an arrangement made in July or Aug., that was merely the initials to be put on.
MR. CHAMBERS. Q. Then from your first coming was that the course of business? A. I believe so, from the beginning—the only alteration made in July was, that Mellish was to put his initials to the general account to certify its correctness—Douglas used to bring me the book with these general accounts; I used to look at them to see that they tallied with the book, and then return the book with them in it to him—Mellish had the general management—the moneys I gave Douglas I considered were sent to Mellish—he received his own wages from me.
Cross-examined by MR. PARRY Q. You say that Douglas was the person to whom you delivered the money, is that so? A. Yes, on account of Mr. Mellish; on account of that department which was under Mr. Mellish's control and management—I treated Douglas as Mr. Mellish's clerk—I used to apply to Douglas on the Thursday and Friday, to know what money would be required for the wages for out door-work on Saturday, in order to make up my accounts; and what I call the lump amount was the whole amount that was required—here is the entry in the wages book of Lees, 4l. 10s. on, 14th Sept. (pointing it out)—I believe this is in Douglas's handwriting—all the entries are in his writing—this entry is dated 21st Sept. here, which was the Saturday; the wages were always paid on the Saturday—this contains the wages of the prior week—I could not tell the exact amount I paid Douglas in a lump, on that occasion; perhaps it might be 50l. or 60l. that week—there are a great many entries on 21st Sept., relating to the wages of the week ending on that day—there may be thirty-five or thirty-six entries on that day—I gave the money to Douglas in a lump, and he furnished me with a written memorandum, or I O U for the lump sum—that was destroyed on the Monday when he made his book up—he would sometimes have a balance to pay back to me out of the lump sum; that would depend upon the amount made up in the book—I did not examine the vouchers
before I gave him the lump sum—I did not get the vouchers till the following week—Douglas did not give me forty, fifty, or sixty vouchers at a time; perhaps there would not be above half-a-dozen of these vouchers in a week—these are out-door accounts—I had no vouchers for the men's wages, except the book—I have never been present at the payment of the wages—my office was in the same establishment, but in front of the house—I had the entire control of the cash—it was not to me that Douglas pointed out an error of 20l., as against my masters—he has never pointed out any errors to me—I was not under Mr. Mellish's control at all—I did not retain the vouchers—they were returned back to that department in the book, to Mellish, I consider—they were delivered to Douglas as Mellish's clerk—I am aware that from time to time advances have been made to the men out of the ordinary payments—there used to be a certain sum of money advanced on the Wednesday for that purpose, and then on the Saturday we made up the full lump sum—I advanced that sum on the Wednesday to Douglas, to be advanced to the men as a portion of the Saturday's moneys—it was 10l. or 15l., or something of that sort—I took an I O U from Douglas for it, which was afterwards destroyed.
Q. Do you know whether Mellish has ordered money to be paid to the workmen by way of bonus sometimes? A. I see by the wages book that gratuities have been paid to the workmen from time to time; I believe by Mellish's order—those gratuities came into the wages book—we employ a number of men from week to week—some of the men would sometimes go off work from illness, or other causes.
Q. Have you known when that has been the case, and men have supplied their place, that the wages were entered to the names of the men gone off work? A. The wages of the men have been entered to the names of the men, during the time of their absence—if four men went off and four others came on, I never noticed that the wages were entered to the names of the four men that had gone off work; that has not occurred to my knowledge; I have not heard of anything of the kind—I do not know that Douglas has been in the habit of advancing wages to the men himself, nor that Mellish has—after Mellish had left, I remember Douglas calling my attention to deductions in Powell's account; I do not recollect to what amount, some-where about 20l.—there was a mistake of that sort—if he bad not called my attention to it, I should have paid it; not to him, but to Powell's—it was an overcharge—he could not have got the money, it would be paid direct from me to Powell—he has not, to my recollection, called my attention to any other errors as against my employers—I confine my attention solely to the cash and the books.
MR. CLARKSON. Q. You have been asked about arrangements, did you know of anything, in the nature of an arrangement, either about the two accounts, or in respect of the mode of keeping them, except what Mellish himself told yon? A. Certainly not—when I spoke of an arrangement, I meant what Mellish told me he should do—it was Mellish's duty to tee that the accounts that were brought to me by Douglas, were correct before Douglas brought them.
COURT. Q. What was said, and by whom, as to the initials being put to the accounts before they were paid; you say after July and Aug., you would not have paid unless Mellish's initials had been put on the bills? A. Yet, for regularity's sake—something was said by me to Mellish on the subject—I cannot recollect what, or whether it was by Mr. Thompson, or myself, it
was said by one or the other—it was explained to Mellisb, that it was for for the purpose of ascertaining the correctness of the accounts.
MR. CLARKSON. Q. Was there any person to your knowledge, whose duty it was to see that the accounts Douglas submitted to you were correct, before Douglas brought them? A. Yes, Mellish—that was his duty at all times, both before and after July, hut after July he was required to put his initials indicative of it—I know nothing on the subject of gratuities, except what appears in the wages book—if Mellish paid gratuities, I should not inquire about them, I had no means of knowing whether Mellish or Douglas had paid them, except from what appears in the wages book—I never inquired how it happened—my duty was merely to see that they were in the wages book—I know nothing of absent workmen being substituted by others—I always paid Mellish his wages, six guineas a week.
I was at one time in partnership with Mr. Frederick Halle Thomson—I was present when Mellish was engaged—I know of the agreement which was afterwards entered into—Dean came some time after Mellish was engaged—I think a wages book was had then, for the first time—I am not aware of one before—I have seen Mellish, both at the desk and table—I think I have seen the wages book there, when Mellish has been there—I have earnestly and anxiously inquired into it, and have very little doubt I have seen him with the wages book—I have a doubt about it—I think that it was Mellish's duty decidedly to see that the wages were correctly entered in the wages book, because he stipulated to have the whole and sole control over that department—he has not said anything about my interference; he has as to Mr. Thomson, he said he had no business with the workmen (the glass cutters), if he had any questions to ask he ought to ask them of him, Mellish, and not of the men, and said, "If I find you interfering with my men any more I will throw up my situation"—they were all in-door men—I have seen Mellish at times with a pencil in his hand, at the desk, drawing different patterns, such as were required in the business—I am not positive whether I have seen him with any book before him.
Cross-examined by MR. CHAMBERS. Q. On many occasions has he had quarrels with Mr. Thomson, or only once? A. Two or three times—I recollect Mr. Thomson had some machinery erected in the fore part of the house where Mellish had no connection, but he accidentally went up and saw it, and complained of its being a breach of the engagement with him, in giving him the sole control of the business—that was about six weeks or two months before Mellish left; he left early in May—I had just joined Mr. Thomson in partnership when Mellish came—Mr. Thomson was in treaty with him when I entered into partnership, and concluded it afterwards—Mr. Cookney was in partnership with us at the same time that was about 15th Oct, or thereabouts, in 1849—Mr. Cookney is an attorney—I knew of the patent being taken out by Thomson and Mellish together; Mellish as our servant proposed that a certain patent should be taken out; I think it was in my name—I can hardly tell when that was—it was before I went that he failed in silvering the inkstands for Mr. Lund—I know that Mellish afterwards succeeded in doing so, that was in consequence of the glass being inverted in such a way that it presented two surfaces, and the solution of silver was put in, Mellish at my suggestion tried the experiment and was successful, and that was the reason my name was put in—I think some of the inkstands of Mr. Lund were done so, but I suggested a mustard-pot or cream-jug—Mr.
Lund had a patent for the inkstands, which failed—I think Mellish had an interest in them with Mr. Lund—afterwards at my suggestion, we found we could put silver on inkstands of this description by making the double glass; it was perfected and you may see them to-day—I believe the patent was taken out in my name, I am not quite sure—I know nothing of the glass trade—Mellish had no interest in it, he carried it out for his master; he was not one of the patentees—I think it was in the name of Thomson and Varnish, but the patent will show—Mellish may have suggested or carried out something, but I do not know that he had any interest in the patent—I never consented to any.
Q. Did you instruct Mr. Cookney to ask him to sign a paper relinquishing his interest in the patent? A. I think it was proposed, for the sake of avoiding any future difficulty—I was present when he refused to sign it—Mr. Thomson was there, and Mr. Cookney too; it was in Mr. Thornton's library—I cannot tell the date, I think it had been lying over several weeks before this thing came on the tapis; and Mr. Mellish went to his house for the paper, which he had left at home; he brought it back and said he would never sign it for this reason, that Mr. Cookney's clerk had put it down that in consequence of his poverty he could not carry it out himself—I do not know what was done with the paper, I believe Mellish carried it away with him—I do not recollect a second paper being prepared and presented to him, or his refusing to sign it, or any paper being burned—I recollect Mellish going away from Regent-street—the shop there was kept in the name of Mellish; his wife managed the business in consequence of his absence at the glass-works; she was always in the shop—she had the shop about a twelve-month—they went away on a Monday—before that I think he bad told me that he had made up his mind that he should leave—he said the business was not managed according to his views; he did not see that anything of a profitable nature to him could arise to make it worth his while to stay—I was" not present when he said it was too much for his wife's health, and his own; or when he said anything about sending to Regent-street for a person to take charge of the goods—I did not go on the Monday to take charge of them myself—I cannot recollect going on the Saturday when Mr. Thomson was with me—I might have done so—I think the furniture was removed in the course of the Monday—I was there a few minutes; Mr. Thomson was not there on the Monday; I think I went alone on Monday—Mr. Thomson has not spoken to me since he was examined about what he said, nor has anybody else—I have been outside in Mr. Clark's room—I went to Paris two or three times with Mellish; the last time was just before Christmas last—we went from Brussels to Paris, and were absent a week—the second time was April or May 1850; we were absent rather less than a week, because we were never absent on Sunday—the other time was in the year before, we went to make purchases of glass—I am not quite positive, but I think we went three times; we went to the first establishments in Paris—purchases of glass abroad were very small in comparison of purchases of Messrs. Powell—I did not transact the business with Messrs. Powell, they sent in their accounts and were always paid by check of the firm—I went to France the first time to take out a patent there for the double hollow work—I attended at the police-office on two examinations; there was a third—I do not think I was at the first—I do not think I was there when Mellish was charged the first time—I was not there when he was allowed to go away on his own recognizances alone.
Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. Do you know where Douglas lived?
A. I know from Mellish that he was to come from Birmingham—he said he knew a young man there who would suit the situation.
MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Can you tell whether it was after or before the first examination that these receipts were found? A. No; I was quite taken by surprise by Mr. Thomson telling me they had been found—that was after the first examination—I attended without a subpoena—I am not a partner now, I left on 3rd May—Mellish had no beneficial interest whatever in the patents—we discovered frauds after Mellish left, but they were supposed to have been committed before he left—I cannot tell whether any frauds have been discovered committed since he left.
MR. THOMSON re-examined. The books have been examined with a view to ascertain whether there have been any frauds committed on our firm since Mellish left, and we find that frauds have been committed since, in the wages book.
MR. VARNISH re-examined. I have seen the accounts in which the alteration of amount is—I believe the alteration in the figures in this account of 14th Sept. to be the alteration of Douglas—these second accounts of 27th July and 19th July appear to be in Douglas's writing—he writes a freer hand than Mellish—I hardly know what to say about this one of 17th Aug.—the figures are very much like Douglas's, but hardly so free as his—my belief is that they are his; and this of 30th July, also.
Cross-examined by MR. PARRY. Q. Just take the one of 16th Sept. in your hand? A. I know it well, without looking at it; you have the other bill, showing you the correct price—the alteration from one to the other appears to me to be in Douglas's writing, because he has a freer hand, and less cramped, than Mellish—I have not a doubt that these initials, "T. R. M.," are Mellish's—they mean Thomas Robert Mellish.
Q. Look at these initials, and look at these figures, and I call your particular attention to the ink in which they are written; do you still adhere to your belief that the figures are in Douglas's writing? A. I do; I think it is a different ink, but the handwriting I am well satisfied with—this "30th July" appears to be in the same ink as the "T. R. M.", and the altered figures—the "T. R. M." I have not the slightest doubt is Mellish's signature—the figures, I still have my impression, are Douglas's—I have had them shown to me before.
WATKINS. I am superintendent of the works at Messrs. Thomson and Varnish's. Douglas was taken on Saturday, 4th Oct.; and on the Monday afterwards I discovered some vouchers in the boxes in Mellish's private room, and others in the table-drawer, which was locked—I employed a locksmith to force it—I showed them to Mr. Thomson, and they were in my possession some time, and were handed over to Mr. Wakeling—these vouchers were amongst those I found.
Cross-examined by MR. BODKIN. Q. Did you mark the papers? A. "No, I first emptied a box; I put the papers into it again, until I had an opportunity of looking at them carefully—the box was opened with a key which Douglas gave up when he was taken—it has been in my possession ever since—I went to the box again the same day, to put in the documents which I found in the drawer in the large table—when the box was opened the papers were all carefully sorted—the papers relating to Lee's payments were found in the box.
MR. CLARKSON. Q. Look at those, and tell me whether those are the papers which, amongst others, were found in the box? A. Yes; I believe they were all found in the box.
JAMES HENRY KEYS . I am in Mr. Thomson's employ. Mellish was the managing man—my wages were paid me by Mr. Douglas, at the desk in the office—sometimes he and Mellish were together when I was paid; sometimes not—I have seen books on the desk, but not very often—I have seen Mellish there when the wages book has been there, looking at the wages book along with Mr. Douglas—that was usually on a Saturday, previous to my being paid my wages, before Douglas went for the money—I have seen them looking at the wages book Saturday after Saturday, both last year and this—I recollect on one occasion, when Douglas was going out of the room, Mellish called him back, and said, "Tell Mr. Dean I shall want a check for" so and so; I cannot exactly say the date—I have seen him go on other occasions with the wages book, leaving Mellish at the desk, and return with the wages book and a bag of money, which he would lay on the desk, Mellish being there at the time.
Cross-examined by MR. CHAMBERS. Q. Were you examined before the Magistrate? A. No; I was there but was not called—I was about to be dismissed by Mellish, last April; he said I was too long going into the city—I was afterwards continued up to the present time.
JOHN BLYTH . I am nineteen years old, and have been employed at Mr. Thomson's sixteen months—I know the wages book—I have seen it on the desk in the office where the prisoners used to sit—I have often seen Mellish looking over it, particularly on Saturday, before Douglas went to Dean to get the money; after he has looked at it, Douglas has gone for the money, but I never saw Mellish there when Douglas came back—I have teen Mellish looking over the wages book three times—I never heard him ask Douglas any question about it—I have heard Mellish say to Douglas "Get 70l. of Mr. Dean"—I have only once heard him. name the sum Douglas was to get—Mellish generally went away on Saturday before six o'clock, or before the men were began to be paid—I have not heard anything pass between him and Douglas on Saturday—as he was about to leave on one Saturday I heard him say, "Send round word if any thing happens"—I used to have to go to Regent-street of a night, after I left—Douglas sent me to Mellish, with a parcel, once after he left on Saturday night,—it was about six months ago, it was a little parcel.
Cross-examined by MR. CHAMBERS. Q. You were not examined before the Magistrate? A. No, I am a porter—I can read and write—I do not think Mellish attended to any books, I never saw him with any—Douglas had the wages book—I never read it—there used only to be the wages book and book of patterns on the desk—I never sat down at the desk—I used to be about the office.
MR. CLARKSON. Q. Should you know the wages book if you were to see it? A. Yes; this is it (looking at it.)
WILLIAM MITCHELL MOORE . I am a glass-cutter. I was employed by Mellish, he paid me once, but generally Douglas paid me, on a Saturday—I have only seen this wages book once—(the receipts were here read as follows: 14th Sept., 1850. Varnish and Co., to W. B. Lee, four green goblets, engraved at 5s., 1l. Received the above. W. B. LEE."—Annexed to the above: "16th Sept., 1850. Messrs. Varnish and Co., to W. B. Lee, engraving as per bill 4l. 10s. Received the above. W. B. LEE." "19th July, 1850. Messrs, Varnish and Co., to W. B. Lee, two goblets, to order at 4s., 8s. Received the above. W. B. LEE."— Annexed: "19th July, 1850, Messrs. Varnish and Co., engraving as per bill 2l. 18s. Received the above. W. B. LEE. T. R. M." "27th July, 1850. Messrs. Varnish and Co. to W. B. Lee, two goblets, engraved
5s. each, 10s. Received the above W. B. Lee"—annexed was—"27th July, 1850. Messrs. Varnish and Co., to W. B. Lee, engraving 2l. 10s. Received the above. W. B. LEE." "Aug. 17th, 1850. Varnish and Co., to W.B. Lee, five goblets, engraved 4s. each, 1l. Received the above, W. B. LEE."—Annexed was "Aug. 17th, 1850. T. R. M." "Messrs. Varnish and Co., to W. B. Lee, engraving as per bill, 4l. 10s. Received the above, W. B. LEE.")
Mr. Powell, of Whitefriars glass-works; William Lownde; Mr. Lund, of Fleet-street; Mr. Baddely, patent agent, of Alfred-street, Islington; Thomas Briggs, of Piccadilly, dressing-case maker; James M'Rae, stationer; Abraham Haines, provision dealer; of Half-moon-street, Bishopsgate-street; and William Crough Jordan, surgeon, of Lower Belgrave-street, Eaton-square, gave Mellish a good character.
MELLISH— GUILTY .— Transported for Ten Years.
DOUGLAS— GUILTY .— Transported for Seven Years.
OLD COURT.—Saturday, November 29th, 1851.
PRESENT—Mr. Justice MAULE. and Mr. Ald. FAREBROTHER.
Before Mr. Justice Maule and the Fourth Jury.
MESSRS. BODKIN and CLERK conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZABETH REYNOLDS . I am a single woman. In Oct. last, I was living with the prisoner at 6, Douglas-street, Westminster—we had lived there together three weeks, but I have lived with him three months altogether—I had a female child of my own living with me, named Mary Elizabeth Reynolds—it was seventeen months old in Oct.—the prisoner was not the father of the child—on 23rd Oct., I left my child alive in bed asleep at 8 o'clock in the evening—I put the child to bed in a lavender frock and a shirt, and went out, leaving no one in the room with it—I went out to look for the prisoner; I met a friend of his, and we went to a public-house, and had something to drink, and not having had much to eat, the drink overcame me, and I was locked up all night—I was taken before the Magistrate in the morning, and discharged—I got back to my house about half-past 10 or 11 in the morning—I went into the room we occupied, and found my child dead in the bed—its face was covered with bruises, it had none the night before when I went out—some of the people in the house spoke to me, and I went about 12 o'clock to the Equitable Gas Works—I went alone, and found the prisoner there—I said, "Oh, Bill, you have killed my child, for it is dead!"—he said, "Dead!"—I said, "Yes; and its face is covered with bruises"—he said, "You should have been at home; I have murdered it; what to do I do not know; for I had better b y well go and drown myself at once"—he said nothing else to my recollection—I spoke to a policeman at the gas-works, and he was taken into custody—this shirt (produced by Millerman)is the one the child had on when I left it that night, and this other one is the prisoner's shirt.
Cross-examined by MR. COOPER. Q. Had you washed the child in the evening? A. Yes, after I came home—there were no bruises on the child then—I had the child with me during the time I lived with the prisoner—he used to nurse it sometimes—he appeared kind to it—the chimney-piece of our room faces the door—there is a stone hearth—the bed is on the left going in—the door is in the centre of the room—when I went to see the prisoner at
the gas-works, I told him the child was dead—he said, "Dead!"—I cannot gay whether he spoke it with surprise; he said it in a low way—he said, "Is it dead?"—and I said, "Yes"—I was not in the habit of leaving the child alone, barring Sundays only—I did not then leave the prisoner at home to take care of it; he was at his work.
MR. BODKIN. Q. Was there anything the matter with the child's neck before this? A. Yes, something the matter with its collar-bone—the doctor told me it was a bent collar-bone—that had happened during the three weeks we lived there.
JURY. Q. How did that occur? A. I do not know how it came—I do not know whether it was the result of violence—she had fallen off a chair.
CAROLINE MARIA LUND . I am in service at Charing-cross. In Oct. last, I had a sister living at 6, Douglas-street, Westminster, and on the evening of 23rd I was in her room, on the first floor, adjoining the one where the prisoner and the last witness lived—I went there about 4 o'clock—I did not know that the child's mother was out—I did not notice her going out—my sister's room door was a little way open—I heard the prisoner come home, and heard him come up stairs—I thought by his manner he was in liquor—when he got on the landing, I heard him say "All right" three times, and he went into the back room, and shut the door—the child was then quiet, and I supposed asleep—about five minutes after, I heard it cry, as though it had been slapped; and while it was crying the prisoner said, "You little b—, if you are not quiet, I will kill you"—I then heard the child slapped, and then a thump, as though it was thrown down, and it screamed very violently—he continued swearing at the child, and called it the same name again; and said if any one interfered with him, he would serve them the same—I then heard a noise, as though he was shaking the child; the child cried, as though it was being shaken—the prisoner then said he was miserable, his life was a misery—he knew he should be hung, and he might as well be hung out of the way—I then heard the child, as though it was thrown down again and it screamed very violently again—my sister was down stairs washing; I called to her to come and take care of the children, and look after her baby, and I then went away—as near as I can judge, it was' about 7 when he came, home, and it was about a quarter to 9 when I left—I got so nervous I could not stay any longer—this occupied from the time he came in, till a quarter to 9—I heard the last noise, as though the child was thrown on the floor, just as I left.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the prisoner's room door shut? A. Yes; I was in my sister's room, walking about with her baby—I heard no other voice than the prisoner's in the room—I did not mention this to any one at the time, as I was not aware but what the child's mother was at home, and it was not an unfrequent thing to hear.
JURY. Q. Did you see the prisoner when he came home? A. No; I knew it was him by his voice—I have been frequently there.
JAMES HENRY WALKER . I am a shoemaker, and live in the same house as the prisoner did—he occupied the back first-floor room, over my head—on 23rd Oct., I was sitting in my room with the door open, and heard him come home between 7 and 8 o'clock—he went into his own room, and I heard him slap and beat the child, and throw it, like as if he had dashed it on the ground two or three times—I heard the child scream very loud, and in about five or six minutes heard the prisoner say, "If anybody interferes with me, I will b—y well serve them the same"—I have heard his voice before that night, but only on the stairs—I heard no more till between 12 and 1, when I was-in
bed, when I heard the child beat and slapped, and dashed on the ground; and a little after 5, on the morning of 24th, I was awoke by the screams of the child, and I heard the same sort of sound again—when I heard the noise between 12 and 1, I heard the child screaming, and between 5 and 6 too—the prisoner came down about five minutes to 6, to go to his daily labour, and I did not hear the child's voice again—in the morning, at a few minutes before 11, I was called by the child's mother, went into the room, and found the child quite dead, lying on a ticking, and part of a sack covered over it, it was dreadfully disfigured—I fetched a policeman, and he came about half-past 11 or 12—I had lived in the house six weeks, and the prisoner and Reynolds three—during those three weeks, I had observed the prisoner's conduct to the child—he used to beat and ill-use it; and I gave the landlady notice that if this ill-usage of the child was not stopped, I could not stop in the house—I never spoke to the prisoner on the subject.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you ever spoken to the prisoner at all? A. Never—I never called him to account for this ill-treatment—I first heard this dashing to the ground on the Thursday evening, between 7 and 8 o'clock—I did not go for a policeman then because he held out such threats—I did not leave my room—I did not think it was my duty to do so—I thought it was the landlady's place—I am a shoemaker—I do not preach at all, or go about the streets with anything—I went to bed at a quarter to 12—I do not go to sleep directly I go to bed—I am troubled with the rheumatics.
MR. BODKIN. Q. Has anybody told you to speak loud when you came into Court? A. No.
WILLIAM MILLERMAN (policeman, B). In consequence of information, on 24th Oct., about 12 o'clock in the day, I went to Douglas-street, West-minster—the last witness fetched me—I found the woman Reynolds there—there was a bed-tick lying on the floor, with a very little in it, and the body of the child was lying on it, covered with a bit of sack—it was quite dead and cold—I lifted up the frock and saw a great many bruises, and there was fresh blood on the tick in several places—there was a wound near the child's eye, from which the blood appeared to have proceeded—the child only had on a frock, nothing underneath—I found this child's shirt, which has been produced, underneath, the tick, saturated with blood, quite wet—a little lower down, underneath the tick, I found the man's shirt, with marks of blood on different parts of it—I found two large pools of blood on the floor, close against the hearth, as if something had been dashed down on the boards—the fire-place is right opposite the door of the room—the room is about eight or nine feet square—there were marks of blood on the floor in two places, and there was one place where some had been attempted to be washed off the floor—there was a smear—I went with the woman to the gas-works, found the prisoner just coming out, and I told him I should take him into custody on a charge of wilful murder against a child, at No. 6, Douglas-street—he said what he had to say he should say at the station when he arrived there—I took him to the station, he there said he left off work about half-past 5; he went and had some beer with some men; he went home about half-past 7, drunk, fell over the child, and he did not know what he had done—the child's body laid on the bed on the left hand as I went into the room—I searched the prisoner at the station, and found blood on his smock-frock, and on his trowsers.
COURT. Q. Had he a shirt on, then? A. Yes—there was no blood on it—it was a good deal cleaner than this one.
MR. BODKIN. Q. As you go in at the door, suppose you were going to
the fire-place, would a person have to step over the bed, or is it on the left-hand? A. It is on the left-hand—he would have no occasion to step over it, it is a very email room.
Cross-examined. Q. Whereabouts is the hearth with respect to the staircase? A. The fire-place is right opposite the door—there was no fender—nothing between it and the door but an old table.
MR. BODKIN. Q. The blood, I understood you, was not on the stone hearth, but on the boards? A. Yes, alongside the stone.
GEORGE PEARCE . I am a surgeon, in Westminster. On 24th Oct. shortly after 2 o'clock, I was called to this house in Douglas-street, and found the body of a female child there—Millerman and the superintendent of police were there—I examined the body, and found sixteen bruises on the surface and extremities—they were severe bruises, most of them, and appeared to be of several days' standing—the left arm and right leg had been recently fractured—there was a contused wound under the left eye, and the head and face were covered with bruises—there was one very extensive one covering the whole right side of the head, and there was blood extravasated under the scalp—the wound and contusions on the head were of recent date—the contusions were such as might have been produced by the child being thrown violently down—on 30th Oct. I made an internal examination, but before doing so, I found an old fracture of the left collar-bone, and some bruises of a circular character on the calf of the left leg, and on the instep, with indentations, apparently occasioned by the marks of teeth—those marks were recent—they were from the teeth of a human being—on making the internal examination, I found a large clot of blood, extravasated, beneath the scalp, covering nearly the whole of the right side of the head, "and on opening the head I found blood, extravasated on the brain, corresponding with the external injury—that was the cause of death—the external injuries would, in my opinion, cause that extravasation of blood, which produced the death.
Cross-examined. Q. Suppose the man to have been drunk, and holding the child up in his arms, and stumbling, and the child falling out of his arms. and he falling on it, might not that have produced what you saw? A. It would not have caused the extensive injury I witnessed.
Q. I am speaking of the damage to the head—suppose a drunken man, tottering with the child in his arms, and it fell on the edge of a hard stone, and he fell upon it, with the dead weight of a drunken man, would not that be apt to produce that of which you have spoken? A. No, it would not, not the serious injury that was presented; it could not—if the child had fallen from the man's arms on the head, it could not have produced the serious injury which I witnessed—a child's head is very thin at that time of life, that was the reason I did not find any fracture—a child's limbs are very elastic at that age—the bones are rather more than gristle—the bones were fractured.
COURT. Q. Was the collar-bone at all united? A. Union had commenced, with distortion, it was bent at an angle—I had not attended the child for that injury—I had never seen it before—the general appearance of the body upon dissection was perfectly healthy—I understood it had been taken to. the hospital for the injury to the collar-bone, and it was bandaged up, but that the bandage had been left off a day or two after—that was between two and three weeks before, I should imagine, from the process of reparation which had taken place.
GUILTY. Aged 20.—Unanimously recommended to mercy by the Jury in consequence of his drunkenness, and the absence of the child's mother. — DEATH .
Before Lord Chief Justice Campbell.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. PAYNE conducted the Prosecution.
GEORGE ALFRED MARTIN . I am clerk to Mr. Joseph Brandeis, a sugarrefiner, at Stratford-le-Bow. The prisoner was employed on his premises, as a carpenter, for about three weeks—on 5th Nov., about 12 o'clock, Mr. Lambert called him into the counting-house, as he was leaving to go to dinner—Mr. Lambert asked him, in my presence, what he had there, and he took this piece of sugar out of his pocket, saying it was only a little piece of sugar—when the policeman came he searched him—here is about three-quarters of a pound of sugar—it is worth about 3d.—a few nails, a pencil, and some little articles, were found on the prisoner—after the officer had searched the carpenter's shop, he produced another piece of sugar, which corresponded with the sugar which the prisoner had—when the prisoner produced the piece of sugar from his pocket, he said, "I hope you will let me off this time; I have never been in trouble before."
Cross-examined by MR. HORRY. Q. Is this the first time you have ever told anybody that he said that? A. I do not think I mentioned that before; I am quite sure it took place—our sugar is not all like this—these other pieces were not found on the prisoner—we have a German carpenter working on the premises—we have a large quantity of sugar on the premises—the men working about there may have taken a piece of sugar to put in their beer—the German carpenter may have done it—the men are allowed sugar for their tea—we do not know that they take it for their beer—we have a number of pieces about the sugar-house—we do not spill a great deal outside the sugar-house—the prisoner came here on bail.
MR. PAYNE. Q. How many men are employed on the premises? A. Between twenty and thirty; I never knew an instance of a man being allowed to take three quarters of a pound of sugar to sweeten his beer.
COURT. Q. Was the prisoner working in the sugar-house? A. Yes; he was repairing—there are pieces of sugar lying about—they are re-melted—this is a piece of a loaf—we crush the loaves, and sell them in a powdered state, in hogsheads—this is the bottom of a loaf—it is a piece that has been chipped off by accident, I expect.
WILLIAM DAVIES (policeman, K 354). On 5th Nov., about 12 o'clock, I was called to Mr. Brandeis's sugar-factory, at Stratford, and the prisoner was given into my custody, for stealing this piece of sugar—I took him into custody—I went to the carpenter's shop, and found a piece of sugar, about three quarters of a pound, concealed under the bench where the carpenters work—I have not got that sugar here—I searched the stable, and found about one pound and a half of sugar wrapped in a handkerchief.
GEORGE ALFRED MARTIN re-examined. The prisoner did not work in the stable—the carpenter's shop is a little distance from the refiners'—the prisoner and another man worked in the carpenters' shop—no one worked in the stable; it is not occupied at all—it is ten or fifteen yards from the carpenters'
shop—the men were allowed sugar for their tea—a box was filled in the men's room, where they have tea for their use—I do not know whether the box was full that day—the German carpenter was allowed sugar for his tea; but the prisoner was an extra carpenter; he would not be allowed sugar. (The prisoner received a good character.) NOT GUILTY .
MARY HEPWORTH . I am single, and live at Stratford, with my parents. I have known the prisoner about five years—he was in the habit of visiting me at my parents' house—we kept company—he came there on 30th Oct.—there was a silver watch on the table—he was with me about half an hour—, I did not miss the watch till next morning—I was in a passion about it, as the prisoner and I had not been so friendly as usual, and I flew to the police-station, not thinking what it would come to, and I gave information against him—I took the policeman to look for him, and we found him coming out of the Pavilion—I accused him of having taken my watch, and he said he had not taken it at first, but he afterwards owned to the policeman and to me that he had taken it, and I gave him in charge, not knowing what I was doing—he bad had the watch before; be took it when he thought proper, and brought it back—if he had asked me for the watch that night I would have let him have it, or anything he had asked for—I beg you will have mercy on him.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Common Sergeant.
HENRY HOLDING . I live in London-street, Greenwich; it is my dwelling-house. On 20th Oct. between 6 and 7 o'clock in the evening, I was in my back-parlour at tea—I was informed my shop window was broken—I had seen it about the middle of the afternoon, but I cannot be distinct about that—I had come in about two hours before—I did not hear any glass break, but I went out and found the window broken, and I missed three waistcoat-pieces which I had put in the window about eleven that morning—these are two of them—I know they are mine.
Cross-examined by MR. WOOLLITT. Q. You had three such pieces as these? A. Yes; the third has not been found.
HENRY WASHBOURNE . I am apprentice to Mr. Sharp, a pawnbroker, at Deptford. On 21st Oct., between 8 and 9 o'clock in the morning, the prisoner pawned these two waistcoat-pieces for 4s., in die name of William Smith—I am sure he is the man, I knew him before.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he say he wanted to pawn them for another person? A. Yes.
HENRY BURN (policeman, 264 R). I took the prisoner on the morning of 21st Oct.—I told him he was charged with having these articles in his possession—he said he had pawned them for a seafaring man whom he did not know, who had asked him to go and pledge them for him.
Cross-examined. Q. He at once said he had pawned them, and went with you at once to the pawnbroker's? A. Yes—I do not know a person about
there who went by the nickname of Bill—there was a man of the name of Starling, who absconded the next day, and has not been seen since—I cannot say whether his name was Bill.
Witness for the Defence,
CHARLES COOK . I am the landlord of the Fountain public-house, at Greenwich. The prisoner was in my service for just upon two years—on Monday evening 20th Oct., between 6 and 7 o'clock, he was in my house at tea in the kitchen with the other servant—my house is about a mile from Mr. Holding's—the prisoner has always borne a most excellent character; I had a fifteen months' character with him—I have trusted him with large sums of money.
COURT. Q. Did you drink tea with him? A. No; I was in my parluor—I have one male and one female servant—I could see from my parlour into the room where they were—the kitchen is right opposite the parlour—I do not always watch servants; but that evening the prisoner sat just before me—my servants are generally about an hour at tea—my wife could see as well as I—she is not here.
MR. WOOLLETT. Q. The prisoner was token the next morning? A. Yes; and then my recollection was called to the preceding evening—I know a person named Stanley, he absconded the same day—he frequently came to my house. (The prisoner received a good character.)
NOT GUILTY .
66. ELIZA SHENLEY , stealing 14 spoons, 8 forks, and other articles, value 20l. 15s.; the goods of William John Smythie, Esq.; also, 3 spoons, and other articles, value 5l. 18s. 6d.; the goods of William Elgiei: to both which she pleaded
GUILTY . Aged 47.— Confined Twelve Months.
Before Mr. Recorder.
67. JOHN DAVIDSON , (a soldier)stealing 2 rings 1 breast-pin, 12 shirt-studs, and other articles, value 54l. 10s. 6d., and 1 10l. and 4 5l.—notes; the property of Charles Henry Morris, his master: to which he pleaded
GUILTY . Aged 24.— Confined Twelve Months.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. RYLAND conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM ROBINSON . I am shipping clerk in the house of Calvert and Co, brewers, of Thames-street—Edmond Sexton Pery Calvert is one of the partners. On 7th Nov. I received an order for twelve barrels of porter, which were to be sent by water—the puncheons were filled, and were sent to Hayes's wharf for shipment—they all bore Calvert's brand, and the consignee's name—in consequence of something I heard, I went with White, on 12th Nov., on board the Director, which was lying in the Commercial Docks—I found the prisoner on board, as master—I examined four puncheons and identified them as four of the twelve which had been shipped—I examined them, the corks of two of them had been disturbed—I had the corks of all four drawn, put my rod in, and found two gallons were gone from two of them, the other two were full—the master of a vessel has no privilege to break bulk under any circumstances—the beer was in such a state that there was no danger of the casks bursting.
Cross-examined by MR. CLARKSON. Q. Do yon know anything of navigating a vessel? A. No—I never went down the river in a merchantman with porter on board—I was never at Sea-reach, or off the north coast when it was blowing a gale of wind—Messrs. Calvert did not authorize such a step as giving the master of a vessel liberty to take beer from the vessel—I have had fourteen years' experience there in the shipping trade—when beer is shipped to go a long distance, we send a cooper on board to vent it, or else the confined air would burst it—this vessel was only going to Ipswich—I never went there by sea.
JAMES MAIM . I am in the service of Calvert and Co., in the shipping department—I recollect the twelve puncheons of stout being filled to go to Ipswich—they were all made up in a sound, proper state, and delivered to Groom, the lighterman, to convey to Hayes's wharf.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know who vented them? A. No; they did not require venting that I am aware of.
RICHARD GROOM . I am a lighterman. On 8th Nov. I received twelve puncheons and a barrel of stout on board my lighter—I took them to Hayes's wharf, Tooley-street—they were to go to Ipswich—I gave them in charge of the boatswain, and delivered them at Hayes's wharf.
MORRIS MAGEE . I receive shipping goods at Hayes's wharf. On Saturday, 8th Nov., a boat came there with twelve puncheons and one barrel of beer, to be shipped for Ipswich—on the Monday, four of them were shipped on board the Director, of which the prisoner was master—I was on the wharf—the prisoner assisted in stowing the goods.
RICHARD WHITE (Thames police-inspector). On Tuesday, 11th Nov., I was on duty on the river, off Rotherhithe, the Director was at anchor on the river—I boarded her, looked down the fore-hold, and saw the prisoner draw this tube out of a cask of porter—I hallooed, Halloo, you are drawing off, the beer there!" and jumped down the hold—the cask had "Felix Calvert". marked on it—the prisoner said, "I am authorized to draw off a little to keep the cask from bursting"—in his bed place, aft, I found these two stone bottles, and in a cupboard, close by his bed place, this keg full of porter—it holds a gallon—I said, "Captain, what do you say to the porter?"—he said, "It came out of the cask"—I went down the fore-hold to make further search, and found this large four-gallon cask by the forecastle—it is half full "—this bucket was close by it, with a funnel in it—this empty keg was close to the other—I said, "Captain, what do you say to this?"—he said, "I hope you will look over it"—I said, "No, I should take him before a; Magistrate for stealing the beer in the after cabin"—I found this old wornout tube (produced)—he was then taken into custody—I was present when two of the puncheons were gauged—they were deficient two gallons each—there were two other casks with Calvert's name on them.
Cross-examined. Q. The Magistrate admitted the prisoner to bail? A. Yet.
GEORGE BARNE . I come from the Custom-house. I am head clerk in the office of the Registrar-general of shipping—I produce a copy of the register, the original is in the hands of the master, and is kept at the port of entry, the date of registration is 19th Jan., 1839—I know nothing more than what this book contains.
WILLIAM ROBINSON re-examined. I know Mr. Ede, his Christian name is Charles—I know his writing and have acted upon it—I never saw him write—this is his order (produced)for this very beer, he is a porter-merchant I should say.
Cross-examined. Q. Did yon ever see him? A. Yes; I do not usually call him Charles, but he signs himself so—I have dealt with him in that name. (The prisoner received a good character,)
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Justice Maule.
MR. O'BRIEN conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN COPESTICK . I live at Maidstone, and am a general dealer. On 19th Aug., between two and three o'clock in the morning, I was in a booth, erected in a meadow, near Maidstone; there was a fair there, Ford was there sitting on the counter of the bar intoxicated—the prisoner was there—there was a pot standing at the bar, and one of them offered me to bet, and after I had drank, the prisoner said, "If I had known you were going to drink out of that pot, you should not have drank out of it"—he called me an Irishman—I turned round to Golding and asked him if I was ever called an I rishman—the prisoner struck me twice on the lips—the deceased said it was a shame to strike an old man, old enough to be his father—he said, "What have you got to do with it?" and struck him twice, somewhere about the face, I cannot say exactly where, and as he fell back on the counter, the prisoner lifted up his legs, and threw him over into the bar—the counter he fell from was between two and three feet high, and between three and four feet wide—as he fell back his legs came up, and he shoved him over—the prisoner was not drunk—I cannot say but what he had bad something to drink, because I saw him drink, but he was no way the worse for liquor—I did not remain to see Ford picked up—the prisoner went away, and I followed him—soon after he went across the fields, and I went up the high road—I was present at the Inquest, and saw the body there.
Cross-examined by MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Have you and the prisoner had any disagreement before? A. Never in my life; I never had an angry word with him—I deal in toys and eatables—I keep a stall and travel about the fairs—I have had no disagreement with the prisoner about a stall, or about, some oranges—I have not been charged with any violence—I was tried for driving a dog within the parish bounds of Maidstone, and would not pay the fine—the deceased was drunk—I do not know that he made any complaint, I did not wait—I did not see how he got up again—I was hurt myself—I made no complaint to any Magistrate.
JAMES GOLDINO . I am a fishmonger, of Maidstone. On the morning of 19th Aug., I was near a booth where the prisoner was—I saw the deceased there—I had not known him before that night—when I first saw him he was sitting on my cart, having some oysters—I afterwards saw him sitting on the counter—I saw some one touch the bottom of his legs and give him a bit of a push, and he felt back over the counter—I helped to pick him up, and carry him out—he was lying a little leaning on his right side—Charles Waller helped to pick him up, we both took hold of bis arms and carried him, he could not walk—we placed him on some straw inside the booth—he complained and said he had lost the use of bis right side—we left him in Mr. Hickman's care—I saw him lying on the straw once afterwards—I did not see him again till I saw his body at the Inquest—I saw the prisoner about a yard and a half, or two yards from deceased at the time he fell over—he was in front of the bar.
Cross-examined. Q. Was Trice tipsy? A. I took him to be in Hquor—the deceased was very tipsy when he was at my cart eating oysters—there was a good deal of quarrelling going on—Mr. Copestick was arguing; that is about the same thing as quarrelling, as I understand it—they were having very high words—I saw no blows—I do not know whether the prisoner did or did' not push the deceased.
CHARLES WALLER . I was in this booth, near Maidstone, and saw the prisoner there and Ford—I was employed by Mr. Hickman outside the booth—I stepped to the front of it, hearing some argument and saw Ford there—I saw Trice hit him once with one fist on the head, but I thought the second blow missed him—Ford was sitting on the bar table—Trice took him by the legs and threw him over into the bar—I assisted in lifting him over the bar—he said he was a murdered man, he was killed—I thought he was drunk—I did not think he was much hurt, from the manner in which he was thrown over—in lifting him I touched his shoulder, and he complained very much; he could not bear to be moved in any way—I went and knocked his mate up in the barge on the river—I saw Ford next morning—he did not appear so well, and I started for a surgeon.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you see whether Ford struck Trice? A. I know there was a dispute, but was not there soon enough to see whether he struck him—he appeared rather quarrelsome; he had been drinking—I did not see him lift his fist when he was struck—he fell rather sideways on the bar-table, and he was struck at or hit a second time before he had time to make any resistance—there were about a score of people there—it was 2 o'clock in the morning, and most of them were drunk.
JOHN DAVIS . I am a surgeon, of Guy's Hospital. About 22nd or 23rd Aug. the deceased was brought there—I was not present when he was brought—I examined him, and found he had sustained some injury at the back part of the neck—his left side was paralysed, but not so much as his right—paralysis would be a consequence of injury to the vertebrae of the neck—he remained under my care till 1st Oct.—the paralysis was very unfavourable, but he seemed partially to recover from it—Mr. Nason afterwards had the care of him—on the post-mortem examination I found the four vertebrae of the neck had been partly dislocated, and were pressing on the spinal cord—the intestines contained a quantity of aqueous matter, which accounted for the diarrhoea; and the kidneys and passage to the bladder were in a very unhealthy state—I attribute his death to the injuries sustained, and the consequent loss of nervous action—the diarrhoea was the proximate cause of death, and the blood mixed with the urine.
Cross-examined. Q. Who attended him first? A. He was attended by a surgeon at Maidstone—it might have been as well not to have brought him up from Maidstone, but he dues not appear to have sustained any injury: the symptoms would be aggravated by it, unless very great care was taken—I should never recommend a person to be taken down to Maidstone in that state—I do not know how he was brought, I found him in the hospital.
RICHARD NASON . I am a surgeon, attending Guy's Hospital. The deceased was placed under my care on 1st Oct.—he died on 21st from diarrhoea, and from passing an immense quantity of blood with his urine, and from exhaustion—I attribute the blood in the urine to paralysis of the bladder—I was present at the post-mortem examination, and consider that the par.
Cross-examined. Q. Was Trice tipsy? A. I took him to be in Hquor—the deceased was very tipsy when he was at my cart eating oysters—there was a good deal of quarrelling going on—Mr. Copestick was arguing; that is about the same thing as quarrelling, as I understand it—they were having very high words—I saw no blows—I do not know whether the prisoner did or did' not push the deceased.
CHARLES WALLER . I was in this booth, near Maidstone, and saw the prisoner there and Ford—I was employed by Mr. Hickman outside the booth—I stepped to the front of it, hearing some argument and saw Ford there—I saw Trice hit him once with one fist on the head, but I thought the second blow missed him—Ford was sitting on the bar table—Trice took him by the legs and threw him over into the bar—I assisted in lifting him over the bar—he said he was a murdered man, he was killed—I thought he wai drunk—I did not think he was much hurt, from the manner in which he was thrown over—in lifting him I touched his shoulder, and he complained very much; he could not bear to be moved in any way—I went and knocked his mate up in the barge on the river—I saw Ford next morning—he did not appear so well, and I started for a surgeon.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you see whether Ford struck Trice? A. I know there was a dispute, but was not there soon enough to see whether he struck him—he appeared rather quarrelsome; he had been drinking—I did not see him lift his fist when he was struck—he fell rather sideways on the bar-table, and he was struck at or hit a second time before he had time to make any resistance—there were about a score of people there—it was 2 o'clock in the morning, and most of them were drunk.
JOHN DAVIS . I am a surgeon, of Guy's Hospital. About 22nd or 23rd Aug. the deceased was brought there—I was not present when he was brought—I examined him, and found he had sustained some injury at the back part of the neck—his left side was paralysed, but not so much as his right—paralysis would be a consequence of injury to the vertebrae of the neck—he remained under my care till 1st Oct.—the paralysis was very unfavourable, but he seemed partially to recover from it—Mr. Nason afterwards had the care of him—on the post-mortem examination I found the four vertebrae of the neck had been partly dislocated, and were pressing on the spinal cord—the intestines contained a quantity of aqueous matter, which accounted for the diarrhoea; and the kidneys and passage to the bladder were in a very unhealthy state—I attribute hie death to the injuries sustained, and the consequent loss of nervous action—the diarrhoea was the proximate cause of death, and the blood mixed with the urine.
Cross-examined. Q. Who attended him first? A. He was attended by a surgeon at Maidstone—it might have been as well not to have brought him up from Maidstone, but he dues not appear to have sustained any injury: the symptoms would be aggravated by it, unless very great care was taken—I should never recommend a person to be taken down to Maidstone in that state—I do not know how he was brought, I found him in the hospital.
RICHARD NASON . I am a surgeon, attending Guy's Hospital. The deceased was placed under my care on 1st Oct.—he died on 21st from diarrhoea, and from passing an immense quantity of blood with his urine, and from exhaustion—I attribute the blood in the urine to paralysis of the bladder—I was present at the post-mortem examination, and consider that the paralysis
arose from pressure on the spinal cord, the cause of which undoubtedly was an injury—it would arise from injury to the vertebrae.
(The prisoner received a good character.)
GUILTY . Aged 26.— Confined Three Months.
Before Lord Chief Justice Campbell.
GUILTY . Aged 29.— Transported for Seven Years,
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
JOHN JUKES (policeman V 155.) On 31st Oct. I went to 1, Gloucester-villas, Richmond-hill—I found these articles in a box there, of which the prisoner had given me the key—here is a pair of slippers, a silver pencil-case, two books, a muslin apron, and some remnants of lace—the prisoner had obtained a situation there—I have shown these things to Mr. Thrupp.
Cross-examined by MR. BALLANTINE. Q. The prisoner was taken up and charged with giving a false character? A. Yes; she was fined 20l., or to be imprisoned for three months—that was on 8th Nov.—I searched her box, and went to Mr. Thrupp—he was very unwilling to come forward—he did not accuse me of trapping him into this—this 20l. is still hanging over this girl's head—if she gets out of this she is to have the three months for the other.
ROBERT THRUPP . I live at Bushy-heath. The prisoner was in my service about twelve months—I think she left me in July—there is merely one piece of silk here that I can identify by its matching the piece it came from—this pencil-case I know.
Cross-examined. Q. Just show me the piece of silk that you know? A. This is it; it had been made up—I never intended to have made this charge—I refused to give the prisoner a character—I certainly said I did not wish to press the charge—my wife considered she was saucy, and I spoke angrily to her—she left of her own accord, and endeavoured to get a character from me and my wile, which we refused—I know she was sentenced to three months.
HARRIET ANN THRUPP . I am the wife of the last witness. The prisoner was in my service—I remember the policeman coming and bringing these articles—I can swear to them all—they are my property—I had seen these slippers perhaps about two months before—they cost half-a-crown—they have never been worn.
GUILTY. Aged 17. —Recommended to mercy by the Jury.—Judgment respited.
PIGOT pleaded GUILTY . Aged 17.— Confined Twelve Months.—
FREEMAN pleaded GUILTY . Aged 22.
WILLIAMS pleaded GUILTY . Aged 32.
Confined Six Months.
GUILTY . Aged 20.— Confined Six Months.
MESSRS. CLERK and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZABETH SIMS . I was at my uncle's, the Queen's Head, at Putney On 15th Nov., at a little after 6 o'clock that evening, the prisoner Fowler came—he asked for 11/2 d. worth of rum—I served him, and he gave me a half-crown—I called my uncle, and gave it to him, and he said it was bad—Fowler opened the door, and ran away.
LIONEL HODDER (policeman, V 52). I was on duty—I received information from Mr. Sims, and went across the fields in the direction of Wandsworth—I saw the prisoners together, and watched them—they went into a beer shop together, and stopped a few minutes—they came out together, and went towards Kingston—they asked me, and a man who was with me, the direction to London—they then passed a Mr. Sims, a baker's, went into the dark, and I saw something pass from Bennett to Fowler—they then came back to Mr. Sims, the baker's shop, and Fowler went in, and Bennett stayed outside—Fowler had a twopenny loaf given him, and I saw him put down a shilling—I saw Mrs. Sims draw the till out, and put the shilling down in a place by itself—as Boon as Fowler left the shop, I went in—I saw Mrs. Sims open the till, and take the shilling from where she had put it in the front of the till—there was other silver there, but it laid at the back of the till—after I had got the shilling, I followed the prisoners, and took Fowler—I said it was for uttering a bad half-crown at Putney, and a bad shilling at Mr. Sims's—he said, "I know nothing of it"—I found three good sixpences on him, and fourpence in copper—this is the half-crown I received from Mrs. Sime.
Fowler. Q. Did you say anything to me before you went to Wandiworth T A. No.
ELIZA SIMS . My husband keeps a baker's shop, at Wandsworth. On 15th Nov., Fowler came and asked for a twopenny loaf—he gave me a shilling, which I put in the front part of the till—I do not believe there was other money near it—the officer came in, and asked me for the shilling—I opened the till and I think there was one shilling by itself—I could not say positively—I believe the shilling I gave the constable was the one that Fowler gave me—I looked at it particularly, as I thought at first it was a bad one.
Fowler. Q. Did you not state that it was your belief that the shilling I gave you was a good one? A. No; I said the same as I do now—there was another man in the shop—I did not take any other money—I did not put any other money in the till till the constable came in—there were other shillings in the till; I cannot say how many—I looked at this shilling before I put it in the till—I thought it was bad, and then I thought it was good.
THOMAS OATLEY (policeman, V 190). I was present when Bennett was taken, just at the foot of the hill going into Wands worth, about 8 o'clock in the evening—the next morning, between 9 and 10, I went to that spot, and found three half-crowns and five shillings, all wrapped in separate papers. and the whole pinned up in this black rag—I was at the station when the prisoners were in separate cells—I heard Fowler call to Bennett, and say, "What the b y hell did you get us shoved in here for?"—Bennett said, "I don't know"—Fowler said, "I should like to write home; how shall I get to write home?"—Bennett said, "You say nothing."
WILLIAM WEBSTER . I am inspector of coin to the Royal Mint. This shilling and half-crown that were uttered are bad—in the wrapper here are three half-crowns of Victoria, 1845—they are from the tame mould at the
one that was uttered—here are three shillings of George the Third, 1820, from one mould, and two of Victoria from one mould—they are all bad.
Fowler's Defence. I get my living by selling things in the street; I had taken the shilling by selling poultry; I know not whether it was bad or good; when I was taken I went back with the officer to the baker's shop; he took a shilling out of his pocket; whether it was the one that I uttered I cannot tell, nor can any one else; it had been out of the till ten minutes, or more, and he might have had other silver in his pocket; he insisted on Mrs. Sims marking that shilling; she said she did not know whether it was the tame; he said, "Never mind whether it is the same or no, you mark it," and she did; I know nothing of this prisoner, except that he asked me the way to London, and he followed me up the Kingston-road: the coin that was found sixteen hours afterwards I know nothing of; I did call out; what I said was, "Old fellow, what have they shoved me in here for?" he said he did not know, but it appeared it was for passing bad money; I said I should wish to write home, which I did wish, as I did not know whether it was bad or good; I know nothing of the half-crown being bad.
FOWLER— GUILTY . Aged 35.— Confined Six Months.
BENNETT— GUILTY . * Aged 25.— Confined Twelve Months.
MESSRS. CLERK and POLAND conducted the Prosecution. THOMAS TOWERSEY (policeman, M 237). On 30th Oct. I was on duty in the Old Kent-road—about 7 o'clock in the evening I saw the three prisoners, but Williams and Simpson were together first—they walked along looking into different shops, and Reynolds was on the other side of the way—I followed Williams and Simpson from twenty minutes to half an hour to the Bricklayers' Arms station—they stopped a minute, and then walked on very fast towards New Cross—about 150 yards from the Green Man public-house Reynolds joined them, and they walked about 250 yards towards New Cross—I still followed them—Williams went in front about thirty or forty yards—she then walked behind them—I went on as far as the Kentish Drovers, when I met two constables in uniform (I was in plain clothes)—I then stopped Reynolds, and asked him what he had about him—he said, "Nothing"—Simpson was stopped by a constable in uniform—their pockets were searched at the place where they were taken, but nothing was found—just as I had done searching Reynolds's pockets, Williams came along on the same side of the way—when she got within about two yards of us she crossed the road—I followed, and took her by both her wrists—I asked her what she had got—she said, "Nothing"—she tried to put her left hand behind her—I took it, opened it, and found something wrapped up—I said, "I thought you said you had got nothing?"—she said, "You have got it now"—I opened the parcel at the station, and found it contained these eleven shillings and four sixpences—I searched Reynolds again, and found two good shillings on him and 1s. on Simpson.
WILLIAM WEBSTER . Six of these shillings are of George III., 1820, and from one mould—one is of Victoria, 1844; and four of Victoria, 1846; all counterfeit—these sixpences are counterfeit, and two of them are of George III., and from the same mould.
WILLIAMS— GUILTY . Aged 29.
SIMPSON— GUILTY . Aged 26.
REYNOLDS— GUILIY . Aged 25.
Confined Twelve Months.
MESSES. CLERK and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
ANN THOMAS . My husband keeps a chandler's shop in Weymouth-street, New Kent-road. On 81st Oct., about 8 o'clock, a person came to my shop—the prisoner's is the nearest face I have ever seen—she asked for a bundle of wood, and tendered a 5s.—piece; I gave her 4s. 9d. change—I held the crown in my hand—I found it was bad, and asked my husband to look at it—I put it in my drawer, and gave it to the policeman on 4th Nov.—I went to the station in the Walworth-road, and saw three women there—the prisoner was one; she was standing in the middle of the other two—she is the nearest face I ever saw—I know the face from the auburn hair, the red hair, carroty hair, and her being pox-marked.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Q. You think the prisoner is very-like that person? A. Yes; the crown remained in my drawer from 81st Oct. till 4th Nov.—the drawer was not locked—there was nothing else in the drawer but two bad sixpences—the police-sergeant came on the morning of 4th Nov., he told me he had a person at the station, would I come and see whether it was like the same person—he did not tell me what sort of a person it was—one of the other women who was there looked like a widow—the other was a young woman, she was shorter than the person who gave me the crown.
MR. CLERK. Q. Do you believe the prisoner to have been the woman who brought you the crown? A. Yes; I have no doubt about it in my own mind.
GEOROE QUINNEAR (police-sergeant, 16). I produce a counterfeit crown which I received from Mrs. Thomas on 4th Nov.—the prisoner being in custody, 1 fetched Mrs. Thomas, and before she entered the station I placed the prisoner with two other females—when Mrs. Thomas came in she picked out the prisoner at once as the person who had uttered the crown—she did not hesitate at all.
Cross-examined. You told her you wanted her to come to recognise some person? Yes; I did not tell her what sort of a person—I told her there was a person in custody, I wished her to come and see whether she could recognise the person who uttered the crown-piece.
RICHARD BOOR . I am a grocer, and live in Richmond-street, Walworth. On Tuesday, 4th Nov., the prisoner came, about 8 o'clock in the morning—she asked for an ounce of tea, and half a pound of sugar—she tendered in payment a counterfeit half-crown—I proceeded across to the other counter to detect it—she exclaimed, "If it is a bad one, don't detect it; give it me back"—I asked her where she lived—she said, "In George-street, round the corner"—George-street is directly opposite my shop—she said her husband had given it to her—I offered to go with her to her husband, and I left the shop with that intention—she said she would lead me a dance, or something to that effect—I met a policeman, and gave her into custody, with the half-crown.
Cross-examined. Q. You were going with her to her husband? A. I went out with that intention; I have never seen him yet—she was a perfect stranger to me.
(The prisoners statement before the Magistrate was here read:—"The prisoner says 'I would not have tried the half-crown if I had known it was
bad; the reason I told him not to detect it was, I thought my husband would know where he took it; he said he would go to my husband; I said he would have a long way to go; I never saw Mrs. Thomas.
(The prisoner received a good character.)
GUILTY of uttering the half-crown. Aged 22.— Confined Four Months.
Before Mr. Recorder.
JAMES THORNDIKE (City policeman, 875). On 11th Nov. I was on duty on London bridge, at 5 minutes before six o'clock in the morning—I saw a butcher's cart pass me—the prisoner and the deceased were in it—the prisoner was driving it with reins—he was going twelve or fourteen miles an hour, as near as I can say—they were trotting—there were other carts on the bridge—the prisoner was going towards the Borough—I watched the cart, because it was driving so fast—it ran against the right side of a four-wheeled wagon, which turned the cart over, and both the men were thrown out—the wagon stood close against the kerb-stone on the left hand side, coming into the City—there was another wagon with three horses in the centre of the road; and instead of his passing it on the right side, he went on the driver's side—I went up, and found the deceased lying on his belly on the road bleeding from the left ear—he was not sensible—I got a board and took him to the hospital—it was just beginning to be daybreak—it was dark.
Prisoner. Q. Was the four-wheeled van, that my cart-wheel went over the axletrees of, close to the kerb? A. It might not be quite close to it, but it was not a foot off it—it was not four feet off.
JAMES GRAINGER . I am a carman, and live at Stoke Newington. On Tuesday morning, 11th Nov., I was coming over London-bridge towards the City, driving a light four-wheeled van with a horse in a rein—I was on the near-side, about a foot and a half, or it might be two feet, from the kerb—when I got just over the top of the bridge, I saw the butcher's cart coming over the bridge towards the Borough, meeting me—it was driving at a very fast rate indeed, at the rate of twelve or fourteen miles an hour; a very fast trot—there were two men in it—it was on the wrong side, and on the off-side of my van—there was another wagon before me—he passed on the near-side of that—I cannot say whether there was room for him to pass on his proper side of that—it was rather dark—after he had passed that wagon, I think if he had been going at a steady rate he would have cleared my van; but his horse was going at such a rate he could not stop it—his wheel ran over my fore-wheel, and caught my hind-wheel, and that turned him over—both the men in the cart were thrown out.
Prisoner. Q. How near were you to the cart? A. Within, about two feet—I moved my van on after the accident, to let others pass me, but as to going any nearer the kerb, I do not think I was an inch nearer—you were going at such a rate that I do not think your horse was within your power, but if you had been going a steady rate you might have cleared me.
COURT. Q. Was the horse running loose? A. No; but he was coming at such a rate that the horse had got the power of him just for a moment—the prisoner was taken to the hospital—I did not see whether the wagon that was before me had struck him.
WILLIAM COYLE DOBSON . I am a surgeon, of St. Thomas's Hospital—William Stopford was brought there—I saw him first on 11th Nov., about six in the morning—I examined him and saw it was necessay for him to come
into the hospital at once—he was bleeding from the ear, and he had a scalp wound just over the left ear—he was sensible at the time, but I knew be would shortly become insensible, and he was taken into the hospital—he had a fractured collar-bone, and complained of great pain in his chest, that would proceed from the fracture of the collar-bone, and of the ribs which we discovered at the post-mortem—he became insensible very shortly after he was taken in, and died on the following Sunday—he recovered his senses, but very imperfectly—he knew his wife—that was the only person he did know—he saw her shortly after he came in, just before he became insensible—I examined his body after death—it was generally healthy—I discovered fracture at the base of the skull, broken ribs, and broken collar-bone—the fracture at the base of the skull was the principal, and there was a great quantity of blood effused in the chest—the fracture was deep in the skull, and was not visible outwardly—it was within the ear as it were, and that would account for the bleeding of the ear—there was blood effused on the brain—in my judgment the cause of his death was that blood on the brain, and the effusion of blood in the chest, which compressed the lungs—those injuries were such as might be occasioned by a fall from a cart—I saw the prisoner, he was shaken and slightly bruised—nothing more—I sent him out immediately.
COURT to JAMES THORNDIKE. Q. Had the man any whip? A. I cannot tell—I did not see him whipping the horse—at the time he passed me the horse was not pulling the reins—the prisoner was not doing anything to urge the horse on—he is a spirited horse—it belongs to Mr. Fowles, of Bermondsey, the prisoner's master—he is not here.
JURY to JAMBS GRAINGER. Q. When you saw the cart coming, was he any distance from you? A. About twenty yards—he had passed a wagon and three horses—I did not see that he was forcing the horse at all—it was going a very fast trot.
Prisoner's Defence. I had to drive the horse sometimes, but I did not agree to drive it, only to look after it; my master generally drove it; I tried my best that morning to keep the horse in; I walked him round by the Monument; he had only been trotting a few minutes.
GUILTY . Aged 23.— Confined Seven Days.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, DECEMBER 16TH. 1851.