CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
EIGHTH SESSION, HELD JUNE 11TH, 1860.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND BY
JAMES DROVER BARNETT
Short-hand Writers to the Court,
ROLLS CHAMBERS, No. 89, CHANCERY LANE.
THE POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE,
REVISED AND EDITED BY
ROBERT ORRIDGE, ESQ.
OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, BARRISTER-AT-LAW.
BUTTERWORTHS, 7, FLEET STREET.
Law Publishers to the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty
On the Queen's Commission of the Peace,
OYER AND TERMINER AND GAOL DELIVERY,
The City of London,
AND GAOL DELIVERY FOR THE
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, AND THE PARTS OF THE COUNTIES OF ESSEX, KENT, AND SURREY, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,
Held on Monday, June 11th, 1860, and following days.
BEFORE the Right Honourable JOHN CARTER , F.A.S. and F.R.A.S. Lord Mayor of the City of London; Sir Charles Crompton, Knt. one of the Justices of Her Majesty's Court of Queen's Bench; Sir George Bramwell, Knt. one of the Barons of Her Majesty's Court of Exchequer; Sir John Musgrove, Bart.; David Salomons, Esq. M.P. and Sir Robert Walter Carden, Knt.; Aldermen of the said City; Russell Gurney, Esq., Q C., Recorder of the said City; Sir Henry Muggeridge, Knt.; Benjamin Samuel Phillips, Esq.; Thomas Gabriel, Esq. William Ferneley Allen, Esq.; John Joseph Mechi, Esq.; Edward Couder, Esq.; and James Abbiss, Esq.; Aldermen of the said City; Thomas Chambers, Esq. Common Serjeant of the said City; and Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq. Judge of the Sheriff's Court of the said City; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery of Newgate, hodden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
THOMAS GABRIEL, Esq. Ald.
OCTAVIUS TRYON CHAPMAN EAGLETON, Esq.
CHARLES GAMMON, Esq.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
CARTER, MAYOR. EIGHTH 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, June 11th, 1860.
PRESENT—The Right Hon. the LORD MAYOR; Mr. Ald. SALOMONS, M.P.; SIR ROBERT WALTER CARDEN, Knt., Ald.; Mr. Ald. PHILLIPS; Mr. Ald. GARBRIEL; Mr. Ald. ABBISS; and ROBERT MALOOLM KEBB, Esq.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MESSRS. GIFFARD and LEWIS conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN MORRIS . I am in the service of Messrs. Hunt and Roskill—about the commencement of November, the female prisoner came there with another person, not Pearce, and I showed them some jewellery; among other articles I particularly recollect an emerald bracelet, a stock one, value about 150l.—the emerald was worth about 25l. or 30l.—they moved to the other side of the shop and saw some more bracelets—after stopping there about half an hour looking at various things, they put two bracelets on one side and said that they would call next day and decide which they would take—we never saw them afterwards—on, I think, the following day or very closely after they had been there, I saw the case in which this bracelet ought to have been, and it was not there.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Was this about 7 in the evening? A. Yes; as near as possible—it was either the end of October or the beginning of November as far as my memory serves me; I cannot charge my memory as to the day of the week or month—there are twenty or thirty assistants in the establishment—there are a large number of customers every day, but I do not think we had any customers in after this—I had never seen the female before that I am aware of—Laurence was shown to me in April or May—I heard that some people were detained at the police-court, Great-Marlborough-street, on suspicion of stealing jewellery, and I went and identified the female prisoner in a room down stairs before she went into the dock, that was in the early part of May—there was no other customer in the shop at the time, but there were other assistants—a person named Stafford assisted me a little while in showing the jewellery, but I waited on them—Stafford is not here—my impression is that I found the
empty box on the following day or the day after; I thought it possible that it might have been mislaid or given out as a pattern—I had shown that bracelet to a great many other people, but this was the last time I showed it—I cannot say whether I showed it to anybody the same day or some days previously—when we show articles of that description some little time must elapse before they are placed in their places again, according to the pressure of business—things sometimes lay there for an hour or so.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Do you usually examine the cases to see whether the jewellery is gone? A. Not always, but in looking for some bracelets the following day or the day after I opened that case and found that the bracelet was not there.
FREDERICK HANNAFORD . I am a lapidary, of 46, Clerkenwell-green—I have known Pearce some two years and a half by the name of Bingfield—he called on me some time about November and showed me an emerald about the same size as this, and two pearls about the size stated on the bill that was issued—he took them back at the time; he afterwards brought them back and I entrusted the emerald to Mr. Gregory to sell on commission.
Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Did he tell you his name was Bingfield? A. Yes; I had had several transactions of jewellery with him before—I am certain this was in November—he asked me 20l. for the emerald, and I offered him 15l., which I should say is about it's worth; he declined letting me have it at that price, but brought it back to me a week or ten days afterwards, and I gave him 15l. for it—no restriction was put upon me as to where I should take it to sell—there was no concealment in the transaction.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. What did the jewellery transaction consist of? A. Paste imitation stones mounted in rings that I cut and made for him.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Are you conversant with precious stones? A. Yes; there is nothing particular in the size of this emerald—there are hundreds of the same size and shade of colour.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Is this a cabouchon emerald? A. Yes; back and front, which is very unusual indeed—during the two and a half years my jewellery transactions with him have been about twelve rings at 15s. a piece—he took away all that he ordered of me somewhere about October; I had had them nearly two and a half years—I had not this card at the time, it did not come out till January.
JOHN HUNT . Q. I am a member of the firm of John Samuel Hunt and others—towards the end of last year we had a cabouchon emerald bracelet in our stock, set in gold with a few diamonds and a gold band; also a bracelet with rubies and diamonds, another with pearls and diamonds; and I forget the exact description of the others, but have them down in the books—I also missed other ornaments with rose diamonds and brilliants—I have here the emerald which was in the bracelet—Gregory offered it to me last January and I immediately recognised it as mine—I afterwards weighed it, it weighed 10 carats; that attracted my attention, because in our stock book it is entered 9 3/4 carats, and it has been so described in the bills—I then looked in the stones book—when a stone is given out to be manufactured it is entered in a small book called the stones book, which is here, and when the manufacturer returns it he puts the weight at the
bottom of his invoice—the person who made the entry is dead—this entry was made in the ordinary course of his duty while he was in our service. MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE objected to this evidence as the entry was not made by the witness himself. MR. GIFFARD contended that the entry was evidence, as it was made in the ordinary course of business, (See Price v. Lord Twrington). THE COURT considered that the evidence was not admissible. Independently of these entries I know the know itself, and I positively swear that this is our emerald and the one that was contained in the bracelet—I have had it in my possession ever since, the value of it is 20l. or 25l.
COURT. Q. What are its peculiarities? A. There are some extraordinary flaws in the crystallization—that is not what is called caboucbon, that is the way in which it is cut and which is rather common—it is this peculiar flaw that I know—I am so much accustomed to stones that I can easily identify it when I look through it.
Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Do you know it by some marks? A. Yes; one of which is very peculiar and unmistakeable—there was no occasion to state the marks in the handbill.
MR. LEWIS. Q. Did you draw up the handbill? A. No; but I assisted to do it.
JACOB FRENCH . On 8th April the male prisoner came to me in the name of Roberts and produced eight diamonds which he gave me to mount as a ring for him, and one other diamond and two rubies to set as another ring—he came again several times afterwards and eventually took them away, paying for the mounting, having paid for the setting previously—on the 20th he brought some other brilliants and I set this ring (produced) for him by the hands of my workmen—the value of all the precious stones he brought me was about 60l. including the last four, which he has not taken away, these are them (produced)—they are four small loose diamonds which were to be made into a set of sleeve-links.
Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Were you before the Magistrate? A. I was there but was not called—I had informed the attorney for the prosecution of the evidence I could give—I saw Pearce at the bar of the police-court and knew him—I was I think subpœnaed there—I received a piece of paper or parchment—I da not know that I told the solicitor at the police-court that I knew the man—I did not express any doubt as to his being the person—I do not know that I told anybody I was sure he was the man—I went there to give evidence against him supposing I knew him—I did know him, but I did not tell the solicitor so because he did not ask me—the person I say is the prisoner, he gave his address, 4, Albion-place, or road, or grove, Stoke Newington.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Have you any doubt about his being the man? A. I am quite sure he is—I saw him at least three times, and negociated with him the making of these rings—I have not been applied to for the diamonds that were left only by a detective.
EDWIN STREETER . I am manager to Harry Emanuel—I know Pearce well—the first time I saw him come there was about 3d January; Young was there in the shop—the female prisoner, to the best of my belief, was with Pearce.
JONATHAN WHICHER (Police-inspector). On 23d April I went with some other officers to Albion-road, Stoke Newington, about 8 o'clock in the evening—Sergeant Tanner knocked at the door, and it was opened by Pearce—I said to him, "I wish to speak with you," and accompanied him down stairs into the lower room, where I found Laurence; I said, "We are police-officers, what is your name?"—he said, "My name is Pearce"—I said, "Have either of you been to Brighton to-day?"—they both said that they had not—I said, "I wish you to go a little way with me for some people to see you"—Laurence said that she wanted to go up stairs, I asked her what for; she said, "To get a pair of boots"—I accompanied her into the top room of the house, but she did not find any boots; we returned to the lower room again where Pearce was; I told Laurence to put on her things and she commenced dressing, I believe she had got her bonnet and shawl on—I noticed something strange in her movements, she kept her back turned towards me, which made me suspect she had got something in her hands which she wished to conceal—I said, "What have you got in your hands?"—she immediately put them under her cloak and said, "Nothing"—I said, "Let me see"—she repeated that she had got nothing—I said, "Let me see," and took hold of her hands; she struggled to disengage herself and screamed—Pearce then seized the poker and made use of an expression as to what he would do, but Sergeant Tanner closed with him, and Laurence threw up her hand and said, "There now, you see I have got nothing in my hand"—I looked down by her feet, saw this ring which Mr. French has spoken of and picked it up—these two other diamond rings were lying close by and were picked up by Sergeant Tanner—I did not see any rings on the floor before—I took the prisoners to the Kingsland station and said, "I now charge you both on suspicion of stealing a diamond locket from Mr. Emanuel in Hanover-square, and some bracelets from Messrs. Hunt and Roskill in Bond-street"—they made no reply—Laurence had this pair of diamond earrings (produced) in her ears, aud holding them and the three rings in my hand, I said, "Have you any objection to tell me how you became possessed of these?"—she declined to do so—I said to Pearce, "I am going to ask you a question, you can do as you like about answering it; some time back you sold a large emerald to Mr. Hannaford of Clerkenwell-green, have you any objection to tell me how you became possessed of it?"—he declined to tell me.
JOHN HUNT (re-examined). These are not our rubies, and I do not think these diamonds in this ring are ours, some of ours were similar to these in the earrings—the jewellery we lost had diamonds of this description.
Cross-examined by SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I suppose no quantity of jewellery could be produced with respect to which you could not observe just the same thing? A. Yes, they may be ours and they may not.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. What was the nature of the pearls? A. They were bouton pearls, that is a button shape, rather flattened behind and round in front, like a round pearl cut in two.
COURT to FREDERICK HANNAFORD. Q. Were the jewels produced to you like those described by Mr. Hunt? A. Yea; bouton peurla.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Is that an uncommon pearl? A. Not at all—the value of the two is 6l. or 7l.
LAURENCE— NOT GUILTY .
PEARCE— GUILTY on Second count.
He was further charged with having been before convicted of felony; to which he
503. EMILY LAURENCE , and JAMES PEARCE were again indicted for stealing a locket, value 1,600l., the property of Harry Emanuel, in his dwelling-house. MESSRS. GIFFARD and LEWIS conducted the Prosecution.
EDWIN WILLIAM STREETER . I am manager to Mr. Harry Emanuel—I recollect two persons coming in to our shop—I recollect the male prisoner perfectly well, and the female to the best of my belief—it was at the commencement of January, I believe the 3d, near about 4 o'clock—there was a great deal of jewellery on the counter; amongst the jewellery there was a diamond locket—it was towards the end of the counter or table—the female prisoner moved about from one end to the other; at last she stopped at the left end of the counter—when they came in they asked to see some lockets—they were shown a great many; they were not expensive enough, and they were shown some more expensive—after a long time they ordered two diamond and turquoise lockets and earrings to match—they would amount to from 160l. to 200l.—they wished it to be done by a certain time as they were leaving for America—I mentioned the names of one or two Americans, and the male prisoner said he knew them perfectly well, in fact, he said, he had brought a watch of ours over from an American gentleman, a customer of ours—we asked him if we should send for it—he said, "Oh no, I will bring it the next time I come"—he gave his address as Portland-place—he wrote the name and address down in a book; I have not got the book here, I do not recollect the name—I think it was Pearce, he wrote it himself in the book—I can fetch the book—while he was writing, his hand trembled very much, he said, "You see my hand shakes very much, I was at the opera last night and a diamond was stolen out of my pin"—I noticed that he wearing a pin without a stone or anything in it—the female prisoner had a muff with her which she placed on the counter, she opened some cases and said, "Oh, these are empty"—she then moved her muff to another part of the counter, and finally placed it at one part opposite to where the locket was—no other customer came in after they left, except a relation of Mr. Emanuers—after the prisoners left, the boxes were closed and in due time taken down into the strong room and locked up for the night—the loss of the locket was discovered next morning—(looking at a silk dress produced by the officer) this is the same material and the same pattern as the dress the female came in this pin (produced) is similar to that which the male prisoner had in his scarf without any stone.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. This was between the lights, was it not? A. Yes; it was just getting dusk—the gas was not lighted when they came in—I can tell you why I noticed the dress, as the female prisoner came in she knocked something off the table and I noticed it—she had something on her face which came down to about her upper lip; I do not know whether you call it a veil or a fall—I did not notice the colour of it or whether there was any pattern or figure on it; to the best of my belief it was a brown fell—I did not take notice of the bonnet—I saw the prisoner again in April, she was then in the dock at the police-court—our case was the first inquired into—she was brought in while I was waiting in the Court and placed in
the dock—I do not think Mr. Hunt was with me at the time—I do not swear to the woman, I say to the best of my belief she is the person—I believe she wore a velvet mantle when at the shop—I dare say we had had the locket on sale not more than a week on the outside; it was a very beautiful one, here is a drawing of it (producing it)—I had not previously shown it to other parties that day, it had been shown by the other assistants—it had been shown that same day, it had not been sent out on approbation, it was shown in the establishment—Mr. Paracott does not keep the key of the strong box in which the jewellery was deposited, the cases are placed in our iron safe and I keep the key—some of the other assistants replaced the jewellery that was lying on the counter in the boxes—I believe it was Mr. Young, one of the other assistants, who discovered the loss.
Cross-examined by MR. TINDAL ATKINSON. Q. Had you been very busy that day? A. As usual—there might have been a dozen persons there in the course of the afternoon, I should think not more—I had last seen the locket about 1 or 2 o'clock, I saw it on the table in another room—it was open—the public had not access to that room: I asked for it and it was brought in for me to look at, and it was taken away again directly after I had passed my opinion on it; it was taken away by one of the young men, I do not know which; that was not the last time I saw it, I saw it again as it was being shown to a lady of title in the afternoon—it was on the counter, it was open then—we have twelve or fourteen persons in the employment—I don't recollect that I saw it more than twice before that afternoon, once when it was open on the table, and when shown to the lady by one of the young men, I do not recollect which.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Did you remember, until my friend reminded you, that there was anything over the face of the female? A. I did not think of it, nor of the mantle—I remember now that she had a velvet mantle on—the locket was in a velvet case—there was a pearl-drop attached to the locket—I should think these persons were in our shop nearly half an hour—Young is the name of the person who attended on the lady—the gas was lighted two or three or five minutes after they came in—they were there about twenty minutes or half an hour after the gas was lighted—I think we asked 2,000l. for the locket—the value is between 1,500l. and 1,600l.
COURT. Q. You say you had seen it in the afternoon shown to a lady; did you see it while the two prisoners were there? A. No; about ten minutes before—the lady put her muff down just where it was.
ARTHUR WILLIAM YOUNG . I am in the employment of Mr. Emannel—I remember a man and woman entering Mr. Emanuel's premises on 3d January last—I can speak positively to the woman, it was the female prisoner—I saw her examine jewellery of different sorts at the counter; lockets principally—I remember the description of a locket that was afterwards missed—I saw it at that time—I showed it to her myself—it was a locket with a pearl drop, in a blue velvet case, which was, I should think, about two and a half inches long—she could have got it into her muff very well—she had a muff, the muff was on the top of the locket—I could not swear to the male person conscientiously, I believe the prisoner to be the man—in consequence of some instructions I followed the two persons out of the shop—I missed them by Hanover-chapel—there was some crowd there and I lost sight of them—I discovered the loss of the locket—it was missing that night, but we did not look any more for it then, not till the morning; then I looked for it and found it was gone, and the case also—I missed it the first thing, when the cases were being taken out of the iron chest, before the business of the
day had commenced—there were no customers in the shop when the two persons came in—they were the last in that evening.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. How was this person dressed? A. A similar dress to that produced; the same description; the same pattern—I recollect the dress—she had a mantle of some kind; I almost forget whether it was a velvet or a mohair—I forget what kind of bonnet she had—I speak to her from her features—I saw her several times—I did not observe whether she had feathers or flowers inside her bonnet, or how it was trimmed—there was nothing to prevent my doing so; but I difl not look—I saw her face—the next time I saw the person who I say was the one I saw on that occasion, was at the police-court—Mr. Streeter and I were both there at the same time—she was in the dock at the time I saw her.
Cross-examined by MR. ATKINSON. Q. I may take it that you have no recollection of this man? A. I could not swear it was the same—I cannot say positively that he is the man—I had been assisting in selling jewellery during that day for Mr. Emanuel—we had not had a busy day—I cannot tell how many persons we had had in the shop, I don't recollect—I do not suppose there were above a dozen in that day—I had seen that locket before; on the previous day, or on the same day—I recollect showing her the locket—I had seen it in its proper place in the drawer—it was shown to some ladies that were in previous to these persons coming in; not by me—I cannot say by whom; one of those that were at the counter—there are two or three of us.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. You said you saw the woman several times; when you went out with instructions to follow them did you see her face again then? A. No; I did not—I only kept behind her.
CHARLES PARNACOTT . I am also in the service of Mr. Emanuel—On 3d January I saw the two persons come into the shop—I can speak with positiveness to the male prisoner, not to the female—shortly after they had gone I called at 7, Portland-place; I did not find them there—I was afterwards shown the male prisoner together with, I should think, about eight or nine other persons—I picked him out myself at once—I was not present when the male prisoner gave his address—I did not hear what he said.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Were you assisting at about the same part of the counter as that at which the female was, whoever she was? A. I was in the next room when the prisoners came in, but I passed in and out several times—I had an opportunity of seeing the persons; in fect I took one tray myself in front of them—I speak only to the man—the female had a small fall, which came down to about here; I did not notice her particularly—you could see through the fall if you looked closely—we were not above two feet apart—it was either a black or brown fall; I cannot say—I cannot tell you what the bonnet was—she had a cloak or mantle over her dress—it was not fur; I could not tell you any other material—the gas must have been lighted before they left—I did not light it—I should say it was lighted before they left, in accordance with the time of the afternoon they were there—I cannot distinctly remember whether it was lighted or not.
Cross-examined by MR. ATKINSON. Q. How long after was it that you saw the male prisoner; when you picked him out from the eight or nine? A. It was at the commencement or latter end of April—I had only seen him before at Hanover-square; never before that—it was not my duty to wait on him if he had been there at that particular time—there are twelve or thirteen of our young men engaged about the place—I had seen this locket several times before—I cannot say that I had the same day; I have
seen it so often—I know where it was placed—it had a large diamond in the centre, set round with smaller ones, with a diamond drop—it was all diamonds.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Were there any pearls in it; in any part of it? A. Oh! it had a pearl drop.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. The male prisoner called the female his wife, did he not? A. No, he did not—he gave the name of Pearce, and she the name of Laurence—Tanner was with me, he was present during the whole of the time—I believe the male prisoner did say something while I was struggling with him; but Tanner will prove that—I did not hear what was said.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Did you find a black velvet mantle in the house? A. Yes; it was at the police-court, but is not here, the officer left it behind—he brought it to the police-court with the dress—sergeant Williamson found the dress.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. They were living there together as man and wife? A. Yes, I may say so.
COURT. Q. Do you know anything about it? A. I know the prisoner's wife; that is not his wife—I believe the two prisoners were living at the place as man and wife.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. You say you know who the prisoner's wife is? A. I know the female that passes as his wife, she is not here—they were living together, keeping a beer-shop in the name of Bingfield—her name is Ellen Coffey, and that is the prisoner's proper name—she was passing by her real name, Mr. Coffey—she was tried with him at Manchester, and acquitted on that ground—amongst other articles I found a recommendation for a passport—it is not here; the officer who had it has left the court; he was here in another case; I have sent for him—it was not produced before the Magistrate.
JOSEPH FONTANO . I am a jeweller and diamond merchant, carrying on business in the Palais Royal, in Paris—in March last the two prisoners entered my shop—I can speak to the man, and I believe it was the woman—the man pointed out some opera glasses—he did not speak at all—I showed him some, and asked him if he spoke English—he said, "Yes," only—I showed him some others and asked if they were to his taste—he did not answer at all, he only pointed to some others—he bought an opera glass at last for 20 francs, and then he looked at the counter, where two ladies were—he paid the 20 francs—I told him I would give him a case to put it in, of the value of 5 francs, and he ran out of the shop.
RICHARD TANNER (Police-sergeant, examined by MR. SLEIGH). I was present when Whicher went to the prisoner's lodging—I did not hear the male prisoner address the female as his wife—he spoke of her as his wife.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. What did he say? A. He seized the poker, and said, "God blind me, if he touches my wife I will smash his b----brains out"—I heard the names which the prisoners gave—the male prisoner gave the name of Pearce—the female gave the name of Emily Laurence.
the prisoners were taken into custody—in the female prisoner's bed-room I found a number of silk dresses; amongst others, the one I have produced—I also found the shirt-pin that has been produced, and a velvet mantle which I afterwards saw at the police-court.
ELIZABETH SAINT . I am the wife of William Saint, a police-constable—he is in charge of the house, 7, Portland-place, and has been since November last—from that time to the present neither of the prisoners have lodged in that house.
HARRY EMANUEL . I have examined the jewels produced by Whicher—some of the larger ones correspond with the diamonds that were on the locket that was lost—they are all City made; all made in Clerkenwell; what we call City goods—they are not so well done as at the west end; there is not the same care bestowed on them.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you say that the City workmen are not so good? A. No; City people do not pay such large prices—I never heard of a locket selling in the City for 2,000l.—there was a large centre diamond in the locket that I lost—I do not observe anything like that here—it was much larger than any of these; ten times larger; it weighed thirteen carats and a grain—I had seen it on that day, not ten minutes before these persons came in—it was not lying about—I asked for it to show to some one who was going out—I would rather not say who that person was—it was a lady of title; she might not like her name called in question.
LAURENCE— GUILTY .**— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
PEARCE— GUILTY .*†— Ten Years' Penal Servitude.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
PLEADED GUILTY .**†— Confined Eighteen Months.
506. JOHN SMITH (Indicted as such, he refusing to give any name) (18), Stealing 1 pair of boots, 5 brushes, 1 glue-pot, and other articles, value 2l. the property of William Gilbert Habershon, in his dwelling-house; to which he
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.
NEW COURT.—Monday, June, 11th, 1860.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. SALOMONS, M.P.; Mr. Ald. ABBISS; and Mr. COMMON SERJEANT.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. COOKE conducted the Prosecution.
MARY JANE BARRETT . My husband keeps the White Swan iu Chandos-street, Covent-garden—on 5th May the prisoner came and called for a glass of ale—I served her myself, and she tendered in payment a half-crown—I immediately saw it was a bad one—I bent it and showed it her, and demanded another—she had then drank a part of the beer—on my showing her that half-crown she took another from her hand—I bent that, and I told her that was bad as well, and I demanded another—she took another from her hand and that was bad also—I did not bend that; I showed it to her, and she screamed and ran away fast—I sent the potman aftet her; he took her to the station—I gave the half-crowns to my husband—the prisoner did not drink all the beer.
JOHN RADFORD . (Police sergeant, 12 P). The prisoner was given into my custody—these half-crowns were given to me by Mr. Barrett—the prisoner gave a place of abode which was false—Mr. Barrett is not here—these half-crowns were produced before the Magistrate when Mr. and Mr. Barrett were there—Mr. Barrett was not bound over.
Prisoner's Deposition. I received the money from a friend of mine, a Scotch gentleman. I had not the least idea it was bad.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. ELLIS and COOKE conducted the Prosecution.
THOMAS WEBSTER . I keep a public-house in St. Martin's-lane—on Saturday night, 5th May, the two prisoners and another man came to my house between 10 and 11 o'clock—they had a pint of porter—while they were there I heard something which induced me to follow them—I saw the two prisoners go into Mr. Kirby's shop—the third man was at the door—I went to the door-way and the third man rushed by me and made his escape—he got away as I entered the shop—I heard Bird ask for 2d. worth of pudding; he was served with it and he put down a shilling—I saw Mr. Kirby take it up and bend it—he put it on the counter and Bird took it up and swallowed it—I had spoken to a policeman before, and he came in and
took Bird by the throat and tried to get the shilling out of his mouth—he struggled and resisted very much—the prisoners were both taken in custody on the spot.
Bird. Q. How did I resist the policeman? A. You pushed him, and I believe you struck him—I did not say at the police-court that I was on the pavement.
THOMAS JOHN KIRBY . I keep an eating-house in Long Acre—I saw the two prisoners come into my shop on the 5th May at 11 o'clock at night—Bird called for 2d. worth of pudding—he gave me a shilling—I took it up and put it in my mouth and bent it very easily—I asked him if he knew what it was—he said it was a shilling—I told him it was a bad one—I laid it on the counter, and he put it in his mouth and swallowed it—the policeman came in and seized him by the throat to prevent his swallowing it.
JAMES WATTS (Policeman, 82 F.) I was on duty in Long Acre on the night of the 5th May—I saw the two prisoners and another come out of the public-house and go into Mr. Kirby's shop—I went into the shop and Bird turned and saw me, and he took the shilling and swallowed it—I seized his throat but it was gone too far—he was very violent—he did not assault me—I found good money on both the prisoners.
ROBERT WENSLEY (Police-sergeant, 36 F). I went into Mr. Kirby's shop—I saw Taylor standing by the side of Bird—I asked Taylor what he had got in his hand—he said, "Nothing"—I seized his hand; he struck me on the side of the head and knocked my hat off—I found on him a good shilling and a bad one.
Bird. The officer came in and seized my throat; if I had had a shilling he must have found it. I could not have swallowed it.
Taylor. I was going up St. Martin's-lane and met Bird; we went and had some porter and gin; I paid with a half-crown; we went on and nwet two others and we had some more porter. We went to Mr. Kirby'a to get some pudding, the policeman came in and said, "What have you got in your hand?" I said, "nothing," and he seized me, and I dare say I might have struck him. He says I had a good shilling and a bad one; I took them in change for the half-crown. How was I to know that it was bad money?
GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months each.
MESSRS. ELLIS and COOKE conducted the Prosecution.
SAMUEL SIMPKIN FISHER . I am a tobacconist, and live in London-road, Bromley—the prisoner came to my shop on 7th April for a quarter of an ounce of tobacco; it came to 13/4d.—he tendered me a bad shilling—I told him it was bad—he said he did not know it—I sent for a policeman and gave him in custody.
GEORGE CLARK (Policeman, 85 K.) On 7th April Mr. Fisher gave the prisoner into my custody and he gave me this bad shilling—I searched the prisoner; he had on him three half-pence and two farthings—he gave the name of John Smith, Old Montague-street, Whitechapel—I did not find anybody there that knew him—he was taken before the Magistrate and remanded, and discharged on 10th April.
GEORGE ALFRED MARR . I keep the Seven Stars public-house, in High-street, Bromley—on 4th May I received a bad 2s. piece from my wife—the prisoner was at the bar—I went round tho bar and asked him where he got the piece—he said a man gave it him—and then again he said a man asked
him to go for a walk at Mile End-gate, which is some distance from my house, and he gave it him and asked him to go with the bottle and get a quartern of gin—I went out and saw the policeman, and gave him the prisoner and the 2s. piece, which I got from Mr. Marr—she bit it with her teeth—she is not here, she is not able to leave her bed; she was confined on the 23d of May.
WILLIAM HENRY POLLAND . I am employed in the Mint department of the Treasury—I was present when Mr. Marr was examined before the Magistrate—I heard her give her evidence; the prisoner was present—what she said was taken down—the prisoner had an opportunity of cross-examining her.
The deposition of Elizabeth Louisa Marr was here read as follows:—I am the wife of George Alfred Marr, who keeps the Seven Stars—the prisoner came to our house about 11 o'clock at night on the 4th instant—he asked for half a quartern of gin; I served him and he gave me in payment a bad florin, which I bent with my teeth, and before I could tell him it was bad, he put down a good shilling, which I picked up—I called my husband and gave him the florin—the prisoner said a man gave it to him with the bottle and told him to come and get the gin.
TIMOTHY DREW (Policeman, K 387). I took the prisoner on 4th May—I got this florin from Mr. Marr—the prisoner said he lived at 16, Little Collingwood-street—that is in Bethnal-green, but the prisoner said he thought it was in Mile-end—I inquired there, but could find nothing about him—I found on him one halfpenny.
GUILTY.—Recommended to Mercy by the Jury — Confined Six Months.
MESSRS. ELLIS and COOKE conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN BATH . I am a draper and live in Kingsland-road—on 7th May, between 10 and 11 o'clock at night the prisoner came and asked for a pair of stockings, my wife served him—he put down a half-crown—I gave him 1s. 10d. change and he left—I kept the half-crown in my hand, and directly afterwards I found it was bad—I ran after him and came up with him about 30 yards off—I said "You gave me a bad half-crown"—he said, "Indeed sir, I will go back with you"—I said, "Where are the stockings and the change?"—he said, "I gave them to my pal"—I said "Where is your pal?—he said he did not know, but he believed he could get the stockings and the change for me—I went some distance with him, and he took me to a dark road—I did not like to go down, and I gave him in charge to a policeman—I gave the policeman the half-crown.
JURY. Q. Was the road lighted with gas? A. I cannot say—it was a new road, and it was dark.
JOSEPH ATHERTON (Policeman, N 374). I took the prisoner in custody on 7th May, between Kingsland-road and Derby-road—I received this half-crown from the last witness—I searched the prisoner, but found nothing on him—he gave his address at 9 Brick-lane, Whitechapel—I went there, but nobody knew him.
Prisoner's Defence. I went down Kingsland-road, and I met a young fellow who gave me a half-crown and asked me to get him a pair of stockings; I said I would, and I did; I gave him the stockings and the change. The prosecutor came to me, and I said I would try to find the man, and I could not.
GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.
MR. COOKE conducted the Prosecution.
SARAH SEELEY . I am barmaid at the San public-house, in Little Sutton-street, Clerkenwell—on Friday 11th May the prisoner came to our house—he wanted a quartern of gin, I served him—it came to 3d.—he gave me a shilling, I gave him change, and put the shilling in the till—there was no other shilling there—the prisoner left the house, and in a few minutes my mistress came in; she went to the bar, and took out that shilling, and it was a bad one—I had not put any other money in the till after that shilling—Mr. Barber was there, and she saw the man I took the shilling from—on the next evening the prisoner came again; I knew him again—I spoke to my mistress, Mr. Miller—the prisoner asked for a glass of rum; it came to 2 1/2 d.—he tendered in payment a shilling—Mr. Miller took it, and it was a bad one—I told him he had given me one the night before—he said he had not been in the house—I told him he had—I am sure he had.
ELLEN BARBER . I was in the Sun public-house on the evening of 11th May—I saw the last witness serve a young man with the gin—I could not swear that the prisoner was the man; it was one very much like him—she served him—I could not say what she received from him.
Prisoner. Q. Do you remember saying on Saturday that you could swear to the man? A. No; you said "Come in and see whether you know me"—I said, "I don't want to come in,"—I believe you to be the man.
ANN MILLER . On Friday night, 11th May, I went to my till and found a bad shilling—my barmaid described the person who gave it her—she said she should know him in a minute—there was no other shilling in the till neither good nor bad—I marked the shilling and put it by itself—on the next night I was there when the prisoner came to the bar—Seeley pointed him out to me; he asked for a glass of rum—the barmaid served him and he put down a bad shilling—I said to him "You are the man I want; you was here last night,"—he said, "I was not in the house before,"—I said, "Whether you was or not I shall lock you up"—I bent the shilling which he gave me and he said, "Don't disfigure it, I am a hard working man"—I sent for a constable and gave the two shillings to him—I marked the one that I found in the till on the Friday night—Mr. Barber came in for her supper beer, and I said "The man is here that passed the bad shilling"—she said she believed he was the man—he said to her, "Come in," but she did not—I had heard the prisoner's voice on Friday night, and I knew his voice again on Saturday.
Prisoner's Defence. Mr. Miller called the young woman to say I was the man. I asked her several times and she would not make me an answer. Mr. Miller said, "I am sure he is the man, I know his voice." I can assure you I am not guilty of going in the house on Friday, and the other, I did not know it was bad.
GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.
MR. COOKE conducted the Prosecution.
Skinner-street—on the afternoon of 17th May, the prisoner came and called for half a quartern of gin and some hot water—I served him and be put down a bad shilling—I tried it and bent it double—I told him it was bad, and asked him if he had got any more—he then seemed to be very drunk, and I went round to him and said to him "Have you got any more?—he gave me another shilling; I gave it to my wife, she tried it and it was bad—I asked the prisoner if he had any more and he pulled out a good sixpence—my wife gave him 4d. change—I gave him both the shillings back—I went out and got a policeman—the prisoner was then outside the door going away—I followed him to the station, and at the station two bad shillings were produced—I could not swear that they were the same that he had offered to me; they were very much like them.
HERBERT BACON (City-policeman 617). The prisoner was given into my custody—I found two bad shillings in the lining of his hat—there was a piece of tissue paper in his hat, but that is lost—I found one bad shilling in the watch pocket of his waistcoat—I found three good sixpences, a 4d. piece, a 3d. piece, and 4 1/2 d. in copper, in his left trousers pocket—I found Home envelopes on him—he gave an address but I could not find that he was known there.
Prisoner. Q. Where were the two shillings found? A. In the lining of your hat; but when I took the hat off they fell down; they were in the hat—I did not say I found them on your head, they were in your hat.
Prisoner. I don't deny uttering the coins; but I deny having any knowledge of their character. I don't think any one would go in a house having a knowledge of bad coin; it would be very contrary to common sense, but an innocent man may be imposed upon: any one is liable to a misfortune of having bad coin. I lent some money to a young man; I pressed him for payment, and he paid me—I suppose it might be bad; I don't know how the coins came in my hat.
GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, June 12th, 1860.
PRESENT—Mr. RECORDER; Mr. Ald. ALLEN; Mr. Ald. CONDER; and Mr. Ald. ABBISS.
Before Mr. Recorder.
518. RICHARD LOFTY (21) , Robbery on Caroline Simmons, and stealing from her person 1 purse and 1s. 1d. in money her property, and beating and striking her: he PLEADED GUILTY to the robbery but not to the violence.
GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months."
MR. METOALFE conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZABETH SARAH GREEN . I am single and live at 47, York-street Bethnal-green, with my parents—I have known Joseph Endell for four years—I was engaged to be married to him; a quarrel took place between us—the prisoner then made proposals to me and I kept company with him rather better than two months—after that time I made it up with Joe and agreed to be married to him—we had the bauns published in the Church—after I made it up with Joe, the prisoner did not say anything to me about marrying him and not marrying Joe after the banns were published—I saw the prisoner after the banns were published—on the night of 12th April I went out with a friend of mine to Joe's aunt's, Mr. Bacon, to tea—while there a young woman came to me—in consequence of what she said I went out—I found the prisoner there—he knocked at the street door just as I was going to open it—he said, "Come along, duckey; we won't run away"—I said, "What do you want here; I don't want you coming after me, it is no good"—when we had nearly got up to the arch he had his hands in his hind pocket, and in consequence of what Ann had told me, I thought he had something in his hand—I ran underneath the arch and he caught me up and said, "Do you intend marrying Joe?" I said, "Yes, I do; so take yourself off,"—he then struck me on the head with a knife—when I last saw him he was at the side of me—I cannot say whether there was more than one blow; I only felt one—I fell in the road—I remember the witness dragging me up out of the road—we ran into a baker's shop—a doctor examined my head when I got home—I was taken to the doctor's assistant; the doctor was not at home—he examined me—my head bled a great deal—I have got things at home that are soaked—the blow was very violent—it was the blow that struck me down—I kept my bed a fortnight afterwards.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Were you a good deal frightened? A. I was dreadfully frightened—I have known the prisoner rather better than two months—he has been in the army—I have seen his papers—I know that he received an injury while he was on board a vessel; the Anna Hardy—it injured his leg, but I don't know that it affected his head—he joined the Temperance Society after I knew him—I did not join it with him—he told me he joined it, but I never saw him join it—I believe he did join it because he attended the place—he did not take any drink—I joined it in Goldsmith's-row—I used to go out with him—we used not to have ginger pop when we went out—I had not been in the habit of taking a little too much—I broke the pledge and then the prisoner said he would break it—I never thought I should have made it up again with Joe and I told the prisoner so—I said it was partly in consequence of Joe's drunkenness—I never told the prisoner's father that I was going to have the prisoner—I never said a word to his father about having him—the banns were put up between me and Joe—I went out with the prisoner several times after that—the banns were up a fortnight and I did not like to tell him—he heard of it first on Easter Sunday; this affair occurred on the Thursday after—I was to have been married to Joe three or four weeks after that—we have not been married yet—I know that the Sunday was the first time we told him about the banns beiug put up—my brother told him; not in my presence—I did not hear him—my brother went away on the Monday morning—he did not come back again between the Monday and the Thursday—he lives in the country; at Battersea—I don't know how far that is from the prisoner's—the prisoner lives in Colling wood-street, Bethnalgreen—I
can undertake to say that my brother George did not see him between the Sunday and the Thursday—I have two brothers—they both told him—they are not here—I had not had a drink with him on this night—on the Sunday night we had been drinking at the Green Man—he gave me a shilling once to get my mantle out of pledge—that was on a Sunday, but I do not know the day of the month—it was before the banns were put up—it was not on the Sunday before Easter Sunday—I think it was two or three weeks before Easter—the prisoner had made me a present of a work-box—that was before he gave me the shilling—that was not after the banns had been put up—he also gave me his likeness—I once sent him a valentine—I was not keeping company with Joe all this time—Joe and I went together to the Church on the Monday to give instructions to have the banns put up—I had made up the quarrel with Joe only on the Saturday night—I had not seen him then since I had fallen out with him—he came two or three times to where I was at work but I did not see him—it was two months since I had seen him—after the banns were put up on the Monday, I had frequently gone out and walked with the prisoner—he had not made me presents at all after the banns were put up—on the Thursday night that this took place he came to where I was at a friend's house—he was half drunk—I am sure I had not been drinking anything with him—I said when I opened the door, "Why, what's the matter with you? you look mad"—I am still friends with Joe.
ANN BECK . I live at 47, Seabright street, Bethnal-green—on the 12th April, about 4 o'clock in the afternoon, the prisoner came to me and asked where Lizzie was—we call Miss Green "Lizzie"—he had this large Spanish knife (produced) with a spring behind in his hand—it was bran new—he had it open up his sleeve—I saw the blade of it shine—my mother was sitting there—I said, "Mother, he has got a knife"—I caught hold of his hand and held it open, and my mother took the knife from him—I then went with him to the place where Lizzie was—I went in—she came out with me—I told her about the knife—she and the prisoner walked on together—I saw the prisoner raise his hand two or three times and she fell to the ground; and then I saw the blood—he dropped the knife—I think he raised his hand before he struck—then I saw him strike and she fell directly—this (a smaller one) is the knife—I saw it in his hand at the time—he did not fall—he picked up the knife again—I dragged her along and we both ran together into the baker's shop, and he ran after us with the knife in his hand—he appeared to threaten again but did nothing; only ran after us—I cannot exactly swear as to how he was holding the knife—the prosecutrix went into the baker's shop—the other witness caught hold of the prisoner before he got up to the door—I did not look at her head when I picked her up—I was so frightened—I found a good deal of blood.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the prisoner drunk? A. Yes.
COURT. Q. How long were you with him? A. Not above half an hour at the outside—he was not stupidly drank; I think he knew what he said.
EDWARD MORLEY . I live at 75, Hare street, Bethnal-green, and am a butcher—on the afternoon of 12th April, about half-past 5 o'clock, I heard a screaming outside the shop—I went out and saw the last witnesses running and the prisoner after them—they ran into a baker's shop—he was stopped against the door—he had a small knife with him, something similar to this—he was following them, he was some yards off of them—I did not notice how he was holding the knife—I took it away from him—he was not running after them to take care of them—he was not very violent—the police constable then came up.
Cross-examined. Q. Then to the best of your opinion he was not going after them? A. Yes, I think he was—I do not think he was running—I did not have much trouble to take the knife away from him—he had evidently been drinking, he was in a very excited state—I did not take notice whether he made use of any expressions—it was a knife something similar to this, I think it was open; I should not like to swear whether it was.
JAMES THOMAS PORTER (Policeman, H 210). I took the prisoner into custody on 12th April, near the baker's shop—he said, "Here I am, you can take me if you like; I have been and stabbed a young woman"—I said, "Nonsense, you don't mean to say that?"—Morley gave me the knife—the prisoner then said, "You don't mean to lock me up?"—I said, "Most decidedly I do"—he then flung himself on the ground and commenced kicking—he was tipsy—I took him to the surgeon's—I was then told that a young female had been stabbed—on the way to the station he said, "Is she dead?"—I said, "I don't know"—he said, "I hope she is, for I intended to kill her, and will some day"—I cautioned him against what he was saying as it might be brought against him—he said, "You may say what you like and be b----d, I have made up my mind to be hung for her some day"—I took him to the station.
Cross-examined. Q. Was he in a very excited state? A. No, not particularly—when he spoke to me he was not excited in the least—he was drunk—if he was drunk he was very slightly excited—he flung himself down with me on the ground—I came to the ground too, several times—he gave himself up to me in the first instance—I at onoe noticed that he was drunk.
THOMAS SARVIS . I am a surgeon of Winchester-street, Waterloo-town, Bethnal-green—I was called to attend the prosecutrix, and found a wound on the top of her head nearly three niches long, cut through the scalp and penetrating to the bone—there was a good deal of bleeding, and she was in a very low state—such a knife as this would inflict such a wound if used with great violence—it appeared to me to be done with violence—she was in danger.
Cross-examined. Q. Is she out of danger now? A. Yes—the bone was cut into, and sometimes there is exfoliation of the bone after that.
GUILTY on the Second Count. Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of the bad treatment he received.
Three Years' Penal Servitude.
The prosecutor stated that he wished to offer no evidence, the prisoner being insane.
NOT GUILTY .
NOT GUILTY .
NOT GUILTY .
PLEADED GUILTY . (See next case.)
MESSRS. CLERK and ORRIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
THOMAS BELL (Policeman, D 214). On Saturday evening, 14th April, I was on duty in Cumberlaud-street, Bryanston-square, about a quarter past 8—I saw the dining-room window of No. 43, Cumberland-street open—I knocked at the door, the female witness came to the door and answered me, and while we were talking, a man who is not now in custody, came from a room, he said that he was engaged by the gentleman of the house—not feeling satisfied, I was about to push him backwards in the hall to secure him, when he sprang past me; I caught hold of his coat and we struggled together in the road for a minute or two—the two prisoners came up close alongside of me, and I saw them take from their coat sleeves a life-preserver each—they first hit me on the lower part of my back, then twice on my head—before that, when the man was on the ground, be called out, "Give it to the b----" it was after that that they took out their life-preservers—Green struck me first and Thomas afterwards—I turned round and said, "You are striking, the wrong one"—I thought they had come to assist me—they all three then made their escape—my head was cut open—I was unable to attend to my duty till 27th April—I am quite sure the prisoners are the two men that struck me—we were close by a lamp.
Cross-examined by MR. COOPER (for Thomas). Q. Then it was by lamplight this happened? A. Yes—I was on the ground with the man underneath me—I was leaning over him to keep him down—the two men were close by the side of us—I had my attention on the man underneath me—this did not take above two minutes—I thought they had come to assist me—if they had hit the other man it would have been all right.
Green. Q. When you first saw me at the police-station why did you not recognize me? A. Because I was not quite sure about it, I was suffering from my head at that time, but the next time I saw you both placed together I knew you at once and you knew me—you struck me on the head first.
Green. At the police-court you said this man struck you first; I never struck you at all. Witness. You struck me on the head—I was first struck on the lower part of my back, and then I turned round and said, "You are striking the wrong one," and at that moment I received the blows—I could see your faces quite plainly.
MR. COOPER. Q. What had they on their heads? A. They both had hats on.
CHARLES FRITH . I am a groom in the service of a gentleman of 37, Great Cumberland-street—On the evening of 14th April I was outside the area gate three doors off from 43, the numbers run odd there—it was about a quarter past 8; I saw two men walking up and down on the same side as 43—after I had seen them walking up and down I saw a struggle going on in the street between a policeman and some man—I saw the two men go up to them, and all of a sudden I saw the fall of a stick or some instrument, and then I looked round and saw three men running away and the other lying on the ground—I am able to speak to Thomas with certainty, he was the last to run away; as he was running he made a stumble in the road and his hat fell off, he came rolling against me and said to me, "I will catch the b----s"—I said, "Yes, do"—I thought he was a swell running after them, they were running on in front—he was close to me when he picked his hat up—he ran after the other two as fast as he could go, when he had picked his hat up—I then went to assist the man who was on the
ground; I found he was a policeman—his head was streaming with blood all over the pavement—Green is very much like the other man that I saw, but I cannot swear to him—he did not come close to me, Thomas did; I saw him again on the Tuesday week following, at the Marylebone police-court, and recognized him as soon as I walked in.
Cross-examined. Q. He was where the prisoners stand I suppose? A. Yes—there were four oi them there—when I saw him in the street he had a hat and a loose coat on, and he looked like a swell—I am not aware that I had ever seen him before—I was not in employment at that time—I wag standing outside the gate—I am in tho employ of Mr. Franks, the banker-there was a gas-lamp about five yards off at the corner of the Mews—Thomas bad a hat on, the others had caps, one had a velvet cap—I am quite sure that both the others wore caps—I described the men to the policeman, he came and told me that he had caught them, and I went to the police-court and saw them.
Green. Q. How far were you off from this affair when it happened? A. It could not be far off, it was only three doors—I did not notice what sort of dress you wore—I don't know whether it was the same you have on now—the men ran past where I was standing—I, thought at first that they were drunken men struggling—I did not see that one of them was a policeman at first, it was done ail in a minute—if I had known what you were up to I should have ran after you and made an alarm—you threatened my life at the police-court when you were going out.
MR. CLERK. Q. Had you given a description of the men before you saw them in the dock? A. I had of Thomas especially, to Mr. Howe, the inspector—as soon as I saw the four men in the dock I recognized Thomas, he looked at me as soon as he saw me, and no doubt he knew me as well.
LOUISA BLYHE . I live at 43, Cumberland-street, Marylebone—On Saturday evening, 14th April, the police-constable Bell came to the door of the house and spoke to me; at the same time a man passed out of the house, the policeman tried to secure him—I afterwards saw the policeman knocked down in the road—the man who ran out of the house had not any business there.
Green. Q. When you first saw me at the police-station, did not the policeman want you to swear that I was the man that was inside the house? A. No, he did not—I did not say I thought you were the man.
EDWARD WILSON . I am a porter in Circus-street, New-road—On Saturday evening, 14th April, I was in Cumberland-street; I saw the man come out of 43, and saw a struggle take place between him and the policeman—I went over to where they were; I saw two other persons come up, they each pulled out a thing similar to a life-preserver, and struok him on the head with is—I can speak to Thomas as being one of the men; I saw him throw his cloak on one side and strike the policeman with his life-preserver—he had on what is called an Inverness Cape—I did not observe the other men at all, they ran away after the policeman was knocked down.
Cross-examined. Q. How far were you off from these men? A. I was close against them; I saw them for about two minutes, I had never seen them before—I saw them afterwards at the station, that was about ten days after, when the witness Frith was there—we went at the same time—they were then standing where the prisoners all stand—I was told that the men had been taken—Thomas had a hat on, I am quite sure of that—one of the other men had a cap; I think the third man had a hat; I think there were two hats and one cap—I went to the station and gave information
about this directly—I got the constable up and left him in charge of some persons and went to the station; I live in Bond-street; I was passing by accidentally at the time.
MR. CLERK. Q. Did you, when you went to the station, give a description of the men who you had seen striking the policeman? A. Yes.
JOHN COLLINS (Policeman, S 111). On Tuesday morning, 17th April, I went to 41, Nightingale-street, about half-past 10—I found the two prisoners there in the front parlour playing cards with two females—I apprehended them on another charge—I told Thomas I wanted him for being concerned with others not in custody, for stealing plate in the Bermondsey-road on Sunday night, and advised them to go with me quietly—Thomas prepared to go—I walked to the door before him, and told him I should lead him, and he knocked and kicked me about—Green came out with a poker and struck all three of us, there were two other constables with me—Thomas put on his stockings and his boots before he left, and his Inverness cape—he took up the poker and said he would take our b----lives if we attempted to lead him.
Cross-examined. Q. But you are alive and well, I am happy to see? A. I am better than I was—Thomas has pleaded guilty to the assault upon me—I felt the effects of this for about ten days afterwards.
WILLITHORNE HAMLEN . I am assistant to Mr. Boreham of Cambridge-terrace—on the evening of 14th April the constable Bell was brought to Mr. Boreham's surgery about a quarter to 9—I found he had two wounds on his head; they were such wounds as would have been produeed by a life-preserver—he had been bleeding profusely, there was a quantity of blood on his coat.
THOMAS— GUILTY .**.
GREEN— GUILTY .**
Eight year's Penal Servitude.
ROBERT HOBBS . I am a clerk at the East India United Service Club, is St. James's-square—the prisoner was also in that establishment as clerk—I recollect receiving on the night of 27th March a 10l. note from Captain Roberts, in payment of some fees due to the-Club by him—he is a member of the Club—I cannot positively say what I did with that note—I cannot say at all—I might have placed it in my pocket, or in the desk; I cannot say which I did—I missed it the next morning—I remained in that night until I went to bed—the prisoner resides in the Club—he would not be in the club-room, he would be down stairs—he could go into that room tip to 2 o'clock—I went to bed at 12 o'clock—my clothes, were in the room on a chair—the prisoner could have access to those clothes—he slept in the same room—he had been in the club about nine months—I made my loss known next morning—the prisoner dictated a letter to the bank—he denied any knowledge of it—it was generally known throughout the house that the note was lost—I am answerable for it.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. This young man, T believe, is the son of a very respectable person? A. He is—he has been in the service of the club between nine and ten months; during the whole of that time, to the best of my belief, he has borne an irreproachable character—he is kitchen clerk—the room in which I was, and in which I kept my books and desks, was not a room in which he would be in the course of his duty—I cannot Bafely recollect what became of the note after I received it—I have no
recollection whether I put it into my pockety—the gentleman from whom I received it is here—after this note was lost and recovered, the prisoner was suspended from the club—since his suspension there has been some other property missing; money stolen, or lost; notes and money—at that time he had nothing to do with the club—we have not found out up to the present time who the party is.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. When did this second robbery take place? A. On the Monday morning, 28th May, between the hours of 2 and 6 o'clock—the money was lost from the coffee-room, from the desk—I have no means of knowing whether it was stoleu by anybody on the premises, or by anybody who came into the coffee-room—it may have been stolen by somebody who came in there—I know nothing about it.
CAPTAIN HENRY CHARLES ROBERTS . I recollect, about 27th March, paying a note to Mr. Hobbs, one night at the club—the number of the note was 78,432—I made a memorandum of it in my account-book when I got the note from the bank—I had another note at the same time—I scratched the note out from my book as I paid it away—I have my book' here.
JANE LAFONT . I reside at 23, Sherrard-street—I recollect one evening seeing the prisoner—I do not recollect what evening it was—I was first called on by the police with reference to this matter about 16th April—I do not know very well how long it was before that that I had seen the prisoner—it was either three weeks or before that—I saw him in Marylebone-etreet—I think it was before 10 o'clock—I took him to my house in Sherrard-street—that is not far from where I met him—he asked me if I had got change for a 101. note—I said, "Yes," so when I came in I rang the bell for Mary Ann Barclay, and she came up stairs, and I said, "This gentleman has got a 10l. note, will you change, it?"—he gave the note to her, he never gave it to me—she went and brought a bottle of wine, and brought the change back and gave it to him—I do not know exactly how long he stayed in my house; not quite an hour; three quarters of an hour perhaps—we went up stairs to a bedroom together—before Barclay returned, he rang the bell, because he was in such a hurry to get the money and go away—we went up to my room directly he came in—we only went into one room—I have got two rooms—there was a light in the room while he was there—I am quite sure he is the person—I was taken by a policeman to the club, and there I saw the prisoner.
Cross-examined. Q. When you were taken to the club to see the prisoner at first, you did not say anything about whether he was the man or not, did you; you had a good look at him and said to the gentleman that took you, that you could not say anything about it; is not that so? A. No; we were sitting in a room and he came in, and he turned his face directly, so that I could not say exactly it was he, but I saw his side face and said, "I believe it is he; I cannot say very well;" and he said, "I will make him come round," and he gave him a can to go and fetch some beer, and he brought a glass of beer to me, and I saw directly that it was he—the first time I could not see his face exactly; I think he knew me, and turned his face that I should not see him—it was the policeman that took me to the club-house—he did not tell me before he took me there that there was a young man there that he wished me to look at—in the morning the policeman came to me with another gentleman and asked me about the 10l. note; he came up stairs with Mr. Barclay, and asked me if I knew the fellow that changed it, and I gave a description of him as much as I could, and he
came back in the afternoon and said he thought he knew the young man, if I Jiked to go to the club and see if it was he—Barclay was with me when I went to the club—she was in the same room with me when the prisoner passed me—I was sitting on one side and she on the other—I did not say at first that the prisoner was not the man—another man came into the room before him, and I said that was not the man—the policeman told me before I went to the club—he did not show me somebody else first, but one came into the room—that person was very young, with black whiskers, but I did not say anything because that was not he—I never said the prisoner was not the person, I said, "I believe that is he, but I am not quite sure"—he turned his face—I have not made a mistake about this—I have never made a mistake in that way in my life—I have mistaken one person for another but not in such a thing as this—I believe I have in my life, mistaken one person for another, but I know this young man; I have not come here to say what I do not know—I do not know that I have ever in all my life, gone up to some person, and been on the point of speaking and found out that I was mistaken—I did not, when I saw his side face, say, "No," and then when he came round with the beer in his hand, say, "Yes; that is he"—I said at first, "I believe it is he," and then when I saw him well, I said, "Yes; it is he"—the room into which I and the young man went was on the second floor—the house was not far from where I met him; five or six houses—Mr. Barclay is the servant of the house—she was not out walking with me—when I and this young man went up to the room, Barclay was not in the room at all—after he had had a talk with me in that room he went away.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. You gave a description of the young man to the policeman in the first instance? A. Yes; he asked me if he had not black whiskers—I said, "No; he is too young; he had got no whiskers at all"—when I saw the full face of this young man, I knew directly that it was he; I was quite sure.
MARY ANN BARCLAY . I am servant at 23, Sherrard-street—I do not recollect the very night, but I recollect Mr. Lafont coming home with a young man, and I was sent to change a 10l. note—the prisoner is the person that came home with her that night—I was in the house when they came in—I did not see them come in—the person rang the bell and I went up stairs and the young man gave me the 10l. note to change, and bring a. bottle of wine—I went and got it changed and brought the wine, and gave the young man the change—I got it changed at Mr. Crosier's, the Queen's Arms, Sherrard-street—I brought the wine and gave him the change—he asked if I would have a glass of wine, and I did—I am quite sure that is the young man.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you open the door when they came in? A. The door is always open—I went up to the room when the bell was rung—the youug man himself handed me the 10l. note—I happened to be in the passage at the time he went out—I was going with a message—the passage was lighted with gas, and up stairs all through the house—I was just at the parlour door, close to the stairs, when I saw him pass by—I did not say anything to him—on these occasions I do not stay in the room any longer than is necessary; I have no business—I took the wine in and counted the change into the young man's hand and told him to see if it was quite correct—I drank a glass of wine, and drank his health, I could not do any otherwise than be polite—I did not that night give any description at all of this young man to the police—Miss Lafont was not present when I gave a description—I was sent to come over to Mr. Crosier's about this affair—I
gave a description to the policeman of the person who changed the 10l. note—I gave the first description of him to the policeman—Miss Lafont was not present then—I did not afterwards tell her that I had done so—I was sent for to Crosier's—Miss Lafont was at home when the policeman came—she was not present when the policeman made a communication to me in the house—I afterwards sent there for her—she lived iu the same house at that time—I made no communication to her—I sent for her; it' was on the same day that I saw the policeman—I did not tell her that I had given a description to the policeman of the person who I believed had changed the note—I let her give her own evidence—I did not take her to Crosier's—I took her to no place—I am the housekeeper of the establishment—she gave the description herself, on the same day, I believe; I waa uot present—I do not know that she and I talked about the matter, as to what kind of a person it was—I knew the young man, I did not need to M told—I had not known him before, but by looking at him and giving him the money, I know him—we did not talk about the matter, only before the policeman—she told me she knew the young man, and I said I should know" him if I were to see him.
COURT. Q. Did you ever talk to her about what description you had given? A. No, I did not.
SARAH ANN CROSIER . I am the wife of Thomas Crosier, of the Queen's Head, Sherrard-street—I recollect the last witness coming to me and changing a 10l. note—I indorsed it—this is the note (produced)—this is my writing on it.
COURT. Q. Can you fix the date when that was? A. No; I should say that I kept it in my possession a very short time, because my husband was ill in bed from an accident, and on his brother coming to see him two or three days after, he gave him some money to give to the distillers; it did not go to our bankers—there has been a date cut out of this—there is "th," and "60"—that is my writing—when I indorse it I always put the day of the month—I did put the day of the month.
RICHARD ADYE BAILEY . I am a clerk in the Bank of England—I believe this date on this note is 31st or 30th March, 1860—there is sufficient left to tell that—"March" is there, and a "3" and part of another figure, and "st," I think it is—that would be the 31st—it was paid in on 7th April—the number is 78,432.
WILLIAM GORDON (Policeman, A 336). On 16th May, I went with Mr. Taylor, the secretary of the club, to the Queen's Head, and after that, to 23, Sherrard-street—Miss Lafont and Mr. Barclay gave me descriptions of the-person who had been at the house with that note—I went in the evening with them to the club; I should think about 8 o'clock—they saw other besides the prisoner, as we were going into the room, and I asked them if any of them was the person, and they said, no—they would not take any notice of the persons they saw in the passage—they eventually identified the prisoner in my presence—I took him into custody—he said he wfes-innocent.
MR. SLEIGH submitted that there was no evidence of larceny in this case; the probability was that the note was dropped, and if the prisoner found it, as it bore no mark showing to whom it belonged, his retaining it would not be a felony (See Reg. v. Thorbum Denison). MR. JUSTICE CROMPTON was of opinion that there was evidence to go to the Jury, he should tell them that if they considered he found the note, not knowing whose it was, and not having the means of knowing, it would be their duty to acquit him.
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. GIFFARD conducted the Prosecution.
GEORGE MUNROE KERR . I am a ship insurance and commission agent of 22, Nile-street, Glasgow, in partnership with Robert Tanner, and Mr. Wilson—I received this letter (produced) in January last—we wrote an answer to that address.
NATHANIEL EASTY . I have seen the prisoner write repeatedly—this letter is his writing and so is this other (produced)—one is dated 7th January, and the other 7th February, and here is another of 29th February—this letter of 30th February is also his writing.
GEORGE MUNROE KERR (continued). In answer to this letter of 7th January we wrote this letter—(This was from Kerr and Co. to Gilkison and Co., dated Glasgow, 19th January, 1860, acknowledging the receipt of their letter, and stating the terms for freights to Trinidad and Demerara)—I afterwards received a letter dated 7th February, in consequence of which I directed a quantity of coals to be shipped on board the Mohqua, and in March sent two copies of the bills of lading—(MR. LEWIS the solicitor for the prosecution here proved the service of a notice on the prisoner to product on his trial the two bills of lading and all the letters)—Bill read: "20th March, 1860. Bill of lading by the Mohqua 50 hogsheads of coal and 20,000 fire-bricks."
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Did the prisoner refer you to Messrs. Gray and Bucannahan? A. Yes; by the first letter—I called on them in consequeuce of that to know what they knew of the firm, and Mr. Bucannahan gave me the substance of a letter which he had received from Mr. Brown—the London Directory is circulated in Glasgow; I did not look into it—we have agents in London, Duncan and Co.; we did not give them instructions on the subject—I never heard of his having been a partner in a firm at Glasgow—I had never heard of him before—we bought the coals of, I think, Messrs. Murray and Langham—I am not certain—there were fifty hogsheads, which came to somewhere about 150l.—we have received money for freights on that vessel since the supply of these goods—as brokers we always collect the freight for the ship—we have received from 400l. to 500l. freight under this charter, which we shall keep until the case is over; but we have paid the charter party 350l.; we have put it to the debit of the freight—I do not know anything of a bill of exchange for the 350l.—we judge from our correspondence that we have not received one—we have letters from fche owner stating that he has never received any security for the hire of the vessel, but we never put the question to him.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Where is the document? A. In the hands of our solicitor, I believe—this (produced) is it—we received it from Griffiths and Co.; it is dated 21st March—it is signed Gilkison, Brown, and Co.
MR. METCALFE. Q. Is it for the charter party? A. Yes; that bill is not yet due—we got this bill to send to the owner as advised by the charter party—we got a telegram stating that there was no such party in London, in consequence of which we retained the bill—it was to become due on 24th June, between 400l. and 500l. in cash, and one of the bills of lading which my Counsel does not produce—on Wednesday, 28th March, I went to Whitecross-street, where the prisoner was detained before he was given in custody, and told him that if he would give up the charter party and oancel the proceedings I would not take any proceedings, and I would take proceedings if he did not—he refused to give it up and I went to the Lord Mayor.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Are you agents to the owners? A. Yes—the ship is put into our hands by Messrs. Duncan, our correspondents in London, and as soon as we heard that there was no Messrs. Gilkison and Brown, we wrote to the owners, taking upon ourselves the whole responsibility of the ship—if that bill is not paid we can pay ourselves—we are liable for the whole; we cannot tell what we shall lose—350l. is not the whole amount—the loss on the ship is likely to be 200l.—we have not supplied the goods as well—we can secure ourselves.
MRS. WAKF. I am the wife of Charles Wake, and live at 19, South-street, Finsbury—my husband met me on Sunday, and left me yesterday morning—I think he is now in Birmingham—I keep a lodging-house—the prisoner agreed with my husband, eight or ten months ago, to come and live there, but he never came—we left South-street in October 1859, and went to Ely-place, Holborn—we kept a place for the prisoner there, and removed his things to it, but he never occupied it—I went once to see him daring that time in Whitecross-street prison—he never paid me anything for rent—he was to board with me—I have let that room before at 12s. a week, but Mr. Brown intended to occupy only a bedroom.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you know that he was expected to come out of Whitecross-street very shortly? A. I heard my husband say so, and I expected him out daily for some time—I know that arrangements were being made for the payment of his debts—we made no secret of our move to Ely-place from South-street; we put a ticket on the house—a great many letters were sent to Mr. Brown, both at South-street and Ely-place—this one (produced) with the printed address was sent to both places—I heard my husoand say that Mr. Brown was one of the firm of Gilkison and Co.—things came from Liverpool direct to our house—I had seen him before the things came; my husband had known him for a little while before—he had not been acting for him; only selling a little on commission—he has taken orders for him—a circular was shown me, but I never saw it before.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. What were the things that came from Liverpool? A. A writing-desk, a parcel of papers, and a parcel of clothing—they came, perhaps, two or three months before we left South-street; that was in the beginning of October—I never saw the prisoner except in Whitecross-street prison.
BENJAMIN CONSTABLE . I am chief warder of Whitecross street prison—the prisoner was brought there in custody for debt, on 15th April—he was in custody under this warrant (produced) which is dated loth April, 1859, and also on two detainers, and I believe I saw him on that day—he remained in custody till removed to be tried here.
Cross-examined. Q. If the debts were discharged where would it be registered? A. At the Sheriffs office—I do not know whether he was actually discharged from two out of three of these debts—the amount of the warrant was 25l. 6s. 6d., and of the two detaniers the first was for 182l. 19s. 2d., and the second for 88l. 16s. 3d.—I know nothing of the case at the Sheriff's Court.
NATHANIEL EASTY . I am in the employment of Mr. Dimothy of Thames-street, a wharfinger—I at one time carried on business with Mr. John Nicholls, a ship and insurance broker; the prisoner was our managing clerk and book-keeper, at 150l. a year—he continued so up to April, 1858, when he left in debt.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know that he had been in partnership with Gilkison and Co.? A. Not of my own knowledge—when he came to our
firm he referred to Messrs. Stewart and Kerr of Liverpool, Mr. Dalgleish of the Commercial Bank at Liverpool, and I am not certain of the third firm, as we did not write to them—I never knew, except from hearsay, that he was a partner in the firm of Gilkison and Co.—I cannot say where I first heard of it—my impression is, that he did perhaps tell me that when he entered the firm—I believe he lived at 114, Faulkner-street, Liverpool—I received from him a circular after he left; it was something like this (produced), but I rather think this is fresh type; it is in substance like it—I received that when I was still at Liverpool—I do not know that it was sent by the prisoner—I know his writing—I did not notice the writing on the cover because it was torn off—I do not of my own knowledge know such a firm as Eccles of Glasgow—I believe he was in Liverpool after I received this circular—I do not know whether he had a place of business there, but his name was on the door at the Albany—Gilkison, Brown, and Co., or Gilkinson and Brown, but I was never there myself—that was, I believe, in 1857 or 1858; it was five or six months after the circular that I first saw the name on the door—I do not know how long it continued there—I do not know that it ever was there—I do not know that the name is erased now; it was there when I left Liverpool, in January—I have seen the name of John Liddle—I believe he collects rents for the Albany—I do not know Mr. Thomas Blaistel, the collector, or James Ireland—my oflice is in a different ward, and I know nothing at all about it.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Did he tell you whether Mr. Gilkison was alive or not? A. I do not remember, but I think not—(The Gazette was here put in, showing the sequestration of His estate of Gilkison and Brown, and stating thai the bankrupts proposed to the creditors a dividend of 3s. in the pound.)
MR. METCALEF to GEORGE MUNROE KERR. Q. Is not the amount 560l. altogether? A. I cannot say—the amount of the manifest is 649l., but in that is included the freight—of that amount, 649l. 1s. 5d. 550l. has been paid.
MR. METCALEF to MRS. WAKE. Q. Have you seen these letters (produced)? A. I have seen some similar to them—they were delivered at our place for the prisoner about ten months ago—during the whole of that time papers and documents of that description were arriving addressed to Gilkison, Brown and Co. from the time he first came—they were sent to the prisoner—no people came there, only letters; they came by post—I have one of the papers with me which was brought from Liverpool—this other paper was delivered by post for the prisoner. (MR. METCALFE proposed that these should be read, to which MR. GIFFARD objected, it not being shown that the prisoner had not posted them himself, and they were therefore withdrawn.)
MR. METCALFE called
HENRY ROXBY . I am a ship broker and export wine and beer merchant, of 40, Lime-street—I have known the prisoner twenty-three years, and have done business for him—in November 1858 I think he was trading under the name of Gilkison, Brown, and Co.—thia charter party was made out for him in that name; all of them.
Cross-examined by MR. GIFFARD. Q. Did you ever see those papers before which you have in your hand? A. Yes—they are copies of charter parties—one has my writing on it.
COURT. Q. Is this a contract you entered into for him? A. This is a copy of it, and is in the name of Gilkison, Brown, and Co.—I have known him twenty-three years—I knew him when he was trading with Gilkison and Brown—I think that firm failed, and I have heard that Mr. Gilkison was dead—I cannot say that I have heard that from the prisoner—I did not
know him after that trading under the name of Hugh, Brown, and Co.—it was in Liverpool that this transaction took place; he represented himself as being at the Albany in Liverpool at the time these contracts were executed—he was trading in London when he signed this chaster-party, but he never bad any office in London that I am aware of.
MR. METCALFE. Q. But he was known in London, and represented himself as carrying on business in Liverpool? A. Yes.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Were his vessels ever loaded? A. Yes; but I believe these contracts were never carried out.
MR. METCALFE. Q. But you have the bill of lading there? A. Yes; this is the bill of lading for the outward voyage—I never went down to Liverpool.
The Court considered that a case Of forgery was not made out.
NOT GUILTY . See New Court Wednesday.
NEW COURT—Tuesday, June 12th, 1860.
PRESENT.—Sir HENRY MUGGERIDGE, Knt., Ald.; Mr. Aid. ABBISS; and
MR. COMMON SERJEANT
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. ORRIDGE and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
SOPHIA HOLLAND . I am the wife of Thomas William Holland, who keeps the Travellers Friend at Hounslow. On 8th June the prisoner came with three women and one woman whom he called his wife—I served him a pot of beer, the price was 4d.—he gaye me a shilling in payment, I gave him a 6d. and 2d. in change—I thought the shilling was a bad one, and I laid it on the table, apart from other money—the prisoner and the women still remained in the tap-room, and after the prisoner and the women had gone into the tap-room, I gave the shilling to my servant to take to my husband iu the garden—about half an hour afterwards one of the women came out of the tap-room, the woman that the prisoner called his wife—she asked for half a quartern of gin—she gave me a shilling—I bent it on the counter, and the prisoner came out in an instant and took the shilling and broke it into four parts and threw it out of the front door and he gave me a sixpence to pay for the gin—I gave him 3 1/2 d. change—he said to the woman whom he called his wife, "Will you have a pot of beer V she said, "No"—he said, "Will you have a pint?"—and they had a pint and drank it—the prisoner paid me 2d. for it, and he went out at the front door—the women were left in the house, and one of them came and asked me to give her a pipe of tobacco—I said I could not.
Prisoner. When we went into the house I went right into the tap-room; one of the women called for a pot of porter, and you sent for two sixpences.
Witness. No I did not—I don't think you were in the house an hour and a half—I will not swear you were not there an hour.
Prisoner. Q. Were you not dressed in black that day and playing the bells? Witness. No; my young mistress was.
THOMAS WILLIAM HOLLAND . My servant brought me a shilling on 8th June; I gave her two sixpences for it—I did not notice that the shilling was bad—I put it in my pocket, where there was a half-crown, but no other
money—some time afterwards I saw the prisoner leave the house, and after that I examined the shilling and found it was bad—I followed the prisoner and gave him in custody—there were four women with him—the policeman took him to the station.
Prisoner. Q. Did you see me play the bells? Witness. There certainly was some one playing, and I took the stick away from them—I was not in the house five minutes before I came out after you.
THOMAS COLLINS (Police-sergeant 43 T). I took the prisoner in custody—I searched him, and found one 2s. piece, two shillings, ten sixpences, one id piece, one 3d. piece, and 1s. 1d. in coppers, all good money—I received this shilling from Mr. Holland—the prisoner told me he changed a half-sovereign on the race-course.
Prisoners Defence. I took down some scaffolding for persons to stand on, which was how I got so many sixpences; I saw a wagoner, and asked him to give me aud the young women a ride, and he did; we went to this house and stopped, and this young woman was playing the bells, and we were all dancing; we had three or four pots of beer. All I had was a pint of beer and a screw of tobacco. I never offered to pass anything away; all the money I had was what I got at the race-course. In the winter time I work at the gas-works. I have had no time, or T expected to have characters here.
GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Montlis.
The Witnesses did not appear.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. DICKIE conducted the Prosecution.
FREDERICK MARTYA TURNER . I am in the employ of Jonathan Crocker and another—I know the prisoner very well—he came to our house twice a day to take goods away—he was carter to Mr. Baker, the calenderer—he used to come about 4 o'clock in the afternoon, to take goods out, and brought them the next day about 1 o'clock—we were satisfied with his conduct till we found that he took away goods that it was not intended for him to take—I saw this piece of calico (looking at it) about two minutes before he came on 8th May, it was safe, it had been put there and marked. I saw the prisoner take it away—it was not one of the pieces he was to take—it was not put amongst the property that he had a right to take—it was put very near the pieces that he was to take—they were on the floor, and this piece was about three feet from them.
Cross-examined by MR. BEST. Q. Did you set the trap? A. No; I watched him—I saw this piece go—I did not stop him, because the policeman was outside to do it—I did not follow him out, I left it to the policeman altogether.
COURT. Q. How was the prisoner to know what he was to take? A. What he was to take were placed in a particular place—this piece was near to them—one of our men gave the prisoner the goods he was to take—that
man was not there when the prisoner took this, he was called away for the moment, and the prisoner took this with some others which he had not taken away before—this was not to be glazed—the prisoner could see me plainly.
WILLIAM COLLINS (Police-sergeant 4 P). On 8th May I was watching opposite Messrs. Crocker's warehouse in Watling-street—I saw the prisoner come up with a horse and cart for some goods—I saw him go inside and take away six or seven pieces which he had been ordered to take away, which he put into the cart—he then went back for six or seven more pieces, which he was to have taken, and at that time he took this piece off a pile by the side of thoso which he was taking away, and he put it in his cart with the others—he immediately drove away, and I followed him in a cab to Shoreditch—I saw him stop opposite the Bell public-house—he got out of the cart and looked about for a minute or two, and then he gave the boy that was with him some money to go and buy something, I did not know what, but afterwards I ascertained it was pies—in the meantime the prisoner tied this piece of furniture in this handkerchief—he took it into the bar of the public-house and gave it to the barman—I stepped in after him—I took hold of it and asked him what he had got there—he said something that he was going to take with him in the morning—I said" What is it?"—he looked at me very hard—I said, "Don't be alarmed, I am only a policeman"—he then opened it, and I saw this piece of print—I said, "I must take you in custody for stealing this from Mr. Crocker's warehouse, I saw you do it"—he said I could not have seen him do that—I said I did, and I saw him put it in the cart—he then went to the cart—I followed him home, and gave the cart to his masters—I then went to his own house and found some other goods—when I was there, he said, "I know I did wroug, I was going to take it back to-morrow morning"—I took him to the station and charged him.
Cross-examined. Q. As you were watching all the time and saw him come out with this calico, why did you not stop him? A. Because I thought he would make an excuse and say he took it by mistake—I was not far behind him when I was in the cab—sometimes I was very close—his cart was a covered cart—he was driving it—I pulled up when he pulled up—when I saw him stop I got out of the cab and walked up close to him—I saw him give the boy money, and saw him bring the pies back.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. DICKIE conducted ike Prosecution.
JOHN BAKER . I live at Clapton with my brother George—he is a calenderer—the prisoner was in his employ—we did not miss these pieces of calico, but the officer brought them back,—three or four pieces—I can't tell on what day; about a month ago—I recognise these as having been sent to glaze by my brother—they had been delivered to the prisoner to take home to a customer—these are Mr. Walter's, he is the only customer that will allow us to cut patterns off the pieces, and if these patterns are not delivered at the warehouse they would be missed—I made the mark of Mr. Walter on these pieces—here are four patterns, and here is the mark I put on them—they had been sent to my brother to be glazed—I delivered them into the cart, and the prisoner had charge of the cart—I have no doubt of these having been in our possession, and the prisoner had no right to have them in his possession at home—I never gave them to him as a present—I gave them to him to take back to the warehouse.
on 8th May; I found these pieces of calico there and some more—I said to him, "How came you by these?"—he said, "My master's brother gave them to me to make patch-work"—these have been in my possession ever since—I showed them to Mr. Baker on the 9th, and he identified them.
JOHN BAKER (re-examined). Q. Has the prisoner's master any other brother but you? A. No—I never gave these pieces to the prisoner for patch-work; nor any pieces like these—if any men ask for pieces to make patch-work of, I have always pieces to give them, but not patterns.
COURT. Q. You have done pieces of these patterns for Mr. Walter? A. Yes; and these were put in the prisoner's cart for him to deliver to Mr. Walter.
Cross-examined by MR. BEST. Q. You don't remember when these goods were in the warehouse? A. Yes, I do; I can't tell exactly the time when I saw them last—I don't know that there is any mark that I put upon them that will enable me to swear that they were in our possession—here is the mark "28" in figures, and that is the only firm that we cut patterns off.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT. Wednesday, June 18th, 1860.
PRESENT—The Right Hon. the LORD MAYOR; Mr. Justice Crompton; Sir John MUSGROVE, Bart. Ald.; and Sir Henry MUGGERIBDGE, Knt. Ald.
Before Mr. Jmtice Crompton.
532. RICHARD HANSFORD (26), was indicted for stealing whilst employed in the Post-Office, 2 letters, one containing a sovereign, the other, 2 sixpences, the property of Her Majesty's Post-master General.
MESSRS. CLEARK and METCALFE conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN GARDNER . I am one of the senior clerks at the General Post-Office—in consequence of complaints from the North Eastern district office, Bethnal-green-road, I directed a test letter to be made up on 28th May, addressed to Mr. J. Easton, 35, Forest-place, Leyton, Essex—it was directed in my presence by Mr. Clare—I enclosed in that letter a half-sovereigu aud an American two and a half dollar piece—I secured the envelope with adhesive matter, and then gave it to Mr. Clare, one of the inspectors of letter carriers, with instructions to post it the following morning—I had also given previous instructions to Mr. Reeves, the inspector of the North Eastern district office—if the letter was posted according to my directions to Mr. Clare, it would reach the North Eastern office at about twenty minutes past 5 in the morning—in consequence of some information, I went to the postoffice receiving house of the North Eastern district in Bethnal-green-road at about twenty minutes past 8 in the morning—the prisoner was brought to me there in a private room, I asked him if he was on duty at the North Eastern district office this morning, he said he was; I asked him what time he arrived there, he said, "About twenty minutes past 5"—I asked him if he knew anythiug of a money letter addressed to Leyton—he said he did not—I then directed the police officer Bingham, who was present, to search the prisoner, and from his left hand coat pocket inside, Bingham took the letter addressed to Mr. J. Easton—I said to the prisoner, "Why here is the letter I have been inquiring about, the officer has just taken it out of your pocket," and, I asked him how he accounted for its being there—he replied, "I do not know how it got there"—I then said, "You can't very
well have a letter in your pocket without knowing how it got there"—he said, "I put it there myself"—I said, "Where did you get it from?"—he made no reply—when he was brought into the private room he had some other letters in his hand, which he had not delivered—I asked him why he had not delivered each letter as I looked them out separately; that applied to all but the letter addressed to Woodford; that was not in his district, it was addressed to Master James Carter, Grove House, Woodford-green, Essex; this is it (produced)—I said to him, "Here is a letter addressed to Woodford-green, how do you account for its possession?"—he said, "I found it amongst my letters, I found both letters amongst my letters, and intended to have written upon them and sent or taken them back to the office"—I said, "But when you set your letters in, you must have seen these letters amongst them"—the prisoner replied that he did not set his letters in—setting them in means arranging them in order for delivery—I asked him, "Who did set the letters in?"—he replied, "Cheatham"—he is a letter carrier employed in the North Eastern office; the prisoner's walk was the Abbey-street walk, Bethnal-green, he had, nothing whatever to do with the Essex letters; if a letter was mis-sorted he had no right to take it out of the office at all—I opened the letter addressed to James Carter before the Magistrate; it contained two sixpences, they could be felt through the letter—I have not opened the other letter—(the witness here opened the letter) there are two coins here, a half-sovereign, and an American coin—I have not examined them—the post-mark is on the letter addressed to Carter, the date is 19th May, posted in the Eastern district on 28th, it would be dated on 29th; if it were posted late at night it would bear the stamp of the following morning—you could feel the money through both letters from the outside.
COURT. Q. You say he had nothing to do with the Essex letters in his delivery, had he anything to do with the sorting of those letters? A. Yes; they might pass through his hands in the sorting.
WILLIS CLARE . I am inspector of letter carriers at the General PostOffice. On 28th May, I addressed this letter to Mr. J. Easton, which has been produced by Gardner—I saw him enclose the money in the letter, he fastened it and gave it to me—I posted the letter at the General Poet-Offiee, about 5 o'clock on the morning of 29th, I put it in the letter-box—it would leave the General Post-Office to go to the North Eastern district, about a quarter past 5, the bag would arrive within ten minutes of the time of its despatch—I afterwards went with Gardner to the receiving office, when the prisoner came to have his card signed—when a letter carrier has finished his delivery he has his card signed, that we may know at what time he has finished his delivery—a letter posted at Bow addressed to Woodford-green, Essex, about 7 in the evening of 28th, would come in due course to the Geueral Post-Office, and it would go with the 5 o'clock despatch to the North Eastern district; that was the same despatch as this other letter went by—when the Essex letters get to the North Eastern district, they are put before the letter carriers to sort, and then they go in a cart to the Woodford and Leyton post-office.
RICHARD REEVES . I am the inspector of the North Eastern district office—the prisoner was employed as a letter sorter and letter carrier at that office—many others were employed on the morning of 29th in sorting letters besides the prisoner—I recollect the bag arriving with the letters from the General Post-Office, on that morning at about twenty-five minutes past 5—I think I opened the bag and took out the letters; among them I
found this letter, addressed to Mr. J. Easton, Forest-place, Leyton, Essex—I knew there would be such a letter—it was not loose in the bag; it was with two or three others—I put it into a bundle with some other letters and placed it before the prisoner; he did not touch the bundle—I cut the string and opened the bundle, and left the letters before him to sort; he sorted the letters—there are two boxes, one called the Hackney box and the other the Loughton box—they are placed before the sorter—the letter addressed to Leyton should have been put by the prisoner into the Loughton box—most likely among the bundle there would be letters for him to deliver on his own walk—he would sort them to another department for the town letters—the Loughton letters were tied up in bundles, put into a bag, sealed up, and sent from the office to Loughton in a mail cart—if letters have been sorted for the town delivery, they are set up by the carriers who have to deliver them—the prisoner's walk on this morning was Abbey-street walk—there were two other letter carriers at the office that morning who had to deliver letters upon that same walk; Cheatham and Gargrave—the letters for the town delivery are sorted for each walk, and the carriers who have to deliver them on a particular walk divide the letters between them—the prisoner left the office on this morning to deliver his letters at twenty-eight minutes after 7—I saw him running through the letters before he tied them up—that is not what we call setting them up: they would have been set up before that, but they all arrange them before they leave the office—Cheatham had set some of them in the first instance, and I expect the prisoner did some himself—when the prisoner had left I looked at the letters for Leyton, which were already tied up—after they are brought to the room they are thrown over to the different towns and villages—I looked to see if the letter for Mr. Easton was there; it was not there—I then made a communication to Mr. Gardner.
Prisoner. Q. Did you look over my letters to see if the letters were not there? A. No, I did not touch yours—I said I saw you look through the letters.
GEORGE CHEATHAM . I am a letter carrier at the North Eastern office—I am employed on the Abbey-street walk, the same as the prisoner—Gargrave is also employed on the same walk—the letters for the Abbey-street walk are all sorted together into one mass and then divided among the three carriers on the walk—Gargrave divided the first—each letter carrier takes a particular part of the walk, and the letters are separated according to the part of the walk that each carrier is going—after they are separated into three parcels they are then what we call set in; arranged in the order of delivery; usually each man does that for himself—if we are setting in the letters and find a mis-sorted letter not belonging to the walk, we put it in the right box—on the morning of the 29th I set in my own letters; I afterwards set in the first portion of the prisoner's letters, up to about ten minutes past 7—those would be the letters I would find there when I got to the office—I go on duty at a quarter to 7—all the letters were set in by me up to ten minutes past 7—somewhere about fifteen or sixteen were set in for my delivery that morning—these letters, one addressed to Leyton, and the other addressed to Woodford, were not among the letters I set in for the prisoner—if I had seen them I should have placed them in the Loughton box—after we have set in the letters we look at them again before we go out of the office—if we find a mis-sort then among the letters it would be taken out.
COURT to RICHARD REEVES. Q. When you untied the letters for the
prisoner to sort, and he began to sort them, what time was it? A. About 6 o'clock when I cut the bundle—that was after I had seen the letter amongst them.
THOMAS GARGRAVE . I am a letter carrier in the Abbey-street walk—On the morning of 29th May I separated the letters for the three letter carriers on that walk—I set in my own letters that morning—I commenced duty about half-past 6—we have sorting to do from half-past 6; it did not take me a quarter of an hour to set in my letters—I set in the letters that came in by half-past 6; it took about ten minutes.
COURT. Q. In those you separated did you see either of these letters? A. Neither of them, I am quite sure of that.
HERBERT CARTER . I live with my father and mother, in Langley-plaoe, East India-road—my brother is at school at Grove-house—I posted a letter to him on 28th May at Mr. Roby's post-office, near Bow Church, about a quarter to 7 in the evening—my mother gave it me to post—I saw her write the letter; she put two sixpences in the letter—I can read and write—this is the letter—my mother is ill—I have seen her write and know her writing—this is the letter, addressed to my brother at Grove-house.
HENRY BINGHAM . I am a police officer attached to the General PastOffice—I accompanied Mr. Gardner and Mr. Clare to the receiving-office in the Bethnal-green-road, on the morning of the 29th—I searched the prisoner by the direction of Mr. Gardner—I found a letter in his coat-pocket, inside in the lining of the flap of his coat—it was not an ordinary pocket; he must have had it made himself—it was this letter addressed to Mr. J. Easton, 35, Forest-place, Leyton, Essex—there was nothing else in the pocket—in his waistcoat-pocket I found half-a-sovereign and some silver.
COURT. Q. About this pocket; was it not in its usual place? A. No, it was cut through the lining in the flap of the coat, just at the corner.
Prisoner. Q. You say it is jjot the usual place? A. No, it is not the usual place; when the coats are issued out they are not so—I have seen them in the breast—he had the coat on before the Magistrate; it is not the one he has on now, it is a red coat.
Prisoner's Defence. I should like to call Mr. Impey, the post-office receiver in Bethnal-green-road, to prove that I had not time to finish my duty. (Mr. Impey was called but did not answer). Had I been allowed to finish my duty I should not have had either of those letters upon me. I was searched before I could finish my duty. I was about to write on them; if I had had time to finish my duty I should have done so. These two letters that are produced I solemnly swear I never saw till I got out; I then saw them and put that one in my pocket, with the intention of writing on it when I got back to the office. I solemnly swear I had no intention of stealing the letters.
GUILTY of stealing the test letter—Recommended to Mercy by the Jury. — Six Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. MCDONNELL conducted the Prosecution.
JOSEPH WINTER . I reside at Great James-street, Lisson-grove—I am a son of the deceased—I last saw him alive on Tuesday morning, 24th April—his health was very good then—he was fifty-four or fifty-five years old when he died, I cannot be sure which—I saw him again on the Thursday morning, about 8 o'clock, he was then dead.
White Lion public-house—I was standing by my stall—I saw the deceased and the prisoner fighting outside the public-house—I saw them fall down sideways; they got up, and one walked back one way, and the other walked back the other, and that is all I saw of it—I only saw one round fought.
COURT. Q. Were they fighting as if angrily, or playfully? A. What I saw was fighting, as if hostely to each other—I saw nothing in the least unfair.
EMMA BARNES . On the night of 24th April last I saw the prisoner strike Mr. Dixon as I was passing the Green Man—I do not know whether Dixon struck again; I did not see him strike—they were fighting—I saw them both fall down—they only fell once that I saw—I saw them both get up together—I did not see them then go into the public-house.
COURT. Q. You did not see where they went? A. No—I did not know the prisoner, I knew Dixon—I am sure the prisoner is the person that I saw—I do not know whether there, were many other people outside the public-house—they both fell down together—I saw Mr. Dixon's face bleeding—I could not tell whether it was his nose or his mouth—that was when they got up.
RICHARD THOMPSON . On the night of 24th April, I walked into the Green Man public-house—the prisoner and the deceased were there, they were sparring together—only the prisoner was sparring—he was sparring near Dixon—Dixon stood leaning his back against the partition; he did nothing; but he said to the prisoner "You can't fight, you never could"—the prisoner asked him to fight—Dixon said, "You never could fight"—they had a little bit of a bustle in the house and then went out—the prisoner struck at Dixon, missed his blow and fell backwards—he then got up and hit him in the bowels, and they both went down together—I am sure of that—he hit him with his fist, he did not kick him—this was on the footpath—they only fought one round—I did not take any notice of how they were as to liquor—after they had had the one round, I saw Dixon walk into the Green Man again—he walked in and sat down there—I went in after him and asked him if he was hurt; he did not make me any answer—he appeared to be hurt—he put his two arms like this, over his bowels—I did not take notice whether the prisoner was the worse for liquor—he did not seem so.
CHARLES WINN ROBINSON . I am a surgeon—I was called to the deceased on 26th April—I found him lying dead on his bed—I made a post-mortem examination—in my judgment the cause of death was inflammation of the bowels, from the contents of the bowel having poured into the abdominal cavity; it was the ilium that was ruptured—it was produced by external violence, there being no ulceration of the bowels to cause a rupture—there was no morbid appearance to account for it—it might be produced by a blow, any external violence sharply applied would do it—he appeared much more healthy than I expected to have found him, having known him some years.
COURT. Q. There was a wound at the back of the head as if from a fall, was there not? A. On the left brow; that was the only external mark—it was not a wound; it was a bruise; it was not through the skin at all, merely blackened—in my judgment it had nothing whatever to do with the death—I opened the head—the brain was healthy—in my judgment the death was entirely owing to the rupture of the bowel—it must have been from some external blow, because there was the appearance of it; not externally, but in the tissues below, the cellular membrane and the muscles
below the skin—I have not the slightest doubt that the death arose from violence applied to that part.
Prisoner's Defence. On the Tuesday this took place I was at work all day at Shepherd's Bush, and coming home I happened to go into the Green Man to have some refreshment; I stopped till half-past nine, I left work at halt-past 6. I was a little excited with speaking about this great fight between Sayers and the American; we were both excited with liquor; we got as far as to holding one another; we got to words and to blows, and I believe we got outside and hit one another; we had one round out there, but it was furthest from my intention to have words with him if he had not began; we were both partly the worse for liquor; this was on Tuesday. I worked all day on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, not knowing that any accident had taken place at all, and coming home on Saturday night at 4 o'clock I went into the same house again to get half a pint of ale, and the policeman was there, and apprehended me on the charge of killing this man. I passed and repassed the place night and morning, and I was not aware that there was anything the matter.
GUILTY.—Recommended to Mercy by the Jury. — Confined Three Weeks.
MR. LANGFORD conducted the Prosecution.
GEORGE ROBERT GIRKIN . I am a cooper of 41, Wellington-street, Bethnalgreen—On Saturday night, 2d June, I was at the Bricklayers Arms in Gloucester-street, Commercial-road, Whitechapel—just before 12 o'clock, before they closed the house, I came down stairs from the club room—I saw Breden standing in front of the bar—his brother came down after I had been down there, and Samuel Hilder—the prisoner came from the tap-room, or from the back of the house somewhere—he and Breden, the deceased, talked together—they were having a few words together—I could not understand the purport of the words—it appeared as if they were quarelling, and I heard the prisoner say, "I will not fight you now you are drunk, but when you are sober"—I did not hear the deceased say anything about hitting—I heard him say "Very well, I will fight when I am sober"—I saw them go outside the house—we all went out at one time, as the house was closed—after they got outside they had a few more words—they seemed to be wrangliug outside again, and Rawlins the constable came up and said to the deceased, "Serve you right if he hit you"—the deceased said, "Hit away"—a very short time after that McGrath struck him in the mouth, and the man fell down on his back on the pavement—his head struck the pavement—I and Mr. Hilder picked him up, and called the assistance of his brother to lend a hand to help him up—I felt to Bee what sort of injury he had received from the fall, and I felt a lump about the size of a Spanish nut—I called to the witness to come and examine it, and he felt the same as I did—the deceased never spoke but once or twice after that; all he said was "Oh, my head"—he did not speak while he was on the ground, it waswhen we had walked with him some distance; when we got as far as the back of the London Hospital—we took him there with the assistance of Mr. Hilder, and left him with his brother to take him home.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. The man had fallen down and got up, aud the prisoner put out his hand and shook hands with him directly afterwards didn't he? A. No; I did not see that—I can't say how long this wrangling had been going on in the public-house, because I had not been down stairs—I don't suppose the quarrel in the house occupied a
quarter of an hour—the deceased was a very quiet sort of man; what I knew of him—I scarcely could understood what he was saying when he was in a state of drink—he was not making much noise, he was so much in drink that I could hardly tell what he said—I did not see him fall previous to the blow being given—I saw them both go out of the public-house together—I had them in my view from the time they went out, till the time the blow was struck; all the time—it was on the pavement that the man fell—we took him arm in arm with us to the back of the hospital—whether he had stumbled and fallen before I do not know; he did not get any fall in the house while I was there—he walked as well as a drunken man would walk; after the fall he never spoke a word till we got to the back of the hospital.
HENRY BREDEN . I am the brother of the deceased; I saw him after he was down—I assisted the other witness to take him to the back of the London hospital—I then went with him to his own house, he walked without my aid afterwards—I called in Mr. Lowe, the surgeon, in the morning, and he attended him—I was with him till he died.
WILLIAM LOWE . I am a surgeon at Stepney-green—I attended the deceased on Sunday morning, 3d June, at his own house—he died about a quarter to 9 at night; the cause of death was a fracture at the back of the skull—that would be caused by a fall.
Cross-examined. Q. I believe you did not make a post-mortem examination of any of the organs except the head? A. No; because I found sufficient cause of death there—I found that the skull had actually been fractured and there was effusion of blood on the brain—it is possible although a man may receive an injury that would prove fatal, he might happen to die from some other cause—I found quite sufficient cause of death—it very seldom happens that a person recovers from a severe fracture of the skull—I have heard that the deceased was a person of intemperate habits—such persons frequently have a diseased state of the vessels of the heart.
MR. LANGFORD. Q. Did you find effusion of blood on the brain? A. I did—before death there was a swelling at the back of the head—the fracture began at the right parietal bone and extended completely across to the left—I think it very improbable that a man would live after such an effusion and such a. fracture—I have not the slightest doubt about that being the cause of his death, and finding sufficient cause, I did not proceed further with my examination.
COURT. Q. Would a blow of that kind prevent a person speaking? A. Before the effusion came on they might speak; he was perfectly insensible while I saw him.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Was this a simple or a compound fracture? A. A simple fracture—it was not a communated fracture; it simply divided the bone—it would be popularly described as a mere crack—I found the effusion under the parietal bone on the dura mater, between the cranium and the dura mater—I am not a fellow of the College of Surgeons, I am a member of the Apothecary's Company, and a doctor of medicine of the University of Giessen.
HENRY BREDER (re-examined). My brother was not sensible after I took him home—he appeared to me as though he was in a state of liquor; he did not speak, he remained insensible till he died—I was with him almost all the time.
GUILTY.—Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury. One Month.
MR. M. J. O'CONNELL conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM CLARK (Policeman, R 265). On the night of 30th April, or the morning of 1st May, I was on duty in the Exhibition-road, Kensington, about quarter past 12 o'clock—I saw a number of persons there, I think about thirty—I saw the prisoner; he was in his shirt sleeves—I also saw another man in his shirt sleeves with him—the deceased was sitting down against the fence, and there were two, three, or four persons about him, or there might be more—I had previously passed them, and they were then trying to get him home—when I found him sitting down near the fence, I made some inquiry, put him in a cab, and took him to Dr. Christian and then to the station, where Dr. Christian's assistant came to see him; the deceased was then dead; I think he died before I got him to the station—in consequence of information, I afterwards went to No. 8, New-road, Chelsea, that same day—I found the prisoner there in bed—I told him he must consider himself in custody for killing one Thomas Weller—he said, "Have I killed him?"—as I was taking him to the station, he said the fight was not his own seeking, the deceased had been bothering him for several days; he had met him on the Saturday night previous and he wanted to fight then, but he, the prisoner, would not fight, and the deceased was determined to have it out on this night, and they went to the Exhibition-road to fight—after the charge was made against him at the station he said it was not his own fight, it was the deceased's own seeking—he said the quarrel had occurred at the Queen and Prince Albert public-house, Knightsbridge, on the Saturday night previous—I took the body of the deceased to the Chelsea workhouse.
Cross-examined by MR. M'DONNELL. Q. Did he tell you that he had continually refused to fight? A. Yes, he said the deceased had dragged him down from the public-house into the passage, and that he was obliged to protect himself.
MR. O'CONNELL. Q. Where is the passage he referred to? A. The passage leading from the barracks into the park—the fight occurred about ten minutes' walk from that passage.
THOMAS DALLING . I am watchman to Mr. Freak, a builder—on the 30th April, about 12 o'clock, I was at the comer of Princes Gate—I heard a noise down the road and went to see what it was—I saw the prisoner and the deceased fighting; the prisoner was stripped to his shirt, the deceased had got his waistcoat on; but his coat was off—I should say there were nine or ten persons present—I told them they had better give over; they did not, they continued fighting—it was exactly four minutes past 12 when the last blow was struck; at the last round they met each other, and the deceased fell and the prisoner fell upon him; to the best of my belief the last blow was struck under the ear of the deceased, but I cannot positively swear—I saw the prisoner strike him somewhere about the face; after the deceased fell he laid there till he was picked up; he never moved—he was taken up by two men and taken about 200 yards down the road, and they placed him in a sitting position against the fence.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you see every round that was fought? A. No; I only saw the last three rounds—as far as I saw it was a fair stand-up fight; at the last round they met each other—they seemed to strike each
other at the same time—I don't mean that the hands of one struck the hands of the other, but their hands were in a hostile position—the deceased in making his blow struck rather on one side and missed the prisoner, but the prisoner's blow told—the deceased was a bigger man than the prisoner in every way.
MR. O'CONNELL. Q. I suppose the light was not very strong? A. It was a beautiful moonlight night, and one side of the road was lighted with gas.
JOHN SCOTT . I am a labourer, and live at 5, Cavendish-street, Chelsea—On the night of 30th April I was near the new Horticultural gardens, employed watching there—I saw some men come down the road, the prisoner was one of them; another one was with him and there were two or three more behind—I saw the prisoner and the other man strip, and they fought for about a quarter of an hour, or a little better—I don't think there was above five or six rounds—I saw some blows given by them—at the last round the prisoner hit the deceased at the side of his head, and caught him as he was falling—they both fell; I can't say who was uppermost—the deceased never got up again—a policeman came up soon afterwards.
Cross-examined. Q. From all you saw was it a fair stand-up fight? A. Yes; all I heard said was, one said to the other, "This is fair enough"—I can't say who it was—I did not know either of them before.
COURT. Q. Did the prisoner take off his clothes of his own accord? A. They both did.
EDWARD EAGER . I was at the Queen and Prince Albert public-house, at Knightsbridge, on 30th April—there was some singing going on there—I heard no quarrel between the deceased and the prisoner—after leaving the room I followed them to the bottom of Park-place; and on getting down the prisoner put out his hand and asked the deceased to shake hands—that was before they made it up to go and fight, about twenty paces from the public house—the prisoner wanted to shake hands, he did not want to have any row whatever—the deceased put out his right hand and said, "No, I would rather fight to-night," and then walked towards Kensington—the prisoner did not wish to fight, I know, but the deceased would not leave him an inch, he never left him at all—I went with them—the deceased had got his coat off before I got up to them, and was rolling up his shirt sleeves—I had known him before—he lived in our house from two years of age—his name was Thomas Weller—I saw them'fight.
Cross-examined. Q. You say the prisoner offered to make it up and wanted to shake hands? A. Yes; he said it was foolishness going to fight—the deceased would not leave him an inch—I did not see him do anything to the prisoner; he only kept shoulder to shoulder with him—I did not hear the prisoner say, "Why should we quarrel? we have been like two brothers."
Cross-examined. Q. Did you hear the deceased say anything to the prisoner as to settling the fight? A. No; not in the house—when I came out to shut the shutters I heard a loud talking at the bottom of Park-place, and when I got there the deceased said to the prisoner, "Now to settle this affair"—the prisoner said, "Shake hands and make it up, I want no more to say about it," and he held out his hand—the deceased said, no, he would not, he would fight to-night—nothing further was said—the prisoner went on towards Exhibition-road with a friend of his—the deceased took him by the hand and said, "No, come on, I will fight to-night."
JAMES STANLEY CHRISTIAN . I am a physician and surgeon, living at No. 1, Ovington-terrace, Brompton—On Tuesday, 1st May, I went to the Chelsea Workhouse and examined the body of the deceased, he appeared to have been dead twelve or twenty hours—I found several external bruises on his knuckles and face, and a jagged cut on the back of his head—it was a large wound—there was a swelling nearly as big as a lady's fist under the left ear—I opened his head and found a ruptured vein in connexion with that swelling under the left ear, just where the vein enters the brain—I found a quantity of blood effused on the base of the brain at the left side—I examined the whole of the body generally; the rest of the body was healthy—I believed he died from pressure of the effused blood on the brain; I have no doubt of it—that might have been caused by some direct external violence applied directly behind the vein—the swelling was such as might have been caused by the blow of the fist—there was nothing else to account for death—the jagged wound behind was a severe one, bub there was no internal injury of the brain from that, and I do not believe it had any connexion with his death.
Cross-examined. Q. Were the muscles thin? A. They were; he was a large framed man, but his muscles and his whole system was relaxed and flabby—his heart was flabby.
GUILTY, under strong provocation, — Confined One Week.
MANLEY PLEADED GUILTY
MR. LILLEY conducted the Prosecution.
EDWARD BOODLE . I am comptroller and secretary to the savings-bank in St. Martin's-place—I produce a deposit account from which it appears that 20l. was deposited in our savings-bank in April, 1843, in the name of Joseph Henry Manley, a minor—according to the course of business, if anybody comes to receive interest or principal, it is necessary that he should he identified—in the case of a minor, when an account is opened we take the signature of the parent or guardian, who is always required to identify the parties when they come to take out the money; whether it be principal or interest—on 2d June I saw both the prisoners at my office—the female prisoner said she came to withdraw the interest on the account—it amounted to 3l. 7s. 6d.—I inquired of her whether the male prisoner was her son, she said he was—as he did not appear to be a minor, I inquired what his age was—he said it was either 23 or 24; I forget which—I said in that case he would be master of his own account, and I struck out the word "minor"—the female said she did not want to take the principal, only the interest—I then sent them into the other office to the chief cashier, to receive the money, and to make his signature in our books, in order that we might not have to refer to the mother oil any future occasion—the last time any interest was paid upon this account was on 4th December, 1854—the female prisoner had originally placed the money in the name of her son—there were six children, and she brought all the six children to put in 20l. each—it was money standing in the name of her husband, and she took out administration to his effects, and received 180l.—I know nothing of the male prisoner, we relied entirely on the female to identify him.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. The money invested was the property of the woman? A. Yes; she deposited it—the male prisoner was afterwards brought back to my office by the cashier, and he admitted at once
that he was not her son, but he said it was her money, and that it was all right—he said he never dreamed of assisting in any fraud, that he did it at the request of Mr. Manley, and believed he was doing no wrong.
MR. LILLEY. Q. When that was said had the prisoners been brought from the cashier's room to yours? A. The male prisoner had, but I did not allow the female to leave my room—I found there was something wrong from what I heard from the cashier.
THOMAS NASH SKALLOW . I am chief cashier of the savings-bank in St. Martin's-place—On the morning of 2d June the two prisoners were brought into my office by Mr. Boodle—the name of Joseph Henry Manley was called out by me, and the male prisoner answered—I wrote this receipt (produced) and laid it before the prisoner—I told him to write his name on this line, and he signed it, "Jophis Henry Manley"—seeing that he had spelt the name wrongly I asked him to sign his name again, which he did, spelling both "Joseph" and "Henry" wrong—the female prisoner was alongside of himall that time—a conversation then took place between the prisoners—one of them said that on the last occasion of a re-payment the male prisoner signed his name, and the other said he did not, but which said which I cannot say—the female prisoner then said that the re-payment was made at a certain part of the office where I was quite certain it was not, from our regulations—I then requested them to go into Mr. Boodle's private office, and told him I thought we had not the right man in this case—he requested the female to leave the room, and then asked the male prisoner if he was the son of the female prisoner—he said, "Oh! it is all right; it isthe woman's money; I have done it before."
Cross-examined. Q. Did he tell you that she had requested him to do it, and that he did not know he was doing any wrong, as she had told him that her son was dead? A. No; I did not hear that said—she said at the police-court that her son had gone to India.
WILLIAM GORDON (Policeman, A 336). I apprehended the female prisoner on 2d June—the male prisoner was brought to the station by another constable the same day—the charge was read to him by the Inspector, and he said that the woman had told him to do it, and he had done it before about seven years ago.
Cross-examined. Q. What did the woman say? A. She said the money was hers, and she had a right to it as it belonged to her step-son, Joseph Henry Manley—I asked her where he was, and she stated at first that he was in the country; she afterwards said that he was in India—she said nothing in my presence about his being dead.
EATON— GUILTY The prisoners both entered into recognisanses to appear and receive judgment if called upon.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, June 13th, 1860.
PRESENT.—Mr. RECORDER; Mr. Aid. ALLEN; Mr. Aid. CONDER; and Mr. Aid. ABBISS
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. METCALFE conducted the Prosecution.
near Windsor—on Saturday, 26th May, I received this box (produced) from the South Western Railway Company—it was addressed to our house—I gave it to Charlotte Ryde to take it up to Mr. Monsell—the address is, "The Mother Superior, House of Mercy, Clewer, near Windsor."
MARIA BENSLEY . I live at the House of Mercy at Clewer—I wait on Mr. Monsell, the Lady Superior there—I found this box in the bedroom, and took it to Mr. Monsll's sitting-room and opened it—I found that it contained the body of a female child—there was a piece of newspaper and ft piece of brown paper on the top—then there were two cloths and an apron, and then the child—the child was wrapped in a cloth also—I found on one of the pieces of paper the name of Mirehouse—I gave all the things to the inspector.
THOMAS STEER (Police Inspector, B). In consequence of information, I went to 60, Upper Seymour-street, on 28th May, last—Mr. Mirehouse lives there—I found the prisoner living there as cook and housekeeper—I asked her if her name was Sarah Gough—she replied, "Yes"—I then said that I had received information that she had been recently delivered of a child, which child had been found at Clewer, in Berks—she hesitated for some little time and then said, "This is most extraordinary"; you are quite right; I hope you are not going to take me away to night"—I then suggested that some of the other servants who had cleaned the room should be called up—she said, "You need not do anything of the kind; there is no one knows anything of it but myself"—I then asked to see her boxes—she said they were up stairs in her bedroom—I then accompanied her to the bedroom, with the Inspector of the Berks police and the butler—when I got into the room I asked her if any one else slept there or occupied the room but herself—she said, "No,"—I saw several boxes in the room—I asked her if they were her's—she said they were—I then searched them—I found in a cupboard a cotton dress partly saturated with blood; I also found several napkins with blood on them—she then said that she wished to speak with me alone—I asked the others to withdraw; after they left the room she said, "I wish to tell you all about it: the poor little dear was bom alive about twenty minutes to 6 on Wednesday last; I saw it move after I came back into the room; I was absent from the room about twenty minutes; I tell you candidly it just moved, and I wrapped it up in a cloth, and not one soul but myself knew anything about it: I was taken suddenly ill, and in about twenty minutes the poor little dear was born; it was born on the 23d; I had a cab the following day, and took it to the Gloucester coffee-house, OxfordStreet, and booked it to the place"—the place, I suppose, where it was found—I took down this statement of her's to refresh my memory, and I asked her if she had any objection to sign it—she did so—it was voluntary on her part.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Is "Brownsley" on one of the pieces of paper that were found in the box? A. Yes—that is the country address of Mr. Mirehouse.
JOHN WEARINGR . I am butler in the service of Mr. Mirohouse; the prisoner was in his service—on Friday, 25th May, in the afternoon, I saw the prisoner leave the house—she had a small box of this description with
her—there was a direction sewn on it—I did not read the direction—she said nothing at all about it.
GUILTY.—Recommended to Mercy by the Jury. — Confined One Month.
MR. GENT conducted the Prosecution.
GEORGE FREDRICK MOLINEUX (City-policeman). On 4th June, about 6 o'clock in the evening, I was on the premises of Mr. Vonder Heyde, a wholesale tobacconist in Thames-street—I saw the prisoner there—he was in Mr. Vonder Heyde's employment—he took a parcel from underneath the counter—he gave it to a boy to take to a public-house next door, to be left till called for—I was in the shop at this time, in plain clothes; I could hear what was said—I saw the prisoner go out of the warehouse about 7 o'clock, or a little after—I was at the public-house door then—he went into the public-house and got the parcel—directly he saw me he walked iu at the private bar of the public-house—in there I asked him what he had got in that parcel—he said, "A pound and a half of tobacco"—I asked him whether he had got an invoice for it—he said, "No"—I told him that I was a detective officer—I asked him whether it was entered in the book—he said, "No"—I asked him whether Mr. Vonder Heyde was aware that he took the tobacco—he said, "Yes"—I asked him where he was going to take it to—he said to a friend of his named Scrivener at Mile-end—he said it was for a friend of Mr. Scrivener's, that he was in the habit of supplying his friend with tobacco and charging him wholesale price for it—he wanted me to accompany him to Mile-end; I declined to go—I took him to the station, where he was searched—on him were found twelve cigars and a case (produced), 6s. 8d. in money, four coins, and a fusee box—I went to his lodgings; I found there this tobacco, and this snuff-box—there is a pound and a half of the tobacco.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Was this tin-foil round it? A. Yes; just as it is—it was not wrapped up in paper, it was loose in a box—the pound and a half of tobacco was wrapped up in one parcel—it came from underneath the counter—the prisoner was standing behind the counter—I do not know the boy; I should know him if I could see him—he was not in Mr. Vonder Heyde's employment—I followed him into the public-house, but not to where he was living; I did not inquire who he was—at first I thought he was in Mr. Vonder Heyde's employ, and that I could pick him out again—I have not endeavoured to find him since—I believe the boy was not known at the public-house—I asked there.
MR. GENT. Q. When you saw the boy go into the public-house, where did you go to? A. I stopped in the public-house till about five minutes past 7, and then I stood at the door—I could still see the parcel, and then I saw the prisoner come out of the warehouse.
JURY. Q. Is there any address on any of those parcels? A. No.
JOHN JAMES VONDER HEYDE . I am a wholesale tobacco manufacturer in Lower Thames-street, City—the prisoner was foreman and shopman in my employment—I have looked at this tobacco—to the best of my belief it is mine—I have similar tobacco in my shop—this snuff-box is my property—the prisoner had no right to remove any of those articles from my premises without making an entry of themvthere is no entry made of this—I have not got my book here—I only knew from the policeman, of the prisoner
taking these goods out—the tobacco and box are worth about 10s.—he had no right to sell to private friends.
Cross-examined. Q. Then he had the right to take them out if he entered them? A. If there had been an order to a customer in the usual course of business, he would have taken them out, and have made the entry—he is a salesman—I do not know that he sometimes takes goods out for sale to people, besides those he serves in the shop—he has to account to me for so much tobacco or so much money—I have had no opportunity of seeing him after the policeman communicated with me—it is an impossibility to tell whether he has taken it out of the bulk or not—we make him responsible for the contents of the drawer—we judge by his returns whether they are correct or not—the bulk is in the warehouse—if the prisoner had wanted anything of the sort he would have put in the book the quantity that he required, and showed that to another man who would have signed his initials to the bookvthe drawer contained four or five or half a dozen pounds—it will hold as much as twelve if it is filled—it is not always full—I do not put it in myself—the cutter puts in what the prisoner orders—supposing the prisoner wished for twelve pounds in the drawer, there is room for it; he could put it in, and then it would be entered against him, and he would have to account for so much, or so much money—if he wanted it from the store he would have to apply to the man who supplies it to him—there are several men about the place who give it out from the store—there is the cutter, and another man, and the boy—the prisoner might, by applying to one of them, get it from the store, and it would be entered in his book—he enters it, and the man who supplies it, puts his initials as having supplied it—I have not any book here—the prisoner has been with me, I think, about three years and a half—about from 14l. to 20l. in money would pass through his hands in the course of a week—he has filled the same place there the whole time—he is a counter man; to attend to the counter department, which is the ready money part.
MR. GENT. Q. Do you call one and a half pounds a wholesale or retail quantity? A. Wholesale—it ought to have been entered in the book—a pound and over ought to be entered—the drawer is for retail—I was present when the conversation with the officer took place.
JURY. Q. When parcels are sent out from your warehouse do they have the address of the customers written outside? A. They ought to have—this is not entered in the book—I did not find anything of that description—the drawer is behind the counter.
COURT. Q. At which end? A. The tobacco was at the right end of the counter—I had a very good character with the prisoner; he has been all his life in the trade—he came from Currie's in the same business.
COURT to GEORGE FREDRICK MOLINEUX. Q. Where abouts did he take it from the counter? A. About the centre—he took it out in a parcel; not loose.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
GEORGE POWLES . I am a hosier of 44, Fleet-street—on 21st May, about half-past 5 o'clock, the prisoners came together to my shop—Kelly asked for some pocket handkerchiefs—I got a pile of ten or twelve pieces, and placed them not before them, but near them on the counter—I opened seven or eight pieces and threw them on the counter—Kelly opened a piece on the top of those which I had opened, and complained that it felt stiff and harsh, and was very much pressed—she asked if I had nothing better—Rose was about three feet from her, and had a child suckling—I told Kelly we had handkerchiefs hemmed and washed, and she could tell better what they were—she asked me to lot her see them, and while I partly turned round to get the paper down, I saw a move of Kelly's arm, and when I turned round I missed a piece of light coloured silk-handkerchief; the only light piece that I had left before them—I took no notice of that, but showed her the others—she took no notice of them, but said she would have one off a piece which was opened, and I cut one off the piece—she gave me 5s. to pay for it, and I had to give her 6d.—before I gave her change I cleared the other handkerchiefs from the counter, and I said, "I miss a piece of light coloured handkerchief, one of you must have got it, which is it?"—Kelly rose from her seat and said she was surprised at the charge—I reached over the counter and looked over in hopes of seeing the piece, but there was none—Kelly was then standing away from the counter—I told them I was positive I had lost it, and I said, "One of you must have it"—they both declared their innocence, and said I might search them—I said, "I can't do that, but I will send for a policeman"—I said to one of my assistants. "Go fetch a policeman"—Kelly was then standing; I said, "You had better sit down," and she took her seat again—the policeman arrived, and Kelly again rose from her seat and said, "I have not got them, you may search me"—I wanted to recognise what pattern it was I missed, and I stepped to the other counter where I had lain the other to see which pattern it was—the policeman came towards me away from the prisoners, he spoke to me, and in the meantime Kose had got up from her seat and took the seat where Kelly had been sitting—the chair must have been moved about six feet away—on turning round Rose was sitting down, and I pointed to the officer and said, "There is the piece of handkerchief I have lost"—it was then on Rose's dress aud rolled up; it was partly on her dress and partly against the counter—it had before been spread out three-quarters of a yard long—the policeman took the handkerchief, and I gave the prisoners in charge—this is the piece of handkerchief—it cost me 1l. 6s. 6d.
GEORGE HILL (City-policeman, 315). I was called to the prosecutor's shop on 21st May, just before 6 o'clock—I saw the prisoners sitting on chairs before the counter—I told them they were charged with stealing silk handkerchief—I looked, but could see nothing—I walked past them to speak to the prosecutor, and after I passed them I saw the child move—I spoke to the prosecutor and then went and took this piece of handkerchief; it was standing between the chair and the counter, and partly resting on Rose's dress and partly on the ground—I had passed near the spot before and looked all around—I am sure if the piece of handkerchief had been there I should have seen it—the prisoners were given in charge.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Did the prisoners move while youwere there? A. Yes—I looked round and saw where I picked the handkerchief up—Kelly rose from that place, and I looked there—when I assed up the shop they changed seats—Kelly rose and got up and sit down again.
Cross-examined by MR. THOMPSON. Q. The shop is at the corner of Mitre-court?
A. Yes—it is not a large shop—there are goods on chairs on the other side—there are chairs on one side and the counter on the other.
Rose received a good character.
ROSE— NOT GUILTY
Kelly was furtlier charged with having been before convicted.
FRANCES PEGRAM . I am female warder at the House of Correction—I jroduce a certificate of conviction—Read: ("Central Criminal Court, January, 1855. Mary Ann Neal, convicted of stealing printed cotton and other articles; having been previously convicted. Sentenced to Four Years' Penal Servitude.")—the prisoner is the person.
COURT. Q. When did she come out of prison? A. In January, 1859.
Kelly received a good character.
GUILTY.— Confined Six Months.
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM SMITH (City-policeman, 572). On the morning of 23d May, I was watching Mr. Mann's shop; I saw Gough come to the front of the shop and he stood in front of it about two or three minutes—there were two or three customers in the shop, and after they were served and had left the shop, Whyman came to the door and beckoned Gough in—Whyman went on the other side of the counter, stooped down and produced this basket with something in it; he handed it to Gough, who instantly left the shop and went towards Little Britain—I followed him—he crossed to the other side of the way and went back again—at that moment Whyman came out of the prosecutor's shop and crossed Aldersgate-street and went to a public-house—I stopped Gough and asked him what he had there—he said, "Some meat"—I said I was an officer, aud said, "You brought this from Mr. Mann's shop?"—he said he did—I said, "What did you pay for it?"—he said, "5s. 3d."—I said, "You did not"—he said, "I did, I paid him two half-crowns and a 3d. piece"—I asked him the weight of it; he said ho did not know, he received it from Mr. Mann's foreman—he repeated many times in going to the station that he gave 5s. 3d. for it, and when at the station he again repeated it—I weighed the meat, it weighed 14 lbs. and three quarters—it was a piece of salt beef—I took Gongh to the station—I then went back to Mr. Mann's shop, I saw Whyman alone in the shop—I asked to see Mr. Mann, and then I asked Whyman what money he had taken, and he said, "That is all the money," pointing to about 1s. 3d. that laid on the desk—I paid, "Is that all you have taken?"—he said it was—I said, "Have you sold any salt beef?"—he hesitated and said, "Yes; but the man did not pay for it"—he said, "I will show you all the money I have got about me," and pulled out a 6d. and 2d.—I took him to the station on a charge of stealing the meat—he was asked by the Inspector what was the weight of the meat, and he said, "18lbs. and three quarters, at 7 1/2 d. a pound, 11s. 9d"—I searched him and found 1s. 6d. more in his waistcoat pocket, which he said he had forgotten to tell me of.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Did you see this clearly? A. Yes; I was exactly opposite—I was in the Welsh chapel, at the gallery window on the first floor, and was right opposite the shop—it was about 20 minutes before 7 o'clock—it was about 5 minutes past 7 when I had the conversation with Whyman—I had seen that this meat was not paid for—when I asked Gough whether he had paid for it, it was not to lay a trap, but to hear his
statement, to test whether he told the truth; not because I had the slightest doubt—I asked Whyman the question for the same reason, to hear his statement—he hesitated, I suppose for a minute—he said he had sold the meat, but the man had not paid for it—there were two other persons in the shop when Gough stood on the pavement.
Cross-examined by MR. THOMPSON. Q. Did you know Gough as a milkman? A. I only know it by his own statement—Whyman went behind the counter—it is a butcher's shop, the counter is on the right-hand side—there were two large windows in front and a door in the centre—Whyman came out, and went in the public-house at the corner of Jewin-street—I took Gough to the station—I did not take him and confront him with Whyman.
CHARLES MANN I am a butcher, and live at 159, Aldersgate-street—Whyman was in my employ—I don't know Gough at all—I saw the piece of beef which was produced by the officer, it was mine—Whyman was authorised to sell meat, but not without the money—he had no right to sell meat on trust to strangers: certainly not.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Do you know that Gough has a milk-walk? A. I never knew the man before—I know from what I have heard that he has lately bought a milk-walk—Whyman had to come to me to know if he was to sell meat on credit, if it were not to a customer that I was in the habit of trusting—I get up about half-past 5 o'clock—I was in Leadenhall-market that morning—the books are kept on the desk—Mr. Maun makes the entries if am not there; if I am, I make them—if Whyman sold meat before Mr. Mann came down, he would make a mark of it, but not enter it—my wife came down that morning while the officer was there—Whyman had been with me about two years; I had a character with him from a butcher in Claphara-road—I can't recollect how long he had been with him.
The prisoners' statements before the Magistrate were here read as follows:
Whyman says, "All that I have got to say is that he was going to call to pay for it during the morning." Gough says, "I was afraid I had not money to pay for it—I offered him part of the money and promised to call aod pay the rest; he refused to take any, and said I had better pay the whole together."
WHYMAN— GUILTY .— Confined Eighteen Month.
GOUGH— GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.
NOT GUILTY . Set Page 246.
MR. PLATT conducted the Prosecution.
JOSEPH NASH . I am a painter, and live at Manchester-terrace in the Isle of Dogs—on 28th May I was out late—I had been in conversation with a woman about 2 o'clock in the morning; before I spoke to her I had 17s. 2d. in my. pocket—she was talking to me about five minutes; when she left me I had not seen anything of the prisoner—I met him at the corner of the court where the woman lives, but that was not till after the woman bad left me—when she left me, I had lost all my money but 7 1/2 d.—that was before I saw the prisoner—I am sure I had 7d. when the woman left me—I looked at it, and I had 7 1/2 d. and I had a watch-guard safe when she left me; it was German silver—it was loose in my pocket—it was not three minutes after the woman was gone
that I saw this prisoner; he had a female with him, and he was charging her with robbing him—I was standing at the bottom of this court, and I said to him, "Never mind about what you have lost, I have lost more"—we got into conversation—he was lighting his pipe, and I asked him for a light for my pipe, and he gave me one—there were two or three more in company with him; two of them got behind me, and they garrotted me—the prisoner came in front of me—there was only him in front that I can identify—I don't think there was any other in front of me, there were two behind me—they got their thumbs in my neck, and throttled me, and they took from me the chain and the money that I had left—I can't say which man it was who took it out of my pocket—there was light enough to enable me to see that the prisoner was one of the men; I am certain of it—I had been drinking a little, but very little—I knew what I was about.
Prisoner. Q. You said you were robbed by a woman? A. Yes; but I know what I had afterwards—I said you were one of the men.
COURT. Q. Were you drunk? A. No; I was not drunk; I had been drinking—I had only been in one public-house—I suppose I had been there an hour or more.
HENRY KING (Policeman, B 249). About 2 'o'clock in the morning of 29th May, I saw the prisoner and the prosecutor at the corner of Duck-lane, Westminster—I heard the prosecutor ask him for a light—when I got down Pye-street I saw four persons running; the prisoner was one of them—they were running from the spot where I had seen the prosecutor and the prisoner before.
JAMES ELLENS (Policeman, B 192). About that time I saw four persons running, but I was not near enough to see whether the prisoner was one of them—I afterwards saw the prosecutor lying on his back at the corner of Duck-lane—he had been drinking but could stand, and he knew perfectly well what he was about.
WILLIAM ASHLEY (Police-sergeant, B 20). From some information I stopped the prisoner between 3 and 4 o'clock that morning with some other men in Dean-street—while there, the prosecutor came up; he walked quite well and seemed sober—when he came up, he identified the prisoner immediately, and told me that that was the man that had throttled him—the prisoner said it was not true and he was innocent—I searched him but found nothing on him.
Prisoner. Q. You asked him if he could identify me and he could not? A. I have no recollection of that.
GUILTY . He was further charged with having been before convicted.
WILLIAM MILLERMAN . I produce a certificate of the prisoner's former conviction—(Read; "Central Criminal Court, February, 1846. William Dixon, convicted of stealing goods of Samuel Cooper. Transported for Seven Years.")—the prisoner is the person, he was in my custody—since then he had twelve months for misdemeanor in 1856—he has been in the army since, and drummed out—he is one of the worst characters we have in Westminster.
GUILTY.— Six Years' Penal Servitude.
THIRD COURT. Wednesday, June 13th, 1860.
PRESENT—Mr. Ald. ABBISS and MR. COMMON SERJEANCT
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
544. WILLIAM COUSINS (29), WILLIAM THOMPSON (28), GEORGE SMITH (27), Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of John Samuels, at St. Pancras, with intent to steal; also breaking and entering the shop of Charles Wright, with intent to steal; to both of which they all
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months each.
545. WILLIAM MCKENZIE FORBES (15) , Embezzling the sums of 10s. 4d., 3s. 8d. and 1s. 11d. which he had received on account of Elizabeth Margaret Orchard and another, his mistresses; to which he PLEADED GUILTY; and was recommended to mercy by the prosecutrix, he being an orphan — One Month at Holloway, and Three Years in a Reformatory.
RICHARD COX (Policeman, N 53). I produce two certificates of marriage, (Read:)—"Hamilton, (Scotland), 3d September, 1844. Robert Brown and Margaret Chennells have been regularly proclaimed to be married bv me, before the witnesses Alexander Laing and John Charlesley, Signed—John Taylor M'Farlane"—"St. Bartholomew's Church, Moor-lane—Robert Watnough Fletcher and Elizabeth Darby married by banns, May 3d, 1857"—I received information which induced me to go after the prisoner, and on 8th May went with his wife to 6, Two Brewers'-court, Golden-lane, and inquired of the second wife, if Mr. Fletcher lived there—she said, "Yes;" T asked to see him, and saw the prisoner, who said that his name was Fletcher—I said that I was an officer, and wanted him on a charge of bigamy—he said, "What, bigamy! who has preferred that charge against me?" I said that it was his former wife who he had married in Scotland—he seemed very much confused, and said, "It is too true, and I suppose I must submit"—he said to his second wife that I was going to take him away on a charge of bigamy, that he had married another woman in Scotland some years previous to his knowing her, and he wished her, the second wife, to forgive him—I took him to the station and he gave his proper name, Robert Brown.
ELIZABETH DARBY . I was married to the prisoner on May 3d, 1857, at St. Bartholomew's, Little Moorfields—I had known him nine years; we were living togother before we were married, and I afterwards persuaded him to marry me—I never heard him speak about his wife, I thought he was a bachelor—I have had six children by him—he lived with me and supported me and the children—during the whole of that time I never saw any wife and did not know of his visiting anybody—he is a cooper—I became acquainted with him in London.
JOHN TAYLOR M'FARLANE . I am minister of Brandon-street Presbyterian Church, Hamilton, North Britain—on 4th October, 1844,1 celebrated the marriage mentioned in this certificate, in conformity with the laws of Scotland, but not in a Church; all marriages in Scotland are celebrated in private houses—I appended a religious ceremony to it—the prisoner is the man—I saw him frequently for several years after his marriage—he lived with his wife—I have lost sight of him for the last ten or twelve years—I have no doubt of his being the man—they had two children as far as I recollect—I saw his wife alive last Monday morning, I knew her.
Prisoner's Defence. I was married in 1844, in Scotland, and after living with my wife three years adverse circumstances separated us; I went to sea as captain of a sailing vessel and returned in 1849, when I communicated with my wife's family repeatedly but had no reply, though my address was
given in tihe letter. I did not think then that she was dead, but thought they would not correspond with a mined and penniless man. I afterwards heard from two of my fellow townsmen that she was dead, and afterwards married my present wife. I intreat you to believe that I had no guilty knowledge: fifteen year elapsed between the first and the second marriage. I had no motive or inducement to break the law, as Elizabeth Darby had no money or property, she being only a domestic servant; neither could it be for the purpose of possessing her person, for I had already lived with her, as my wife, previous to marriage: my only aim in doing so arose from her sense of the disgraceful way in which we were living. I have been five weeks in prison and have five children who have no bread winner but myself.
COURT to RICHARD COX. Q. How did you come to see the first wife? A. She came from Scotland on purpose to prosecute the prisoner.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. ORRIDGE condueted the Prosecution.
ALFRED GREEN (City Policeman, 376). On 11th June I was on duty in the Poultry, between 11 and 12 o'clock, and met Wilson coming towards the Mansion-house—a lady was walking just in front of me; Wilson looked at her dress, turned round suddenly and followed her through the Poultry towards Cheapeide—she went to her right side, pressed close against her, and left her—in a few minutes she was joined by Thorn, and they both went up Cheapside—(MR. SLEIGH here stated that Wilson wished to plead guilty)—they passed up and down Cheapside several times—Wilson went on one side of several ladies and left them, and then they spoke together and went away again; they then went into St. Pauls-church-yard together, and Wilson went to Mr. Williams' right side—I saw Wilson's shawl project on this side, she pressed up against her for a second and Thorn was close to her—I was not above a yard from her—they then suddenly left the lady, and both walked together towards Ludgate-hill—I followed them; they got about 100 yards from where I left Mr. Williams, and I saw them walking together looking at a purse which was open in Wilson's hand—I heard them say something, but could not tell what—I stepped in front and took the purse from Wilson's hand, saying, "What have you got here?"—she said, "Oh, I have just picked it up"—I said, "No, you have not picked it up, you have picked the lady's pocket"—Thorn said, "Dear me, I do not know anything of the young woman, I was merely asking her the way"—I said, "But I have been watching you"—I then went to the lady—the purse contained a cheque for 30l—I found on Wilson a sovereign and 6 1/2 d. but nothing on Thorn.
MARY WILLIAMS . I am staying at 8, Beaumont-Street, Marylebone—this purse and cheque are mine, they were safe in my pocket when I left home—it was a very deep pocket under the flounce and could not be seen.
Thorn's statement before the Magistrate was here read as follows:—"I have nothing to say, only I never saw the other one before."
GUILTY .— Confined Six Months each.
FRANCIS LLOYD . I am house surgeon to St. Bartholomew's—Mary M'Gettigen was brought there on the afternoon of 15th May with two cuts, one on the back of her left hand, injuring one of the leaders, and the other on the forefinger, dividing the leader in that situation, and opening the joint—it was a clean cut, and might have been done with some sharp cutting instrument; a knife would have done it—she will probably have a stiff finger for a considerable time, even if it eventually gets well—there were two severe bruises on the side of the head, one just behind the ear and another higher up, and there was a slight cut by the side of the neck, which, if it had been deeper, would probably have divided the jugular vein, but it was quite superficial; it was a clean scratch—she is still an outpatient.
Prisoner. Q. Would not a piece of china cut that finger instead of a knife? A. No; a piece of sharp glass might—a china saucer would not do it.
WILLIAM ROWLAND (City-policeman, 247). I took the prisoner on 16th May, on a warrant—I told him I wanted him for assaulting his wife, and cutting and wounding her with intent to do her grievous bodily harm—he said nothing; he was drunk—a few minutes afterwards his wife came out and began to quarrel about something which had occurred some little while before, about his living with another woman—I took him to the station and searched him, but found nothing—I do not know where the woman is, I have tried to find her—he was not so drunk as not to understand what I said; he could walk—he quarrelled with his wife as if he understood what she said.
Prisoner's Defence. The woman has been in the habit of drinking a good deal lately; she had me arrested and I was sent to Holloway for a month's imprisonment: when I came out I went to ask where she had applied for relief. I would not live with her as she was addicted to drink. I went to her and she caught hold of my coat and tore it and, said that I wanted to bring w—s into the place. She struck me with a child's saucer and it broke in two, and her finger caught in it; if she was here she would tell you the same.
GUILTY, of a common assault. — Confined Two Months.
EMILY DOWDING . I am the prisoner's sister—I was present in 1854, at St. Jude, Bethnal-green, when he was married to Sophia Gower—he lived with her up to last September—she is still alive, and is here.
REV. ALFRED MORRISH . I am curate of All Saints, Rotherhithe—I produce the marriage certificate book of 18th September last—I married the parties who were married that day; I could not swear to the prisoner, but I can swear that the man who wrote the name here I married to Mary Ann O'Callaghan—I saw the bridegroom sign this.
Prisoner. Q. What reason have you to say that is my writing? A. I should know it from a thousand—you last wrote to me in May, 1858, and I have not seen your writing since—I will swear to these letters that are disconnected—I will swear to the R. and the D.
Q. Then you swear to two letters out of fourteen? A. I can swear it is your writing; I have often seen you write—I cannot say whether I have seen your writing more than three times in seven years.
WILLIAM HORTON (Policeman, 373 K). I took the prisoner on 26th May—I said, "You understand what you are charged with?"—he said, "Yes"—his wife, who was with me, charged him—I said, "Then you do not deny it?"—he said, "No; I do not deny it"—on the way to the station he said, that he felt very uneasy in his mind, and he should be glad when the job was over—he said, "What punishment do you think I shall get?"—I said, "I cannot tell."
Prisoner. I asked you what they gave for bigamy now. I did not say what should I get, because that would be owning the bigamy.
Witness. You said, "What punishment do you think I shall get?"
Prisoner's Defence. There is very little evidence against me except my sister's, who has not seen my writing for two years, and very little for seven years, when she was a mere child; and now she can only swear to two letters in fourteen.
GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
MR. ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN GALE . I am a dressing-case manufacturer of Siae-lane—on 16th April the prisoner called and selected a despatch-box; the invoice was to be made out in the name of Boucher, and sent to Metcalfe, Musgrave and Co. of Goldsmith-street—the price was 7l. 10s.—I had known those gentlemen some years, and had no hesitation in sending it, which I did with a receipted invoice, directed the porter to leave the box and bring back the money—I heard these directions given by my young man Bottomley to his brother, who is my porter—he brought back the invoice but not the money—this is the box (produced)—it is quite new.
Prisoner. Q. Did you speak to me at all? A. I did not—this case was not dismissed by the Lord Mayor, he committed it, and we were bound over to appear here.
THOMAS BOTTOMLEY . I am in Messrs. Gale's service—I recollect the prisoner coming there for the despatch-box—he gave the name of Boucher, and ordered it to be sent to Metcalfe and Co., 9, Goldsmith-street, about four o'clock, as the gentleman it was for was going to leave town—we knew that to be a respectable house, and I sent it by my brother with a receipted invoice—he was to be paid for it and bring the money back—the prisoner said nothing about the payment, but we expected it as it was a cash transaction.
Prisoner. Q. Did not I say my name was Boucher? A. No; I understood that you gave me the name of Boucher, of Messrs. Metcalfe, Musgrave, and Co., of 9, Goldsmith-street—they are calico and stuff merchants.
JOSEPH BOTTOMLEY . I took this despatch-box to Goldsmith-street, and saw the prisoner and another man—the other man took it and opened it, looked at it and said, "I do not know anything about it, you had better take it back"—the prisoner said, "No, there is no occasion to do that, you may as well leave it"—I told him that I was to have the money for it, and then the other one said, "Mr. Metcalfe is not in"—I asked him when he would be in—he said, "In about half an hour"—I left the box and brought the invoice away.
Prisoner. Q. Have you ever seen the other man since? A. Not that I know of—I had never seen him before—I do not know that he was Messrs. Metcalfe's London agent—I said that the box was for Mr. Boucher; I did not say I would leave the box until after the prisoner said that I had better do so.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. When you mentioned that it was for Mr. Boucher must the prisoner have heard it? A. Yes; he was not two yards from me.
HENRY ROBERT ELLIS . I am assistant to Henry Harrison, a pawnbroker in Aldersgate Street—on 17th April the prisoner brought this box and asked for 2l. upon it, which I lent him—he gave his address, John Taylor, 10, Sloane Street, and went away—he afterwards came and wanted a declaration as he had lost the duplicate—he then gave his name George Taylor, 14, Sloane Street—I gave him the form; we are bound by Act of Parliament to do so.
JOHN METCALFE . I live in Manchester and have an office in Goldsmith-street, Cheapside—there was a person named Wood there, but he has absconded since this affair—he had no authority to let the prisoner go there—I never gave him authority to order a despatch-box for me—I never saw the prisoner before till he was brought before the Lord Mayor.
Prisoner. Q. Was Mr. Wood your London agent? A. He was our salesman; if I knew that he permitted anybody to come on the premises but his own servant I should have immediately discharged him—I do not know that you left a bill for 25l. with him on Sunday—I am not aware that he asked you to call on Messrs. Wilson of Cheapside, and get two letters—I know there is a Mr. Wood, a respectable bookseller of Cheapside—I know Caldecott's—Mr. Wood has had no right to buy goods and give references on our behalf.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. I suppose it is quite possible that Mr. Wood did give him leave to send anything there? A. Quite.
Prisoner's Defence. I purchased the box for myself, and asked them to send it to Mr. Metcalfe's office, as Mr. Metcalfe's name was on the door. The young man called two or three times next day to see that it was all right; he did not complain that the box had been obtained in an improper manner.
JOSEPH BOTTOMLEY (re-examined). I called next morning about one o'clock and said that I had called for the box I left last night—the prisoner said, "Mr. Metcalfe is not in," and told me to call next day—I did so and he was not there.
Prisoner. They are wrong in the dates; it may not necessarily have been on the 16th.
GUILTY .**— Confined Eighteen Months.
MR. HORRY conducted the Prosecution.
ALEXANDER JACK . I am a warehouseman to John Richard Morley and others, of Cheapside—on 22d May the prisoner brought this order, "One silk umbrella, green; one black, and small and light; one dozen merino vests, from 36 to 48, long sleeves, for Brie and Co., 43, Conduit Street, Regent Street"—I looked out two umbrellas and said, "Black we do not keep at all"—he said, "Brown will do"—I took them down to the entering room where Mayston was, and entered Brie's name in the book kept for that purpose—the prisoner signed this book (produced) but I did not see him—I left the order in his hands to go to the other department.
Cross-examined by MR. DICKIE. Q. You never saw him write? A. No; I entered the name of the person giving the order and afterwards found this written.
RALPH REED . I am warehouseman to Messrs. Morley—on 22d May the prisoner came to my department with this order in his hand—I looked out the vests—he gave me the name of Brie and Co., and I wrote it down—I took the slip of paper I wrote into the entering room, and left it with Mr. Mayston with the vests.
JOSHUA MAYSTON . I am warehouseman to Messrs. Morley—on the 22d May the prisoner came to my department and caused the goods in this order to be entered in the entering room—when the buyer of goods takes them away he signs for them—I did not see this "Froescblen" signed—I directed the goods to be given to the prisoner, and caused them to be entered and tied up by the packer—I saw the prisoner at the counter waiting for them, but did not see them in his possession—the packer is not here.
COURT. Q. Did you see this order in tho prisoner's hand? A. I did not; it was brought from the department to me.
CHARLES SCHOFIELD . I am assistant to Messrs. Brie and Co., of Conduit-street, Regent Street—the prisoner was in their employment for a short time in December, 1859—he left on the 24th December—this document is his writing, I know it Perfectly well—I have seen him write frequently in the employ of the firm—he had not the slightest authority to make such an order—this signature is also his.
Cross-examined. Q. What was the prisoner? A. He came there on trial as a cutter—he was not a clerk—I was in the counting-house to see that he did his duty—I know that he had no authority to do this because he had left the employ at the time—there is a partner here to speak to that, Mr. Browne—I have seen the prisoner write more than 20 times, I swear that is his writing.
MR. HORRY. Q. Was Mr. Browne in your employ at anytime? A. Yes, I do not know that he has left—he was there the whole time the prisoner was in the employ of the firm—he was there, but I do not know what his connexion with the business was.
MR. DICKLE. Q. Was Mr. Browne a partner? A. Yes; I have always said so, but I do not know whether he has a connexion with the firm now; he was a partner I am positive—he shared the profits and the losses—there are about 90 people in the establishment—the business is a shirt maker's—there are a great many women employed on the premises.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
There toas another indictment against the prisoner.
MR. TAYLOR conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM HENRY CHILD . I am a brush maker, of Providence-row, Finsbury—on 12th December the prisoner came and said he wanted some brushes to show to a friend who was going to open a shop at Brighton; and wished me to send him some samples—he said, "Send them round to 3, James-street, Old-street, my place of business"—that is not very far from my place—he said, "My name is Imiss, and I am a wholesale milliner"—two days afterwards I sent him round fifty-nine brushes as samples, the value of which was about 3l. 10s., by my foreman, Thomas Wilson—the prisoner called on me about three days afterwards and said, "Mr. Child, I
have brought you an order for fourteen dozen brushes, but you omitted to send any clothes brushes, and I want some samples to show my friend; I am going down to Brighton to-morrow morning"—I selected twelve, and be took them away with him—he said he should return in a few days, and would bring the samples back with a further order—he did not do so, and I did not see him again till he was at the police-court, about 17th December—none of the goods have been returned.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. You did not supply the 14 dozen? A. No; I sent the others without any inquiry at all; not with the hope of driving a brisk trade at Brighton—the custom of the trade is either to return the brushes, or send to say that they will be kept—the ordinary practice is to pay for the samples if the parties wish to keep them—I sent them to 3, James-street.
THOMAS WILSON . I am in Mr. Child's employ—on 14th December I, took a parcel containing 59 brushes, to 3, James-street—I packed them up myself—this memorandum (produced) was made of them and put outside the parcel—I delivered them to Agnes Smith—I saw the prisoner when he called at my master's; he is the same person.
AGNES SMITH . In December last I was living with the prisoner at 3, James-street, under the name of Imiss—I received a parcel from Wilson and delivered it to a boy who used to carry out boxes in the millinery line, to take away—the boy was not in our service, but he used to run on errands occasionally—I delivered them to him, as I had a message to send the parcel back to Mr. Child—it is such a long time ago, seven or eight months, that I forget it—after leaving there, the prisoner and I lived in Ray-street, under the name of Hawkins—he carried on business in the Birmingham line.
Cross-examined. Q. Had he carried on the millinery business at James-street? A. Yes—I believe he has been separated from his wife some time—she is a violent woman, and he took the name of Imiss to prevent her from following him—I gave the boy instructions to take the brushes back to Mr. Child.
MR. TAYLOR. Q. Have not you called at Mr. Child's shop yourself after the brushes were delivered? A. Before I sent them back I did—I was sent there with a message about them—it was a few days after they were sent—I cannot say that it was after that that I gave them to the boy.
COURT. Q. I understood you to say, that you called after they were delivered and before they were returned? A. I cannot say, because it is so long ago.
THOMAS GURLING . I am beadle of St. Luke's parish—I apprehended the prisoner on another charge, at 10, Ray-street, Clerkenwell, where he was living in the name of T. and S. Hawkins—I had had a warrant against him since December for leaving his wife and family—he was carrying on a Birmingham and Sheffield warehouse—there was a difficulty in apprehending him, he got on to the roof of the house.
MR. METCALFE contended that there was no case of stealing, as the articles were sent on approval, on sale or return, and that the prisoner was therefore entitled to keep them if he chose. MR. TAYLOR submitted that possession of the goods was obtained by a trick, that the prosecutor did not actually part with the goods, and that the intention of the prisoner in obtaining them was a question for the Jury. MR. METCALFE further contended that if the witness Smith was to be believed the property was sent back; that if she was not to be believed, tlte prisoner had made his election and kept the property, and either way there
was no case to go to the Jury. The Court considered that the prosecutor had parted with his property without having made proper inquiries, and therefore that he could not indict for felony.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. COOPER for the Prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
554. JOHN ORMSTON (24), and JOHN LLOYD (23) , breaking and entering the shop of John Draper, at St. Stephen's, Coleman-street, and stealing therein 10 pairs of boots, 1 pair of shoes, 20 lbs. of leather, and other articles, value 9l. 10s. and money to the amount of 5s. 1d., his property.
THOMAS JACKSON (City-policeman, 169). On 31st May, I was on doty in Leatherseller's-buildings, about half-past 5 in the morning.—I passed the prosecutor's shop, heard an unusual noise inside, put my hand against the door, and asked who was there—one of the prisoners answered from inside, "It is all right, we have come to work"—I said, "Open the door"—they did not do soz—I put my hand against it and pushed it a little open, so that I could see in a little—I saw Ormston sitting on a shoemaker's stool, and Lloyd standing behind the door—I could just see his boot—he had got his fiat against the door—I saw that it was he when I got in—I asked him to open the door again—I then heard one say to the other, "He thinks we are thieves, surely"—I got in and asked them who gave them authority to pome up—Dunston said, "It is all right; a man has been and let us in with a key"—I then sent for Mr. Draper, and took the prisoners to the station—I pulled Lloyd's boots off, and a half-crown dropped out of his trousers—there was no marks of violence on the door, it was only locked.
JOHN DRAPER . I am a shoemaker—on 30th May at half-past 8 o'clock in the evening, I left my shop safe—I was the last person there—I locked the door from outside and took the key with me—the window was fastened with outside shutters which have a screw inside, which had not been catched—the door had been unlocked somehow—there was no violence—I do not know the prisoners—I never gave them authority to go there—I saw some of my boobs and shoes, in a sack, which did not belong to me and some leather and tools—I missed two half-crowns and a penny from a little drawer which was not locked.
Ormston's Defence. The door was open when we went in.
Lloyd's Defence. I saw a man come out a little the worse for liquor, and I fell in against the door; I was not in there three minutes before the policeman came, and as to his having to force open the door it ia false; directly he asked me to open it I did so.
Ormston wad further charged with having been before convicted.
HENRY GREATHURST (Policeman, G 209.) I produce a certificate, (Read: "Central Criminal Court; John Lovetrue, convicted of burglary; August, 1858. Confined Six Months.")—I was present, Ormston is the person.
Ormston. That is true.
ORMSTON—GUILTY.**— Six Years' Penal Servitude.
LLOYD—GUILTY.— Confined Twelve Months.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, June 14th, 1860.
PRESENT—The Rt. Hon. the LORD MAYOR; Mr. BARON BRAMWELL; Sir HENRY MUGGERIDGE, Knt. Ald; Mr. Ald. ALLEN; Mr. Ald. CONDER; and Mr. Ald. ABBISS.
Before Mr. Baron Bramwell.
555. HENRY FRANCIS RICHARDSON (49), was indicted for feloniously embezzling and stealing, on 19th August, 1859, the sum of 10l. 10s. which he had received on account of His Royal Highness George William Frederick Charles Duke of Cambridge, to whom he was clerk and servant. Second Count, describing himself as clerk and servant to George Montague Hicks. Third Count, as clerk and servant to the Lord Mayor and others. Other Counts, for embezzling the sums of 3l. 3s., and 11l. 11s. as such servant; and other Counts, describing him as a bailee of the money, and fraudulently converting the same to his own use.
MESSRS. GIFFARD and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN ENTWISTLE . I am a merchant living in the city of London—On 19th August last, I paid to a person, who signed a receipt in my presence, the sum of ten guineas—this (produced) is the receipt which that person gave me.
WILLIAM ANDERSON ROSE, ESQ., ALDERMAN . I am acquainted with the prisoner's handwriting—this is his signature to this receipt—(read: "19th August, 1859; London Rifle Brigade. Received of John Entwistle, Esq., the sum of ten guineas. H. F. Richardson.")
Cross-examined by MR. GIBBONS. Q. Did you afterwards see your donation advertised jn the newspaper? A. I saw it. (MR. GIFFARD objected to the statement of the contents of a document not produced.)
ALEXANDER FROST . I am an engraver of Bouverie-street, Fleet-street—On 18th October last, I paid the prisoner three guineas to become an honorary member of the London Rifle Brigade—I asked him for a receipt, and he said the receipts were not ready, but I should have due notice when they would be ready; and that it would be a grand affair.
WILLIAM SCOTT . I am managing clerk to Mr. John Cosgrave Simms—On 14th December, I paid a cheque of eleven guineas at the head-quarters of the London Rifle Brigade—that was ten guineas as a donation and one guinea as the admission fee—I paid it with this cheque (produced)—it has been returned as having been cashed.
Cross-examined. Q. When did you pay it? A. On 14th December; the day it is dated—I paid it to Mr. Jeffreys—I have seen Mr. Richardson at the office; I cannot say whether he was there when I paid the money to Mr. Jeffreys—Jeffreys gave me a receipt for it.
WILLIAM BRADLEY . I am clerk to Messrs. Fuller and Co., bankers, Lombard-street—I paid this cheque with a 10l. Bank of England note, No. 35,700, dated 20th October, and 1l. 11s. in coin—this (produced) is the note I gave; I paid it over the counter—I do not remember the person who presented the cheque.
FRANCES KIRBY . I am the wife of Joseph Kirby, a bricklayer—I have acted as charwoman at the prisoner's house; he lived at Kilbura—I remember being at his house about Christmas last—I do not remember his giving me a 10l. note to be changed; I remember fetching the remainder of the change, but I did not take the note—I did not see the 10l. note with Mr. Richardson; I fetched the change—Mr. Bowen said I took the note, but I do not believe I did—Mr. Richardson told me to fetch the remainder of the change one morning; the change for this 10l. note—he told me to go to Mr. Bowen the tea-grocer's to fetch it—I did go and get it; it was to have been 30s. but he had not sufficient by 1s. 6d.; Mr. Bowen gave me the 30s. all but 1s. 6d.—I brought it back, laid it on the table, and asked Mr. Richardson to count it, which he did—I did not go back next day and fetch the 1s. 6d.; to the best of my recollection that was had out in goods next day—I do not remember taking the 10l. note; I am not certain, but I do not remember it.
Cross-examined. Q. Who is Mr. Bowen? A. A tea-grocer where Mr. Richardson deals; almost next door—he had changed the note.
JOHN BOWEN . I am a grocer at Priory-place, Kilburn—the prisoner dealt with me in December last—I received a bank-note from the charwoman, I believe, the last witness, but I cannot swear it; it was for change—I gave the change, not all on one day—I believe there was 30s. to be given to make up the change, and then 1s. 6d.—I paid that 10l. note in to the London and Westminster Bank—that was the only one that I paid in at that time.
Cross-examined. Q. I believe Mr. Richardson dealt with you all the time he lived there? A. Yes—I believe that was the first note I ever changed for him.
EDWARD STEVENS . I am a clerk of the Marylebone branch of the London and Westminster Bank—this 10l. note was paid, in to the account of Mr. Bowen, on 28th December, 1859, and was by me paid into the Bank of England.
MR. ALDERMAN ROSE (re-examined). I am an Alderman of this city—at the time in question I was Vice-President of the Council of the London Rifle Brigade—I was also Chairman of the Finance Committee, and generally audited the accounts—from about July last year until the end of February this year the prisoner acted as Secretary to the brigade—in that capacity he received monies and accounted for them to me—in the ordinary course of business as soon as the money was received it ought to be paid in to the Bank of England—an account had been opened there in the names of certain members of the Council—that observation would apply to cheques, they ought not to be cashed but paid in to the account—I have been through the books with reference to this matter, that is to say, the accountants have, and upon the information they have pointed out to me in the books, I am in a condition to speak—the accountants are here—a donation of ten guineas would be entered by itself as a separate sum in the banker's pass-book, in the ordinary course of business—there is no entry on 19th August, 1859, of Mr. John Entwistle's donation, nor on any day a week before or a week after the 19th, in fact there is no such entry—I can refresh my memory by this book (referring to the pass-book)—this is the banker's book; the bankers would keep it—our cash-book would be kept by Jeffreys—the pass-book was examined by me from time to time; here are my initials in it—the prisoner handed it to me—there is no entry of three guineas paid by Mr. Alexander Frost, on 18th October, nor of eleven guineas paid on 15th December—when I audited the accounts with the prisoner
from time to time, he showed me the cash-book as well as the banker's book—I have been through the cash-book; there is no entry there of either of these three sums—this (prodticed) is the cash-book—I objected to the prisoner that the cash-book was a mere copy of the banker's pass-book, and his reply was that every transaction appeared in the banker's book, and therefore a copy of that must be a correct account of the financial state of the brigade.
Cross-examined. Q. When did you first become acquainted with Mr. Richardson? A. I think about August last year—it was not on the occasion of his calling upon me to ask if I would support Colonel Hicks as a candidate for the office of Governor of Whitecross-street—the first time I saw Mr. Richardson was in reference to the formation of the London Rifle Brigade; that would be about August or the latter end of July—I can't charge my memory exactly; it was some time in last summer—he called upon me suggesting that I should become Colonel of the brigade—he was, no doubt, the first to suggest to me my joining the brigade, he and Colonel Hicks—he was instrumental in getting up the brigade; I will not say he was mainly instrumental, but he was instrumental; he and Colonel Hicks were the two parties that called on me in the first instance—as to getting it up, I think I got it up as much as anybody, I think I did the majority of the work—I was, no doubt, very much assisted at the outset by Mr. Richardson and Colonel Hicks, and by the public—I had known nothing at all of him previous to that—after I joined the brigade I was Vice-President of the Council; I was made Vice-President at a public meeting—there was a resolution to that effect—Richardson was present at that meeting—I do not feel that he made me Vice-President; there was a public meeting called at the Guildhall: at that public meeting certain resolutions were passed, among others that the Lord Mayor, for the time being, should be President, and that I should be Vice-President, and certain gentlemen were named to be on the Council; and that was the origin of the London Rifle Brigade—I am not aware that there was any resolution appointing Richardson to be Secretary: you will find his appointment in the minutes of the Council—there was a special minute appointing him acting Secretary pro tem with a commission of five per cent, on monies collected, which commission was to be arranged and determined by the Finance Committee, of which I was chairman—the five per cent, commission was to be upon sums collected by Mr. Richardson—there were large sums collected by individual exertions—that was to be his mode of payment; whether he was entitled upon particular sums, was to be determined by the Council, and there was a special minute to that effect—this is the minute first appointing him Secretary (referring to the minute book), it is under the date of 3d August—(Reads:) "A discussion ensued as to the office of Secretary—Mr. Richardson was requested to act as Secretary pro tem.—"It was unanimously resolved that Mr. Richardson be empowered to collect donations and subscriptions for this brigade, and that he be allowed a commission of five percent on all monies he has obtained or may obtain, and that should any question arise in reference to his commission account it be referred to the Finance Committee"—This is the resolution appointing me to the Finance Committee—"It was unanimously resolved that the next meeting of the Council take place at the Mansion House, on Wednesday next, at three o'clock precisely"—the date of this is 6th July, and then at the next meeting of the Council, "That the Finance Committee consist of Sir Francis Doyle, Bart., Mr. Alderman Carter, and Mr. Alderman Rose"—I dare say there is a resolution appointing trustees; I will endeavour to find
it—(Mr. Giffard stated that there was no resolution nominating trustees, as such)—I know there was a resolution appointing trustees for the Crystal Palace agreement, and I had an idea there was one for that purpose—as an active member of the brigade, if there had been a resolution appointing trustees I should have known it, but these matters are very Voluminous, and I should not like to charge my memory without referring to the books; as Mr. Giffard informs me he has, and that there is no such resolution, of course that will save me the trouble of informing my mind of it—this little book (looking at one produced by Mr. Gibbons) contains the original rules of the brigade—I believe it was published by our authority, but I should explain that those rules have been very much altered, and the authorised rules were only passed on the 16th of last month, but originally these rules were given out to the brigade—I do not know of my own knowledge that the prisoner is a member of the brigade besides being Secretary; he may be, but I do not know it—I took upon myself the duty of auditing the accounts—there are 1,500 members—I cannot charge my memory about the feet whether the prisoner paid his three guinea subscription as an honorary member, it may be so, I do not know it (looking at a paper); this paper indicates that he has paid his three guineas, and that he was a member of the corps; this is the first time I knew of the fact—this paper is evidence of the fact that he was a volunteer as well as myself—I never saw a document of that kind before in connexion with any other member of the brigade; I see it is signed by the Lord Mayor—I was chairman of the Finance Committee—I undertook, as my duty, to audit the accounts; I audited them personally.
Q. How did you audit them? A. I had Mr. Richardson in the office and I had this book—I can give you the date when I first audited them—the first signature of mine here is 21st September—I cannot tell who was present then, I have no means of refreshing my memory, except that I was there because I find my signature: I have only that to guide me, I cannot charge my memory—the next occasion that I can speak to by reference to this book is 14th November—I can't say that that was the second occasion upon which I audited the accounts, it is the second occasion that I can speak positively to as to date—there would be a weekly audit, but this has my signature—I cannot tell who was present then, I only know I was there—I cannot say who was present on the next occasion, I can only say that I made the audit, because here is my signature, and here is my memorandum of the digest of the account in the book—it was very seldom that anybody else attended, I mostly had to do it all myself—Mr. Richardson and Jeffreys were always present, I am very clear about that—Richardson was at his desk, and Jeffreys, who was a clerk brought into the office by Richardson, was called in with this cash-book, the banker's book, and the vouchers, and upon that I made my audit, such as it was—I did not go through the accounts with Jeffreys, but with Richardson, Jeffreys being the man that wrote the papers under the direction of Richardson—Richardson took the part of explaining the accounts and producing the vouchers—the actual carrying of the books was done by Jeffreys, but the explanation was done by Richardson—the whole of this book is in Jeffreys' handwriting: all the entries are made by him—I am not speaking of all the audits—the first audit is in Richardson's handwriting, signed by me: that is to say the materials of the audit are put in and signed by me; all the audits after that are in my own handwriting completely, in red ink, showing the details of the explanation of the account—none of these
entries in this book are made by Richardson as far as—I can see, except the digest of 14th November; the book is made up by Jeffreys.
COURT. A. The original entries in the book that you had to audit are all in Jeffreys' handwriting; is that so? A. Yes; Jeffreys being a clerk put there by Richardson without any authority from the Council—he was paid by the Council, but he was engaged by Richardson and employed by him—there is no minute in the book appointing him—when I made the audit, in order that everybody might understand the book by looking at it, I put a sort of digest at the end of each audit in red ink—in the first instance that was done by Jeffreys and signed by Richardson—that was the one of 14th November, but I did it ever afterwards, and initialed it—there is no handwriting of Richardson's after 14th November, in the original entry nor in the digest.
MR. GIBBONS. Q. None of the digests are in his handwriting? A. No; there were two accounts: there was the fund belonging to the Rifle Brigade, and the monies received on account of Silver & Co. for uniforms; and in order that any member of the council coming to the office should understand exactly what we had in hand as our own funds, and what belonging to Messrs. Silver, I put in red ink a digest of the audit, as an explanation of the account: the first of those was made by Jeffreys and signed by the prisoner, and all the rest were made by me and signed by me—my recollection of the first audit is, that I said, "No one can understand it in this way, you had better put an explanation in red ink, so that any one coming here may understand how the balance stands."
COURT. Q. It is very intelligible—you first put your receipts, then your disbursements, and then the apparent balance? A. Yes; then from that I deduct so much as is pledged to Messrs. Silver, and then I make a final balance, which is available for all purposes—on the face of this it does not show from whence the amount due to Silver & Co. is derived.
MR. GIBBONS. Q. Do I understand you to say that you looked through the book on every occasion; all the items? A. I went through it and checked it with the banker's book, and you will find my tick in the banker's passbook—I went through the book with the prisoner—Jeffreys took the one book and I took the other, the prisoner explaining each item as we went along—Jeffreys was the man who did the work, that is to say he was writing clerk, to save Richardson the labour, but Richardson was the man I had the explanation from—I believe Richardson was an attorney; I do not know whether he had his certificate and was practising as an attorney at that time—I suppose he was once employed by the brigade as an attorney, because an amount of five guineas was passed to him for "professional services"—Jeffreys was employed by Richardson without authority—he did not receive his orders from the Council, but from Richardson—I did not give him orders; not with regard to finance certainly—I never gave him orders when I came to audit the accounts, I treated him as Richardson's clerk—the brigade paid him, but I looked for no explanation of money matters from him—he wrote up the books by Richardson's direction, there was no other clerk employed, Richardson had to keep the accounts—I have seen all the books—the rough minute-book is in Richardson's handwriting—the petty cash-book is in Jeffreys' writing—I believe none of the account-books are in Richardson's handwriting—Richardson ought to have kept the accounts, he had the custody of the books—Jeffreys wrote the books, but they were in the custody of Richardson, and he was responsible for every entry, there being a true account of what took place with the cash—I believe Jeffreys was present at every audit I made—most likely he ticked one book while I
ticked the other—very likely Jeffreys read out the items, but I looked to Richardson for the explanations—Richardson has read over the items to me, I cannot charge my memory with any distinct time, but I have no hesitation in saying that on several occasious he did as I have described Jeffreys to have done, ticked the items—I cannot identify any one particular time, but I have no hesitation in stating generally that Richardson always represented these sums as a true statement of the disbursements of the cash in his custody, and that Jeffreys was merely acting as an amanuensis—Richardson collected the money and paid it in to the bank, and he gave me this as an account of what he had received and collected; it was always brought before me as chairman of the Finance Committee, as the account of the monies collected and disbursed—other persons collected money, but it all went through Richardson's hands, and appears in the books—the money was all given by the persons collecting it into Richardson's hands, to pay into the bank—the money was always given to Richardson, on all occasions—money paid in the office would be given to Jeffreys—Silver's accounts were paid to him—if Richardson was out, money would be paid to whoever was there—no doubt Jeffreys has taken money on several occasions and Mr. Clearson also—he is a gentleman employed there by the Council some months ago to assist in the work of the office, and who is now acting as Secretary—during the time Richardson was there, there were a great many sums of money received, large and small—I can tell you exactly how much was received while he was there—it was 8000l. or 9000l.—there was one sum of 100 guineas, a donation from the Corporation; I do not know whether he paid that in—that was the largest sum he received—the bulk of the sums were from 5 to 10 guineas, here they are (reading over a variety of sums varying from I guinea to 20)—the prisoner was engaged in collecting subscriptions, as well as in the office—generally his mode of operation was to have one or two of the Council with him to go round to the leading firms—they introduced the subject and he acted as Secretary, and when the donations were given he took them home and paid them into the bank.
Q. Besides that, I suppose, he did the puffing, wrote to the newspapers and all that sort of thing? A. He put in the advertisements no doubt—he prepared the reports for the newspapers (looking at a paper)—I dare say I may have seen this before—one of our grouuds of complaint against Mr. Richardson was that he was in the habit of putting very incorrect reports in the papers, that he put in things which did not actually take place; perhaps that may be one of them—(looking at another) I believe this is one that he prepared and sent out—all these things were not done under the sauction of the Council; he did a great many things that he had no sanction for at all—there was no special sanction for that paper that I know of; there was a general sanction for that sort of thing implied, not expressed—I think the first occasion of any complaint about his reporting was about 14th or 15th October—business had been before the Council and one member of the Council was in a minority, the remainder unanimously on the, other side, and the views of the one member were put into the report, and the decision of the Council and the bulk of the report was omitted—of course that was matter of complaint, and after that the reports were ordered to be revised; at least, I do not know whether it was after that, but at one period a minute was passed that some one was to be responsible for the reports—There was a petty cash-book kept—I was in the habit of drawing cheques for petty cash—the petty cash-book was kept in Jeffreys' handwriting, but the money was paid to Richardson to disburse; he was responsible for the money, and we looked to him for a true-account of it—he
was arrested on Monday, 5th March—the warrant was applied for the same day I believe—he had sent in his resignation some weeks before that—on 20th January a committee met to inquire into his duties and emoluments, and after that they brought up a report, and on that report his resignation was accepted.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. His resignation was by letter, was it not? A. Yes; this (produced) is the letter.
MR. GIBBONS. Q. Will you read his appointment? A. I have read that, it was merely appointing him pro tem.—I know of no other appointment than that—there is no appointment on 10th January—there was no resolution about that date appointing him Secretary; there was a committee appointed to inquire into the duties and emoluments of Secretary—that committee was called at the Mansion-house, and they brought up a report recommending that Mr. Richardson be appointed Secretary, but that report was not adopted, and Mr. Richardson's resignation as Secretary pro tem, was accepted—his resignation was then in the hands of one of the members of the council, the Lord Mayor, at the time that report was brought in—at that time the prisoner had some petty cash in his hands—I do not know of Jeffreys' going down and receiving the petty cash from him—I do not know that it was paid over to the office; I know it was not, that is to say, the accountants tell me it was not, for it appears in the sum he was deficient, I think it was the balance of a 25l. cheque; the accountants will give you the exact amount—the sum total of his deficiency was 506l. odd according to the accountants' statement—the accountants can explain better than I can the how that deficiency is made up—I arrived at the conclusion that there was that deficiency, upon the report of the accountants specially employed to go through the accounts—according to the resolution which I have read the prisoner was to have a commission of 5 per cent.—I cannot from memory tell you the amount of his commission account—he certainly did not collect 5,000l. or 6,000l.—two sumsof 48l. 15s. and 38l. 13s. have been paid to him as commission—those were paid to him upon his own statement of account—I believe his commission accounts are in court—he made it 101l., but the account was subjected to the examination of the finance committee—the two first accounts were paid without examination because we thought he ought to have money, and at the end of any specified time his accounts would have been gone into, and if any amounts were improperly charged there as subject to his commission, they would have been struck out—he charged everything in his account that he could possibly lay claim to he did not claim 595l.
Q. Was there not a resolution passed to make him a donation of 300l. irrespective of his commission? A. There was a resolution passed when this report was brought up recommending Mr. Richardson to be appointed secretary at a salary of 150l. a year, that report was negatived by the council on 10th January; his resignation was accepted, and he was voted a sum of 300l. in addition to his commission, provided his accounts were found to be correct—this is the resolution—it is on 20th January "Mr. Richardson's tender of resignation of the office of secretary having been read, it was moved by Mr. Kinnaird, M.P., seconded by Lieut-Colonel Hicks, and carried unanimously, "That the duties of Secretary to Rifle brigades being henceforth required by the authorities to be performed under the commanding officer and particularly requiring a military man for their performance, the resignation of Mr. Richardson be accepted"—it was then moved "that he be paid his present claim for collecting subscriptions, and 300l. in addition, in discharge of any claim he may have against the brigade up to 25th March next"—it
was then moved by Mr. Alderman Allen, seconded by Mr. Alderman Rose, "that the Council empowers the Finance Committee to employ an accountant to examine the accounts at an expense of not more than twenty guineas, and report"—That sum of 300l. was never paid to Mr. Richardson, because his accounts were wrong—he claimed 101l. as his commission—there was not another account of 20l. for cab hire; this report recommends it, but that report was not adopted the first I heard of that claim was when the report was brought up—I did not know anything about it till then, I was not allowed to be one of the committee—I was present when the resolution was passed recommending his commission to be paid—I never heard that his claim included 28l. for cab hire as well as 101l. for commission—he never made a claim to the Council for cab hire, he may have made it to the committee that met at the Mansion-house—I never heard of his claim of five guineas for professional services until I saw the report—he never could have made the claim for cab hire to me, because I have been through the petty cash, and found large sums charged for cab hire every day—the committee recommended the payment, but, as I have said, that recommendation was not adopted—this is the minute referring to it—(Reads:) "Mr. Alderman Wire moved that the report brought up be received and agreed to, and that Mr. Richardson be appointed Secretary to the Council of this brigade on the terms and conditions named in this report—Mr. Richardson was requested to withdraw, and on his return was informed that further consideration of the subject would take place next Tuesday"—then on the Tuesday, the 17th Jan.—"a special meeting of the council was directed to be called for Friday next, at 1 o'clock, upon the office of Secretary; no other business to be discussed" then the minute of the meeting of the 20th I have already read—his resignation was all this time in the hands of the Lord Mayor—it was sent in before the report was sent in, and it was formally accepted on 20th January.
Q. 101l. was the amount of his claim, and 300l. the amount of the donation; was any portion of that ever paid to him? A. Yes; I paid him 50l. on my own account.
COURT. Q. Part of the 300l.? A. Yes; he wrote to me stating that he wanted money, and I gave him a cheque for 50l.
MR. GIBBONS. Q. When was that? A. This is the minute. "We recommend that a cheque of 50l. be paid to Mr. Richardson on account, W. A. Rose, Vice-President."
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Read the next minute. A. "That 31l. 12s. 6d. be paid to Mr. Richardson to make up 50l. for petty cash disbursements."
MR. GIBBONS. Q. When was Colonel Hicks appointed to the brigade as Lieut Colonel? A. He was nominated at the public meeting, that was the first meeting, on 21st July—the prisoner was present at that meeting.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Did Colonel Hicks act as the officer in command of the force from that time? A. Yes—the items of the first audit in this book are in Jeffreys' handwriting; that was not a regular audit, it was on 21st September; on that occasion Richardson called in Jeffreys to bring in the books, and the banker 8 book and this book were compared by me, and anything that I could not understand I called on Richardson to explain—he gave me explanations, and Jeftreys would bring in the voucher book as well as these, upon directions from Richardson—that was the course of business all through—Richardson never on any occasion suggested that Jeffreys had kept back monies that he ought to have accounted for to him—no other money was accounted for to me by Richardson than what appears in the books—the 300l. was to be paid him for services he had rendered the
brigade—it was by way of donation; we felt that he had exerted himself, and that we ought to pay him, and the payment was to be made subject to the accountants' reporting the accounts to be accurate—that was to be in addition to the 5 per cent. commission on the amount collected.
COURT. Q. You have stated that the donations should appear separately in the banker's pass-book? A. Yes, there may be some items lumped—the speciality of the pass-book consists in this, that every item is described, and that was part of the instructions—the payments by admission fees were all paid in in a lump, that is, it would not be put "two guineas," "two guineas" and so on, all being one special amount—the unexplained items in the passbook would be made up of admission fees and a small amount as well; they would not comprehend any donation of ten guineas or any larger amount—(The letter of resignation was here put in and read as follows—from the prisoner to the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor. "January 18th, 1860. My dear Lord. I beg leave to tender my resignation as Secretary to the London Rifle Brigade; should the Council decline to accept it, it will prove I retain their confidence; and I shall always study to deserve it."
EDWARD PULLEN . I am a member of the firm of Harding, Pullen, and Co., accountants—about 26th January, I was employed by the London Rifle Brigade to go through the books—on 30th January I went to the head quarters of the brigade; I saw the prisoner there—I went for the purpose of making an examination of the books, and I made a cursory examination—I was introduced to Mr. Richardson, and he then said that he should require a few days to prepare them for examination—when I made the cursory examination, the books were produced to me by the prisoner; my examination at that time was merely to ascertain the nature of them—when he said he should require a few days, I assented; it was arranged that he should let me know when they were ready, and if I happened to be passing before I heard from him I was to call—I called again on 7th February, I saw the prisoner and he said they were not then ready—I called again on 14th February by appointment, to report to the Finance Committee what arrangement had been made for the audit—I did not see the prisoner on the 14th; I thiuk I next saw him on the 28th—I wrote to him on the 14th, with reference to the books—I did not post the letter myself—I received an answer; this is it (produced)—I saw him on the 28th, and he then said the books were ready, and I arranged to go the following morning with a clerk and set him to work upon the investigation—I went with my clerk next morning, and the books were handed over to us as being complete—they were handed over by the prisoner—my clerk then went through the books—I did not go through them in detail, I left it to my clerk who is here.
WILLIAM HURLBATT . I am clerk to Messrs. Harding and Pullen—I went through the accounts—there is no entry in the banker's book or the cash-book of the sum of ten guineas received as a donation from Mr. J. Entwistle, or of three guineas of Alexander Frost on 18th October, nor of ten guineas from Mr. Simms on 15th December, 1859.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the prisoner present when you went through the books? A. I think the whole of the time I was there.
Q. Was anything said to you about Mr. Entwistle's donation? A. One item I know he said was omitted and must be entered before the next audit, but whether that was Mr. Entwistle's or not I cannot at this moment remember—there was one item which I found was omitted, I do not say that was Mr. Entwistle's—I could see the amount of that item at the time, I cannot remember it now—I cannot swear it was not Mr. Entwistle's donation that he mentioned.
COURT. Q. How came you to see the amount at the time? A. I had an account of the receipt having been issued for this donation.
GIFFARD. Q. Was it upon your pointing out that there was no such entry that he made the observation? A. It was.
This being the case for the prosecution, Mr. Gibbons inquired whether Colonel Hicks, who was in attendance, was not to be examined. Mr. Giffard replied that he was not aware Colonel Hicks could prove any fact relevant to this prosecution, but if the Court desired him to be called he would put him in the box.
MR. BARON BRAMWELL considered it was a matter to be left entirely to the discretion of counsel.
MR. GIBBONS submitted that there was no evidence to support the Counts charging the prisoner as servant either to the Lord Mayor, the Duke of Cambridge, or Colonel Hicks. MR. BARON BRAMWELL was of opinion that by his accepting the office of Secretary, pro tem., he became the servant of the Council, consisting of the Lord Mayor and others. MR. GIBBONS submitted that those gentlemen had no power to constitute themselves a Council or to hold property as such, and that it must be sfown that the money received by the prisoner was money belonging to them, and for their own use; that an indictment for embezzlement could not be sustained without proof of the money being the property of the persons alleged to be the masters; although therefore these parties might have employed him, still they not being a corporation or a partnership, had no power to hold property; that there was no proof of any trustees having been appointed, nor if there had been, was the property laid in them; the money subscribed was not intended for the Council or for their purposes, but for ike Rifle Brigade which was not then formed; and if it had been formed it would be the property of the Colonel, under the statute of George 3. c. 44. s. 56, and at the time in question, the appointment of Colonel had not been paid. The learned Counsel referred to the judgment of Mr. Baron Parke in the case of Reg. v. Goodbody, as supporting his argument, and contended that upon the grounds he had urged there was no case to go to the Juvy.
MR. GIFFARD stated that the case of Reg v. Goodbody did not touch the present question, and that the decision there had been overruled; the way in which he put the case was simply this, that the prisoner was employed by the gentlemen who were present at the meeting referred to, and he had received money on their behalf for which he had not accounted.
MR. GIBBONS contended that the money must be the money of the parties on whose account he received it; if he was employed by the Lord Mayor and others, as the Council of the brigade, the monies he was alleged to have embezzled must be their monies, whereas the evidence established the fact that the monies were intended for the Rifle Brigade not then formed; that as far as the holding of money was concerned, the Council was in fact an illegal association until their rules were confirmed by the Secretary of State, and that until then each subscriber was the rightful owner of his own money and had a legal right to claim it back.
MR. BARON BRAMWELL . "I think the objection is not tenable—if this were to be held to be a good objection, there has been no good indictment for embezzlement yet, it does not allege the money to be the money of the person upon whose behalf he received it in particular; all that is necessary to constitute the offence of embezzlement is, that the relation of master and servant should be established, that the servant received money for the master, and that having received it he embezzled it; if those three things are established, there is no question as to whose money it is, although I have no doubt that the property was. in the masters, and that they had a right to receive it from him, and if it was a chattel they would have a right to that cliattel; I think there is nothing in the objection."
MR. GIBBONS to MR. ALDERMAN ROSE. Q. Is that your letter? (handing one to the witness). A. That is my signature, I see it was handed down by the Lord Mayor—it is my writing.
MR. GIBBONS proposed to put in the letter, not as his evidence, but as part of his cross-examination of the witness. Mr. Baron Bramwell was of opinion that that could not be done without the consent of the Counsel for the prosecution—it was not put in.
MR. GIBBONS in his address to the Jury, read from the newspaper the name of Mr. Entwistle appearing as a member of the brigade, and also from another paper the name of Mr. Sims as an honorary member upon this evidence Mr. Giffard replied.
GUILTY .— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
There was another indictment against the prisoner.
MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution, and MR. LEWIS the defence.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT—Thursday, June 14th, 1860.
PRESENT—Sir JOHN MUSGROVE, Bart. Ald.; MR. RECORDER; and Mr. Ald. MECHI.
Before Mr. Recorder.
PLEADED GUILTY.— Judgment Respited.
558. RICHARD FITZGERALD (45), and JAMES BESBOROUGH (24) , Stealing 6 blankets, 4 sheets, and other goods, and 21l. in money, the property of William Hennessey. Second Count, charging Besborough with receiving the said property.
MR. TAYLOR conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM HENNESSEY . I am a shoemaker and live in Dudley-street, Seven-dials—on 29th April, I was living in 7, Berwick-street, Soho—that was on Sunday—I expected my wife from Ireland that morning, at the Dublin wharf; I went there to meet her—I got there between 9 and 10 o'clock that morning—I went into a coffee-shop at an early hour, and I was speaking to another chap who is not yet found—he said he was an Irishman—the prisoner Fitzgerald was standing by, and he said to me, "Don't you stir, when the boat arrives I will let you know"—he afterwards came and told me it had arrived, and then Fitzgerald and I and the other man went to the wharf—I told the man my wife was on board—he would not allow me to go—one of these went in, I am not sure that it was Fitzgerald—the boxes came out, and were laid on the footpath by me—Fitzgerald then went and fetched a truck, he went by order of the other man—my wife and my step-brother hired the men, I was not present—Fitzgerald brought the truck, the things were put on the truck, and they were rolled up to Tower-hill—I can't say whether Fitzgerald drew the truck, they were altogether, they were arguing—I kept them in sight till they reached the top of Tower-hill, I then lost
sight of them—when I last saw the truck, Fitzgerald was with them—I did not see him again till he was at the Thames police-court.
COURT. Q. Did you hear any directions given in Fitzgerald's presence where the truck was to be taken? A. No; I was not present.
MR. TAYLOR. Q. Are these tools which are here produced yours? A. Yes; I did not see them that morning, I left them in Ireland; they were in the box—I am sure they are mine.
Cross-examined by MR. SHARPE. Q. How long were you here before your wife? A. Five days, I had been in London before she came—I believe I was three days in Bristol—I had left Ireland in the week previous, eight or ten days before—I had seen my tools up to the time of my leaving—these are ordinary tools used by shoemakers—there are no private marks on them—I can identify them—our tools are never marked—I think it was between 9 and 10 o'clock when I got to the wharf—it did not take many minutes to put the things on the truck—I had been there early in the morning—I started with the things between 9 and 10 o'clock—I should think I lost sight of them about 10—after I lost this man I went to 7, Berwick-street; I think I stopped there about half an hour; my wife was with me—that night I was stopping at a friend's place—I went to Seven-dials, I think a week or a fortnight afterwards; between the 29th of April and the 13th of May I returned to Berwick-street.
MR. TAYLOR. Q. Do you know this last? A. Yes; it is what I make my boy's boots on—the tools are worth 7s. or 8s.
ELLEN HENNESSEY . I arrived by the Cork steamer at the Dublin wharf on Sunday morning, 29th April—I am the wife of the last witness—before leaving Ireland I packed up my things—I packed up my husband's tools; these are some of his tools; I put them in the same box where the money was—it was a red painted box—I brought that box with me, and it was put on the truck—when I saw my husband I saw Fitzgerald; I made a bargain about taking the things—he got a truck, and he and two men put all the things on the truck—I made a bargain with Fitzgerald for 4s. to take them to 7, Berwick-street—I offered him 3s. 6d., and after he got the things on the truck, he wanted another 6d., and I agreed to give it him—they were taken towards Tower-hill; I saw it till they turned at a corner on Tower-hill, and I lost sight of the truck—the last time I saw it Fitzgerald was with it—I don't know anything of the other two men—I have never seen that red painted box since—there were three boxes and three bundles and 21l. in cash—60l. or 70l. worth of property altogether—I went to Berwick-street and stayed there about half an hour and then came back again—I saw Fitzgerald again about 5 o'clock in a public-house in Whitechapel, I asked him what he had done with my things, he said he had left them with the two men—I kept him till a constable came.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you pack these things yourself? A. Yes; I and my little boy—I don't know these tools by any mark—I was not in Court when Nathan was examined.
Fitzgerald. The first man you saw was on board the steamboat. Witness. Yes; you or the men drew the truck.
MR. TAYLOR. Q. Was it Fitzgerald who agreed with you to take the things to Berwick-street? A. Yes; it was.
LAZARUS NATHAN . I live at 1, Wentworth-street, and am a boot and shoemaker—on Sunday, 29th April, I lived at 26, Flower and Dean-street—on that afternoon I saw the prisoner Besborough; he came and beckoned me out, and I followed him—he went to a house situated on the left-hand side of
Lower Keate-street, the last house on the left-hand side coming from Brick-lane—when he got there he took me up stairs to a back-room, and showed me these shoemakers' tools—he asked me if I would buy them—I told him they were no use to me—they were no value—at that time another man came in whom he called Jem Joe, and he said, "Here is a lot of cuttings" (bits of leather)—I asked him what he wanted for the lot together—the other party said. "Fifteen shillings"—I told him I would not give one third of that—he asked what I would give, and I gave 5s. for them—Besborough said, "They are very cheap for the money"—they did not take the 5s. then—I asked Jem Joe how he came by these things, and he said they were left there for rent; the man had been away three weeks—I then left and went away, and when I got two or three doors off, Jem Joe came and said I should have them—he and Besborough stood at the door together—I put two half-crowns into Jem Joe's hand, and he gave a half-crown to Besborough.
Cross-examined. Q. What time was this? A. Between two and three o'clock in the afternoon—this was in Keate-street—I don't know whether it was at No. 8—I saw the tools when I first went; some were on the seat and some on the floor—Jem Joe did not say it was his room—he did not say that the place belonged to him—he did not say who the tools belonged to, he said they were left for three weeks' rent—he did not mention for the rent of what place—Besborough showed me the tools—he did not say that they were his or that they were not his—Jem Joe said they were left there for three weeks' rent, but neither of them claimed them singly—I was examined at the Police-court—I did not say when I saw Besborough that I did not know him—I did not say anything of the sort—I signed some paper—I did not say that I did not know Besborough—I did not say that I had not bought anything of Besborough. (The witness's deposition was here read, in which he stated, "Besborough took me to a house; presently another man came in and said the tools were left in his room for rent.") I also got some pieces of leather—I did not say, when before the Police Magistrate, that I did not know Besborough—I did not say that I had not bought the tools from him but from another man—When Deeble, the policeman, came to me about this he took me in custody for having the goods in my possession—I was charged with receiving the goods, but I am not aware that it was knowing them to be stolen—this is the first time I ever appeared in a Court of Justice except when I was an apprentice and summoned my master for wages—I never was convicted—I have not had penal servitude; it is quite untrue.
MR. TAYLOR. Q. You say it was the last house on the left? A. Yes; in coming from Brick-lane towards Commercial-street—it is next door to the Blacking Bottle public-house, nearer to Commercial-street.
JOHN BROWN (Policeman, 180 H). I know Besborough and I know where he lives—I know the passage which joins the Blacking Bottle, in Keate-street—the house at the corner of that passage, the Blacking Bottle, is at the corner of that passage, and the house where Besborough lives is at the other corner—as you go from Brick-lane along Keate-street, it is the last house on the left hand corner—I don't know where Fitzgerald lives.
Cross-examined. Q. How long before had you known Besborough living in that house? A. I had called him up to work a week or eight days before.
JOSEPH DEEBLE (Policeman, 195 H). I know Besborough, he lives in a house right opposite to the Blacking Bottle—as you go down from Brick-lane it is the last house on the left hand side—I obtained these tools from
Mr. Nathan, on a Friday, three or four days before I took Bflsbarougb—I took him at 41, London-street, Stepney, on the following Monday night—I told him I should take him for receiving some shoemakers' took knowing them to be stolen—he said, "I never had any tools"—I said, "You did, and sold them to a Jew"—I know where Fitzgerald lives—it is some hundred yards from where Besborough lives.
Cross-examined. Q. He denied that he ever had anything to do with these things? A. Yes—I had not been to Beaborough's house for some time before that day—I was in Court when Nathan was examined at the Thames Police Court—I first took Nathan for having these goods, knowing them to be stolen—he was brought up on that charge, and after that he was examined as a witness—I did not hear him say that he did not know Besborough—I did not hear him say that Besborough was not the man who sold him the things but another man—I heard all that he did say—when Mr. Nathan was put on the Mil, I took Besborough in the with five or six others, and I took Mr. Nathan and said to him, "Look in. Mr. Nathan and see if there is any one there you know"—he said, "Yes; that is the man," pointing to Besborough—I never heard him say that it was not Besborough but another man who sold him these goods—he said it was Besborough and Jem Joe.
Fitzgerald's Defence. For above 18 years I have been getting a living by hard work and jobbing at the wharves. I never was charged with any dishonesty. On that Sunday morning when the steam packet arrived, the prosecutor went to the wharf and tried to get in; but he was refused, no stranger being allowed, and be being much in liquor, for he had been drinking with two men whom he had employed, both strangers to me. As he could not get on the wharf, one of the two men said, if fee knew the name of the party be would go in. The prosecutor gave him the name and address, and this man then went on board the ateam packet and found the woman, and she gave him charge of the goods, and he brought them out in the street and asked me to fetch a hand-truck. When I came back the man that had charge of the goods and his mate loaded the truok, I then asked the men where the goods were going, they said to Oxford-street, near Soho, which is a long way from the wharf, aud they were to get 4s. 6d. I then efused to go, as that would not pay three men and truok hire; I told them to go and get a truck for themselves, as I bad left sixpence deposit on that truok; one of the men then handed me a sixpence, saying that they did not want me to go with them, and that they would take back the truck safe; they began to drag the truck along, and the prosecutor and his friend with them. I did not like to let the track go with two strangers, and I followed them to Tower-hill. I saw a policeman and I asked him to stop the truck, but he took no notice of what I said, and the two men dragged the truck along Tower-hill and the prosecutor and his friend with them. I went no further with them but returned back to the neighbourhood of the wharf, where I stopped till the afternoon. I then went to inquire of the owner if the truck had been brought back, he said, "No," and there was some one there asking about the goods, and we went to the station-house and reported the loss. If I had had any fear or known anything of the goods, I might have gone miles away, but I went seeking the truck and could not find or hear of it. On the Sunday evening I was taken, and when at the station-house, all the property I had in thd world was M. I am quite innocent of the charge.
FITZGERALD,— GUILTY of Stealing — Confined Eighteen Months.
BESBOROUGH.— GUILTY of Receiving — Confined Twelve Months.
MR. TAYLOR conducted the Prosecution.
SARAH HETHERINGTON . I live at No. 8, Little Portland Street; I have known the prisoner four years—on 1st May I met him accidentally in New Oxford Street, between 7 and 8 o'clock in the evening—Sarah Sayer was with me; having met him, we walked to Cheapaide, and went to a street near Cheapside and went in a public-house—the prisoner said I had come to meet a young man—I said, yes—he said I had made an appointment with the young man—I said, yes—I then left the prisoner and went to Cheapside where I was waiting for a young man—Sayer went with me—she left me for a few minutes, and while she was gone the prisoner came up to me again and asked me to go and have something to drink, which I refused—he then said he would not leave me till I did, and we went into a public-house near the Bank—Sayer was with me—I was then going away, and the prisoner came and walked with me to 8, Portland Street, and we had supper there—Sayer was with me—the prisoner said that I had been telling falsehoods about him—I said I had not, and I got up to go out—he stood before me—I sat down again, and he asked me if I would be there the next evening at 7 o'clock—I said I did not know—he then sat down, and he had his right hand on my breast—I don't recollect anything more till I found myself in the hospital, and I was wounded over the left breast.
Cross-examined by MR. BEST. Q. You had known him four years, had he been courting you? A. He seduced me first—he has been in the habit of seeing me from time to time—he did not appear very angry when I told him I had gone to meet a young man—we went to several public-houses—he is fond of drinking, he frequently gets drunk—he has supplied me with money—I did not ask him for anything that night—he gave me sixpence on the Saturday night before to pay for my lodging.
SARAH SAYER . I am staying where the last witness lodges—I went with her that night to New Oxford Street, then to Cheapside, and then to another public-house near the Bank, and returned to 8, Portland Street—I saw Hetherington get up to leave the room, and the prisoner stood before her—she sat down again, and after that he asked her if she would be there at 7 o'clock the next evening—I then saw his two hands were on her breast, and she said "Oh," and fell on one side—I caught her, and another person caught her in their arms; she was put in a cab and taken to the hospital—the prisoner did not appear excited, he was not at all intoxicated.
FRANCIS SAMUEL WITHERINGTON . I am house surgeon at Middlesex Hospital; about a quarter past 12 in the morning of the 2d May, the prosecutrix was brought there—she was partly in an insensible state—I examined her person and found a punctured wound just above the left breast, about two inches and a half deep; it had penetrated her clothes—it might have been produced by a knife—from the direction it took it was not a dangerous wound, if it had taken another direction it would have been a very serious wound—I should think there must have been considerable force used.
WILLIAM HENRY ALLEN . I am a hackney carriage attendant No. 76—on the night of 1st May I was on duty in Great Portland-street—I saw the prisoner there—I went and caught hold of his left arm and wished him to return to the coffee-shop, 8, Great Portland-street—he refused—I said, "You had better come back and see what is done"—he said, "No; I will not go back, I will be revenged"—he walked down Portland-street and then
he said, "I shall not go much further, I have done it"—he had something in his hand—I could not discern what it was till he was taken by the constable, who took the weapon from him.
Cross-examined. Q. I suppose he was excited? A. He did not seem excited in the least—this knife was taken from his clothes on his left side, but he had it in his right hand when I was walking with him first.
MR. TAYLOR. Q. Had he cut himself? A. He had cut himself a little in the side.
WILLIAM SPRATT (Policeman, 213 D). On 1st May at a quarter past 12 o'clock, I was at the corner of Margaret-street—I saw the prisoner and the last witness with him, and two or three more persons—the last witness said, "Be careful, he has stabbed some one"—I caught the prisoner by the wrist and held him—I saw somethiug in his left side—Simmons came up and took this instrument from his left side.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he not say, "Take care, he has got a knife, he will stab some one?" A. He said, "He has stabbed some one."
THOMAS SIMMONS (Police-sergeant, 20 D). On that morning I was with the last witness—I saw the handle of this instrument sticking from the left side of the prisoner—I could see nothing but the handle; I caught hold of it and pulled it out—I took the prisoner to the station; I said to him, "Who is this woman that is stabbed?"—he said, "She it nothing more than a common prostitute; she has been the ruin of me"—I examined his person, he had three slight wounds near the heart—this instrument had passed through two waistcoats and his drawers and shirt—this has been the heater of an Italian iron—it has been sharpened to a point.
The prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY .— Three year's Penal Servitude.
MR. DICKIE conducted the Prosecution.
MARY FENTON . On Sunday morning, 14th April, about 10 o'clock, my hnsband and the prisoner had a few words, and she used very bad language, but nothing more after that till about quarter or twenty minutes to 8 o'clock that night, when she came with her husband down the court where I live—she came to my door and called me out—I went and opened the door and she hit me—I went back and defended myself as Well as I could—she then took up a large scraper to throw at me, and her husband took it from her—she then took the tea-kettle of water and threw it, and struck me on the forehead—I was in the hospital three weeks or a month.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. I believe you and she have not been on very friendly terms? A. No—she lives next door to me—she is a couutry woman of mine—she is Irish—I don't know whether Irish people fight for love—I have not often had words with her, we had about twelve months ago—she has not had to complain of my doing violence to her—I was not before the Magistrate for striking her with a broom; I defended myself with a broom while I was sweeping my door—I did not strike her with the broom before she had hold of the kettle—I declare I never struck the woman—I did not thrust the broom at her—I held it before me till I got in doors—the kettle was thrown at me—the water made me wet—it was a tin kettle with an iron handle and an iron spout.
house—I tried to get in, and knocked four or five minutes—she did not let me in, and I forced the door; I told her I wanted her to go with me to the station for throwing a kettle at Mr. Fenton.
Cross-examined. Q. Did she say that Mr. Fenton struck her first? A. I did not hear her say anything of the kind.
MR. SLEIGH here stated that he could not resist a verdict of unlawfully wounding.
GUILTY. of unlawfully wounding—Recommended to Mercy by the Prosecutrix.
Confined Three Months.
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, June 14th, 1860.
PRESENT—Sir HENRY MUGGERIDGE, Knt. Ald.; Mr. Ald. ALLEN; and
MR. COMMON SERJEANT.
For cases tned this day see Kent and Surrey cas's.
OLD COURT—Friday, June 15th, 1860.
PRESENT—MR. BARON BRAMWELL; Sir HENRY MUGGERIDGE, Knt. Aid.; Mr. Aid. Allen; and Mr. Aid. ABBISS.
Before Mr. Baron Bramwell.
MESSRS. SLEIGH and LEWIS conducted the Prosecution.
SUSAN BEARD . I am unmarried, and live with my mother at 12, West-street, Golden-square; that is next door to the house in which the prisoner and her husband have been living—he carried on the business of a tailor and trimming maker—on Sunday evening, 22d April, between 8 and 9 o'clock, I was standing at my door; as near as I can remember it was about a quarter to 9 o'clock—while there I perceived a smell of fire—in consequence of that I went inside the passage of my own house—I found that it did not proceed from any part of my house, and I then went out to the street-door again—I still smelt the fire—while I was standing at my door the second time, I saw the prisoner come out at her private door—there is a shop-door and a private door to their house—smoke next attracted my attention; it came from the private door as it was shut—as the woman was coming out I saw smoke—I did not see the smoke before the door was completely closed by her; I saw her close the door and go out—the door was just closed and Mr. Bennett had passed when I saw the smoke—she had only just passed me, and I looked up and saw the smoke coming up from the private door—as the door closed to the smoke went from it and went up to the top of the house—I went and looked down the area of their house and observed flames—I could see the kitchen window from the area—there were blinds in it; they were down—I do not know how far the prisoner could have got from the house when I saw the flames in the kitchen—she could not have got very far—there was not a minute between my seeing the smoke and looking down the area and seeing the flames—I looked at once, and then I looked round to see if she was gone, and I could see nothing of her—the blinds of
the kitchen window were down—there are no shutters—I next went and gave an alarm to Mr. Kitchen, who lives at 12A, next door the other way—she came—we did not then both look into the area—I went up stain into my own place, and then came down with oue of the children—I found the policeman knocking at the door and ringing the bell—soon afterwards the alarm caused the fire-people to come, and the engines—I have frequently been in Mr. Bennett's shop—living next door I had often opportunities of seeing into the shop and going in—I have seen a grate in the shop; I have never seen a fire in it when I was in there—I have lived next door five years last February—I did not see Mr. Bennett come back that night after the firemen came—I saw her husband go out that evening at 7 o'clock—I did not see him at all after 7 o'clock, before the fire; I saw him return at 10—I believe there was a lodger at that time in the top room; not at the moment of the fire—I saw that lodger in the evening in the passage, when the fire was over—I did not see anything of him before the fire; I had not seen anything of him since the middle of the week.
Cross-examined by MR. GIFFARD. Q. How often were you in the house of the prisoner's husband? A. Not very often—I went to the house I live in, five years last January—this matter occurred on 22d April—I cannot say how long they have been there; I should say four years—I have been in their house very often since they have been there—not very often since last January; about eight or nine times altogether—I do not remember going in one morning the very week this happened and finding them at breakfast; I believe I have seen them once or twice at breakfast—that might have been five or six months before this matter happened—I do not remember what they had for breakfast; something hot, I believe—I did not see the prisoner's husband cooking it at that very fire; I will swear that—I did not see them have anything hot to eat, I only saw something in the cups—I don't know where the kettle was boiled—the tea-tray was on the counter; the counter is in the shop—I have only been in the kitchen once—I only went to the shop door, and I did not see any fire then—I say that I have never seen a fire in the grate in the shop—I have seen the tea-tray with the cups and saucers on the counter—the people that live in that street are most all piece-brokers—there are a good many places in the street where they let lodgings—there are a good many people in each house—a piece-broker is one that sells pieces of cloth—Mr. Kitchen was standing at her door, and I at mine, when I saw the smoke coming up—we are next door—I did not say anything to her; I told her to come and look down the area, but that was afterwards—I went and looked down the area, and then I was going to call after Mr. Bennett—I knew her very well—when I turned round from looking down the area I could not see her; she was gone—there was time for her to get out of the street before I looked down the area—I told Mr. Kitchen that Mr. Bennett must have left between five and ten minutes; that was not when I first saw the smoke—I looked down the area and called Mr. Kitchen; I said to Mr. Kitchen, "Mr. Bennett has been gone out between five and ten minutes"—I looked down the area, and saw the flames almost immediately I saw the smoke—the street was very still between 8 and 9 o'clock—Mr. Bennett passed me, she must have seen me; I did not speak to her.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Did you tell Mr. Kitchen that the prisoner had gone out five or ten minutes before you saw the smoke and the flame or anything of that kind? A. No; between the time I saw the smoke and flame—there is a court close by; two doors off the house.
COURT. Q. Did the prisoner pass Mr. Kitchen as well as you? A. Yes—Mr. Kitchen's and my house are on the same side of the prisoner's—mine is No. 12, Mr. Kitchen's is 12A; the prisoner's is 11—she first of all would pass my house and then Mr. Kitchen's, and the court is next to that.
ANNA KITCHEN . My husband's name is George—we live at 12A, West-street—12, the house of the last witness, is between my house and that of the prisoner—next to my house there is a court; there is the shop door and theu the court—I remember standing at my door on Sunday evening, 22d April, about a quarter to 9 o'clock—Susan Beard came and asked me to look down in Mr. Bennett's kitchen, to know if I thought there was a fire there—I looked down and it was all in flames; there were flames in the kitchen—I had not seen anything of Mr. Bennett previous to Mr. Kitchen's making that communication to me—she said that Mr. Bennett had been gone past about ten minutes—soon after that the firemen came—I did not see anything of Mr. Bennett till the fire was over, aud I saw her looking in the shop—Mr. Kitchen, when she came to me, told me to look down the area, and I saw that it was on fire; she directly said to me, "Mr. Bennett has been gone past about ten minutes"—I have been in the prisoner's shop about three times, I think, whilst I have lived in that house—I have never seen any fire in the grate in the shop.
Cross-examined by MR. GIFFARD. Q. You went and looked directly she called you? A. Yes; and she said it directly—I dare say I had been at my door a quarter of an hour—I did not see Mr. Bennett pass—she told me on the Monday evening that she saw me at my door, but I did not see her pass—I did not see whether there was a line hanging with clothes across the kitchen—I did not afterwards see the remains of a line of clothes hanging across the kitchen, as if drying before the fire—what Susan Beard said to me first was, "Come and see whether there is a fire there"—she did not say anything about the smoke to me—I could see the light through the blind; there seemed to be very great flames, but I did not see what it was on fire—I do not think the blind itself was burning.
COURT. Q. Have you any notion how long you have been standing here as a witness? A. I should think about four minutes.
ALPHONSE HOPERA . I am a tailor, and live at 12, West-street; that is next door to the house where the fire was; I have lived there two years—I have been in the habit of going into Mr. Bennett's shop—I have seen a fire in the shop grate—he was obliged, in the course of his business, to make use of irons heated; he used to come and heat them in my place—on Sunday evening, April 22d, about 7 o'clock, Mr. Bennett went out from his house; he had a dog (Upon MR. SLEIGH putting the question, "Did he take that dog out with him" MR. GIFFARD objected that that was not evidence, the prisoner not being present. The Court considered tliai it was relevant to the inquiry, because the prisoner's husband and the dog being in the house would make the crime of setting fire to it of more difficulty, and that therefore it was necessary to show tliat they were gone)—I saw him go out at the door with the dog; he was not in the habit of taking that dog out—I saw him again before I heard of the fire—I saw him go back to his house at 8 o'clock; he had his dog with him then—I saw him go out again about a few minutes after that—I stood by the door of my shop—he had his dog with him then; he took it with him—that was the last time I saw him before I saw the fire—it was very nearly 9 o'clock when the fire commenced—I heard something and rushed out; before that I saw the prisoner go out—that was not quite ft a minute before I heard the scream whioh caused me to rush out—I saw her
from the doorway of my shop; she went past my door mto the court, and I lost sight of her—I live in the same house that Susan Beard does—hearing the cries of fire, I went to the house immediately and saw the two fires—I looked in the area and it was all in flames, and in the shop it was all smoke—I could see the fire in the kitchen, and I looked in the shop, and it was full of smoke—the shutters and doors were all shut; I could see through the window at the top—the shutters have a window at the top—I could Bee smoke and little sparks of fire—I remember last year I had some talk with the husband in the presence of his wife about insurance; he invited me to take a cup of tea with him—I cannot tell you whether that was in December or November; it was about that time—he then told me something in bis wife's presence (MR. GIFFARD objected to this as being nothing which the prisoner could either assent to or dissent from, it was merely something done in her presence. MR. SLEIGH stated that he would subsequently prove that after the fire the prisoner was asked whether her husband was insured, and she said the did not know, and therefore it was necessary for him to prove that she did know it. THE COURT considered that that would clearly make it admissable)—the prisoner called me up stairs into every room and opened the drawers and showed me jewellery and velvet, and said that she was obliged to show them everything, for the insurance officers came to see and she showed them everything—she did not say what office, and I did not ask her—the husband was present; I bad some conversation with him in her presence, besides what I have told you—he asked me why I did not insure; I said I did not know where—he said, "In the best office"—and said, "I am well insured"—he had got a paper in his hands, bat I did not see what the direction was—he said it was a policy.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he tell you it was a life-policy? A. He told me it was a policy for insurance of his property; he said that it was his policy—I will not swear that I had any conversation with him at all since April, 1859—we never had a quarrel, but after he was in prison I did not want to have anything to do with him—I can't remember whether it was November or December last that I spoke to him—I had not spoken to him for a year before this matter happened—this conversation was in November or December—I do not know exactly whether it was in 1858; I do not know what year it was—Mr. Bennett went out of the house—I know the private door; one door is immediately next my door, and the second door is in the passage to the shop—I cannot tell whether he has warmed his irons at my place within a year of the fire.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. You remember last Christmas? A. Yes—I suppose it was the Christmas before that we had that conversation—at the time I had that talk with him about insurance of property, there was some talk of life insurance—he told me of three insurances, fire, life, and property.
WILLIAM CHANTOR . I live at 11, Vine-street, Regent-street—at the time of this fire I was in the police force; I have retired from it since—I was on duty in West-street on Sunday evening, 22d April—I saw some little girls looking down through the grating before the kitchen window of 11, West-street—that was about ten minutes to 9—I went and knocked at the door, and rung the bells—the blind of the kitchen window was on fire, and the shop was also on fire—I sent for the firemen and the engines and they speedily arrived—I did not enter the house; I had, in the course of my duty, passed the house that evening before the fire—I had passed about twenty minutes previous to seeing the children looking down the area—I did not observe anything of the fire then.
GEORGE RICHARD STAPLES . I am one of the fire brigade stationed at the engine house, at Golden-square—just before 9 o'clock, on Sunday evening 22d April, in consequence of information that there was a fire in West-street, I proceeded there with the men and engines—I found a policeman at the door—as soon as I had the engines ready for work, I had an axe and broke the shop door open—as soon as that was broken open I gave directions to one of the men to take the branch, and, the water being all ready, to put out the fire—he put out the worst of it in about five or ten minutes—that wag behind and under the counter, and round the shelves at the back part—when I went in I saw the fire raging in those places—we were called at fiye minutes to 9, and I should think we were round at the door in about seven minutes—it would be about two or three minutes past 9 when I entered the shop—the water was ready directly—I have been thirty-five years last February in daily experience of fires, and in my judgment and experience, the fire must have been burning for half an hour, certain—I gave orders for a man to go down into the basement, and I went down afterwards—I wag called for the kitchen—after the worst of the fire was out I sent a man down below to use the hand-pump, and to take the bundles down and put them into water, and put them back again—I subsequently went down into the kitchen after the fire had subsided, and made an examination—there bad been a three leaf clothes-horse in front of the fire with tilings on it, and a basket on a box on the right hand side of the fire had been destroyed—there were the remains of it; it was burnt to charcoal—the basket may have been removed by my man who went down—I then found out that there had been two separate fires—the clothes-horse was not destroyed, one leaf of it was a good deal charred, and the top part of the box on which the basket was, was burnt—I cannot tell you what size the basket had been, as only the charcoal of it was left—no portion of the ceiling was destroyed except by discolouration.
COURT. Q. Were the only burnt things in the kitchen the clothes-horse and the box? A. There was also a blind or curtain at the window; I am not positive which it was—the clothes-horse was round the fire, and the box at the right hand side of the fire—the window was right opposite the fireplace—the paint was scorched and the front window broken—my rough calculation of the size of the kitchen was 12 ft. by 9—the heat from the clothes-horse would set fire to the curtains—it was sufficiently near for that—the strong heat would do it—it would go along the ceiling and fire the curtain—the clothes-horse was eight or nine feet from the window—the burning of the clothes-horse might have fired the basket, or the burning of the basket might have fired the clothes-horse; one would do the other.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Did you examine the floor between the two apartments? A. Yes—there was no communication between the fire in the kitchen, and that in the shop; they were two distinct fires—there is not the slightest possibility that the fire below could have caused the fire above, or the fire above have caused the fire below—I told one of the men to examine the gas pipes and the state of the meter, and I was in the kitchen at the same time—when he went to it I could see by the handle that it was off—there was a good fire in the grate in the kitchen—I examined the grate in the shop; there had been no fire there whatever—it may be two or three feet from the end of the counter to the fireplace, and the body of the fire would be two
feet further, that would make it five feet—the counter nearest the fireplace was on fire; it was well burnt through, but the body of it would be two feet further from the fireplace—the body of the fire extended perhaps about a foot and a half to the right—that would not quite take the middle of the counter in—there would be only heat at this end, but it was burnt more towards the other end—in my judgment the fire originated near the bottom, and not at either end, it was under the counter—the materials that I found under the counter were partly consumed; they were the remains of cloth and cuttings and woollen stuff—there were shelves behind the counter round the shop, and stock upon them—the fire went round the shop—there was a basket under the counter which contained some part of his stock, but I did not examine it closely enough to know—one side of it was burnt, and part of each side was consumed down to the bottom—the contents of it were partially burnt, and likewise the ends—it was more long than round, it looked like a small hamper—I should say that the fire in the shop had been in existence the longest—I should say the fire in the kitchen commenced after the shop had been burning some time—one was confined and the other was not—the fire under the counter was confined, and would take a long time to burn the boarding two-thirds through, to what the one in the kitchen would, that was exposed openly in the room—from the kitchen there are steps leading up stairs—I examined the state of those steps outside; they were not at all affected by the fire—I found no person in the house.
Cross-examined. Q. Tell me the reason why you say that one was longer than the other? A. Because the front of the counter and the underneath part was burnt so much through the wood-work, which being confined, must take a long time—the fire in the kitchen had not burnt out, our men had put it out, it would have put itself out—the counter was burnt underneath and in front—I do not know whether it is made of mahogany or deal—I should think it may be about three quarters of an inch thick in front, and the counter itself about an inch, but I did not examine it minutely—it was a common shop counter—I did not measure it—I only stepped the size of the place—I think the shop is twelve feet by nine, and I should suppose the counter might be eight or nine feet—one end of it goes in a direction across the room and very nearly to the window, but there is a show board in the window—I did not observe some greasy measuring tapes about—the half-burnt curtains are there now; they are not here that I am aware of—there is all the stock in the shop as it was found—there are some woollen or cloth cuttings—I visited the premises about half-past 10 last night, but I did not go into the shop—I did not notice a clothes line in the kitchen—it might be hanging from the window for what I know—I observed that there had been a subsidence in the house, and there was a crevice between the top of the basement of the window and the flooring of the shop—there was just an opening in the kitchen between the front of the window-frame and the ceiling—it is at the front part of the side, and goes to the top—I do not suppose that if one of these greasy measuring tapes had been hanging down, it would have conducted the fire up, because there was plaster; though there was an opening a little to the right—I must see where the flame travels—the crevice may be about six feet from where the basket was; not the basket in the kitchen—I have not measured—I did not see any scraps of paper about the floor, I saw a trace of tinder—unless I know how a room is before a fire, I cannot tell what hag brought it from one end of the room to the other, but the papers were not
so littered about as that; and it depends altogether upon whether the tapes are lying or hanging—if they are hanging they would be destroyed, but there must be a strong heat at the top of them—when you have the tapes hanging in this position they would burn well—if they were lying on the floor I should expect to find some remains, but it would depend upon how it dropped down—I think the crevice was very likely to be about three quarters of an inch wide—it goes all along the window from the side of the window-frame, and is open here and there—(Explaining it to the Court by pointing to one of the windows).
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Is this the front kitchen or the back? A. It is all front, there is no back—there was no trace at all of fire in the crevice, there was hardly discolouration—in my judgment there was no communication whatever, nor could there have been any, between the fire above and the fire below.
COURT. Q. Could a piece of measuring tape have been dropped from the shop into the kitchen through that crevice? A. No; I did not see any signs of it at all—the crevice was under the show board—I do not think if any person had tried to do it from the shop, it wonld have passed; it comes to the window frame—if I were to take a flexible thing like this pen and push it up, it would most likely come out in the flooring overhead, but a piece of tape could not be dropped through—I did not see any opening above, but a pen pushed up would make its appearance above if the flooring was away overhead—the flooring was not away overhead; there was a crevice underneath which was not open to the room above—it was not open—there was the floor above, but it must get through the joiste to get there—the crevice at the ceiling was open to the flooring of the shop, but there was no opening in the flooring—a piece of tape could not be dropped through, it could be put up if there was a hole, but I have not seen any hole—there was no trace of fire at the window end of the shop excepting in the heat above, which was caused by the other fire—the shop floor was scorched, but not the under side—the part furthest from the window was charred; it was nofc charred at the window—I have not looked minutely to see whether there is a hole in the flooring.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. But you inspected the ceiling of the room below, and the floor of the room above? A. Yes—as to seeing daylight through the hole, we had the shutters down when the fire visited it and we could see well round the place—I noticed no such hole.
PAUL JERRARD . I am engineer to the London Fire Brigade—I went with the last witness to West-street—some engines had already arrived when I got there, and were at work—the shop door had been forced open—I went in with Staples and went by his direction into the kitchen—the fire was then being extinguished in the shop—I found the kitchen door ajar, and found a three leaf clothes-horse before the fire, about two feet or two feet and a half from it—it came round in a circle, one leaf of it was burnt and tinder was lying on it—there was a basket on fire on the right hand side—I have had twenty-eight years' experience of fires, and can say that the fire up stairs had been longer in continuance than the one below—I examined the gas pipes, the gas was entirely turned off from the meter—I examined the floor of the shop and the ceiling of the kitchen, there was not in my judgment the least communication between the fire above and the fire below; if there had been, we should have seen it—there was no trace of connexion between the two.
Cross-examined. Q. When you went into the kitchen was the fire out?
A. No; the embers were burning, and the rollers of the blind in the window—that would not have gone out by itself if it had not had water put on it, and the clothes-horse was alight.
COURT to SUSAN BEARD. Q. Which door did the prisoner come out of? A. The private door.
STEPHEN MARTIN . I am one of the London Fire Brigade, and have been a fireman twenty years—I went with Jerrard and found a very bright flame going right across the shop—I did not go into the kitchen that night or the following day—I was there a week afterwards on night duty—I looked at the kitchen ceiling and saw the gas pipe melted—I also examined the flooring of the shop—I should think there is no connexion between the kitchen and the shop.
JURY. Q. Had you an opportunity of knowing the contents of the basket? A. It appeared to be clothes or bits of cloth; I am not certain, it was burnt so much—there might be pieces as big as the top of my cap left.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Did you observe boxes both of male and female clothing in the shop? A. I did not.
JURY. Q. Did the gas pipe go over the, ceiling? A. Yes; that was melted by the heat of the fire in the kitchen—the gas from that pipe would not set light to the floor above because it was turned off at the meter—the meter was in the kitchen, in the front of the house at the far end of the kitchen near the area; that is where it is turned off, and it was turned off.
JOHN BAXTER . I am a fireman at the Holborn station, and have been so three years and four months—I arrived at this fire about a quarter to 10 o'clock—I remained there the whole night in charge of the premises; I examined them to see that all the fire was out—I saw no means of communication between the fire in the kitchen and the fire in the shop—the ceiling was entire—there was no hole where it could get through.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you look to see whether there was a crevice; did you get a ladder or steps to see whether you could pass a pen through? A. No.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. You looked at the ceiling? A. Yes; to see if there was any hole burnt—I saw nothing at all in the shop, of a communication between the two.
MR. SLEIGH. here called upon Simanomtz Bennett, the prisoner's husband, to produce his policy of insurance, which he did.
JOHN CHURCH . I am head manager at the Phœnix Office—this paper (The policy) bears the signature of three of the Directors of that company; I know their writing—these signatures are their writing respectively—this is one of their forms of insurance. MR. GIFFARD objected to this, there being no proof of the execution of it, or of the gentlemen being Directors.
COURT to SUSAN BEARD. Q. Do you know that person sitting at the end of the seat there (The person who had produced the policy)? A. Yes; it is Mr. Bennett, the prisoner's husband. THE COURT considered that the policy was admissable, and that MR. GIFFARD could address the Jury as to its genuineness. It was disted December 3d, 1859, for 600l. by Simanowitz Bennett of 11, West-street, Golden-square with the Phœnix Company.
JAMES HORWOOD . I am in the employ of Mr. Winstanley, a surveyor of Paternoster-row—I went to 11, West-street, and took a claim with me, a portion of which relating to the household goods and wearing apparel, I
read in the prisoner's presence—this is the claim, (produced) this is the part I read—I asked to see the items—she was in the room at that time and with her husband—she pointed them out to me—they were four oil paintings, thirteen picture-frames, a chest of drawers damaged, a dressing glass damaged, four sheets, one cotton dress, one linen dress, one line dress, &c.—I asked them together to point these things out to me, first one then the other—those articles in my opinion are worth 40l. 16l. for which 54. 12s. 2d. has been claimed—I went into each room, but I only took notice of what the prisoner's husband had claimed for—the value of those articles, at a rough guess, would be I should fancy from 150l. to 160l.—the amount for whioh they are insured is 306l.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the stock over insured? A. I have no doubt that it was—I was examined before the Magistrate, allow me to explain—when I said before the Magistrate, the re-instating price, it is probable that it was not, but there is a wonderful difference between cost price and reinstating price—it was not more insured than a prudent man, wishing to protect himself from fire, would insure, if he insured for what he could sell the articles for, clearly not.
GOURT. Q. What is a piece-broker, is he a person who buys pieces or remnants of cloth? A. Yes; and also sells needles, and buttons, and sewing silk for tailors' use only—if he had got three yards of cloth for 1s. he might not be able to replace them for 20l.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Was the claim which you read to him for compensation 40l.? A. 44l. 6s.—what I read to him was 54l. for household goods, that is an over claim—I think it is 20l. too much; it is not very uncommon for the office and the claimant to differ 20l.—I do not know whether the prisoner was occupying the house until the charge was made; I saw her, there on one occasion—I was examined before the Magistrate the first day she appeared, that is about ten days since—I do not know whether she was summoned, she was there—the fire happened on Thursday, and we examined the house on the following Monday, 30th April—I am not aware of any charge being made against her before the Magistrate before June—I was at Marlborough-street when the proceedings began—she and her husband were in the body of the Court, their names were called and they answered; they were not in custody—with reference to matters that I did not examine, the guess I gave is very rough; it is not the custom for persons from our office to examine the goods—when there is an intention to insure and there is no officer for that purpose, it is done occasionally, with regard to building but not to stock; any clerk in the office might be sent—I saw the remains of the wearing apparel nearly consumed, and also two boxes of wearing apparel under the counter.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. I see here that the sum insured on the household furniture is 306l.? A. Yes; I believe the real value of that property to be from 150l. to 180l.—the cause of the delay in preferring the charge was that an inquest was previously held at which I gave evidence.
MR. SLEIGH to JOHN BAXTER. Q. Did you see the prisoner come in after the fire? A. No; she was in before I got there; Mr. Bennett was present—he asked what was the matter as I opened the door to let him in, and seemed very much surprised; his wife was crying and said, "There has been another fire here"—he asked where it was and went into the shop, looked round and seemed greatly surprised.
MR. SLEIGH to GEORGE STAPLES. Q. Did Mr. Bennett say anything to Mr. Bennett, or she to him with reference to this matter? A. I was not
there when be came home—I was there When she came home—I asked her whether they were insured, and she said that she did not know for her husband was out—I left word with my man, and when her husband came home I went round again—her husband had then gone to a publie-housd; I followed him there—I went in at one door as he went out of the other, with a can, and as I supposed something to drink in it—I went up with him to the first floor, and asked him in the prisoner's if he was insured—I said, "You recollect my face again"—he said, "Yes damn, I wish I had never seen your face again"—I had seen him before on the other occasion three years ago, when there was a fire at the same (*) and two houses were destroyed—that was on 1st February, 1809.
MR. GIFFARD stated that he wished to produce a person who was outside the court, but whose name was not known. The prisoner's husband was directed, to point him out to an officer and bring him in, his name was then stated be Sutton.
COURT to JAMES HORWOOD. Q. Did Mr. button mate the valuation? A. I am not aware that he did I think he will tell you he did not.
MR. SLEIGH to JOHN CHURCH. Q. What is the name of the company who issued this policy? A. The Phœnix Fire Office. (The act of incorporation of the Phœnix Fire Insurance Company was here put in by MR. SLEIGH, on reading which MR. GIFFARD contended that the property should be laid in the secretary, the Phœnix Fire Office not being now a Corporation. The COUNT proposed to amend the indictment under Lord Campbell's act. MR. GIFFARD contended that Lord Campbell's act did not apply to Arson, and that therefore there was no power to amend, upon which MR. SLEIGH put Mr. Sutton into the witness box.)
ISAAC SUTTON . I am the principal surveyor of the Phœnix Fire Office—George William Lovell is the secretery of the company—he was one of the secretaries at the time of the execution of this policy in 1859.
Cross-examined. Q. Are there more secretaries than one? A. Willmer Harris appointed by the trustees, but I do not think it falls within my range of duty—I do not know, of my own knowledge how they appointed.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. You say there is another secretary? A. Yes; they were joint secretaries, but Wilhier Harris is How seoretary—he was so within the last three weeks—they were joint secretaries in November and December last.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Are you here as one of the witnesses the prosecution? A. I have been sumotoned as such; I was told he by Mr. Lowe, clerk to Mr. Dames—I did not examine the stock in trade or the goods of the prisoner's husband; my duty to survey risks—I went through the house aud saw the stock in trade, and the furniture, and all the property in the house generally; I took no observations about it—the prisoner husband did not tell me what he valued it at, nor did I say what the value of it was; I said nothing to him about it.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Was the prisoner these? A. Yes, they were both there; both husband and wife—it was in December, 1859, I think—she knew the object for which I came, whatever passed they both took part in; in going over the house she went with us, but there was no pointing out particularly—the conversation generally was about effecting an insurance—there were cartainly two secretaries on 22d April, joint secretaries, whose names I have given—Mr. John Davis is one of the Directors of the company.
MR. SLRIGH applied to the Court to amend the indictment, which teas done by making the First Count, to defraud "George William Lovell, then, continually and now, secretary for the time being," the Second Count to defraud "William Harris," and George Lovell then being secretaries, and Third Count to defraud John Dairies, then and thence, continually, now being one of the members of the society. MR. GIFFARD then contended that he ought to be allowd to recall Mr. Sutton to cross-examine with respect to the names now inserted by amendment in the indictment, which he was unable to do until the record was in its present shape, which THE COURT declined to allow, but would put any question to the witness for MR. GIFFARD.
COURT to ISAAC SUTTON. Q. How do you know that Mr. Davis is a member? A. I have seen cheques and policies signed by him, and I see him repeatedly at the office.
MR. GIFFARD further contended that the Act of Parliament upon which the Court had made the amendment, did not apply to this case, the words in the company's act being "All prosecutions preferred by or on behalf of the said society" and that the present prosecution was neither the one nor the other. MR. SLEIGH contended that this was not a private prosecution, but one on behalf of the Crown. THE COURT overruled the objection, but stated that it might become a matter for further consideration if necessary.
COURT to GEORGE RICHARD STAPLES. Q. What was the condition of the floor Of the shop; what was the worst that had happened to it? A. It was charred up about one-third through, in some places; more than scorched, it is burnt—a portion of it is charcoal, so that you could scratch it off with your nail—the two panels of the passage door were burnt through; almost sufficient to put your head through—that hole would create considerable draught; it would take the fire higher, to a floor above—they were burnt from the inside, outwards—that is the door out of the shop into the passage.
Witness for the Defence,
ANDREW TRIMMING . I am a surveyor, and have carried on business in Adam-street for the last twenty-two or twenty-three years—I examined the house where the prisoner lived, where toe fire took place—there is a most easy and immediate means of communication for a flame between the two rooms—under the lining of the head of the kitchen window is a large fissure or crack, occasioned by the vibration of the house towards the street, which is very uncommon in houses; that fissure extends very nearly the entire length of the window—I saw that there had been a fire there; the communication had evidently gone that way, its passage was marked—the upper portion of the frame was charred, immediately up to this crack—cobwebs, some of which remain on the opposite corner, are entirely removed from this portion of the frame, cleaned away—I then probed the crack to see where it led to, and found it led immediately to the under side of the floor board of the shop; I then went to the shop floor and there discovered a clear and large opening to the extent of many inches in length, and three-eighths of in inch in width—from different parts of the ceiling, but especially immediately over this opening, were hanging various articles partly consumed, those immediately over the opening were a bundle of one or two dozen tailor's measuring tapes, the under part of them was more or less burnt away, and had evidently come in contact with fire, in the situation in which they still remain—I think the burning of the cotton blind would be most likely to produce the result I saw, because the door would immediately create a draught to the fireplace, and it would naturally find that opening and ascend by it—the shop door communicating with the passage there would be
a large chamber of air—the fire being created under the floor, and this being a communication existing, the natural tendency of flame would be to find its way through the opening to the shop—I do not care about exhausting the air or even diminishing it if there is a passage of'air; the fire being underneath and an opening above, it would naturally find its way—if you hold a candle to a hole leading from a lower room to an upper one, the flame will find its way through the hole, which would at once do the office of a little chimney.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. When was it you made the examination of these premises? A. I think on Monday or Tuesday last—I first became acquainted with the fact that a fire had occurred at that place about five minutes before—I never saw the prisoner's husband till this moment—I have rather directed my attention to the prevention of fires in buildings—I have never made investigations in cases of fire supposed to be wilful—this is my first essay in that branch of my profession—it was not by the prisoner's husband that I was taken to see the premises—I walked—there was a solicitor who I happened to know, and who I met five minutes before—I was not informed that an inquest had been held till that moment, it might have been mentioned on the way to the place—I heard that an enquiry had been made, I did not know whether at the police-court or where—I went for the purpose of making an examination, and being possibly examined myself afterwards.
Q. Did you think as a scientific gentleman, possibly to become a scientific witness hereafter, that it would be proper to solicit the fire brigade people to be present? A. I thought nothing about it—I did not solicit the presence of any third or independent party, not with the knowledge that the man was a fireman—a man was there, but I did not know he was a fireman till after I left the house—I have not seen that person here to-day—having made these investigations I arrived at the conclusion that I have stated here to-day—I did not then suggest that it would be a fair and proper thing thai those who had investigated the matter should be called to look at this great big fissure, to see whether it was in the same condition as when they saw it after the fire—I saw that it was an old fissure, one of some years' existence, that was perfectly clear—that is the fissure that runs along by the window curtain—at the time I saw the fissure, I saw the part of the counter where the fire had been raging in the shop—I did not see that the fire was confined for the most part to the centre of the counter, and underneath it—I saw it in no particular part—the shop generally was more or less charred with fire in every portion—the under portion of the fissure may have been three fourths of an inch wide—the large portion, immediately over which these articles were hanging partially consumed, was in front of what we should call the story post—the front window is here (pointing to the plan)—it is very near the door—it is on the entrance side of the counter—it is a perfectly parellel opening, supposing this to be the story post, it had moved away three-eighths of an inch in the width of the story post.
COURT. Q. Do you say that it was on the public side of the counter? A. Yes, and close up to the face of the shop—it was a place that anybody coming into the shop might have stepped over—it ought to have been seen by the witnesses who have been examined to-day—it was just by the side of the door, anybody might see it, or thrust a stick down; it is on your left as you enter, one or two feet from you—I have been in Court to-day, and heard the fireman describe that the bulk and body of the fire was raging under the counter, and so to speak, on the proprietor's side of it, and other
places also, but I have heard do one deny that it was all over the shop, although it raged there principally—as an architect and surveyor I should have more prudence than to enlarge the opening—I did not take away, or cause to be taken away, any of the ceiling in order to examine the entire portion of the boards themselves—the upper portion being consumed, as you have heard, I considered it unnecessary.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. In your judgment would it have been proper to widen the hole? A. No; nor did I trace what the operation of the fire would be—I saw the certain means of introduction from one room to the other, and my mission was ended—that was a hole which had doubtless existed for years—it had been the work of time since the house was built, or at any rate since it was floored—it is a common occurrence from the vibration—if the ceiling had been plastered in the last eight or ten years, probably it would have been filled up—a fireman was there, he assisted me in making these discoveries, but I did not know he was a fireman; he might have heard my observations.
COURT. Q. Do you believe the fire in the shop originated from the fire below? A. My object was to see the possibility of the means of communication, but with regard to the transit of the fire, I am not able to guess—I immediately arrived at the conclusion that the fire in the shop above originated in the room below, and that opinion is not now altered—I swear that in my judgment the fire in the shop above originated in the kitchen below, but if it was put to me that the tapes were not hanging there at the time, it would create a doubt; but presuming the things to exist then as they were left by the fire, that is my opinion—I express my opinion chiefly as to the mode of transit of the fire—I do not know what was behind the counter, or suspended over the ceiling, and I do not know the variety of draughts in the shop; these are matters upon which one has no doubt whatever, and it is my opinion that the fire in the shop originated in the kitchen below, but I do not say that it is founded upon any absolute or certain judgment—the hole above is opposite to the other; you might go at this hour and push up a small walking-stick—they are not exactly opposite, but a surveyor's rod or rule would pass from one to the other, or a small walking-stick.
Q. If the fire originated in the shop below, the flame must have come through one fissure in the ceiling and then through the other fissure and burnt something in the shop? A. I will not say, because the fissure might be filled with paper or combustible matter, which would be a vehicle of the flame, and which would no longer exist; but without that I consider that through those twelve inches which I suppose the flame would have to travel it could have travelled without any aid from combustible matter—I do not know whether the edges of the fissure in the shop were charred; the floor was so dark and covered with remains I did not examine them to see whether they were charred from fire, or from the embers about—I did not take the trouble to look whether the edges were charred, and I do not know whether in the present position that would be discoverable—it is possible that the flame would have gone through the fissure without considerably charring the edges, and so as to set fire to the tapes over it—I cannot tell how long the tapes were; they must have burned half their length—my theory is that the flame might have got through the crack, set fire to the tapes, and gone out without much charring the edges—on the lower edges the fire was clearly traceable, quite up to the fissure, and it was perfectly clean there and not like the floor.
JURY to GEORGE RICHARD STAPPLES. Q. Is there a burner over the counter? A. There is one in the window at the end of the counter—the side door was shut; a man who is here, Martin, opened it—there was no gas burner on the counter over the place where the fire under the counter was—the gas burner was in the window, and the pipe came up on the right side; they are two separate branches, one serves the shop and the other goes to the kitchen—the pipe goes from the meter below up to the right hand angle of the window as you stand in the street, and there is a metal pipe goes off from it; it comes through the kitchen ceiling.
COURT to STEPHEN MARTIN. Q. How was the door of the shop? A. Shut when I got there; I opened it.
JURY to SUSAN BNARD. Q. Was there a cat kept there? A. Yes, I believe there was a black cat.
JURY to GEORGE LOWER. Q. Was there any inclosure to the show board? A. My impression is that there was not; it is very narrow, only nine inches wide.
GUILTY .— Four Years' Penal Servitude ,
NEW COURT.—Friday, June 15th, 1860,
PRESENT—MR. RECODER, and Mr. Ald. CONDER. For cases tried this day see Surrey cases,
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. O'CONNELL conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM CARTER . I am horse keeper at the Swan Inn, Stratford. On the night of 27th May, I was in a four-wheeled chaise, which was in a ride where we keep the carriages—there was another man with me—I was on the further side, the dark side—I saw the prisoner come into the yard and he pulled the ladder from the lamp, and placed it against the water-butt—he saw Knight, the man who was with me, but he did not see me—he said to Knight, "You had better come out of that trap, or else the ostler will pull you out"—Knight said, "I am, (doing no harm, only sitting down taking my rest"—the prisoner theu walked round the closet and up the yard—he came back in a quarter of an hour and then he walked out of the yard again—he went out of the front door—Knight then left me, but I remained in the chaise—the prisoner then came down the yard again the third time, from twenty minutes to half an hour after Knight had left me, and he went and took this tap from the butt; I saw him take it—he then went up the ladder and took this ball; he took them both away—I can't say whether he put them under his jacket, but he took them out of tne yard—in three or four minutes afterwards I went up the yard and saw two officers—Mr. Hadland keeps the house, it belongs to him—I am in the employ of the General Omnibus Company—I can swear positively to these articles, I have had the handling of them for four or five years—the chaise I was in is fourteen, or fifteen, or sixteen yards from the water-butt.
Cross-examined by MR. M'DONNELL. Q. How large is the yard? A. That I can't give you satisfaction about, it is larger than this Court; the omnibusses
turn round in it—the prisoner said to Knight, "Come out, or the ostler will pull you out"—I was in the chaise first, I was waiting for one of my horses which was ill—I remained when Knight went away—I am not aware of any other persons being in the yard—the prisoner never saw me at all, I was by the side of the man that he spoke to—I was sitting by the Bide of Knight in the chaise.
JAMES HADLAND . I am landlord of the Swan Hotel, Stratford—on the night of 27th May, Carter gave me some information—I went in the yard and examined the water-butt—I found the tap was gone, and the water was flowing from the butt—the prisoner was brought back afterwards—I can swear to this tap being mine—I cannot swear to this ball—I have compared this with the piece it was broken from, and it corresponds exactly—these things are worth about 1l.—I believe I had seen the prisoner, I believe he was in work.
THOMAS KNIGHT . I am a labourer, and live at Stratford—on that Sunday night I was with Carter sitting on the same seat in a phaeton—I saw the prisoner come down the yard, he came and touched me on the knee, and said I should get pulled out if I sat there; I said, no I should not, I was not doing any harm—I did not see him move anything in the yard.
Cross-examined. Q. How many persons were in the yard? A. I and Carter, nobody else, that I saw, but the prisoner—I was close to Carter—when the prisoner spoke to me it was sufficiently loud for Carter to hear him—Carter sat more in the dark. THOMAS KINCHENDEN (Policeman, K 53). I am stationed at West Ham—on Sunday night, 27th May, Carter came to me while I was on duty in the Broadway—I went round to a place leading to the Romford-road—I saw the prisoner standing against the churchyard railings, he was in the act of drawing his arm through the railings—I said to him "You must go back with me to the Swan public-house and see the ostler"—he trembled very much, but he went back, and while I was trying to find the landlord and the ostler he ran away—I ran after him—he jumped over a garden wall and I lost him—I went back to where I had seen him—I got over the church-yard railings, and found there two brass taps and this ball, inside the railing—they were so near that a person standing outside could have placed them there—when I saw the prisoner there he was stooping down and drawing his hand out—I saw the prisoner again on the following night after he was taken in custody.
GEORGE CLARK (Policeman, K 145). I am stationed at West Ham—I was on duty on 28th May—I saw the prisoner; when he saw me he ran away—I had not said anything to him—I ran after him and caught him—I told him the charge that was made against him—he said, "I did not mean to be locked up last night."
COURT to THOMAS KNIGHT. Q. Did you see the prisoner when he was brought back by the policeman? A. Yes; I was standing talking to the ostler—I did not say anything to the prisoner—nobody but the officer had spoken to him before he ran away.
GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.
MR. O'CONNELL conducted the Prosecution.
in Essex—he went to sea in April—when he went I came up to London, and remained for a month—before I came to London I had bolted the book door of my house, and locked the front door—I had bolted the middle door inside—I had left a quantity of clothes and property in the house—I returned on 28th May, about 2 o'clock, and on coming to the house I could not get in—there was a key inside the lock—George Smith got in for me through the back door window—he let me in at the back door—on going in I saw the prisoner; I asked him, what business he had there, he said, he came to take a night's lodging—I sent for a policeman—before the policeman came I went up stairs; I found the door looked—on finding that, I came down and asked the prisoner for the key—he said, it was in the coal cellar—I asked him to get it, and he did—having got it, I went up stairs—I went first into the front room and then into the back room—I found this bundle containing a number of things which I had left in the drawers—these articles are mine—this waistcoat is my husband's—my box was open and the things strewed about the room—in my bed-room I found my drawers all open and empty—I missed some rings, a brooch, and some money in a money-box—some silver articles, a clock, and several other things—there was a looking-glass moved and tied up in the back room—a policeman came and I gave the prisoner into custody.
JURY. Q. Did it appear as if the bed had been lain on? A. Yes.
THOMAS CONNER (Policeman, K 117). On 28th May, I was sent for to the house of the last witness—I found the prisoner sitting on a chair in the back-kitchen—the looking-glass was tied up and was on a table in the kitchen—the prisoner said, he merely did it to get victuals—I found this bundle of clothes there—I searched the prisoner and found on him these two pieces of foreign coin—these other articles were found at the pawnbroker's, all which the last witness identified.
HENRY MILSTHAD . I produce a certificate—(Read: "Central Criminal Court, December 18th, 1854. John Goddard convicted of stealing some carpenter's tools having been before convicted. Confined Six Months.")—I was present, the prisoner is the person.
GUILTY.— Three years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Baron Bramwell.
MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution. MR. TINDAL ATMINSON conducted the Defence.
Before Mr. Recorder.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Three Months.
JOHN HUMPHREY STEWART . I am a horse master, living at 12, Cottageplace, Greenwich—on Tuesday, 15th May, I turned a pony out on Blackheath to graze—I saw it there about 9 o'clock in the evening—next morning about 6 o'clock I went there; it was then missing—it was a bay gelding—on the following Wednesday I saw it in the possession of the
witness Pett—in consequence of what I heard, I gave information to the police—I know the prisoner by sight—I never gave him, or any one else, authority to take the pony—he had assisted me a very little in work about the pony, some time previous—I had paid him a shilling for some work that he did—the value of the pony was 12l.
THOMAS PETT . I am a labourer of No. 1, Common Castle-lane, Kingsland—on 16th May I was at Romford-market—I saw the prisoner there—he had another party with him, and the pony that was afterwards shown to the last witness—he wanted to sell it, he asked 8l. for it—he said he had been working it all the winter in a coal and coke cart, and he wished to dispose of it on purpose to buy donkeys, to work on the heath—I offered him 4l. 10s. and I gave him another 5s.—he sold it for that.
JOHN BRIDEGEMAN (Policeman, R 88). I took the prisoner on Blackheath Hill, and told him I apprehended him on a charge of horse-stealing—he said that I was mistaken in the person—I told him that I would find a party who would prove that he was the party.
GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted.
HENRY SPICER (Policeman, R 188). "I produce a certificate (Read: Maidstone, January 7th, 1858, Charles Janes convicted of stealing a coat.—Confined Six Months")—I was present—the prisoner is the person.
GUILTY.**— Confined Eighteen Months.
MR. ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.
JAMES SHARPE . My father is executor to my late uncle, who died last year—my uncle was a pawnbroker, carrying on his business at Deptford—I had been assisting him in the business about seventeen years—the prisoner had been in the service a much longer time—it was my business latterly, to wind up my uncle's affairs—I was entrusted by my father to do so—there were two shops; one for sale, the other for receiving pledges—the prisoner often received from the salesman in the sale shop, things to dean and brush—his general duty was to attend to the pawnbroking department—in consequence of certain information. I marked these five coats and three books (produced)—I marked some of them, and copied the marks off some of them—there were two other costs that I marked afterwards—there were five coats air in one parcel—I marked them all, about 6th April—I marked the books a little later—I missed them on 21st April; and the coats on 27th and 28th—I missed the whole—on 23d April I instructed Westbrook the officer to keep a watch on the house—the prisoner was given into custody on 18th May—I went the same day with Westbrook to search the prisoner's house—I there found three books and three coats—the prisoner had no authority to take those off the premises.
Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Did you take any part in the business yourself previous to the death of the former proprietor? A. I did for some years—I was chiefly engaged in the pawnbroking department—the prisoner had the general management of that department—I do not know that for the last several years, he has had the privilege from the deceased proprietor of taking away to his own house any articles which he pleased, selling them, and paying over to the proprietor the amount at which they were charged in the books—I never heard of that at all—when the prisoner had anything from the house, he invariably enquired the price of it before he took it away—if he required any article for himself or any friend, he showed it to his employer, and then he might take it—he could take anything by first asking
his employer—he was not in the habit of taking away things without mentioning it to his employer, and subsequently handing over the money for them, according to the estimate put upon it in the shop—the goods were not marked with the prices they were to fetch; the cost price was put on them, but not the sale price—the prisoner was not in the department where the clothes sale was managed—he used to sell and redeem pledges of plate and jewellery to people who came into the shop—when he took property away he mostly paid for it afterwards; sometimes he did not—I have never heard him say that he had sold such a thing, which he had previously taken away, and then ask how much he should be charged for it, and pay the money over—my uncle, when he was alive, used to take a considerable share in the management of the business, so I was not always present—he was taken in custody at the house not at the shop—previously to that the solicitor spoke to him about it; I was present—he charged him with taking things away—I cannot recollect the exact words; he spoke of the fact generally, that he had been guilty of a systematic robbery—the prisoner said he should decline answering any questions—he did not say, "There is no foundation for such a charge, but as you think proper to take these proceedings, to charge me in this manner, I shall decline to say anything until I go before a proper tribunal"—he did not make such a reply—he did not say that he was innocent, or that the charge was unfounded, or anything of that sort—he had the management of the jewellery department—I went immediately and searched his house; I did not find any of my diamonds or plate, or any such articles as those.
MR. ROBINSON. Q. Had he any authority, under any circumstances, to take away property without first intimating it to his employer? A. He had not—when he has taken away goods and paid for them afterwards, I generally entered them in the book in which I keep the account of his wages; and generally put down to his account the amount which he was to be charged—that was the case as far as I know.
JOHN JAMES ANDREW . I am a partner in the firm of Atkins, Andrew, Atkins, and Irvine, solicitors—I was present on the occasion spoken to by the last witness—I told the prisoner he has charged by Mr. Sharpe with stealing certain articles of wearing apparel, and embezzling certain monies—I remarked, "This is a serious offence, Buchanan, have you anything to say?"—he hesitated for some considerable time, and at last said, "I would rather not say anything at all"—that is, I believe, the whole, as near as I recollect.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you make use of the term "systematic robbery?" A. I told him he was suspected of robbing his master; I don't know whether I used the word systematic—he certainly appeared very much confused—I offered him a great deal of time to answer—I also asked him if he would like to call in any of his fellow workmen, or if he would like to send for a solicitor—he declined doing that—he was called into the sitting room, where I was engaged with Mr. Sharpe—he appeared taken aback and confused at the charge.
JAMES WESTBROOK (Policeman, R 114). In consequence of information I received, I kept watch at Sharpe's shop—I went on 24th April, for the first time, about half-past 1 in the day—I saw a female come across from the opposite side, and go straight into Mr. Sharpe's shop—she looked about a little time, then went into the shop, and then came out again in a few minutes without anything—I watched her two or three days, and she did the same; came out without anything.
COURT to JAMES SHARPE. Q. What time did you go out to dinner of a day? A. About half-past 1, or 2 o'clock—I generally remained away about an hour—I left Buchanan there.
JAMES WESTBROOK (continued). I watched her for a month—I saw her there eighteen times altogether—I saw her two days at ten minutes to 2—I saw her carry a bundle to Buchanan's house—I did not see her come out of the shop on those occasions—I had not seen her go into the shop either—at first I kept on one side of the road, some distance off, where I had a good view of the doorway; then I went further off—I was farther off on these occasions when I did not see her come out—on the 9th. I saw her go into the shop, and come out with something—she looked in at the window before she went in—I did not see whether Buchanan was there—she looked in at the window, and then went in—she had not anything with her then—she came out with a bundle which looked like a pledge parcel—it might contain one or two coats, nothing more—she took it to Buchanan's house; the house to which I subsequently went—I saw that done also on the 5th and the 16th of May—that was the last time—the same thing was done on each occasion—she remained outside sometimes a quarter of an hour before she went in—I cannot exactly say, because I saw her so many times, and when she did not go to his house, I did not take so much notice—I took him in custody on the 18th; I searched his house with Mr. Sharpe, and found the coats and books which have been spoken to—I produce a coat which I received from Mr. Hill—I found twenty-nine duplicates on the prisoner.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. What is that mark? A. Some figures; it is not in my writing—I did not take this coat in pledge myself that I am aware of—the mark is made by our salesman—I copied it in a book and compared it with it—I can swear positively, from looking at that mark, that that coat was in my possession, either on 27th or 28th April—it is an unredeemed pledge; it is part of our sale store—I know who the woman is—she has been in the habit of using my shop many years as a pawnbroking establishment—I do not know positively that the prisoner was in the habit, both in my predecessor's time and my own, of purchasing pawn-tickets from old customers, and redeeming the property himself—if he did it, it was without the consent of his employers; I never saw him do it—I believe that he did purchase tickets, before the time of this affair—this is part of the unredeemed, and part of the sale stock; the time having expired—I do not know that it was his habit with respect to old customers, to advance them money for the purpose of getting them some of their property, even after the time had expired, and the property had been forfeited—I never heard of his doing that; he never told me—since he has been in custody, I have heard from Bow-street, that he promised to redeem things for the woman—I never heard it before that; I never made inquiries before.
MR. ROBINSONS. Q. Would you ever have sanctioned it if you had known it? A. No—I have seen the woman here to day—we have not taken in any fresh pledges since my uncle's death—she may have renewed things, but not made any fresh pledges.
COURT. Q. When did your uncle die? A. 7th April, 1859.
WILLIAM HILL . I have carried on business two years, at Cross-road, Deptford, as a corn and flour dealer—the prisoner owed me 4l. odd—I met him two days previous to his being taken in custody—he said he was ashamed to meet me, owing me that amount of money, that he could get no
settlement down where he was—he said, "By-the-bye, I sent a coat to your house a short time ago;" he said he did not know that I wanted one, but that if it suited, the price was 15s.—this is the coat that I received from him—that was all that took place.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you known this defendant several years? A. I have known him personally some three or four years—during the whole of that time he has borne an unexceptionable character for honesty and integrity, and general good behaviour.
ROBERT REID . I am salesman to Mr. Sharpe—it was my habit to send parcels of goods into the other shop to the prisoner to be denned and brushed—about April I sent a lot of clothes in; I subsequently found that they were not returned to me by the prisoner.
Cross-examined. Q. How long have you been salesman there? A. Thirteen years—I do not know that the prisoner was in the habit, before the late Mr. Sharpe's death, of taking goods out of stock and selling them on his own account, and afterwards paying the money over for them—I never heard of his doing that without getting the price from me—having got the price of the article before he took it, he has occasionally taken things to a friend of his for a brother-in-law, and paid subsequently after he had sold them—I have told him the price—if he wanted things of me for anybody he used to bring the articles to me and aak me the price—he has never said "I have taken such an article and got a customer for it; how much are you going to charge me for it?" and then paid me the money; I never heard of that at all—I was there in the late Mr. Sharpe's'time; he attended to the business as well as myself.
' MR. ROBINSON. Q. As far as you know of what Mr. Sharpe did, did you ever hear of such a thing? A. Not of taking the things away without the price—in December last he told me that he wanted a coat, or waistcoat, or trousers, for a Mr. Keens, who, I think, is his brother—he brought them to me and asked me to make a memorandum of it—I told him to make out the memorandum, and he did so; I have got it now—since that there was a pair of black cloth trousers, which he said he wanted for his son—he always asked me the price before he took them.
COURT. Q. Had he any means of hearing what the price was, except from you? A. No.
MR. SLEIGH called
WILLIAM EVERDON . I reside at High-street, Deptford, and am employed in the firm of Smith and Adams, coal merchants—previous to going into their employment I was in that of Mr. Sharpe, pawnbroker; and at the same time with the defendant—he was there when I went into their service, which I did in 1837, and remained with them till 1856—the prisoner was on terms of almost friendship with Mr. Sharpe; in Mr. Sharpe's absence he managed the business—I did not know of his dealing, while I was there, with any of the property of the establishment on his own account—I am not aware that it was the practice to take unredeemed pledges, sell them on his own account, and afterwards pay over the money to his employers—it was never done by him to my knowledge—I do not know that he had any authority from the late Mr. Sharpe to do so—I do not know that he ever sold any of the property on his own account, and paid cost price or a little more to his employer.
Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Q. You never did any such thing yourself? A. No.
the employment of the late Mr. Sharpe; I entered it in 1828, and left in 1846—I was in every department during that time—I was an apprentice for seven years; I knew all about the business—the prisoner used, in common with ourselves, to deal with Mr. Sharpe's property on his own account—if we wanted articles for our friends we got them, and then returned the money to Mr. Sharpe.
COURT. Q. What was the course pursued if he wanted anything? A. It was our invariable custom to mention that we wanted such and such articles and to take them for approval and have the price fixed, and then take them—I never took any article without first mentioning it to Mr. Sharpe or the manager of the business, and I think it was not the custom to do so.
RICHARD WILLIAM WEBB . Q. I have been in the employment of Mr. Sharpe between eleven and twelve years—it began in 1832 and ended in 1843—the prisoner was there during the same time—I have been accustomed to take property out of that house for a number of years, without its being priced—the custom was when articles were brought down from the ware-house, to put on the date they were pledged, and the price lent on them—the goods mostly were not valued before customers applied for them—I have often taken articles for my mother's approval, and if they suited her I would return to the shop and get Mr. Sharpe to value them, and then take them back again, and those that would not suit were returned to the shop—that was done frequently, generally indeed, without Mr. Sharpe's knowledge—the defendant used to value the things as often as Mr. Sharpe—he was superior to me in the establishment—I have no doubt that he used to take things away himself, without telling Mr. Sharpe that he took them—I have known him to send away things frequently without telling Mr. Sharpe—he valued property as well as Mr. Sharpe; he would be entitled to value that very property which be sent away, if Mr. Sharpe was not in the way—Mr. Sharpe was very frequently out of the way—the prisoner would have an account running on through six or twelve months with the late Mr. Sharpe.
COURT. Q. How do you know that? A. I have seen him settle many times with Mr. Sharpe; and hand in a paper too, saying "I have purchased these things," and the difference would be paid to him in his wages.
MR. SLEIGHT. Q. Are you in any employment now? A. No; I have been out of business for some time—I have means, but they are rather limited—I Have been out of employment some years—I have a small annuity—the prisoner was decidedly on terms of friendship and intimacy with the late Mr. Sharpe—it was like a family party almost—his confidence was unlimited—I have known the prisoner ever since that time—I have seen him daily—I have lived in his house and have known how he has conducted himself.
Cross-examined. Q. I am afraid it was not like a family party when you were there? A. They had a great deal of trouble in Chancery—I am brother-in-law to the present Mr. Sharpe—I left the service of the late Mr. Sharpe, in 1843—my mother was related to Mr. Sharpe—I used frequently to take things to my mother for approval—she used to purchase them and make presents of them—Mr. Sharpe has not, on many occasions, threatened to kick me out of the house—I left in 1843—I have slept there frequently without aud with the knowledge of Mr. Sharpe, since that—Mr. Sharpe did forbid me the house since that time; not as late as 1856, much further back than that—I left there in very ill health—I have not been in any regular employment ever since—I would get employment if I could—I
am not fit for any other employment but that—I have never tried to get into that again.
MR. SLEIGH. Q. Is pawnbroking injurious to your health? A. Yes.
RICHARD BARON . I was brought up originally to pawnbroking; I was about thirty years engaged in that—I am engaged in some other business now—I knew the late Mr. Sharpe for many years—I knew the defendant during the whole period that he was in his employment—I was on terms of intimacy with Mr. Sharpe for the last twenty or thirty years, and with the prisoner also; I knew them both—I know of the prisoner's dealing on many occasions with the property without Mr. Sharpens knowledge—I had invariably permission to take articles on approval if I wanted them to effect a sale—I returned what I had not sold—when Mr. Sharpe has been in the shop I have asked him the price; he has referred me to the defendant and said, "He will let you have what you require."
Q. Do you know anything about the prisoner dealing with Mr. Sharpe's property for his own private benefit? A. I never entertained such an idea for a moment—I do not know of his taking part of the stock, and selling it on his own private account—I never purchased a thing from him privately, on his own account.
The prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY .— Confined Eighteen Months.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. MCDONNELL conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN PURLES . I keep the White Hart beer-shop, Blackheath—last Thursday evening, 7th June, the prisoners were there—there were other persons in the room; four civilians—the prisoners were wearing their belts—they appeared sober—four pots of fourpenny ale were called for—they drank it and gave some of it away—after they had been there about an hour, they had a cane-bottom seat which I thought they were going to break—that was about quarter or ten minutes to 10—I took it away for fear they should break it, and oue of them collared me and said, "You b----you shall not have it"—it was a seat to hold about three persons—I do not know whether it was either of the prisoners who collared me, but there were ten or eleven soldiers—when I say collared I mean seised by the throat—they all came round me—it was a soldier who caught me by the throat—Rogan jumped on the table and said something in Irish which I did not understand—they then all took off their belts and put them in their hands, muttered among themselves, and went outside the door, and one came back and broke a window—I shut up the shutters fearing there would be a row, and all came back and knocked at the door and the shutters, and one said, "Come on lads, let us have the b----out"—I did not go outside—that ia all I know of it—I believe it was McTaddon who broke the window, but I cannot say.
Cross-examined by MR. SHARPE. Q. Did you not pull the bench from under one of them? A. No, I asked them to give it to me, and they said, "Are you the landlord of the house"—I said, "Yes"—they said, "You shall not have it, your wife shall have it if she likes"—oue of them brought it to the bar and gave it to her—there was no disturbance in the house—they were all standing up, they were not sitting on the bench—but somebody
collared me when I attempted to take it—they asked me whether they might sing a song, and I said, "Two if you like"—I heard no one say at the bar that they would rid the house of the soldiers—I went down to the barracks next day and identified some person as having been in my house—I did not find afterwards that that man was on guard at the time—Houghay is the man I did not identify—a man that was proved to be on guard that evening.
FREDERICK HURDEN . I was at the White Hart last Thursday evening—the prisoners were there, they sung six or seven songs—there was no disturbance inside the house with the exception of Rogan jumping on the table—I was outside some time afterwards on the opposite side of the road, and heard a cry of "Murder"—I saw some of the prisoners there, but it was dark—the people in the neighbourhood had put their lamps all out, and you could not tell a red jacket from a black or blue one—I saw one or two belts used but could not say by whom—I was not struck by a belt—there was a row—I was knocked down by a soldier but could not say who it was—I saw the prisoners both outside and inside the house.
Cross-examined. Q. When you looked outside the house, did you not see at least ten soldiers in the street? A. Yes.
THOMAS WILLIAM SMITH . I am a hair dresser at Blackheath—on Thursday evening last, about half-past 10, I heard a noise and went outside my door—I saw a number of soldiers making a furious noise and flourishing their belts about—I only saw two policemen—I crossed over and stood as a looker on, perhaps ten minutes, during which time the language and the noise was frightful—they then gradually, by the persuasion of one of their party who tried to get them away, worked their way up on to Blackheath—I followed them there and then returned—I saw King, Rogan, and McTaddon there—McTaddon struck me with a belt on the head—I had seven or eight cuts on the top of my head from one and the other, but from him principally—I saw belts used—they came down the hill some few minutes afterwards with a most furious yell—I saw the shop shutters being shut up—I saw nothing that occurred previous to closing the shutters.
Cross-examined. Q. Are you quite sure you were hit on the head by McTaddon? A. Yes—the lamps were out—it was dark but we were close together—there was a great deal of pushing about—I had never seen him before—when I saw him again he was in custody; I knew him directly I saw him, and said, "That is the man who struck me"—King also struck me—I recognise those three, McTaddon, Rogan, and Connoway—I had a special constable's staff and struck some of them—I was called on by the police to interfere or I should not have done so—I only know by hearsay that they belong to the Donegal militia—they called out, "We will show them what the Donegal men can do"—I concluded that they were Irish by their brogue, but there was not time to think—from the time I first saw them going up the hill to the time they returned ten minutes did not elapse; it is not more than fifty yards to the top of the hill.
COURT. Q. Did you hear anything else shouted out? A. Yes; "We will kill the b----English"—I did not pay much heed to what else they said because the police called on us to assist—about ten or eleven of them rushed down, and there were six or eight of us—they had their belts striking right and left all the way down at the doors and shutters.
WILLIAM BROWN (Policeman, 98 R). I was on duty in Blackheath village in plain clothes, last Thursday night—I heard a row at 'the White Hart and saw the men come out and walk up and down the street—about a
dozen militia-men—the first thing one of them did was "to break a window—I saw all the prisoners there—Rogan called to them to fall in, and they immediately fell in and marched down the street in a very furious manner, calling out, "We will kill the b----English;" and striking at the shutters and everything that came near them—I collected some civilians together, and called upon them to assist me and prevent them doing further injury—Smith was one of them—we made a rush at them, overpowered them, and secured the first five, all except Houghay—I got struck several times with a belt on the face, head, and arm, but we managed to take these five to the station.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you hear a yelling proceeding from outside the public-house at this time, not proceeding from the soldiers, but people yelling after the soldiers? A. No, nobody yelled after them; when I was struck with the belt there was a regular fight and scrimmage going on—there were ten or twelve soldiers; there might have been fourteen—my body was still larger—I was also assisted by two volunteers who were not in uniform—one of them went and got a rifle and joined the crowd—I did not see him strike one of the soldiers and break the stock of his rifle in doing so—I know that there is a rifleman summoned to prove that—I did not see the stock of the man's rifle broken; I saw it after it was broken—I do not know that some of the soldiers had their heads cut open—one was not taken to the hospital to my knowledge; nor is one at the hospital still in a dangerous condition to my knowledge—several of the persons who assisted me had sticks; I do not know whether any of them had pokers"—they got hold of the first things they could—I heard no one call out that they would kill the b----Irish; I think I should have heard it if it was said—I did not see any militia man surrounded by a square or circle of civilians and rat off, nor see him struck when he was trying to get away—I cannot say whether these soldiers came back to rescue their comrade who was in danger of his life—one of the civilians had a drawn sword—there were no riflemen with bayonets, nor was one of the prisoners taken between two riflemen with fixed bayonets—I never heard that there is a strong feeling in Blackheath against the Irish militia.
MR. MCDONNELL. Q. If the expression "Let us kill the b----Irish" had been used, were you sufficiently close to have heard it? A. Yes—I did not hear anything like it—I was also assisted by two other policemen—I had not seen the soldiers strike anybody—all they had done was to holloa, make a row, strike their belts against the shutters, and break a window; they had not assaulted anybody—they had marched up and down two or three times, making a great noise and knocking their belts against the shatters and doors.
COURT to THOMAS SMITH. Q. Were you struck before these men were attempted to be removed? A. Yes; I was struck before the police attempted to take them at all.
WILLIAM NESBITT (Policeman, 303 R). I was on duty at Blackheath abocft half-past 10 o'clock—about nine or ten militiamen were standing outside the public-house with their belts, using fearful expressions—they went into the village and returned in two minutes making use of the same expressions, "We will have the b----English" or something like that—they then wentand struck two or three shutters and returned a third time, and King struck the policeman Brown with his belt; that was before we interfered with them at all; it was when they were attempting to stop the row—I was struck by two of the prisoners, but I could not say which, once on the head, and once
on the shoulder—I took Rogan; he was striking some civilian with a belt but who it was I don't know—Houghay struck me with his belt while I was taking Rogan.
Cross-examined. Q. Was it not the next day that you took Rogan in custody? A. It was not.
THE COURT suggested to MR. SHARPE that it would be impossible to resist a verdict as to the riot.
GUILTY of the riot. — To enter into their own recognizances in 10l. each to appear and receive judgment if called upon.
ELIZA PALIN . I am the wife of Edward Palin of Cross-street, Charlton—on Saturday evening, 27th April, my eon Thomas brought the prisoner home with him; he was a stranger to me—he came again on Sunday about 11, and stopped and dined—my son showed him two concertinas which were there—he left with my son after dinner, and came back by himself about 6 o'clock, and said that he wanted one of the concertinas, the highest noted one—I was up stairs, heard all he said, and came down—my youngest son said "Do you know which it is?"—he said, "Get them out and I will tell you"—Edward said, "Did my brother Tom tell you where to get it"—he said, "Oh yes, it is all right between your brother Tom and me, I am going to have one and my mate is going to have the other"—he went away with it, and in about ten minutes came for the second concertina—I said, "Tom said he would not sell it; did my son Tom say you were to have it?"—he said, "Yes, it is all right; my first lieutenant is at the corner by the public-house; he is going to give me 15s. for the concertina, and I will give Tom 13s. and keep 2s. for selling it"—I said, "Very well," and let him have it, believing his statement—my son came home about an hour afterwards and I mentioned what had taken place to him.
Prisoner. Q. Did you ask me whereabouts your son was? A. No; you did not say that he had gone to Greenwich—he always said that he would not sell the concertina.
THOMAS PALIN . I am a son of the last witness—on 20th April the prisoner accompanied me to my mother's house; after we left I did not send the prisoner back for a concertina; I had not bargained to sell it to him.
Prisoner. Q. Did not you go out with me on Saturday evening? A. Yes—I did not offer to sell you the concertinas for 10s. each; I never said a word about it—they are worth 15s
JAMES WILLIAM CROUCH (Policeman, 118 R). I saw the prisoner apprehended—he was in the company of a man named Cole—in consequence of what Cole told me I went to Cole's house and procured this concertina (produced)—I showed it to the prisoner and asked him if it belonged to him—he said, "Yes"—I asked him what statement he could give of it—he said that he would tell that to the Inspector.
Prisoner's Defence. I was out with the prosecutor about 11 o'clock at night, and he said if I would go back with him he would show me two concertinas which he would take 2s. apiece for; I gave him 2s. deposit and he
told me to come up at 11 o'clock and I should receive them. I went them and he was not at home; I stopped till he came home, and he said that I might come at any time and have the concertinas. I went to the house and received them both.
GUILTY.— Four Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. SLEIGH and ORRIGE conducted the Prosecution.
PHINEAS COWAN . I am a partner in the firm of Lewis, Cowan and Co. soap makers of Barnes, Surrey—Eddingt on has been in the habit of selling bones to me for the last four years—Bromley has been in my employ at various times, and had been taken into my employ within three or four days of this first transaction, 4th April—we have employed Carney some years; I believe he and Bromley are brothers-in-law—from something which took place on 5th April, I watched from the roof of the building—it is large building with a slate roof; you can see from the roof to the ground—it is about twenty feet high—the carts which delivered bones were brought to deliver them at the weighing-machine below which I could see from the roof—I commanded a view of the whole—I was watching, on 5th April, between 5 and 6 in the afternoon, when Eddington came with a cart of bones—Carney and a man named Biggs were weighing them—Biggs is a man who was in our employment, and left some weeks afterwards, and I have not heard of him since—he did not give us notioe to leave, nor did we give him notice—I do not know where he is; he left four or five days previous to 27th April—Mr. Parsons, the foreman, was also there—Carney and Biggs had to lift the bones on to the weighing-machine, and remove them after they had been weighed into baskets—Carney called out the weight to Mr. Payne, who entered it in a book; Eddington also checked the weight—on the whole of the bones being weighed and delivered, Eddington and Payne compare the weight, and on their agreeing Mr. White the cashier pays—Mr. Payne gives an order, either a leaf of his book, or a counterpart, which he tears out—that is Mr. White's authority to pay Eddington; it is a Voucher upon which the money is received—Eddington in this instance made his memorandum on the side of the building, where there was a piece of iron, with chalk—four baskets are employed—the cart is drawn within the building, conveniently near to the weighing-machine—two baskets are put on to the scale-board, and while they are being weighed, two others are being filled—it was the duty of Bromley and Carney to carry away the baskets of bones from the weighing-machine—on this occasion I observed that one basket was removed from the scale-board to the heap when two should have been removed—instead of moving the second they left it on the machine, and another full basket was put on—before the first basket was removed its weight was called out and booked—another full basket was then added to it, and that was weighed again, as if two baskets had been put on, so that the weight of one basket was called out twice—I saw that done five times, so that we were charged with five baskets
more than we received—the weight of two baskets on the scale was called out on each occasion, and put down against me—after I had seen two baskets done that way, I called Mr. White, our cashier, on to the roof, and he came and saw the remaining three—the next occasion was the 13th, when I was in the same position, and saw the same process carried on—Eddington came with a load of bones about the same time—Carney and Biggs were at work, and I think Payne helped them, as he was anxious to get away—he had not helped before—I only saw one basket weighed a second time on that occasion—Biggs was receiving the baskets—on the 20th, Biggs, Carney, Eddington, and Payne were there—I saw one basket left on a second time, and when Mr. Payne came to check the weight, he said, "This basket has been weighed before, I remember it quite well"—the man said, "No, it has not"—but Payne quite was certain, and caused the basket to be removed, so that on that occasion we were not defrauded at all—on the 27th I went to the same spot—the three prisoners were present—Eddington came with his cart about the usual time—I saw that two baskets were left on, as on the previous occasion, the only difference in the process being this, that Mr. Payne stood here, and the basket was there—Bromley came to take the second basket; he put it so, and brought a new basket and put it so, and then took two marrow-bones, from one, and put them to the other, so as to disturb the top, and we were defrauded on that occasion of two baskets of bones—Eddington was assisting filling the baskets—he was standing by, and could see on each occasion what was occurring; he must have known it—he had a different number of baskets—he should have had two empty baskets, or two full ones, but he only parted with one full basket—the custom is to fill two at a time—it was Bromley that moved the baskets in that way—on the baskets being removed, they were taken to a distant heap—these were marrow-bones, and each basket was worth about 13s.—they are supposed to hold a hundredweight, but they hold rather more—on the last occasion I came down from the roof, and as Eddington drove away with Bromley and several more, I went after them with Sergeant Smith, and came up with them at public-house about 200 yards off—I said, "There is something wrong in your bones, Mr. Eddington, and I wish you to come back"—he came, and we re-weighed the bones in his presence—I had put his bones into a distinct heap by themselves, to re-weigh them; all the marrow-bones that had been delivered—we found 2cwt. 27lbs. short—he said, "There is evidently some mistake; have any been taken up stairs?" Mr. Payne said, "No"—I went up stairs, merely to meet the remark, and there were none there—we had taken care previously that there should be no more bones in the place but what he brought—another customer was bringing in some bones at the time—we caused those to be re weighed also, in Eddington's presence, and found that there was no excess, but some few pounds deficient—those were marrow-bones—I then gave Eddington in custody.
Cross-examined by MR. BEST. Q. Did you look down from the roof? A. Yes, through a hole—I had moved a slate so that I could see with great convenience—this happened about twenty feet below me, and I could see the whole of the cart and the men as distinctly as I see you—the hole was large enough—I do not know whether if anybody looked up they could see me—I have never looked up from the bottom—my attention was not directed to the time, but I believe it was between 5 and 6 o'clock on the 5th of April—I am as accurate about the number of baskets, as I am about the time—I paid very great attention to the number of the baskets, but the hour of the day is immaterial—Bromley did not come on the scene at all
till 27th April—one man carries a basket, and the other lifts it on his back, I and then begins to fill up the other one—Eddington sometimes helped it on to his shoulders—I did not make a note.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Were you lying down? A. No; I was in a convenient posture; sometimes on my knees and sometimes stooping—I do not know whether the hole was an inch wide; it was not three—I looked down from very nearly as high as this Court; twenty feet—it is a I sloping roof—my feet were against the parapet wall, in the gutter, and my I body resting on the slates—I had some chaise cushions put there—the cart I and horse were brought into the house—they were both under me, and the I scale was under me—I had a very extended view—the three prisoners and I Payne were moving about—I said nothing to Eddington about it; on 5th I April I let his cart go away—I took a note of the five baskets on that day in I a memorandum book—I chalked down one on a card each time I saw a robbery committed—the bones were only re-weighed on one occasion; the last I—it is about the length of this Court from the scale to where the bones are I put—they were thrown, on the 27th, into a bin prepared for them by tiers I of casks—there were only two compartments, one where Eddington put his, and the other was occupied by the customer whose bones were being taken in, into which marrow-bones had been shot before the re-weighing took place—they were separated by a the of large casks, bigger than beer barrels—Eddington was our bone collector; I am not aware that we solicited him, it is quite possible—he goes about collecting bones and delivers them to us in cart-loads—there is also what is called waste—there were some baskets of waste delivered on the 27th, but I do not know how many—I did not pay attention, because marrow-bones were those which the fraud was committed with—there was nothing improper done with the waste—it was called out in the same way with the other baskets, and was shot in a different part altogether—it was not re-weighed—it is not possible that a basket of waste was shot and called out as a basket of marrow-bones; you might as well say that a basket of soot would be taken for a basket of salt—it is not possible for the waste to be entered as marrow-bones, because the marrow-bones were weighed on the 28th, and washed singly—the marrow-bones and the waste were being weighed at the same time—the waste consists of the bones of smaller animals—marrow-bones are from the legs of larger animals, oxes, and small mutton bones, and blade-bones—it has not often occurred that what ought to be entered as waste has been entered as marrow-bones—I never heard of it, nor have we been obliged to refer to the men and ask them about it—I swear that marrow-bones are not entered as waste—I was in the same place on the 27th—there was nobody with me—I think it was after six.
MR. ORRIGE. Q. Are you always present when, bones are sold to you? A. No—a basket of waste is known by its appearance, and it is called waste, and is booked and carried to a different part—the marrow-bones are nearly three times the price of waste.
MR. RIBTON. Q. Have you paid him for these bones? A. Yes; we paid him for what were delivered on the 27th—since this case was sent by the Magistrate for trial we have not paid him for the bones that we were overcharged for on the 27th, but on previous occasions—we have paid him for these since this case has been sent for trial.
MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Were you applied to for payment? A. Yes; by an attorney, and under advice we paid it.
what was going on down below—I saw Eddington unloading his cart assisted by Carney, Biggs, and Payne—Eddington was sorting the bones from the cart, and Carney and Biggs were placing them on the scale—after weighing one of the baskets of marrow-bones was left on the scale and weighed a second time when another had been brought and put to it, and the weight called out again—Mr. Payne was standing at the tail of the cart—Eddington checked it with him—we paid for the weight that had been called that day—on 5th April I was called by Mr. Phineas Cowan, went on to the roof, watched with him, and saw the same men and the same thing go on as before—Mr. Cowan had been on the roof some little time—I saw three baskets weighed twice over—Eddington was assisting in filling them, and Payne was checking the weight as it was called out, and talking to Eddington at the tail of the cart—on the 27th I had had some money marked for the purpose of paying Eddington, as was previously arranged—he came there again, and after he had gone with his team I went to him and requested him to lend me what money he had—he left me 3l. 13s.—about three-quarters of an hour after they had finished loading, he brought a voucher from Mr. Payne for 14l. 18s. 1d., for me to pay; this (produced) is it—I paid him seven sovereigns, one half-sovereign, six half-crowns, six shillings, two 5l. notes, and a penny-piece—they were all marked except the penny—some of that money was afterwards brought to me by Lockyer and Smith, and I recognised it.
Cross-examined by MR. BEST. Q. Had you known Carney some time? A. Yes; he has always been an honest man as far as I am aware—he has been employed there for eight or nine years—this is the first time I have heard anything against Brown—he has been employed there some time.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. I suppose you looked through the same hole as Mr. Cowan? A. Yes; but not on the first occasion—the cart was in a line with the scale but not perpendicular to us—I could not see where the bones were shot; they were taken a little out of sight—I have never known what ought to be entered as waste, entered as marrow-bones—I do not remember your asking me that question before, but if you did I gave you the same answer—mistakes have never occurred to my recollection—I have been in the employ thirty years—Payne has been there four or five years—Eddington's business was to stand at his cart and fill the baskets—he did not put them on the scale, he took the weight—he and Payne would enter it at the same time—he entered it as a check on Payne—a basket of marrow-bones would be filled, and then a basket or a couple of baskets of waste—they would be weighed separately and alternately—a basket of waste would be taken and the weight called out in the same way—a person would call out, "Two cwt. so much, weight," and if they were marrow-bones he could see what they were—he looks at the scale to see what they are first—sometimes among the waste there are bones nearly as large as the marrow-bones, but of very different descriptions, such as bullocks' heads.
CORNELIUS PAYNE . I am foreman of the bone department at Messrs. Cowan's—on 4th April Eddington brought some bones there; Carney and Biggs assisted him—I superintended the weighing—on the 5th they were also there delivering bones, and on the 13th and 20th—one basket was left on the scale on the 20th, and I said "Carney, take that basket away," he said something about its not being weighed—I said, "Oh, nonsense, it has been weighed, take it away"—there was something peculiar about the bones which I knew it by, and I said, "Eddington, you want to weigh the
bones over twice"—I do not remember that he made any remark to that, but the basket was taken away without being re-weighed—on the 27th I was, there when Eddington came with his cart of bones—Carney and Bromley were also there—we weighed the bones as usual, and I saw that the weights, were correct—some waste bones were weighed that day—they are weighed in the same baskets—when a basket of waste is put on it is called waste, and I look to see whether it is waste, or whether it is marrow—they are very, different in appearance, and in price—one is 13s. 6d. and the other is 5s.—Eddington was sorting his bones and keeping tally on what we call a frying pan—on the whole being weighed, I gave the counterpart of this voucher—he then left with it and took it up to Mr. White—a short time afterwards Eddington was brought back by a police-sergeant, and Mr. Cowan said be wanted the bones re-weighed—every basket of Eddington's was shot in one place—I assisted in re-weighing them—there were 20 cwt. 3 qrs. 23 lbs.; and on re-weighing there were only 18 cwt. 2 qrs. 24lbs., making a difference, of 2 cwt. 27lbs.—I waa there from the time of Eddington's leaving and being brought back—no bones were taken away, they were in precisely the state when he came back as when he left—when he saw the difference he said he supposed there must be some mistake—he was there when they Were weighed and when they were re-weighed—he said, "Have any been taken up stairs?"—Mr. Cowan said "No, but we will go up and see," and there were no bones in the place but these, and some belonging to a man named Clare, which were unloading.
Cross-examined by MR. BEST. Q. Did you stand close to the scale while they were being weighed? A. Yes.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Were these the only bones delivered by Eddington during the mouth, or where there more deliveries than you have mentioned? A. Yes; he delivered some on 3d April, and on the 4th, 5th, 10th, 13th, 17th, 18th, 20th, and 24th,—here are also some on the 25th, but that entry is in Mr. White's writing—I do not think there were any on the 26th—there were none after the 27th—I was not present at the delivery of Mr. White—I took down the weights of all the others—the only irregularity I saw during this time was on the 20th—Mr. Cowan did not tell me anything that he saw on the 4th—he made no communication to me—I have not known mistakes occur in marrow-bones being entered for waste, or waste for marrow-bones, nor have I corrected them as the bones, have been delivered—it was between six and seven o'clock on the 27th—that was later than we take them in generally, and of course there would be more hurry—I have never been obliged to refer to Bromley and ask him in reference to marrow-bones and waste—I do not recollect such a thing.
MR. ORRIDGE. Q. On each of those occasions, the 10th, 17th, and 24th, were marrow-bones and waste delivered? A. Yes, both—we have four baskets, and we fill two and put them on one side—they can generally fill the other two while two are being weighed.
HENRY LOCCKYER . I am a detective officer—I apprehended Carney on 22d April—I told him the charge; he said nothing—I asked him what money he had got, and he produced 8s. 6d. in shillings, three half-crowns, two fourpenny pieces, and twopence In copper—I asked him next morning where he got it, he said, "I picked it up by the side of Mr. Eddington's cart," and that Mr. Cowan had given him 4d. and Mr. Eddington 6d. for unloading the the cart—I afterwards showed that money to Mr. White—this (prodwuced) is it.
Cross-examined by MR. BEST. Q. Did he object to give up the money at
all? A. No; I did not ask him about the other money—I was not present when the cart started but I was on the premises.
HENRY SMITH (Police-sergeant). On the evening of 27th, I went to a public-house, saw Eddington and told him that there was something wrong in the weight of the bones, and he must come back with me—Bromley was in Eddington's cart, and I told him that he must come back also—they went back and I saw the bones re-weighed—I told Eddington that I was a police-sergeant and must take him into custody for being concerned with Carney and Bromley in conspiring to defraud Mr. Cowan—he said, "Evidently there is a mistake," and went back and looked to where he had chalked down the bones that had been re-weighed—I asked him if he had given either Carney or Bromley any money—he said, "Yes, he had given Carney sixpence and some half-pence"—we went up into the counting-house of the factory and I searched Eddington there, and found two 5l-notes, six sovereigns, a half-sovereign, three half crowns, and four shillings on him.
Cross-examined by MR. BEST. Q. Were you present when the cart started from the factory? A. Yes—it went in quietly; the horse did not gib a bit—I did not see Eddington get in—I think there were twelve people went away with it—it went quietly.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Did you see the cart drive off? A. Yes; from the factory to the public-house—I do not know where he received the money from Mr. White.
EDWARD WHITE (re-examined). I paid him in the counting-house—his cart was not at the door—it was forty or fifty yards off where it generally stayed—he was in the habit of letting the men ride over the bridge to save the toll
MR. RIBTON to HENRY SMITH. Q. Did not you hear from Eddington that he had dropped some money out of his pocket? A. He said so at the police-court—he did not say how much.
MR. ORRIDGE. Q. Was that after you said that Carney said he had picked it up by Eddington's cart? A. Yes, half an hour afterwards.
Eddington received a good character. GUILTY .— Confined Two Years.
BROMLEY and CARNEY— GUILTY .— Confined Two Years each.
MESSRS. POLAND and ORRIDGE conducted tlie Prosecution.
MARY WISE . I am the wife of William Wise, who keeps the Windmill, in Park-road, Clapham—on 5th May the prisoner and three other men came there—they asked for a pot of 6d. ale; I served them and the prisoner gave me a bad 5s. piece—my husband came in, I showed it to him, and he said it was bad—I had given the prisoner change aud he walked out—after I found the 5s. piece was bad, I gave it to the servant to take it next door, and she brought it back—when I found it was bad I sent my lodger after the prisoner—he came back and I told him it was bad—he said he got it from selling a horse—I returned him the 5s. piece and he gave me five shillings—on the Sunday evening he came again and told me he had got rid of his 5s. piece—that he took it back to where he got it from—I had never seen him before.
ELIZA TAYLOR . I am servant to the last witness—on 5th of May iny mistress gave me a 5s. piece to take to the next door—I found it was bad and brought it back to my mistress—I saw her give it to the prisoner—I am quite sure it was the one she had given me—I never lost sight of it—the neighbour looked at it and said it was bad.
MARY NASH . I live at the Robin Hood beer-house, South Lambeth—on Monday evening, 10th May, I was there at a quarter past 10 o'clock at night—the prisoner came there with another man—the prisoner asked for some ginger-beer—I served him—he gave me a half-crown—I said it was bad, and he said, "Here is sixpence," and he gave me a good sixpence—I kept the half-crown, and he said, "If you will give me that half-crown I will give you a good one for it"—I did not give it him, I said it was not my duty to give it him back—he abused me very much indeed—I sent for a constable and gave him in charge—I gave the half-crown to the constable; the other man ran away out of the house—the prisoner did not run at all, he was taken in the house; I kept him there—the prisoner said he took the half-crown at the coal wharf—he did not say where.
WILLIAM JOHNSON . I am an engineer—I live in Cavendish-row—I was in the Robin Hood on 10th May—I saw the prisoner and another man come in the tap-room—I saw the prisoner put his hand in his pocket and pull out a handful of money from his pocket, and he was scraping it over with his other hand; he then took a half-crown and went to the bar—the other man went with him—I did not see the prisoner served, but I went out when I heard him abusing the last witness and her mother to see if I could see an officer—I was turning back and the other man was at the back of me, running down the road—I went back to the bar and the caps were there which the other man had had for sale—the constable came in and Miss Nash gave the prisoner in custody—the prisoner threatened to bite my nose off because I interfered—I told him if he had done wrong he would suffer for it—he wanted me to show some resistance—he made two or three jumps at me with his mouth wide open.
GEORGE TERRY (Policeman, V 340). On that Monday night the prisoner was given into my custody at the Robin Hood—Miss Nash gave me this half-crown—the prisoner said he lived in Lyam-road, Brixton—I went there, and his father said he had not seen him for the last twelve months—on the way to the station he tried to get away, and said he would soon fetch some one who would rescue him—he threw himself flat on his back, and he would have got away had it not been for the last witness—I found on him 4 1/2 d. in coppers.
GUILTY .*— Confined Twelve Months.
MESSRS. POLAND and ORRIDGE conducted the Proseution.
SARAH COOPER . I live at a public-house at Wandsworth—on 15th May the prisoner came with two females between 9 and 10 o'clock in the evening—he wanted some gin—I served him, and he gave me a half-crown—I felt it between my fingers and thumb and found it was bad—I turned round and said, "Do you know this is bad?"—he said, "No, I do not"—I gave it him back to try it; he tried it between his teeth and bent it—he said he had just taken it of his master and he would give it back to him—I was paid for the gin in copper—the price was fourpence—the prisoner took the
half-crown away with him—the next day he called again and said he had taken the half-crown back to his master and it was all right.
Prisoner. My wife paid for the gin, I had no more money. Witness. She might have paid but 'I don't know. I saw you put down some of the coppers; it was not a sixpence that was put down, it was coppers. I feel convinced that I was paid in coppers.
ELLEN UPTON . I am the wife of George Upton, a grocer at Putney—on 17th May about half-past 3 o'clock, the prisoner came and asked me for. a penny saveloy—I served him; he paid me with a shilling—I gave him change—there was another man with him who stood by the door—after he was gone I examined the shilling—I found it was bad—I ran after the prisoner and the other man; I said, "Give me that saveloy and that change back and I will give you this shilling; it is a bad one—or I will call a policeman"—the prisoner said, "This is not the shilling I gave you"—I said, "It is, it never left my hand, and it is bad; give me those things back or I will call a policeman"—he gave me back the money and the saveloy and I gave him the shilling, and he and the man went away—this is the shilling that I returned to him.
SARAH BALLARD . My husband keeps the Cedar Tree at Putney—that may be about a quarter of a mile from Mr. Upton's—on 17th May the prisoner came to my house about a quarter past 5 o'clock in the evening with another man—the prisoner asked for a pint of porter—I served him, he paid me twopence for it—the prisoner and the other man drank it—the other man then asked for half a quartern of gin—I served him and be gave me in payment a half-crown—I gave him 2s. 4d. change, and as soon as I gave it him they were off out at the door—I looked in my hand and the half-crown was bad—I called my husband and gave it to him—he went after the prisoner and the other man and they were brought back.
EDWARD BALLARD . I am the husband of the last witness—on that Thursday evening my wife gave me a half-crown—I went after the prisoner and the other man; they were something like 150 yards from my house—I followed them and brought them back; I asked them if they were aware it was a bad half-crown that they had given to my wife—the other man said; "I know I gave you a light half-crown, but I did not know it was bad"—he said it was paid him by his master for wages on Saturday, and he had had it in his possession ever since—a policeman came in, and the prisoner and the other man were both searched at the bar in my house—there was no bad money found on them—there was good money found on both of them—one of them said he lived in the Grange in Wandsworth—the other said his name was Thompson—I said I was not satisfied, and I gave them io custody; the other man escaped while I went to put my boots on—there are two doors to my house, and he got out—the policeman went after him but he got away—while he was gone I took charge of the prisoner—on the following morning I found a shilling wrapped up in paper, precisely on the spot where the prisoner was searched—I gave that shilling to the constable, and the half-crown.
JAMES HEAD (Policeman, V 100). On 17th May I was on duty, and the prisoner and another man passed me—Mr. Ballard came after them, and I went back with him to the Cedar Tree—he said the other man had gives him a half-crown—the man said he took it for his wages on Saturday—he said his name was William Thompson, and he lived at the water-side at Wandsworth—he gave back the 2s. 4d.—he made his escape out of the house—I pursued him but could not take him—this is the half-crown and the shilling.
JAMES JOHNS (Policeman, V 69). On Thursday, 17th May, I assisted in taking the prisoner in custody; he was taken to the station and searched—one shilling, three sixpences, one fourpenny-piece, one threepenny-piece, and twopence halfpenny in copper was found on him in good money—I received this shilling the next morning.
Prisoners Defence. The shilling that I gave was a good one; I know nothing about this shilling nor the half-crown.
GUILTY — Confined Nine Months.
MESSRS. POLAND and ORRIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
JOSEPH MALPAS . I keep the Lord Nelson public house—on 28th May, the prisoner came for a glass of gin—I served him, and he laid a bad shilling on the counter; I said, "This is a bad one"—he laid another one down and said he did not know that he had a bad one—I told him I believed he did know it, and I should give him in charge—I sent for a constable and gave him in charge—I gave the bad shilling to the constable.
JOHN FERDINAND BACHE (Policeman, L 38). On 28th May, the last witness gave the prisoner in my charge, and he gave me this bad shilling—the prisoner said his name was Henry Thomas, and he gave his address 14, Marsham-street; I could not find it—I searched him and found on him two good shillings and 4 1/2 in copper.
MARIA ROBERTS . I live at the Blue Coat Boy, in Lant Street—on 1st May I was there about 10 o'clock at night—the prisoner came in for 1 1/2 d. worth of gin—I served him—he gave me a sixpence; I put it in the till and gave him change—there was no other sixpence in the till, only shillings—I went to the till atxmt five minutes after, I found one sixpence only in it—I took it out to give change; I found it was bad—I threw it behind the fire and it melted—I saw the prisoner again on the Saturday following—he asked for 1 1/2 d. worth of gin—I did not recognise him at first, but after I had served him with the gin I did—I drew the gin but did not give it him—he laid down a sixpence—I saw it was bad, I said it was bad—he said, "It is a good one"—I said it was bad; I bent it double and threw it on the counter and it fell on the floor; Mr. Cleverley picked it up and gave it me; a constable was sent for, the prisoner was given in custody, and I gave the sixpence to the constable.
COURT. Q. You did not recognise the prisoner when he first came in? A. No; but when I looked in his face I was certain he was the man—I said to him, "Here is the second bad sixpence you have brought me"—he said, "It is a good one"—I said, "You are the same man that brought me the other bad one on Tuesday"—he said, "It is a good one."
SARAH CLEVERLEY . I am the wife of William Cleverley—on 5th May I was in the Blue Coat Boy; I saw the prisoner there—he gave a sixpence to Mr. Roberts, she bent it and threw it over the counter—it fell on the floor, I picked it up and gave it to her—I had seen the prisoner there before on the Tuesday night—I saw him served on that occasion with 1 1/2 d. worth of gin, and he paid a sixpence—I am quite sure he is the same man that was there on Tuesday—I did not say anything to him on the Saturday.
Prisoner. It was a man that picked up the sixpence and put it on the table. Witness. No, I did—there is no table there, there is a large butt, but no table.
COURT. Q. Did you hear Mr. Roberts say anything to him? A. Yes,
she said, "You are the man that brought me a bad sixpence on Tuesday"—I don't know what he said—hardly anybody could hear what he said; I believe it was, "That was a good one."
JOHN BENSLEYN (Policeman, M 28). On 5th May I received this sixpence from Mr. Roberts—I took the prisoner; I found on him two shillings, four sixpences and 2 1/2 d., all good—he was taken to the police-court and rcmaudtd and discharged.
Prisoners Defence. I was not aware that the shilling was bad; I went in the other public-house and had a drop of gin; I was only there once. The person behind the bar was very much intoxicated. The landlord came down and gave mo in charge.
GUILTY .*— Confined Twelve Months.
MESSRS. POLAND and ORRIDGE conducted tlte Prosecution.
JOSEPH MALPAS . I am landlord of the Lord Nelson—on 1st June the prisoner came between 5 and 6 o'clock in the evening for a glass of beer—I served her; she gave me a counterfeit shilling—I told her it was bad—she said she did not know it was bad—I sent for a constable and gave her in custody, with the shilling—on 26th May I received a shilliug from my pot-boy—Mr. Malpas is not here—my pot-boy saw all that passed.
EDWARD SHEPHERED . I am pot-boy at the Lord Nelson—on 26th May I saw the prisoner there; she asked for a quartern of rum; Mr. Malpas served her—I saw that, and she gave her in payment a counterfeit shilling—Mr. Malpas took it up and gave her change, and the prisoner left—Mr. Malpas gave me the shilling immediately—I am quite sure it—was the shilling which the prisoner had given to her, I had not lost sight of it—I examined it and found it was bad—I bent it—I immediately went after the prisoner but did not succeed in finding her—I afterwards gave that shilling to Mr. Malpas, and he returned it to me—on 1st June, when the prisoner was given in custody, I gave that shilling to the constable—I had before that broken it into two pieces—I am quite sure that the prisoner is the woman who uttered that shilling on the 26th May.
Prisoner. Q. Did you say at the police-court that you had received that shilling for wages? Witness. A. Yes, I did receive it in payment of wages.
COURT. Q. But you examined it and found it was bad, and gave it to Mr. Malpas? Witness. Yes, I received it again on the evening of the same day—he paid me 8s.—he gave me 7s. and the counterfeit one an hour or two afterwards for wages—I know it was the same shilling because I had bent it before I gave it him—I bent it in the detector—when I found it was with my wages I did not say anything to Mr. Malpas about it—I was at the loss of it.
MR. POLAND. Q. After you got it back you broke it in two? A. Yes, I had thought it was a good one after the prisoner left.
GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.
MESSRS. POLAND and ORRIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN RENARD . I keep the Simon the Tanner public-house, in Long-lane, Bermondsey—on 3d June the prisoner came in and tendered my wife a shilling—she bent it—I was in the bar—the prisoner then tendered another shilling and that was bad—I said, "Have you got any more?" she said, "Yes," and she produced another, and that was bad—I gave her in custody—she said she lived in High street, Poplar, and she had the shillings given her by a woman; but she did not say who, nor what for.
Prisoner. I had 3s. and 3/4 d. in my hand; I said I sold a petticoat for 3s. Witness. No you did not.
WILLIAM BRADLEY (Policeman, M 203). The prisoner was given into my custody on 3d June—Mr. Renard gave me these 3s.—at the station the prisoner had 3/4 d. in her hand—she would give no address nor any account of herself whatever.
Prisoner. I sold a petticoat for 3s.; I went to get the rum; she gave me the rum, I did not drink it. She said the shilling was bad; "I said I have got two more." I did not know they were bad.
GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.
MR. DICKIE conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM COLLINS (Police-sergeant, P 4). I went to the Bricklayer's Arms in the Old Kent-road, on 8th May—I went into the room by myself and waited half an hour—I saw Window and a person named Cox come in—I saw Window in the act of selling some pawn-tickets, and he had these samples or patterns of calico—I got into conversation with them, and I asked Window if these were for sale; he said, "Yes"—I said, "What length are the pieces?"—he said. "About ten yards, the same pattern as this on the ticket"—I asked him what he wanted for the tickets; he said, 4s.—I said, "If I buy them is it all right? "he said, "Yes;" I said, "Are you sure of that?" "yes;" he said, "I work for Mr. John Maples, an upholsterer, and I work two days in a week in the Crystal Palace for him, and I receive these things in lieu of cash for wages"—I told him I did not think that was at all likely; I said, "I am a policeman and I take you in custody"—I took him in a cab to his home, and searched his house—he told me it was his house and he took me there—I searched his house and found this piece of calico there, about twenty yards—I took him to the station, and the statement which he made there, that he bought it of Nash, caused me to go in search of Nash—I went and watched the warehouse and saw Nash steal the piece—when I took the duplicates I said to Windpw, "Why is not your name on the ticket? "he said, "I suppose it is that of a woman I sent to pawn it"—I found two pieces more at Cox's house, and I also found another piece and a duplicate at the house of a person named France.
Cross-examined by MR. SHARPE. Q. When you went to this place you were in plain clothes? A. Yes—I was in the parlour of the public-house—that was where Window and Cox were talking in my presence—they saw me—I joined in the conversation and appeared a purchaser—I had not, at that time, told them I was a policeman—when I told him I was a policeman
Window said, "Very well"—Window made the statement about Nash to Mr. Turner, while I was searching the house—he did not say that he had them from Nash, who was taking them home to his master, Mr. Baker—he did not say that Nash worked for Mr. Baker—the name he said was Mr. John Maples, an upholsterer—I did not know anything against Window before this—I believe he is a working upholsterer by trade—when Cox was with Window, Mr. Turner was there—I did not go with Mr. Turner but by appointment—I met him there—Mr. Turner was sitting in another place when the tickets were exposed for sale—he did not see them—I did not agree to purchase the tickets—I asked what he wanted for them; he said, "4s. each"—I had the tickets before me at that time.
FREDERICK MARTIN TURNER . I am in the employ of Mr. Jonathan Crocker and another, 86, Watling-street—I know Window by seeing him—I know Nash, he was in the habit of coming to our warehouse to fetch goods to calender—this piece is the property of my employers—no piece similar to this was ever sold in this state—Nash was in the habit of coming for property for his employers—these samples and patterns are such as we have—I went with the policeman to Window's house—he told me he bought the pieces of a man named Nash who worked for Baker, Upper Clapton, and that he paid him for them—I am quite sure this piece is the property of my employers—we never sold this or any piece in this state.
Cross-examined. Q. You are warehouseman there? A. Yes; my employers are in a large way of business—I know they had chintz of this pattern—there is no private mark on this, but I know the pattern—it is not a common pattern—we have not sold hundreds of pieces in this state—I am quite sure that there are not other manufacturers who have this pattern—every thing that is sold in our establishment, in this department, passes through my hands—it would not happen that a calenderer would cut off a pattern and send it to another person—it is not a common thing in the trade for a manufacturer to copy a pattern; it is very seldom done—this is quite a new pattern—we take stock every month—we took it about 20th March and about 20th April—we had not this piece in stock in March, and I don't think this piece was in the house on 20th April—I know that this is our property—I ordered the goods to be printed—there is not a mark on this—they took off the mark at the end—my employers might not have sold a piece of uncalendered goods by way of sample—it could not have been done without my knowledge—I have the charge of this department—nothiug is done without my knowledge.
MR. DICKIE. Q. Had you ever sold this piece to Nash, or given it to him? A. No; this pattern had only been out about a fortnight—it was not likely that anybody would have this pattern in stock—I should have been likely to have known if my own pattern had been taken. MR. SHARPE. Q. You send the patterns down and they make the goods? A. Yes; at Manchester.
JOHN LEE . I am assistant to a pawnbroker in East-lane, Walworth—I produce a piece of chintz furniture, pawned on 14th April for 9s. in the name of Mary Drake—it has been identified by Mr. Turner—I have the duplicate of this, and the policeman has the other duplicate we gave.
MR. TURNER. This is the property of my employer.
FRANCIS GODDARD I am assistant to Mr. Wade, a pawnbroker in the Kentord;—I have a piece of chintz furniture pawned for 7s., on the 21st April, by a female—I have another piece pawned on 3d May, which does not belong to this case.
F.M. TURNER re-examined. I know this piece is my employer's.
ELIZABETH CRAMP . I live in Eden-plaoe in the Kent-road, and am a furniture dealer—here is a piece of calico which I bought of Mr. Window on 7th May for 11s., I paid him 8s. in money, and 3s. he owed me—he said he was employed by Mr. Maples at the Crystal Palace, and he had paid him in goods—he had to take it instead of money, and it had cost him much more than he bad sold it for—he said Mr. Maples lived in Tottenham-court-road—he showed me this duplicate also (producing it) and asked me to buy it—he asked 3s. for it—it is for a piece of chintz—Itold him I would not buy it, but he might leave it with me.
Cross-examined. Q. Are you sure that he said he was working for Mr. John Maples? A. Yes; I don't merely guess so—he said it was Mr. John Maples of Tottenham-court-road.
ALFRED BURTON . I am barman at the Bell, in Shoreditch—I know the two prisoners by coming to our house—Nash has brought goods and left them with me twice—I can't say when, but once was when the officer came with him—that was on the 8th May—Nash left the parcel which the policeman took—Nash asked me to take care of it till he came for it—the prisoners had been in the house drinking together—I think it was about a fortnight before that—they came again and brought a parcel wrapped in brown paper—Nash gave it to me and asked me to take care of it, and he called for it on the following day—they had conversation together and took refreshment together and went away, and on the following day Nash called for the parcel—I had seen the prisoners at other times, they called three or four times a week—sometimes Nash called by himself nearly everynight—Mr. Window has sometimes called with him as often as three or four times a week.
Cross-examined. Q. You have been examined before and I believe you did not seem at all certain whether Window was the man? A. No, I was not, because he had no hat on—when he put his hat on I felt sure he was the man—there was nothing remarkable about the hat—when he sat at our house he kept his hat on always—he never took it off at all—I will swear that Window and Nash were at our house together more than twice—they were there three or four times altogether or four or five times—on 8th May Window was not there—when Nash brought the parcel and gave it to me to keep it was a brown paper parcel.
COURT. Q. Are you now sure that Window is the man? A. Yes.
HENRY ALFRED COTTON . I live at 10, William-street, Walworth-common—I am a broker—I have known Window several years—I have had transactions with him the last two years—he brought me some duplicates and patterns—he showed them to me but I did not buy them—at the latter end of April he brought some again—he said he had them from Mr. John Maples; that he worked at the Crystal Palace for a 1s. an hour, and half of it was taken out in these sort of goods, and the other half he had in cash—he brought several others; about ten—amongst them I picked out two, this is one of them.
Cross-examined. Q. He showed you as many as ten, are they here? A. Not that I am aware of—I only had patterns—I picked out two, and gave him 2s. each for the tickets—I knew he was a jobbing man—I bought the tickets and he went and redeemed the articles.
Cross-examined. Q. Is there any mark of yours on the one produced by Lee? A. No; but I know it from its being my own design; the names have been taken off—I know I sold none of these—none of these have been sold in this state; they are to be calendered—these are all uncalendered, and are all my own design—it is not from their being uncalendered that I know that they belong to my employers—if they had been calendered I should have known them—we had pieces of this description in stock; they were sent to Manchester for the purpose of being printed.
COURT to COLLINS. Q. You found one piece at Window's house? A. Yes; and after that I took Nash in custody—I told him that Window was in custody, and that a piece exactly like the one he had was found at Window's house—he did not make any answer—I told him the reason I watched him was because Window had said that he bought them of him—he made no answer—I repeated it and he made no answer—I told him I had found pawn tickets in Window's possession having patterns on them—he said nothing; he evaded all that I said to him.
Window received a good character.
WINDOW— GUILTY .
NASH— GUILTY .
Confined Eighteen Months each.
There was another indictment against the prisoners.
Before Mr. Recorder.
577. THOMAS CHARLES WHITE (17), and EDWARD DEVRILL (34) , Burglary in the dwelling house of Henry William Brown, and stealing one ring, one broach, and one pair of stockings, value 15s. 6d. of Ann Sophia Goodwin, and one handkerchief, one pair of boots, and one shawl, value 5s. of Henry William Brown. Second Count. Feloniously receiving the same.
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
HENRY WILLIAM BROWN . I live at No. 5, Dorchester-terrace, Old Kent-road—I am a carman—on 31st May I went down about half-past 5 o'clock in the morning—I found the door at the back was open—it had been shut the night before and fastened as usual—I went into the kitchen and missed a pair of boots, three brooches, a ring, and a pocket-handkerchief—I went up to a back parlour and missed some things there—everything was safe the night before—the value of the property stolen was about 5l.—these are my boots.
ANN SOPHIA GOODWIN . I am in the service of the prosecutor—on that Thursday morning I was called by my master—I found that I had lost a brooch, a ring, and a pair of stockings—this is the ring, and these are the stockings; the brooch has not been found—they were all safe the night before.
PATRICK SHEHAN . I live in the Old Kent-road—before I went before the Magistrate the prisoner White came to me in the Old Kent-road and he said, "See what a lot of things I have been and stolen"—he showed me three brooches, a ring, a pair of stockings, a pair of boots, and a handkerchief—these are the boots he showed me, I know them by the eyelit holes.
Cross-examined by MR. DICKIE Q. White showed them to you and said he had stolen them? A. Yes; he said he had got something to sell, and he said the other man was blind drunk and he did not think he would come back again.
COURT. Q. What are you? A. I get my living by selling things—I had
seen White a couple of days before he came and told me this—I gave him a piece of bread and butter before.
JOHN TIMOTHY HUGHES . (Policeman, M 249). White was brought to the police-station on Friday, 1st June—he was told he was charged with breaking into the house and stealing several articles—he said he knew nothing about it, and in a minute afterwards he said, "I will tell you all about it—I got in at the back door about 5 o'clock yesterday morning—the three brooches and the ring aud buckles, and pair of stockings, I sold to Adam for half-a-crown (Devrill goes by the name Adam), and the boots I have got on my feet; the handkerchief I pawned for 9d., and the shawl I sold to a man at Millbauk for 2d."—I went to the pawnbroker's and got this handkerchief—this knife was found on him in his pocket, and by getting the glass out in the centre of the door he could get his hand in and open the door—this knife fits the marks on the door.
WILLIAM TAYLOR (Policeman, 94. M). Between 4 and 5 o'clock on Thursday afternoon, 31st May, I was in St. James'-road. Old Kent-road—I was called to by the prosecutor—he pointed out Devrill who was offering this brooch for sale—I asked him where he got it from and he pointed to a boy standing on the green—that was Shehan, who has given evidence—in consequence of that I took Shehan, aud on his coming up Devrell said, "That is not the boy"—I told Devrill he must go to the station—he walked with another officer and I walked behind—when we were in Blue-anchor-road the prosecutor said, "I lost a ring as well as the brooch"—Devrill made answer, "I have got that ring"—he felt in his pocket and he said, "I have not got the ring, I have seen it and that is all"—he walked on about five hundred yards further, and I saw him put his hand in his pocket and then put his hand behind him and drop this ring, which has been identified by the servant, and the brooch by the prosecutor.
Cross-examined. Q. Was he drunk? A. He had been drinking.
JAMES BROWN (Policeman M 144). I searched Devrill at the station—in the right hand pocket of his jacket I found this pair of stockings—I asked him how he came by them, he told me he bought them out of a shop—I asked him what shop; he said that was his business.
WHITE— GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
DEVRILL— NOT GUILTY .
MR. DICKIE conducted the Prosecution.
HENRY DABLEY . I live at Deptford—on 1st June between 2 and 3 o'clock in the morning, I was in the Borough, near St. George's Church, I met Griffiths—she spoke to me and asked me where I was going—I said to my ship—at that time Brown and Edwards came up—Brown came behind me and throttled me, and Griffiths aud Edwards came in front of me and rifled my pockets—I struggled, and I held Brown a good bit till I heard the policeman coming; he then got away, and he and Edwards ran off, and Griffiths came and took me by the arm and told me not to run after her husband—it was just break of day—I was perfectly sober.
Cross-examined by MR. SHARPE. Q. You have been examined before about this matter; did you then think it was between 12 and 1 o'clock? A. I knew it was past 12, I was not exactly sure of the time, I did not exactly know—I was on the pavement going towards my ship—I had been
away from 9 or 10 o'clock that night—I had been only walking—I had two or three glasses of ale—I had a small glass of sherry before I went on shore; about half a quartern, I suppose—I am not aware that I had seen either of the prisoners before—the whole of this did not last above a couple of minutes—my pockets having been rifled, Brown and Edwards got away, and Griffiths seized me—I kept her till the policeman came and asked me what was the matter, and I told him—Brown and Edwards ran round a corner—I did not see Edwards again till she was in custody—when I went on shore I had about 13s. and some halfpence in my right hand trousers' pocket—I had had my hand in my pocket not two minutes before these persons came up.
MR. DICKIE. Q. You knew this was past 12 o'clock? A. Yes.
WILLIAM ALDERTON (Policeman, M 110). On 1st June, between two and three o'clock in the morning, I was passing up my beat in Kent-street in the Borough Thomas Richards I saw the prosecutor and Griffiths standing at the corner of a street, and I heard what passed Thomas Richards I went to the extent of my beat and turned back, and I heard a cry of "Police"—I came down, and when I got to the corner of Napier-street I saw Griffiths holding the prosecutor by the cuff of his coat—I saw Brown aud Edwards run round the corner—Edwards had her apron up to her eye, and her eye was black—she said that Brown had hit her—the prosecutor came up, and he said, "That is the woman that had her hand in my right hand pocket, and that is the man that held me by the throat"—the prosecutor was sober.
Cross-examined. Q. I suppose he had not been drinking a drop? A. That I can't say, it was between half-past two and three o'clock—it was about ten minutes' walk from the station—I did not know Griffiths before—she did not charge the prosecutor with assaulting her—the prosecutor said both the women rifled his pockets while the man held his throat—I went round the corner for Brown—Griffiths remained there with another constable—I was at the corner when Griffiths was taken—the officer was coming in the opposite direction to me—when I went after Brown I turned my back, but I afterwards saw Griffiths in custody of that policeman—when I went after Brown and Edwards they appeared to be quarrelling—I lost sight of Brown just at the corner—he was five or six yards from the corner when I saw him again—I was about twenty yards from him when he turned the corner—I am sure that the man that turned the corner was the same man that was quarreling with Edwards—I did not see his face but I saw his back—he had on the same dress that he has on now—I did not take Edwards, the sergeant took her—I did not see her taken; she was charged when the prosecutor came up—I took Brown, my brother constable took Griffiths, and the sergeant came down with Edwards.
MR. DICKIE. Q. Does Brown exhibit the appearance of the man who was running round the corner? A. Yes; I am quite sure in my own mind he was the man.
Crost-examined. Q. You can't swear it? A. There could be no chance of his getting away—there was no other man running but my sergeant.
BROWN— GUILTY .
GRIFFITHS— GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
EDWARDS— GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.
Brown was further charged with having been before convicted.
stealing a chest of tea, having been before convicted—Four Years' Penal Servitude.") The prisoner is the man.
BROWN*—GUILTY.— Eight Years' Penal Servitude.
MESSRS. GIFFARD and LEWIS conducted the Prosecution.
LEWIS BUTLER . I am a coffee-house keeper at 7, Long-lane, Smith-field—I know the prisoner, and I have seen a person under the name of Reding—I have known the prisoner nearly a month, he took a second-floor back room at my house, at 3s. a week—I think I saw Reding this day fortnight—he knocked at my door and I answered it—he asked if Mr. Stockil was within—I said, "No"—there was no business carried on there—there were letters came, I should think eight or nine or ten.
HARRIET BUTLER . I am the wife of the last witness—the prisoner took the apartment of me—he gave me these two pieces of paper (produced) with the name of William Stockil—I don't know that he told me his name was William Stockil—he tole me he wanted the room for writing to have the use of another room when he expected a gentleman to see him—I never saw Reding.
Cross-examined by MR. ORRIDGE. Q. When was it he took the room? A. I can't say exactly—he gave me these pieces of paper and said if letters came in that name I was to take them in—I did not ask him his name—I thought that was his name—he never appeared to have anything particular there—no goods ever came to that room.
WILLIAM STOCKIL . I am a currier, and live at 37, Long-lane, Bermondsey—I carried on business there for about fourteen years—I am a manufacturer and rather a rival of the French manufacturers—I believe any name is well known in Paris—I know a person named Durand; I have known him about two years, and the house with which he is connected for many years—I have ordered goods of Leon Durand some time ago—these letters (looking at them) are not my writing (This being read purported to be from the witness to Messrs. Durand, the first dated 8th May, requesting to be furnished with their price current, and the second containing an order for various goods, referring to the London and Westminster Joint Stock Bank and requesting them to draw a bill at thirty days for the amount)—I have known Reding seven or eight years—he was once a customer of mine and had goods invoiced to him—this (looking at it) is one of the genuine heads of my invoices; on it is the representation of my prize medal from the exhibition in 1851—some communication passed between me and Mr. Durand; the result was the stopping of the case of goods in question.
Cross-examined. Q. You exhibited leather in the Exhibition of 1851? A. Yes; and I obtained a prize medal—the representation here is of the English prize medal, and the Paris peize medal of 1855—this is the English one, and this the Paris one; but this other invoice has not the Paris one on it, only the English—my invoice has on it 37, Long-lane, Bermondsey, and this other invoice is 7, Long-lane, London E.C.—I don't remember such a thing as exhibitors affixing their medals to their invoice except the prize medal holders—I have dealt with Messrs. Durand about two or three years—I don't know any person in England of my name except my own father. LEON DURAND. I am a leather merchant carrying on business in Paris in company with my brother, Achelle Durand—I received this letter—my
father received it first, and I saw it myself—it was in an envelope with the London post-mark—I answered it and received in reply this other letter from that he obtained the goods indicated in this letter—the value of the order was about 200l.—I know Mr. Stockil of Loug-laue, Bermondsey; I don't know any other Mr. Stockil—I don't know the prisoner—I have been to Mr. Husband's in Loug-lane—I have there seen the goods I forwarded in answer to this letter—these are some of the leather I sent.
Gross-examined. Q. Do you know Mr. Stockil? A. Yes; I have seen him in Paris four or five mouths ago—I have drawn a bill for the amount of my property at one month—that bill is not due—it was drawn the 19th of May and will be due the 22d of June—we were anxious to open accounts in England.
WILLIAM HENRY FORSTER . I am a clerk in the employ of the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway—I produce a letter dated the 1st June, signed Durand—I received it at the office of the railway—it referred to a case directed to go to Long-lane—I saw some goods directed to William Stockil—that case was the one referred to in this order, "Please to hand over the case of goods marked W. S. from Paris, and consigned to William Stockil, Long-lane, Smithfield"—"William Stockil, 7, Long-lane, May 29th, 1860"—this was signed by Reding; he came to me a day or two after to know if the case had arrived—I saw him again on the Monday—it was on Friday when he first came—he came again on 4th June and produced a a letter from our agent.
EDWARD HEWLETT (Police-sergeant, M 8). I went to 7, Long-lane, Smithfield, on the 4th of June—it is a coffee-house—I saw the prisoner—he was called down stairs—I ask him if I could speak to him privately—he said, "Yes; walk up stairs"—I went up to the first-floor front room—I said, "I think you are Mr. William Stockil, are you not?"—he said, "Yes; are you come from the Railway?"—I said, "Yes, I have just come from the Railway with reference to some goods there"—he sat down and finished writing a letter, and I waited a minute or two while he did so—he then turned round and spoke to me, and said, "How is it the goods did not arrive before; there was some mistake"—I said, "Yes, I understand there was"—I then said, "I am a police-officer, and I have come to take you in custody in reference to those goods, for attempting to obtain them under false and fraudulent pretences, from Messrs Durand and Co., Paris"—he said, "Very well"—he collected the papers, and I brought him out of the house—I took him to the station in a cab—when we got in the cab, he said, "I am not Mr. Stockil; I wish to tell you about it"—I said, "You need not tell me anything unless you like"—he said, "I am employed by a gentleman recently come from Paris, by the name of William Stockil—I am his clerk"—I said, "I think you go by the name of Mr. William Stockil, and you engaged the room"—he said, "Yes, I did; I pay for the room"—he said he was not the gentleman who called at the Railway-station.
Q. Look at these letters sent to Mr. Durand; from what you saw of the prisoner's writing, what is your belief as to whose writing these letters are? A. To the best of my belief they are his writing—this is the letter that I saw him writing when I was there.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you look over his shoulder? A. I stood by his side, when he was writing—that was the only occasion on which I saw him write—I am of opinion, from seeing him write this, that these letters are his writing—I should think they were—I would not undertake to swear they were.
MR. ORRIDGE to MR. STOCKIL Q. Is it your custom to write your name iu full? A. Not in general, but "Wm. Stockil."
GUILTY of Uttering. — Ten Years Penal Servitude.
There was another indictment against the prisoner.
MR. LEWIS conducted the Prosecution.
The evidence of Lewis Butler, Harriet Butler, William Stockil, and William Henry Forster, given in the last case, was read over.
JOHN MARSH (Policeman, M 184). I apprehended Reding at the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway, on the 4th of June—I asked him if his name was William Stockil, he hesitated and said, "No," he was agent to Mr. William Stockill; he was in his employ—I told him I Was a police-constable and he must come with me to the station, for forging the name of William Stockil of Long-lane, Bermondsoy—he said he knew nothing about it.
COURT to LEWIS BUTLER. Q. How soon after Hardouin took your apartment did Reding come there? A. He came on the 1st of June.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. DICKIE conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZA DAVIES . I am a spinster, and live with my mother at 9, Princes-road, Lambeth—we occupy the two parlours—on Sunday morning, 5th May, we went to bed about 11 o'clock—our two parlours were locked up and the door between them was buttoned—the shutters were shut and bolted, I believe, and the window was shut—between 3 and 4 o'clock I heard a noise in the front parlotir, and on looking round I saw a young man getting over my bed—I began to scream, and he said, "Stop a bit, what is the matter?"—I kept screaming, and he turned round, fastened the door again, and buttoned it as usual—I was in the back parlour—he still kept in the front—he was getting over the bed—I called for assistance, got a young man in, and asked the prisoner what business he had there—he said, "I want my property"—I said, "What property?"—he said, "My two bags"—I know nothing of him; never saw him before to my knowledge—I sent for the police—he told the policeman that he was subject to tits, and did not know how he got there—he had no shoes on—the shutters had been opened, but were shut to again—the hearth rug was turned on one side—it was moved.
JAMES PACKER (Policeman, L 48) On 16th May, about 4 o'clock in the morning, I was called by the last witness, aud found the prisoner in her parlour, with his shoes off—I asked him how he came there—he said he did not know; he was very sorry, but he had fits—I asked him where his shoes were; he made no answer—I found them under the table, and asked him if they were his—he said, "Yes," and put them on—I took him to the station—there was some dirt on a chair, as if a person with shoes on had stepped on it—the shutters were partly open.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Do you know where he lives? A. In Spring-gardens, Vauxhall, three quarters of a mile off—the parlour is on the ground floor—the window was closed, but not fastened—I believe there is no
fastening to it—I could see no mark where any force had been used—the hole where the shutter bolt ought to go in was filled with sand, and there was not sufficient room to hold—I think the shutter could be opened without leaving any mark.
MR. RIBTON called FANNY FOOT. The prisoner has lodged with me more than two years, up to the present time—he left about eight months ago, but used to come and see me—he came a fortnight ago, and had a fit at my house—he serves the shops with toys and has three or four bags, but he generally carries two—he is subject to very curious fits; not exactly like fits—sometimes he has them three times a-day, and he would lie down and go to sleep for three hours before they go off—he is more like a person out of his mind, at times—he had them every fortnight, but when he was taking medicine they were not so strong—I remember his coming in at the window instead of the door, and he took his boots off, and lay down in the parlour—that was a twelvemonth before—he went to sleep for three hours, and was taken to bed.
Cross-examined by MR. DICKIE. Q. How long have you known him? A. Three years—he lodged in my house between two and three years; he was never out after 10 at night—he has often been brought home on a barrow, with his two bags—I never knew him out late, or druuk—he wag not fit to walk or do anything when he was in a fit—when he got in at the window he did not know what he was about, because the fits were on him—I mean to say on my solemn oath that he has got into my house by the window; not when the fits were on him, when they have been off of him—sometimes it has been the night before they came to him—I have sent to his brother sometimes when they have been on him—I know his brother; he is no relation of mine, only a friend.
MR. RIBTON. Q. I suppose the fit is some time coming on him? A. They come all of a sudden.
HANNAH HAGUES . I live at Elliot-row, St. George's-road—the prisoner lodged with me the last five months up to within a month of his being taken in custody—he is a respectable, well conducted, honest young man—he had fits at my house, and sometimes three in a day—when they were coming on they made him strange in his conduct, so that he did not know what he was about.
Crdss-examined. Q. Did he fall down? A. If somebody did not hold him—he kept very good hours, and he paid his way, and behaved very well.
HANNAH BARNES . I live at 10, Spring-gardens, Vauxhall-walk—the prisoner had been lodging with me a fortnight and two days when he was taken in custody—during that time he had one severe fit—it was on a Friday night—he had then been there a fortnight—he was just going to have his tea, and fell down suddenly, and there he lay for half an hour—he then got up, had his tea, went out, came home again, and went to bed—he was all right the next day, Saturday, as far as I could see—he went out on the Saturday evening after he had his tea—I never saw him again—I knot Princes-road—that would not be on the straight road from the Borough to my house—it is not much round—I have only seen him have one fit, a severe fit, but twice I have seen him look rather strange—he came to me, and on the next morning he was eating his breakfast—I spoke to him and he gave me no answer—that lasted for perhaps ten minutes—during that time he did not appear to know what he was doing.
have sold goods to him; he supplies the shops with them—he always cash—he carried two bags with him—he was at my shop on the day before this, the Friday, and purchased some goods.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know anything of his habits? A. I know that he has had two fits in my shop.
MR. RIBTON. Q. How did they they affect him? A. Once while I was serving him he asked me for one or two articles and stopped in his purchase—I spoke to him, and he gave no reply—his eyes wandered, and he gazed at me very stedfastly—I saw a dull pallor over his face, and asked him what was the matter with him; he made no answer—seeing he was likely to fall, I got a chair and placed him in it, and after a time he became in strong convulsions—it took more than my strength to hold him, and I had to call one of my workmen—he was for about half an hour unable to help himself—I let him sit there, and afterwards saw him part of his way home—the other occasion was similar, with the same symptoms as before, and strong convulsions.
NOT GUILTY .
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, JULY 9TH, 1860.