CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
CARDEN, MAYOR. FIFTH 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—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, February 22nd, 1858.
PRESENT—The Right Hon. the LORD MAYOR; Mr. RECORDER; Mr. Ald. WIRE; Mr. Ald. CARTER; and Mr. Ald. ROSE.
Before Mr. Recorder and the First Jury.
MR. THOMPSON conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN MARINAS BICKER CAARTEN , Esq. (Barrister-at-law). I have with me some papers in a cause of Clark v. Judkins, which was referred to me for arbitration—I produce the particulars of demand in the action, and one letter; that is the only letter—this is the order of reference—I have not got the summons—on 12th Nov. there was a meeting, at which the defendant was examined—he was sworn on the New Testament—I produce the papers which are in my possession, but I would take his Lordship's opinion whether I am bound to give any evidence of what took place, before me as arbitrator; I believe it has been held that it is a matter for the arbitrator's discretion, and, if he wishes it, the Court will not compel him to give any information of any thing that transpires before him—I think there is a case to that effect in 3 Carrington and Payne; besides, this can be proved by other witnesses—(THE RECORDER was of opinion that the evidence must be given, the note taken by the arbitrator being the best and most satisfactory evidence of what passed before him).
COURT. Q. Refreshing your memory by your note, are you able to tell us what evidence the defendant gave? A. This lasted over eight meetings, occupying a great number of hours on each occasion, a great number of witnesses being examined; and I certainly should not like to pledge myself as to any particular evidence that was given—I see what I have here, and I have no doubt it is correct—my note is, "I know Wright—I know nothing
except from hearsay; I have no knowledge of any transaction with Mr. Wright"—I have not the words, "in any way"—that is the whole of the examination, with respect to Wright's account, on that occasion—in his re-examination he said, "The letter of 7th March, 1857, I have only seen to-day."
JAMES BARNARD SECKER . I am a law stationer. I was employed by Mr. Greaves, a law stationer, of Castle Street, to take notes of the evidence on this reference, on one day only; that was on 12th Nov.—I heard the defendant examined with respect to Wright's account.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Are those the original minutes that you took? A. They are; they are not in short-hand.
MR. THOMPSON. Q. Read it. A. "I do not know any thing about Wright's account, except by hearsay; I have no knowledge of any transaction with Wright in any way."
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Had you any communication with Mr. Clark before you went to take notes? A. Yes, I had, before entering Mr. Caarten's chambers—he told me that he wanted me to take notes in this matter—he did not say that he hoped to be able to prosecute Mr. Judkins for perjury, nothing of the kind—he said he wished to have a copy of the evidence—to my knowledge, no person was present when this conversation took place—(THE RECORDER was of opinion that this evidence was too slight to sustain the allegation of perJury.)
NOT GUILTY .
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Eighteen Months.
PLEADED GUILTY , and received a good character.— Confined Four Months.
MR. ORRIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
HENRY RALPH . I am clerk to Mr. Younghusband, a carrier, of the Old Bailey. These studs (produced) are mine; I had them in my coat pocket, about 9th or 10th Jan., which I left in the office—I missed them three or four days afterwards—I saw them next at the Fortune of War public house, at the corner of Giltspur Street—Mr. Younghusband gave the prisoner into custody.
Cross-examined by MR. TALFOURD SALTER. Q. Were you in the habit of leaving your coat every night? A. Yes—the place where it was hanging does not communicate with the yard; you go out of the yard up a flight of stairs—I was in the habit of putting the studs into my pocket, and therefore, I presume, I had them there—I do not recollect putting them there on that
particular occasion—I cannot say whether they might not have been dropped in the stable yard—it is near a cab stand.
MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Do the carters come into the office? A. No, unless it is to ask a question—the prisoner was able to go into the office at any time.
ISABELLA HOUGH . I am the wife of William Hough, who keeps the Fortune of War, Smithfield. I know the prisoner, by his coming in sometimes—he came there on the Thursday before he appeared at the Police Court, about 11 o'clock in the morning; he took these studs out of his pocket, and asked if he could have a raffle; I said that I would inquire, and he left them—I said that it was a pity for him to raffle them; he said that he did not want them, for he picked them up at the cab stand in the Old Bailey—he brought this bill (produced) with him, and it was exhibited in the bar—(This was a raffle paper, representing the studs as the property of Mr. Bolton.)
Cross-examined. Q. Might he have said that he picked them up by the cab stand in the Old Bailey? A. Yes; he said, "I have picked them up at the cab stand in the Old Bailey."
JOHN CHURCH (City policeman, 257). On 1st Feb., I took the prisoner into custody—I told him the charge—he said that he found the studs in Mr. Younghusband's yard, No. 23, Old Bailey—he gave me his correct address.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. ORRIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM HUTSON . I live at No. 18, Toogood's Rents, Holborn, and work occasionally for Mr. Younghusband, in the Old Bailey. On Thursday, 21st Jan., between 8 and 9 o'clock in the morning, I was working in one of his lofts, waiting till my mate came out from breakfast—I could see from there into the stable, and saw the prisoner there; Bolton was sweeping the manger—he took a four bushel sack and filled it with corn and chaff out of the manger, and put it on the fore part of a wagon which Chapman was the driver of; but I did not know his name—I saw Chapman give some silver and halfpence into Bolton's hands—Bolton did not see me, but on the following Monday he told me to come up and clean the stable out, and he would give me 1s.; and while I was doing so, he said, "Did Stumpey take notice of that sack of corn that was on the fore part of the wagon?" I said that I did not know—he said, "If he got up and looked at it he would have bowled me out."
Cross-examined by MR. TALFOURD SALTER. Q. At what time was this conversation? A. Between 5 and 6 o'clock in the morning; the men were not there then—I had not told Bolton any thing about what I had seen—I told my tale at the police station, and also at Guildhall—I told Stumpey on the Saturday, ten days afterwards, what I had seen Bolton do—Stumpey was there till the 30th, but I am only there now and then, two days a week; Thursday and Saturday are my days—I had been there between the day Bolton took the chaff and the day I told Stumpey, but I did not tell him before, because I waited to see my master—I have not been accused of stealing corn—there are other men there, but they could not go to the stable—the corn was taken from the manger in the stable—this was market morning, and the men did not come to work till 9 o'clock—Stumpey was engaged with me, and would be with me when I was cutting chaff in the loft—no one was with me on this occasion—Stumpey expected to come to me at the time the manger
was swept—I believe he is considered an honest man—his time to return was half-past 8 o'clock, but he was a few minutes after—it was about half-past 8 o'clock that I saw the manger swept, just at the time Stumpey was expected to come back—from the stable to the loft you have to go up stairs by Mr. Younghusband's office—I was looking down the place where they put the hay up, and could see all over the stable—I was sitting down, and I could see the faces of the men in the stable, and they could see mine if they were looking that way—Bolton never turned round towards me at all; he kept his back to me all the time—it is usual to sweep the manger night and morning—nothing is put into the manger but hay and corn—I had known Bolton about three weeks—I have been there ten or twelve weeks—I cannot say how long he has been there.
MR. ORRIDGE. Q. After this conversation, did you see your master for some days? A. No, I did not tell him at all; I told the man who cuts the chaff.
Chapman. Q. Do you remember my coming into the public house and asking you whether you wanted a job for half an hour? A. Yes, I had never seen you before—I went and helped you to load the dung, and you gave me 6d.
JOSEPH TAYLOR YOUNGHUSBAND . I am a carrier in the Old Bailey. Bolton was my night watchman and horse keeper, and was employed in the stable—Chapman came from parties who contracted with me to take away manure; he had no right to take any thing else—Bolton had no right to give him corn or chaff.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you seen Chapman in the yard? A. Yes, engaged in loading manure—Bolton has been with me seventeen or eighteen months as watchman—Stumpey has been some time with me.
WILLIAM HOLLOWAY . I am a farmer, of East Ham. Chapman was in my employ—I sent him every Thursday to Mr. Younghusband's for manure—on Thursday, Jan. 21st, I saw him return; he threw his bait sack off the wagon just as I walked into the yard—I asked him what he had got there; he said that it was part of his bait, that he had put his horses into the stable of Mr. Younghusband, and there was some chaff and stuff in the manger which they ate, and they did not want his bait.
Cross-examined. Q. What is the distance from your place to his? A. Nine or ten miles—no one else was sent with him—he has been with me about three months—there was not a bushel of bait in the sack when he brought it home, therefore it could not be what was stolen from Mr. Younghusband.
Chapman. There were two bushels, I dare say.
COURT. Q. Did you give him money to pay for the manure at the time? A. No, and the bait he takes from home with him.
COURT to WILLIAM HUTSON. Q. You say that he filled the corn and chaff into the sack; was the sack full? A. Yes.
Chapman's Defence. What the man gave me I took innocently, and gave it to my horses.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. ORRIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
my mark, "Y.S.," which means Younghusband and Son—they are pieces of my harness, and have been wrenched off—these envelopes have "Great Western Railway, Superintendent's Office," upon them—they are supplied to me as agent, and were kept in my desk, in my office—it was not the prisoner's duty to be in the office at night, but he came in in the morning to light the fires.
Cross-examined by MR. TALFOURD SALTER. Q. How many envelopes are there here? A. Eighteen—there are only three agents besides myself—I have used harness with these marks on it eight or nine years—I have had harness worn out during that period, but we always remove the brass on our own premises when we sell the harness—these pieces belong to a back band—this is a very old piece, but here is a very new piece—this piece does not suggest to me that it has belonged to old harness; the initials look new, and I should say it is nearly a new plate—I have forty men in my employ—I have never seen pieces of brass lying about the yard—the pieces, when taken off the harness, are put into my office—the harness maker takes them off and gives them to me—these are a superior sort of envelopes, and I have been particularly careful of them, and never left them on my desk to my knowledge—on 30th Jan. the prisoner was suspended when I paid him his wages, and the things were found at his house on the following Monday night.
MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Did you suspend him on Saturday night? A. Yes, in consequence of a quantity of property being stolen—I never sold any brass, but my father has; he died last June.
JURY. Q. Did you lock your desk? A. Generally; I might have left it open by accident—I found no attempt to break it open.
Cross-examined. Q. Where was he when he told yon that? A. At the Smithfield station.
WILLIAM JAMES BAILEY (City policeman, 271). On 21st Feb., I went to No. 3, Perry Street, Somers Town, and in the first floor front room I found the things produced, the envelopes in a drawer, and the brass in a bundle, in a cupboard in the same room.
Cross-examined. Q. Was there a woman there? A. Yes, she represented herself as his wife, and there was a child there.
Cross-examined. Q. How long have you known him? A. Seven or eight years; he lived with me five years and a half, and went from me to Mr. Younghusband's.
COURT. Q. Was he in your employment? A. No, he lodged with me, and I always believed him to be an honest, respectable man, and for what I know, he was in respectable employment. (The witness having made this statement, MR. ORRIDGE called the following witness at an earlier stage of the case than usual):—
Mr. Younghusband stated that he had been robbed to the extent of 70l. during January alone, and that the prisoner was the only watchman on duty at night.
Four Years Penal Servitude .
290. SARAH TIZZARD (24) , Stealing 1 guard chain, value 3l.; the property of Charles Cox and another, to which she PLEADED GUILTY. There were two similar indictments against the prisoner, to which she pleaded NOT GUILTY. MR. HORRY, for the prisoner, stated that she had already been sentenced by a Magistrate on those charges, which was the reason she pleaded Not Guilty to them. Samuel Henry Taylor, her brother-in-law, gave her a good character, stated that her husband had deserted her and her child, and that her father would take care of her in future.—Judgment Respited .
NEW COURT.—Monday, February 22nd, 1858.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. FINNIS; Mr. Ald. WIRE; Mr. Ald. CARTER; and Mr. COMMON SERJEANT.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant and the Fifth Jury.
291. CHARLES TUCKER (32) , Unlawfully obtaining, by false pretences, an order for 5l., of Edward Sanders; also, Stealing 1 coat, value 4l., the goods of William Bramwell; having been before convicted: to which he
PLEADED GUILTY .— Four Years Penal Servitude .
MESSRS. SLEIGH and BAILEY conducted the Prosecution.
BEALE FREDERICK FRENCH . I am a solicitor, and reside in Amherst Road, Hackney. I have a place of business in the city. On 2nd Feb., I was returning from my place of business to the neighbourhood of my own residence—it was about half-past 7 o'clock—there were lamps lighted, and it was a very light night in consequence of the great fall of snow—Amherst Road is a very wide road, and winds round with a gradual curve—I saw the prisoner coming—I should say I saw him 150 yards off—I was near a turn when the prisoner came parallel with me—he was on the same footpath with me, and within a yard of me, and he turned and fired a pistol at me, as he was in the act of passing me—I felt my jaw struck, and three of my teeth were knocked out—I had never seen the prisoner before—I put my hand to my face, and the prisoner stood there while I did so—I cried "Police!" and the prisoner ran away, and I pursued him—he did not stop to assist me—he was taken by a policeman very shortly afterwards—I am sure the prisoner turned slightly towards me when he fired—I had not spoken to him—nothing had passed between us—we had not knocked against one another—I do not think any one was by at the time—I cannot say that I saw the pistol—the prisoner never uttered a word—when I found I was shot, I called "Police!" and he ran away.
WILLIAM POCOCK (Policeman, N 432). I was on duty in Amherst Road, I heard the discharge of a pistol—I was proceeding in that direction, and met the prisoner running, pursued by Mr. French—I stopped the prisoner, and Mr. French came up and charged him with shooting him—I took the prisoner to the station, and Mr. French came and made the charge—I was about to go back, as Mr. French told me he saw him throw something away, but the prisoner put his hand into his left trousers pocket, took out this pistol, and said, "Here it is; there is nothing thrown away"—I cautioned the prisoner that any thing he might say would be taken down in writing, and might be used in evidence against him—he said he was only trying the pistol—I found
on him a knife, powder, some shot and percussion caps—I know nothing of the prisoner.
COURT. Q. Did you ask the prisoner his name and address? A. Yes; and he gave them correctly—he was perfectly sober—he was excited—he had been running very fast.
ALEXANDER WILLIAMSON (Police inspector, N). I was at Hackney station when the prisoner was brought there—I took the charge—I gave him the usual caution—he said, "I quarrelled with my mother, and came out to try the pistol, but I did not intend to shoot the gentleman; I did not see him coming round the corner"—I am not well acquainted with the place where this took place.
CHARLES JOSEPH TOMKINS . I am a surgeon, and live in Medina Villas. On 2nd Feb., a little before 8 o'clock the prosecutor was brought to me—I examined him; he was bleeding profusely from the lower lip and jaw; after washing his face, I found the marks of seventeen shots on the right side of the lower jaw and cheek; some of them had lodged in his face, one or more had perforated his jaw, three teeth had been broken short off in the lower jaw, one shot had separated the gum from the jaw, and had lodged in the opposite side—the shots produced are of the same size as the one I extracted—the wound was a severe one—I saw the marks of powder on the right side of his cheek and nose—they were very much marked with powder—I think the pistol must have been fired off very close to him, still the contents of the pistol were scattered about wide—in all probability the injury had been inflicted by a pistol like this—I did not apprehend that the prosecutor was in danger, he was in very great pain—there was very great loss of blood—if erysipelas comes on it may be dangerous.
COURT. Q. Are these shots large enough to kill a person? A. Yes—if the wound had been a little lower down it would have gone into the carotid artery, and if a little higher it might have gone into the temple.
COURT to WILLIAM POCOCK. Q. Do you know the spot where this took place? A. Yes; there is no corner there; it is a gentle curve; no person could be concealed from another at the distance of one yard, nor at the distance of ten yards.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate was here read as follows: "I did not intend to do it."
(The prisoner received a good character for kindness and humanity.)
GUILTY .— Confined Two Years .
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, February 23rd, 1858.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. FARNCOMBE; Sir JAMES DUKE, Bart., Ald.; and Mr. RECORDER.
Before Mr. Recorder and the Second Jury.
MR. RIBTON conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM PRICE . I am a member of the Stock Exchange. On 19th Feb., I was in Angel Court, Throgmorton Street, about half past 2 o'clock; just passing through the gateway, I found some one very close behind me, which excited my suspicion—I put my hand to my pocket, to see if every thing was
safe, and found the prisoner close behind me; he held my handkerchief to me, and said that I had dropped it, and he had picked it up; it was safe two minutes before—I laid hold of the prisoner, and gave him into custody.
Cross-examined by MR. PLATT. Q. Are you quite sure that you had put it into your pocket again? A. I feel sure of it in my own mind—I had a coat on with a pocket outside, at the side, but it runs a little backwards—I do not believe I left my handkerchief hanging out; I always put it quite in—I have never said that he touched me on the shoulder, but he said that he did; I will not swear that he did not—he instantly presented it to me, on my turning round; there was no hesitation on his part, as if he was trying to conceal it.
MR. RIBTON. Q. What induced you to feel your pocket? A. Finding somebody closer to me than he ought to be—I was rather hurrying along, and therefore could not account for anybody being behind me.
LEWIS NOTLEY (City policeman, 665). The prisoner was given into my custody by Mr. Price—I asked him how he came to take the handkerchief; he said he saw it hanging out of the gentleman's pocket, and he thought he would lose it, and took it out, and gave it to him—I asked where he lived; he said, "I refuse my address."
GUILTY .—He was farther charged with having been before convicted.
—(Policeman.) I produce a certificate—(Read: "Mansion House, July, 1857; Francis Gates, Convicted, on his own confession, of stealing a handkerchief from the person; Confined six months")—I had him in custody—the prisoner is the man.
GUILTY.**— Confined Eighteen Months.
294. JOSEPH PRICE (27) , Breaking and entering the dwelling house of Frederick Collins, and stealing therein 30 lbs. weight of gutta percha, value 3l.; his property.—2nd COUNT, Feloniously receiving the same.
MR. PLATT conducted the Prosecution.
JAMES BARNARD . I keep a gutta percha warehouse, at No. 257, Tottenham Court Road. On 8th Feb., some person came to me to know whether I would buy some gutta percha; I asked him to leave me a sample, to see whether it was good, as an excuse, and in the mean time, by going to the station, I found out who had lost it—on the 9th, about 7 o'clock, the prisoner came, and said that he had brought the gutta percha that some one had been a little before to know if I would buy—he produced some; this is some of it (produced)—I had a policeman there, who took him.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Do you know who the other person was? A. Yes, but we cannot find him—he only brought three or four soles on the 9th; I said that I would buy them, and in an hour afterwards the prisoner came with some—the policeman was in the parlour at the back of the shop—I was in the centre of the shop when I spoke to the prisoner; the conversation lasted perhaps five minutes.
FREDERICK COLLINS . I am a dealer in leather and gutta percha, at No. 7, Little Earl Street, Seven Dials—I know the prisoner; he was in the service of Mr. Dyer. On Saturday, 6th Feb., I and my wife were aroused by a knocking at the door, at a little before 6 o'clock, and, on coming down, I found the glass broken and the shutter removed from the top window; the bolt had been forced out—some gutta percha had been lying within reach of this glass; this is it (produced); it is my property—I know them by chalk marks on them—I lost thirty pounds weight, value about 50s., and other articles, to the amount of 8l. altogether.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you only know the prisoner by sight? A. That is all—Mr. Dyer is a leather seller, of Queen Street, Seven Dials—I also lost eyelet pliers, punches, and a number of articles connected with the shoe trade.
JOHN PETHERS (Police inspector, E). About 7 o'clock on this night, I went to Mr. Barnard's shop, in Tottenham Court Road, and in a few minutes the prisoner came in with a bag of gutta percha; this is some of it—I came out, took him into custody, and asked him how he came in possession of it—he said that a tall man had employed him to bring it from Camden Town—he gave his address at the station, which I found to be correct.
(The prisoner received a good character.)
GUILTY on the Second Count.— Confined Six Months.
295. REBECCA ELLIOTT (36), and AMELIA SMITH (30), were indicted for stealing 1 pair of boots, value 15s., the property of Emily Sammons; and other goods, value 12l., the property of Daniel Thomas Lyons Clanchy, in his dwelling house.—2nd COUNT, Feloniously receiving the same.
MR. ORRIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM WREFORD (Citypolice sergeant, 54.) On 9th Feb., I was on duty in Cutler Street, City, between 12 and 1 o'clock at noon, with Baker, and saw the two prisoners—we pursued them and got up to them under an archway in Cutler Street; Baker laid hold of Smith, who had the plate; Elliott was proceeding on—I then took Smith; Baker went and took Elliott—Smith had something under her arm, under her shawl—I examined the bundle at the station; it contained this silver tea pot, toast rack, cruet stand, decanter stand, and a variety of things.
COURT. Q. You say Elliott was proceeding on? A. She was, merely at the same pace that she was going before; Smith was stopped, and she walked on.
CHARLES BAKER (City policeman, 635). I was with Wreford on duty in Cutler Street, on 9th Feb., between 12 and 1 o'clock—from information I received I went in pursuit of the prisoners—I saw them and a man come out of a court in Cutler Street—they saw me and turned back; they were coming towards me—I ran after them; I took Smith and gave her to Wreford while I went after Elliott and took her into custody in the Clothes Exchange, and took her to the station—I charged her with the unlawful possession of the things—she said the woman had picked them up—I asked her where—she said in some street, but she did not know the name of the street—Smith gave her address at No. 8, James Street, Kensington, and Elliott in Fulham fields, but she did not know what street.
Cross-examined by MR. COOPER (for Elliott). Q. Did Smith say anything? A. She said she picked it up—I afterwards found this blanket at Mr. Hampstead's, a pawnbroker at Hammersmith.
MARY ANN BOWYER . I am a searcher at the Bishopsgate police station—I searched the prisoners when they were brought there—on Smith I found this silver mustard spoon and four duplicates; I found nothing on Elliott.
EMILY SAMMONS . I am cook in the employ of Mr. Clanchy, of No. 5, Campden Hill Road, Kensington. On Tuesday morning, 9th Feb., I came down stairs at 8 o'clock, and saw that the table cloth was off the table in the breakfast parlour, the area door wide open, the sideboard cupboard open, and the plate all gone; this is it; it is all my master's property—I had known Smith for about six weeks previous to the robbery—I have employed her occasionally to wash my dresses, nothing more—I saw her last on 4th Feb.—I can
swear to this blanket, it is my master's property; it had been on the kitchen chair before the fire; it had come home from the wash the night before.
Cross-examined. Q. Are they silver or plated goods? A. The cruet stand is silver, and the spoon also; the others are plated.
HENRY HAMPSTEAD . I am a pawnbroker, in King Street, Hammersmith. On Tuesday morning, 9th Feb., the two prisoners came to my shop, about 8 o'clock—they were not together, they were in separate departments—Smith offered me this spoon for sale, and told me she had a quantity more plate, would I buy it—she held up a parcel, it sounded like plate, but I did not look at it—I asked how she came by it—she said she had found it—I told her she had better take it to the station house—before that she produced this blanket and table cover, which I bought of her for 4s.—I sold the table cover on that same day—I asked Elliott what she wanted there; she said she was waiting for a person—that was all she said—no business transaction took place with her—the two women left the shop; when they got to the door Elliott was going to part, but Smith asked her to come on, and have something to drink—my foreman watched them—I saw them leave my shop together, and speak to one another at the door.
Cross-examined. Q. I believe you have known Elliott for sometime? A. Yes, I should say about eighteen years—her husband is a brick maker, what is called a moulder—I never knew any thing against her—she has borne the character of an honest, industrious woman.
COURT. Q. Did you see Elliott come into your shop? A. I cannot say that I did, or Smith either—it was very early in the morning—I had only just come into the shop; I came down and found them both there.
EMILY SAMMONS re-examined. I had not been down in the morning previous to 8 o'clock—I had not seen the property safe that morning; I had seen it at 10 o'clock the night before—I was the first down in the morning.
Smith's Defence. I was going to Hampstead on the morning of the 9th to meet a person about some work, about 8 o'clock in the morning; as I was going along I saw a bundle on a bank, I picked it up, it was very heavy; I was speaking to Elliott; she said she had got some work to take home, and went away with her basket; while she was gone, I opened the bundle and found what it contained; I tied it up in a smaller parcel; Elliott returned to me, she accompanied me to Mr. Hampstead's, where I am well known, and where I have been in the habit of pledging for the last fifteen or sixteen years, and he never knew any thing wrong of me; I told him I found the bundle of plate, and showed him the spoon; he said it was very good; I put the blanket and table cover on the table and asked 6s. for them; he wrote a ticket for 4s.; I said the ticket was of no use to me, and I left it there; he gave me 4s., and I left the shop, in company with Elliott; I asked her to have something to drink; I was afraid to take the plate to the station house, in case I should be taken in custody, and thought I had better keep it; Elliott did not know what the bundle contained; I went on the road to Hoxton, and Elliott went with me, as she knew the way; but she took the wrong road, which brought us out where the policemen apprehended us; as we were going along, two men who looked like Jews, knocked against me, and the plate rattled; they said, "What have you got here?" I said, "Nothing"—they said, "Come in here, and we will buy it;" I would not sell it, and went on, and I suppose because I would not sell it they gave information to the police,
for two or three minutes afterwards I was taken into custody; I am innocent; I found the plate; I did not intend to dispose of it; I have a large family, and my husband has been eighteen years in a good situation; I had no cause to do such a thing; if I had stolen the property I should not have taken it to a pawnbroker's, where I was known.
HENRY HAMPSTEAD re-examined. I have known Smith some years, almost as long as I have known Elliott—I can not say whether I knew where she lived; I have known her by sight quite seventeen years—I did not know exactly where Elliott lived; I knew it was somewhere close in the neighbourhood.
ELLIOTT— NOT GUILTY .
SMITH— GUILTY .**— Confined Eighteen Months.
296. JOSEPH EDGES (40) , Stealing 50 pieces of gun furniture and 24lbs. weight of brass, the goods of John Barnett and another, his masters; and JOHN WARREN (27) , Feloniously receiving the same; to which
EDGES PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. HORRY conducted the Prosecution.
JOSEPH EDGES (the prisoner). I have been a porter in the service of Mr. Barnett, a gun maker, in the Minories, for about two years—I have pleaded guilty to stealing some brass—there was a great quantity of it loose about the factory, and it was a very great temptation to anybody—I had been told by Mr. Barnett to knock some stocks off, and this was the remainder of it—I took it to Mr. Warren and sold it—I only went there once; it was twice in one evening—the first time, I think I took about eighteen pounds; but I will not be certain—he did not ask me any questions when I took the first lot; I swear that—I took the second lot about a quarter of an hour afterwards; he did not ask me any questions then—he paid me 11s. 6d. for the two quantities—I did not tell him where I got it from.
Cross-examined by MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Was not that a fair price for it? A. I do not know—I have known Warren about three months—I do not know how long he has been in business.
COURT. Q. What is Warren? A. A marine store dealer—I knew him by living close by.
WILLIAM COPPIN (Policeman, K 379.) On the evening of 11th Feb., I was in Charles Street—I know Warren's shop, No. 1, Princes Street, which leads into Charles Street—I saw a female, who I have since ascertained to be his wife, leave the shop; I saw Warren, at that time, standing just inside the door; he was a short distance from me, perhaps fifteen yards—I followed her up to Charles Street, Waterloo Road, Mile End New Town—she was carry-something very heavy underneath her shawl—I asked her what she had got; I examined it; it was a quantity of brass—I sent her with the brass to the station house by a constable—before doing that, I had some conversation with her—I then went back to Warren's shop; he was then closing his door—I asked him whether he had bought any brass to-day, of any description; he said, "Yes, I bought about three farthings worth"—I asked him how long it was since his wife was there; he said, "Two hour"—I said, "Are you sure of that?" he said, "Yes"—I said, "Has she taken any brass away from here?" he said, "No"—I said, "Then if she has told me she has just brought some brass away from here, she has told me an untruth?" he said, "Yes "—I said, "Your wife has gone to the station, you had better come on with me;" he said, "Very well"—as we were going along he said, "I bought the brass my wife has got, of a man that lives in Charles Street, a gunsmith; he did not give me any name; he told me the house."
Cross-examined. Q. How long have you known Warren? A. I should
say about three months—I think that is about the time he has been in business—I cannot say what he was before—I was not absent from his shop more than five minutes before I returned—I was not laying any trap for him—I did not ask these questions to see if I could catch him out in a falsehood—I never laid a trap for any man in my life.
JOHN BARNETT . I have a partner; I carry on business in the Minories—Edges has been in my employment about two years, as porter—some months ago, I told him to break up some old muskets—he had access to that metal—this is the description of metal; I have every reason to believe that it is my property.
Warren's statement before the Magistrate was read as follows:—"This man came to me about 8 o'clock last night with seventeen pounds of brass, and asked me what I gave for old brass; I said 6d. a pound; he said he had bought a lot of old gun stocks of his master, and had knocked them off; in about a quarter of an hour afterwards he came with six pounds more, and I paid him 11s. 6d.; I should not have bought it, only he said he knocked it off the old gun stocks he bought of his master.
(Warren received a good character.)
WARREN— GUILTY of Receiving—Recommended to mercy by the Jury, it being his first offence.— Confined Twelve Months.
EDGES— Confined Twelve Months.
297. ROBERT WILLIAMS (21) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling house of John Rawding, and stealing therein 60 yards of cloth, 20 yards of doeskin, 2 jackets, and 43 pairs of trousers, value 20l. 10s., his property.
JOHN RAWDING . I am a tailor of No. 8, Holywell Lane. On 29th Jan., I went to bed about 12 o'clock at night, having fastened the doors and windows myself—I was alarmed next morning, at a little before 6 o'clock, and found the back parlour window open—I went down the court, and found some things of mine put on a costermonger's barrow—they had been safe the previous night—I missed thirty-eight pairs of trousers, four rolls of stuff to make into trousers, a roll of moleskin, two jackets, and five other pairs of trousers; these (produced) are some of them—I have found all except the five pairs of trousers.
WILLIAM THOMAS GOOZE . I am a porter, of No. 5, Holywell Place, close against the prosecutor's back wall. On 28th Jan., in the morning, I was in bed, and heard some one jumping from the wall between my master's and the prosecutor's premises; a water closet parts them—I then heard a barrow come up the court, which I knew was wrong—I got up about five minutes before 6 o'clock, and when I got out I found the prisoner on the top of the wall—there was another man on the top of the water closet, and the barrow was close by—I asked the prisoner what business he had there—he jumped down, and I collared him—the other one ran away, I could not see his face—we went together about twenty yards, when he slipped from his coat, and ran away—I could go no further, for I had no shoes or stockings on, and I kicked my foot against a stone—I saw him again five minutes afterwards, and am sure he is the person.
Prisoner. I was not on the wall; my feet were on the barrow, and my arms on the wall; he said, "What do you want here?" I said, "Two men
asked me to come and move some goods." Witness. You were on the wall—you said, "It is all right, Joe, you know a thing or two."
HENRY FORDHAM (Policeman, H 197). On the morning of 30th Jan., I was on duty in the neighbourhood of Swan Yard, Shoreditch, and heard a a cry of "Stop thief!"—I saw the prisoner running, without his coat, in a direction from whence the cry proceeded—I stopped him, took him back into Shoreditch, and then into Holywell Lane to the last witness.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate was here read as follows: "I am guilty; it is my first offence."
Prisoner's Defence. I am guilty of the man taking hold of me on the wall, but nothing else.
GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.
RICHARD LEGG . I am a cashier to the London Joint Stock Bank. On 19th Jan., a cheque for 30l. was presented for payment, I do not know by whom—it purported to be drawn by Mockford and Co., who have been customers of the bank for a number of years—I have seen the prisoner come to the counter—this is the book in which I made the entry at the time I paid the cheque—I paid with a 10l. note, No. 47,878 a 5l. note, No. 24,177, and 15l. in gold—the dates are not entered in this book—after cheques are cashed they are taken away by another clerk, and entered by the ledger keeper, and are finally written into the pass books of the customers by a junior clerk, the cheques are then put into the pocket of the pass books and returned to the customers with the pass books.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Q. How long have you been in the habit of paying Messrs. Mockford's cheques? A. Ever since I have been at the counter, about ten years—I know the signature perfectly well—I had no doubt about the signature to this cheque at the time I paid it—I cannot tell how many other persons have come to the counter from Messrs. Mockford, as cheques are frequently presented by strangers—I do not recognize any clerk of Messrs. Mockford's in particular, but I do not give up the pass book—I should recognize the prisoner as the clerk, if he came for the pass book.
WILLIAM GEORGE SHARPE MOCKFORD . I am a merchant, of Kennett's Wharf. On 1st Jan., this year, I went into partnership with Mr. Mesnard—the prisoner has been in my employment five or six years—his duty, among other things, before 1st Jan., was to take charge of the cheque book, and he invariably went to the bank for me—I bank at the London Joint Stock Bank—after Jan., Mr. Mesnard was to keep the cheque book, but the prisoner still went to the bank as before, and brought me the pass book occasionally—I have one other clerk, Mr. Poisson; his duties were chiefly to attend to the French correspondence—the prisoner kept the cheque book until Mr. Mesnard was initiated into the business—before 1st Jan., the prisoner filled up the cheques for my signature, and after that, Mr. Mesnard, but sometimes the prisoner—the bank honours my signature alone—I had my pass book on Monday, 18th Jan., and again on 27th Jan.—the prisoner was at business on the 19th, and was in and out all day on business—he left on the 22nd, on a plea of illness—when I looked at the pass book on the 27th, I discovered an entry, "1051, 30l., 19th Jan."—I had not signed a cheque for 30l. on that day, but I had about that date; I cannot say when, because I have not got my cheque book here, but it was paid on the following day—(The cheque book was sent for)—the only two cheques for 30l. that I had drawn in Jan.,
were one on the 16th and one on the 20th—when I came into the counting house, the prisoner had either got the cheque book in his hand, or it was on the table by my side—on seeing this entry, my partner looked into the pocket of the pass book, in my presence, but there was no cheque answering to the entry of 30l., and no other cheque was missing—the prisoner was absent on a plea of illness when I discovered the entry—I had given him injunctions to keep the cheque book in the safe, and the returned cheques also, according to their dates.
CHARLES LEONARD MESNARD . I have been in partnership with Mr. Mockford since the beginning of this year. On 18th Jan., as well as I recollect, I sent the prisoner for the pass book, and again on the 27th, and gave him a cheque to get cashed at the bank—I went out, and he had returned when I came back—my attention was afterwards directed by the prisoner to the pass book, in my office; I asked him if he had brought the pass book, and he pointed to it; I did not take it up immediately—about half an hour afterwards, the prisoner told me that he felt very unwell, and, if I had nothing particular for him to do, he should like to go—I told him he might go, and he went—while he was away, I took up the pass book and examined it; I noticed the 30l. cheque of the 19th almost immediately—I found a debit of 30l. against me—I examined the pocket of the book, but found no cheque corresponding to that amount; all the other cheques were there—I saw the prisoner next morning, and told him I wanted the return cheque from the bank, corresponding to the amount in the pass book—he looked a little confused, and said, "I have not got it; I know nothing about it"—he made two or three answers—he spoke to me during the day several times about it, and I spoke to him—I had then been to the bank to make inquiries, and I told him that the cheque had been changed for notes; he made no reply, but some time afterwards he told me, that if the cheque had been exchanged for gold, he did not see how we could trace it.
HENRY WILLIAM VERNON . About 19th Jan., in the beginning of the week, I was supping with the prisoner in Holbom, and I changed this 5l. note for him—I endorsed my name on it, and paid it away—I had no other 5l. note at the time.
Cross-examined. Q. What are you? A. Articled clerk to a solicitor—it is not the first 5l. note I have had in my possession—I know it was about a month ago, and about 11 o'clock at night, at some oyster rooms—there was nothing to call my attention to the date of the 19th—it might have been three or four days earlier, but not a week—I do not know when I was first spoken to on the subject; a detective came to the office a week or two ago—I kept the note till next morning, or it may have been a day after, and gave it to a clerk in the office, who cashed it for me—I will not swear that it was not three days after—the clerk's name is Morton; he is not here—I am clerk to Messrs. Water and Burn.
JOSEPH TWINEY PICKERING . I am a clerk in the London Joint Stock Bank. It is my duty to make up the customer's pass books—these figures on the debit side of this pass book, on 19th Jan., are in my writing; I copied them from the cheque, which I then put into the pocket of the book—I cannot recollect putting it there, because we have some hundreds in the course of the morning; but I must have put it there.
Cross-examined. Q. The only thing that makes you believe so is, that it is your practice to do so? A. No, but because I have entered it in the book.
COURT. Q. Do you think, if you had departed from your usual practice, you should have remembered it? A. Yes—the cheque has not been looked for since, at the bank, to my knowledge—after I have put the cheques into the pass books, I give them to the ledger keeper, and they are put into pigeon holes.
HENRY WHITE . I am a ledger keeper at the London Joint Stock Bank. It is my duty to tick off entries in the pass books—this is my tick in this pass book, against this 30l.; that proves that it corresponded with the ledger—I afterwards placed the book, to be given up when application was made for it—I do not look at the cheques in the pocket, unless the ledger and pass book disagree.
Cross-examined. Q. Where did you put it? A. Immediately behind the cashier, where there are some hundreds of similar pass books—it remained there till it was called for.
MAXIMILIAN POISSON . I have been clerk to Mockford and Co. four months. The prisoner was the only other clerk—I have never been to the bank for the banker's book—I was not at the bank at all on 27th Jan.—I have never filled up any cheques for Mockford and Co.—I saw the pass book on the table on 27th Jan., but did not touch it.
GEORGE SCOTT . I am a detective officer. On 30th Jan., I was with Mr. Mockford in Upper Thames Street, and saw the prisoner—Mr. Vernon said, in his presence, that he had changed a 5l. note for him—the prisoner said, "For me?"—Vernon said, "Yes, for you, when you were with Primrose"—I told him the charge, and that he must go with me to the station; he said, "Very well," and I took him to Bow Lane Station—he was searched, and a piece of paper fell from him; whether he threw it or it dropped, I do not know, but my impression is that he threw it—I said, "You must not throw any thing away; if it is not affecting this charge, it will be given back to you"—I picked it up; this is it (produced)—I have compared it with this book; it has on it "London," and part of the word "Joint"—I afterwards received a 10l. note from the Joint Stock Bank; here is writing on the front of it.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you the 5l. note with you? A. Yes, when I went to him with Vernon.
W. G. S. MOCKFORD re-examined. This writing on this note is the prisoner's; it is, "C. Muller, 30, Threadneedle Street"—I find in this cheque book (produced) counterfoils of the two cheques for 30l., which I have spoken of, and here is a blank counterfoil—the date of the cheque before that is 15th Jan.; the following is a cancelled cheque, and the next is 16th Jan., and then this 20th, 30l.—some of the entries on the counterfoils are in Mr. Mesnard's writing, and some in the prisoner's.
MR. ROBINSON submitted that there was no proof that this cheque was forged, but rather that it was not, because the clerk, who knew the signature, passed it as genuine; and further, that, as there were three cheques for 30l. entered in the pass book, it was impossible to say which of them was the one in question, and which were the bond fide cheques.
HENRY WHITE re-examined. There are other cashiers—I do not know the date of the cheque I paid; I only know the date on which I paid it. (MR. T. ATKINSON stated, that he could show which cheque it was that was paid on the 20th.)
C. L. MESNARD re-examined. I know to whom this cheque of the 20th was given; it was dated the 20th, though given on the 19th, being dated after banking hours—it was not paid till next day; that enables me to speak
to it's identity—I paid it myself, to my brother, Edward Mesnard, at his office, some time after 4 o'clock, to the best of my recollection—the cheque is not here.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. Is this alteration from the 19th to the 20th in your writing? A. Yes—the counterfoil is generally filled up first, and the cheque afterwards, that is my practice; but in this instance I filled up the counterfoil first, and took out the cheque, and filled it up when I was out—I will not swear that it was not before 4 o'clock, but, to the best of my belief, it was—I never pay cheques in that way, and request that they may not be paid till next day—I do not sign cheques; I draw them, and my partner signs them.
MR. T. ATKINSON. Q. Have you searched for the cheque to which this counterfoil refers? A. I have not.
NOT GUILTY . (See page 395.)
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined One Month .
pMR. METCALFE conducted the Prosecution.
PERCEVAL BOWLES (Policeman, N 284). A little before 5 o'clock, on the morning of 27th Jan., I was on duty in Cavendish Street, New North Road—I noticed the side door of No. 13, Brudenel Place, partly open; I went in, and looked round the yard; I then came out, and waited till I got assistance—I then went in again, and got over the walls, and, as I was getting over the wall from No. 12 to No. 11, I saw three men getting over the wall from No. 11 to No. 10—I called out, "Stop thief!" and they were taken by two constables—I did not see them taken—I was not near enough to see who they were—I saw the prisoners in custody in about a minute—I found a pair of boots under the kitchen window of No. 11; I found no owner for them—I also found a single boot in the garden at the end of No. 11; that was about six or eight yards from where I had seen them getting over the wall—when I saw Taverner in custody, I asked him if he knew any thing about the single boot; he said, "Yes, it is mine"—he had no boots on at that time; it was at the station I saw him.
Cross-examined by MR. PAYNE (for Taverner). Q. You saw three men getting over the wall, and afterwards saw these two men at the station? A. Yes—I saw them in custody a minute afterwards—Taverner had no boots on at the station—his stockings did not appear to be muddy—I could not say whether the men had boots on when I saw them getting over the wall; they were over all on a sudden—Taverner had boots on when I saw him in custody a minute afterwards—I found this boot three-quarters of an hour afterwards.
ROBERT JEFFREYS (Policeman, N 165). I heard the cry of "Stop thief!" about 5 o'clock on the morning of 27th Jan., near Brudenel Place—I got over the wall into the back yard, and found Taverner in a bye garden, that does not belong to any house, about ten or twelve yards from Mr. Brooks' house—he had to get over several walls to get to that place; he must have come across the garden of No. 10; he was hid in a dark place—I turned my lamp on when I got over the wall, and saw him screwed up, with this cloak on his left arm—I took him into custody, and took the cloak from him; it has been identified by the prosecutor.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you mean to swear that that cloak has been claimed by the prosecutor as one of his? A. Yes.
WILLIAM WELCH (Policeman, N 201). I went to Brudenel Place about 5 o'clock on 27th Jan.—I got over a wall there, and found Hillier just over the wall at the rear of No. 3, Brudenel Place, curled up in a corner, about three yards from where Taverner was found—I had a struggle with Hillier before I secured him—I handed him over to Sergeant Higgins—I found a pair of girl's boots in the garden of No. 2, Brudenel Place—I afterwards went into the back garden of No. 11, and there found a pair of goloshes; I also found a single boot—I took them to the station and paired it with one that one of the other witnesses produced; it was the fellow to it—when I took Hillier he had boots on—I asked if the boot belonged to them, and Taverner said, "Yes, it belongs to me; give them to me and I will pat them on,"and he did so—I believe the boots Hillier had on were his own.
ROBERT COX (Policeman N 60). About half-past 5 o'clock I went to the prosecutor's house; I found the back kitchen window wide open—some drawers had been opened, and some things were lying on the floor, in the front kitchen—I also found some cloaks and other things lying in the back garden; these are them.
GEORGE BROOKS . I am a clerk, living at No. 11, Brudenel Place—I was called up about half-past 5 o'clock on this morning—I found the back kitchen window wide open—I waited till one of the constables came in, when we searched the house, and I found that a chest of drawers in the front kitchen had been entirely turned out, and a lot of clothing about the kitchen—I found a lot of clothes lying in the garden, outside the back kitchen window—I had fastened that window the night before, previous to going to bed, about 9, or between 9 and 10, o'clock; I am pretty well certain it was after 9 o'clock—I usually fasten it every evening about that time, or see it safe—these things belong to me; this cloak is one of my daughters'; these boots belong to one of my children; these are my daughter's goloshes, and these are my children's capes and cloaks; these trousers belong to one of my boys—these boots are one of my little girls'; these are my own boots, they were on the drawers.
Cross-examined. Q. You do not know the cloak, I suppose? A. Yes, I purchased the material myself of which it is made—there is nothing here of my own, except the boots—I went to bed about a quarter past 11 o'clock—I did not examine the place again before I went to bed—I am generally the last up—I was so that night—I have no servant.
MR. METCALFE. Q. How near were you sitting to the back kitchen? A. In the front kitchen; I was sitting there all the evening—the back kitchen window was fast when I went to bed—the house is in the parish of St. Leonard, Shoreditch.
GEORGE HIGGINS (Police sergeant, N 42). I produce this pair of trousers, which I found in the waistband of the prisoner Taverner's trousers; this pair of boots, which Mr. Brooks claims, I found on Tavemer's feet; and these small boots were in the pocket of his coat.
TAVERNER— GUILTY .*— Confined Eighteen Months.
HILLIER— GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
HENRY LATTEN . I am a coach painter, and live at No. 15, Church Street, Kennington Road. On 17th Feb., between 12 and 1 o'clock in the morning, I was going along Whitechapel Road—I was not sober—I was not decidedly
drunk—I was capable of conducting myself home—as I was going along, the prisoner Brown jumped at me, put his head into my stomach, and knocked me down; and, as he was in the act of knocking me down, some other party was over me—I could not swear who that was—I called out, "Police!" and a policeman came to me in a moment, and found Brown on me; I held him tight until the policeman came—it was all done in half a minute—I had between 5s. and 6s. in my pocket previous to the attack—I afterwards found I had but 61/2 d.
THOMAS BRETTON (Policeman, H 161). I was on duty in Whitechapel on the morning of 17th Feb.—I heard a cry of police, I ran to the place, and found the prosecutor and the two prisoners; Brown was stooping over the prosecutor, apparently in the act of robbing him—I took him into custody—Brian had a tussle with the prosecutor, and got away from him; he made a kick at him once or twice—I cannot tell whether he struck him—as he ran away he picked up Brown's cap, which he had dropped—I took Brown to the station, and four or five minutes afterwards Brian came back with the cap and said, "Policeman, he has done nothing, let him have his cap "—I recognized him, and told a constable to take him into custody; he ran away, I sprang my rattle, he was pursued by another constable, and brought back—I am sure he is the person—about seven or eight minutes previous to their attacking the prosecutor, I saw them cross the street within about fifty yards of the spot—I knew them both by sight previously.
JOHN HURST . I am a boot maker—I was coming from Sadler's Wells theatre, about half-past 12 o'clock on the Tuesday night, and saw the prosecutor and Brian in a scuffle together—Brown put his head in the prosecutor's chest, and threw him down on the ground—thinking it was a common street row I did not pay much attention to it; but as the policeman was proceeding with Brown to the station, Brian, to the best of my belief, but I cannot swear to him, came up with a cap, and he was pursued and brought back.
Brian's Defence. I know nothing at all about it; this boy says that he had two more with him.
Brown's Defence. Is it possible that I could knock that man down? he was drunk and foolish, and was cursing and swearing all along—he said at the police court that it was a man knocked him down.
GUILTY .—Brian was further charged with having been before convicted.
—DUNAWAY (Policeman, H 129). I produce a certificate—(Read: "Thames Police Court. William Brian pleaded guilty, on 5th April, 1856, to larceny, and confined six months")—I was present on that occasion, and proved a former conviction against him at the Westminster Sessions, in April, 1855, where he had six months—I am sure Brian is the person.
BRIAN— GUILTY .**— Four Years Penal Servitude .
BROWN—Recommended to mercy.— Confined Six Month .
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, February 23rd, 1858.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. CARTER; Mr. Ald. ROSE; and Mr. COMMON SERJEANT.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant, and the Sixth Jury.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN, conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM CUNNINGTON (Policeman, K 315). I produce a certificate of a conviction from Mr. Clark's office,—(Read: "Central Criminal Court, Feb., 1857; John Lynch, Convicted of uttering counterfeit coin; Confined one year")—I was present—the prisoner is the person.
WILLIAM KEYS . I keep a beer shop in the East India Road. On 2nd Feb., the prisoner came into my shop with another man—the prisoner called for a pint of 4d. ale—the price of it was 2d.—I served him, he offered me a florin—I gave the change—I remarked that the florin was bad, but they went out before I tried it—I called to them, but they did not return—I ran after them, and laid hold of the prisoner—the other man ran away—I asked the prisoner if he knew what he bad given me; he said, "No, but if you come to my friend, I will give you the money back again"—the other man had taken the 1s. 10d. change—the prisoner also said he would give me any thing he could, if I would not take him—I took him to the station, and gave the florin at the station.
CHRISTOPHER PEARSON (Policeman, K 262). The prisoner was given into my custody on 2nd Feb.—the last witness, gave me this florin—I told the prisoner what he was charged with; he said the other man asked him to go into the beer house to have some ale with him, and that it was not him who tendered the florin—he requested the prosecutor to go to the Commercial Road with him, and he would give him any thing to make it up—I asked the prisoner his Dame and address, he said he had no name at all, and he did not live at any place—I found on him two 1d. pieces.
GUILTY .— Four Years Penal Servitude .
MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.
THOMAS PAWSON (Policeman, A 269). I produce a certificate of a conviction from Mr. Clark's office.—("Read: Central Criminal Court, Feb., 1857; Charlotte Smith, Convicted of uttering counterfeit coin; Confined six months")—I was present—the prisoner is the person.
Prisoner. It is a mistake altogether, I never was convicted; how oan you swear to me? Witness. By your features—I had you in custody—I am sure you are the person.
MR. BODKIN. Q. Did you take her before the Magistrate? A. Yes, and she was remanded; and I had her here too.
Prisoner. I never was here but once, and then I was acquitted. Witness. That was since the former conviction.
MR. E. J. JONAS. I know that she was here the last time, and I believe she is the person who was here before, but I would not swear it.
flour, it came to 2d.—she gave me a shilling, I tried it with my teeth, and found it was bad; it bent—I told her it was bad, and she offered me a sixpence, which I refused—I told her she had been there twice before, and offered me two bad shillings, and she denied it—I refused the sixpence, and gave her in charge—she had been there before, on two successive Tuesdays before that Tuesday—the first time, she asked for a pound of flour, which came to 2d., and the next time, for two eggs, which came to 21/2 d.—on each time she had offered me a bad shilling—I tried them with my teeth, and returned them to her—on those occasions she did not offer any more money.
Prisoner. Did you give me in charge? Witness. No; my father did in my presence—I can swear to you coming before—if you came into the shop two or three times I should know you.
JOHN GOSLING (Police serjeant, V 14). The prisoner was given into my custody—I got this shilling from Mr. Bird, in the last witness' presence—I told the prisoner she was charged with passing a bad shilling—she said she lived in Simmons Street, Chelsea—a good sixpence was found on her.
Prisoner's Defence. On the 2nd Feb., I went to the shop, and laid down a shilling; she put it to her teeth, but did not bend it; she took it to her father, and he came out and said it was a bad shilling; whether it was the one I gave her I do not know, I am almost sure that the one I gave her was a good one; he said he would go with me to see where I lived; I had a good sixpence, he would not take that, but gave me in charge; I had never been there till that night.
GUILTY .— Confined Eighteen Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.
THOMAS JONES . I reside in Philpot Street, Commercial Road, I keep a china shop. On 13th Feb., the prisoner came there—I am sure she is the woman—she wanted a yellow baking dish—the price was 6d.; I served her, she gave me a crown piece—my wife came up, and I gave it to her for change—I had no change.
Prisoner. I am not the person. Witness. I am sure she is the person—I had not known her before.
SARAH JONES . I am the wife of the last witness. On 13th Feb., my husband gave me a crown piece; the prisoner was there—I gave her change, 4s. 2d.; she bought a dish and something else, a tea pot, I think; they came to 10d.—I was not in the shop while my husband was dealing with her; I came in just as she gave the piece—I put the crown into my purse; I had no other crown piece all day—the next morning, I found it was bad—I wrapped it in a piece of flannel, and put it in a cup, thinking I should see the prisoner again—she came again on the Monday; I knew her in a moment—she wanted a large saucepan; it came to 1s. 8d.—she gave me another crown piece, and that was a bad one—I looked at her, and said, "You are a very good customer, bringing me bad money continually"—I told her I had one, and I took it out of the cup, and showed it her—I sent my little girl to the Lord Nelson, to get change for the crown, and she brought it back—I told the prisoner she had given my husband one on Saturday night, and I took it from him, and gave her change—she said she had not been out of her room all that day—it was while the child was gone, I told the prisoner about passing other bad money—I called a policeman, and gave her in charge, with both the crowns.
giving me a crown piece; I took it over to the Lord Nelson, to get change—I gave it to the person at the bar; he tried it, marked it, laid it on a shelf, and told me to go and tell my mother—my mother went over with the policeman; I did not go back with her—I saw the crown piece afterwards, and saw the mark on it—I should know it again—this is it; I am sure it is the same.
THOMAS CONNOR (Policeman, K 117). The prisoner was given into my charge—I told her she was charged with passing two counterfeit crown pieces—she denied all about being there on Saturday night, but acknowledged she gave the 5s. piece on Monday, but she was not aware it was bad; she had it from her husband—she had on her a half sovereign and 5d. in copper, all good—she gave her address, at No. 46, Goulstone Street; I west there, and there is no such number in the street—these are the two crowns.
Prisoner's Defence. I went for the saucepan, and she said she was willing to let me go, if I would make good what I gave her on Saturday night; I said I would not give her for what I never uttered; I was not out of the room all day.
GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.
MICHAEL JOHN WELCH . I keep the Old Star and Crown, Broadway, Westminster. On 29th Jan., the prisoner and another man came in, between 1 and 2 o'clock—the prisoner called for half a quartern of gin; it came to 2d.—he gave me a half sovereign, and I gave him 9s. 10d. change—as soon as they had drunk the gin, they went away—as soon as they were gone, I looked at the half sovereign more particularly, and found it was bad—I sent Kelly out after the prisoner, and he detained him—I went out, and saw him—a constable came up, and I told him he had given me a bad half sovereign; the prisoner said, "If I gave you a bad half sovereign, give it me back, and I will return you the change"—I said, "No, I shall wait till the constable comes"—the constable came, and I gave it to him—the prisoner hit the constable's hand, and knocked the half sovereign out, and it fell on the ground, and the prisoner made a kick to kick it down an area, but it did not go down; I picked it up, and gave it to the constable a second time.
Cross-examined by MR. PLATT. Q. Did you first take it for a good one? A. Yes, there was nothing which made me doubt it—I took it into the bar, where my wife was sitting at dinner—the prisoner never counted the change, but took it away; it was three half crowns, two shillings, and fourpence—they went away directly, and then I found it was bad—the prisoner did not say, "Let me look at the half sovereign; here is your change; I thought it was a good one"—he said, "Give me the half sovereign, and I will give your change back"—he did not express a wish to look at it; he wanted it, and shoved the change into my hand—he did not make a movement towards it, to get hold of it; he knocked the constable's hand underneath, to knock it out of his hand; I picked it up, and gave it to the constable a second time—it went five or six feet up, and came down on the ground—there was not somewhat of a scuffle—I gave the prisoner in charge—I had my money back again—he put the change into his pocket, and was gone directly—I turned round, and the half quartern of gin was gone; it was a two-out glass—there was a second man, and he was discharged.
to go and detain them; I followed them, and overtook them about 300 or 400 yards off—they were together all that time—I went and spoke to the prisoner; they were then in Dartmouth Street—I asked the prisoner if he had been into a public house in the Broadway; he said he had not; he denied having been into any public house at all; he said, "I know nothing about it"—Mr. Welch turned the corner, and called to me to detain them, they were the men; and directly the prisoner saw Mr. Welch, he said he recollected being in a public house in the Broadway—Mr. Welch came up, and told him he had given a bad half sovereign—the prisoner thrust his hand into his pocket, and said, "Give me the half sovereign; I will give you the silver"—Mr. Welch refused to give him the half sovereign; he gave it to the constable, and the prisoner knocked it out of his hand, and tried to kick it down an area.
Cross-examined. Q. The moment the prisoner saw Mr. Welch, did he recollect that he had been into a public house? A. Yes.
MR. BODKIN. Q. When did Mr. Welch call out? A. When he had got two or three yards into the street; but the prisoner said he had been into the public house, directly he saw Mr. Welch turn the corner.
JOHN BURNETT (Policeman, B 146). I saw the prosecutor; he had hold of the prisoner, at the top of Dartmouth Street—the prosecutor gave me the half sovereign, and as soon as I had it in my hand, the prisoner struck me under my hand, and it fell down; the prisoner kicked it some distance—there was an area near where it was kicked—the prosecutor took it up, and gave it into my hand.
Cross-examined. Q. Did not the prisoner say, "Give me the half sovereign, and I will give you the change? A. Yes; he did not ask to look at it—I had not got the half sovereign at the time he asked him to give it him.
GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and PLUMPTRE conducted the Prosecution.
CATHERINE O'LEARY . I keep a shop in Prince's Street, Mile End New Town. On 25th Jan., about 11 o'clock in the morning, the prisoner came, and bought two ounces of butter and a quarter of a pound of sugar—they came to 23/4 d.; she paid me with a shilling—I gave her 91/4 d. change, and she went away—I put the shilling into my pocket; I had two sixpences, but no other shilling there—the prisoner returned in about ten minutes; she bought some other articles, I cannot tell what—she paid me with a shilling; I gave her change, and put that shilling into my pocket—about 1 o'clock, the prisoner came again; she bought half a pound of butter and half an ounce of tea, which came to 61/2 d.—she paid me with a shilling; I gave her 51/2 d. change, and she went away—I put that and the other shillings out of my pocket, into a small drawer in a chest of drawers, and a sixpence also—I kept one sixpence in my pocket—I did not receive any other shilling except those I put into the drawer—the brewer came, about 4 o'clock, and I gave him a 2s. piece and two of the shillings I had put into the drawer—about 6 o'clock, the brewer returned, and said something to me—he brought two shillings back; I looked at them; they were bad—I went to the drawer, and found the other one was bad—I wrapped the three shillings in paper, and afterwards gave them to the policeman—on 28th Jan., the prisoner came, about 7 o'clock in the evening, and asked for a penny candle—I gave her one, and she produced a half crown—I placed that in a drawer by itself, and
gave her two sixpences, a shilling, and 5d. change—in about ten minutes, she returned again for some tea, which came to 11/2 d.—she put down a shilling, I weighed it, and told her it was bad; she did not pay me—I kept the tea and the shilling—I said, "It is bad; I will lock you up"—she said, "It is not bad; it is what you gave me in change for the half crown"—I said, "You are too good a judge of bad money to take it from me; I did not give it you; I gave you an old shilling and two sixpences"—the shilling she tendered was a new one.
COURT. Q. Did you recognize her, on the 28th, as the same person who had given you the three bad shillings on the 25th? A. Yes—I did not say any thing to her about it, because I thought I would wait to see if she offered more—I said, "You passed three shillings here on Monday; you are not satisfied with that; I will now lock you up"—she said, "I did not."
Prisoner. She said nothing of the kind. Witness. Yes, I did—you did not say, "You ought to know me better, by dealing here, than to say it is bad"—you have been in the habit of dealing with me; you had been there between the 25th and the 28th, and bought things—you have dealt with me for five months; you came two or three times a day—I had no suspicion of you.
WILLIAM GREEN . On Monday, 25th Jan., I received a 2s. piece and two shillings from the last witness—I put the money into my pocket, where I had no other silver, and gave it to my employer—he gave the shillings back to me—I am sure what he gave me back were the two I had got from the last witness; I had no other.
PATRICK CUNNINGHAM (Policeman, A 496). On 28th Jan., I took the prisoner into custody—I got these four shillings and a half crown from Mrs. O'Leary—they were marked at the station—3d. in copper was found on the prisoner.
Prisoner's Defence. The inspector at Spital Square station asked her where she put the money, and she said she put it into her pocket, with some more money; he said, "How much?" she said, "About 1l., or 30s.;" the policeman stood by, and heard it, and when she got to the Court, she said she put it with sixpences; on the 28th, I gave her a shilling, not knowing it was bad; if it was bad, I knew nothing about it.
GUILTY of passing the half crown.— Confined Six Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and PLUMPTRE conducted the Prosecution.
MARIA FLACK . I keep a draper's shop at No. 4, Cambridge Place, Middleton Bow, Dalston—the prisoner came to my shop, on 22nd Jan., between 6 and 7 o'clock; she purchased a small article, which came to 11/2 d.; she tendered in payment a half crown—I gave her change, two shillings, a 4d. piece, and a halfpenny—she left the shop—I placed the half crown in my pocket, where I had no other half crown—the next morning I had occasion to pay a bill, and, in payment, I tendered the half crown I had received from the prisoner the night before—it was tried in a detector, and found to be bad—I put it apart from other money, in the corner of a drawer—it was kept separate till 28th Jan., when I gave it to Nicholls—on 28th Jan., the prisoner came, between 6 and 7 o'clock in the evening, for a penny skein of cotton—I knew her at the moment—she gave me a half crown—I saw by the
colour that it was bad, and I said to her, "This is not the first bad one you have given me; this is the second"—she said that I was a bad, base, wicked woman to say so—she said, "I have not been in the shop before; I have not been confined a fortnight"—I called a person, and said, "This woman has given me a bad half crown—he said, "Have you tried it?" I said, "No"—I then tried it, and it broke—I said to the prisoner, "I will give you one chance; if you like to pay me for the bad half crown you gave me last Friday, I will let you go"—she said, "It is a likely thing I am going to pay you for what I never had"—she would not pay, and I sent for the police—a waterman came, and when he came, the prisoner said, "I would rather pay you than be locked up"—he said it could not be done, he must take her in charge, and I gave him the two half crowns.
Prisoner. Q. Why did you not tell me the half crown was bad before you took it into the parlour? A. I never took it into the parlour—I called my father out and said, "This woman has given me a bad half crown"—he said, "Have you tried it?" I then tried it, and it broke in my hand—I did not say that I paid the half crown to a woman that cleaned for me, and she brought it back again next morning—the charwoman was in the shop, and I said to her, "Close the door;" and you said, "Do you think I want to run away."
GEORGE NICHOLLS . I am Waterman 163—I attend to carriages—I was called into the shop, and received the two half crowns—I took the prisoner to Kingsland station, and gave the half crown to the policeman Gall.
Prisoner. Q. Did she not say that she paid the first half crown to a person who cleaned for her, and that the person brought it back the next morning and said it was bad? A. No.
JAMES GALL (Policeman, N 276). I received these two half crowns from the last witness—the prisoner was brought to the station; she had two good half crowns on her—she said her husband gave her half a sovereign to get change, and he gave her three half crowns and kept one, and the one she uttered was one of them.
Witness for the Defence.
JOHN NEALE . I am a coach smith, and work for my brother; I live at No. 19, Lumber Court, Upper St. Martin's Lane. On the evening of 22nd Jan., I went to the prisoner's place—she lives with her husband in the same house as I do—I went to her room about half past 7 o'clock; I left work at 6 o'clock—I cleaned myself and went to their room to her husband, to know if he would go with me to the theatre at half price—the prisoner was there—I saw her in bed, and I went away.
Cross-examined by MR. ELLIS. Q. When did you first mention this? A. This is the first time I have mentioned it—I have not had any conversation with the prisoner about it—I have with her husband; he said it was a falsehood for the prosecutrix to say that she was there at that time—I knew that the prisoner was taken up—I knew it the day after she was taken; it was on the Friday, I think, that I heard of it—I told her husband that I would go up and state what I knew—he said, "Do not you remember her being in bed?" I said, "Yes"—they were living in the same house that I do.
GUILTY of the uttering on the 28th.— Confined Four Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and PLUMPTRE conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZA BENSON . I am the wife of Henry Benson; he keeps the Hare, in Brick Lane, Spitalfields. On Friday, 5th Feb., the prisoner came for a pennyworth of gin; I served her; she gave me a shilling; I put it in the till, where there was no other shilling, and gave her 11d. change—In half an hour she returned, and asked for half a pint of half and half, and gave me another shilling—I placed that in the till with the first shilling—she did not drink the half and half, she called a man on of the tap room to drink it, and she went away—I then found that the two shillings were bad, and I put them on the shelf—I had not received any other shilling between the times of the prisoner coming.
Prisoner. Q. I went there at two o'clock in the day. A. Yes, yon were there all the afternoon, till between 6 and 7 o'clock—you were the worse for liquor—I did not see your husband.
HENRY BENSON . I am landlord of the Hare. On 6th Feb., the prisoner came to my house about 10 o'clock in the evening; she asked me for a pennyworth of gin; I served her, and she gave me a shilling—I found it to be bad in a moment—I said, "This makes the third one you have given us"—she said, "Pray don't lock me up, I have got a baby four months old"—I gave the shilling to the policeman; he marked it with my penknife—I gave him the other two shillings; he took them to the police station and marked them there—I got the other two shillings off the shelf in the back parlour; I saw my wife place them there.
JAMES CONNELL (Policeman, H 225). I took the prisoner—I received from the last witness these three shillings, which I now produce—I found in her hand a half crown and a penny, which were good—on the way to the station the prisoner begged and prayed not to be locked up, as she had a family—she denied passing the two shillings on Friday night—I marked the two shillings passed on Friday with two holes, and the one passed on Saturday with three holes.
Prisoner's Defence. My husband finished a garment on Friday; I went and took it home; I met a friend, and we went and had some gin; I changed a half crown, and we had several quarterns of gin; I was very much the worse for liquor, and my husband came and fetched me home and put me to bed; I went again the next day, and was taken in charge.
(The prisoner received a good character.)
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. ELLIS and PLUMPTRE conducted the Prosecution.
HANNAH VERING . I live in Exeter Street, Lisson Grove, and keep a wardrobe. On Tuesday, 2nd Feb., the prisoner came between 2 and 6 o'clock to purchase a shirt; I showed him some; he chose one at 1s. 3d.; he gave me a half crown; I gave him a shilling, and he left the other 3d. off of a coat—I knew him well—soon after he left I found the half crown was bad—I took it down to his lodging—he had left his lodging, and I could not find him—I returned and marked the half crown, and put it in a private drawer by itself—it remained there till 9th Feb., when I gave it to Goodwin—on Wednesday, 3rd Feb., he wanted a handkerchief—I said I thought I had none, but if he would call in an hour I would see—as soon as he came, I sent for a constable, but before the constable came he had left—he did not call in an hour—I did not see him again till he was in custody.
COURT. Q. How long had he been in the habit of buying thing of you? A. About a fortnight—he had bought three shirts before—he told me he was a sweep—he had looked at a coat; the price of it was 4s., and he paid the 3d. as part payment for it.
ELIZABETH HARRIS . I am the wife of George Harris, a grocer. On 6th Feb., the prisoner came, about half-past ten o'clock in the evening, for an ounce of tobacco—the price was 3d.; he gave me a half crown, I looked at it, and said it was bad; he said he was not aware it was bad; he took it from his master, Mr. Butler, in Market Street—I gave it to the girl to take it across the road, to show it to a person—she came back, and said Mr. Wilson was not sure, but he thought it was bad—my husband came in, I told him what had happened, and he gave him in custody.
COURT. Q. Did you know him? A. I had seen him at my shop before—he had paid me money, which, I suspect, was bad—I had bad money in my possession.
ELIZA MITCHELL . I am servant to the last witness. On 6th Feb., I saw the prisoner in the shop—I got a half crown and took it to Mr. Wilson; he took it, and gave it me back; I took it over to Mrs. Harris.
AGNES WILSON . I am the daughter of Mr. Wilson—the last witness came to me with a half crown—I gave it to my father, and he gave it me back—it was not out of my sight—I am sure it was the same—I returned it to the witness.
GEORGE HARRIS . On Saturday, 6th Feb., I returned home between 10 and 11 o'clock—the prisoner was in the shop—my wife showed me a bad half crown, and said that the prisoner was the man that brought it—I looked at it, and it was bad—I took the prisoner by the collar, and asked him how he came by it—he said he had just taken it from his master, Mr. Butler, in Market Street—he asked me to let him go, and said if I would take him to his master he would explain how he got it—he said he was a hard-working fellow—I walked with him, but I found he was going in a wrong direction—I took him back, and gave him in charge—I gave the constable the bad half crown.
JAMES GOODWIN (Policeman, B 258). I took the prisoner; I received this half crown from the last witness—I received this other half crown afterwards—I found on the prisoner a tobacco box and one halfpenny.
Prisoner's Defence. I went to Mrs. Vering's, and purchased a shirt; I gave her the half crown, she gave me a shilling out; she put the half brown in her pocket, with other half crowns and other shillings; she had no till; I never saw her put any money in a till; she put the money in her pocket, and she did so on that night; I went to Mrs.Harris for the tobacco; I gave her half a crown, she told me it was bad; I said I did not know it, and asked her to let me look at it; she did, and I gave it her back; I said, "If you think it is bad, do not take it;" she went away out of my sight for ten minutes; she came back, and said Mr. Wilson did not know whether it was good or bad; she did not like to take it, but said her husband would be in half an hour; I went out, and went thirty or forty yards and met her husband; I knew him by going in the shop several times; I turned and went into the shop behind him; Mrs. Harris said, "That is the man that gave me the bad half crown, send for an officer," and he did so.
COURT to ELIZABETH HARRIS. Q. Did the prisoner leave the shop before your husband came? A. No—I said that my husband would be in in a few minutes, if he liked to wait, which he did.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. ELLIS and PLUMPTRE conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM ROWLAND . I reside with my father and mother, they keep a shop. On Saturday, 30th Jan., the prisoner came, between 5 and 6 o'clock in the evening, for a bunch of greens—I served her, she gave me a shilling, I gave it to my mother, and she handed me 10d. change, which I gave to the prisoner, and she left—about an hour afterwards I saw the shilling, and found it was bad—I knew it to be the same, as there was a particular mark on it—I saw my mother throw that shilling into the fire; it was bent, and I observed a nick on the edge of it—on Saturday night, 6th Feb., after the shop was closed, I heard a knock at the door, about twenty minutes before 12 o'clock—I opened the private door and saw the prisoner; she asked if we had any cabbages, I said, "Yes, we have, but none but 2d. ones"—she said she would have one—I told her to walk through the passage to the back room, where there was a light—I knew her directly, and saw her to be the same woman who had come on the previous Saturday—my father served her, and she put a 2s. piece into his hand—I said to him, "Just look at what you have got there;" and he handed it to me, he, being very old, could not tell a good one from a bad one—I bit a piece clean out of it, and found it was bad—I showed it to my mother, and she said to the prisoner, "This is a pretty thing to bring at this time of night"—I went out and fetched a constable, and gave the prisoner in charge—the prisoner said a woman sent her to purchase a cabbage.
Prisoner. He said he did net see the shilling, and his mother took it, and gave it to a woman. Witness. Yes, she gave it to another woman, to make a purchase, before she discovered it was bad—I saw it thrown in the fire, and I said it was the very one that the prisoner gave me—I saw a nick on the edge when I first received it from her—my mother is here.
HANNAH ROWLAND . I am the wife of John Rowland, and the mother of the last witness. On 30th Jan., my son gave me a shilling—I put it in my pocket with one other shilling—in about half an hour, I took the two shillings from my pocket, and gave to a particular friend to buy something—she came back immediately, and said one shilling was bad—I showed that one said to be bad to my son—he saw it when it was in the shop, in my friend's hand—I put it in the fire, and saw no more of it.
HENRY JOHN (Policeman, T 223). I was brought to the Rowland's house, between 11 and 12 o'clock, to receive the prisoner in charge—she was locked up in the parlour—I took her to the station—she said she met a strange woman in the street, who gave her this florin to go to Dick Rowland's to get a cabbage—there were five sixpences and 7d. in copper on her, all good.
GUILTY of uttering the florin.— Confined Six Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and PLUMPTRE conducted the Prosecution.
RICHARD EDEN . I am landlord of the Fox public house, Kingsland. On the night of 12th Feb., the prisoner Stone came—he called for a pint of beer and half a screw of tobacco—he tendered me a counterfeit shilling, which I detected at once, I placed it on the bar, and asked him if he had got any thing more about him of that description—he said, "No, I have 2d. to pay for the beer; you had better take the tobacco back, as I have not money to pay for it "—I bent the shilling, and the prisoner took it off the counter and
threw it away—he left, and I sent for a policeman; the policeman and I watched him—he went by the side of a lamp, with a light which they keep burning, and stood there for a few minutes—he then called "Bob" twice, and whistled—he went down King Edward Street, where he was joined by M'Donald—they went in the direction of Stoke Newington Green—M'Donald went into the De Beauvoir Arms, and Stone was outside waiting—the constable Last went into the De Beauvoir Arms, and Brant went and took Stone—they were taken into a room and searched, nothing was found on them—I saw Stone sit down in a corner by the fireplace; I told the constable to take him away, and he would find something under the cushion—we went there, and found a bad shilling under the cushion, where Stone had been sitting—it was wrapped in a piece of paper.
SARAH HABGRAVES . My husband keeps the De Beauvoir Arms. On the night of 12th Feb., M'Donald came to the bar for a pint of porter and half a screw of tobacco—it came to 21/2 d., he laid down a shilling—I took it from the counter, and put it on the inner counter by itself—the constable came in, I asked him if it was a bad shilling, and he said, "Yes"—he took the prisoner, and searched him.
M'Donald, Had you any objection to the shilling when I gave it you? Witness. No; I laid it on the counter, and the constable came in, and took it.
JAMES BRANT (Policeman, N 451). I was sent for by Eden—Stone came out of his house, and went about twenty yards, and gave a whistle, and called, "Bob"—he was joined by M'Donald, at the corner of King Edward Street—I called another constable, and we followed them to the De Beauvoir Arms—M'Donald went in there; Last went in and took McDonald, and I took Stone—I took him inside, and found on him only 71/2 d. in copper—he said, "I know nothing of the other man, I only asked him the way to Islington"—M'Donald said, "I know nothing of that man at all"—I had watched them about half a mile, they were together the whole time.
SIMON LAST (Policeman, N 355). I was on duty in plain clothes on that Friday night, at twenty minutes past 8 o'clock—the last witness called my attention to the prisoners, I followed them to the De Beauvoir Arms; M'Donald went in, and I followed him; he laid down a shilling, and was served with the beer—the landlady laid the shilling on the inner counter, I looked at it and found it was bad, and the landlady gave him into custody—I searched him, and found 2d. on him—Mr. Eden directed me to a place where Stone had been, I went and found this other shilling in a bag and a piece of paper—the prisoner said he knew nothing about it.
M'Donald. Q. How often did you put your hand down? A. I only took the shilling up twice—I jinked it down once, and took it up and bit it, and found it was bad—I had not looked at three shillings before I said that one was bad.
MR. ELLIS. Q. How many shillings did you see in the De Beauvoir Arms? A. I saw one shilling after the one M'Donald had given—he had not put the beer to his mouth when I went in—I saw the lady take the shilling up and lay it on the counter, and I reached over and took it—and after I had seen another bad shilling, one was found under the cushion.
M'Donald's Defence. I did not know that I had a bad shilling, I had earned 1s. 6d. that day.
Stone's Defence. I am a hard-working man; I have got one or two masters to give me a character; they searched me, and the constable had left
the room for ten minutes, and he came in and said "Get up," and he said he found that shilling under the cushion, after I had been searched and nothing found on me but 71/2 d.
RICHARD EDEN re-examined. Stone had got his right hand rather behind him, and was very fidgety, that excited my suspicion—he got up, cast a side glance round, sat down again, and kept fidgeting—I told my suspicions to the constable, and he went and found the shilling in the spot where Stone had been sitting.
STONE received a good character.
M'DONALD— GUILTY .
STONE— GUILTY .
Confined six Months.
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, February 24th, 1858.
PRESENT—The Right Hon. the LORD MAYOR; Mr. Justice WIGHTMAN; Mr. Justice CROMPTON; Sir JAMES DUKE, Bart., M.P., Ald.; Mr. Ald. FINNIS; and Mr.Ald.GABRIEL.
Before Mr. Justice Wightman.
316. EDWARD JAMES SALTER (alias Holmes ) (29) was charged, upon four indictments, with feloniously and knowingly uttering forged Bank of England notes, with intent to defraud; having been previously convicted of felony: to which he
PLEADED GUILTY .— Eighteen Years Penal Servitude .
317. JOHN CARROLL (33) , Stealing, whilst employed under the Post Office, 2 letters, containing 1 photographic picture, value 5s., and 1 lens, value 4s.; the property of the Postmaster-General: to which he
PLEADED GUILTY .— Eight Years Penal Servitude .
Before Mr. Justice Crompton.
PLEADED GUILTY .
(The prisoner received a good character.)
Confined Eighteen Months.
(There were three other indictments against the prisoner, for forgery, upon which no evidence was offered.)
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, February 24th, 1858.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. SIDNEY; Mr. Ald. FINNIS; Mr. RECORDER; and Mr. Ald. ROSE.
Before Mr. Recorder and the Fifth Jury.
MESSRS. BODKIN and TINDAL ATKINSON conducted the Prosecution.
RICHARD LEGG . I am cashier to the London Joint Stock Banking Company. I remember, on 19th Jan., paying a cheque for 30l., purporting to be drawn by Mockford and Co.—I have the book here; the entry is in my
own handwriting—I am not certain whether I paid it to the prisoner—I paid a 10l. note, No. 47878, a 5l. note, No. 24177, and the remainder in money—I can say positively that the 5l. note was a new note—after I have cashed a cheque, I put it on a file; it is then taken from me by another clerk, who is here—it is not my duty, after the cheques have been entered and examined, to put them in the pass book.
WILLIAM GEORGE SHARP MOCKFORD . I carry on business as a merchant, at Kennett Wharf, Upper Thames Street; the prisoner has been my clerk several years. On 1st Jan., I took a partner into my business, Mr. Mesnard—up to 1st Jan., it was the prisoner's duty to keep the cash and pass book; he did not after 1st Jan.; he occasionally filled up a cheque, but Mr. Mesnard took the cash and pass books—the prisoner always went to the banker's for the cheque and pass book—I sign the cheques invariably—this has been the cheque book during the present year—I did not issue a cheque on 19th Jan., for 30l., but Mr. Mesnard did one—I remember Monday, 27th Jan.; the prisoner was in the office that day—I did not see him come in when the pass book came in; I saw him in the office in the early part of the day—I saw him with the pass book; I think he handed the pass book to Mr. Mesnard—I saw him leave the office, and after he left the office, Mr. Mesnard called my attention to the pass book, and I looked at it—after looking at the pass book, I looked at my cheque book—I observed a cheque was missing, about 19th Jan.—supposing a cheque had been spoiled, I had told the prisoner it was to be cancelled by crossing the margin in the cheque book—here is no such word in the cheque book on that day, or about that day.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Though you signed the cheques, your partner used to take them, and the prisoner? A. Yes; after 1st Jan., they were filled up sometimes by the prisoner or Mr. Mesnard—after 1st Jan., my partner joined me; it became his duty to take care of all the books—he may have gone sometimes to the bank for a book—I may have gone myself sometimes, but, since 1st Jan., I do not know that I have—the prisoner was sent for the pass book—I did not send him; I was not present when any one did send him—when I came in, the prisoner was in the office, standing by the side of my table—the pass book was on the table—he handed me 5l., the proceeds of a cheque—with respect to spoiled cheques, there is a mark on the paper to show that they were cancelled; I was sometimes in the habit of putting that mark, indicating the cancel, myself, and my partner likewise—with respect to the cheque itself, if it was spoiled, it would be put into the fire; I invariably burnt them—I am not in the habit of giving blank cheques—I gave Mr. Mesnard some cheques signed in blank, to be filled up; I think five or six, since he became my partner.
MR. BODKIN. Q. When you sign cheques in blank, do you always give them to your partner? A. I never did so but on one occasion, and I gave them to my partner—the practice was, that if a cheque was spoiled, the word "cancelled" should be on the counterfoil—I do not find the word "cancelled" on the cheque which is missing; I do on the next counterfoil, in the prisoner's handwriting.
CHARLES LEONARD MESNARD . I am a partner of Mr. Mockford; I have been so since 1st Jan. When I came, I found the prisoner in the employ—he had the care of the cash; I was going to take all those duties from him, but, of course, I did not do so immediately I went in—from 1st Jan., the prisoner had partly the keeping of the cash, and partly myself—the prisoner filled up part of the cheques, and I filled up others—I was perfectly new in the business—the prisoner sometimes filled up cheques; they were signed by
Mr. Mockford—the prisoner sometimes took them to him to sign, and sometimes myself—there were some cheques drawn in blank, since 1st Jan.; I am able to state that I filled those cheques up—there were crossed cheques drawn, and blank cheques—I did not fill up the crossed cheques; I filled up those which were not crossed—I remember, on 27th Jan., I sent the prisoner to the bank for the pass book—I was not there when he returned; I came in afterwards, and found him there—I did not see the pass book at first; I asked him for it, and he pointed to it on the table—this is the pass book—after I had asked him for the book, and he pointed to it on the table, I was talking to Mr. Mockford, and remained talking a short time, and the prisoner shortly afterwards told me he did not feel well, and if I had nothing particular for him to do, he would like to go—I told him he might go, and he did go; he did not return that day—after he had gone, I took up the pass book; I looked at it; I found an entry in that pass book which attracted my attention—I then looked into the pocket of the pass book; I did not find any cheque there, corresponding to the entry in the pass book, of 30l.—I did not find a cheque for 30l., on 19th Jan.—I am able to state, that on that day no such cheque was drawn—I filled up a cheque on that day, but it was after bank hours, and it was dated on the 20th, being filled up after bank hours——I saw the prisoner the next morning; I did not speak to him at first; I immediately went to the Joint Stock Bank—when I came back, I saw the prisoner—I said to him, "Ratcliff, I want the cheque for 30l. which has been taken out of the cash book, corresponding with this entry of the 19th"—he looked rather confused, and said, "I have not got it"—I explained what cheque it was, a cheque for 30l., on 19th Jan.; he denied any knowledge of it—I found a 5l. note—I told him we had discovered that the cheque had been paid in notes, and some time after he remarked to me, that if the cheque had been paid in gold, he did not see how it could be traced—as well as I can recollect, that was after I told him we had discovered it had been paid in notes.
Cross-examined. Q. This was the day after he absented himself? A. Yes—I believe he came to the office on the day after the conversation; I was not there myself—I saw him again at the Mansion House—I drew a cheque for 30l. on the 19th, but I dated it the 20th—I saw this pass book lying on the table in the office—I was not there when the prisoner came in—I drew a cheque for 30l. on the 15th—I am not aware that I went to the banker's, to get the pass book, more than once, or that I did get it once; I have only been in the business since 1st Jan.
MR. BODKIN. Q. On 15th Jan., did you draw a cheque for 30l.? A. Yes; it was crossed for the banker's—I paid that to J. B. Eland and Co.—I saw that cheque at our office after it had been paid—I saw it about the 18th—I have missed that cheque—I have the cheque here which was drawn on the 19th and dated the 20th; that was not crossed, but left open—I paid it to my brother, and it is returned as cancelled.
JOHN TURNEY PICKERING . I am a clerk in the London Joint Stock Bank. It is my duty to make the pass books up for customers—I made an entry in this pass book before me; it is on 19th Jan., 1858—I examined this entry with the cheque; I copied this from the cheque—I then put the cheque into the pocket of the book, and put it with the rest.
Cross-examined. Q. This date that you refer to is the 19th? A. Yes—it is not my duty to take care of the pass books—having received the cheques, I put them into the pocket; that is part of my duty—I have to do that for a large number of customers, forty or fifty every day—I think my attention
was drawn to this matter about three weeks ago—I do not make an entry in any book of the number of cheques I put into each pass book—I should say that in Jan. I put cheques into Mockford and Mesnard's book almost as often as the book was in—I do not know how often the customers send their books in—I cannot tell how often, during Jan., I put cheques into their book—that is my only entry in the book since 9th Jan.—the entry before 19th Jan., that I made, was on the 8th—when I put the cheques into the pocket, I deposit the book with the other pass books—it is no part of my duty to deliver the books to the customers—there are other entries in Jan., by other clerks, not in my writing.
MR. BODKIN Q. You examined that book on the 19th, and put the cheques in the pocket, and delivered it to the ledger keeper? A. Yes—here are no entries in my handwriting between the 8th and 19th, No. 1051—I got that from that part of the cheque where the name is written—sometimes there is the name and number too—some persons put the number, because it is shorter—I took this from the cheque, decidedly.
COURT. Q. I suppose each clerk puts in the cheque which he enters? A. Yes; and, after 19th Jan., cheques were entered and put in by other clerks.
HENRY WHITE . I am ledger keeper to the London Joint Stock Bank. In the course of my duty, I enter ticks in the ledger—the entry is not mine; the tick is—my tick is to the entry of 30l., on 19th Jan; that is to prove that it corresponded with the entry in the ledger—the book is then put for the cashier to give up, when an application is made for it by the customer—I do not refer to the pocket of the pass book for the cheque, only when it does not agree with the ledger—I had no occasion to refer to the pocket that day, seeing it agreed with the ledger.
HENRY WILLIAM VERNON . I am clerk to Werter and Byrne, Carey Street, Lincoln's Inn, solicitors. I know the prisoner by sight—I remember supping with the prisoner one evening, about a month ago; I cannot remember the exact day—on that occasion I changed a 5l. note for him; it was in Holborn, at a refreshment place—I do not remember where I was on 19th Jan.; it was about that time that I saw the prisoner—I passed that note on the following morning, to Mr. Morton—I wrote my name on it—this is the note; here is my handwriting on it—I am still in the employ of Werter and Byrne; I am articled to them.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you any recollection of the date on which you changed the 5l. note for the prisoner? A. It was about a month ago; I paid it away the next day, to the best of my belief—I did not say yesterday that it might be two or three days after.
COURT. Q. Had you any other 5l. note in your possession at that time? A. No.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you any distinct recollection whether it was the 19th or 20th? might it have been on the 17th or 18th? A. I think not; I paid a sum into our banker's on the 17th, and if I had had this note, I should have paid it in—my impression is, that this was handed to me on the morning of the 20th, between 10 and 11 o'clock.
CHARLES PRIMROSE . I supped in Holborn, in company with the witness Vernon; I think it was on 19th Jan.—I am not sure it was the 19th; it was somewhere thereabout—I saw a 5l. note pass from the prisoner to Mr. Vernon—it was at a refreshment place in Holborn.
ALFRED BROWN . I am paying cashier at the London Joint Stock Bank. On 20th Jan., I cashed a cheque for 30l., for Messrs. Mockford and Mesnard; I gave for it two 5l. notes, Nos. 56941 and 56942, and two 10l. notes, Nos. 59107 and 59108.
ROBERT SELFE. I am clerk to John Edey and Co. I received a cheque for 30l. from Mockford and Mesnard, on 15th Jan.—I do not recollect whether it was crossed or not—I paid it into Robarts and Co., on 15th Jan.
GEORGE SCOTT (City policeman). I took the prisoner on this charge, on 30th Jan.; I took him to Bow Lane station—while I was searching him, I noticed a piece of a cheque fall, which I produce—I have examined the bank cheque book, and find this piece corresponds with the piece in the book.
Cross-examined. Q. It was on 30th Jan. you took him? A. Yes—this is a portion of some cheque, but no particular cheque—I produce a 10l. note, which I obtained at the Joint Stock Bank.
Cross-examined. Q. Is this like the prisoner's ordinary writing? A. Some of it is; some is disguised.
COURT. Q. Did you draw any other cheques for 30l., except the two on the 15th and the 20th? A. No—I did not sign any other.
(The prisoner received a good character.)
GUILTY .— Confined Two Years .
MR. BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.
LEWIS HASLUCK . I live in Hampshire. I was in London on 23rd Dec.—I had in my possession a 20l. note—this is it (looking at it)—I went into a pastry cook's shop in St. Martin's Court on that day, and had some trifling article—I had my 20l. note and some silver in a little bag in my trousers' pocket—the prisoner was in the shop I went into—I had some article and paid for it—I took the money out of my bag—I had not to receive any change—I should think I was in the shop ten minutes—I stood to eat what I bought at the end of the counter—there were two gentlemen in front of the counter—I believe I was standing the whole time—I was standing when I paid for what I had—I did not pull my bag out—I passed my hand inside and got a sixpence out to pay for the refreshment I had, and in drawing my hand out, I presume I drew out the note—I did not miss it till the following day—I went to the shop immediately on discovering my loss—the prisoner was not in when I entered, but she came into the shop and was moving away from the establishment—I told her I had lost a 20l. note, and my impression was that I must have dropped it there—she told me she knew nothing of the note, but she thought it probably was dropped on the wrong side of the counter, and somebody might have picked it up and taken it away, and she was very sorry for me—I followed her down to the cab that was waiting for her, and she gave me to understand she was going either to Lambeth or Westminster—I did not see her afterwards till she was in custody.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. When had you this note in your possession first? A. Some weeks before—I had been that morning to Aldridge's—I did not go to Aldridge's after the loss, to ask if I had dropped it there—I did not go to a public house opposite Aldridge's, to see if I had dropped it—I
had been an hour or two at Aldridge's that morning, and I went over to a public house—after leaving the prisoner, I went to Ely Place, where I was staying—I did not go to any other place to wash down the pastry—when I went to the prisoner the next day, she told me she was moving—I went to the shop a few days afterwards—I did not get her address from the persons who were there—I put myself in communication with the police; that was on the receipt of information that the note had been traced; that was about the second week in January—I was not, at one time, under the impression that I had dropped the note in the street; I did not say so—I was not under the impression that I dropped it between St. Martin's Lane and Barbican, on the 23rd—I put an advertisement in the paper—my impression, from first to last, was that I lost it in the pastrycook's shop—I was not in Barbican at all that day; that was on Wednesday—I was in Barbican on the Thursday—I believe I was not on Tuesday—I was not under the impression that I lost the note between St. Martin's Lane and Barbican—I believe Barbican has been suggested in reference to the loss.
WILLIAM MARSHALL . I am assistant to Dakin and Co., tea dealers, St. Paul's Churchyard. I remember the prisoner coming to the shop on 28th Dec., she made some purchase which I think amounted to 4s. 6d.—she paid with a 20l. note—this is the note she gave—it was about half past 6 o'clock in the evening—I wrote on the note "28, 12, 57"—she did not give any name—I had the address on it, but the address is torn off now—I am quite sure the prisoner is the person—I saw her afterwards when I was taken to Hampstead Road.
Cross-examined. When was it you first heard of the matter afterwards? A. I cannot recollect—it was several days afterwards—it may have been a fortnight or three weeks—I had not seen the person who brought the 20l. note previously, to my knowledge—it was about the 5th Feb., I was taken to the Hampstead Road—the officer described a female to me—after I received the note, I handed it to the cashier—in our shop there is a great amount of custom, and a great number of assistants—the cashier is Charles Seymour—he is not here—the note taken that day was entered as a 10l. note—that was by the person to whom I gave the note—when I was taken to Hampstead Road, it was to the prisoner's lodging—the officer did not tell me that he had the person in custody—I was taken to see if it was the party who came into the shop and tendered the 20l. note.
MR. BODKIN. Q. The person who entered a 10l. note must have made a mistake? A. Yes—I do not remember having seen the prisoner before that day—I am certain she is the person.
MR. SLEIGH to LEWIS HASLUCK. Q. You went from the pastrycook's to Ely Place; did you go out again that evening? A. No—I did not leave any written address with the prisoner; I said I should go at once and advertise it, and stop payment—we had those few words as she was passing.
JOHN MOORE . I am a City officer—I had a communication about this note, and I endeavoured to trace it—in consequence of what I discovered, I went to the shop in St. Martin's Court—the prisoner had left—I found she was lodging in Frederick Street, Hampstead Road—I went there and took Marshall with me—the prisoner occupied the first floor—she came down, and I said, "Mrs. Pepino, I believe you remember a gentleman calling on you in St. Martin's Court, respecting a Bank of England note"—she said "Yes, I do; I have never seen that note; I gave directions to the servant to look sharp after the note when she swept the shop, but they have seen nothing of
it"—Marshall was there; I was there perhaps three or four minutes—when we came out, Marshall said, "That is the woman"—she was taken on the following day.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you make two visits to her? A. Yes; I called on her on the 5th Feb., and on the 6th I took her into custody—I got the address from the shop where she had been—some other persons are in that shop now, successors to her—I know nothing of the shop.
NOT GUILTY .
321. ALFRED JONES (25), WILLIAM GINGER (35), EDWIN SHORE (30), and HENRY FIELD (40) , Stealing, on 15th Feb., 1501bs. weight of lead, value 30s.; also, on 16th Feb., 123lbs. weight of lead, value 25s.; the goods of Joseph Taylor, their master.
MR. PAYNE conducted the Prosecution.
ROBERT PACKMAN . I am a detective officer of the London police. On Monday, 15th Feb., I went with Foulger to where the men were at work, at the new Clothworker's Hall—I went to a spot were I could see the men at work—I saw the four prisoners there; certainly three of them—I will not swear whether Field was the other man or not—Ginger and Shore were bringing lead from different parts of the roof of the building, and taking it to Jones, who was beating it up into a smaller bulk on a kind of scaffold—a portion of it he put into his own trousers, and part he put down to some one underneath, who I believe to be Field—about ten or twelve pieces were brought to him—I saw Shore unbutton his trousers, and put some lead in, I believe, from the distance I was at—that was all I saw that day—I went there between 4 and 5 o'clock, and left about twenty minutes after 5 o'clock—I went again on Tuesday, to the same place, about ten minutes before 5 o'clock—I saw the same three that I had seen before, and I believe the fourth man—I saw the lead brought by Ginger and Shore, and Jones beating it up, and putting a portion in his pockets, and putting some down to some person below—I left where I was and went into the street, and at half past 5 o'clock the gate was thrown open—I met Jones coming out of the building—I felt that he had something very bulky and heavy—I saw a portion of lead in his pockets—I asked him how he accounted for having his master's property—he said he took it to get some beer—I took him to the station, and found on him various pieces of lead, altogether 72lbs.—about 50lbs. was in the fall of his trousers, and the other in various pockets—I found on him 2s. 91/2 d.—Jones gave a false address, No. 12, Robert Street, City Road—Ginger gave the address, No. 14, Windsor Street, Islington—I went there, and found a number of copper nails in a box, and a number in a jacket in the room.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. When you went on Monday, were a number of men at work? A. I saw five or six—Ginger and Shore were rather above Jones—they brought the pieces of lead from behind the dome, and threw them on the boards where Jones was—they stood some time looking, while Jones was beating them up and putting them in his pockets—I was looking after them about twenty minutes—Ginger gave his right address.
THEODORE HALSTEAD FOULGER . I am a City officer. I went, on the Monday, with the last witness and Mr. Taylor, to a place where I could command a view of the roof and dome of Clothworker's Hall—I saw Jones, Ginger, and Shore, and I think Field, but I cannot swear to him—Jones brought a box of lead from one part of the roof which we could not see—Shore came and got on a lower part of the scaffold—Jones beat these pieces up and put in his pocket—Ginger kept throwing pieces of lead to where these
men were—I should say Jones put a dozen pieces into his pockets—I left, and went again on Tuesday evening, about 5 o'clock—I saw almost precisely what I had seen on the preceding night—Jones beating up lead and putting it in his pocket—Ginger took some lead round to another part of the building—I saw him carry one piece, which, I believe, was afterwards taken to the shop—I saw them throwing pieces of lead down to Jones, and he took it and put it about his person—I went round to the building about ten minutes or quarter past 5 o'clock—I took Field into custody, and, on returning to the building, I saw the men come out—there were about one hundred men—the plumbers and labourers were called on one side, but they made a rush to get back—I took Ginger and Shore—I found on Ginger 1s. 9d., and a few copper nails; and on Shore 3d., and a few copper nails—I saw Field coming out, and he went into a doorway, when he saw the police—he remained there about a minute, or perhaps a little longer—he had the top of his waistband unbuttoned—I had some communication, and took him—I found nothing on him—I took him to the station with the others—the next morning, I went to the doorway where Field had gone in, and found a piece of lead weighing 53lbs. dropped between the joists—there was no way of getting out of the building by going in that doorway.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. The men were all coming out of the building in a body, when you stopped them? A. Yes—I cannot say how many came out; perhaps a hundred or a hundred and twenty—I should say there were more than a hundred altogether—I took Field and came back—I searched Ginger and Shore in the building—the doorway is but a short distance from the gate—I searched the men nearer to the gates than the doorway.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. The piece of lead you found on Ginger was very small? A. Yes—it did not weigh half a pound.
JOSEPH TAYLOR . I carry on the business of a plumber in Clements Lane. I am engaged in doing the plumber work at Clothworker's Hall—the four prisoners were in my employ as labourers—they all receive the same wages—in consequence of information, I went with two police officers, on Monday, 15th Feb., to the building—I went about 3 o'clock, and put myself in an office which overlooked the building—the men were at their work—about 4 o'clock, I saw Jones take his position on a part of a scaffolding at the back part of the building, and, a few minutes afterwards, Shore came forward with a quantity of lead, and handed it to Jones—about a minute afterwards, Field came forwards and he got underneath where Jones was sitting—he brought some lead, and put it on the scaffold where Jones was sitting—Ginger then came and brought some lead, and threw it on to the scaffold—Jones had a brick in his hand, and he was knocking up the lead that was brought to him—the men who brought the lead could see what he was doing; they were standing within a yard of him—he handed several pieces, nine or ten, underneath to Field—I could see Field distinctly, and could see what he did with the lead; he lapped it round his body—the lead that Jones did not give to Field, he put some into his pocket, and fastened a portion underneath his stomach—I have seen the lead that was found—I have not any doubt that it is my lead—the prisoners had not any right to take it.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Have you any old lead there? A. No, none; it was all taken away when the building was pulled down—this was all new lead—there would be cuttings which ought to have been taken back to my premises—it was the duty of one or two men (not the prisoners) to collect them, and to convey them to my warehouse—no one of the prisoners
had any command or control over the others—there was a foreman of the works who gave all the commands—these men were acting under the foreman—his name was Reed—I have discharged him since—I saw Field take some lead—he undid his waistcoat, and placed the lead round his body—I remembered all that I had seen when I was before the Magistrate, certainly—if I had had my own way, I should have had them taken the first day, but I was advised to let the detectives follow them, to try to find the receivers.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Did you see Ginger collect the lead? A. The building is such that I could not see him till he came with the lead; it is a circular building—Ginger threw it on the scaffold before Jones—Ginger went away and came back again—Shore had been at work at that building about three months, and Ginger five or six weeks—some lead had been brought to my shop—about one quarter of the quantity that was found on one of these prisoners.
MR. PAYNE. Q. It ought all to have been brought there? A. Yes; none of the prisoners had any right to beat it up, and put it in their pocket.
COURT to JOSEPH TAYLOR. Q. Was any stock taken of the lead? A. Yes; and upwards of five tons are missing—the job was commenced in Nov.—Shore was there about the commencement; Ginger and the others came after Christmas. (Jones, Ginger, and Shore received good characters.)
GUILTY .— Confined Six Months each .
MR. PAYNE conducted the Prosecution.
THEODORE HALSTEAD FOULGER . I am a detective police officer. On 16th Feb., I was at the Clothworker's Hall—I saw the prisoner leaving, about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour before the other men left work—I went and stopped him; I told him I was a police officer, and asked if he had any thing about him—he made no answer; I felt his trousers pocket, and felt some lead—I took him to the station, and searched him—I found one piece of lead in each of his trousers pockets; they weighed 8lbs.
JOSEPH TAYLOR . I am a plumber, and am engaged in the work at Clothworker's Hall—this is my lead—the prisoner was in the employ of Mr. Jay—the prisoner had nothing to do with lead, or with taking it to my warehouse.
COURT. Q. Was there any lead about there, except your's? A. No, none.
Prisoner's Defence. I was coming out to see what time it was, and I saw this piece in front of the building outside; I took it up, and put it in my pockets; I wanted to come back, but the officer stopped me; I thought it was no harm.
GUILTY .— Confined Three Months.
MR. PAYNE conducted the Prosecution.
DENNIS REDDEN . I am foreman to Mr. Jay, the contractor for the works at Clothworker's Hall—the prisoner was employed by Mr. Taylor—on Tuesday evening, 16th Feb., about half-past 5 o'clock, the men were stopped in going out—I saw the prisoner about to leave, and the doors were shut by order of the police—I saw the prisoner unbutton his jacket and trousers, and he seemed to have some difficulty in getting something out—it appeared to be taken from the waistband of his trousers—it fell heavily, like lead; it fell, or
was thrown, under the stairs—the prisoner then got as near to the door as possible—I spoke to the time keeper, and pointed out the place where the lead had fallen.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Were you at work there? A. Yes—I am foreman to Mr. Jay—about a hundred men were leaving—before any had gone out, the gates were shut—the men were not collected in a body; the mob was in the centre of the building—I was on the outskirts—there might be half a dozen about me, within three or four feet of me—there were three or four others nearer to me than the prisoner—there were none between me and the prisoner—I knew the reason that the orders were given—the prisoner did not go away from me—he endeavoured to get to the door as quickly as possible—he was the second that went out after he had unbuttoned his coat—it was after he removed from me I saw him unbutton his coat—I thought it was lead that fell—I could not see it; it was dark—I did not go immediately to pick it up—some of the other men saw it, no doubt—I asked them whether they saw it—a person of the name of Adams saw it—I spoke to the time keeper about a minute afterwards; the lead was found under the stairs—I was about four feet from the stairs—the prisoner was standing under the stairs.
JOSEPH LAMBERT . I am time keeper to Mr. Jay—I was on the premises when the men were leaving, on that Tuesday evening—Redden directed my attention to the place where the lead was found—I did not see any person go to that place after he spoke to me—I saw the officer find the lead under the stairs.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you near where the prisoner was? A. I was not in a situation to see him—I saw Redden—there were many persons about him—there were not many persons behind him—the stairs were behind him—I could not see the place where the prisoner stood—I could not see the stairs; the wall prevented me—I did not inquire whether any of the other men had seen this.
MR. PAYNE. Q. Did you see the officer pick the lead up in the place that Mr. Redden had pointed out? A. Yes.
Witness for the Defence.
HENRY REED . I know the prisoner was at work there that day—I know this piece of lead produced; it is 7lb. lead—there is 6lb. lead and 5lb. lead—I know where the prisoner was at work that day; there was lead there—there was 5lb. and 7lb. in the morning, and 6lb. lead in the afternoon.
Cross-examined by MR. PAYNE. Q. Had he to put it in his trousers? A. No—I was the foreman, and was discharged—Mr. Taylor said, the next morning, that if I had used proper diligence, this could not have taken place—I have no rule here to gauge this lead—I have a lock-up—all the cuttings ought to have gone to the shop—it would be no use to put them in my lock-up at half-past four o'clock, when they were to go at five.
(The prisoner received a good character.)
GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
WALTER JONES . I am a surgeon, at Fetter Lane. The prisoner came into my service on 10th Jan., as an assistant, and he continued till the 29th; two days after he left, I missed a coat, a pair of gloves, some boots, and books—this coat (produced) is mine—it was taken off the prisoner at the police court—some books of mine were found at his lodging.
Prisoner. Q. Had you several coats hanging up in your study? A. Yes, two or three—I gave you a frock coat the first week you were there—I did not give you this one to try on—the one I gave you was quite a different coat to this—I told you the books were at your service, to read at my house, not to take away—this one is a medical list, that ought not to have been taken from my house.
Mr. COOPER. Q. Did he leave you without notice? A. Yes; about half-past eight o'clock in the morning, without saying a word about it.
JOHN HEAD (Policeman, C 89). I took the prisoner at half-past 1 o'clock on 6th Feb., on another charge—he was taken to the police office, and this coat was identified on him—at Marlborough Street he was searched, and a bottle of prussic acid was found upon him.
Prisoner's Defence. My master gave me a coat, and the morning I left I took this coat in mistake; the books, he told me, were at my service, to read.
COURT to WALTER JONES. Q. When the prisoner left, did he leave the coat that you gave him behind him? A. No, he took them both—he resided at my house—he had no business to leave the house at any time, without my consent.
GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
SAMUEL WILLIAMS . I am cashier to the Parcels Delivery Company—the prisoner came to my office on 21st Jan.—he said he had called for Mr. Jones's account—I had left word at Mr. Jones's house, that if Mr. Jones would come I would pay him—the prisoner came, and received 4l. in gold, and the rest in silver—this is the receipt, signed by the prisoner, "Received, Jan. 21st, 1858, 4l. 5s. 6d."—when I went to the house, I saw the prisoner—I asked for Mr. Jones; he said he was not in—I said, if Mr. Jones would come, I would pay him the money, and he said he would tell him.
WALTER JONES . On 21st Jan., I was down at Cheltenham—the Parcels Delivery Company owed me some money—the prisoner had no right to receive that or any other money, only what was brought to the shop—he had no right to go out for any money—I did not find this out till after he had left—I find a leaf had been torn out of the book on 21st Jan.—this is the book in which he ought to enter any sums he received—if this money had been brought to the shop, he might have received it, and told me.
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, February 24th, 1858.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. FINNIS; Mr. Ald. CARTER; and Mr. COMMON SERJEANT.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant and the Seventh Jury.
PLEADED GUILTY .**— Four Tears Penal Servitude .
327. MARY ANN ROBINSON (22), ANN FISHER (22), and HENRY JONES (30) , Stealing 1 purse, value 1s., and 11s. in money; the property of Abraham Hancock, from the person of Louisa Hancock; Fisher having been twice before convicted: to which
FISHER— PLEADED GUILTY .**— Four Years Penal Servitude .
Mr. LILLEY conducted the Prosecution.
LOUISA HANCOCK . I am the wife of Abraham Hancock, of No. 8, Ormond Terrace, Regent's Park. On 8th Feb., at about half past 4 o'clock, I saw the two female prisoners—Robinson asked me the way to Mary-le-bonne—I inquired "What part?" because we were only a few yards out of Mary-le-bonne; she said, "Oh, Mary-le-bonne"—I directed her—Fisher was at my right hand very close to me, and Robinson in front—they then left me, and almost immediately I felt, and missed my purse from my dress pocket, containing a half sovereign and 1s. or 2s. and a bill, which I had just paid, and put into it only a few minutes before—I turned, and saw that the prisoners were not going the way that I had directed them; they were walking, but as soon as they saw me following, Fisher ran away—I called to the park keeper, and gave him information; he stopped Fisher—this is my purse (produced), and this paper in it is mine—I afterwards saw the other two prisoners stopped—I went to the station; the three prisoners were present, and somebody threw my purse at my feet—the half sovereign and a peculiar sixpence were gone, but there was some silver left.
Cross-examined by MR. COOPER. Q. Had you a new fashioned pocket; in your gown? A. Yes—Fisher stood on my pocket side—I was walking quickly when the female prisoners stopped me; they were together.
Cross-examined by MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Where was Jones? A. He afterwards addressed me.
GEORGE BROOKS . I am park constable No. 2. On 8th Feb., about half past 4 o'clock, I saw the female prisoners together, and Jones within two yards of them—they were crossing over the bridge, from St. Martin's Church—all three were in conversation for ten minutes—the women then talked to the lady, while Jones stood in the road, four or five yards off; they then went away over the bridge, at a good pace—I went over, and met the lady; she gave me some information, and I went after them—Fisher was running when she saw the lady talking to me; I ran after her, and stopped her—the other two ran on the contrary side of the road—Jones followed the women, when they left the lady, and they had left him to speak to her.
Cross-examined by MR. ORRIDGE Q. What road was it? A. The Albert Road, near the York and Albany; that belongs to the park—the lady and the two women were on the pavement, and Jones in the road, by the rails, four or five yards off—I was in my park dress; they might have seen me plain enough, if Jones had been keeping a look out—Jones got 400 or 500 yards before he was taken; he asked me, at the station, what I gave him in charge for.
GEORGE WHITE (Policeman, S 290). On 8th Feb., about half past 4 o'clock in the afternoon, I was on duty in the Regent's Park, and saw Fisher running beside the park railings, as fast as she could, and the park keeper following her—Jones and Robinson were running on the opposite side of the road, and as soon as they saw me, they walked—the park keeper called to me, but I could not hear what he said—I stopped Jones, and another park keeper stopped Robinson, and the lady gave her into custody—Jones said at the station, "I know nothing of the women"—as soon as they were placed in front of the dock, Fisher took the purse from under her mantle, and threw
it over the desk at Mrs. Hancock, who was sitting there, saying, "Here is your purse, Ma'am;" it dropped close at her feet.
ROBINSON and JONES— GUILTY .—They were both further charged with having been before convicted.
JOHN COOK (Policeman, S 198). I produce a certificate—(Read: "Clerkenwell, July, 1852; Mary Ann Robinson, Convicted of stealing a gold watch, from the person; Confined six months" )—I was present—Robinson is the person—she has also been convicted of stealing a watch from an hotel—she has been living with a man who is now doingfour years penal servitude.
ROBINSON—GUILTY.— Four Years Penal Servitude .
JONES—GUILTY.—(The officer Cook stated that he had been five times in custody for burglary and other offences.)— Transported for Fifteen Years .
WILLIAMS PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.
MICHAEL HAYDON . I am a detective officer. On 22nd Feb., I was at the corner of Ludgate Street, about twenty minutes past 5 o'clock, and saw the prisoners—Williams put her left hand into the pocket of a lady, while Cochrane engaged the lady in conversation—Williams withdrew her hand, and walked quietly away, followed by Cochrane—I spoke to the lady, and went after the prisoners; they walked away together down Ludgate Street—I laid hold of Williams, told her I was an officer, that she had stolen a lady's purse, and she must come back with me to the shop where the lady was waiting—I took from her hand this purse, open (produced)—she said, "You have made a great mistake; you are mistaken altogether—I addressed them both, but Cochrane made no reply—I took them back, showed the lady the purse, and she said that it was her's, in their presence—the charge was booked at the station, in their presence; they made no reply.
ANN EVANS . I am a widow. I was in Ludgate Street, the day before yesterday, and saw Cochrane at my right elbow; she asked me if I could direct her to London Bridge, or which omnibus would take her there—the other woman disappeared, after asking me two or three questions—a policeman came up and spoke to me, and I felt in my pocket; another policeman beckoned me into a stationer's shop, and I found I had lost my purse—it was afterwards shown to me; I had seen it safe a very short time before.
Cochrane's Defence. Since I have come out from my six months, I have been at the wash tub; I do not know this woman.
GUILTY .—She was further charged with having been before convicted.
ALFRED GREEN I produce a certificate—(Read: "Central Criminal Court, Dec., 1856; Mary Connor, Convicted of stealing a purse and money, from the person of Sarah Scudamore; Confined six months")—I was present—Cochrane is the person.
GUILTY.— Confined Eighteen Months.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, February 25th, 1858.
PRESENT—MR. Justice WIGHTMAN; Sir JAMES DUKE, Bart., M.P., Ald.; Mr. Ald. SIDNEY; Mr. Ald. CARTER; and Mr. Ald. HALE.
Before Mr. Justice Wightman and the Fourth Jury.
329. HENRY EDWARD LEGGE was indicted for that he, being employed in the public service of the Queen, did receive the sum of 23,517l. 9s. 81/2 d., on account of the public service, and did afterwards steal 1,322l. 3s. 81/2 d., part of the said sum.—2nd COUNT, for embezzling the same.
MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL and MR. BODKIN conducted the Prosecution.
OCTAVIUS WHITFIELD . I am a clerk to Messrs. Hare and Whitfield, of the Temple; they are agents for the solicitor to the war department, and are conducting this prosecution. I produce a copy of a notice, which I served personally on the prisoner, on 22nd Feb.—(This was a notice to produce the defendant's commission, as paymaster of the 2nd Royal Surrey Militia; it was produced by the defendant's solicitor, and was dated 21st April, 1855).
RICHARD CHARLES KIRBY, ESQ . I am accountant-general to the army. In 1855, I was chief examiner of army accounts, which did not at that time include the militia; the militia accounts passed into my department for the book keeping purposes—it is the practice of the paymaster of a regiment to transmit quarterly what is called a pay list, an account of his receipts and disbursements; that is the case with all regiments, except the household troops—I produce the accounts rendered by the paymaster of the 2nd Surrey Militia, from April, 1855, to the time the regiment was disembodied—there are five accounts in that period.
R. C. KIRBY, ESQ. (continued). I have gone through these five accounts rendered to the department by the prisoner—I have prepared a statement of the account between him and the public, founded on those accounts—the first account commences on 1st April, 1855, and finishes on 30th June, inclusive—the second account is from 1st July to 30th Sept.; the third, from 1st Oct. to 31st Dec; the fourth, from 1st Jan. to 31st March; and the fifth, from 1st April to 12th June, 1856, the day of disembodiment—the regiment was embodied on 1st Feb., 1855; from Feb. until the prisoner was appointed, the adjutant, Captain De Tessier, acted as paymaster—the paymaster is virtuallly paymaster from the date of his commission—in the first account, commencing 1st April, 1855, the prisoner takes credit for a sum of 912l. 19s. 1d., as being due to the paymaster at the time he accepts the account; he brings forward a total on each side, the difference of which is 912l. in his favour; that is at the opening of the account; it is attributable to the date of 1st April, the day he begins the account—in the account I have prepared, I have given him credit for that 912l.—I have charged him with the amount of the drafts drawn by him on Cocks and Co., the agents of the regiment.
MR. CHAMBERS, seeing that a variety of documents were being produced, directed the attention of the Court to the 3rd section of the Act, by which the prosecution were enabled to give evidence of three distinct acts of embezzlement, or misappropriation, within six months; and he submitted that the prisoner was now entitled to be informed upon what distinct acts the Crown intended to rely. THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL contended that he was not called upon to accede to the application; the indictment did not charge any distinct and separate acts of embezzlement; but it alleged a misappropriation of certain sums, the result of the whole account. MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN considered that some distinct time, and some definite date, must be fixed upon, but thought that the objection was premature.
MR. KIRBY (continued). Cocks and Co., of Craig's Court, were the agents of the regiment—I have seen these cheques before, and have carefully gone through them three or four times—there are five cheques of the prisoner's, of 200l. each, in the first quarter; and nine of Captain de Tessier's.
CAPTAIN JAMES FITZHERBERT DE TESSIER . I acted as paymaster of this regiment, from the time of its being embodied to 1st April—I do not know that I can say that I ceased to act then, because I acted after that, till about the end of May, for my successor, the prisoner—I drew these nine cheques on the agents from 1st April to the end of May; I drew them for the prisoner.
MR. CHAMBERS. Q. Do you mean to say that he ordered you to draw them? A. He obtained leave, between the returns, on that distinct understanding; he could not have gone away between the returns, had I not drawn the cheques for him, or somebody deputed by him—I drew these cheques whilst he was on leave.
MR. BODKIN. Q. Had he the benefit of them in his account? A. Yes, they were entirely for the service of the regiment—I acted for him after his appointment, before he was gazetted; he had leave of absence, and left me to manage it for him—he continued the account that I had begun on 1st April. (The first cheque drawn by the prisoner was dated 22nd May, 1855.)
MR. KIRBY re-examined. These fourteen drafts amount to 3,073l. 14s. 10d.—I find in this first quarterly account, entries of receipts by the prisoner from other sources—no cheques are entered—in all these accounts, instead of entering facts, he enters guess work, estimates; they amount to 3,865l. 12s. 2d.—he debits himself with the balance first, and then with three other sums—entering estimates instead of money is not a correct mode of accounting—he does not debit himself to the full extent of 3,073l.—the real credit in the account is 2,573l. 14s. 3d.; the three items amount to 3,865l. 12s. 2d.—part of that credit is withdrawn on the other side—he admits, in this account, having received other money for the public service; there is, "Pay forfeited, 3l. 2s. 10d.;" "Stoppages for men in hospital, 54l. 10s. 4d.;" the result is that he debits himself with 835l. 14s. 01/2 d.; that is in addition to the 3,865l. 12s. 2d.—the balance on the first quarterly account, ending in June, 1855, is 1,108l. 19s. 4d., as due to the paymaster.
COURT. Q. In order to arrive at that balance, does he make himself debtor for as much as all the cheques would amount to? A. No, they do not amount to that extent; the sum he debits himself with is less by 500l. than it ought to be.
MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. On the second quarterly account how is the balance stated? A. Due to him 1,638l.; that is carrying on the former balance—by the next pay list, which is in December, there is due to him
184l. 4s. 6d.—he does not bring forward the former balance there, but he draws for it on a supplementary estimate—by the fourth, in March, 1856, there is due to him 1,249l. 11s. 5d.—it is always "due to him;" by the fifth, 1,534l. 4s. 5d. is due to him—that was the last account rendered—I have gone through those accounts, with a view of ascertaining what he actually received—in those five accounts, he credits himself with having paid the officers and the hospital expenses—I have looked at these accounts frequently, for the purposes of this trial; the sums that he debits himself with, instead of being bills, are the sums that he estimated at the beginning of the month; they are only conjectural, instead of being facts.
COURT. Q. But, after all, he does debit himself with those sums. A. Yes, which are incorrect; he did not expend that amount—if the sums that he put down to his debit had exactly equaled the amount of his cheques, of course we should have no objection to the amount; but that is not so—the estimates credited by him in June, 1855, amount to 3,865l. 12s. 2d., in which is included the pay of officers, which he debits again, and so far neutralises that credit by 1,291l. 17s. 11d., so that the true credit given by him is 2,573l. 14s. 3d., whereas he drew bills to the extent of 3,073l., as already shown.
MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. He also credits himself with an item in respect of hospital expenses, does he not? A. Not in that pay list; it is only the pay of officers in the first quarter's account—at the end of that account he makes out a balance due to himself of 1,000l. odd; that is, after taking credit to himself for the payment of 1,291l. 17s. 11d. for pay of officers—he also credits himself with payment to officers in the second quarter's account, that is, 1,239l. 2s. 5d., and also with hospital expenses, in two sums of 35l. 9s. 2d., and 1l. 6s. 8d.—we do not allege any other sum in that second quarterly account as put by him to his own credit and not paid—in the third quarterly account, he again credits himself with the pay of officers, in three several sums, amounting together to 1,400l. 15s. 2d.; none of that has been paid—he also credits himself with 42l. 9s. 4d. and 1l. 14s. 2d. for hospital expenses; those are the only sums—in the fourth quarter he credits himself with 1,184l. 6s. 5d. for pay of officers, and 78l. 11s. 8d. for hospital expenses—there is no other sum that we allege not to have been paid—in the fifth quarter he credits himself with officers' pay, in two sums of 925l. 17s. 8d., and 966l. 18s., making 1,892l. 15s. 8d., and also with 67l.2s. 10d. f or hospital expenses—there are no other items in that account with which he credits himself that we allege not to have been paid—the sum total of these amounts is 7,235l. 11s. 5d.—he never paid a halfpenny of that amount; but the final result of the whole of the accounts is a deficiency of 1,322l.—in the first quarter he states himself to have received, "Amount of pay of soldiers forfeited by sentence of court martial, 3l. 2s. 10d.;" "Stoppages from soldiers in hospital, 54l. 13s. 4d.;" "Soldiers pay equivalent to bread and meat, 726l. 10s. 101/2 d." "Soldiers deposits in the savings' bank, 11l.;" "Cost of company's books, 7s."—that is all in the first quarter—we do not debit him with the income tax; he charges himself with 85l. 1s. f or it; but he charges it back in the next page—the total of the sums I have given is 920l. 15s. 01/2 d.—his own total in the first account is 6,919l. 18s. 1d.—that is what he charges himself with on the first account—he actually received 3,994l. 9s. 10d.—in the second quarter, he debits himself with three months' estimates, amounting together to 4,269l. 18s. 5d.; he actually received, 8,173l. 1s. 10d.—he debits himself with other sums—we have not gone through them all; we are only now speaking of the estimates—in the whole, he debits himself with 5,182l. 13s. 2d., and he actually received 8,173l. 1s. 10d.—I perceive that
I have brought forward the total from a former quarter; he received, in that quarter, only 4,263l. 13s.—in the third quarter, he charges himself with having received 5,868l. 0s. 7d.—there is no amount brought forward there—the amount actually received by him was 5,422l. 2s. 11d.—in the fourth quarter, he charges himself with 4,578l. 18s. 4d.; he actually received 5,620l.—that is exclusive of any balance brought forward—in the fifth quarter, he charges himself with 5,657l. 13s. 6d.; he actually received 4,302l. 4s. 3d.—taking the result of those figures, I make the balance 2,630l. 18s. 5d., which is the deficiency.
COURT. Q. Then how do you explain the difference between that amount and the 1,300l. which you allege as the actual deficiency? A. In this manner: if you take down the figures as I state them, I think I may make it quite clear—it has already been shown that the pay of officers charged, and not paid, as we say, is, including hospital expenses, 7,325l. 11s. 5d.; then we take from that the sum that he has overcharged himself, which is said to be 2,605l. 18s. 5d.—I have not made out the account in that way myself; that leaves 4,604l. 13s. overcharged; then there is a sum that he must have credit for, which is the balance he debits in his first account—I give him credit for 3,049l. 12s. 10d.; the difference is 912l. 12s. 1d.
Q. But what is the balance that he states? A. The fact is, that the statement I have made out, is made out in quite a different manner; therefore, you must excuse me if I am not quite clear, but I have no doubt of the general result; he has overcharged a sum of 7,000l. odd, which he has never paid; if you deduct from that 4,604l. 13s., which he has charged himself with and never received, that leaves 2,630l. to his credit; no, against him—there is an essential difference between our claims upon him, for what we have paid him, and what he credits himself with having received in the estimates; we show that we paid him actual bills, drawn by him, drafts to a certain amount, he credits estimates only.
MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. Taking the account in the way we have taken it, does it make his debit, as near as possible, amount to 1,300l.? A. Yes, it does.
COURT. Q. But assuming that he has not paid a farthing of the 7,000l. odd for which he takes credit, is he then indebted on a balance of account, according to your statement, 2,636l. 1 8s. 5d.; whereas, if you have given the figures accurately, it ought to be 1,322l.? A. The account is so complicated in all its details, and the manner in which it is made out, that I should find it very difficult to do what you require me to do; I can only say that it does not appear prime facie on the statement.
MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. What course did you adopt to bring out the 1,300l.? A. I debited the sum that he had drawn, as shown by his own drafts; I then debited the sums that he credits himself with in his pay lists, as having received from other sources—the amount of those sums, up to June 12th, 1856, is 23,517l. 9s. 8d.—I get at the sum which he has paid from his own charges, only rejecting the pay of officers and hospital expenses; the result of that is to allow him 22,195l. 6s.; that would give a balance of 1,322l. 3s. 8d.—the difference arises between the amount that I find he has actually paid, and the amount which appears on the present statement to be actually paid.
COURT. Q. You stated just now that he had actually received 23,517l. 9s. 8d.? A. Yes; and then he is to be debited with 7,235l. 11s. 8d. but that is to be withdrawn in the sum I allow him—the gross sum received by him is 23,602l. 10s. 8d.—he was paid 22,195l.; he is entitled to credit for
that; we allow that he has paid it—if that is deducted from 23,602l. 10s. 8d. it leaves 1,407l. 12s. 8d.—the pay of officers and hospital expenses are excluded from the sums we allow.
MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. How do you account for the difference between the 1,407l. 12s. 8d. and the 1,322l. 3s. 81/2 d.? A. We have not charged against him some small sums—this last account was received on 23rd Dec., 1856, six months after the time—taking his accounts as they stand, they show a very large balance due to him, 1,532l. 4s. 5d.—during the period over which these accounts extend, there was a very great press of business in the office, and an immense deal of correspondence—the first account was examined to the extent of seeing superficially how it was made out, and a letter was written on the subject—on 9th March, 1857, the result of the examination of all his accounts was sent to him, and he was called upon to pay 1,300l., the cash balance—we first sent in a detailed claim for 1,935l., including various sums for explanation and vouchers; that included the 1,300l.—in Jan. last, criminal proceedings were taken; many demands had been made from time to time for a settlement; the matter was finally referred to the solicitor of the war department, and then these proceedings were instituted.
Cross-examined by MR. MONTAGUE CHAMBERS. Q. I believe you first gave him notice that you intended to proceed in the Court of Exchequer to bring him to account? A. I am not aware of that—I do not know the precise date at which the matter was referred to the solicitor; in April, 1857, the solicitor was engaged in a correspondence—I now say that our real demand, on the most favourable view of the accounts for the paymaster, is 1,322l. 3s. 8d., as a cash balance—we have not excepted two or three sums which he debited himself with, which has caused the small difference between the 1,400l. odd, and the 1,300l. odd—the balance never stood even in any quarter—the last two quarters he was decidedly in excess—at one time, on the face of the account, he was in advance of the public, that was at the beginning of his career—he did not always send in vouchers; a great many were not sent—the audit passed through two or three hands—I was not personally the auditor at the time; it passed through the hands of the juniors in the department to which militia accounts were allotted—when the first quarterly account was sent in I had not anything to do with it, except to record the amount in the books of the office, and the same with the four other accounts.
Q. Then nobody attempted to audit or inquire, until after the last account was sent in? A. Yes, they did; a clerk in the War Office, of the name of Stillwell—he is not one of the witnesses for this prosecution—three or four persons were engaged in going through these five quarterly accounts; one of them is here, Mr. Sidney Kirby, a son of mine—the first pay list in March was declared to by Captain De Tessier—the first account which the prisoner signed begins with a balance—I have got the account which Captain De Tessier sent in—the course of business with respect to these quarterly accounts is anterior to the money being paid, to make what is called a monthly estimate of the probably expenditure required during each month—that is the proper mode of proceeding—the monthly estimates are here—three monthly estimates are sent in every quarter, and a supplementary one, if necessary—the army agent sends in a quarterly account to the War Office; we give them a printed form; that is a very different form from these, a very simple form compared to these—these printed forms for the quarterly accounts are supplied from the War Office; there are twenty-eight forms, all bound in one volume—the captain of each company pays the men, and he is intrusted with money by the paymaster to do so at the end of each month; he is bound to balance
his account with the paymaster, and the paymaster adopts the charges, and introduces them into his pay list—a form is provided for the purpose of getting the acquittance of the captain each month.
COURT. Q. Here is a large sum of 7,235l. 11s. 5d. taken credit for, as having been paid to captains and others, which was never paid; but after all the balance now claimed is only 1,300l. odd; there must have been some over payments made by the prisoner on other accounts, or the balance would be larger. A. Yes; he over debits himself, as has been already proved, for the drafts under the name of estimates, and that stands to his credit, and is withdrawn on the other side—he did not receive the sum that was to be paid to the officers, it is only an estimate; an estimate is sent in to justify the paymaster in drawing at all—he claimed to a very large, extent beyond what he wanted, therefore he was always in a condition to draw more public money than he could want—he might have drawn much more than he did—he might have drawn to the whole extent of the 7,000l., but as soon as his quarterly pay list came in, it would have been seen what a large balance he had—it was in his power to do so, no doubt, for a time.
MR. CHAMBERS. Q. I see here that he is required to make a statement of sums paid to officers, as shown by the abstracts and monthly pay lists; where do the abstracts and monthly pay lists come from? A. The officers prepare them, and hand them to the paymaster at the end of the month, and there is an account current between them, which is adjusted every month—he takes the amount from what the officers hand to him, in order to get their receipt—the proper course of business is, almost immediately after the quarterly account is delivered, for some person to examine, and then send to the paymaster what is called an abstract of examination it is very desirable that it should be done as soon possible after the quarterly account is sent in; it is the ordinary practice, but it was very much interrupted during the Russian war—the duty of the examiner is, to take the abstract, and to put down his objections—there are printed forms, in order that all that may be done—every single charge that is objected to, is to be entered in the abstract of examination, and then the paymaster, having that called to his attention, is called upon to answer the objections, and to return it, so that it may be seen whether he has answered them, and whether his answers will be allowed—no abstract of examination was sent, in this case, until the receipt of the last pay list; after his last account was sent in, he would receive five abstracts of examination; he would have to go back through all those five abstracts of examination, to see whether he could answer the queries and objections—the burden would be thrown upon him, of correcting the errors in all the five accounts—he would not have to alter the figures in his accounts, but he would have to say yea or nay, whether it was correct.
Q. Suppose, not being a good accountant, he had entered a sum of money on the wrong side, or entered it twice over, and that pervaded all the accounts, he must make the correction or allowance in all the accounts? A. Certainly—in the third quarterly account he charges against himself 81l. 16s. for income tax; he debits himself with that amount in the Dec. pay list—he also charged the pay short of that, but in the next quarter he resumes the charge; he corrects it—that is noticed in the abstract of examination; that was after the whole of the accounts were sent in, I am not aware that it was noticed before—his quarterly debits consisted, generally, of the three monthly estimates; the estimate is made about the middle of the month preceding, but the money to be credited is not the estimate, but the draft—there is nothing
for estimates but the pay of officers; and there is his solemn declaration that he paid it—he both credited and debited himself upon estimates.
Q. I want an explanation of this: I see here, "To pay of officers, after deducting income tax, to be accounted for by the agent;" does the agent send in any account? A. The system, with regard to the pay of officers, is rather peculiar; the agent makes out one annual account, in which he charges all the pay of officers, name by name; that is done to prevent a double charge between the paymaster and the agent—the agent would have to charge and account for the 1,291l. 17s.11d. in this first account—in form No. 11, you will find a statement of the stoppages for men in hospital; that is, where he debits himself with stoppages; and where he credits himself, he must produce the account, to prove that he paid it, and if it was a wrong charge, it would be struck out—if there had been time to follow the proper course of business, we should have gone regularly through the account, quarter after quarter, and called upon him to produce his vouchers, and have seen which way the true balance was—he would not have to pay up that balance at the end of each quarter; he would have to carry it forward to the next quarter, as a debit against him or a credit on his side.
Q. Then what I understand you is, that there is a running account between the paymaster and the War Office? A. It is limited to a very small sum, regularly; it is limited by taking exception to any charges that appear to be improper, or where there are not vouchers produced—we point out the sums which are incorrect, and he corrects them in a future pay list; the balance goes on from quarter to quarter—I have had a very long experience in these regimental accounts—occasionally, young men go into the army as paymasters; in "the Line," it is usual to have a man already a soldier, an officer; but in the militia, you cannot get that—in the army, they are generally old captains, and gentlemen who have given their attention to accounts; but in the militia you cannot get that, and are obliged to resort to persons who have not had experience; we are obliged to take the recommendation of the Lord Lieutenant of the county, he appoints; we have scarcely any option in the matter, except we know something against the character of the party—I have never seen any account so irregular as this—the agent pays the officers—the agent sends in quarterly accounts—I have compared the defendant's quarterly accounts with the agent's; they are usually examined with the pay list; that is done in a branch of the office which I now superintend—these accounts have very much the appearance of having been prepared by a man who does not understand the proper way of preparing accounts—the paymaster is responsible; he may commit it to whom he likes; a pay sergeant might help him—in the regiments of the line, undoubtedly, there would be sergeants more experienced than in the militia—it would be the business of a young man to make himself acquainted with the accounts, if he accepts the appointment—I do not know whether the charge originally made against the defendant, at Bow Street, was for embezzling 1,900l.; I was not there then—I have stated that 1,400l. is the amount of his deficiency; I have explained the way in which I account for the difference between that amount and the 1,300l. odd—he became a clear defaulter in the quarter ending March, 1856; I mean, there was then a balance against him of 1,322l.
MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. Is that balance of 1,322l. the difference between what he actually received and what he actually paid? A. Yes.
COURT. Q. Which way was the balance, and what was the amount of the cash balance, on 1st July, 1855? A. He was in debt to the public,
218l. 19s. 4d.—on 1st Oct., there was 172l. 18s. 5d. due to him—that is not bringing forward the 218l. that was against him on the previous quarter; I am taking each quarter by itself—on 1st Jan., he was in debt 814l. 16s. 7d.; on 1st April, 1,054l. 9s. 2d.; and the fifth quarter is 319l. against him.
MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN inquired, whether the Prosecution intended to fix upon any definite act of embezzlement, or merely to rely upon the balance alleged to be deficient, as to which considerable confusion seemed to exist. MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL stated, that the Prosecution was not in a position to fix upon any particular item or date; they could only rely upon the general balance. MR. CHAMBERS submitted, that that would not support the indictment, and again directed the attention of the Court to the 3rd section of the Act. MR. BODKIN referred to the case of Reg. v. Mower, where the same question had arisen. MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN would not withdraw the case from the Jury.
THE RT. HON. THE EARL OF LOVELACE . I was colonel of the regiment of which the prisoner was paymaster, from the time the regiment was embodied until it was disembodied; during that time, the prisoner did not pay me any portion of my pay—I received my allowances, but not my pay—I received my pay through Messre. Cooks, the agents.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you appoint this young gentleman? A. No; I was in Italy at the time the regiment was embodied, and I applied for leave, and got leave till 1st May, 1855, when I joined—during my absence, it was necessary that the paymaster should be appointed, and the second in command made inquiries, and proposed the prisoner's appointment—the allowances that he paid me were of different sorts; for instance, the forage allowance for the horses; allowance for lodging, when we happened to be in a town in which there were no barracks; and I think there might be one or two other items—I presume that what I drew from the agents would be accounted for by them—I did not see much of the prisoner when I joined the regiment; I think the commanding officer would, perhaps, see less of the paymaster than any other officer of the regiment, because the paymaster's work is chiefly at a desk; his duties would bring him very little in contact with the commanding officer—I have to sign the monthly estimates, and look over the quarterly returns, as far as the muster roll is concerned, and things of that sort.
COLONEL PARRETT . I was lieutenant-colonel of the 2nd Royal Surrey regiment of militia. The regiment was embodied on 1st Feb.—I held the command of the regiment until the return of Lord Lovelace, who was on leave of absence until 1st May; after his lordship's return, I continued to be lieutenant-colonel, and remained on the strength of the regiment until it was disembodied—I only received allowances from the prisoner; the pay I received was from Cocks and Co.
Cross-examined. Q. I suppose you drew upon Cocks and Co.? A. Yes; they have accounted to me for it—I drew cheques upon them.
Cross-examined. Q. I suppose you had no money transaction of any kind with him? A. I had no public transaction.
CAPTAIN DINGWALL . I was in the regiment, as an officer, during the whole time it was embodied. I received my daily pay from Cocks and Co.—allowances for lodging and other matters I received from the prisoner; contingent money, and field allowance, and fuel—my daily pay as an officer I received from Cocks and Co.
CAPTAIN KERSHAW . I was a lieutenant in this regiment part of the time, and then a captain. I received my pay from Cocks and Co.; I only received from the prisoner, allowances, fuel, and lodging money, but no pay.
Cross-examined. Q. They have sent in their accounts, I suppose? A. No, they have not—I have drawn all my pay.
JAMES HOOPER . I am a clerk in the house of Cocks and Co., the army agents; they were agents to this regiment, of which the prisoner was paymaster—the pay of the officers was paid through oar house—these drafts appear all to have been paid by our house.
MR. TAYLOR re-examined. I was surgeon from April, 1855, to June, 1856—during the first two quarters, the hospital was purveyed by myself; during the subsequent quarters, by the purveyors under Government—the hospital was not at any time purveyed by the paymaster.
COURT. Q. What do you mean by "purveyed"? who paid for the things supplied to the hospital? A. I drew on the paymaster, during the first two quarters, sums for the payment of the hospital expenses; afterwards, I had nothing to do with the purveying—the two quarters to which I refer, are those beginning in Feb. and March, 1855, and April and May, 1858.
Cross-examined. Q. Where was the hospital? at Guildford? A. Yes—the expenses incurred there were everything relating to the maintenance of the sick in hospital—I, as surgeon, drew from the paymaster on estimate—I drew the first sum of Captain de Tessier, who was acting paymaster; that was a cheque for 40l., on Haydon's, the banker's, at Guildford, on the paymaster's account, and the second was the same; I drew 60l. on 30th Aug.
MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. What was that 60l. for? A. It was to meet bills for goods supplied during the second quarter, the bills not having been sent in.
EDWARD LOVE . I was in the employment of Mr. Green, of Portsmouth; he was purveyor of the forces for that district—Guildford was in his district—I entered into his service at the latter end of Feb., 1855—from 1st July, 1855, to Feb., 1856, Mr. Green purveyed the regiment of which the prisoner was paymaster—the head quarters then left Guildford for Aldershot; that was out of Mr. Green's district, but part of them remained till March, some of the sick—they were purveyed by Mr. Green during the time they were there—by purveying, I mean, every thing requisite for the sick, supplied out of the Government stores by the purveyor—the purveyor drew money from
the general agent of the Government; he was not paid by the paymaster of the regiment.
Cross-examined. Q. Who do you call the general agent? A. Sir John Kirkland—the hospital supplies are drawn from the tradesmen; they would be paid by the purveyor—I did not make any payments myself; I learned about the payment, from being in the office—Mr. Green used to visit the district—I was never at Guildford—I know that the Guildford accounts were paid by Mr. Green—I have not got the accounts; they are at the War Office—Mr. Green is at home.
KENTISH JENNER . I was purveyor of the camp at Aldershot, from 1st Jan., 1850, to 30th Sept. that year. The 2nd Surrey Royal Militia were there, from 16th Feb., to, I think, 4th June, when they went to Guildford, to be disembodied—during that time, I supplied the necessaries for the hospital—I was paid by the Government; I charged it in the public accounts—I received no portion of it from the paymaster of the regiment.
Cross-examined. Q. You were at Aldershot? A. Yes—I paid for every tiling myself—I was actually present at the camp, and know that I supplied it.
—HUTTON. I am a sheriff's officer, at Guildford. On 25th June, 1855, I had a warrant placed in my hands, to execute against the prisoner's goods—I saw him; I told him I had a writ of fi fa against him—he said that he was only in ready-furnished lodgings, and had nothing—I said, I thought there was a little something beyond that; I said, I knew he had got a horse at the White Hart—he then asked me the amount, and gave me a cheque for it—I received 12l. 2s. 10d. for it, at Messrs. Haydon's, the banker's, at Guildford.
FREDERICK TRAVERS . I am a clerk to Hurford and Taylor, solicitors, at Oxford. I produce the proceedings in actions brought against the prisoner by several persons—one of the plaintiffs was Henry Brown, of Oxford; the date of the writ was 28th Aug., 1855, for 14l. 9s. 9d.; another was Richard James Spiers, of the same date, for 39l. 2s. 4d.; another, of Thomas Rymer Marshall, 17th Sept., 1855, for 27l. 18s. 6d.; another, William and Charles Wells, 12th March, 1856, 30l. 13s.; another, Rhoda Sophia Miles, 22nd Aug., 27l. 18s. 4d.—there were other writs, which I have searched for, but have not been able to find—I have the precipe book upon which they were issued—the writs would be served by our agent, an attorney, practising in the country; I do not know who it was—there were a number of writs issued at different times; search has been made for them, but we have not been able to find them; they would either be with us, or with the agent or person who served them—I have not got any of the papers here connected with those suits—the prisoner's attorney, Mr. Sanger, appeared on some of those writs—I am not aware that I had any communication with the prisoner on the subject.
—CHESTER. I was clerk to the late Mr. Sanger, an attorney. He was engaged to settle some actions for the prisoner—I have his cash book here.
MR. CHAMBERS. Q. Were you at all concerned yourself in the matter? A. I noticed all the proceedings that were taken, and Mr. Sanger used to talk to me about them; I am his nephew, and knew all that was done in the different matters—I assisted in the business of the office—he was acting for Mr. Legge—I should object to produce any thing that may be considered privileged, representing his solicitor.
MR. BODKIN. Q. Are these entries in Mr. Sanger's cash book, in his handwriting? A. Yes, in which he charges himself with the receipt of money—on 6th Aug., 1855, I find this entry: "Legge, by cash remitted by
you, and paid, 21l. 9s. 4d."—on 3rd Sept., "Legge, by cash for your cheque, 20l. 13s. 2d."—on 1st Nov., "Legge, by cash from your notes and cheque, 27l. 18s. 6d."—on 12th Nov., "Legge, by cash of you, 10l."—on 7th Jan., 1856, "Legge, by cash remitted by you, 12l. 9s. 11d."—on the 29th, "Legge, at suit Spend, by cash of defendant, 20l."—on 30th Jan., "Ditto, by cash of Mr. Legge, 7l. 2s. 10d."—on 3rd March, "Legge, at suit Hawkins, by cheque on Cocks and Co., for debt and costs, 32l. 5s."—on 31st March, "Legge, by cheque on Cocks and Co., 20l."—12th April, "Legge, by cash remitted by you, 10l."—on the 29th, "By cash of Mr. Legge, 30l."—30th April, "Legge, by cash remitted by you, 25l."—on 2nd May, "Legge, by post office order from you, eight guineas "—on 2nd June, "Legge, by cheque on Cocks and Co., 32l"—on 12th June, "Legge, by cheque oh Cocks and Co., 20l."—on the 14th, "Ditto, 10l. 0s. 3d."—on the 23rd, "Legge, by cheque on Cocks and Co., 6l. 6s. 6d."—on the 25th, "Legge, by cheque on Cocks and Co., 6l. 13s."—on 23rd Oct., "Legge, by cash returned by Mr. Legge, 30l. 16s. 4d."—7th Feb., "Legge, by cheque of H. E. Legge, Esq., 20l.—Mr. Sanger was acting for him, with reference to actions brought against him.
Cross-examined. Q. When were you applied to, to give evidence on this trial? A. I was subpoenaed a few days ago—a gentleman called, I think, some weeks ago, to say that proceedings were taken against Mr. Legge, and to ask if we had not been concerned for him—I did not allow them to look through the books; I merely stated that actions were brought, and that we acted for him—a list was afterwards given to me, and that was checked—I attended Mr. Hare, the solicitor for the Government; I think that was last Monday—I am not carrying on business for myself; Mr. Godwin carries on Mr. Sanger's business, at the same office, No. 4, Essex Court, Temple—Mr. Sanger acted as Mr. Legge's attorney, and I believe he paid off some of his Oxford debts.
MR. R. C. KIRBY re-examined. The allowances mentioned by Lord Lovelace and the other officers, formed no portion of the officers' pay to which I referred in my evidence—it formed no portion of the 7,300l. odd; they are debited, and we have allowed them to the paymaster—they are charged in the estimate, and he takes credit for them—like paymaster's pay was 12s. 6d. a day, on first appointment.
Cross-examined. Q. Had he allowances for rent and other things? A. If he was not found in barracks, he had allowance money; there was no forage allowed him, nor any allowance besides lodging; lodging money includes fuel—I am not quite sure whether he was accommodated with barrack at Guildford—there is a store there.
MR. SOLICITOR-GENERAL. Q. Is any charge for lodging allowed in the account? A. Yes, 2s. or half a crown a day is generally allowed for lodging.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Thursday, February 25th, 1858.
PRESENT—Mr. Justice CROMPTON; Mr. Ald. SIDNEY; Mr. Ald. ROSE; and Mr. Ald. HALE.
Before Mr. Justice Crompton and the Fifth Jury.
MR. LILLEY conducted the Prosecution.
HENDRY WILLIAM FULLER . I am a doctor of medicine, and live in Manchester Square. Jacob Jackson is under my care at St. George's Hospital—I saw him on Tuesday, he has got a large abscess on his back, he is not fit to come to this court through illness, and will not before some time—he is servant to a medical gentleman, Mr. Robinson, No. 103, Lisson Grove.
WILLIAM BODEN (Policeman, D 221), I know Jacob Jackson; I was at the police court when he gave evidence against the prisoner—his deposition was taken—the prisoner had an opportunity of cross-examining him—I saw him in the hospital the day before yesterday, he was then ill in bed—I have not the slightest doubt that he is the same man who gave evidence against the prisoner—I saw Jacob Jackson's deposition taken in the prisoner's presence, so that he could cross-examine him—I received information of this robbery, and I apprehended the prisoner on Monday, 1st Feb., at half-past 11 o'clock at night—I told him the charge, he said that he knew nothing about it; he was not there at that time—I told him that he was charged with committing the robbery at a certain time and place.
Prisoner. Q. Did you see me on the Sunday morning? A. No; another constable brought you to me on the Monday night.
The deposition of Jacob Jackson was here read at follows:—"I live at No. 103, Lisson Grove North; I am a servant. Last Thursday evening I went out with a friend—I had my great coat on, he asked me to take it off, I went in and took off my great coat, and came out again without it—I had a silver watch in my pocket—I went to George street, Portman Square—as we were coming back, the prisoner and another young man were behind us in Montague Square—the prisoner turned back—my friend stooped down to lace his shoe, and I walked on—the prisoner came up to me and said, "Do you know which is No. 31?"—I told him which it was, and he snatched at my watch, and broke the swivel, and got my watch—the chain was silver—the prisoner ran away as hard as he could—the man that was with him ran away in a different direction—I gave information to the police constable—I am sure the prisoner is the man—the watch was worth about 4l.—JACOB JACKSON."
WILLIAM HAMMOND (Policeman, A 373). About half-past 11 o'clock at night on 1st Feb., I met the prisoner in Mary-le-bonne Lane—I told him my brother constable wanted him for stealing a watch—he said, "It is not me, I know nothing about it"—I said, "Never mind, you must go with me to the other constable," and I took him to him.
Prisoner's Defence. He asked me to go to the station with him, I said, "No;" he said, "Come to John Street," I said, "No;" he said, "Well, come to the other constable," and I went with him; it was about half-past 10 o'clock.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. PAYNE conducted the Prosecution.
MICHAEL M'MAHON . On 10th Feb., I was an inmate of the East London Union Workhouse, at Homerton—I knew the deceased John Webber, he was an inmate there—he was about 65 years old—he slept in No. 18 bed-room—he had slept there about a fortnight previous to his death—he used to make a romancing noise in the night, talking very loud in his sleep, and disturbing the men—I do not know what he said—I understood two words he said, Mah and Bah—he was annoying to all the men that were there—he kept them awake—I am not aware that he was ill—he was not speaking to any one, he was talking to himself—I slept in the same ward opposite to him,
my bed was on the other side—The prisoner slept in the next bed to the deceased—on the night of 10th Feb., between 9 and 10 o'clock, the prisoner came to the deceased, put his hand on him, and said, "Don't make such a noise, you prevent my sleeping, and the other men as well"—and he had said that to him before on other nights—the deceased made no answer to that—I did not see whether he was awake or not—I saw the prisoner get out of his bed between 1 and 2 o'clock, and put his two hands to the middle of the deceased man's bedstead, and he turned the bedstead on it's side, and the deceased came out on the floor—the fall of the bedstead was very heavy on the floor—the bed and bedclothes came with the deceased on the floor—the prisoner then put his hands to the bedstead a second time, and threw it right over the deceased—the deceased cried "Murder!" three times when he was on the floor, and the prisoner took the bedstead off him, and put it in it's proper place—the deceased got up, put his bed to rights, and got into bed—when I got up at 7 o'clock in the morning, I saw blood on the floor about three feet from the bed—I saw the deceased get up in the morning at the usual time, 7 o'clock; he put every thing on with the exception of his coat—I left the room at half-past 7 o'clock, the deceased was then sitting on the prisoner's bedstead, and his face was down on his own bed—I left Crawford in the room—I did not hear of the deceased's death till after breakfast, about 9 o'clock the same morning—I went up to look at him about half-past 9 o'clock, I saw him dead—I did not see any bruises on him—I thought he was sleeping when I left the room.
Prisoner. You say that I took the bedstead off the deceased; it did not go over him, it turned on it's side. Witness. Yes, it did—the bedding was between the man and the bedstead.
ROBERT CRAWFORD . I was an inmate of the workhouse; I slept in the ward No. 18—I knew the deceased—I slept behind the door, further away from him than the last witness; further off than the prisoner was—I saw the prisoner get out of bed between 1 and 2 o'clock, and throw the man right out of bed on to the floor—he came right over to my bed with the bed and bedstead on the top of him—he sung out murder three times, and he asked for somebody to get up and assist him, and no one would, and at last the prisoner got up and took the bedstead off of him and put it in it's right place again—I did not see any blood—I am blind with one eye, and very nearly so with the other—I did not see any thing done with the bedstead and the clothes afterwards—the deceased was rather bad in his breath, and he was worse in his breath after he got into his bed again—he moaned in his sleep, and made a terrible noise; none of us could go to sleep, we all thought he was dying—I mean every night he made this noise—when I got up I asked him what was the matter, and he said, "This vagabond, Pinson, threw me right out of bed"—I did not hear the prisoner say anything—the next morning the deceased dressed himself all but his coat—he was very bad—he began to make his bed, and he was walking about from one side to the other, and he came and sat down on the prisoner's bed, and laid his head on his own bed—I went down about half-past 7 o'clock—I went up again directly after breakfast, and saw him lying in the same position—I could not tell whether he was gone—he was found dead directly afterwards, when we came up stairs again.
Prisoner. The bedstead never touched the deceased, it was lying on it's side. Witness. No, the bedstead laid on the top of him—the man was on the floor, the bed was on the top of him, and the bedstead on the top of the bed.
Feb.—I was sent for a little before 8 o'clock, and reached there soon afterwards—I should say he had been dead about five minutes—I saw blood oozing out of the right nostril—there was blood on the floor, and on his pillow—there was a slight mark of contusion over the right side of the head—that was the only appearance of violence externally—on Sunday morning I made a post mortem examination—there was no other external mark on the body—on turning back the scalp, I found beneath it a black mark, answering to the external bruise, and an extensive extravasation of blood—the vessels on the surface of the brain were gorged with blood—the brain, in other respects, was healthy—I found the contents of the stomach, and the abdomen, perfectly healthy—on opening the chest I found the heart twice it's natural size—the large veins leading to the jugular, and other large veins leading to the right side of the heart, were excessively gorged with blood and mucus—that would lead me to infer that the actual cause of death was pulmonary apoplexy—the extravasated blood under the scalp was not sufficient to cause death—in my judgment, the sudden exposure, and the shock sustained in being thrown out of bed on an extremely cold night, accelerated the death of a man previously diseased as he was.
COURT. Q. Would these facts, if they were true, account for his death? A. Yes, exactly so, my Lord—I could not undertake to say that they caused his death—he had come to me ten days before with a trifling case—I am certain he would not have died if this had not taken place—none of the vessels about the heart had given way—it must have been some shock to the body to cause his death—no mental affection would cause it—if sudden death had occurred from some emotion of the mind, some vessel must have been broken, or some disease of the brain—I certainly do not attribute his death to any thing mental—from what I knew of his case before, supposing the circumstances stated had happened, I should say his death was accelerated—I am compelled to come to that conclusion.
GUILTY .—Recommended to mercy by the Jury— Confined Two Months.
THOMAS WISE . I am a carpenter, and live in Upper Chapman Street, Pimlico. I was in the prisoner's house on 12th Jan., No. 12, Cartwright Street, Westminster—I went to the house about 11 o'clock in the day—the prisoner and his wife were at home—they went out together, and returned in about an hour, both in liquor; the prisoner was very much so; the deceased was not so much as the prisoner—a quarrel took place between them which lasted about a quarter of an hour—towards the close of the quarrel the prisoner told his wife that if she did not hold her noise he would smash her head—she replied, "Do it; do it"—my head was then turned from them, and when I turned my head again, I saw the prisoner with a five-pint tin saucepan in his hand—the deceased got hold of the saucepan lid, and tried to return the blow—the lid had fallen off the saucepan on to the counter—I had heard it fall—the deceased did not return the blow—I prevented it—there were no more blows struck after that—the deceased was bleeding from the left side of the upper part of the head—the prisoner asked me if I would go with his brother to the chemist's to have her head dressed, and I and the deceased and the prisoner's brother went to the chemist's—this happened on Tuesday; I saw her afterwards on the Thursday, she seemed better, and went to the theatre—I won't answer whether her head was bandaged—I saw her on the Thursday after, and she was not quite so well.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Have they been married twelve or thirteen years? A. Yes, I think it is turned thirteen—the deceased was very aggravating that morning—the prisoner was in the shop attending to his business, dusting his goods—he asked her several times to be quiet and let him attend to his business—I went to the theatre with them on the Thursday afterwards; they were then on very excellent terms—from the time this happened till she died her husband shewed her every attention, and behaved with the greatest kindness every time I went in to see them—I heard him tell her she ought not to go to the public house afterwards—she went in and had a glass of gin after we came from the theatre—the chemist said she had better not drink.
WILLIAM GEORGE LAWS . I am the prisoner's brother. My sister-in-law was 29 years of age—I live in my brother's house and carry on business there—I was there on 12th Jan., between 12 and 1 o'clock—I was up stairs, dressing myself—Wise was waiting for me to go out—while I was washing myself, my brother called me down—I saw his wife leaning against the counter and the shop door; she was bleeding from the left side of the head—I went to a chemist's with her—I have never seen her intoxicated since that time.
Cross-examined. Q. I believe during the whole of their married life they lived on most excellent terms? A. Yes, so far as I know—she did not go the same evening to a raffle—she went on the Tuesday following, and took the bandage off her head—it was on the Thursday she went to the theatre; she had the bandage on then, but she took it off on the night she went to the raffle—she told me to tell any one that asked, that she had hurt her head in getting some coals.
MR. SALTER. Q. When the prisoner called you, what did he lay? A. He said, "William, run and fetch Mrs. Johnson; I have cut Charlotte's head, and I think it is serious, and I am sorry for it"
JOHN WADE . I am a chemist and druggist. On 12th Jan., the prisoner's wife came to my place—she had a scalp wound on the left side of the head, about an inch above the temple, about an inch and quarter long, and of slight depth—I dressed it within a couple of hours—I saw her afterwards, and did every thing that was necessary to the wound.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you caution her not to take the bandage off, and not to drink? A. I cautioned her not to drink, and keep herself free from excitement—I never supposed she would do such a thing as take the bandage off—such a wound would not cause death.
MR. SALTER. Q. How long were you attending her? A. I think I saw her four or five times in seven or nine days.
COURT. Q. Do you mean, that by itself the wound would not cause death, but it might by erysipelas intervening? A. Yes—it was in reference to that I cautioned her, because wounds in the head or scalp are so likely to be succeeded by erysipelas, and that, undoubtedly, might be assisted by drink.
JOHN PAYNE . I am a doctor of medicine and licentiate of the Apothecary's Company. I first saw the prisoner's wife on 22nd Jan.—she was suffering from erysipelas—she had a wound a little above the temple, on the left side of the head, which I look upon as the exciting cause of the erysipelas—I know no other cause but that—the wound itself was very slight, but it would be sufficient to produce that effect—I had known her for years—I am
speaking of her general habit and temperament—I continued to attend her till her death on 31st Jan.—she died, as the post mortem examination showed, from contusion on the brain—I connect that with the erysipelas I had seen on the 22nd.
Q. Might the contusion on the brain be caused by other diseases as well as erysipelas? A. Yes—I look on the effusion as the consequence of the erysipelas—I found nothing else to account for it—erysipelas continually takes place without any wound having been inflicted—some persons are more predisposed to it than others—being given to drinking is one of the most common causes of it—I should call her a person singularly predisposed to erysipelas—erysipelas is a disease of the whole system, and her indulging in drink might have produced it independent of and quite irrespective of the wound—I look upon that wound as the most manifest exciting cause of the erysipelas; but erysipelas and effusion are quite consistent with constitutional derangement—supposing there had been no wound, the erysipelas would have proceeded from natural causes, and more especially so from her previous state—the wound was of the most slight description—it did not go through the inner skin.
MR. SALTER. Q. Is erysipelas a disease which will spread over the whole body? A. Yes, it is a disease of the whole system—it requires an exciting cause to develop it, in any one given spot—it will very frequently occur without any manifest exciting cause—the wound did not appear to be the nucleus from which the erysipelas proceeded—it was on the left temple—the greater part of the disease was round the neck and face.
COURT. Q. But may it happen that where there is a wound, the erysipelas does not appear to spread from the wound? A. The erysipelas will develop itself at a distance from the wound—the development may, in all probability, have arisen from the constitutional cause—the erysipelas had extended up to the wound—I attribute the erysipelas to constitutional causes, but I believe it was excited by the wound—I believe the constitutional causes and the wound produced it—it might have arisen without the wound—I considered the wound but a very small matter, but it being there I could not but notice it—I had seen symptoms of erysipelas in her once before—the death in this case may have been caused by the erysipelas, without any wound at all—she died of erysipelas, and I think the wound had very little to do with it.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. COOPER and MR. RIBTON conducted the Prosecution, and Mr. SERJEANT BALLANTINE the Defence.
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, February 25th, 1858.
PRESENT—Sir JAMES DUKE, BART., Ald.; Mr. RECORDER; Mr. Ald. HALE; and Mr. COMMON SERJEANT.
Before Mr. Recorder and the Seventh Jury.
334. THOMAS CHAPPELL (22) and JOHN RIDGWAY (22) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling house of John Brady, and stealing therein 1 dead goose and 3 lbs. of pork, value 5s. 6d., his property.
MR. GENT conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN BRADY, JUN . I live with my father, at Old Ford; he is a cabman. On Monday night, 1st Feb., I went to bed at 10 o'clock, having fastened the place up—I saw a dead goose on the kitchen dresser, and a piece of pork in a dish—between 12 and 1 o'clock I heard a noise as though a door was smashed in, and then heard plates and dishes rattling—I got out of bed and looked out at the window, and three chaps ran round when I spoke—the prisoners are two of them; I know them quite well—I said, "All right, Chappell, that will do for you in the morning"—he said that he would choke me—I stayed at the window and saw Chappell again; he pushed open a gate leading to the back door, which leads to the kitchen—I went down ten minutes afterwards and found the door lying in pieces, and the goose and pork were gone—the house is in the parish of Old Ford, Bow.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Do you know these men very well? A. Yes, and my father and mother know them—my mother and Mrs. Bye, and the prisoners had all been out for a spree, but not my father—my mother came home that morning, not many minutes after this—she was not rather the worse for liquor—Chappell was the worse for liquor—I thought this was a joke, because they had come on the Monday before and took all the water butts away from the yard and put them across the road, for a lark—the house is but one storey high, and I could see Chappell quite plainly.
MR. GENT. Q. Why did you say, "All right in the morning." A. Because he had come on the Monday before, and my father wanted to know who it was—we have got the water butts back, but not the goose or the pork.
SARAH BYE . I am a widow, of Three Colt Street, Old Ford. On 2nd Feb., between 12 and 1 o'clock, I was near Mr. Brady's house, and saw both the prisoners, and another, who went away so quick that I could not see his face—the second one was Ridgway; he had a white flannel jacket on; but since the police have been after him he has altered his coat—they were running from Brady's premises, jumping over the fence—I heard the crash first, and heard Brady talking to them out of the window as I came up to the gate, and Mrs. Brady was close behind me—I said, "Chappell, what have you been doing?" he ran a little way down the street and came back again—when Mrs. Brady came up we went to look, and the door was in pieces, and the goose and piece of pork were gone—we went round the neighbourhood to see if we could see any police, but could not—I was at the public house that night; there might be a dozen males and females there—it was a female's wedding day, Mrs. Hill; Mrs. Brady was with us, and the prisoners; we were all close together—the prisoners were quite sober.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you quite sober. A. Yes, and so was Mrs. Brady—we went to the public house at 10 o'clock; it was the Three Colts—the prisoners were in their own company—we had a little ale; we had no spirits—Mrs. Brady did not propose that we should go home and have some coffee—I do not know Piggey George; I know George Shaw as a neighbour—I have known the prisoners a considerable time; I knew them when they had a lark moving the water butts—my house is not opposite, it is in the next street—I did not blacken my face that night—I and the prisoners were not marching up and down the street, and singing—there was singing in the public house—I got home about half-past 1 o'clock.
MR. GENT. Q. Did the prisoners leave the public house before you? A. No, we all came but together, and I and Mrs. Brady came round the middle street—I do not know whose face was blackened; it was none of our party, that I saw.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. PLATT conducted the Prosecution.
ROBERT VIRGO . I am a leather seller, of No. 69, Dudley Street, St. Giles's; I rent the house and sleep there. On 9th Feb., about 1 o'clock, I went to bed, having made the house fast—about 5 o'clock I was awakened by a policeman, and found a window broken and the shutter removed—I missed these articles (produced) from the window; they were safe overnight—they are my property, and are worth about 40l.—I have seen the prisoner once or twice before; the last time was about a month before—here are marks on some of these boot fronts.
Cross-examined by MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Do you know what he is? A. A shoe maker—he came to my shop in the way of trade—I made these marks.
FREDERICK WINCHESTER (Policeman, F. 159). On 9th Feb., about 5 o'clock in the morning, I was on duty in Dudley Street, and saw the prisoner and two other men—I concealed myself in a doorway about fourteen yards off and saw the prisoner go up to Mr. Virgo's shop, put something between the shutter and pull it away, and likewise break a pane of glass—he then deliberately put his arm through the hole and pulled out several boot fronts, and the two others assisted him—they took the property to No. 27, opposite, threw it down in the passage, and then came back again, and I saw the prisoner bring out a roll of leather—I followed them across the road to No. 27—they went in, and almost directly the prisoner came out and I took him in custody—the others escaped—I told the prisoner the charge; he made no reply—I took him back to No. 27, and found all this property in the passage I then roused Mr. Virgo.
Cross-examined. Q. Was he drunk? A. As sober as I am now—I was about fourteen yards from him—there was a gas light there, and I had seen him before and knew him by sight—the door of No. 27 was open—they all three carried away boot fronts; this is only a sample of them.
GUILTY .†— Confined Twelve Months.
336. THOMAS FOX (58) , Breaking and entering the dwelling house of Charles Henry Edmands, and stealing therein 4 coats, 15 pairs of trousers, 2 dressing cases, and other goods, value 25l.; his property.
MR. SHARPE conducted the Prosecution.
CHARLES HENRY EDMANDS . I am a solicitor. At the end of July or beginning of Aug., 1857, I left my house, Oakley Lodge, locked up, and left the key with my mother-in-law—no one else had a right to enter it—I returned about 3rd Sept., and missed three door-mats, a table cover, a pencil case, two rugs, one with a raised lion in the centre, a figure of a lady in china, ten coats, two packs of cards, a great number of trousers, a pen knife, a dressing case, my wife's writing case, and some gold studs—this is the dressing case (produced)—I am sure it is mine—I had some of the fittings out of town with me which I have here; this razor is one of them, it is marked No. 1, and No. 2 is left in the case still—the razors are all by Mechi—this is another part of the dressing case—it is of a peculiar construction, and it fits—this is another part which I had with me, and which also fits—I had cards of this description (produced)—I have no doubt this pair of trousers are mine; they are the same kind and make—I have not tried them on since—this plaster of Paris font is mine—the value of the property is from 40l. to 50l.
Cross-examined by MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Do you know that these dressing cases are made by dozens? A. Yes—it is made by Allen—it is not unusual to have razors engraved No. 1 and No. 2, but the engraving is peculiar, it was not done by my desire—I have no doubt about these trousers, they are peculiarly made—they are old ones.
GEORGE EDWARD WILMOT . I am a prisoner in Newgate, under sentence of four years penal servitude for forgery (see page 127). I know the prisoner—I remember a conversation between him, Sowden, and myself in August—I cannot say the day or the week, but it was about 5 o'clock in the afternoon—Sowden met us promiscuously, as I thought, but no doubt it was a planned thing, he told the prisoner he was going to do his swell's drum over—I asked him what he meant, he said he was going to screw into the governor's house, which I afterwards found out meant opening the front door—in consequence of that, I went over with the prisoner to Mr. Edmand's house on the same day, about half an hour afterwards—Sowden stood at the corner of Pier Street, which is very near, it was the prisoner's practice to carry a bag containing skeleton keys and housebreaking instruments, and he introduced a key which opened the door—I was at the gate—he said, "I have got him at last," and opened the door, and told me to go in—he said, "Come along," and I went in with him—we proceeded over several rooms, and several articles, three mats, a table cover, and a paper-knife were packed up in a bag, and the prisoner carried them away, except the knife, which was given to Sowden; and it was taken by me to a man named Ainslow, a tailor, of Queen's Road, Chelsea—the prisoner waited outside while I went in—on the same evening, between 6 and 7 o'clock, we went to the prosecutor's again, and got a very large hearth-rug, with a lion upon it, and another rug; one was tied up and left behind the door, and the other was taken—that was all, I believe, that was taken that night—the door was only locked each time—(previously to the robbery taking place he had mentioned to me that there was such a robbery going to take place, and I had refused to have any thing to do with it)—we went again the next night, and the prisoner used a skeleton key again, we took several frock coats, two waistcoats, several pairs of trousers, the pair of grey trousers (produced), many shirts, a set of three studs, a gold swivel, a hearth rug, a pack of cards, and this dressing case, but there was another razor in it, I think—we took them all at once in a large bag—the prisoner afterwards said that he intended to sell the trousers, and the coats, and waistcoats—I gave information to the police on Christmas Day—I was only in the prosecutor's house on those three occasions.
Cross-examined. Q. What policeman was it that you mentioned it to? A. Vincent Gummer, the same who took me into custody for the forgery, and that charge also originated with the prisoner—the street is a thoroughfare, but it is rather a retired spot—it took five or six minutes to fit the skeleton key—the house was closed—the street door is under a porch—you have to go through two wooden gates the width of this Court to get to the porch—there is pallisading in front, but it can be seen—I was in the house a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes the first time, not more—Fox brought the things away, and I went at his bidding to Ainslow to dispose of them—I only received a pack of cards—I brought nothing away—there was nothing which required two people to carry—there was a very large bundle, but he carried it—he did not take me exactly for amusement—I assisted him to pack up the goods, and on the third occasion I carried the dressing case and the figure under my arm wrapped up; it was then somewhat later than it was the day before, but it was not dark: it was much darker in the house—the prisoner
was forced to have a candle to view certain parts of the premises, which was the cause of his burning his hat—the bundle Fox was carrying was rather heavy, and he asked me to carry it while he carried these—I know these trousers, because they have no collar which frequently runs round the waist, and this part is peculiar—I am not a tailor.
MR. SHARPE. Q. What space is there between the pallisades. A. Eight or ten inches.
JOSEPH EWER . I am a hair dresser, of No. 8, Waterloo Road, Chelsea. I know the prisoner and Wilmot, and have frequently seen them together at my shop, but merely coming to be shaved—I saw them together frequently during the course of last year, and on one occasion Wilmot came and left a rug with me—the prisoner was not with him, but he afterwards returned in company with the prisoner—Wilmot asked me to purchase the rug—I examined it, and thought it was too good for me—he asked me 50s. in the prisoner's hearing for it—I refused to buy it, and they went away, saying that they would bring a party who would buy it, if I would let it remain—they returned in half an hour, saying they could not find the party, and would I advance them a little money on it—I lent him a sovereign on it, and he promised to redeem it next morning, but it remained three weeks, and was afterwards taken away—after that the prisoner came, and I said, "Wilmot has been here and taken the rug away"—he said, "Oh, very well"—it was a very handsome rug, with a lion worked in the centre.
Cross-examined. Q. Was it Wilmot who did all the talking? A. Yes—there were other customers in the shop—Wilmot displayed it openly—I had said nothing to him about how he came by it—I did not know whether he brought the prisoner to avouch for his coming by it honestly—the prisoner had no part in the bargain; it was not unusual for him to come to my place frequently—his son is in my employment, and has been for two and a half years.
JURY. Q. To whom did you pay the soverign? A. To Wilmot.
WILLIAM WALKER . I am landlord of the King's Arms, Upper Ebury Street, Pimlico. I have seen the prisoner with Wilmot more than once—he sold me a pack of cards once; I believe it to be one of these packs produced—it was the latter end of Aug. or the beginning of Sep.; the two were together—there were many persons in the house; I cannot remember whether Calver was there—they were sold publicly.
DANIE CALVER . I am a house decorator, of No. 21, Monmouth Street, Hammersmith. I have seen the prisoner several times at the King's Arms, and dozens of times with Wilmot—I once bought some tickets of the prisoner, he told me they were for glazier's diamonds, which would be very valuable; and there was a ticket of a pair of trousers pawned at Mr. Elliott's on the same day—I won't say whether it was the prisoner or Wilmot said that they were pawned at Elliott's—they said it in other persons hearing—the tickets were given up to the police—these are them.
Cross-examined. Q. Did this dealing take place with other people about. A. Yes, it was quite open; Fox said that the tickets were for sale—Wilmot gave me the tickets, and I laid the money on the bar; I will not be positive who took it.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you take them in. A. Yes, I do not know from whom.
the trousers from Elliott—I went with the prosecutor, and he identified the trousers.
WILLIAM LINDROTT . I am a plaisterer, of 14, South Street. I bought this dressing case of the prisoner five months ago for 5s., as it was not complete—he said that he had been a man better off, and did not require such a thing—I lodged in the same house with him.
Cross-examined. Q. Did Fox and Wilmot both lodge in the house? A. Yes, in the same room as I did; they slept in the same bed, and I had a bed to myself—I did not know of this robbery—I did not see the dressing case brought there; it is just as I bought it—Wilmot knew that I bought it, because it was in the room where we slept; he saw me with it; he did not ask me any questions about—I had known Fox about a month—I cannot tell which of them brought the dressing case to the room—Fox said nothing about Wilmot—I knew that Wilmot was in custody.
MR. SHARPE. Q. Were you in the room before Fox came in? A. I think he was in the room when I came home—I gave him 2s. in money and a lock which I had—I do not know whether he is a lock smith.
SARAH BUTCHER . I live at No. 14, South Street, Chelsea. The prisoner and Wilmot came to lodge with me at the latter end of Aug., and remained six or seven weeks—at the latter end of Aug. or the beginning of Sep., I saw an image similar to this in their room and a dressing case—Lindrott brought it down; I had never seen it before; I heard the prisoner say that it was his own when he was in better circumstances but he did not say how long ago.
GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted.
SAMUEL DAMERELL . I produce a certificate—(Read: "Central Criminal Court, Aug., 1849; William Fox, Convicted of stealing 2 guard chains from the person; Confined one year")—The prisoner is the person; I had him in custody.
GUITLY.†—(Policeman, B 199, stated that he was a trainer of young thieves, and that he had seen him with Wilmot.)— Eight Years Penal Servitude .
JULIA SPILLEN . I am the prisoner's wife, and live at No. 4, Fort Buildings, Shoreditch; I am a costermonger. On 12th Feb., I was sitting in Mrs. Collins's kitchen, No. 4, Fort Buildings; only my two children were with me—about half past 7 o'clock my husband came in, and asked me to go out and have half a pint of beer; I said, "No"—he asked me twice, and I refused; the third time, he struck me, and I felt it go through me—I fell down, and do not know what happened to me—I do not know whether it was with any thing in his hands; it went through my clothes, and into my belly—I lost my senses, and a surgeon attended me—I had been away from my husband for five weeks; he very often threatened me with my life, but it was nothing but talk—he never spoke about a knife—I think he had had a drop to drink on this occasion.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. How long have you been married to him? A. Six years next summer—he is not my first husband; I had some children by my former husband—I do not wish to live with the prisoner at all—my son by my former husband is grown up, and my daughter also—the prisoner had not got much furniture to move from his house to another place, and if I moved it, it was my own—if I left him without a bed to lie upon, he had plenty of money to buy a bed.
ELLEN DALEY . I am a widow, of No. 4, Fort Buildings, Shoreditch. On this night, between 7 and 8 o'clock, I saw the prisoner make three stabs at his wife, with a piece of iron; and, at the fourth, I seized him by the right arm, and prevented his stabbing her again—John Laren, who was sitting there, seized him, and got him outside the door; he ran up the court; we followed him, and gave him into custody—I took a candle, and found this piece of iron in the court; I saw it in the prisoner's hand, when he stabbed the prosecutrix—he must have brought it with him, for I never saw it in the house before—I do not know whether it is a skewer.
COURT. Q. Had you seen the prisoner in the court, at 12 o'clock on that day? A. I heard his voice in the court, at 12 o'clock; he said to his wife, "Will you not come home?" she said, "No;" he said, "If you do not come home after to-day, by Jesus Christ I will have your guts out"—I gave the skewer to the policeman.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you been out drinking with the prisoner this very day? A. No.
JAMES BELLAERS . I am a surgeon, of No. 225, Shoreditch. On 12th Feb., at 8 o'clock in the evening, I was sent for, and found the prosecutrix lying down, at No. 4, Fort's Buildings—she had a small wound on the abdomen, an eighth of an inch long and an eighth of an inch deep—I did not see much blood—I ordered her to poultice it; I have seen it several times since, and it is quite well—this piece of iron would inflict such a wound.
Cross-examined. Q. Was it a superficial wound? A. A very slight wound.
GUILTY of Unlawfully Wounding.—(The officer stated, that he had had three months for assaulting his wife, and one month for assaulting the police.)— Confined Eighteen Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .*—(Policeman, S 198, stated that he was the associate of convicted thieves, and the trainer of juvenile thieves. A person named Barr stated, that the prisoner had had his boy under his teaching since 1852, who was now suffering twelve months imprisonment.)— Four Years Penal Servitude .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. ORRIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM SHRIMPTON . I am a marine store dealer, of Stratford. On 3rd Feb., the prisoner came to my shop, and asked what I gave a cwt. for old lead; I told him 17s.—next morning he brought a roll, and said that it was not so much as he expected, it hardly paid him for taking up, but there was a little more of it—I was suspicious, from his manner, but bought it of him, for 5s. 11/2 d., and took his name, W. Lowe, of Bow—I gave information to the police—this (produced) is part of it.
Prisoner. I bought the lead, and sold it to him.
GEORGE ALLWRIGHT . I am a builder, of Lewisham. On 4th Feb., and the week previous, the prisoner was in my employment; I was making some alterations in a house at Stratford, where there was a great quantity of old
lead to be taken up, and it was folded up, and put in a room by itself—this lead is mine: this piece came from a shop front, and this from a gutter—it was taken up with a pick axe; there is a mark where the pick axe went through it—I did not miss it till I heard from the police—it had been taken up three or four days previously—I have compared it with the place.
WALTER KERSEY (Policeman, K 35). I took the prisoner, on the evening of 4th Feb.—I told him the charge, and he said that he bought the lead—I asked him if he had sold any lead that morning to Mr. Shrimpton; he said that he had not—I sent for Mr. Shrimpton's son, who immediately recognized him, and he then said that he had purchased the lead.
Prisoner's Defence. There were two or three men sleeping on the premises, to take care of them; I bought it of a man, the other side Stratford Church, on Tuesday; he asked me where they bought such things; I said, "There is a rag shop higher up;" I thought I might earn 6d., so I bought it for 3s. 6d., and sold it for 5s. 11/2 d.
GUILTY .—Recommended to mercy by the Jury.— Confined Three Months.
Before Mr. Justice Crompton.
340. GEORGE WALKER (25) , Stealing, on 24th Dec, 1 coat and 1 waistcoat, value 2l. 10s.; on 10th Feb., 1 coat, value 2l., and, on 17th Feb., 1 pair of trousers, value 1l.; also, on 24th Feb., 1 coat, value 2l.; on 16th March, 11 coats, value 20l.; and, on 8th Aug., 1 coat, value 2l.; the goods of the Eastern Counties Railway Company, his master: to all of which he
PLEADED GUILTY .— Three Years Penal Servitude .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. SLEIGH and ORRIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
MART ANN JUBB . I am cook to Mr. Spinks, of Blackheath. I know Mr. Jobbings, the baker; my mistress was a customer of his—I know the prisoner, by his coming to our place with bread from Mr. Jobbings—on 16th Dec. he came, and the bread he brought that day came to 1s.; he did not bring an account; I always paid him—on 18th Dec., the bread he brought came to 1s., and I paid him—on 19th Dec., the bread he brought came to 1s.—I paid him each day, or if I did not one day, I did the next; I never let it exceed two days.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Did you always pay him? A. Yes—I paid him on 16th Dec.—the amount of the bread was 1s.; I am sure of that—I paid him either that day or the next—I got the money from my mistress; she was not present when I paid—I have been in her service seven months—I have no entry of the bread—I do not know whether I paid the prisoner on 16th Dec.; I always paid him, either that day or the next—I could not be sure whether I paid him that day—there was no bill, no entry in a book—I have never said it was 8d. that the bread came to on 16th Dec.
COURT. Q. Was it 1s. or 8d. that the bread came to? A. It was 1s.—I am quite sure it was 1s.—I did not say it was 8d. when I was before the Magistrate; I said it was 1s.—this is my writing to this deposition (looking at it); it was read over to me—I know now that it was 1s. I paid him.
MR. RIBTON. Q. Have you been talking about this since? A. Yes, to
my mistress; I talked about the amount—I took bread on 17th Dec.; I paid him for that, 1s.—I took three loaves, and paid him 1s.—if I did not pay him that day, I did the next—I could not be quite sure whether I paid him on the 17th, or the next day—I cannot swear about the 16th, whether it was paid on that day, or the next—I paid him on the 17th, or the next day; I never exceeded two days—I will not swear whether I gave him any money on the 18th; I paid him all, up to 19th Dec.—I am quite sure I paid him money on the 19th—I think I paid him 2s.; I am sure I paid him 2s.
COURT. Q. You said before the Magistrate, that on the 19th, you paid him? A. I paid him 2s.
MR. RIBTON. Q. Was any one present when you paid him? A. Yes; we keep another girl; she is not here—she saw me pay the 2s.; I am sure of that.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. During the whole time he delivered bread, to the day he last delivered it, did you always pay him on that day, or the next? A. Yes—the 19th Dec. was the last day he delivered bread.
COURT. Q. Did your mistress keep any book? A. No; I went to her for the money, and she gave it to me.
GEORGE FREDERICK JOBBINGS . I am a baker; I carry on my business at Montpelier Vale, Blackheath. The prisoner was in my service, to carry out bread, and to receive money—he used to take out bread in the morning, and deliver it to the customers, and he was to account in the afternoon or evening, when he booked his bread—I never allowed him to go over one day—he paid me or my wife every evening—he had been in my employ about a year—I discharged him on 19th Dec., and gave him into custody about ten days afterwards—on discharging him, on the 19th, I said, "I shall not want you any more"—he did not account to me for 8d., received on 16th Dec., or for 1s., received on 18th Dec.—he did not account for, or pay me 1s. on 19th Dec.—on the 19th, I said to him, "You have been taking money of Spinks, and Cook, and Evans, and it is not the first time; you had a caution last week; I shall not require you any more; if you like to look up in the week, I will speak to you again; I shall have nothing more to say to you to-night"—he said he was very sorry, and he would not do it again; if I would forgive him, he would pay me the money—I did not give him into custody till the next week but one—I was not present when the policeman Brown took him—I used to pay him 10s. 6d. a week, and his bread and flour.
Cross-examined. Q. You did not give him into custody till ten days afterwards? A. No—no bills went to Mrs. Spinks—the money was paid when the bread was delivered, I believe—I have been serving Mrs. Spinks about seven months—I did not receive the money every day from the prisoner—it sometimes ran for three or four days—he did not pay me on Saturday—I cannot say that he never paid on Saturday—I paid him his wages every Saturday—not on the Saturday when he was discharged—he did not pay the money out of his wages on any occasion—his wages were always paid the last thing, and before he received his wages he had paid me what he had to pay—he paid me when he booked his bread—I think he kept a book at first—I think he had to serve twenty-three or twenty-four customers—he paid me three or four days bread at once, and I will not swear that he did not pay me on a Saturday—I discharged him about 9 o'clock at night—he had done every thing—when I mentioned those three names to him, I am perfectly sure he said he was very sorry—it was after I had mentioned those names that he said those words—I have never said I was very sorry that I made a charge against him at all—a gentleman called on me, and said the case was not
strong enough—the prisoner told his father that the reason he was discharged was because I had lost a large customer—I did say I was sorry I had made the charge—it took me two or three days out of my business—I did not say I could not withdraw it, because I should be sued for damages—I have another boy in my service, he used to go with bread—I have an errand boy, he did not take out bread to regular customers, only odds and ends—the prisoner took out about twenty-six quartern loaves—all those customers are not in the habit of paying every day—the prisoner came at night and gave me a certain sum, what he had received, and I assume that the others have not paid—he was always asked if they paid, and he said "No"—it has run three or four days to me—he has not paid me for three or four days.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Did he ever tell you that the customers had not paid? A. Yes; each time—it did not often happen that three or four days passed—he paid every day—whenever any account was not paid, he used to say it had not been paid—I did not always pay him his wages, sometimes my wife did.
COURT. Q. What was it you said when you discharged him? A. I said, "You have been taking money of Spinks, Cook, and Evans, and this is not the first time, you have been cautioned before"—he cried, and said he was very sorry, he would not do it again.
JURY. Q. Did he ever make up any amount that he was deficient in the week before? A. No.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Some friend of his applied to you that you should not go on with the prosecution; did he suggest to you that you should make a flaw in the indictment. A. Yes, he did.
JANE JOBBINGS . I am the prosecutor's wife. I was in the habit sometimes of settling with the prisoner—he did not account to me for 8d., received on 16th Dec.—he did not pay it to me, or account for it—nor for 1s., received on 18th Dec, or for 1s., received on 19th Dec.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he pay you any money at all that week? A. My book is here (looking at it), on 16th Dec., he paid me for Mrs. Cook, and some others, but nothing from Mrs. Spinks—I have none at all down on the 17th—he did not receive money every day—I do not know that he was in the habit of paying three or four days' accounts from any one customer—he had no right to do so—it has happened—when I mentioned the family of Cook, that was a family that paid every day, he did not give it to me—he has often paid me in one sum what he has received from some customers in three or four days—that has not happened frequently—I have never stopped money out of his wages; that I am sure of—he had been with us twelve months—in my book here is the family of Spinks, he paid me for them, on 15th Dec., 2s. 8d.—I do not know whether that would be more than two days bread—that has not happened often—I knew that Spinks paid every day, and I said to him, "What, not paid?" and he said, "No."
COURT. Q. Did he deny the receipt of part of that 2s. 8d., and afterwards pay it? A. Yes, he did.
WILLIAM BROWN (Policeman, R 98). I took the prisoner at his father's house on 29th Dec.—I said, "You are charged by Mr. Jobbings with embezzling various sums"—I had a paper with five names, I mentioned Evans' money, and Spinks', and three others—he said, "I acknowledge having received Mrs. Evans' and Spinks', but I paid them to Mr. Jobbings; the others I never received."
Cross-examined. Q. Did you take a note of what he said? A. No; he
said he had received these two bills, and paid them to Mr. Jobbings; the others he had not received.
COURT. Q. Did you use the word embezzlement at all? A. I did.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. SLEIGH and THOMPSON conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZABETH WARREN . I am the daughter of Captain Stockley, of Woolwich. He deals with Mr. Jobbings for bread—the prisoner was servant to Mr. Jobbings—I recollect sending for change for a half sovereign to pay the prisoner—to the best of my recollection, it was on the 13th or 14th of Oct., the bill was due on the 10th—it was sent in on the Monday—I asked the prisoner, and he said he had no change—I sent Notley for change, and paid the prisoner 6s. 2d., he signed the receipt on the bill—I left the bill on the dresser in the kitchen, and desired them to file it—I saw the prisoner afterwards—the next bill did not come in till about three weeks afterwards—the bills usually came in weekly—when the bill came in, I said to the prisoner, "I wish Mr. Jobbings would send in the bill correctly"—I told him there was an error, and I should call on his master—I said the bill which I had paid was entered in that bill—he told me he would take the bill, and mention it—he said he did not know—I went down and called on Mrs. Jobbings, and paid her the correct bill, that was the remaining balance; she struck out the week that I had paid—I am quite clear that I paid the prisoner the 6s. 2d.—that bill was filed—I have not got it here.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Do you know how long the prisoner has been serving you with bread? A.I really cannot tell; I very seldom see the prisoner, it is only when I pay him—I have seen him twenty or thirty times; he ought to have come every day—I paid sometimes weekly and sometimes two or three weeks—I very often send out for change, when the tradespeople have not got change—this was paid on the 13th or 14th—the bill was due on the Saturday, and was brought in on the Monday; I looked over it, and paid it on the 13th or 14th; I have a memorandum of it in my own pocket-book, but no date to it—I really cannot tell where the bill is; the bills are filed in the kitchen—the prisoner was paid in the kitchen; he was standing close where the file is—I have two servants; of course, they had access to the file—there are two files, one for the butcher and one for the baker; the bills and receipts are put on those files—after I paid this money, I did not get a bill for two or three weeks; that has continually occurred before, since the prisoner has been there—I have repeatedly complained to Mrs. Jobbings—I really cannot tell whether the prisoner served us with bread up to the 19th of Dec.—I have never paid him a bill since this one—I have a book, and pay at the shop regularly every month; I had paid him on the week before—up to the end of the month it was 18s. 31/2 d.—I am not certain whether I sent out for change then: I may have done so—the amount of the bread we have varies very much, it has been 2l. a month—I saw the bill when I paid it; as I walked out of the kitchen, I desired Notley, the man servant, to file it—it was at mid day, I should think it was between 12 and 1 o'clock—the cook was there; I don't know whether she saw it paid—when I paid the bill to Mrs. Jobbings, I paid it less the 6s. 2d.—I was not spoken to about this till December—I spoke to Notley about it.
HENRY NOTLEY . I am in the service of Captain Stockley. I remember the last witness sending me out for change for a half sovereign; it was either on the 13th or 14th of Oct.—I brought the change and gave it her, and I
saw her pay the baker's boy 6s. 2d. out of it; that was in the kitchen—I saw the bill, and saw the boy sign it—Mrs. Warren left it on the table, and I put it on the file where the bread bills go—when the prisoner came with bread he always came right into the kitchen with it; I looked for that bill afterwards when we found out the mistake, that was not until the latter end of the month—I could not find it—I never noticed that there were other bills missing, but I could not find that one—we always paid the bread bills weekly till the week before, and then we paid 18s. 31/2 d. through my mistress being away from the house—some days after this bill was paid, I saw the prisoner looking over the bills—I asked him what business he had to do that; he said there was some mistake in one of the bills, and he wanted to find it out, if he could—I told my mistress of it, and after the mistake was found out, the prisoner said to me, "You was foolish to tell your mistress that you had seen her pay me, and you was foolish for saying anything about seeing me looking over the bills"—I said I would not see my mistress and my master wronged for no one.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you gone out for change for your mistress before? A.I had several times—I know this bill came in on the 12th, and my mistress kept it one day to look it over—it was paid on the 13th or 14th—my mistress and I were in the kitchen, and the cook was there, but did not see it—the next bill did not come in till the latter end of the month—the butcher's boy came into the kitchen sometimes—it was in December the prisoner was taken into custody—I was never spoken to till he was in custody—he did not continue to deliver bread till the 19th of December—Mr. Jobbings put another lad on, I cannot tell when; I took no notice—this bill was paid about 1 o'clock—the prisoner had not a horse and cart, he brought a basket—I had often seen my mistress pay him money before; he received it from her and put it in his pocket; he made no entry of it; he had no book—I should think he had been serving there four months—the sums were paid to him weekly, except the week before this.
JOHN HARRIS . I live at Blackheath, and deal with Mr. Jobbings for bread—I have no bill of 6s. 01/2 d.; I have looked for it—I know nothing about that bill—I had one bill on the 5th Dec. of 4s. 101/2 d.
ANN EVANS . I am housekeeper to Mr. Dyer, of Blackheath. We deal with Mr. Jobbings for bread—the prisoner used to supply it; I paid for it as I took it with ready money—I remember the 19th Dec.—I took a half-quartern loaf, and paid him 31/2 d.—there was nothing owing for bread at that time.
GEORGE FREDERICK JOBBINGS . The prisoner was in my service—it was his duty to deliver bread and to receive money from the customers—he did not pay me on the 13th or 14th of October an amount of 6s. 2d. on account of Capt. Stockley—it was his duty to pay the money he received every day—this ledger has no such amount as 6s. 2d. from Capt. Stockley—in this book of the bread here is an amount of 6s. 2d. due from Capt. Stockley—I spoke to the prisoner about it—I said, "There is a bill of 6s. 2d. from Capt. Stockley, which Mrs. Warren says she has paid"—he said, "I have not received it"—I said, "She says she has"—he said, "Let her produce the receipt, and I will pay you"—there is no payment of 31/2 d. on the 19th Dec. from Mrs. Evans, the housekeeper to Mr. Dyer—the prisoner told me on the Saturday night that he had received Mrs. Evans' money; he did not pay it over to me—I said, "You have not paid these amounts in," and he said "No."
Cross-examined. Q. How long had he been with you? A. Eleven or twelve months—he served about twenty-four customers in a day; he went out about 10 o'clock in the morning—he had a two wheeled truck, which he
pushed himself; it was not rather, heavy work—he went a circuit of five or six miles; he would return about 2 or 3 o'clock—he took out from twenty to twenty-six quartern loaves—I had not more than six customers who paid him weekly; they did not all pay him on the same day, on different days, and he would pay me in the evening; it has often happened that he did not pay for a day or two—the money he has paid one day he ought to have paid the day before—I never received the 6s. 2d.—very few customers paid him—I should not think on any occasion he would receive 3l.—I discharged him about 9 o'clock on the 19th Dec.; that was the first time I spoke to him about these—I did not ask him, on 19th Dec., about this 6s. 2d., because the lady said she might find the receipt perhaps—some of those entries in the book are what I received from him, and some from other persons—I have two other collectors; they have a particular circuit to themselves.
MR. THOMPSON. Q. Was the prisoner's duty any thing more than the ordinary bakers? A. No—he ought to have paid over these amounts daily, when he received them.
JANE JOBBINGS . I did not receive 6s. 2d. from the prisoner on account of Capt. Stockley's bill—Mrs. Warren came to my place about an error—I told the prisoner that the lady said she had paid the bill; he denied it, and said she had not paid it.
GUILTY.—Recommended to Mercy by the Jury and
the Prosecutor.— Confined Four Months.
MESSRS. CLARK and POLAND, conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN NEWMAN . I keep a beer shop in South Street, Greenwich. On 23rd Jan., at 7 o'clock in the evening, the prisoner came and called for a pint of beer and a screw of tobacco—he wore a hat—I served him; he tendered me 1s.; I thought it was not good, and put it in the drawer by the side of the bowl, by itself, gave him change, and he left directly—as soon as his back was turned I examined the 1s. and found it was bad; I ran after him, but turned the wrong way, and did not see him—I had seen him five or six times before that—he used to come in on Saturday night and have half a pint of beer, and chuck down 1d.—the first time he gave me 1s. was the first time I found bad money in the till—I bent the 1s. and put it in a can by itself—I afterwards gave it to the policeman at the Court—on 13th Feb., he came again, at 7 o'clock—he usually came at that time, but sometimes a little earlier—he had on a cap then; he called for a pint of beer and a screw of tobacco, and gave me 1s.; I bent it before him, with my finger, and thumb; he put his hand in his pocket and produced 6d., which he threw towards me—I said, "I have had enough of your bad money," and refused to take it—I asked a stone mason who was there to collar him—I went out, brought back a constable, and afterwards gave him both the shillings—he took about half the beer, and then filled his pipe, lighted it, and then threw down 1s., and I gave him 9d. change—he then drank the remainder and went away—it was about three minutes before he paid me.
Cross-examined by MR. DOYLE. Q. Do you know that the prisoner is a hawker about Greenwich? A. Yes.
EDWIN CLARK (Policeman, R 241). On 1st Feb., I was called by Mr. Newman—he gave me two bad shillings, and I took the prisoner—Mr. Newman charged him with having been there before; he said that he had not—I only found 2d. on him.
Cross-examined. Q. Is the date 1817? A. Yes, there are a great many shillings of that date, and of 1816 also; some hundreds of 1817 could be produced in a very short time.
MR. CLARK. Q. When you speak of two shillings from the same mould, do you mean of the same date? A. No; I find corresponding marks in certain places, which proves that they are from the same mould; but they may be from the same pattern, and not from the same mould; yesterday I had a case where there were four of the same date, but only two from the same mould, the same shilling may be used twice for a mould, and may have an additional mark on it when the second mould is made.
MR. DOYLE. Q. How many shillings may be taken from one mould? A.I have seen as many as forty; but it is only a first-rate hand that can do that; half a dozen is a common number.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZABETH BROWN . I reside with Thomas Lee, who keeps the Royal Oak, Woolwich. On Saturday, 23rd Jan., about 7 o'clock, I served the prisoner with half a quartern of gin; he brought a bottle with him—he gave me a florin, which I tried and found was bad—I asked him where he got it; he said that he had just taken it for his wages of his master—he asked me for it, but I refused to return it—he did not pay for the gin—he said if he fetched his mother would I give it to him—I told him to fetch his mother, and he left the money and the bottle of gin, and I saw no more of him till he was in custody, on 8th Feb.—during that time I had kept the florin apart from other money, and gave it to Lowe—I had given information to the police, and in consequence of what they said to me I went to the police court, and the prisoner was brought out of a cell into the court by himself—I did not pick him out from a number, but I am sure he is the person.
Prisoner. I never gave it to her. Witness. I am sure he is the lad—the bottle has never been fetched away.
THOMAS SERJEANT. I keep the Carpenter's Arms, Woolwich. On Saturday, 6th Feb., about 6 o'clock in the afternoon, the prisoner came, and my wife served him in my presence with half a quartern of rum; he brought a bottle to put it in—he tendered a bad half crown; I told him it was bad, and that he had been to me on a former occasion, when I was too busy to attend to him; but this time I had time to attend to him, and would lock him up—he said nothing to that—I asked him what he was; he said that he was apprentice to a turner in the Arsenal—I said, "That is the same tale that you told me on a former occasion," and gave him into custody—the first occasion was about six weeks before; I did not serve him on that occasion; but I saw him, but I was called down stairs and shown a 2s. piece in his presence—I examined it, and it was bad—I asked him where he got it from; he said that his mother gave it to him to fetch half a quartern of rum in a bottle—I gave it to him back, as he said that if I would let him have it he would go to his mother and get a good one—he left the bottle on that occasion, and never came for it—I am quite sure the florin was bad.
into my custody by Mr. Serjeant—I asked him how he came by the money; he said that a man gave it to him—I looked outside, but saw no man—Mr. Serjeant gave me this half crown (produced).
Prisoner's Defence. I was coming from home, and Tom Phillips, who is in the Arsenal, stopped me and asked me to go in for it for 1d.; I said, "What is the reason you do not go in?" he said, "Because there are a lot of men round the bar, and I know one of them, I do not want to see him; he gave me the half crown, and I went in, and the gentleman said that it was bad, and that I had been there before, and detained me; I had never seen him before, and he never asked me where I got it from, till the policeman came, and then I said that I got it from a man outside.
GUILTY .*—(Mr. Poland stated that he had been before charged with uttering, and discharged; that his brother was also a common utterer; and his half sister was tried yesterday.)
Confined Twelve Months.
346. JOHN SMITH (22) , Stealing 1 watch and chain, 1 coat, 1 pair of stockings, and other articles, value 5l. 3s., and 33l. 8s. 6d. in money, the property of Francis Journeaux, in a vessel upon a navigable river.
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
FRANCIS JOURNEAUX . I am captain of the brig Beebie, of Jersey. On 19th Jan. she was lying in the river off Deptford creek—I went to bed in the cabin at about half past 9 o'clock—my trousers, coat, and scarf were in the sitting cabin—there was 33l. in gold, 8s. 6d. in silver, and this knife (produced) in my pockets, all which I missed in the morning—I am positive of this knife—I bought it in Newcastle in July—I found the companion shut, but not locked—the top of it was torn open—it was closed when I went to bed—I spoke to a constable, and on the following day he showed me my knife.
Cross-examined by MR. ORRIDGE. Q. What crew were on board? A.Nine besides me—they were all there next morning.
FRANCIS KELLY (Policeman H 130). On the morning of 21st Jan., in consequence of information, I went to a room in Glasshouse Buildings, Whitechapel, and saw the prisoner and a woman named Mee, whom he lived with—he asked me what I wanted him for—I called out to another constable "78, come in"—he did not come in, and the prisoner went to the fireplace, got the poker, and made a blow at my head—I avoided it and seized him, but he got away and escaped to Blue Anchor Yard, where he was stopped by a man—I went back to the room and saw a coat there; I took it up, and this knife fell from the pocket—he said, "That is my coat, give it to me"—I cannot say whether he saw the knife—at the station he said, "That is my knife, I bought it three months ago, in Ratcliffe Highway"—the prosecutor identified it—we were at two police stations, one at Whitechapel, and another at Greenwich.
Cross-examined by MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Was that said at Greenwich station? A. Yes—the knife was in my hand—I did not give it into the prisoner's hand—the robbery was on the night of the 19th, or morning of the 20th, and I took him on the 21st—he lived at a brothel.
MR. COOPER. Q. Did you go back to the room and find some money there? A. Yes, 7s. and a purse—afterwards, from further information I received, I went to a public house in Drury Court, Holborn, and found that the woman with whom he was cohabiting had deposited 17l. there.
MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Did you see her deposit it? A. No—I did not take
the prisoner to the house in Drury Lane where I found the money—when I took him he said that he knew nothing about it.
GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted.
GEORGE WILSON . I am chief constable of the West India Docks. I produce a certificate—(Read: "Clerkenwell Sessions, Oct., 1853; John Smith, Convicted of Stealing 2 jackets, having then been before convicted; Sentenced to four years penal servitude")—The prisoner is the person—I was present at his trial.
GUILTY.**— Eight Years Penal Servitude .
MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM YOUNG (Policeman R 144). It is my duty to stand at the gate of Woolwich Dock Yard, when the men are going out at night—I am authorized to search them if I think it expedient—I was on duty at the outer factory gate about a quarter to 6 o'clock, and the prisoner attempted to go through, (he is the leading man or foreman of the labourers)—a sergeant of my division was with me who touched the prisoner, and I searched him and found in his jacket pocket three pieces of leather, thirteen pieces of candle, two whole candles, and a brass sheath (produced)—the pieces of leather were between his waistcoat and shirt—the candles were wrapped up as they are now—I asked him no questions, but he said, "It is a bad job," and seemed very much confused—I left him in charge of the inspector inside the gate, and went to a locker in the Dock Yard and found this piece of leather (produced)—I found the key on the prisoner when I searched him—next day I showed it to him, and he asked if it was the leather that was found on him—I said, "No, it was found in your cabin"—he said that he had it in his cabin for the purpose of mending straps which were used in his business—I compared the band of leather with the pieces found on him, and they correspond as if cut from one another—an hour after I took the leather to him he said that the candles and leather he could give no account of, or something to that effect, and the sheath he picked up while going round the yard with a gang of men, and placed it in his pocket, with the intention of giving it up to the proper authorities—he had actually reached the gate, and was passing out when he was touched by the inspector.
Cross-examined by MR. PLATT. Q. Was it his duty as foreman of the workmen to go round? A. Yes, he had a gang of men to look after—I do not know whether it was his duty to distribute leather among them—he had a great many hands under his control—I do not know the course of business in the yard—it was one of these small pieces of leather that was concealed between his shirt and braces—he wore a pilot jacket—on opening it, the leather would not be seen; I was going to open his waistcoat, and he pulled it out—I saw it before he drew it out; and saw it's exact position—there was a kind of dirty handkerchief over it—that is not the place where a handkerchief usually is, because there was no pocket inside the waistcoat—I do not speak to these being government candles—he was very much confused, and said, "I can give no account," or something to that effect—the cabin is a kind of shed to put tools in, and materials too—no one could get there who had not got the key—when I spoke about the leather I found in the cabin, he said that it was usual for him to have such pieces of leather to use in his work—this mark of a knife on both pieces of leather corresponds—I believe they come from one piece.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Was it after you found the leather in the cabin that he
said that it was usual to have pieces for his work? A. Yes; he did not say that it was usual at the time I searched him—I did not see any of the pieces of leather upon him before I searched him; they were between his braces and his shirt, and he had on a jacket and a waistcoat, which were buttoned up—there may have been a pocket inside the jacket, but not in the waistcoat—the sheath was in his outside pocket.
JOHN WILLIAMS . I live at Ann Street, Woolwich. I am leading man of the stores in the dock yard—the prisoner was leading man of the labourers; he has been in the employ of the government twenty-seven years; his wages were 1l. 12s. 6d. a week—these pieces of leather are of the same description as other leather which forms a portion of Her Majesty's stores—I believe this leather to be Her Majesty's property—the prisoner could have access to it—he had to work with leather occasionally, but had no business to carry it about on his person—these candles are similar to what are served out; they have a coloured thread which I know them by—the prisoner has not access to them; they are issued by me—he has no right to take any candles or pieces out of the dock yard—there are no perquisites; this sheath has the government mark, the broad arrow, on it; he had no right to have it in his possession—if he picked it up in the yard he ought to have deposited it with me at my store, which is within the gates—the gate by which he went out is 100 or 180 yards from my store.
Cross-examined. Q. Can you undertake to say that these candles and the leather are the property of Her Majesty? A. I can swear that they are similar to what are used in the dock yard—this coloured thread in the wick is always used in the dock yard candles—they are not commonly to be bought; they do not get into the hands of marine store dealers or grocers when a ship comes home that I am aware of—there is a faulty place in both pieces of this leather—the prisoner superintends labourers, and has a large body under him—he has a little leather occasionally for their use—if he has too much the cabin is the proper place for him to keep it; and every thing which he has to use—this sheath is worth 7d. as old brass; the leather 2s. 2d.; and the candles about 6d.—I have known the prisoner in service there upwards of seventeen years—he has brought me pieces of brass which he has picked up on other occasions, three or four times—he would not be entitled to a pension after a certain number of years unless he was in the factory department.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Have you any doubt that the candles are the peculiar manufacture used in the dock yard? A. I have no doubt; if a person bought a lot of them at a marine store dealers, he could not get them into the dock yard without carrying them through the gates; but they do not search people going into the dock yard—the prisoner had the key of the cabin—our candles are not wrapped up in this way; these were not wrapped up by my direction.
(The prisoner received an excellent character.)
GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his character.— Confined Three Months.
Before Mr. Recorder.
RINOLDI PLEADED GUILTY .†— Confined Twelve Months.
(The prisoners, being foreigners, the evidence was interpreted to them.)
towards London; they had the coats which they have on now chucked over them; their arms were underneath—I watched them some time, and saw them go into a large clothier's shop in Deptford Highway, and lost sight of them for about ten minutes—I then met them in the High Street, and they went into another large clothier's—I saw that Rinoldi had got a bundle under his cloak; he put it in his hand—they remained about a minute, and went on the Lower Road, through Gibraltar Gate, towards London—I had a sergeant in plain clothes with me; he caught Rinoldi, and I caught Conte; they were taken to the station—I had seen them together before, at Gravesend, on the 3rd—I found in the bundle five pairs of boots, seven waistcoats, and three coats.
ROBERT WARDEN . I am a boot maker. On 10th Feb., the prisoners came, and Conte asked to look at a pair of boots which were in the window—I showed them to him, and they would not fit—he spoke English—he had two other pairs tried on, but neither of them fitted—he said that if I would put the tree in, he would call again in half an hour—it was then half-past 12 o'clock—they did not call again—these two pairs of boots (produced)are mine; they were safe in my shop shortly before, and Rinoldi went to the other end of the shop and placed his parcel where they were hanging.
Conte. Q. Did not I tell you that as they did not fit me I was going to another shop, and if they did not suit I would come back next morning? A.No, you positively said that you would come back in half an hour, if I put the tree in—I understood your English perfectly well.
Conte's Defence. As I did not know the road to London, I asked this young man, and he accompanied me; while we were going along he took a parcel from under his cloak, but I did not know anything about it, and I can hardly believe that he could have done it.
JURY TO JAMES WESTBROOK . Q. What did you find on them? A. Half a sovereign and a 4d. piece on Rinoldi, and 1l. 0s. 11/4 d. on Conte—two other pairs of boots were found on him, not got from this shop; I found the owner of them, but the Magistrate did not think fit to send the case here—Conte had on an old pair of boots, the same as he has now on.
CONTE— GUILTY .†— Confined Twelve Months.
(There were five other indictments against the prisoners.)
349. THOMAS BAILEY (21), HENRY FULLER (19), and BENJAMIN WILLIAMS (20) Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling house of George Sullivan, and stealing therein 73 rings, value 70l., and 4 watches, 6 brooches, and other articles, his property.
MESSRS. SHARPE and DOYLE conducted the Prosecution.
GEORGE SULLIVAN . I am a watchmaker and jeweller, of 5, Greenwich Road. On the night of 5th Feb., I went to bed about 12 o'clock; the house was fastened up, and the shutters secure—about 5 o'clock in the morning I heard a violent concussion; I got up, and examined the back and front doors, but finding them secure, went to bed again—I did not examine the shop window—I was subsequently called by the police, and found the window broken, and a number of goods gone—one shutter was sprung over the other, the bar forced out, and the glass broken—the persons had only put their hands in—the window was marked with blood, and so were some of the tickets—I missed seventy-eight rings, some watches, pencil cases, and watch keys, value about 200l.—they have not all been recovered—these (produced) are a portion of them—they are my property.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. How much has been recovered?
A. About 30l. or 40l. value—here are five diamond studs, a diamond ring, three silver watches, and one gold watch—the constable has shown me about seventy rings found on the prisoners.
WILLIAM HOLMES (Policeman, R 287). On 6th Feb., about a quarter to five o'clock in the morning, I saw Fuller and Williams going towards Greenwich from the prosecutor's house—I was on duty in Greenwich Road, about 200 yards from it—five minutes afterwards, I saw them come back past the prosecutor's shop; I saw nothing wrong about it then; that was at ten minutes to five o'clock.
Fuller. It is false, I was not near the place. Witness. I am sure I saw you, I did not know you by sight.
GRORGE CHAPMAN (Policeman, R 208). On 6th Feb., I was on duty at New Cross Road, Deptford, nearly a mile from the prosecutor's premises—Margetson was with me—I saw the three prisoners about a quarter past 5 o'clock in the morning, going in the direction of London—another policeman named Edmunds came up, and we went down Five Bell Lane, into the high road again, about a quarter of a mile further up; we watched the prisoners come up, and then walked out in front of them. I took Bailey, and asked him where he came from, he said, "From the docks." I said, "What docks?" He said, "Below," moving his hand in the direction of Deptford—I asked him where he lived; he said, "In the Borough"—I asked him what he had about him; he said, "Nothing"—I put my hand into his right hand coat pocket, and took out this silver watch, and a quantity of rings; four dropped on the ground, I picked up two of them at the time, and afterwards went and picked up one, and another constable picked up another—I searched his left pocket, and found a quantity more rings, in all forty-two—I asked him how he accounted for the possession of this property; he said, "We picked it up near a horse trough at a public house; did we not, Ben.!" Williams replied, "Yes"—when we came past the Marquis of Granby, he said, "This is where we picked it up; did not we, Ben?" Williams replied, "Yes"—I looked at Bailey's hand, it was cut, and from some remarks which I made to him, he said, "I have met with an accident on the road, as we have just come from Chatham across Blackheath."—I found this handkerchief saturated with blood (produced) round his hand; I also found on him a knife, a key, and a pen knife.
Cross-examined. Q. Have not you said that you found the handkerchief in his pocket? A. Yes, at the station—I do not think this is the first time I have mentioned it being in his hand; if it is not down in the depositions, it ought to be; he afterwards said that his nose had been bleeding; the forefinger of his right hand was slightly scratched—the Marquis of Granby is half a mile from the prosecutor's house—I did not see a basket there; I looked for one; there is a horse trough there—I did not find any of the property on the other prisoners.
JAMES MARGETSON (Policeman, R 373). I was with Chapman on this morning, and apprehended Fuller—I searched him, and found in his left hand coat pocket a very large brooch; in his waistcoat pocket, a silver watch; and in his trousers pocket, two silver watches; this (produced) is one of them, the rest have been given up—I made further search, and found five silver brooches, and another plain brooch; twenty-eight gold rings, a small glass case containing some of the rings; a small gold chain; two gold pencil cases; one diamond stud; and two gold earrings (produced)—the rings were mixed together loose in his trousers pocket; but a few of the valuable ones were inside this glass case—I asked him how he accounted for having these in his
possession; he made no reply—I had seen the prisoners all together the day before, near Greenwich church
Fuller. It is false, for we were in Chatham the day before, there were rings picked up in the road by working men, which he has not mentioned.
Witness. There was one ring picked up the same morning, and we met a gentleman who gave a ring up to me.
GEORGE JEFFERY ADMONDS (Police inspector, R 162). On 6th Feb., about half past 5 o'clock in the morning, I was with the two other policemen, and took Williams—I searched him, and found in his right hand trousers pocket this life preserver, the lead of which is cut, and a piece of glass was embedded in it, which has dropped out since—it fitted into the cut—I found a pawnbroker's duplicate in his cap lining, at the station—I asked him where he had been to; he said, "Down the road"—Bailey said to Williams, "Ben, we found them things by the horse trough;" Williams said, "Yes"—the window is plate glass.
Williams' Defence. I am guilty of having them, but not of stealing them.
FULLER and WILLIAMS— GUILTY .— Confined Two Years each .
BAILEY— GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted.
WILLIAM HUCKSTUP (Policeman, K 293). I produce a certificate—(Read:—"Clerkenwell Sessions; Henry Williams, Convicted of housebreaking, Sept., 1856; Confined eight months)."—I was present—Bailey is the person.
BAILEY—GUILTY.**†— Six Years Penal Servitude .
MR. SHARPE conducted the Prosecution.
DAVID AKEHURST . I live at No. 3l. Union Buildings, Woolwich; I am carman to the South Eastern Railway Company. On 31st Feb., I was returning home from an Odd Fellows' Club, and before I turned into Union Street, I saw Pearce standing at the corner, and Ginger a short way down High Street—I walked on, and when about three minutes walk from my house I heard some one behind me, I looked back, and saw that it was Ginger—I walked on, and found that he drew nearer to me, and when he was within five or six yards of me, I looked back, and got out into the road for him to pass me; he would not, but seized me by the collar—I begged of him to let me go, as I had not interfered with him—he knocked my cap off, and as I stooped to pick it up, he seized me by the throat, and Pearce came up and said, "Take his watch, take his watch"—I snatched my watch of the guard and put it in my trousers pocket, but in vain—they plundered my pockets of 6s. 3d., and my watch—Ginger then squeezed my throat till I became insensible, and when I came to my senses I went for the police, and found Pearce in bed—the policeman took the clothes off him and said, "Is that the man?" I said, "Yes; I suppose you thought I did not know you, Dick, but I did"—I had known him more than twelve months about the town—Larking took him to the station, and I went with the other constable to Ginger's house, and found him in bed—my watch, and chain, and purse have not been found—I believe Pearce said he had not been in Ginger's company that night, but I am not positive—I was perfectly sober—it was a bright, moon-light night, and there was a gas lamp very close.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. What do you Odd Fellows do when
you meet? A. We pay our contributions—I knew the prisoners about the streets of Woolwich, but had never spoken to them—I knew that they called Pearce, Dick—I did not tell Larking the names of the persons who had robbed me; I did not mention the name of Dick to him—I described the men to him—I do not know whether he said, "I think I know who the men are"—Butcher was with him when he took me to Pearce's lodging, he went up stairs into the room with us—there was a light in the bedroom when we got in; I believe it was a candle, but the policeman went up in front of me, and went into the room first, and I after him—he did not tell me that a man lodged there who answered the description—I charged Pearce in the room with being one of the men who robbed me, and he said that he did not know any thing about it—when the policeman told him the charge, he said to me, "Am I the man?" I said, "Yes"—he asked the policeman if he had brought a piece of paper for him.
JOHN LARKING (Policeman B 192). On the morning of 2nd Feb. I was on duty in Union Street, Woolwich, and the prosecutor gave me information—he was sober—I then went to Pearce's house and took him in custody—I found nothing—I asked him if he had been in Ginger's company, he said, "I have, you know I am always in Ginger's company"—he also said, "I left Uncle Tom's cabin beer shop at 11 o'clock with Ginger, and went direct home"—I saw them leaving at that time.
WILLIAM BUTCHER (Policeman R 85). I was with Larking when the prosecutor made his complaint—I went to Pearce's, and after that to Ginger's, Kent Cottage, Warren Lane—we found him in bed, and Akehurst identified him—we found nothing—I had seen the prisoners at a few minutes after 11 o'clock that night going towards their home—Ginger said, "Have you brought me the paper?"—that is slang; I do not know what it means.
Cross-examined. Q. What time was it when you went to Ginger's? A. About 1 o'clock in the morning—he immediately denied having anything to do with it.
JOHN WILKINSON . I live in Union Street, Woolwich, and am a butcher's servant—on 2nd Feb., about 12 o'clock, I was in Union Street, going home, and saw some one lying on the ground—I should not like to swear whether it was the prosecutor or not—I saw the two young men close to him—the little one said, "Halloa, Bill"—I only knew him by sight—I answered, "Halloa"—I went some little distance down, and heard some money rattle—they asked me to take the man on the ground home, but I would not touch him.
Cross-examined. Q. You say you saw the two young men; do you mean to say it was the prisoners? A. Yes; I knew them before—I could not see the man before I got up to him—it was not a dark night, but it was in a dark place—I cannot say now what they said to me about him, or whether they said he was drunk; I cannot recollect—my name is not Bill.
GUILTY .**— Four Years each in Penal Servitude .
MATILDA SPRULES . I keep a haberdasher's shop in Blisset Street, Greenwich. On Saturday evening, 6th Feb., the prisoner came into the shop about 7 o'clock, and asked for a halfpennyworth of black thread—I served him, and
he went away—Jane Spinks was in the shop at the time—about ten minutes after he had gone, I missed a roll of calico; it had been by the counter, opposite the door, not where the prisoner was; I had not seen him near that counter, only where I was serving—I had seen it safe five or ten minutes before the prisoner came in—about 10 o'clock that same night I went to a marine store shop, and there found it.
Prisoner. Q. When I left your shop did you see me take anything with me? A. No—neither did I see you touch anything.
COURT. Q. Did you see him go out? A. Yes—he could not have had the roll of calico then without my seeing it.
JANE ELIZABETH SPINKS . I live with my father in Blisset Street, Greenwich, a few doors from the last witness. On Saturday evening, 6th Feb., I was in her shop—the prisoner came in behind me—I had seen him before that with a man who has escaped—I heard the other one say, "Go in and get a halfpennyworth of black thread," and the prisoner came in and stood behind me while I was served—I came out before him—I went across the road, and when I came back I saw the one who has escaped and the prisoner walking up Blisset Street together—I stood at our gate and watched them; the other one went into the shop, and came out with something on his shoulder and walked across the road, and they went away, and I saw no more of them—I had seen the other one three or four times before—I knew him by sight; he used to be potman at a public house close by—I did not see the prisoner after that I saw him go across the road and the other one follow with something on his shoulder—I should not think it was quite ten minutes after the prisoner went in for the thread that the other man went in and got the roll—they had been loitering about there nearly all the evening.
JOHN PARSONS . I live with Mr. Shay, a butcher, at Royal Hill, Greenwich. On Saturday evening, 6th Feb., I was going down Blisset Street—I saw the prisoner on the opposite side of the way to Miss Sprules—he was in company with the one that has escaped—he crossed the road to the shop and went back again—I can't say whether he went in—I then saw the other man go into the shop and bring a roll of stuff out on his shoulder—I went and told Miss Sprules—I did not follow the man with the roll, I had got some meat on my tray.
JNO. JENNINGS (Police sergeant, R 40). In consequence of information, I went along the road to the George public house, Blackheath Hill—I there found the prisoner—I called him out, and told him he was charged with stealing a roll of calico from the shop of Miss Sprules, in Blisset Street—he said he did not take it, he knew nothing about it—he said he went in to buy a halfpenny worth of thread—I did not find the calico at the marine store dealer's; I found it at Miss Sprules' shop—the marine store dealer has left, and I have not been able to find him—I believe he left that same night.
Prisoner. I know nothing at all about the crime; I was along with my sister, who came from Sydenham; we went to the George public house to have a drop of beer, and I was there all the evening; I got a halfpenny worth of thread to mend my trousers, and then went straight away to see my brother about a job of work; I stopped to have a drop of beer with him, and the policeman came and took me into custody.
GUILTY.*— Confined Nine Months.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. SHARPE conducted the Prosecution.
SAMUEL WILLOUGHBY . I live in New Buildings, Red Cross Street. On 3rd Feb., I left home to go to Walworth, about 8 o'clock in the evening—I had 10s. 7d. in silver in my pocket. On returning from Walworth, I went into the Sugar Loaf public house—I was drinking there—I found a sailor there, and was drinking with him some time—it might be an hour—it might be about 10 o'clock when I got to the Sugar Loaf—when I came out I might go with the sailor towards London Bridge; I would not say—we came out of the Sugar Loaf together—I do not recollect going anywhere else—I had some money when I left the Sugar Loaf—I cannot tell to what amount—I was drunk—I am not aware that I went to High Street, and from there to Union Street—there was something happened to me; it was in Union Street the policeman told me—I remember nothing of seeing the prisoners till I saw them before the Magistrate—in the morning I had no money, it was all gone, and my clothes were dirty—I had my 10s. 7d. in coming up from Walworth.
Cross-examined by MR. LILLY. Q. That was about 8 o'clock? A. No, nearly nine; in fact, I got drunk, and forgot all about it.
THOMAS HALTON (Policeman, M 251). I was on duty in High Street, Borough, at a quarter past 1 o'clock, on 4th Feb.—I saw the two prisoners and the prosecutor standing together—Hands had got her hand in his pocket, and, as soon as she pulled it out, they both laid hold of him by the shoulders, threw him on the pavement, and ran away—when Hands drew her hand out of his pocket, her hand was shut—I pursued and overtook them about twenty yards off—I caught them both round the neck; another constable coming up, I let him take hold of Welsh, and I said, "You have robbed that man"—Hands said, "I never touched the man"—I laid hold of her hand, and took six shillings, and 6d. in copper, out of it—it was her right hand, which she carried under her cloak in running.
Cross-examined. Q. In what part of High Street was this? A. About twenty yards from Union Street, towards the Town Hall—I was on the same side of the way as the prisoners, about ten yards from them; there was no one else there—I never heard the cry of "Police" from any one—there was no one passing, and no cab—they ran towards Union Street—I followed them about twenty yards—the prosecutor was lying on his back; I sent another constable to take him up—he was taken to the station—he did not recover himself—I saw him the next morning.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Justice Wightman.
354. ALFRED FEIST was indicted for that he being the master of the workhouse of St. Mary, Newington, and, as such master, being entrusted with the dead body of one Mary Whitehead, a pauper in the said workhouse, for the purpose of interment, and not otherwise, unlawfully did fail and omit to provide for the decent interment of the said body, and did, for lucre and gain to himself, deliver the said body to a certain hospital for the purpose of dissection.—There were 63 other COUNTS, varying the manner of stating thecharge.—The 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Counts were for delaying the said burial, and other counts charged like offences with respect to the bodies of other paupers.
MR. ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.
EDWARD CORDER DURMER . I am one of the churchwardens and guardians of Newington parish—the defendant was the master of the workhouse for rather more than two years—he was discharged in consequence of these discoveries.
Cross-examined by MR. MATTHEWS. Q. Was the defendant the person to give the notice of removal of a body for the purposes of dissection, according to the usual course of the workhouse? A. It was his duty to send the notice to the inspector of anatomy; the medical certificate of death would be sent to him at the same time, in the ordinary way—the master was supplied with printed forms of notice of removal, in compliance with the Anatomy Act, 2nd and 3rd William IV.—the master represented the guardians, for the purpose of sending bodies to the hospital—I never heard the master's authority questioned in that respect—I have known Mr. Feist during the entire time that he has filled the office of master—I have had an opportunity, nearly daily, of seeing in what way he performed his duties—his conduct, as master, was exemplary, as far as my observation went, until I heard this accusation—I have had an opportunity of knowing the inmates intimately, and they speak, generally, well of him, those who are well conducted; those who are otherwise would, of course, not like his discipline—there was no disregard of the feelings of the poor under his care; on the contrary, as far as my observation went—the guardians, with the consent of the Poor Law Board, have twice raised his salary in consequence of his good conduct—I am generally familiar with the management of the workhouse—the burials would be under the care of the undertaker—there was a contract between the undertaker and the guardians as to the burials; it was the office of Mr. Hogg, the undertaker, to manage and conduct the burials of the paupers—I do not know whether he had the control of the dead house—the number of paupers in the workhouse averaged about 550—Mr. Feist's duties were very numerous and very rigidly attended to, as far as my observation went; he was very regular in the performance of his duties—there were a large number of visitors; he would not have much time to give to each—there was a resolution come to by the guardians on 24th Dec. last, "That the master of the workhouse have the sole charge of the dead house, and the responsibility of the proper disposal of all bodies deposited therein;" that resolution was passed after the master had left.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. Were you at all aware that he ever received any money from the hospital? A. I was never conscious of it at all—the performance of the burials was under the care of the undertaker—the guardians had no communication with the undertaker beyond receiving and acknowledging the contract—I am not prepared to say it was Mr. Feist who gave directions to the undertaker as to the course he should pursue; the master certainly would do so; the governors and guardians never gave him any—the inspector of anatomy supplied the master with notices; it was the official form from the inspector's office; I do not know how he got them.
HARRY BURRELL FARNALL . I am one of the inspectors of the Poor Law Board—I was sent down by the Board to hold an inquiry with regard to this matter; I held it on 23rd Nov., 1857—Mr. Feist was examined.
MR. MATTHEWS. Q. Was he examined on oath? A. Yes—the inquiry was with reference to his alleged misconduct.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. Did you take down his examination? A. Yes; I
have it here—(MR. MATTHEWS objected to this evidence; it had not been shown that the witness had any authority to administer an oath; and under these circumstances the statement made by the defendant would be made under illegal compulsion, and ought, therefore, to be excluded; it was precisely analogous to the case of a Magistrate swearing a prisoner instead of asking him to make a statement. MR. JUSTICE CROMPTON stated that this question had been much considered in the case of Rex. v. Price, when it was held that an act done by a public functionary must be taken to be prima facie within his practice)—I have been an inspector for ten years—the original power to administer an oath was given to the assistant commissioner by the Poor Law Amendment Act, when the assistant commissioner was set aside, the inspectors of Poor Laws were put in their place and the same power was committed to them; that is under the same Act of Parliament—there was no appointment under seal to hold the inquiry, nor is it necessary, because inspectors of Poor Law are empowered under another Act of Parliament on all inquiries to administer an oath—the power given is to take evidence on oath—this was no special inquiry, further than other inquiries are. I was not specially appointed to make the inquiry; it was one of the ordinary inquiries made by the poor law inspectors; and, under the authority of the Act of Parliament, I administered an oath, as I always do and always have done for many years past—I did not require the defendant to take an oath in this instance; when he first appeared before me, I asked him whether he would be sworn or not, I left it to himself, and he said he would rather be sworn—I asked whether he had any objection to be sworn—he said, not at all, he would rather be sworn—if he had said, "I had rather not be sworn," I should have taken his declaration, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, but not from any doubt that authority was vested in me to administer the oaths—when I say I would have taken his declaration, I do not mean I would have administered the form of declaration to him, I mean I would have heard what he had to say—this is what I took down—(Read: "I am master of the St. Mary Newington Workhouse, and have been so for two years and ten months—there has been a great number of deaths in this workhouse since I have been here—the same contractor has always buried the dead from this workhouse while I have been here, his name is Robert Hogg—I keep one key of the dead house and there is another kept by the porter—I am aware there is a law which enables guardians in certain cases to deliver the dead bodies of paupers to properly licensed persons for the purposes of dissection—I do not know whether there is any order of the guardians in their books to this effect—Mr. Hogg was the contractor for burials when I came to this house—the clerk has informed me that although there was no record of the fact, nevertheless the guardians availed themselves of the 2 & 3 William 4c., 75, s. 7—The next day after I came in as master, the dead body of a pauper was forwarded to a school of anatomy, it was taken away by Mr. HOGG—I have a form of certificate under which I forward the dead bodies of paupers to schools of anatomy (form put in) this form is always accompanied by a medical certificate (form put in) I have forwarded many bodies of paupers to schools of anatomy—I remember Mary Whitehead, she died in this workhouse—her body was sent to a school of anatomy—I always send to the friends of paupers deceased—I can not recollect whether any of Whitehead's friends attended—I am satisfied that if any dead pauper has a friend who claims the body, that such body would not be forwarded to a school of anatomy—I have been at Guy's Hospital; for the last twelve months all bodies from this house have gone there—I have been twice at the hospital on business which I was sent for—the secretary sent
for me on both occasions—I received as much as 10l. from the secretary—the secretary of the hospital told me himself that he always made the masters of workhouses presents when the school had been benefited by such work-houses—but I do not know of any case where a claimed body has been sent to those schools—MR. ROBERT HOGG comes here two or three times a week—I am not aware of his having ever sent a claimed body to the school of anatomy—all receipts for bodies are supposed to be brought to me—I have never looked at any of the books in Guy's Hospital—I remember Charles Greenland—I do not know that he had a wife—Miss Mottram was the nurse then, and is so now; I should imagine that she would know if a friend visited Charles Greenland—I know of no such friend; his body was sent to a school of anatomy, and I got a receipt for it—I destroy all such receipts at the expiration of each quarter—I go through the sick wards; and I remember Greenland—he never asked me to send for his wife or any other relative—to the best of my knowledge I never saw Greenland's wife—I remember Phoebe Clarke—her body was unclaimed, and it went to the school of anatomy—I do not know whether Clarke had a visitor—my wife is the matron—she never informed me that either Sarah Fetter, Sarah Grant, Charles Greenland, or Phoebe Clarke's bodies were claimed—I do not recollect any friend of Phoebe Clarke's—I have never received any fee or gratuity from Mr. Hogg in any way—Mr. Hogg is always assisted by his own men at funerals and never by any inmates—I was not in the dead house with Mary Whitehead's friends—I employ a number of persons in the workhouse to find the relatives of paupers—I have told you the whole truth—the gratuity allowed to me from the society is given generally a little after Christmas—I do not think I got the same gratuity on both occasions—the last gratuity I got amounted to 20l., I think—the secretary never at any time told me that he gave me this sum for a certain number of bodies; but only as a gratuity, I do not know of any Act of Parliament which prevents my taking such a gratuity—I have several times been present when bodies were screwed down in our dead house—I do not know that it is my duty to do this—I should not consider it my duty to go to see a body screwed down which had died in this workhouse—I told Dr. Iliffe that I never received any fee for a body sent from this workhouse to the school of anatomy—I did not mention the gratuity to Dr. Iliffe—I have had no private conversation with Mr. Hogg relative to this business—if I have spoken to him others have been present—for instance Mr. Bull—Mr. Billet—and Mr. Heseltine—I never suggested to Mr. Hogg that he should take the whole blame of this business on himself—nor has Mr. Hogg ever told me that if there was blame we must share it between us—I went to Mr. Hogg with Mr. Heseltine and Mr. Billet, and I said, "I want you to answer me one question, Did you ever give me a fee in any one way?" and he says "Never, by God"—in the very beginning of my taking office I told Mr. Hogg that it must be well understood that no bodies which went to the school of anatomy should be charged for burial to the Parish—If Mr. Hogg has charged the guardians with the burial of Mary Whitehead I gay it is a fraud—If he has charged for the burial of Charles Greenland it is a fraud—and so of Phoebe Clarke—I have never received any fee present or gratuity from Hogg—my wife has never received any gratuity from Mr. Hogg—I did not go to the secretary with Mr. Hogg, nor do I know that Mr. Hogg ever received anything from the secretary—I now believe from this inquiry that claimed bodies have been sent to the hospital for dissection—I never refused any friend to see a corpse. Alfred Feist.")
Cross-examined by MR. MATTHEWS. Q. Were the notices of removal and
the warrants of removal with respect to Mary Whitehead, Greenland, and Clark, shown to Mr. Feist at the time of the inquiry, when the questions were put? A. No, they were not—the warrants of removal were not before me at the time—they did not come before me in the inquiry—the hospital books were not produced—Mr. Hogg was also examined before me—every thing he said is in his deposition—I have inspected the workhouse while the defendant was master, I always found it in very excellent order, and the poor contented, the management of it was very creditable; it appeared to me that his discharge of his duties was exemplary—I have certified to the Poor Law Board that the house was always in order.
LOUISA MIXER . I live at No. 30, Pitt Street, St. George's Road. I am married—I am the daughter of Mary Whitehead—she was at the workhouse—she died on 30th Jan, 1857—I saw her there the day before she died—I received intelligence of her death, and went to the workhouse on the day she died—I saw her about half past 2 o'clock, or from 2 to 3 o'clock in the afternoon—I was told that she died about 10 o'clock in the morning—I saw Mr. Feist—I went into the dead house with the nurse to put a night dress on my mother as she lay in the coffin, and after coming out, I went into Mr. Feist's office, and asked him what day my mother would be buried—I told him my mother's name—he said he did not know whether it would be on Saturday or Monday; he told me if I went to Mr. Hogg, Mr. Hogg would tell me what day she would be buried—I asked if more than two could follow; he said, "Yes, by payment of 1s. 6d. each person"—On Monday, 2nd Feb., I went again to the workhouse—I had gone to Mr. Hogg on 30th Jan.—I heard that the funeral was to take place on the Monday, and went there—I saw the porter at the lodge, he told me to wait, and I should be sent for when I was wanted—I waited some time—I then went out into the yard, I saw Mr. Feist, and told him I had come to the burial of Mary Whitehead—I went into the dead house to see my mother's body—Mr. Feist came to fetch me and my sister from the room where we were waiting, and he took us into the dead house—I saw my mother in her coffin; Mr. Feist remained while I was looking at the body—I remained there, perhaps, five minutes—Mr. Feist told us not to go too near—after we had looked at my mother for about five minutes, he said, "Now, ladies, that will do," and we came out, and went back to the room we came from—I am quite sure it was my mother's body I saw—in about half an hour Mr. Feist came and said, "The friends of Mary Whitehead;" we went out, there was a coach and a hearse, we got into the coach—I did not see the coffin put into the hearse—I followed a body which I believed to be my mother's—it went to the Victoria Cemetery, and there I saw the coffin put into the ground.
Cross-examined. Q. Who first asked you about this? A. Mr. Burgess; I believe he is clerk to the guardians—he sent for me between four and five months ago; that must have been eight or nine months after the funeral—that was the first time my attention was called to it—the first time I saw Mr. Feist was in the yard—when I went to ask about the funeral, I asked him when my mother would be buried, he asked me who she was, and I said, "Mary Whitehead," and then he referred me to Mr. Hogg—I saw him in the workhouse yard on the day of the funeral; he was merely walking about—there might have been one or two other persons in the yard, I did not notice them—Mr. Hogg was not in charge of the hearse—I did not see Mr. Hogg after I left the dead house—his men were there—Mr. Feist came to the waiting room to call us.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. Was Mr. Hogg in the dead house when you went there with Mr. Feast to see your mother? A. Yes.
HENRY COOK GREGG . I am clerk to the inspector of anatomy. Mr. Backett was the inspector, he has resigned—I produce a notice of removal to the inspector with regard to Mary Whitehead, also a medical certificate as to the cause of her death; and the declaration, or official return from the hospital signed by the teacher of anatomy—the notice purports to be signed by Mr. Feist; it is a notice to the inspector that such a body will be removed on 2nd Feb. for anatomical examination—I produce a certificate of burial from the clergyman—a warrant for the removal of the body would be issued by Mr. Backett on the receipt of the notice, and the certificate of the cause of death.
Cross-examined. Q. Does the inspector select the hospital to which the body is sent, and specify it in each warrant? A. Yes; there is no arrangement with the guardians.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. But, as a matter of fact, the inspector would send all the Newington bodies, that could lawfully go, to Guy's Hospital, would he not? A. They go to Guy's Hospital—I have got the warrant in this case, it is signed by Mr. Backett—it would go to Hogg, the undertaker.
E. C. DURMER re-examined. The writing to this notice is Mr. Feist's, and so is the body of the certificate of the cause of death, except the signature of the medical officer.
JOHN GANNON . I am medical officer of the Newington workhouse. I attended Mary Whitehead prior to her death; this is my signature to this certificate; the cause of death is also my writing—this certificate was handed to me by Mr. Feist; I signed it in his presence, and handed it to him back—these certificates are only given by me in cases where the body is to be removed for dissection—I think it was brought on the day of the date, but I am not certain; the date is 2nd Feb.; it was brought on that day—(The notice was here read: "Sir, I have to inform you that the body of Mary Whitehead, aged 75, whose last place of abode was Newington workhouse, and who died at Newington workhouse, on Friday, 30th June, 1857, may be removed for anatomical examination, on Monday, 2nd Feb., at 9 o'clock. Signed Alfred Feist, 1st Feb., 1857." The certificate stated that Mary Whitehead died of chronic bronchitis, the warrant signed "John Backett, inspector," was dated 1st Feb., and was directed to Mr. Hogg, authorising him to remove the bodies of Mary Whitehead and others to the school at Guy's Hospital.)
Cross-examined. Q. These certificates and notices were given and signed in the usual course of business at the workhouse? A. In the usual course—they were always handed to me by Mr. Feist himself, never by Mr. Poole, the clerk—I had occasion to go to his office every day to sign the book, and then they were put before me, and I signed them—I know nothing about there being a difficulty in getting bodies for anatomical purposes—I never directed that any particular bodies should be sent to the hospital if possible—I had nothing whatever to do with that—I never expressed a desire that any particular body should, if possible, go to the school (Looking at a paper)—The man referred to here died of phthysis, but I expressed no desire about that case—it would be desirable that all cases should go to the school, but I had nothing to do with it.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. You would be very much transgressing your duty if you did, would you not? A. I think I should.
Hospital, and was so last year—the signature to this return is mine—looking at this document, I know that a body, purporting to be that of Mary Whitehead, came to the hospital on 2nd Feb.—before I signed this, I received the warrant and the return from the master of the workhouse—the body came about 9 o'clock in the evening, I should think—it is put 9 o'clock here—we generally have them in the evening—this was signed by me within twenty-four hours of the reception of the body, according to the Act, and it is forwarded within twenty-four hours to the inspector of anatomy—that body was dissected, and afterwards sent back, in order that the remains might be buried—the undertaker receives the body from us as soon as we have done with it, and he receives a certificate of burial.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you personally receive the documents in the first place? A. Yes—the porter receives the body at the reception room—I do not see it until it comes into the dissecting room—I have not the least doubt that I saw this body—I am in the dissecting room every day—I have no personal recollection of the case.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. Did the body correspond with the particulars stated in the paper, age, sex, and so on? A. Yes—it was the body of a woman, and an old woman.
ROBERT HOGG . I am an undertaker, carrying on business in St. George's Road, Southwark. I have been employed for five or six years by the parish of Newington to bury the paupers—this (produced) is my bill from 29th Sept., 1856 to 21st Feb., 1857—I have charged the parish for the funeral of Mary Whitehead on 2nd Feb.—I cannot recollect the burial of Mary Whitehead in particular—I have seen the witness Louisa Mixer—I saw her at the work-house when she came to attend a funeral—I have produced the warrant with reference to Mary Whitehead—these papers, the notice and the certificate, were given to me by Mr. Feist to take to the inspector—I did take them, and obtained a warrant with Mary Whitehead's name in it—I kept the warrant as my authority for the removal—the body to which that warrant relates must have been sent to the school at Guy's Hospital—I recollect the relatives going into the dead house to see the body—that was the ordinary course—the body was in a coffin in the dead house, and was seen by Mrs. Mixer—I saw her look at a body; it was the body of Mary Whitehead—that body was left behind in the dead house, coffin, and all—I was in the dead house, and saw all that was done there—the relatives followed a body—I have no recollection whether there were three bodies in the hearse or only two, but there must have been one that was brought from the hospital for interment, and that was buried in the place of Whitehead—the body that Mrs. Mixer had seen, was taken to Guy's Hospital; it was by the direction of Mr. Feist that this was done.
Cross-examined. Q. Whose body was taken to the cemetery instead of Mary Whitehead's? A. That I cannot say; it was a party that was brought from the hospital, that had been for dissection previously—I cannot recollect this burial in particular; I cannot recollect whether two or three bodies were placed in the hearse that morning—I never saw Mary Whitehead whilst living; I did not know her by sight in any way—there was no name on her coffin that I am aware of; the names are only put on in chalk by the paupers when they bring them down stairs—I recollect taking that body to the school by having the warrant, and by the notice papers being sent to the inspector—I know that the warrant referred to the body of Whitehead, because there would have been no other body left behind on the burying day; I can only tell which body was left behind, from the daughter seeing it—upon occasions when there have been no coffins there, the bodies have been brought down to
the dead house in shells, but when there have been coffins there, they have brought them down in the coffins they have been buried in; that is the regular practice—I had the conduct of the funerals—I had not access to the dead house at all times; a key of the dead house was kept at the porter's lodge; I could go to that when I thought proper—I was in the habit of bringing the bodies of paupers who had died out of the workhouse, into the dead house; that was by orders given by the relieving officers—I never removed a body into the workhouse without an order from the relieving officer—I did that at all hours up to 9 or 10 o'clock; I also brought into the dead house the remains from the hospital, I always had done so, to be buried with the other funerals; that was so regular that it was done for the last six years, ever since I did the work; I have always done so; I have never informed the guardians of that—when I removed a body from the hospital, the expense of the burial was paid by the hospital; they paid me 3l. 10s. for each burial—the workhouse paid me 5s. 6d.—I charged both the hospital and the work-house in all those cases where the substitution took place; not for the unclaimed bodies—I did not know any of these bodies—I charged 5s. 6d. for the funeral of Mary Whitehead; supposing the remains of Mary Whitehead to have come back again, and to have been buried at the expense of the hospital, I should charge them 3l. 10s.—I do not know that it was contrary to my orders to charge the workhouse for the burial of bodies that I removed from the hospital; I had no orders at all about it; I assumed that I had a right to charge both; Mr. Feist never told me that I must not charge—5s. 6d. was not an insufficient price to pay me, not taking into consideration the unclaimed bodies which are sent for dissection during the period the contract is held; it is only by means of the unclaimed bodies that I am enabled to make it pay—the certificate of death and the notice of removal I always take to the Inspector of anatomy; sometimes they were sent to my place under cover, and sometimes they were given to me at the time I went to the workhouse; I generally got them from the master; I never received any from the clerk; it was my duty to go to the workhouse to inquire what deaths had taken place; I was bound to see what bodies were in the dead house, two or three times a week; it was my duty to provide for all burials that I was directed to perform—I got the warrant from the Inspector of anatomy, and under that warrant I removed the body; when I removed the body, I took the warrant with me, and the master had a receipt for the body when I took it away; the Inspector's warrant is my authority for removing the body for anatomical purposes—in the case of Mary Whitehad, it was done by Mr. Feist's directions; those directions were given to me on the morning of the funeral, at the workhouse, in the dead house—nobody was present then.
COURT. Q. What were the directions? A. That the body of Mary Whitehead, if it was Mary Whitehead (I had no means of knowing whether it was or not) should be left behind for dissection.
MR. MATTHEWS. Q. At what time in the morning was this? A. About 11 o'clock, or half-past—I was given to understand that that justified me in doing this—I have sometimes taken up the friends of parties on the road when it was the funeral of an out-door case—I have not taken up any at a public house called the Huntsman—my bills were not sent in to, or signed by, Feist, that I am aware of—I sent them to Mr. Burgess, the clerk of the guardians—I cannot say whether all the workhouse bills were sent to Mr. Feist—I have seen my bills in his office, on his table—I am not aware that my bills were signed by him, or submitted to him—I was called before Mr. Farnall, the Poor Law inspector—I refused to answer any questions at first—upon
that the guardians pledged themselves that my answers should not be used against me—I had great reasons for acting with that precaution—questions were then asked me, and I made answers—(MR. ROBINSON objected to the witness being examined as to his statement before Mr. Farnall, unless the whole examination was put in. MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN did not consider that course necessary)—I stated to Mr. Farnall, "I know of several cases where I have charged the parish with the funerals of paupers when the bodies of those paupers have been transferred by me to the schools of anatomy; I have done this when relatives and friends have come to me about such bodies"—I did not know whether they were relatives or not; I stated that—I said, "I know that those bodies were at the school of anatomy"—I also said, "I have gone to that school and substituted a body for that which the relatives claimed, and so carried out a funeral," by special orders—I think I mentioned about special orders before Mr. Farnall—I also said, "And then I have charged such funeral to the parish; this I have frequently done; I cannot recollect the names of such cases; I have known the relations of paupers in the dead house with me when bodies have been screwed down, and I have known those very bodies reach the school of anatomy through my agency"—I also said, "This was arranged by substituting a coffin, with remains in it, from the school of anatomy, and then the relations followed such remains, and then I charged for such funeral"—I said, "This substitution commenced with the old master, Mr. Cox"—that was in reference to the substitution of the bodies after they were removed to the school of anatomy, where persons had come to claim them after they had been removed—what was due to me was not kept back until after I had given my evidence before the Magistrate in this case—I did not receive my money until afterwards—I was told on the morning of the inquiry that my cheque was ready for me, previous to my going before the Magistrate; they told me that the cheque was there ready for me to receive; that was before I went before the Magistrate; it had been signed by the guardians, and I could receive it when I liked—I did not take it then, because I knew, in the morning, that I was going before the Magistrate—I could have gone and fetched it then if I had liked—it was not with Mr. Burgess that I had this talk about the cheque, it was with Mr. Walters—I saw Mr. Burgess at the police court, while he was going in, previous to my first examination—I had no conversation with him in the presence of Mr. Heath, his clerk—I never asked for payment—I was dismissed—I sent in my bill afterwards—I always receive notice that my money will be ready on such a day—I generally received that notice three or four days after the cheque was signed—I had two or three days notice of my dismissal—I cannot recollect when it was; I think it was within a month of the quarter; six weeks, perhaps, through the quarter; about 28th or 29th Nov., 1857, I think—the inquiry before the Magistrate was in Feb., this year, I think.
COURT. Q. You say they told you that your cheque was ready for you; why not go and take it? A. I was not ordered to go and receive it—I could have got it on the morning previous to the inquiry before the Magistrate—I did not go, because I had not received a notice from the clerk that it was to be paid; there is always a written notice sent when the money is to be received—I received the notice from the clerk on the morning previous to the inquiry before the Magistrate—I did not think there was any particular reason why I should go; I have often let it before a week or a fortnight.
MR. MATTHEWS. Q. Had you a notice that the cheque would be paid?
A. Yes; I got the money, I think, on the day following the examination—I was undertaker of Lambeth workhouse—I lost that through this affair.
MR. ROBINSON submitted that in re-examination he was now entitled to read the whole statement made by the witness to Mr. Farnall; he having been examined as to portions of that statement. MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN was of opinion that this could not be done, the witness had adopted the questions put to him, and, therefore, the statement could not be used in contradiction, which was the only way in which it would be admissable; but it was open to the Counsel, in re-examination, to put anything to the witness that might qualify any statement he had made.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. Did you state to the inspector that you had done this by special orders? A. I thought so—it was by Mr. Feist's special order that these things were done—I have only charged both the hospital and the parish in cases where bodies have been substituted—where a body has legitimately gone to the hospital and been unclaimed, I have only charged the hospital—I cannot say whether that has been with Mr. Feist's knowledge—I dare say this substitution has taken place ten or fifteen times within the last twelve months—those ten or fifteen cases have been by the direction of Mr. Feist; he has been present in each case at the time it has been done—I have never substituted in that way without the order of Mr. Feist; the papers must first go to the inspector before I can remove a body to the hospital—I have been in the habit of giving Mr. Feist a receipt for bodies—I dare say I gave a receipt for the body of Mary Whitehead; it was my invariable custom to give it.—(A notice to produce this receipt was admitted; it was not produced.)
MR. MATTHEWS to MR. H. B. FARNALL. Q. You heard certain statements of Mr. Hogg's, made before yourself? A. Yes—I have heard the account he has given of those statements to-day—I heard him say to-day that he had frequently substituted bodies by special orders—I heard him say, when before me, that he had frequently substituted bodies; but I heard nothing of special orders, nor anything to that effect—I never heard him state that he had any special orders in this case—he stated to me that he and the master of the workhouse together had these substituted bodies in this way; and he said also, that the master had been present when such substitution was going on—he states here, "I can swear that I substituted one body for another, and Mr. Feist has been present when I substituted them"—he did not use the words "by special orders" to me—he told me that he never had given Mr. Feist any money for these bodies, but he told me that he had given him certain gratuities, but that was in consequence of Mr. Feist recommending him some private practice.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. What did he say with regard to any money passing between him and Mr. Feist? A. "I have occasionally made Mr. Feist presents; I have given him a sovereign sometimes, perhaps six or seven in the year—I never made Mrs. Feist any presents—I did not give these sovereigns in any way on account of the bodies—I gave them for recommendations for private funerals."
MARK SHATTOCK . I am accountant to Guy's Hospital—I have from time to time paid Mr. Feist money—in 1856 I paid him 19l. 10s., and in 1857 I paid him 26l.—I paid him that as a gratuity for his trouble with reference to the certificates, and the trouble he had had during the past years—I knew that he was master of the workhouse—I have the returned cheques here—I was perfectly ignorant of the 31st sec. of 7 & 8 Vict., c. 101—I had nothing
to do with the bodies—I paid him this money for the counterparts of the confidential returns to the Inspector-General—it approaches to somewhere about 10s. for each body, not more—it was given as a gratuity for his trouble, the trouble he might have in making out the returns and certificates, signing and filling up the notices, and getting the certificates; strictly so—the amount I paid him would have reference to the number of bodies or certificates.
Cross-examined. Q. Have they indicted you yet for buying bodies? A. No, I am not a purchaser of bodies—I followed precedents which I found had been acted upon—I cannot say for how many years this has been the invariable practice at the hospital; as regards myself it has been since 1849—that was long before Mr. Feist was master—these payments for the certificates were made as a matter of course—I am perfectly ignorant of the fact that the master is not obliged by any of the Poor Law Acts to make out these certificates; and that, therefore, his salary does not include that trouble.
EMMA GREENLAND . I reside in Procter Street, Newington. I am the widow of Charles Greenland—about 15th May, 1857, he became an inmate of Newington workhouse—I was not in the habit of going to the workhouse to see him—I never saw him there—I applied to see him, but was not allowed to do so—I applied to the master, I saw the mistress, and she refused me to see him; I did not see the master then—I first saw Mr. Feist on the same night that my husband died; that was on the 20th May—he asked me who I was—I told him that I was the wife of Charles Greenland, and I understood that he was taken much worse—he said, "Yes, he is"—I told him that I had been there at dinner time, between 1 and 2 o'clock, and wished to see him and was refused as it was not visiting day—he said he was very sorry for that, for he would rather for me to have seen him then than to see him now, for then he was alive—I said, "Then, I suppose, he is dead"—he said, "Yes, he is; he has been dead a quarter of an hour, you had better not see him now; you had better come next morning at 9 o'clock"—I went next morning with my brother-in-law—I saw Mr. Feist—we asked to see the remains of my husband, and we were sawn him in the dead house by a nurse, whom Mr. Feist called—I saw Mr. Feist again that same morning, and we made arrangements about the burial—he asked me if I wished to take the body out—my brother-in-law told him it was out of my power to bury him—he said, "Very well, the parish will bury him"—my brother-in-law asked when the funeral would take place, and he referred us to Mr. Hogg, who, he said, managed and conducted the funerals—I applied for the clothes he had on, and he said if I had his clothes I must have his body, as the clothes he had on came to the parish—he went in with very good clothes; in short, they were borrowed clothes, and he was only there five days—I did not see Mr. Feist again—I had my children ill, and could not attend the funeral.
Cross-examined. Q. Are you aware that that rule about the clothes is a usual one? A. No—I do not know anything about it.
JNO. GREENLAND . I am brother-in-law of the last witness, and brother of Charles Greenland. I went with the last witness to the workhouse the day after my brother's death—I saw Mr. Feist, and told him I had heard that my brother was dead, and I wished to see him—he sent a woman into the yard with me to show me the corpse—I saw my brother's corpse; I know it was him—after that I went back to Mr. Feist and complained about their having kept the wife away; he expressed great regret—he told me I must go to Mr. Hogg to ascertain the day of the funeral; that was all the information he could give me—my brother's wife said something about his clothes, and he said if the clothes were taken away they must take him away and bury him—I did
not rightly hear what it was he said; I was standing outside on the steps—I ascertained from Mr. Hogg that the funeral would take place on the Saturday following; I went there—I saw Mr. Feist, and said I had come to the funeral of my brother, Charles Greenland—the name of Greenland was written in chalk on the coffin—I was told to go into the waiting room, and there I sat, I should say nearly half an hour, until my patience was exhausted, and I went out into the yard—I did not see the body that morning—it was by Mr. Feist's direction that I went into the waiting room—Mr. Feist, Mr. Hogg, and another man were present when I saw the coffin with the name "Greenland" chalked upon it; that was the day after the death—when I came out of the waiting room I saw Mr. Feist, Mr. Hogg, and his man in the yard; there were three or four coffins lying on the ground, and a hearse and a coach—I asked how long it would be—he said, "It will be all right presently, you had better go in"; so I went back to my seat—I afterwards came out and followed a body, which I supposed to be my brother's—I saw the coffin buried.
Cross-examined. Q. Were Mr. Hogg and his man engaged in putting the coffins into the hearse? A. They were engaged in some way or other; I could not say how—there were several coffins on the ground—Mr. Feist was present—he told me that my sister could not have represented herself as my brother's wife, or she would have been admitted—I told him that his wife and child had been kept standing there nearly all day, and were not admitted.
MARY THOMPSON . I am the wife of George Thompson, who died in the workhouse at Newington—he died on 10th March, 1857—I was in the work-house with him; we had been there two years last Nov.—I used to wash and clean about the house—I knew Mr. Feist perfectly well, and he knew me and my husband perfectly well—on the day my husband died I asked Mr. Feist to be allowed to see him—he said I should, and I did—on the morning of the funeral, he asked me whether there was a black wrapper or a gown to put on me—nothing was procured for me—I saw the body of my husband that morning in the dead house; it was in a coffin—the undertaker and the task master were there at the time; Mr. Feist was not there—I did not see him when I came out—I followed the remains of my husband, as I thought, but I am given to understand I did not—I had no further conversation with Mr. Feist than I have stated.
Cross-examined. Q. Did not he ask his wife to lend you a wrapper? A. Yes—Hogg was in the dead house when I went to see my husband's body—I wished to remain until the coffin was nailed down, Hogg and the task master hurried me out of the dead house.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. Who is the task master? A. Percy, I think his name is, he is not task master now—I do not know whether he was a person under the direction of Mr. Feist.
REBECCA MATTHEWS . I reside at Pleasant Row, East Lane, Walworth. I am the sister of Phoebe Clarke, who died in the workhouse at Newington, on 21st Feb., 1857—I was called on to see her when she was taken bad, and I went to see her when she was dying, and I saw her the morning after she died—I went with my sister, Sarah Crutchley, to the workhouse, that was on Sunday morning, 22nd Feb., I saw Mr. Feist, and asked him if he would allow me to see my sister, Phoebe Clarke; accordingly he sent some person with me to the dead house, and we saw her—Mr. Feist went part of the way with us, but some person who was in the house opened the door—I saw Mr. Feist again when I came out, in the garden, but said nothing then—I asked him when the funeral would take place, and he referred us to Mr. Hogg; he said he thought it would take place on the Wednesday following, but we
must apply to Mr. Hogg to be certain—on the following Wednesday morning my sister and I went to the workhouse about half past 9 o'clock—I saw Mr. Feist in the waiting room, I asked him if he would allow me to see my sister, and he refused me—he said he could not show me the body, for Mr. Hogg had the keys of the dead house, and therefore we could not see her—I asked him a second time, and he refused me—some time afterwards Mr. Hogg came, and my sister went into the dead house, I did not—Mr. Hogg said that a body was there that was very offensive, it would not be possible to go in—Mr. Feist did not go in while I was there, he was in the garden—when my sister came out we went into the waiting room again, and stayed there—I did not go into the dead house, my sister did—we were afterwards called out, and followed the body of my sister, as we supposed.
Cross-examined. Q. At the time Hogg told you there was a body in the dead house that was offensive, and you had better not go in, was Mr. Feist in the yard? A. Yes; he was, I suppose, four or five yards from the dead house, he was speaking to some persons in the yard.
SARAH CRUTCHLEY . I went with the last witness to the workhouse—I had visited there with my sister before the day of the funerals—on the day of the funeral I went there with my sister—I went twice into the dead house to see my sister's body—I had no conversation with Mr. Feist, I saw him and Mrs. Feist outside the gate—when I first went into the dead house, I saw the of my sister, Phoebe Clark; my sister was present when I went in the first time—I saw the body, and so did my sister; I do not know that she saw as much as I did, I was stronger than my sister, she was very poorly, and she could not go—I went in the second time because I felt anxious to see her once more before she was screwed down—there was a man there apparently knocking the nails into the coffin—I did not see Mr. Feist there either time; I believe he was present when we got into the vehicle to go off, but I did not notice him particularly.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you say that you saw a man actually nailing down the coffin in which your sister was? A. I did so—I did not see that coffin taken out; it was three quarters of an hour after that before we were called for.
HENRY COOK GREGG re-examined. I produce a notice to the inspector in the case of Greenland, purporting to be signed by Mr. Feist—I also produce the surgeon's certificate of the cause of death; the return from the hospital signed by Mr. Poland; the certificate of burial; and the warrant of Mr. Backett for the removal of the body.
E. C. DURMER re-examined. This notice is in Mr. Feist's writing, and the body of the certificate.
H. C. GREGG re-examined. I produce the documents in Thompson's case—here is the notice to the inspector, purporting to be signed by Mr. Feist; it is dated 12th March; the date of the death is the 10th, and of the removal, the 13th—the medical certificate is dated 10th March—I have not got the warrant in this case—Mr. Poland's return is dated 18th March—the warrant was not issued until 17th March; I did not get these papers until then—I made a memorandum of that on the back of this, from my rough book.
E. C. DURMER re-examined. This notice is signed by Mr. Feist, and the certificate is filled up by him.
JOHN GANNON re-examined. This certificate was issued by me on the day it bears date; it was brought to me by Mr. Feist—I signed it, and gave it back to him, filling up the disease, on the day it bears date.
ALFRED POLAND re-examined. This is signed by me—the body was received on 13th March—my impression is, that I signed it on the 13th, and that the date of the 18th is a mistake—it is in the clerk's writing; I cannot explain it.
H. C. GREGG re-examined. I produce the certificate, the notice, and the returns in the case of Phoebe Clarke.
E. C. DURMER re-examined. The signature to this notice, as well as the body, is Mr. Feist's writing, and the medical certificate is also his.
MR. MATTHEWS to MR. DURMER. Q. Can you tell me the usual hour for funerals at the workhouse? A. In the morning, about 11 o'clock; that would be about the time that Mr. Feist would go his rounds, and visit the workhouse—the dead house is in the stone yard; his duties would not generally take him there—it might be his duty to visit that part of the establishment—the bills of the workhouse are usually certified by the master.
MR. MATTHEWS submitted that, under the provisions of the Anatomy Act, the defendant was entitled to an acquittal on this indictment; the Act in question was entirely of a permissive, and not of a prohibitory character; he directed the attention of the Court particularly to sections 2, 7, and 9; and urged, that the defendant, as master of the workhouse, was clothed with whatever power the guardians possessed, for the purpose of sending bodies to be anatomically examined; that he had lawful possession of such bodies, within the meaning of the 7th section; and that he was not entrusted with them merely for the purposes of interment, which words evidently applied to the undertaker, and not to the guardians, or their representative, the master; it was clear, according to the evidence, that all the conditions imposed by the 9th section had been complied with, and the only question that could be raised was, whether the second part of the 7th section was applicable to this case; viz., whether any known relative of the deceased had requested the body to be interred without examination; there was no evidence of any such request having been made in this case; and therefore, as all the conditions of the Act had been complied with, the defendant was entitled to an acquittal.
MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN inquired of MR. ROBINSON upon which Count he relied. MR. ROBINSON contended, that he had proved all; the defendant was merely the servant of the guardians; and if the friends of Whitehead had expressed a desire that the body should be buried, he would be entrusted with that body simply for interment; instead of which, according to the evidence, he sold it. MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN was of opinion, that the words, "for the purpose of interment, and not otherwise," pointed to the undertaker, and not to the master, whose possession of the body was by virtue of his office. MR. ROBINSON suggested, that those words were mere surplus age, and if they conveyed a misdescription of the nature of the defendants office, they might be rejected. MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN considered, that the master was clearly not
the person referred to in that section; and this objection applied to the first four Counts; the 5th Count appeared to raise the real question; for by the common law it was a misdemeanour to delay improperly and unnecessarily the burial of a dead body, and to sell a dead body might, at common law, be a misdemeanour. MR. MATTHEWS contended, that no authority had gone that length; he argued, that a misdemeanour at common law must involve a trespass, and referred to the cases of Reg. v. Gillies and Reg. v. Sharpe, as supporting that proposition; he, however, relied upon the statute, as, in any event, furnishing a justification for all that the defendant had done. MR. JUSTICK WIGHTMAN, as at present advised, was disposed to consider, that the mere selling a dead body for the purposes of dissection, might be an offence at common law, independent of the statute, and, as to that, he would take the opinion of the Jury upon the evidence; by the terms of the Act it would seem that, whatever may have been the cast at common law, it was lawful for any person having lawful possession of the body of a deceased person (leaving out the undertaker), to permit that body to undergo anatomical examination, unless the known relatives should require it to be interred without such examination; he did not find, in any of the cases in question, that there had been any requirement that the body should be interred without examination, although all might well suppose that would be done; but there was the further circumstance, which he should leave to the Jury, whether this was done for lucre and reward, as alleged in the indictment; and then the question would arise, whether this Act enabled a party, having lawful possession of a body, to sell it for the purpose of anatomical examination; as to that, he would at present give no opinion.
MR. ROBINSON was prepared to contend, that, as to the requirement to bury without examination, if the defendant, by his conduct, deceived the relatives into a belief that the burial would take place without any such examination, and so prevented them from actually making that request in words, that would amount to the same thing.
MR. JUSTICE WIGHTMAN was of opinion, that some act must be proved; but, upon the whole, he deemed it best to leave both points to the Jury, viz., as to the selling, and as to the requirement.
MR. ROBINSON, with respect to the 5th Count, called the attention of the Court to a case of conspiracy on the part of a surgeon and master of a work-house, to prevent the burial of a person who had died in a workhouse; the case was analogous to the present, and he submitted that, under any circumstances, such a proceeding would amount to a misdemeanour.
(The prisoner received an excellent character.)
THE JURY found, in answer to questions submitted to them by THE COURT, that the defendant caused to be delivered the dead bodies of Mary Whitehead and others, and delayed the burial of them for an unreasonable length of time, in order that they should be dissected in the mean time; that he did so for the purpose of lucre and gain; that he caused the appearance of the funerals of those parties to be gone through, with a view to prevent the relatives, in any of the cases, requesting the body to be interred without being subjected to anatomical examination; and that the persons who appeared as the relatives of the deceased, might have required the body of the deceased, in any of the cases, to be interred without anatomical examination. Upon this finding, THE COURT ordered a verdict to be entered, of GUILTY on the 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Counts. — Judgment Reserved .
THE JURY expressed their regret that any offer should have been made to the witness Hogg, which had prevented him standing by the side of the defendant.
The defendant was admitted to bail, to appear and receive judgment on 10th May next.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. CLERKE and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN AVERY (Policeman, L 206). I produce a copy of the record of the prisoner's former conviction—(Read: "Central Criminal Court, March, 1857; Hannah Fitzgibbon, Convicted of unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin, twice within ten days; Confined nine months")—I was present—the prisoner is the person.
Prisoner. What he says is quite correct.
JOHN LILLE . I am a cheesemonger, of No. 4, Wandsworth Road. On Tuesday, 26th Jan., about ten minutes to 5 o'clock, the prisoner came, with a younger woman—I served the prisoner with a piece of pork, which came to 11d.; she gave me a bad half crown; I bit it, marked it in two places, and gave it to her back—I asked her how she came by it; she said that she received it from her husband—she gave me a good half crown, and I gave her the change—they both left together; I followed them about a hundred yards; they stopped at the corner of the turning to Vauxhall Bridge, just by the turnpike, where the prisoner put something down a grating at the side of the road, and forced it down with her feet—it had been freezing—I afterwards pointed out that grating to Letty—this (produced)is the half crown; it has my marks on it.
Prisoner. Q. Did not I purchase something else? A. Yes, on the opposide of the shop, but I know nothing about that—I did not stand at the door, and tell you that I had some very nice pork—I did not give you in charge; you were taken, and the police requested me to attend.
THOMAS WALKINGTON SUTTON . I am servant to a contractor, at Lambeth. On 27th Jan., Letty pointed out to me a grating at the corner of a road—I searched it, and found this half crown in the galley; it had fallen into the soil, and was choked with snow and ice.
ANN ELEY . I keep the George and Dragon, High Street, Vauxhall. On Tuesday, 26th Jan., after 5 o'clock in the evening, the prisoner and another woman came in—the prisoner asked for half a quartern of Old Tom, and gave me a good sixpence; I gave her 31/2 d., change—they both drank of the gin, and then the other woman called for a half quartern of Old Tom, and gave me a counterfeit shilling; I told her directly that it was bad, and they both said, "I do not think that we have any more money"—I sent for a constable; Letty came, and I gave them both in charge—when he came in, they both said they had got some more money, and would I search them, to see if they had any more counterfeit money—I marked the shilling, and gave it to Letty.
Prisoner. You never gave me any change. Witness. I did; and when the policeman came in, you said, "As I have got the coppers in my hand, I will pay for it"—I said, "I must be paid for this Old Tom;" and you asked Mrs. Colston (See next case)—she said, "I have got no more money;" I then sent for a constable—Mrs. Colston said that she was an unfortunate woman, and that a gentleman gave her the shilling.
JOHN LETTY (Policeman, L 47). On 26th Jan., Lille called my attention to the prisoner and another woman, who were walking along High Street, Vauxhall, together—(he pointed out a grating to me, which I pointed out to Sutton the next day)—I watched them into the George and Dragon, and took them into custody, and received this shilling (produced)from Mrs. Eley—they produced money when I went in—3s. 81/2 d. was found on the prisoner, and 183/4 d., some tea, and a piece of pork, on Colston.
Prisoner's Defence. I am not guilty; I have been very ill since I came out of prison, and this was the first afternoon I had been out.
GUILTY.**— Four Years Penal Servitude .
MESSRS. CLERKE and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
John Lille, Thomas Walkington Sutton, Ann Eley, and William Webster, repeated their former evidence.
COLSTON— GUILTY .*— Confined Six Months.
(No verdict was taken against Fitzgibbon.)
PLEADED GUILTY .— Six Years Penal Servitude
MR. CORNER conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM HAYDON . I am an inmate of St. Olave's Union. I knew the deceased, Christopher Wright, he was an inmate and the prisoner also—on Saturday, 6th Feb., I was with them in the old man's hall, and a quarrel took place between them; it began by the prisoner calling the deceased Yorkey, and jeering him; the deceased threatened to punch his head if he did not desist; the prisoner kept on, and the deceased got up and struck him once with the flat of his hand; there was a little bit of a scuffle, but I did not see the prisoner return the blow, he ran away laughing; in fact it was at that time all play on the part of the prisoner—the deceased returned, and kept chaffing and jeering about the county he belonged to, and about Yorkshire pudding—the deceased got up and struck the prisoner a blow in the face, and the prisoner returned it with his fist that time, and on the left side of the cheek—there were one or two blows, and they closed almost immediately; the deceased fell underneath, and the prisoner on top of him—the deceased fell flat on his back, being paralyzed with his left arm; he was about 48 or 49 years old—a man named Kane, who was in charge of the room, pulled the prisoner off, and Wright was picked up and put on a form, and they asked him whether he was hurt much, he made no reply—as they went out to supper I saw the prisoner and Wright shaking hands—I went in with them to supper, and when we had been at supper some little time, Wright was taken in a fit—I told one of the men to untie his handkerchief; he was taken into the receiving ward, and the doctor was sent for.
JOHN KANE . I am an inmate of St. Olaves Workhouse. I was present at the scuffle between the prisoner and the deceased—there was first some joking and teasing on the part of the prisoner towards Wright; the prisoner said "Well, Yorkey, how goes it now?"—he said, "Ax my a"; call me that again, and I will come round and hit you"—the prisoner said "You had better try"—Wright got up, went round and struck the prisoner with his open hand, and the prisoner ran away laughing—a minute or two after that the prisoner went round and said "Well, Yorkey, what do you think of the Yorkshire pudding?"—Wright got up directly and struck the prisoner with his fist, they both closed, and the deceased struck him—they fell, and Wright was undermost—not more than three or four blows on each side were struck before they fell—a
blow on each side, that was all, and they closed and fell—I ran and took the prisoner off the deceased, took him to the door and was going to tell the master, but the bell rung, and when I went into the hall I told the master—when the prisoner got to the door he said "If you have not had enough come outside and you shall have some more"—he said it jokingly, because I said "What are you about?"—I told the master and he told the prisoner he ought to be ashamed of himself to strike a poor paralyzed man—he said it is only play Sir—the master said, "You ought to be ashamed of yourself, I will send you somewhere else"—it was all fun from the first to the last of it.
Q. Was the blow in the face in play? A. Well, I must draw in there; it might have been in earnest then on the deceased's part, but I do not believe it was on the prisoner's part—I saw a mark on the deceased's face, and said, "Wright, why you have got a black eye," and before they went to supper they shook hands together—while they were at supper the deceased went off in a faint, and never recovered from it.
JAMES INNES MACKINTOSH . I am a doctor of medicine, and surgeon to the St. Olave's Union. I was sent for on 6th Feb. to see Wright, and found him insensible and suffering from compression of the brain; he remained insensible till his death, on the 11th; I was quite unable to rouse him from it—I afterwards made a post mortem examination of his body; I found a large quantity of blood extravasated on the right side of the brain, which, in my opinion, was the cause of death; I found nothing else to account for death—I have not the least doubt that the brain had been in a state of disease for some time from it's appearance, but that was not a state likely to lead to sudden death without external causes; I have heard the evidence, and am of opinion that the violence used would lead to that extravasation of blood.
COURT. Q. What violence do you refer to? A. The fall; the blow on the left cheek would not be sufficient to produce it, but the fall occasioned by the blow, and the prisoner falling on him—the extravasated state could not have proceeded from the diseased brain without external violence.
NOT GUILTY .
GEORGE COLLIER . I am a lighterman, and live at Wandsworth. On 25th Jan., I was in the tap room of the Ship public house, and the prisoner, who was there, began to quarrel with me about some work—I shoved him, and he said, "Shove me again"—I shoved him again, and he said, "Hit me, and I will go up to the police court"—I shoved him again with my open hand, but did not hit him—he got hold of a poker and struck me on the back part of the head; I became insensible, and was in bed ten days—I was not drunk, but fresh—I was with the captain of a Billy boy.
Prisoner. He was not talking about work, he was talking about going away; the captain agreed for one of them to go with him, and said, "Two drunken captains will not do on board one vessel;" and as soon as he spoke he up fist and struck at me. Witness. I did not; I shoved him on the breast, and then on the face; he agreed with another captain to take him down; he is what they call an un freeman; he said, "I have agreed with another man, and if he does not come you shall go"—I said, "He is liable to be fined 40s. for taking you down."
HENRY HARRIS . I am a lighterman—I was at the Ship on this day; I was sober—Holley and Collier had a few words; Collier struck Holley, who said, "I will go up to the police court and get a summons for you"—he
struck him again, and fetched blood on his cheek—instead of going for a summons, he turned to the fire place, got a poker, and struck him—he took two hands to the poker, and Collier fell down insensible; I thought he was dying—the prisoner was more sober than Collier was.
THOMAS BOCKING (Policeman). I was called into the public house, and found Collier dying, as I thought—I found a wound on the back of his head—the skin was broken—I saw the prisoner and said, "You and Collier have been having a quarrel, what was it about;" and he said, "About going down with a Billy boy"—I took him to the station and said, "Whatever you are going to say to me, tell me the truth"—he said, "Collier struck me on the eye and said, 'Take that, you b—y s—' "—there was a slight streak of blood on his face—I said "Is that true?" he said "Yes, and I got up and said I will take out a summons, and Collier struck another blow here" pointing to his left temple, where it appeared that a blow had recently been given—this (produced)is the poker, it weighs 7lbs—he appeared to know what he was about.
Prisoner's Defence. I am very sorry for it; he struck me twice, and he has very often threatened me before; I have a witness to prove it, but do not know whether he is here, his name is Joe Sheppard—(The witness did not appear.)
GUILTY .*—Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account the provocation.— Confined Twelve Months.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, APRIL 5 TH, 1858.