CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
TENTH SESSION, HELD AUGUST 17TH, 1868.
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
EDWARD T. E. BESLEY, 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
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, August 17th, 1868, and following days,
BEFORE THE RIGHT HON. WILLIAM FERNELEY ALLEN, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; Sir ROBERT LUSH , Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's Court of Queen's Bench; THOMAS CHALLIS , Esq., Sir FRANCIS GRAHAM MOON , Bart., F.S.A., and Sir ROBERT WALTER CARDEN , Knt., Aldermen of the said City; The Right Hon. RUSSELL GURNEY , Q.C., M.P., Recorder of the said City; THOMAS DAKIN , Esq., ANDREW LUSK , Esq., M.P., WILLIAM JAMES RICHMOND COTTON , Esq., JOSEPH CAUSTON , Esq., and THOMAS SCAMBLER OWDEN, Esq., Aldermen of the said City; and THOMAS CHAMBERS , Esq., Q.C., M.P., Common Serjeant of the said City; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol delivery of Newgate, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
ALLEN, MAYOR. TENTH 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, August 17th, 1868.
Before Mr. Recorder.
THOMAS WALLACE . I am a publican, of Princes Street, Leicester Square—on the night of 2nd July I went to my door, as there was some disturbance in the street—the prisoners were crossing the road—Cotterell up with his fist, and struck me in the eye—Salter immediately struck me, and as I struggled with them, somebody snatched my watch from my pocket, but did not get it—I was bruised and beaten about—the chain did not snap, and I put my hand up and saved my watch—I did not see the hand, but I felt the snatch.
Salter. Were not you urging me on to fight? Witness. No; I did not see you fighting—I did not say "Give it to him."
ALFRED JORDAN . I live at 36, Princes Street—on the morning of 3rd July, about 12.30, I was at Mr. Wallace's, and heard a disturbance—I went outside, and saw the two prisoners and a woman quarrelling—Cotterell struck Mr. Wallace, who stood at his door, in the eye—Mr. Wallace went after him into the middle of the road, and he assaulted him again, and was taken in custody—I saw nothing of the attempt to rob.
RIDHARD KERR (Policeman C 202). I was in Princes Street, and saw both the prisoners assault Mr. Wallace—he had hold of Cotterell, who struck him in the eye; and Salter struck him about the body and arms—I caught hold of both of them, and the rest of the crowd tried to rescue them—six men and two women were near them in the crowd—the women beat my knuckles, to release my hold—Cotterell gave the name of Watson.
Cotterell. What do you say about my address? Witness. I went there and asked if a person named Watson lived there, and they said, "No"—I said that you were dark, and had a little beard under your chin.
GEORGE APPLETON (Policeman C 22). I assisted in taking Salter—he was placed in the reserve room at the station, as another charge was being taken, and he said to Cotterell, "We have b—well Jewed the old bloke's sling and his poke"—the sling is the chain, and the poke is the watch.
Cotterell. Can you give me the slang for "We have got the man's watch and chain?" Witness. No.
Salter. It is very strange the other policeman did not hear it Witness. He was outside the door.
Cotterell's Defence. I have no knowledge of the slang, and do not believe there are such words. I acknowledge the assault.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment each .
654. ALFRED BALES (25), ELIZABETH BROWN (64), GEORGE HENFREY (30), and EMILY HENFREY (25), Stealing fifty-eight spoons, eight ladles, and other articles, value 100l., of Alice Lewis, the mistress of Bales, Bales having been before convicted.Second Count—Feloniously receiving the same. BALES PLEADED GUILTY .— Seven Years' Penal Servitude .
MR. STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution.
EDWIN ANDERSON CARR . I am assistant at the Pulteney Hotel, 13, Albemarle Street, kept by Mrs. Lewis—on Thursday, 23rd July, I missed two baskets of silver from a plate-closet, where it was kept during the day, and a bag in which the tea pot was wrapped up—there was also a spoon, a fork, a butter knife, and another fork; also, from the sitting-room, a lady's companion, or small box—Bales was in the service that day—I saw him last between 5.10 and 5.15—I was not aware he was going to leave—I identify these articles (produced).
ISAAC WISEMAN (City Policeman 126). On the afternoon of July 25th, I was called to Mr. Bryer's, a refiner, in Barbican—the prisoner Brown was there, and I saw this part of a gravy spoon and part of a fork—I asked her how she came to buy them—she said that her master gave them to her in Bunhill Row to sell—she afterwards said she received them from her daughter—I asked her where her daughter lived—she said 13, Mack's Place, Fetter Lane—I searched her at the station, and found four empty purses, several duplicates, a ring with seven or eight keys, and 5s. 3d. in money—I went with Outram to 13, Mack's Place, and saw the two Henfreys—I went to the water-closet, put my hand in the pan, and found two skeleton keys, a patent key, and this butter slice (produced).
Brown. Did you find anything at my place? Witness. No.
JAMES LAMMAS (City Policeman 24). I went to Henfrey's house, and the two Henfreys were left in my custody while Outram and Wiseman went up stairs to search—George Henfrey asked me to let him go down stairs—I did so—there is a window looking into the water-closet, and I saw him go in a hurried manner and throw something into the pan—he came up stairs again and began abusing his wife for receiving this spoon, fork, and butter knife as payment for some washing she had done for Bale—he was very fidgetty, and asked me to let him go down stairs to fetch some water—I said, "There is water up stairs"—he said, "That is too hot, I want some cold out of the
cistern"—I let him go down with a jug to the back door, and saw him rush into the closet a second time, and thrust his arm into the pan—I heard something jingle—he brought the jug back, and I asked him to let me have a drink, thinking there was something in the jug, but there was only water there—on 23rd July, about 6.20, I saw Bales and George Henfrey in company at a beer shop in the court where Henfrey lived.
ROBERT OUTRAM (City Policeman 175). I received information, and went to 13, Mack's Place—I asked Mrs. Henfrey if she knew Mrs. Brown—she said it was her mother—I showed her the spoon and told her she was charged with having it in her possession—she said, after some hesitation, that she received it from a young man named Alfred Bales—I told Henfrey I should take him in custody for receiving a portion of the same, knowing it to be stolen—I searched his room, and found a skeleton key, and he handed me another on the way to the station, which he said was the key of the street door, but it was not—on the way to the station I found the top of a silver pepper-box—this piece of baize was given to me by a woman who is not here—on the Monday morning I searched the top of the adjoining house, and found this plated fork—I also found a piece of a broken crucible, such as is used for melting silver—Nos. 1 and 13 adjoin—I afterwards took Bales, and in his bag, which I found at Leaf Walk, near Edinburgh, I found this gold thimble.
E. A. CARR (re-examined). This thimble was in the lady's companion at the hotel
. WILLIAM BONYTHON HULTON . I am a painter, of Nevill's Court, Fetter Lane—Mrs. Brown came into my shop between 6 and 7 o'clock, and asked the boy if she could see his mistress, and she asked my wife if she would mind it, as her daughter was going to make a present, but did not wish her husband to see it—my wife took it in, and Mrs. Brown said she would call for it, and went off.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. Brown says, "I am innocent. I know nothing about it, except my daughter gave it to me to sell" George Henfrey says, "I only knew about Bales bringing the iron knife and fork." E. Henfrey says, "I have nothing to say. I know nothing about the robbery."
Brown's Defence. I went and took it innocent enough. I know nothing about it
BROWN— GUILTY of receiving; recommended to mercy by the Jury. One Month's Imprisonment . GEORGE HENFREY— GUILTY of receiving; he was further charged with having been convicted at clerkenwell, in April, 1864, to which he PLEADED GUILTY.**— Ten years' Penal Servitude . EMILY HENFREY— NOT GUILTY .
656. THOMAS KENNARD (30), to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Thomas Barnes, and stealing therein one bag, one bottle of champagne and other articles, his property.— Nine Month's Imprisonment . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
657. JOHN DRURY (36) , to embezzling the sums of 5l. 7s. 9d., 8l. 16s., and 1l. 17s. 7d., of Thomas snelling, his master.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]And
Marley, and stealing therein five forks, two salt sellers, and other articles, his property.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
NEW COURT.— Monday, August 17th, 1868.
Before Mr. Common-Serjeant.
MR. STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution.
SARAH COOK . I am the wife of Michael Cook, and keep the Gunboat public-house, St. George's in the East—on Saturday, 4th July, the prisoner came in about 9.45 for a pint of porter, which was 2d.—he gave me a bad florin—I gave it to my husband, and he handed it back to the prisoner, and the prisoner was given in custody—another man, who was with him ran away—the prisoner said he only had 2d. and a watch.
MICHAEL COOK . I am the husband of the last witness—I was called into the bar by my wife, and she handed me a bad florin—I took hold of the prisoner and he was given in custody—I gave the florin to the constable—he said he had no other money, only 2d. and a watch.
GEORGE HART (Policeman K 154). The prisoner was given into my custody—I searched him and found this bad florin in his waistcoat pocket—I received a bad florin from the last witness—I marked them both.
Prisoner's Defence. I received the money from my master—I put one in my waistcoat pocket; I did not know they were bad.
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Imprisonment .
MESSRS. COLERIDGE & STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution; and MR. PATER
TRYPHENA PILE . I live at 171, Kentish Town Road, and assist my brother, a hosier and glover, at 73, Park Street—on the 23rd July, about 9.15, the prisoner came in for a collar, which was 61/2d.—he gave me a florin and a halfpenny—I gave him 1s. 6d. change—he asked for something we had not got in stock, and said he would come on Friday—I told him to come on Saturday, and he left—I put the florin in the till—there was no other florin there—shortly after he left a bad florin was shown to me by my brother—I put it in a drawer I had for my own use—I took it out next morning, my brother tried it with caustic, and it was put on the mantelshelf—on Monday, 3rd August, the prisoner came in again, about 7.30—I recognised him—I saw him served by the assistant, who shortly after gave me a bad florin—I took the other florin from the mantelshelf and showed them to him, and asked him for good money—he said he gave a half-crown—a constable was sent for—the prisoner became very violent—he said he was not in the shop, he was at Dover—he tried to push my brother through the glass door—he also struck me in the side with his fist—he was given in custody—the florins were given to the constable.
Cross-examined. Q. You were struck by accident, I suppose? A. I think so—I put the florin in the till on 23rd July—there was not much silver there—there was no other florin there—my brother found out that it was bad—
the prisoner was in the shop on 3rd August for about three-quarters of an hour—I asked him to give me good money for the bad—we do a pretty good trade.
WILLIAM JOHN PILE . I am a hosier, at No. 73, Park Street—on Thursday, 23rd July, I went to the till about 9.30—amongst the other money I found a bad florin—there was no other florin there—I handed it to my sister—the next morning I asked her for it—she gave it to me, and I marked it with some caustic—I then put it on the mantelpiece—on Monday, 3rd August, the prisoner came into the shop and was served by Mr. Jones—I saw my sister go up to the prisoner and show him two florins—I took them from her, put them in my pocket, and sent for a constable—he said, "What are you keeping me for?"—I said, "You will see presently"—he said, "If I have given you bad money I will give you good for it"—I was standing near a glass door at the time and he tried to push me through, and we had a struggle—the constable came, and I gave the prisoner in charge, with the two florins.
JOHN JONES . I am assistant to Mr. Pile—on the 3rd August, about 7.30, the prisoner came in for a collar, which was 71/2d.—he gave me a florin—I went to Miss Pile to get change—I saw her go to the prisoner with two florins—she said, "Will you give me good money for these?" I was then sent for a policeman.
GEORGE ELMSLIE (Policeman S R 45). I took the prisoner, and received these two florins from Mr. Pile—I searched the prisoner, and found two good half-crowns and a penny—he said, "I tendered a half-crown on the 3rd, but the previous one they will have to prove."
GUILTY .**— Eighteen Month's Imprisonment .
MR. COLERIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN DANIEL SMITH . I am eleven years old, and live with my parents at Laundry Yard, Westminster—I have known the prisoner by sight some time—on 10th July he spoke to me at the corner of the yard and said, "Here, little boy, will you fetch me a pint of beer, and I will give you a half-penny"—I said, "Yes"—he told me to go to the Rose and Shamrock, and gave me a yellow jug with a broken spout, and a half-crown—the beer came to three half-pence, and they gave me four sixpences and 41/2d. change—I went back to the prisoner and gave him the beer and change, and he gave me a half-penny
EDWIN BULLOCK . I am postman at the Rose and Shamrock—on 10th July Smith came in about 9 o'clock, and I gave him a pint of beer, price three half-pence—he brought a jug with him with a broken spout—he gave. me half-a-crown—I put it in the till—there was no other half-crown there—about two or three minutes after my master came in—no other money had been taken in the mean time—I saw him serve Mary Roach with some beer in the same jug with a broken spout—she gave him a bad half-crown—after that he went to the till and took out the half-crown I had pnt there—I found it was bad—I kept both of them.
a half-crown, and in consequence of what he said I went to the Rose and Shamrock, saw Mr. Howe, and asked for a pint of beer—I gave the half-crown for it—he gave me no change—the prisoner was then at the bar—Mr. Howe said, "Who gave you this?"—I said, "A man outside"—Mr. Howe said it was bad, and the prisoner then went out—I recognized the prisoner as the person who was with the man who gave me the half-crown and the jug—Mr. Howe took the beer away and gave me the jug back, and kept the half-crown.
JOHN HOWE . I keep the Rose and Shamrock, 64, Marsham Street—on 10th July, about 9 p.m., I came into the bar and saw my potman there—I had been down in the cellar about ten minutes, and had cleared the till just before—the prisoner was in the bar—about the same time the little girl came in—I served the prisoner with a half-pint of beer, and he paid with a penny—I gave the little girl a pint, and she gave me a bad half-crown—I asked her where she got it, and she said a man gave it her outside—in consequence of something that was said, I looked in the till, and found another half-crown; I marked the two pieces, and sent for a constable—the prisoner was taken the next day—I gave a description of him—I knew the little girl as a regular customer, and the little boy too.
MORGAN MORGAN (Policeman B 277). On 11th July last I received two bad coins from Greaseley, with a description of the prisoner—in consequence of which I apprehended him in Marsham Street on the following day—I told him I wanted him for being concerned with another man in giving counterfeit half-crowns to children to pass at the beer shop—he was put amongst other prisoners, and the little boy and girl were called in and identified him—I received a yellow jug with a broken spout from the potman, but it was broken at the station.
Prisoner's Defence. I know nothing at all about it, and never saw the boy or girl in my life.
GUILTY *— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment .
MESSRS. COLERIDGE and STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution.
No evidence was offered against CATHERINE RODGERS.— NOT GUILTY .
JOHN HUTCHINGS . I keep the Old George public-house, Heston—on Wednesday, 22nd July, the three prisoners came into my public-house, and asked for a pot of beer—the male prisoner gave me a half-crown—I put it in my pocket, and gave him the change, and they left when they had drunk the beer—I had no other half-crown in my pocket—after they had gone out I looked at it and found it was bad—I went out after the prisoners, and followed them to Mr. Mattingley's beershop—I waited outside, and when they came out I took the male prisoner—I took him into the house, and the two women followed—I gave the man in charge—I marked the half-crown, and gave it to the constable—I gave the man 2s. 2d. change.
SARAH MATTINGLEY . I am the wife of William Mattingley, and keep the Half Moon beer-house—on Wednesday evening, 22nd July, the prisoners came in for a pot of beer—the male prisoner gave me a half-crown—I had no change, and asked Ann Cross to change it—I gave the prisoner 2s. 2d.—as they wore going from the house Mr. Hutchings met them at the door—I afterwards went to Miss Cross again, and found the half-crown was bad—I gave it to my husband, and he gave it to the constable.
ANN CROSS . I was staying at a friend's at Heston—I remember Mrs. Mattingley giving me a half-crown to change for her—I gave her the change and put the half-crown in my pocket—she came to me afterwards, and I found it was bad—I gave it back to her.
WILLIAM MATTINGLEY . I am the husband to Sarah Mattingley—on 22nd July I came home from work, and saw the prisoners in the tap-room—I saw my wife give change to the male prisoner—I afterwards received a bad half-crown from her, which I gave to the constable after I had marked it.
THOMAS LAWRENCE (Policeman T 134). On Wednesday evening, 22nd July, I took Navin—on the way to the station-house she lay down in the road and kicked, and a bad half-crown fell from her boot (produced).
JOSEPH WHITE . I am the son of Thomas White, a wheelwright at Heston—on 22nd July I saw Navin sitting under the hedge of my father's garden, unlacing her boot—I went away—I next went to the place on the 30th, and I picked up a bad half-crown—it was lying on the surface of the ground under the hedge—I gave it to Farley.
CHARLES FARLEY (Policeman). I was with White when he found the half-crown—as I was getting through the hedge I scraped up the ground, and found a two-shilling piece and a shilling, both bad—I gave them to my father—we were getting through the hedge and found them accidentally.
NAVIN— GUILTY .— Six Months' Imprisonment .
663. EDWARD BAILEY (27), and ALFRED CLARKE (24) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of the Guardians of the Hackney Union, and stealing therefrom two coats and other articles, their property.
MR. BESLEY conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM PLOWMAN (Policeman N 222). On 6th August, at 3 o'clock in, the morning, I was at the top of John Street, Homerton, about a quarter of a mile from the workhouse—I saw the prisoners going towards Clapton—they had a large bundle each—I said to Bailey, "What have you here?"—he said, "I have some clothes, and I suppose you want to know as well as the rest"—I looked at the bundle and said, "I wish you to go to the station with me"—he said he got them from his uncle's, at Bow—I took them to the station—Clarke said nothing—I examined his bundle—the clothes have been shown to various persons, who have identified them.
know the prisoners well—they have been inmates of the workhouse—they knew the store-room that was broken open very well—I received information that it had been broken open, and examined it—I found twelve or fifteen bundles about the place, and various things gone—I know this coat as Thomas Smith's, an inmate of the workhouse—I was in the room at 5 o'clock; it was quite safe then—the door was broken open, and there were marks of a chisel on the wood when I went again.
Bailey. Could it have been broken open without a noise being made? Witness. There must have been a slight noise made—I don't know who took them.
THOMAS SLATER . I am an inmate of the Hackney Union—on Wednesday, 5th August, I went to the store room between 7 and 8 o'clock; it was safe then—I went again next morning, at 4.45, and found it in confusion, and twelve bundles opened—this coat is the property of Thomas Smith; it passed through my hands, and I put it in the store-room.
Bailey's Defence. We were out rather late, and found the bundles in a field near the Hackney Union.
BAILEY— GUILTY .*— Fifteen Months' Imprisonment .
CLARKE— GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment .
666. WILLIAM FELL (61) , to three indictments for embezzling 3l.0s. 7d., 11l. 3s. 10d., and 17l. 10s., of John Barnett, his master.— Five years' Penal Servitude . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
667. WILLIAM ATKINSON (23), and ROBERT WARREN (27) , to burglariously breaking and entering the counting-house of Henry Kent Causton, and stealing therein 4l., and a ten franc piece, his property. ATKINSON Fifteen Months' Imprisonment .WARREN Six Months' Imprisonment . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, August 18th 1868.
Before Mr. Recorder.
BASIL MELAS . I am a merchant, in the City of London—I have a private residence in Porchester Terrace, Bayswater—I am principally connected with the Greek trade—I have known the prisoner about eighteen years—many years ago he established a list for the information of merchants, with respect to the arrival and departure of vessels laden with corn—I was originally a subscriber to that list—after it had been established a
few years, a Mr. Dornbush started a similar publication, which became very extensively patronized in the trade, and the prisoner's list was not so much patronized—Dornbush's list was established about ten years ago—for a certain time I continued to subscribe to both lists; I then discontinued the prisoner's list, and continued to subscribe to Dornbush—I have never had any quarrel or disagreement with the prisoner—in the beginning of September last, I received this letter from the prisoner—it is his writing—these other letters are all his writing—(Letters read: "10th September, 1867. Pray remember Mrs. Fermi and her six children, and help Mr. Zariff on their behalf. They are regularly baptized Christians, and not Jews, whom it is now the fashion to throw, like dogs, into the Danube." "16th September, 1867. This family will be lost by the poverty inflicted upon it There is no time to lose. I proclaim it in time; it admits of no more indifference. With this I sound the alarm for the second time. You yourself will be my witness. Seven Christians; you understand. Pray run and see Mr. Zariff. Save the Christians."—(Mr. Zariff is a Greek merchant)—"17th September, 1867. Now pray listen to me well. The list must come back to me, according to solemn engagement when Mrs. Fermi went to Falmouth for it; or there must be arbitration, as accepted, before two gentlemen. I have now additional witnesses to testify on oath to my renewed peaceful steps. Call a meeting, even to the temporary neglect of your own affairs; and, I say so advisedly, the ruin produced is without parallel. This is my last word; I have done. Wisdom in time." "23rd September, 1867. To my own additional credit, I will add that the asking people to subscribe again, even if some would, it would only be for a year, and at the end of that I should be in the same plight again. Patchwork, with this prospect of quickly returning calamity in my spoliation, is abhorrent to a man of my age and declining health. Justice alone! I ask and beg all to obtain it for me. I do not profess Judaism; and if I did, I would undertake to show that a Jew is a man, by heaven! for all that. Stir, I implore you, and get me back the position and respect that are due to me." "3rd October, 1867. I saw Mr. Roselli. It is no farcing matter; never in the world there has been a subject more serious. To repeat its substance once more; one of these things must be done: 1st. The morning list to come all to me, as agreed when Mrs. Fermi went to Falmouth; or, 2nd. Arbitration, as accepted, before two gentlemen; or, 3rd. I give up my own list on receiving 14,000l., yielding, at five per cent, the 700l. a year 1 cleared; or, 4th. The promoter of my spoliation to buy the other morning list, and give it to me in reparation. So everything has now been said and written, and wisdom in time recommended. Deeds alone, and quickly remain to prove that Justice must prevail, and that there is no Jew to throw into the Danube here, and no Christianity to shelter malefactors either." "21 Oct, 1867.—First steps in the beginning of the end. Mrs. F. is going, mad. At 2 this morning she upset the house, and ran away in her night-clothes. After much search she was found delirious in the garden. She talks of drowning herself and all the children. For the information of our assassins."—"31 Oct—To Mr. Zariff. Mr. Melas spoke to the man hired to assassinate me, and that man insulted him grossly. To-day boiled rice for all. Make the sign of the Cross."—"To Mr. Melas. 31 Oct, '67. So the man insulted grossly even you. To-day boiled rice for all. Make the sign of the cross."—To Mr. Ralli. Nov. 5, '67. In all solemnity save me from my approaching death by a broken heart; get back for me, for my
wrecked large family, my property; move heaven and earth for it I implore you once more in all solemnity."—"Mem. Mr. Melas will please to send, or see Mr. Ionides, and make the appointment; Mr. Fermi will call in the course of the day for it." Shortly after the receipt of the letter of 31st October, I had business which took me abroad; I think it was about 10th November—(Two other letters from the prisoner, dated 8th November, were also put in and read, describing the illness of his children, and the poverty of his family, and charging it upon the "dastardly malefactors" who recoiled at the ruin they had caused)—This paper is a pen-and-ink sketch of the neighbourhood of my house—it is in the prisoner's handwriting—it pretty accurately describes the locality of my house, and the streets leading to and from it—there are the names and addresses of a number of Greek merchants written on the other side—that is in the prisoner's writing—about 10th November I had occasion to go abroad—I remained abroad until the beginning of May—soon after my return, I received some other letters in the prisoner's handwriting—this is one—(This was dated 30th May, to a similar effect, and stating that his earnings had amounted to 700l. a year, which, capitalized at 5 per cent., would give 14, 000l., which he had claimed, and had been refused, instead of which he had only been offered charity, which he detested—he alluded to his own and his family's sufferings, and urged the necessity for immediate help and an appointment)—Upon the receipt of these letters, I placed myself in communication with my solicitors—I made no appointment—"4th June, 1868. I this day hand this memorandum to Mr. E. O. Ionides, to show round to his Greek friends. My home cannot hold us any longer, and we must leave or be ejected. Where to go it is impossible to foretell. I call attention to the Greeks, that such a state of things would induce any other man to destroy his whole family. With me they are safe; but I bring to the Greek knowledge that my wife—I cannot be responsible for what she may do, especially as I found her one day sitting alone in great gloom, and she told me she was thinking of shutting the children inside a box, and herself sitting over it till they should be smothered to death. They are seven in all, with the mother, all baptized Christians, and still entirely ruined by Christians, who mistook them for Jews."—I wrote this letter (produced), and directed it to the prisoner—it was returned to me in an envelope, with the prisoner's writing on it—this is the letter:—"19, Old Broad Street, 12 June, '68. Sir, I am surprised that you should continue to annoy me with your letters. You are well aware that you have no species of claim upon me, and you must distinctly understand that under no circumstances will you obtain any money from me, and if you again trouble me I intend to apply to the police, and cause you to be sent to prison."—This other letter is the prisoner's writing:—"11 June, 1868. To Mr. Melas. Move, and save this family. I propose that the Greeks and their friends would do as enclosed, and Mr. Coventry is ready to lend the Greeks every amount of co-operation. Save the adoration of Jesus, and before I die, let me see their existence securely restored."—The other papers (looking at several) are also in the prisoner's writing—in one of the letters there ii the expression, "Make the sign of the Cross"—I understand the meaning of that to be, "Prepare for death"—it is an Italian expression—I am a Greek, but I understand Italian very well—that is the acceptation of the term generally among Italians.
Cross-examined. Q. You are not a Jew, I believe? A. No, I am a Christian—the expression "Make the sign of the Cross" does not mean
astonishment or wonder—if I make the sign myself, that is one thing, if I am told to make it, it means prepare for death: no one conversant with Italian would take it otherwise—I came from abroad at the beginning of May—it was about the middle of June that I gave prisoner into custody.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINB. Q. Did you consult your solicitors, Messrs. Thomas and Holland, before you left England? A. Yes—I received information on my return, and after that gave him into custody.
EUSTATIUS CONSTANTINE IONIDES . I am an insurance broker, in Threadneedle Street, City—I am a Greek—in May this year I received some letters from the prisoner—he very often came to my office—some time in June he told me to negociate with Mr. Melas to get 14, 000l. for him, or else to take 8000l. as compensation for having lost his subscribers, because Mr. Dornbush had published a better list—he considered that the Greeks in general, and Mr. Melas in particular, were to blame for Mr. Dornbuah's success—I told him that he was labouring under delusions; that if he humbled himself to ask people to subscribe to his list, and was moderate in his expressions, and left off abusing people, that they might feel charitably disposed to assist him and his family; but that threats of that kind made people exasperated; and I also informed him that Mr. Melas would not stand any more of these annoyances; that he would certainly take measures to prosecute him—he said if that was the case, and nothing was to be done for him, then Greek blood would be shed.
CELIA ROBERTS . I am a charwoman, and have been lately employed by the prisoner's wife—on a Saturday, about three weeks ago, I was in charge of the house and the children—after Mrs. Fermi had been to see her husband she told me something—I went with her to an attic in the house—I brought down this box and another—we went up a ladder—I found them inside a small trap-door in the roof—it was in Mr. Fermi's bed-room—I took out the contents, but I did not exactly look at them—this pistol was in it, and these other things—these papers were in the tin box.
NICHOLAS SIMPSON FATT . I am shopman to Messrs. Riley & Co., gunmakers, of 315, Oxford Street—on Thursday, 11th June, the prisoner bought this pistol—it it what is called a duelling pistol—he wished twenty or twenty-five bullets to fit it, and produced this as a pattern—he wanted them within an hour's time—1 told him I could not oblige him with them—he then said he would come for them at 6 o'clock—he did not come till the Saturday—I had not got them done then—we had had some communication from the police—I kept the pistol and the bullet, and told the prisoner they were not ready—I know nothing of this other pistol in the box, it is a five-chamber revolver—these bullets fit it—here is a powder flask and caps.
GEORGE DORNBUSH . I am proprietor of the Floating Cargo Morning and Evening List—the morning list is a similar publication to one originally published by the prisoner—I bought it in 1861—it had been started by somebody else—I know the prisoner—(MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE proposed to give in evidence certain violent conduct of the prisoner towards the witness, in order to explain certain passages in the letters, and to show intention, but the RECORDER considered it inadmissible, as not applying to the person whom the prisoner was now charged with threatening)—I believe the prisoner came out of prison on 1st February, 1867—I was born at Trieste—I know Italian
very well—when the expression "Make the sign of the Cross" is used it means "Prepare for the worst; prepare for death."
Cross-examined. Q. Do you live at Trieste? A. I have been there twenty-five years—the Italian language is spoken there as the popular language—I never heard the expression used as one of wonder and astonishment.
OCTAVIUS VALIERA . I am a Greek by birth—I have resided about ten years in Italy, and am perfectly acquainted with the language—when the expression "Make the sign of the Cross" is used by one person to another as an imposition; it means "Make your last prayer and prepare for death."
Cross-examined. Q. Has it any other meaning? A. If I make the sign of the Cross it means a prayer, but if I am imposed by any one to make it, it is a menace—I don't think it means "You had better repent"—I have never known it used in that sense.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you heard it employed in any other sense? A. No, I have not heard it used as an expression of wonder or astonishment: if I make the sign of the Cross to myself it is the sign of devotion, or if I cross myself it may mean astonishment; but if I tell another person to do it, it is a threat to prepare for death.
PETER LEONINI . I was a professor of languages—I am now a curate in the Church of England—I am a Roman by birth, but am a naturalized British subject—I have heard the expression "Make the sign of the Cross"—if made use of to another person it means "Prepare yourself for the worst—prepare for death."
Cross-examined. Q. Does it not also mean "Repent?" A. It depends upon the way in which it is addressed—it implies "Repent for what you have done—and prepare for what comes after."
HERMAN GWNIA .—I was born at Trieste—I am perfectly acquainted with the Italian language—I am connected with the house of Trewelin & Goschen—I have heard the expression in the letter "Make the sign of the Cross" the meaning I should attach to it would be "Prepare for death."
Cross-examined. Q. Do you agree with what the other gentlemen have said? A. Yes—there is no other meaning attached to the expression so far as I know.
Cross-examined. Q. You heard the other gentlemen examined, do you agree with their evidence? A. In what way—there is no other meaning attached to the words than "Prepare for the worst"—if I was astonished I might make the sign of the Cross—but if it is addressed to another it is a menace to kill you.
Cross-examined. Q. A person making the sign of the Cross would be expressing astonishment or wonder? A. Yes; or when you make a prayer you make the sign of the Cross—I don't think it is an expression of astonishment—the expression comes from the banditti, in Italy; before killing a
person, they used to tell him to prepare for death, and then tell him to make the sign of the Cross—I know that Mr. Melas is a Greek.
GUILTY . Recommended to mercy by the Jury. He was further charged, with having been before convicted of felony at this Court, in January, 1866, to which he PLEADED GUILTY.— Judgment respited .
MESSRS. F. H. LEWIS and BESLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. COLLINS
HENRY ALLEN , I am a horse dealer, of Hitchenden Mews—I have resided at Notting Hill nearly 20 years—my wife Catherine Allen was living with me—I have been shown some clothing and articles in possession of the police, worth about 45l., most of it was women's wearing apparel—some of Mr. Prince's was with her's, there was a suit of his clothes, and several things, shirts and collars—there were eight or ten silk handkerchiefs of mine and a lot of wearing apparel—the bulk of the wearing apparel was my wife's—the value of that and the bed linen, and one thing or other, was about 40l. or 45l. altogether—there were table cloths, pillow cases, and several things—they were things which I had been using in my household—I saw some spoons and forks at the station, some knives and a teapot—I believe them to be my property—I don't know how long before 1st July they had been in my house, because I was mostly out in the country at horse fairs—I had had the handkerchiefs in use about a week before—the last time I was at home before 1st July was about 28th June—I then went to Spalding Fair, Lincolnshire—I left my wife at home and I gave her 30l. that I did not want to take with me, to put with the other money—as far as I know the table cloths and other things were there then—the prisoner was a particular friend of mine, and was often at my place—he was a master butcher at Notting Hill, within 100 yards of my stable, and lived nearly opposite—I had known him nearly three years; he had been a visitor at my house for eighteen months—I have sold him a horse or two, and have had supper over it with him—my wife has been there at the time—after going to Spalding Fair I went to Thorney, in Cambridgeshire, and got back to London on 1st July—I then found my wife gone—I enquired for Prince, but could not find him—I then examined and missed my property; it could not have been taken by one person—three large boxes were afterwards shown to me by the police; two of them belong to me and had been in my house before I went to Spalding—they were filled with things—a woman could not lift them.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you not value the property, when you were at the Police Court, at 20l. or 25l? A. No, I valued it at 45l.—there was a gown and shawl that cost ten guineas—I know a man named Wix—he is no relation of my wife's, that I am aware of—I don't know that he carried the boxes out of my house—I don't know the prisoner's age—my wife is about 35 or 36; she might not be so old, I don't know her age to a year or two—I think the prisoner is about 30—it has not come to my knowledge that my wife and Wix took the boxes the back way out of my house—(Catherine Allen was called in) that is my wife.
I went on board the City of Cork steamer, at Cork; she was bound for America—I found the prisoner and Mrs. Allen on board together, with some luggage—I told them what they were charged with—I found their passage ticket for New York upon the woman—I did not read it in their presence—I read the telegram that I had for them—I found no passage ticket on the prisoner—he said he was going to New York with his wife; she was present at the time—I told them to order up the boxes that belonged to them, and that any property that belonged to them they had better take out of the ship—we went down the after hold, and the prisoner picked out three boxes; they are here—they were locked; he had the keys—I opened the boxes in the presence of a police-officer from Scotland Yard—they were afterwards examined by Allen, and all the property, except a few articles, in the three boxes, were identified by him as his property—I can't recollect in which of the boxes the handkerchiefs were—he identified several articles mixed here and there in the three boxes—I brought them to London.
Cross-examined. Q. When you asked him who the boxes belonged to, did he not say that they belonged to him and his wife? A. I believe there was something of that—they were marked, "Mr. Prince"—the keys of the boxes were not in a little bag in Mrs. Allen's hand; the prisoner had them in his pocket—I did not see Mrs. Allen hand them to him—he handed them to me—there were three or four keys—there were two carpet bags, and three boxes—these (produced) are the three boxes which he said belonged to him and his wife—I asked him if he had any more property in the ship, or if the purser had any money belonging to him, and he said, "No"—the carpet bags contained male and female wearing apparel, mixed.
MR. LEWIS. Q. Are the boxes in the same condition as they were when you saw them on board the vessel? A. Yes—some of the man's wearing apparel was in the boxes—the whole of the clothes were mixed together.
HENRY ALLEN (re-examined). These boxes belong to me—they were up stairs in my house when I went away; two out of the three were—a person would not see them without going up stairs into the bedroom—the other one my wife bought, to pack up a lot of new things to take away with them.
MR. COLLINS submitted that there was no evidence of any possession of the goods, on the part of the prisoner, in this country, and the mere possession in Ireland would not give this Court jurisdiction.
COURT to PATRICK MAHONEY. Q. Did you hear from the prisoner where be had come from in the ship? A. No; he did not say anything about that, but I know the ship came from Liverpool.
JOSEPH MAXWELL . I am a detective officer of the Liverpool constabulary—on 4th July, I went on board the City of Cork steamer—I there found the prisoner and Mrs. Allen—I had seen them before, on the Prince's Landing Stage, at Liverpool, from which the tenders leave to take passengers on board the steamers—they went on board the City of Cork steamer as steerage passengers; I saw them go on board—I saw their luggage brought down in a cart, with some other luggage of other passengers, from Morton's, in Union Street, which is a lodging-house for emigrants—I saw a box like that (one of those produced), with "Mr. Prince, New York," labelled upon it; and a box like that was labelled, "Not wanted during the passage."
MR. COLLINS renewed his objection, and contended that this carried the case
no further; there was no evidence to show the prisoner dealing with the goods before they reached Liverpool.
MR. LEWIS urged that it was a question for the Jury, whether the wife did not take away the property by agreement with the prisoner, in which case there would be a joint taking. See The Queen v. Thompson, 15 Law Times, page 101.
THE RECORDER could not see any evidence of a joint possession until they were together at Liverpool, and under these circumstances this Court would have no jurisdiction; he therefore directed a Verdict of NOT GUILTY .
See next case, and Third Court, Friday.
MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH with MR. POLAND conducted the Prosecution; and
WALTER REED . I am a clerk in the London and Westminster Bank, St. James's Square branch—Henry Allen opened an account there about 18th January, 1864—I cannot give the exact date—on opening the account he would have to sign this book—I saw him sign it, and I filled up the address for him as he said he could not write, that he was not a great scholar, and would I write it for him—the address is Latimer Road, Hammersmith—that would be the ordinary signature on which the account would be drawn out—I am accustomed to act upon handwriting at the bank—these two cheques for 705l. 18s. 6d. and 902l. 9s. 3d., I think, are not in Allen's handwriting—in my judgment they are not—these deposit notes (produced) are genuine, as far as I can judge—there are nine of them.
Cross-examined. Q. Are you perfectly certain of that? A. Yes, they are genuine—I have no difficulty whatever in saying so—they are not exactly similar one with the other, but they resemble the signature in the signature-book.
AUGUSTE DELVALL . I am a cashier at the St. James's Square Branch of the London and Westminster Bank—I know that a person of the name of Henry Allen had a deposit account there—I have been in the habit of acting upon his signature in paying money—I know the prisoner as his wife—I remember her bringing this deposit receipt for 700l. on the 18th January—she came with 200l. in notes, to be paid to her husband's account—that increased the sum from 700l. to 900l.—according to our practice, we keep possession of the deposit receipt for 700l. and issue a new one for 900l.—when she brought it it was signed Henry Allen across the stamp, as it is at present—there was 5l. 18s. 6d. due for interest—I paid that in money, and gave a new receipt for the 900l.; this is it—on 27th April she came again to the bank and brought the deposit receipt for 900l., signed—that would make it an order for payment; 2l. 9s. 3d. interest had accrued—I filled in the amount, and it then became an order for 902l. 9s. 3d.—she said she would take 800l. in 100l. notes, the rest in fives and tens, half of each, and the 2l. 9s. 3d. in cash—I compared the signature to the order with the signature book, and at the time believed it to be the genuine signature of Henry Alien, the depositor—I have since compared it more carefully, and also the order for 706l. 18s. 6d, and I now consider that they are forgeries—the numbers of the eight 100l. notes which I paid the prisoner were 64, 496, 62, 904, 72, 072-3-4, 72, 798-9, and 72, 800—the ten 5l. notes were numbered 7857 to 7876 inclusive, and the five 10l. notes 59, 189 to 59, 193
inclusive—I did not compare the signature of the deposit receipt for 700l. with the book because that was only increasing the deposit.
Cross-examined. Q. With regard to the deposit note and cheque for 700l. in January, which was presented by Mrs. Allen when the 200l. was paid in, she would have been compelled to do that in the ordinary way of business, I suppose? A. She might have had a new receipt for 200l.—it was not absolutely necessary for her to give me the deposit note with Henry Allen's name signed—it was the habit of the deposit customers to do so usually—what she did was perfectly natural if Allen had given her the note and the 200l. to pay in—unless I had heard something afterwards, I should not have looked at it again—it could serve no purpose to forge the name on the deposit note, except it was done with the intention of drawing it out altogether—when the 200l. was paid in it would be a proper thing to give up the old deposit note and get a new one—I don't think I had received Allen's deposit before—I do not remember having done so—I may have seen his signature in the signature-book, but I had not examined it—it was not until I was told the note was forged that I suspected it was a forgery—Allen came to the bank.
MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH. Q. Have you seen the other deposit notes? A. No, I have not—I have now looked at them, and I think they are all genuine—when I pay away so large a sum as 900l. I think it necessary to compare the signature on the order with that in the book—I should not have paid the odd sum for interest on the 700l. unless the deposit note had been signed—it was some time in the beginning of July that I was told that this was a forgery.
PATRICK MAHONY . I am one of the Irish Constabulary—I went on board the City of Cork steamer, at Queenstown—I there found the prisoner and Prince—I told the prisoner I had a description of her, and had a telegram to arrest her and Prince on a charge of forgery—I told her she was charged with forging on the bank for the amount of 600l., giving the number of the notes and all—she refused giving up the money there until she came ashore—she said she could not allow herself to be searched on board ship—after coming ashore I searched Prince and her—she handed me over 600l. in 100l. notes—it was in this bag, which she handed to me from inside her small-clothes—I opened it in her presence and found the six 100l. notes—she also handed me her passage ticket—there were also two 10l. notes, and fifteen 5l. notes—I made a copy of the numbers of the 100l. notes, and have them here; they are 64,496, 72,072, 62,904, 72,798, 72,074, and 72,800—I handed up the smaller notes to the bank, by order of the Magistrate—she made no further observation when I found the money—she was brought to London by Sergeant Langley—they were both together when I charged them—after coming ashore he told her to hand over the money—he had 70l. 10s. in gold himself—(The passage ticket was from Liverpool to New York and Philadelphia, for Charles Prince, aged 28, and Catherine Prince, aged 23).
WILLIAM BENNETT . I live at 8, Bank Buildings, Islington, and am a cattle salesman's banker—I have seen the man Prince frequently—this 100l. note, No. 72,799, was paid to me on 25th May by Prince, or someone who gave that name—I wrote on it at the time "Prince, Notting Hill"—to the best of my belief it was Prince who gave it me—it was to pay for some sheep to a customer of mine—the sheep came to 55l. 7s., I gave him the change.
Cross-examined. Q. You have known Prince for a long time, have you
not? A. Yes, for some six months—I have had several dealings with him, and know his person well—I should hardly like to swear positively that I received the note from him, but still I feel pretty certain—I have a good many dealings, and am rather in a large way—I think he was the man, but I would not undertake to swear it.
MR. POLAND. Q. Do you know that he lived at Notting Hill? A. Only by his own representation—I wrote that address on the note—I should have written that if he had not paid it himself—they do not always pay money themselves—they sometimes send it by other persons—it was to pay for sheep purchased by Prince.
CHARLES CHABOT . I carry on business at 25, Southampton Row, Holborn, and am an expert in handwriting—I have made it my study for many years, and I have been constantly examined in Courts of Justice upon the subject—I have compared the signature of Henry Allen in this book with the signatures on the two orders for 900l. and 700l.—in my opinion they are decidedly not written by the same persons—I have compared them carefully, and give that as my decided opinion—I can give my reasons—I have examined the other deposit receipts produced, and I believe those to be the genuine handwriting of Allen—I have not the slightest doubt of it.
Cross-examined. Q. Do I understand you to say that in your judgment the same person could not have written these nine signatures and the other two? A. I don't believe he could—if he wrote a hundred signatures I do not believe he could write like this, without copying it, and I scarcely believe he could copy it—I was sent for by someone from the bank—I was first shown the order for 700l., and then the one for 900l., and I was asked whether I thought they were the same as the signatures in the book, or something to that effect—they were shown to me separately—my attention was directed to these two as being forgeries—they were put before me, and I was asked whether there was any difference, or something of that kind, between these and the others—I saw immediately that these two agreed particularly in certain things, and that they differed from those—I was directed to say whether the two were written by the same person who wrote the others.
EDWARD LANGLEY (Police Sergeant). On 6th July, Allen made a communication to me—I went with him to the Police Court, Marlborough Street, and obtained a warrant against the prisoner for forgery—I afterwards went to Queenstown, and took her on this warrant.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the warrant obtained on a sworn information? A. Yes; Allen swore it.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude .
The following prisoners PLEADED GUILTY.—
671. JOSEPH GRIMES BARROW (34) , to unlawfully conspiring with another person to remove and conceal his effects, he having been adjudged a bankrupt. MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH for the prosecution, stated that the prisoner was believed to ham acted under the advice and influence of another person.— Three Months' Imprisonment . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
672. THOMAS MCCABE (19) , to two indictments for stealing post letters, whilst in the employment of the Post Office; and also to an indictment for forging and uttering a Post Office Order for 15s.— Six Years' Penal Servitude . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
673. HENRY JOHNSTONE (50), JOHN SUTTON (28), and FREDERICK BARDEN (24) , to a burglary in the dwelling-house of Julius Delile, with intent to steal, each having been before convicted of felon.—JOHNSTONE** and SUTTON**— Seven years' Penal Servitude each . BARDEN*— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment. An officer deposed that Barden since his conviction had been for a time in honest employment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
674. ALFRED JACKMAN (34) ,to two indictments for forging and uttering requests for the delivery of goods; and to stealing one chain, of William Bird.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
675. AUGUSTUS HENRY PINKNEY (24), to two indictments for embezzling 10l. 12s. 2d. 11l. 12s. 11d., and other sums, of Albert Augustus Dean, his master.— Five Years' Penal Servitude . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, August 18th 1868.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. POLAND. conducted the Prosecution.
ALFRED WRIGHT . I am a constable of the London and North Western Railway—on 31st July, about twenty minutes to 10 in the evening, my attention was called to the prisoner, who was leaving the premises of the London and North Western Station, Broad Street, City—he was a shipper there—his coat was rather bulky—I stopped him and asked him what he had got about him—he said "Nothing"—I took him back and met Pusey—I then took him into the constable's box, and in the pockets of his coat I found a pair of boots on each side—I asked him where he got them—he said that he picked them up in the truck
Prisoner. Was I going to the office? A. Yes, to book your time.
Prisoner. I was going to take the boots into the office, as I did not know what to do with them. Witness. You were descending the steps.
HENRY PUSEY . I am a constable in the service of the London and North Western Railway—on the 31st July I searched the shipper's box on the goods platform about 11.15, after the prisoner was taken, and found these two pairs of women's boots (produced)—I had seen the prisoner at that box two hours before—he went in and shut the doors behind him—he came out about 10.30, with his coat on his arm—I searched the water closet, and found another pair of boots there—every man in the station had access to the shipper's box, and to the water closet—the prisoner has been there four years—his wages were 26s. a week.
THOMAS GOODGE . I am a warehouseman, in the service of Solomon and Co., of Tuilleries Street, Hackney Road, wholesale shoe manufacturers—on 29th July I packed up 101 pairs of boots for Mr. Hayes, of Harrogate, and a consignment note was made out and forwarded to Pickford & Co.—these boots produced were put in, they have our mark inside and out.
Mr. Hayes, and they were placed in a trunk—the prisoner was one of the men engaged in loading that truck.
NESLEY HAYES . I am a general dealer at Leeds, and have a shop at Harrogate, as a boot and shoe maker—I received a case of goods from Solomon & Co., it ought to have contained 101 pairs; it only contained 84—17 pairs were missing, value about 6l.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate: "I picked up the boots produced, in the truck, not with the intention of keeping them. On going into the truck again, to see if I could put the boots back, I found the box corded up again."
The prisoner produced a written defence, stating that he picked up the boots, and finding the box corded up was afraid to make it known.
GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment .
MR. BRINLEY. conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN SLATER , I am a grocer, of 11, Brookley Walk, Homerton—on Monday, 28th June, I went to bed about 1 o'clock—at 2 o'clock I thought I heard somebody in the room; I thought it was my mother, and did not pay much attention, I opened my eyes a little, and thought it was my brother, I opened them further, and saw the prisoner gliding across the bedroom—I called out, and he bolted out of the room—I had known him before—the shop was secure when we went to bed, and when we went down we found a piece of glass cut out of the parlour window, and the window forced open—I missed some money, tobacco, flour, bacon, and a leg of lamb, value about 5l.—I traced some flour along the garden to the place where the prisoner lives—I went there with Bray about 6 o'clock, and found the lamb, bread, and some very white flour, similar to what I had had—I found the prisoner under the bed in his own room—the policeman had knocked.
COURT. Q. Did you find the cheese, the butter, or the tobacco? A. No—these articles (produced) are my property—the prisoner lives three doors off.
JAMES BRAY (Policeman N 125). On Sunday morning, 28th June, I went with Slater to the prisoner's house, at 6 o'clock, and found the prisoner concealed under a bed in a room next his own—a man and a child were in the bed, and a woman stood at the door—I found a leg of lamb, three or four quartern loaves, and some flour—he said that he knew nothing of the lamb, and the bread he had bought at Bethnal Green—at the station he said that he had picked the lamb up at his own gate, when he went in doors—he was dressed—the ground was so hard that I could not say whether there were footmarks of more than one person—I found no tobacco, butter, or cheese.
Prisoner's Defence. I was the worse for drink, and went and laid on the floor. I found it inside the door, and picked it up, thinking it belonged to someone in the house.
GUILTY . He was further charged with having been before convicted, at Worship Street, in March, 1863, to which he PLEADED GUILTY>.**— Twelve Months' imprisonment .
MR. STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution.
ELZIA PARKINS I am single—I lived with the prisoner as his wife two years, up to July, at 13, Hendon Place, Pimlico—on 3rd August, about 5 o'clock, I went out for a walk by myself—we had had no words—he said, "I will go and seek for work"—he went out before me—I walked towards Battersea Bridge, and when I got over it he came up to me, and said that he was coming to go for a walk with me—I asked him what business he had following me—he said that he was not following me—I still kept walking on, and he kept following me—I went to his brother's house—he followed me there—I was there two or three minutes, and then went to a friend's house in Pimlico—he followed me down into the kitchen—I stayed there two or three minutes, and then went straight home, and he with me—as soon as I got home, I took off my bonnet, struck him in the face, and asked him what he meant by following me—he said that he did not follow me; he came with the intention of going for a walk—I kept hitting him all the time—he held my hands, and slapped me in the face—I said I would get a situation, and go away and leave him—I flipped him in the face with a towel—he said he would not stand it any longer, and struck me in the face—I called out, and the landlord came up—I ran towards him, and felt a knife being put into my back, just below the shoulder blade—the prisoner was then behind me—I had been putting the knives into the box previous to that—I had said, "I will knock your brains out with the tongs"—the tongs were there, but I had not got them—the prisoner followed me down stairs, and said he was very sorry, and wanted to come into the room, but I would not let him—I saw a doctor.
Prisoner. She was putting the knives and forks into the box; she had a knife in her hand, and I thought she meant it for me: I went to take the knife out of her hand. Witness. Yes you did—you got one, and the others fell on the floor—when you slapped me in the face, I turned round and ran to the landlord—I used no gesture to him—I had flipped him with the towel—I had the towel in one hand, and the knives in the other—I fell into the landlord's arms—I ran against him, and fell backwards somewhat.
MR. STRAIGHT. Q. Then it was by the landlord coming in that you went back. A. Yes—I cannot say that I went back on the knife, but 1 felt the knife then.
JAMES NISBET . I am the landlord of the house—these people lived there six weeks—on 3rd August, 1 had been up two or three times trying to pacify them—she always flew at him, it appears, and he always got her down, and held her by the hands, and she cried out, "Leave go of my hands," and he has said, "I will, if you will be quiet"—I heard the prisoner scream, "Mr. Nisbet! Mr. Nisbet!"—I rushed up stairs—the door was wide open; the table was standing near the bed, and he was holding her down with one hand on the bed, and getting a table knife out of the drawer with the other—he made three or four probes at her back, but only struck her once—she rushed down stairs—he looked very wild—I was afraid of the knife, and
rushed down stairs, and he after me, into the room where my mistress and children were—they went into another room, and I collared him.
Prisoner. She fell back on the knife. Witness. She did not full back—she was rushing away, and you went after her.
CHARLES CLINCH (Policeman B 367). I was called, and saw the prisoner in the passage—I asked him what was the matter—he said he had had a misfortune, and stabbed his mistress—he showed me into the parlour, and I found her with her clothes stripped down, and bleeding from a wound under the right shoulder blade—I asked him what it was done with—he said, "A knife"—I asked him where it was, and he gave me this knife (produced), and said he did it with the knife somehow—his right hand was bleeding from a cut.
Prisoner. She fell back on the knife, and it ran into my hand.
THOMAS CASTLE , M.D. I live at 2, Upper Tachbrook Street, Pimlico—I was called, and found the prosecutor suffering from a sharp cut under the right shoulder, and bleeding—it was about an inch long, and three quarters of an inch deep—it could be caused by this knife, which I saw at the time—it had been cleaned then, but there was still blood on it—there was a out on her dress—it might have been dangerous, if it had been half an inch lower or higher, as it might have gone between the ribs, and into the lungs; but it had struck on the surface of the rib—she is nearly well now.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate,—She took the tongs to me and threatened she would do for me, I asked her to be quiet; she kept flourishing the tongs around my head. I have a mark on my arm and leg where she hit me. GUILTY of unlawfully wounding.— Four Months' Imprisonment .
MR. BRINDLEY conducted the Prosecution.
RICHARD SHERWOOD (Policeman Y 263). On the morning of 6th July, about 4.20, I was on duty at the corner of Phoenix Street, Somer's Town, and saw the prisoner and another man—I said to the prisoner, "What are you hanging about for at this time in the morning?"—they said, "We are going to the cattle market"—I said, "All right!" and passed on—I passed Mr. Johnson's shop; it was all right then—I re-passed the shop at about 4.50, and found the door open—I called Mr. Johnson up, and looked through the house—the back parlour window had been forced open, and I found this knife and pickaxe on the floor—there were marks outside the window, and a gimlet was put through the bar—the framework of the window was broken, as though it had been forced from the outside.
Prisoner. Do you know where the other man lives Witness. He lives anywhere; I cannot find him. I am sure of you, I know you by sight.
came in for a light for a cigar which he had in his hand—he stood against the counter and looked into the parlour—his father lives opposite, and used to live next door—I was disturbed about 4.45 in the morning, and found every drawer in the shop open, and the things strewed about—I missed a gold watch, a child's money box, containing, I suppose, from 3l. to 4l., about 30 three-penny cigars, and about 30 two-penny ones—I had fastened the window with a gimlet—I have seen none of my property since.
FREDERICK PHILPOT (Policeman Y 122). I took the prisoner, and told him the charge—he said, "It is all my father's fault: starvation drove me to it. I knew you were after me about Johnson's affair, and now I will tell you all about it. My father turned me out of doors when I had nothing to do, and that is the cause of it. The watch I pawned, and the cigars I threw away."—he said that he pawned the watch over Blackfriars Bridge, but he could not name the street—he also said, "I kept out of the way, and my father paid my fare to Birmingham."
Prisoner. He apprehended me for a suit of clothes. I never said a word about the burglary. My father sent me away to get work. I am innocent. Witness. He said all that I have mentioned.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment, to commence at the expiration of the former sentence .
OLD COURT.—Wednesday, August 19th, 1868.
Before Mr. Justice Lush.
684. JARVEEL FRANKLE (59), BARNARD HARRIS (61), and OSCAR REWMAN (41), were indicted for unlawfully conspiring, with others, to engrave upon certain plates parts of undertakings for the payment of money of the empire of Russia.
FRANKLE and HARRIS PLEADED GUILTY .— Seventeen Months' Imprisonment . MR. SERGEANT BALLANTINE, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence against REWMAN— NOT GUILTY .
There were other indictments against the prisoners upon which no evidence was offered.
MR. DALY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. WARNER SLEGH the Defence.
SARAH WEAVER . The deceased was my husband—on Saturday night, 19th July, I was returning home with him, about 12.30—when we got within a few yards of our house, he left me to go and open the door; but when he got to the door, he found he had not got the key; I had it—he afterwards returned towards me, following two men—the prisoner is one of them—they were making their escape from the door, where they had assaulted him—I did not see them assault him, but he told me so—I heard my husband ask the prisoner how he came to assault him—he had not interfered with him—he seemed to stand in a fighting position—I said to my husband, "Don't fight"—he said, "No, I am not going to fight"—he turned to one of my boys, who was with me, and said, "Go to the policestation and fetch a policeman," and as he said it he took hold of the prisoner's
collar—the prisoner put up his hand and held my husband's hand on his collar with his right hand, and struck him, with his right, violently—on the right side of the head—after he struck him, he shoved him and pushed him from him—he fell on his back in the middle of the road—he was taken up insensible, and taken first to the station, and afterwards to the hospital—he never recovered his senses—I remained with him till he died.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know who the other man was with the prisoner? A. No, I knew neither of them—my two sons were with me—my husband went out about 10.30 to meet my two sons, and I went out about 11 o'clock to meet them—I did not see my husband assaulted on the doorstep, but I heard the noise and talking—I did not say, at the police-court, that my husband said one of the men had been shaking him; he said this man had kicked his legs as he sat on the door-step—I did not see him sitting on the door-step—there is a wall projecting out there—I heard the prisoner make use of bad language to my husband—my husband was sober, and I believe the prisoner was.
WILLIAM THOMAS WEAVER . I am the son of last witness—I was with my father on the morning of the 19th, going home—my father returned to us, saying, "One of these fellows has been shaking me, or struck me, and kicked my legs"—with that he placed his hand on the prisoner's shoulder, and told my brother to fetch a policeman—the prisoner put his right hand on my father's hand, and held it, and with his left hand struck him on the right temple—he pushed him as well, and he fell insensible.
Cross-examined. Q. How long had you been with your father? A. Since 12 o'clock—he had been at Mr. Bontemps, a pastry cook's and confectioner's, since 11.15 or 11.30—he also sells "beer and wine—my father had about one glass—as we went home my mother met us—my father went on to open the door—he only left us two or three minutes—he did not leave our sight, but the wall projects out a little in front of the door-step—I saw two persons go towards the door-step—one, the prisoner, went up to my father, and one stood a little back—I did not see the prisoner strike my father at the door—I saw them run away from the door, and my father walked after them and took hold of the prisoner's collar.
CHARLES MILLER (Policeman Y 37). I was on duty this morning in the Junction Road—I heard a slight noise, and saw the prisoner make a rush, and hit the deceased on the head—he fell—the prisoner then turned round, made a rush, and ran away—a sergeant who was with me caught him.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you see the deceased take hold of the prisoner? A. No—I only saw the one blow struck—there seemed to be no provocation on the part of the deceased, he did not touch him that I am aware of.
WILLIAM BELL (Police Inspector). I took the charge against the prisoner—he said, "How do they know it was me, there were two of us; never struck the man, I might have pushed him"—when I was taking him to the cell, I said, "I am afraid this will amount to a more serious case than you seem aware of—he said, "I am very sorry, but I never struck the man; I might have pushed him"—he was sober.
JAMES STANTON CLOUGH . I was house-surgeon at University College Hospital when the deceased was brought there, on the morning of the 19th—he was quite unconscious, and never recovered—I afterwards made a post-mortem examination—I found a very severe injury to the head, two fractures of the skull, tearing the substance of the brain in five different
parts—one fracture was on the right temple, about five inches long, another fracture was on the base of the skull, above the right eye, two blood vessels were ruptured beneath the fracture, and a large quantity of blood poured out inside the skull—the fracture on the temple could by bare possibility be caused by a blow with a fist, but not probably—it would be more likely from a fall. The prisoner received a good character.— NOT GUILTY .
There was another indictment against the prisoner for assaulting and causing actual bodily harm to the said William Thomas Weaver, upon which no evidence was offered.
MR. COOPER conducted the Proseuction; and MR. METCALFE the Defence.
MART ANN GODDARD . I live at 14, Cannon Street Road, St. George's in the East—I was a domestic servant in the service of the deceased until his death—he was a licensed victualler, and kept the Duke of Wellington public-house—on Saturday, 11th July, he returned home in his pony and cart between 3 and 4 o'clock—he went up stairs first to ask where the boy was—he afterwards came down and went into the bar-parlour, where my mistress was—I heard a noise, but being deaf I could not distinguish the words—after a time I went into the kitchen—my master came in and washed his side underneath the tap—he washed blood off—he said something to me—my mistress came up and said, "Conrad, Conrad, let me attend to you, I will attend to you"—be said, "No, go away, don't pull me about, leave me alone"—she then put her arms round my neck, and said, "Jane, Jane, may God forgive me, I did not mean to do it"—I went for a doctor—she did not tell me how it happened, she said there was a few words between them—I afterwards looked under the counter, opposite the bar-parlour door, and found this knife stained with blood—I had missed the knife when I cleared away.
Cross-examined. Q. Did not your mistress say that she did not intend to do it, that she meant to frighten your master? A. Yes—he said, "It was an accident, Jane, your mistress did not intend to do it"—she was a very quiet well-behaved woman, and very attentive to her husband—he drank sometimes, and was then very violent—he had behaved very violent to her on several occasions—I believe he had had a little to drink on this occasion—I saw that my mistress's eye was black on the day after this occurrence, it was not black before.
JOHN HUMPHREYS . I live at 17, Charlotte Street, Fieldgate Street, Whitechapel—on Saturday, 11th July, I was at the Duke of Wellington with four of my shipmates—the deceased came home, put up his pony, and went into the bar-parlour, and while he was there I went to the counter for change, and saw him raise his arm towards the prisoner—I can't say why that was done—I did not hear any talking—the door was just ajar.
CHARLES GEE (Police Inspector K). On 12th July, about 12.15, I went to the house and saw the deceased in bed—in the prisoner's presence I said, "Mr. Vanderhalven, it is a very serious affair"—he said, "Yes, Mr. Gee, it is; it was my fault, it was my fault"—the prisoner said, "No my dear, don't say it was your fault, tell the gentleman (or Mr. Gee) the truth"—he did not answer, and she said, "I will tell him, and if I am wrong you correct
me. As I was sitting down to dinner, Mr. Vanderhalven came in; we had a quarrel, and he struck me a severe blow. We continued our quarrel, and he gave me another very severe blow, which gave me a black eye" (and she pointed to her eye which was then very black) "I said, 'If you do that again I shall do something;' he struck at me again another violent blow, and at the moment I picked up a knife and struck at him; I did not know that I had hurt him until I went up stairs to the kitchen, and then to my horror I found that he was stabbed. I immediately sent for the nearest surgeon, and Mr. Morrison came and dressed the wound"—turning round then from me to her husband, she said, "Have I not told Mr. Gee the truth"—about two seconds elapsed, and he faintly said, "Yes"—I said, "Well, Mr. Vanderhalven, this is a very serious matter"—he said, "It was all my fault"—I said, "Do you wish to charge Mrs. Vanderhalven with this"—he said, "No, certainly not, certainly not, it was my own fault"—he died on the following Sunday, and I then took her into custody.
Cross-examined. Q. Besides saying "It was all my fault," he said, "It was an accident," did he not? A. Yes; at the very commencement he said that.
JOHN REED MORRISON . I am a surgeon, of 57, Cannon Street Road—on Saturday, 11th July, about 3 in the afternoon, I was sent for, and found the deceased standing at the kitchen door—he walked with me up into his bed-room—I then examined him, and found a wound on the right side, such as this knife would make—I did what was necessary—I did not apprehend any danger; it had stopped bleeding—Mr. Comley, the family attendant, afterwards took charge of the case.
COURT. Q. What was the nature of the wound; did it appear to be a direct thrust or not? A. Yes; it was a cut wound, with a slight change of direction in one part—it seemed to go between the ribs and the skin, and as it was a gaping wound I put in my finger to feel the direction, but did not probe it much for fear of doing damage.
HERBERT COMLEY . I am assistant to my father, a surgeon, of 71, Whitechapel High Street—about 3.45 on the afternoon of the 11th, I found the deceased under Mr. Morrison's care—I saw the wound, and stitched, dressed and bandaged it—I apprehended no danger at that time—about 8.30 the same evening the wound began to bleed—I then began to think it serious, and called in Mr. Hutchings, a surgeon—I visited the deceased two or three times a day—on Thursday hemorrhage again set in—my father then took up the case—he died on the Sunday week.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he seem to be going on well for some time? A. Till the following Thursday morning—the fresh bleeding was from internal hemorrhage; I could not assign any cause for that—he did not drink after the Saturday, only half a pint of beer—drink would be very likely to retard his recovery, and to cause the wound to break out again.
JOHN COMLEY , M.R.C.S. I am the father of the last witness—I first attended the deceased on the Thursday morning—he continued under my care until his death, on the Sunday. I made a post mortem examination by desire of the Coroner—the external wound had perfectly healed, but on examination, I found it had penetrated between the sixth and seventh ribs—that was the cause of death—the knife, after entering, must have directly turned down, for it went through the pleura, the diaphragm, and on to the liver, so that he must have turned his body round; he must have been making a lunge at her at the time—she never had the power to
inflict the wound to that extent; he must have received it by his own let in turning.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. WOOD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. METCALFE the Defence.
WILLIAM HUGHES . I am constable of the parish of Old Brentford, Ealing—a little after 10 o'clock on the morning of 18th of July last, I was standing at my door, and saw three pleasure vans coming down the road opposite my house—they were coming in a line when I first saw them, one after the other, and coming pretty steady—the first van was in the regular line where it ought to have been, on the near side going to Hounslow—it was drawn by three horses—I believe music was playing—the second van was following the first, near the middle of the road—the third van was drawn by four horses, and loaded with people—the third van tried to pass the other two; the horses were being urged as fast as they could trot without galloping—the driver was using the reins—I was on the off side; the van passed very near me—I should say within a yard of the kerb, and then came into the gutter—it was going at such a rate that I expected to see it turned over—I went into the road to look—I heard the screaming of women, and saw the old man, the deceased, lying in the road—I ran up as fast as I could, to get the man out—the wheel-horse of the van had fallen over the barrow, and the leader was on the footpath—the man lay between the two hind wheels, hit head towards the footpath, and not above four or five inches from the wheel—I cannot say who was driving the van—I saw the prisoner afterwards among the crowd, he was pointed out to me as the driver, and I took him into custody—he said, "I hope you won't lock me up."
Cross-examined. Q. You took someone else in custody at first, did you not? A. No—I had known the deceased many years—he was about 75 or 76 years of age—I don't believe he was deaf—I was standing at the sill of my door when this happened; I was not inside—I did not tell the prisoner's father that I was in-doors, and did not see it—I did not see the accident—I saw the vans coming down the hill—I believe the bands were playing—I believe there was a big drum in the second van, and the man was beating it very loud at the time the third van was trying to pass the other two—I think the people in the second van were cheering—I did not see that the horses in the third van were frightened; they were trotting as fast as they could trot—they were being urged by the reins, and the whip too; the reins particularly.
JAMES HOPEWELL . I live in Plaistow Park Road, and am clerk to a soap manufacturers—on 18th July, I was standing on the footpath, about seventy yards from the last witness's house, on the opposite side—I saw three pleasure vans, very crowded with passengers, coming down the road, at what I should term a steady pace, when the driver of the last van suddenly urged his horses to the off-side of the road, endeavouring to pass the other two—I saw him pull his horses on one side, and whip them—I did not see the accident—I went away to my business.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you mean to say that the driver used the whip? A. Yes—I swear to that—I cannot say whether he took it out of the rest, or whether he held it in his hand—I saw him flogging his horses—I did not
see a cart coming up behind the vans—I cannot say whether there was one or not—there were four horses to the van, two abreast.
JOSEPH RYAN NEVILLE . I am a cooper, at Old Brentford, and live between twenty and thirty yards from Hughes, lower down on the same side, towards Hounslow—I was standing at my door, between 10 and 11 o'clock on the morning of the 18th, and saw two vans, one near the gutter on the near side, and the other about the middle of the road; the first one must have passed—all at once there was a cheer, but from which van I don't know—after that, or almost simultaneously, there was a scream from the women, I think, from the second van, but I could not swear to that—I immediately ran to the spot, and saw the deceased lying on his back behind the van, with his feet towards the middle of the road—I believe the hind wheel of the van had passed over his head—he lived about a quarter of an hour afterwards.
Cross-examined. Q. I believe you had known him for several years? A. Yes; I should think for seven years—I should think the horses were going from nine to ten miles an hour—I don't think the deceased was deaf—there was music playing, but I did not notice in which van—the drum was playing; it was nothing out of the way, not very loud.
SARAH MOLES . I live at Old Brentford, about thirty yards from Hughes, between his house and the deceased's—I was standing at my door, and made a great alarm, because I saw that the deceased was sure to be killed—he had a barrow with him, and was going towards Hounslow—he was in the road, close against the path on the right side, in the gutter—I saw three vans going by very fast, one with four horses, and two with three I saw the horse knock the old man down and trample on him, and the van went over him—I don't know who was the driver.
Cross-examined. Q. Did the driver try to pull up? A. I think that must be so, because it was out of his power to pull up four horses in a moment—one of the leaders fell on the path, and the other fell in the road—he tried to pull up—I don't believe he could avoid knocking the man down—I have known the deceased nearly twenty years—he was not hard of hearing, but he was an old man, and had no power to get out of the way, because the horses were upon him, going so quickly.
JOHN FINNEY . I live at Old Ford—I saw the three vans—I saw the third van pull out from behind the other two, with the intention of trying to pass—I saw the off leader knock the deceased down—the wheel horse kicked up against the barrow, and that threw him—I helped to pull him out from behind the van—he died in about ten minutes.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the driver trying to pull up as much as he could? A. Yes; he tried his utmost directly he saw the deceased—I don't believe he could see the deceased until he got dear of the other van—he was going at a tidy rate; I can't say how fast.
JOSEPH WILLIAMS . I am a surgeon, at New Brentford—on 18th July I saw the deceased—he was then dead, lying on the pavement—the whole side of his face and head was much bruised—there was a little blood about his mouth, and his jaw was broken—I should say his head must have been knocked by the wheel—I can't say whether it went over his head or not—I should not think a mere kick of a horse would have caused it—the injuries to the head were the cause of death.
cry—he was very excited—I told him it was nothing to laugh at—he said it was done, and could not be helped.
MR. MOTCALFE called the following Witnesses for the Defence:
THOMAS JONES . I am a mason, and live at 13, Dunford Place, Kentish Town—on 18th July, I and a number of other masons hired a van of the prisoner's father, to go to Hampton Court—it was drawn by four horses—the prisoner drove it; I sat by his side, on the left—when we got to Kew Bridge there were two vans in front of us—we kept behind them—just before we got into Brentford, a drum on the van we were following frightened the horses of two market gardeners' carts, which very nearly backed into the side of our van—they were going the same way as us; we were passing them—when the big drum struck up it frightened our horses and threw the leaders out—we had been following close behind the other van for about ten minutes—we had not attempted to pass up to that time—the horses flew out then—there was a man wheeling a barrow on the off side of the road—we halloaed to him, but he took not the slightest notice—the off side horse hit him right in the back, and he was knocked down; and the prisoner in pulling up, which he did with all his main, threw the off side horse down, also the wheeler, and the old man went underneath the van—the prisoner did all he possibly could, he even put his leg over the rein—we were going between six and seven miles an hour—there had been no racing—we had not been ten minutes on the high road—there was a cart behind us—the prisoner did not use his whip at all, it was in the socket; I am sure of that—he did not shake the reins, or urge on the horses—I attribute it entirely to the drum, which made the horses shoot out.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he take the whip out of the socket when the drum beat? A. No, not at all, I am quite sure.
COURT. Q. Had you anything to do with the parties in the other vans? A. No; we were entire strangers to them.
JOHN SCULLER . I am a bricklayer, and live in Pond Street, Hampstead—I was on this van—I sat on the box, on the right hand side of the prisoner—when we got on the high road at Kew, we fell in with two other vans—we kept behind them—there was no racing, or any attempt to pass them—I should say we were going six and a half or seven miles an hour, not more—when we got near Brentford, two drums began to strike out all at once; it resembled thunder—there was a big drum and a little one—that caused our leaden to pull out; they were very restless and frightened—the other van was close to their heads—we saw a man in front, and halloaed to him, and the prisoner in pulling up, pulled his leader down, and threw the shaft horse down, and his head went on the kerb—the prisoner did all he could to avoid the accident; he pulled with both hands, and put his leg over the reins—he did not use the whip; it was in the socket behind me—I never saw him whip the horses all the way.
NOT GUILTY .
688. JOHN BOWERS (25) , PLEADED GUILTY to feloniously killing and slaying William Pemberton . He received an excellent character; and MR. LEWIS, for the Prosecution, stated that the prisoner had received great provocation, and that the case was of a most mitigated character.— Three Days' Imprisonment
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution; and MR. PATER the Defence.
MICHAEL DILLON . I am a croquet painter, and live at 1, Roxboro' Road, Kentish Town—the deceased Thomas Molloy was seven years in my employ—he was about 16 years of age—I saw him dead—I saw him the evening before; he was then in his usual health—he had had small pox about six weeks before, but was only away three days, and came back cured.
WILLIAM THOMAS . I am a boot and shoe maker, at 30, Bedfordbury—I knew the deceased by sight—on Wednesday morning, 8th July, I was looking out of my door, and saw George Patten and a boy named Anthony quarrelling about the ownership of a dog—Anthony struck Patten, and Patten called on Molloy to assist him—they both began fighting Anthony, and the prisoner stepped forward to help him—they fought together, two and two—Molloy and Vickers fought together—it did not last above three minutes—they closed, and were pomelling each other—they both hit as hard as they could—I did not see any particularly severe blow struck by either—I went into my shop for a moment, and when I came back, somebody had the deceased in their arms, and he was carried to the hospital.
Cross-examined. Q. You did not see anything unfair? A. No—the deceased was about the same stamp and height as the prisoner, but much slighter.
HANNAH JENKINS . I am the wife of George Jenkins, of Davies' Buildings, Bedfordbury, boot maker—I saw the boys fighting—Vickers had Molloy under his arm, and he struck him with his fist very heavily in the side; I should say over half a dozen blows—Molloy groaned very heavily after that; his arms relaxed their hold, and his head fell back—I was panic struck, and begged them to have no more blows, but, being passionate, I suppose he did not hear me—he continued giving him blows—he then threw him on the ground, not violently—the boy struggled very hard in a convulsive manner, and then he was dead—before that he was trying to strike the prisoner as well as he could, but he had no power in his hands—it was on the side, over the heart, that the blows were given.
WILLIAM STOCKBRIDGE . I live at 18, May's Buildings, St Martin's Lane—I am a builder up to 10 o'clock; after that I am in the legal profession—I was walking up Bedfordbury, where I have my sheds, and saw the four boys fighting, two and two—Patten and Anthony ran away—the prisoner and deceased were fighting, not more than two or three minutes, what I call a fair stand up fight—I saw nothing unfair—I saw the boy fall, and was the first to say he was dead—some woman had then got him in her arms—the prisoner said, "Good God, sir! don't say he is dead"—I said, "You must not go"—I was about twenty minutes before I could find a constable.
THEOPHILUS BRYETT TURNER . I am house surgeon at Charing Cross Hospital—I saw the deceased there on the Wednesday morning, about 8.30—he was quite dead—I made a post-mortem examination—the cause of death was paralysis of the heart; that might be produced by such blows as those described.
Cross-examined. Q. I suppose you would be rather reluctant to say with certainty which was the cause of death, a blow or excitement? A. I am perfectly convinced that a blow would cause it—if he had suffered from any affection of the heart, it would be likely that he should have died from
excitement, but there was no organic disease—persons are not liable to paralysis without organic disease—I can venture to say that he did not die from excitement—when he was first brought in, I said I could not say what was the cause of death; I gave my opinion after the post-mortem examination—there was evidence of blows on the right side, opposite the heart, and also on the abdomen, near the gastric region, not of a severe character.COURT. Q. Might a fall have caused the mischief? A. Not in that region, unless he fell against a knob.
GUILTY .— Three Days' Imprisonment .
MR. HARRIS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. COLLINS the Defence.
CAROLINE PRICE . I am the widow of the deceased—I last saw him alive and well at 11.10 on Saturday evening, 8th August—at 4 o'clock on Sunday morning I saw him dead—he was a stamper and tool maker, and was 46 years of age.
Cross-examined. Q. Were the prisoner and your husband great friends? A. Yes; they were fellow-workmen at Mappins'—the prisoner was a foreman, and my husband worked under him—they had known each other about fifteen years, and were always very good friends—my husband was sometimes violent in temper—it had increased of late—he used to give way to fits of sudden passion—I was frightened of him—the prisoner always treated him with great consideration—he expressed very great sorrow after this occurrence—he helped my husband to the hospital.COURT. Q. Was your husband sober when you last saw him. A. Yes.
JOSEPH SURREY . I am a tailor, of 27, Wells Street, Oxford Street—on 8th August, about 12.30, I was standing at my own door, near the Tiger public-house, which was closed, and saw the prisoner and deceased standing talking together, very quietly, not loudly—they stood there for about ten minutes, and all of a sudden I saw the prisoner strike the deceased, and knock him down into the road—I could not say whether he hit him in the face, or the back of the head—the blow stunned him—he fell on his face, and hands and knees—it was not near the kerb; right out in the road—the prisoner struck him a second time in the road, while he was down on the ground—I directly ran across and said, "You ought to be ashamed of yourself for striking a man like that"—he said, "What have you to do with it? I will serve you the same"—a female named Morris came running across the road at the same time; several parties came round, and the deceased was picked up, and taken to the hospital—the prisoner followed—he said he was very sorry for what he had done, that he would not hurt a hair of his head; they had been great friends for a number of years—he did not say what they fell out about—the prisoner seemed to be middling sober—he did not seem to be any the worse for liquor—he might have had something to drink for what I know.
Cross-examined. Q. This was between 12 and 1 o'clock on the Sunday morning? A. Yes—they were standing just ten paces from me—I have measured it by the kerb—I had been standing at my door about twenty minutes—I saw them come from the archway of the public-house when it closed—I saw the prisoner strike the deceased a second time, while he was on the ground; he lifted his head up with his left hand, and struck him
with his right—as soon as I saw the second blow I ran up—I heard the prisoner examined before the Coroner—he stated that only one blow was struck; I did not hear other witnesses say so.
MR. HARRIS. Q. What—was it the prisoner stated? A. He owned that he struck the deceased one blow, and that he hit him as hard as he could.COURT. Q. Are you able to say whether the deceased struck the prisoner at all. A. No, he never lifted his hand up—I heard no quarrelling—I did not hear the prisoner say anything then—what he said before the Coroner was, that he struck him a blow because the deceased aimed a violent blow at him—he did not do so; it is not true—I saw them distinctly—there was a lamp close handy, which threw a light right on them.
HENRY CASE . I was house surgeon at the Middlesex Hospital when the deceased was brought there, about 12.30 on the morning of 9th August—he was then dead—I made a post-mortem examination thirty-six hours afterwards—the immediate cause of death was effusion of blood on the brain—that would be caused by violence, a blow or a fall—the blow of a fist would not be so likely to produce it as the head coming in contact with the pavement, or any hard substance—the effusion was all over the surface of the brain, but a great deal more at the base—I have heard the evidence—that might account for the injuries I found; either a blow or a fall.
Cross-examined. Q. I think you have said that the appearances were more likely to be caused by a fall than anything else? A. Yes—if the man had been lifted up, and then fallen again on the back of his head, that would have caused it.COURT. Q. Did you see any marks of violence externally? A. A confusion on either cheek—the man was certainly not healthy—all his internal organs were in a state of degeneration—the same consequences might not have happened to a healthy man; still I think his death was accelerated by the violence.
MR. COLLINS called the following Witnesses for the Defence.
HENRY PARKER . I am a horse keeper, of 25, Wells Mews, Oxford Street—on this Saturday night, about 12.20, I was coming up Wells Street, and saw the deceased on the ground—the prisoner and several other men were there—I got some water, and the prisoner called for some brandy, which he paid for, to give the injured man, who was propped up in a sitting position against a man's leg; and while he was in that position I saw him fall very heavily on the ground—he seemed to slip sideways—it wan a heavy fall on the road—you could hear it some distance—after that he seemed to be very much changed, as if he was going—he seemed to change colour a good deal—he turned whiter—he was insensible from the time he fell.COURT. Q. How came his head to slip? A. There was an altercation between the persons about him, and all their heads were turned, and his head was accidentally let go and fell—he was alive before that—he died on his way to the hospital—I assisted him there—the prisoner accompanied us, he was crying a good deal, and was very much cut up.
Cross-examined. Q. Where was the prisoner? A. He was standing not half a yard from the deceased when I went up—the deceased was lying on the ground, nobody was holding his head then—someone picked him up while I was there—I could not say who it was—I saw the witness Surrey there—I did not see the prisoner strike the deceased or touch him, except to take the water from my hand to give to him—there was an altercation
between Surrey and the prisoner, and it was while that was going on the man's head was let go.
JOHN MILES . I live at 22, Wells Mews, Oxford Street—on the night of 8th August, at 12.13, I was outside the Tiger—I saw the prisoner and deceased together, and saw them shake hands twice outside the door of the Tiger—I was about two yards off—I don't know what they said, there was conversation between themselves—when it was over, Howe said, "All right, old boy, we shall be all right by-and-bye," and they shook hands together—I said to the prisoner "I will wish you good night, sir"—he said, "Wait a minute, I am going too"—I waited a little while—they had another conversation, I don't know what it was about, and they shook hands together a second time—I then left and went to bed—I left the prisoner with the deceased—I had known the prisoner about three months.
Cross-examined. Q. Then there was no quarrelling while you were there? A. Not an angry word—the deceased seemed very much out of temper—they both seemed sober—I went into the Tiger about 12 o'clock; the deceased was standing at the door with a dog—I spoke to him, and said "Good evening," but he never answered—he held his head down: he seemed very cross—I did not know him before.
HARRIET MILLER . I live at 85, Wells Street, Oxford Street—on Saturday morning, 8th August, a little after 12 o'clock, I was standing at my window, and saw two men standing talking quietly together—they were not making any noise particularly—I heard one of them fall—I could not see them, it was dark—I afterwards heard the prisoner talking with another man, and saying be would not hurt a hair of his head, that he was a particular friend of his, and he had known him fifteen years—I heard him say to the deceased several times, "Get up, Tom"—he seemed to be standing in among the crowd that collected, and they were quarrelling with him, out man in particular.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you hear that man say "You ought to be ashamed of yourself?" A. No—I did not hear the prisoner say "I will serve you the same"—I was near enough to hear what was said, but there were several talking together—I only heard one blow before the man fell—I was looking for my husband coming home—I did not think the men were quarrelling—I could not see them distinctly, it was rather dark.
The prisoner received a good character. GUILTY .—Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his character.— Three Months' Imprisonment .
MR. HARRIS conducted the Prosecution.
HARRIET PARKER . I am the wife of George Parker, of 8, James Street, Oxford Street—the prisoner and his wife lived in the same house; they occupied the back room, third floor—I occupy the fourth floor front—on 20th July, about 10.30 at night, I came out of my room on to the landing, hearing cries of murder proceeding from their room, also cries of "Police, will no one come to assist me?"—it was a female voice—I did not hear a man's voice at all—I next heard her say, "For God's sake, don't"—I could
saw their room door from where I was standing; it was shut—I went and knocked at the partition, and said, "Are you going to desist from ill-using your wife? we had enough of it on Saturday night"—he made no reply—I then heard the woman say again, "For God's sake, don't"—I then put my head out of the staircase window, and saw the woman coming from the window, face downwards, as if she was thrown—her head was first, and her arms were hanging down—she fell on to the lead-flat, 19 feet below—she turned right over in the act of falling, and did not move afterwards—the window was shut down immediately, very quickly, slammed—I did not see the prisoner at the window—it is a sash window—I ran down stairs, calling "Murder"—I got a policeman—I went with him up to the prisoner's room, he knocked at the door—after some minutes the prisoner opened it—the constable asked him where his wife was—he said he did not know—the constable charged him with throwing his wife out of window—he said he was quite innocent—he was taken to the station—I saw that the room window was shut—the room was in very great disorder, and there was blood all over the room—I afterwards went and looked after the woman, and the surgeon was sent for.
DANIEL FREDERICK KERRIDGE (Policeman D R 4) On 20th July, about 10.45, I went, with D R 208, to the room occupied by the prisoner—I knocked at the door—he asked who it was—I said, "The police"—after two minutes he came and opened it—I asked where his wife was—he said, "I know nothing about it"—I said, "Have you thrown her out of window?"—he said, "I know nothing at all about it, I was asleep"—the window was shut when I went in—the room was in great disorder, as if a scuffle had taken place; almost everything was out of place and broken, and there was a good deal of blood about—the prisoner was not bleeding—there was a table under the window—that was broken, the leaf was broken off and lying on the ground—the window was not broken—it was an ordinary sized window, about 4 feet wide; I did not measure it—the distance from the window to the lead-flat is 19 feet—I looked out of the window, and saw the woman below—I believe the prisoner had been drinking—I took him to the station, and then came back and assisted her—Dr. Clark came and examined her, and recommended her to be removed to the hospital.
MARGARET KEEN . I live at 9, James Street, Oxford Street, next door to the prisoner—on the night of 20th July, I was in my bed-room, the back room first floor, with my window open—I heard a person fall down—I came out to her as quick as I could—I found her lying on the leads, on her right side, with her hand under her head, insensible—I asked for some water and a towel, which was brought me, and I washed her face—she had a cut on the side of her head, which was bleeding—the blood was running from her—she was about five minutes before she came-to, and when I lifted up her head, she said, "Oh, don't hurt me."
HENRY CASE . I was house-surgeon at the Middlesex Hospital when the prisoner's wife was brought there, on 20th July, about 11.45 at night—I found that she had dislocation of the left hip joint, several ribs fractured on the right side, and numerous scratches on the front of the throat, I should say from a person's nails—I did not notice any wound in the head; I examined it, but not very carefully; there may have been one, but I think I should have seen it if there had been one—she was not bleeding at all about the face—the body was covered with contusions, which were produced by some blunt instrument, or a fist, or by rough handling—the blood the last witness speaks to, on the head, might have been from the scratches on
the neck—a fall from a window would not produce all the injuries I found; it would produce the dislocation of the hip joint, and some of the contusions on the side, but I can't see how the fractured ribs would have been produced by the fall—she must have fallen on the left side to dislocate the hip, and I can't imagine how the ribs on the right side could have been fractured by the fall, nor the bruises about the body generally—she was in danger of her life, but she is now convalescent—she left the hospital on the 10th August—she is a slight woman.
JOSEPH HUGHES . I am a currier, and live at 4, Henrietta Street, ManChester Square, in the back parlour, which looks out on the back of the house where the prisoner lives—on the night of 20th July, I heard cries of "Murder! help! police!" in a woman's voice, from the back, that continued for about half an hour—after that I heard a fall of something, I could not imagine what, and a crash of a window, and then the window shut, the sound was like broken glass, and then a fall of some heavy body—it was a dull sound, as if it fell on the pavement, or something at the back of the house, and immediately after I heard a man's voice say, "Take that"—I ran round, and found the deceased on the leads of No. 8, just under the window—I fancy she must have fallen upon the next window, before she reached the leads, by my hearing the glass break—there was a window broken on the second door—I did not observe whether the leads were flat, or whether there were ribs to it—there is a wall six or seven feet high round the leads.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate: "When I went home she was drunk, on the floor. I went to pull her into bed; she would not go to bed, and wanted to go out. I locked the door, and went to bed myself. We had some words before that, but no blows. When the constable came, I was in bed; when he knocked, I got up. He asked if I knew anything about my wife. I said I did not know where she was."
HARRIET PARKER (re-examined). I have lived in the house about seven years—the prisoner and his wife had lived there about nine months—she was a very quiet woman when she was not in drink—she was not in the habit of drinking, only at times, when he used to take to drink—I saw her several times that afternoon—I saw her taken up stairs by her son, and put on the bed, before the accident—she had been out with the prisoner, drinking, and she seemed quite incapable; that was about 9 o'clock—she was very drunk—I did not see the prisoner then, not till some time after—I was standing at the street door, and he came up and spoke to me—he did not seem as if he had had a great deal of drink—her son is nineteen years of age; he does not live with them—when he took her up stairs, he went out and shut the door, and I did not see him afterwards—there was no one else in the room.
Prisoner's Defence. She made a declaration at the hospital the morning after; I want that read. She said I did not do it.
DANIEL FREDERICK KERRIDGE (re-examined). Her deposition was taken—she said she fell asleep on the window-ledge, and fell out of the window; but the doctor said she was not in her right senses at the time—when I went into the room there was no one there besides the prisoner.
GUILTY .— Twenty Years' Penal Servitude .
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, August 19th, 1868.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MESSRS. POLAND and BESLEY conducted the Prosecution, and MR. M. WILLIAMS
JOHN TAYLOR . I am a farmer and cattle dealer, at Southall—on 12th June I saw a boy named Etherington driving four sheep opposite my farm, 400 or 500 yards from the prisoner's shop, going towards it—the prisoner was following him, driving a cart—I said, "What game is this, Norton"—be said, "It is all right; I have received a letter from Mr. Court; I have sent a letter and cheque to Mr. Court"—I knew the sheep came out of my field—he said that he was to have the nine sheep if I did not—the sheep had been in Mr. Court's field, which I let to him, and these were some of his sheep which I had seen in the field the day before—Dwight, Mr. Court's drover, drove them back to my field—the prisoner said, "They are nasty sheep; I will not have them at all; have you got any sheep"—I said, "I have only three fat sheep"—I had them fetched down, and he gave me 36s. for them.
Cross-examined. Q. What time did you meet him with the sheep? A. I think it was before 10 in the morning—I did not notice whether they had a blue mark—the prisoner said, "Sure there is a fuss about the sheep; blast the sheep! I will not have them at all."
ALEXANDER DWIGHT . I live at Southall, and have been thirteen years a shepherd in Mr. Court's service—I saw Ellington on 12th June, not far from the prisoner's place, driving four sheep towards his yard—the prisoner was not there—I remained by the sheep, and in about ten minutes the prisoner called me across, and said, "What business have you to turn the sheep back?"—I said, "When I have orders from master you shall have the sheep back"—he said, "I have written a letter to Mr. Court"—I said, "That has nothing at all to do with me; when I have orders, you shall have the sheep"—I spoke to Mr. Taylor, who said, "I do not know more than what Norton told me"—I do not know what that was—I kept the sheep—they had a blue mark on the shoulder.
Cross-examined. Q. What time of day was it? A. Between 12 and 1 o'clock—the prisoner had bought eleven tups and five ewes of Mr. Court on the 11th—it is the habit of dealers to say, "You can take my sheep at a certain price," in the market, and then come for them afterwards, but not to fetch them out of the field.
JOHN COURT . I am a farmer and cattle dealer, of Clewer, Northamptonshire—I hired a field, at Southall, of Mr. Taylor—on 26th June I received this cheque (produced) from the prisoner; for eleven tups and five ewes, sold to him on the Wednesday before—I had had no letter from him, nor had I written to him—I gave him no authority to remove nine or ten sheep from the field—he never set any price upon them.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you never written to him? A. Yes—I do not know whether I sold him the fifteen sheep on the 11th, but he sent me the cheques on the Saturday following—I cannot say whether I sold him the tups before the four were met on the road, as I never heard anything about
the four for a long while afterwards—I sold him after this eight sheep it 50s. each, and that is all the dealings I have had with him since he has been at Southall—after I brought this charge I received a letter from his solicitor threatening me with an action—here is the gentleman who sent it to me, and he said, "I wish I had never sent it"—that was before the prisoner was given in custody, but after I had made the charge—(The letter demanded a suitable apology for a gross slander, to be advertized in the newspapers and the payment of 50l. to the prisoner, otherwise proceedings would be taken).
MR. BESLEY. Q. What was the date when you made the charge of stealing the sheep? A. On the Wednesday before I received the letter—I have received no letter from the prisoner except the cheque—some beasts were sold I think a fortnight from the day that I sold the sheep, early in July—the eight sheep were sold before the beasts—the ten tups and five ewes was the first transaction—my son wrote him a letter—the cheque was not paid—this (produced) is the only letter I received from him except the one containing the cheque, which is destroyed (The letter was dated July 5th, from the prisoner to the witness, regretting that the cheque had been returned by the bankers, and stating that it was caused by a cheque which he had paid in for 95l. being stopped).COURT. Q. Have you been paid? A. Yes, and for two beasts as well—the cheque was paid three weeks afterwards.COURT to A. DWIGHT. Q. Were you present at the sale of any sheep? A. Yes, on the 11th, at Southall—I took them to the prisoner's place myself—I know it was 11th June, it was two days before I saw the four taken away.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. POLAND and BESLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MESSRS. M. WILLIAMS and STRAIGHT the Defence.
ALEXANDER DWIGHT . The gate of Mr. Court's field comes into Muddy Lane—Wexley Lane is a turning on the same side of the field before you come to the gate—the Bee Hive public-house is close by—the prisoner's house is in the high road from Uxbridge to London—the north road joins into Muddy Lane, and forms one road up the Greenford Road—on 18th July, I counted eighty-seven sheep belonging to Mr. Court in Mr. Taylors's field at 7 o'clock a.m.—they were marked differently—there were some white-faced sheep among them, Northamptonshire sheep—I afterwards went to Uxbridge, and on my return it was too dark to count the sheep—I counted them next morning, and twelve were gone—I had not given anyone authority to remove them—I had the marks of them in a book—I have never seen them since, nor their skins—they were all white-faced, but all were not marked alike—I did not see the prisoner that day.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you the book with the marks here? A. Yes (produced)—the eighty-seven were all Northamptonshire sheep.
THOMAS OSBORNE . I am foreman to Mr. Wells, a farmer of Southall—he has a farm at the end of Wexley Lane—on 16th July, about 10.45, I saw the prisoner and his son together just over the stile in Wexley Lane, and about 150 yards from our farm house—the boy had a stick—I was talking to the prisoner a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes, about 140 yards from the field where the sheep were—he had no sheep with him—he said,
"Young man, you live down at the farm?"—I said, "Yes"—(there is no thoroughfare down there)—he said, "If ever you have a sheep dropped or a bullock dropped, you come to me"—I said, "Yes," and he went up the lane—he asked ne question about any sheep.
JOHN CURTIS . I am a labourer, of Southall—on 16th July I was trimming the ditches in Wexley Lane, about 11.20, and saw the prisoner—I knew where he lived, but did not know his name—he had a little boy with him, with a stick in his hand—the prisoner said, "It is very warm, old gentleman"—he came back about 11.50, and laid down on the turf by the side of where I was at work, and asked me what time I went to dinner—I told him when Mr. Dodd's bell rang, 12 o'clock—he laid there five or six minutes, and then went away across Mr. Wells's field into Mr. Taylor's field, and I saw the boy there driving the sheep down the field towards the gate which goes out into Muddy Lane—I saw no more of him—I could not say the number of sheep there were—there is no public footpath across Mr. Wells' field, the right way to get in was by the gate in Muddy lane.
JAMES GOODENOUGH . I live at Southall, and work for Mr. Harvey—on 16th July I saw the prisoner and a boy about 13 passing the Hare and Hounds, towards the West End, about 12.45, and driving ten or twelve white-faced sheep along the road—he was a stranger to me—I cannot swear to the prisoner or the boy.
Cross-examined. Q. Was it before you got to Whittington's Farm. A. Yes.
CHARLOTTE BURNELL . I am a widow, and niece of Mr. Nutman of the Bricklayers' Arms, Greenford Road—on 16th July, the prisoner, who I did not then know, came in about 12.50—he had some sheep outside, and a little boy was left in charge of them—the prisoner had a glass of beer; he drank half of it and took half out to the boy—I said a glass of beer is not much between two—he said, "You want a glass at every house you go to"—I said, "How is it with those poor sheep"—he said, "Will you allow me to go across your field?"—I said, "Not with your sheep; you can go, but the sheep would be all over our crops"—he said, "Will you direct me the nearest way to get to Southall; I told him—he then had another glass of beer, and left—I did not notice the sheep; I was eating a mutton chop.
Cross-examined. Q. Was it a very hot day? A. Yes.COURT. Q. Where does the private road come out? A. If he had gone far enough it would have taken him to the Uxbridge Road, but it is all across fields; there is only a footway.
ROBERT ANDREWS . I am a butcher, of Hanwell—on 16th July, about 1.30, I saw the prisoner at West End, which leads from Mc Nulton's to the White Hart, with twelve white-faced sheep—a little boy was behind him—I called him—he came across to me, and we had a pint of beer and a bottle of ginger beer at the White Hart—we remained there about ten minutes—the prisoner paid for it—he asked me the road to Mr. Whittington's, I told him, and he and the boy and the sheep went towards Mr. Whittington's—I knew him before; he has lived in Southall about seven months—I have dressed some things for him at his place opposite the George—he slaughters at his own premises.
Cross-examined. Q. He knew you, and you knew him? A. Yes.
JOSEPH FELLOWS WHITTINGTON . I am a farmer—on 16th July, about 2 o'clock, the prisoner came to my farm, and asked me if I had any sheep to sell, as he wanted some small mutton—there happened to be seven in a
meadow close by; we drove them in—he purchased them and took them away himself—I saw no boy and no other sheep.
Cross-examined. Q. Are you quite sure about the time? A. I cannot say to half an hour—I knew him before, he is a wholesale and retail butcher—I had purchased of him once.
MR. BESLEY. Q. Were the sheep delivered to him on this side towards the Uxbridge Road, or towards West End? A. On the Uxbridge side, they were in a field at the back of the farm—they were not Northamptonshire sheep—three of them were white-faced, to the best of my recollection, and the others were black-faced.
JOHN HAWKINS . I am a railway agent, and live at Southall—on 16th July, near 2 o'clock, I was going to West End with a load of drain pipes—I passed Whittington's farm about a quarter of a mile, and then saw the prisoner and his son with twelve sheep, Northamptonshire sheep—there were no black faces among them—they were going towards Southall—I told the prisoner if he should have one pitch on the road I would pick it up as I came back—it was very warm that day—he made no answer—I knew him before, and have bought meat of him—I did not notice the marks.
Cross-examined. Q. Were they an odd lot, a mixed lot? A. Yes—there was a great deal of difference in them—some were ten stone and some eight—it was between Whittington's Farm and Hayes' Gate that I met them, leaving Whittington's farm behind.JOHN COURT. On 16th July, I had some Northamptonshire white-faced sheep in Taylor's field—Dwight was left in charge—I did not sell the prisoner twelve sheep that day, or authorize him to take them—the value of the twelve was 25l. 12s.
WILLIAM REVELING (Police Sergeant M). I went to the prisoner's house on the 29th, and told him I wanted to take him respecting the twelve sheep he took from Taylor's field on the 16th—he said, "All the sheep I had I found in the lane, which I had received by rail, and had lost"—I told him I thought there would be another charge against him respecting the four—he said, "I can prove that I had partly bought them; I will go anywhere with you."
Cross-examined. Q. Did he say, "I went round to Whittington's and got some more, and come straight home?" A. Yes.
MR. POLAND. Q. Did he say when the sheep had come by railway? A. No—he said he had thirty up, and had sold fifteen and lost fifteen.
THOMAS WOOD . I live at Lucy Road, Holloway, and am a salesmen—on 15th July I was at Southall Market, and sold thirty sheep for the prisoner—they were brought to Southall by somebody he employed—they were, as near as I can recollect, white-faced sheep—they came direct into my pens—I cannot say who brought them—I sold them, and the whole thirty were delivered to a man named Lawrence, the purchaser—I saw his drover take them out of the market—I have known the prisoner some time.
CHARLES BAILEY . I am a fishmonger, of Southall—on 17th July, I went with the prisoner in his cart to Newgate Market—he took up about ten carcasses of mutton, two hind quarters of beef, and about ten sheep skins, and some ox hides—they were brought from the slaughter-house—I should think the sheep had been killed over night—we started about 4 o'clock in the morning—the weather was very mild.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you know the prisoner? A. Yes—he is in the habit of sending a great many sheep up to market—I heard him tell the
porter where to take them—a policeman was standing at the tail-board of the cart, part of the time that they were being loaded—it was all done openly—I had no suspicion that anything was not straightforward.
Witnesses for the Defence.
RICHARD NORTON . The prisoner is my father—on 16th July, between 9 and 10 in the morning, I started with him to look for some sheep which had been at the back of my father's house, and were gone in the morning—we went across the Little Field, out into Muddy Lane. and down the lane till we met Curtis—we then went down in Taylor's field; father sat on the gate, and I went in to see whether the sheep were there—I did nothing there—they were not there, and we went into Muddy Lane—I did not drive the sheep past my father—we found the sheep at the end of Muddy Lane, and some of them in Greenford Road, and collected them together—we then went on to a public-house, and father stopped and had something to drink, and brought some out to me—I then went on with the steep, and father came and overcatched me, and we went up to the White Hart—father went in there and had something to drink, and I went a little way on the road, and stopped the sheep, and he came and catched me—we went on to Mr. Whittington's, and I went on round the corner with the sheep, and stopped by a pond—my father came in a quarter of an hour, and brought seven sheep, and then we went on past another public house, and met Hawkins—we then had twenty-two sheep—Hawkins said if we had any sheep drop he would pick them up as he came along—we then went to another public-house, on to the turnpike, and father paid the turnpike, which is before the public-house—he paid a little girl—father and I then went in and had something to drink, and the sheep went on—we did not stop anywhere else; we went straight home, and fifteen of the sheep were steeled, and the rest turned out at the back—I was in the slaughter-house when they were steeled, and helped to skin their legs.
Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. Q. How old are you A. Ten years last Tuesday—the little girl is not here to whom my father paid the turnpike—the turnpike is just to the right, as you come out—we did not let the sheep through the turnpike-gate, but we had to pay—the turnpike is about ten yards up the road, to the right, from Whittington's farm—the girl is a little bigger than me, she was standing up the road—there is a chain up across the road there—my father had had the sheep which were lost, a week—he had sixteen the day before, and had killed one over-night—he kept his sheep at the back of the house in Gibson's field—they are but dry-houses there—he does not rent the field of Gibson—I do not know whether he pays for putting his sheep there, or how long he has put them there—it is building ground—he only turned out a few there sometimes—he had thirty at the beginning of the week, they came by railway, and he killed them as he wanted them—the building ground has grass on it, which they ate—I saw the fifteen sheep there the night before, at 7 o'clock—I did not count them, and do not know what sort they were—they had all strayed away next morning, at 7 o'clock, when I got up, but Ned the butcher had missed them first, and went in search of them, but could not find them; and about 10 o'clock my father and I started off to look for them—we went down Wexley Lane, towards Wells Farm, and saw that man (Osborne)—I do not know whether my father said a word to him about the sheep being lost, and our looking for them—I saw Curtis trimming the hedge; I said nothing to him, I do
not know whether my father did, about the sheep, but he spoke to Curtis—I went into Mr. Taylor's field to look for the sheep, there were a large number there, and I walked in among them to see if I could see any of my father's sheep—my father did not come and help me, he was sitting on the gate—I went down through them, and went back and told him I could not find any of them—we found some of them in Muddy Lane, and some in Greenford Lane, before we got to the other public house—Muddy Lane is five or six yards from where we found the last of the sheep—we did not drive them back to my father's, instead of driving them all round here, because father had seven more to get at Mr. Whittington's—that is the longest way round—I never saw Mr. Goodenough at the Hare and Hounds—I did not try to drive the sheep down the private road opposite Nutman's, and my father did not tell me to try and get permission to drive them that way—I was left to mind them—he did not tell me it would be better to go down the private road—my father went into Whittington's farm, and told me to go on with the sheep—he did not tell me to wait—I did not know that there was a pond round the corner—when I got to the pond I waited, and he joined me, driving up the seven sheep himself—he had driven them to me before I saw Hawkins—Hawkins was a bit further than the pond; further from Whittington's.
COURT. Q. How many sheep had your father two or three days before he lost any? A. Sixteen the day before, but we killed one every night—I do not know of his having any between the thirty coming and the fifteen being lost—we got safe home with the twenty-two sheep about 2 o'clock.
COURT. Q. Did you go back from Wexley Lane into Muddy Lane? A. Yes—I went across the field and father sat on the gate—I went into the field to the gate, that is the gate in Muddy Lane—I went back into Muddy Lane, and then went into the field at the gate, and my father with me—he sat on Mr. Taylor's gate, and I went into the field to see where the sheep where lying—they were in a pit some way down the field—I do not know whether the sheep we lost had white faces, father said that some had black faces and some spotted—I had seen them at my father's—when my father went in at Whittington's gate he told me that he had to go in there for seven more sheep—I am sure he told me that—the sheep we lost were marked N. on one side, and I looked for the N. mark and found those fifteen sheep with the N mark—some had spotted faces, and some white—there were more spotted than white.
EDWARD RICH . I am a butcher, and servant to the prisoner—on 16th July, about 6.30 in the morning, I missed some sheep from a field behind my master's—I looked about the fields and could not see them, and I went and told my master they had got out—he said that I had better go and look for them—I did so, but did not know much about the place, and I told him I could not find them—he and his son then went to look for them—they had been in the field a week or rather more—I fetched them from the railway station, thirty of them—I paid 19s. 9d. for the carriage of them, and received a ticket—I cannot read this ticket (produced) nor say whether that is it—when my master returned he brought back twenty-two sheep—fifteen were killed that day—I saw them taken away to London, and helped to load the cart—my master sends between twenty and thirty to market every week—their skins were in the cart, and also some beef—a policeman was there while the cart was being loaded, he comes to call master up in the morning—I was examined before the Magistrate at Brentford.
Cross-examined. Q. These sheep that you fetched from the station, was it a week before? A. I cannot say; it was on a Wednesday—we had had these fifteen sheep a long time—they were not part of the thirty I got at the railway station—I said before the Magistrate that I fetched thirty sheep, from the railway station, but I did not say that they were these—I produce this ticket because the gentleman kept asking me about it—I brought the thirty sheep home—I did not take them to market afterwards—I do not know who did—the prisoner has no servants besides me—Wednesday is market day—I did not drive them into the pens at the market—I drove them to master's slaughter house that they should not mix with the other sheep, and not to the field behind—I brought them from the slaughter house in the morning, about 4 or 5 o'clock—I mean to say in the presence of that man (a Mr. Wood) that I did not in his presence drive those thirty sheep into the pens at Southall market—I do not think I have been in that market twice in my life—that Wednesday was not once of the twice—the fifteen sheep that my master lost came from different parts, I cannot say where, so many as the master buys—I said that the fifteen that were lost I had had for a week—I cannot say that I fetched them from the railway—I did not say they were part of the sheep I paid 19s. 9d. carriage for—I saw the sixteen safe on Wednesday, at 8 o'clock, and killed one from them and turned out the fifteen; and next morning they were all gone—the ground they were on is behind the slaughter house—I do not know whose it is—it is building ground—five sheep got out one night before—I went eight or nine miles to look for these fifteen, and then told my master—I do not know Muddy Lane, or Taylor's field—I have only been there seven weeks last Friday—I do not know the Bee Hive or the Northfield Road—I went all four roads and bye lanes—I can write my name—the fifteen that were lost were all black-faced sheep—I knew them by a N which I had put on them—a man comes and buys some of the skins, and some master takes to London—I was at home when he returned with his son and the sheep, it was between two and three o'clock.
MR. WILLIAMS. Q. You say that you had been nine or ten weeks in the prisoner's employ, did you know that part of the world before? A. No, I came from Bristol—my master has sometimes fifty, and sometimes sixty sheep in the week, killing them off—I never saw Mr. Wood till to-day—my master has been in prison ever since he was committed.
WILLIAM JOHN RICHARDS (Policeman X 192.) On the night of the 16th the prisoner requested me to call him—I went to call him on the 17th, but he was up, and the cart partly loaded—three or four more sheep had to be loaded.
Cross-examined. Q. Generally speaking, you have had to call him? A. I have called him four or five times, but this morning he was up—he went off five minutes afterwards.
MR. WILLIAMS. Q. Was it then hot weather? A. Yes.
COURT. Q. Can you tell me what distance it is from the end of Muddy Lane to the prisoner's? A. About a mile and a half, as far as I can guess.
COURT to J. F. WHITTINGTON. Q. How far is the pond from your house? A. Seventy or eighty yards—there is a bend in the road before you get to the pond—from the end of Muddy Lane, where it goes into Greenford Road, to the prisoner's house, is a mile and a quarter, or a mile and a half; and by the West End Road, and down by my farm, I suppose it is four and a half or five miles.
JURY to J. HAWKINS. Q. Did you count the sheep?A. Yes; they were all white-faced sheep that I saw.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude .
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, August 19th, 1868.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
695. JOHN DAVIES (20), and WILLIAM HORNET (18) , to stealing a hat and coat, the property of John Naid, having been before convicted— Twelve Months' Imprisonment each . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. NICHOLSON conducted the Prosecution.
MARTHA CHALKWRIGHT . I am the wife of John Chalkwright, of St. Thomas Road, St. George's-in-the-East—on 1st August, about 4 a.m., I was awoke by finding a man in the room, pulling the bed-clothes about—I said, "Who are you?"—he said, "I am John"—he then took one leap, closed the door, and ran down stairs—I put oh my skirt, and followed him—he went into a court opposite—I went up the court and into a house, and saw him lying on the stairs—he was dressed—I said, "I know you; you are just come out of my place"—he said, "No, you are mistaken"—a constable came up and took him—the prisoner is the man—I missed two sixpences and a penny—they were in my dress pocket when I went to bed—I left my dress on a chair near the bed, and when I awoke it was lying on the fender.
Prisoner. How was it that you knew me?Witness. By your lip bleeding—it was bleeding when you were in the room, and so it was when I saw you on the stairs—I lost sight of you for about five minutes.
BENJAMIN VON SCHALVEN , I reside at Blacksmith's Place, St George's Road—on 1st August, about 4 a.m., I heard a person enter the passage and go up to the second floor and try the door, but could not get it open—he came down, and my wife sung out, "Who's that?"—he then tried my door—I jumped out of bed, ran down stairs, and he ran out of the passage—I saw his back, but not his face—I put on my trousers, and went to look for him—I did not see anyone—I looked through the window—he came back to my sister-in-law's house, and was trying the door there—he could not get it open, but went three or four steps up, and lay down—at the same time Mrs. Chalkwright came out, and asked me if I saw anyone passing—I went with her, and found him lying on the stairs—she gave him in custody—I believe the prisoner is the man I saw in the passage—I can recognise his clothes very well.
WILLIAM REDDING . I live at 2, Thomas's Court, St George's-in-the-East, the house occupied by the prosecutrix—I lived in the front room—I shut the window down and closed the shutters about 11 o'clock—I was awoke by someone leaning over me, in the act of pulling the shutters to—I said, "Is that you, Jack?" and there was no answer—the party then went to the door leading to the washhouse, and went out—I went to sleep, and heard
no more till I was called in the morning by Mrs. Chalkwright—I am sure the person got in at the window, because the door was looked, and we had lost the key—the only way of getting into the house is through the window—the man would have to get over my bed if he got in at the window.
JOHN BARRETT (Policeman H 158). On the morning of 1st August I was called by the prosecutrix, and took the prisoner for stealing two sixpences and a penny out of her dress pocket—I took him to the station, searched him, and found 1d. in his right hand pocket and 6d. in his trousers pocket—he said he had been robbed of 17s. 6d.—he had been drinking, but was recovering.
Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate: "I was drunk, and lying in the passage where Mr. Von Schalven found me. I was never in the house of the prosecutrix."
Witness for the Defence.
ROSANNA IVES . I am the prisoner's sister-in-law—on Saturday evening, about 12 o'clock, we were drinking in the Back Church Lane; that is close to Thomas Street—I lost sight of him after 12 o'clock, and saw him no more till I saw him in Newgate—he was rather tipsy when he left, and had about 19s. in his pocket—I had paid him 14s., and he had other money besides that.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. HARRIS conducted the Prosecution.
DAVID JOHANN . I live at 27, Durham Street, Golden Square—about 10.15 in the evening of 8th July I was in Broad Street, St Giles'—some person came out of a doorway and seized my chain—while I was holding him three men came behind me, knocked me down, and took away my watch and chain—I was knocked down with great violence—they all ran away towards Long Acre—a policeman came up, and we followed them—I never lost sight of them before the policeman came up—I lost sight of them after—the man who seized me first was a short man—my watch was worth twenty guineas.
HENRY WILSON (Policeman F 104). On 8th July, about 10.15, I was in King Street, Long Acre—I saw the prisoner with three others running down King Street—the prosecutor was about 200 yards behind—I followed about 40 yards, when they turned down a court, and I lost sight of them—I have no doubt that the prisoner was one of the four—I saw him six days after at the police station, and picked him out from six others—I told him he was the person I saw running in King Street on the evening of the 8th, and he made no answer—I then charged him with being concerned in robbing Mr. Johann of a watch and chain; he said nothing—I have seen him several times before.
Prisoner's Defence. I was not there at the time; they put me along with four men with white smocks on. The inspector was standing by, and the policeman comes in and said "That's him". The inspector said "That's what?" and he said "The one that took the watch."
NOT GUILTY .
MR. GRIFFITHS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. METCALFE the Defene.
GEORGE KIRKLEY . I am a carpenter, and live at Denmark Road, Hammersmith—on Saturday, 11th July, about 12 o'clock, I was with a man named Smith in the Hand and Flower public-house, Fulham—I saw the prisoner there—I had not known him before—he called me a West End thief and a bloodsucker—I had not spoken to him before this—I said, "I am much obliged to you"—he came and shook hands with me—I said I did not wish to have a row with him, and he said he wished to have a row with somebody—he said he had been to the back woods of America, where he had killed many a black b——, and chucked him behind the bush—I asked him to sing a song, and then the potman came in—the prisoner began knocking him about, and then he commenced knocking me about—he asked me what song he should sing, and I said, "The Sailor's Grave"—I and Smith then left the public-house and the prisoner followed—he passed by us and crossed the road—he went about twenty yards before us towards Hammersmith, and all of a sudden he rolled against the shutters—he held his hand out, and said he would shoot the first b——that came near him—Stacey then came up, and asked what the row was about—I had seen him in the public-house about five minutes before—he had no conversation with the prisoner while I was there—the prisoner made a rush towards him and said, "There, take that"—Stacey called out, "I am stabbed"—the prisoner's hand was down when he rushed at Stacey—he pulled down his trousers, and showed me the wound; the blood was streaming down then—a young man named Bedborough came up, and caught hold of the prisoner's hand; I then saw a knife in his hand which I had not seen before—he was taken into custody, and Stacey was taken to a doctor.
Cross-examined. Q. How long were you in the public-house?A. About forty minutes—he was there when we went in—we came out first; I am sure of that—Stacey was not there when we went in; he came in about five minutes before closing time—I never saw him before—the prisoner was not drunk; he had been drinking—Stacey was not drunk, nor was I—I live about half a mile from the Hand and Flower, somewhere near Brook Green—when we left the public-house, we crossed over the road directly—we stood up for a few minutes under the trees; it was raining in torrents—we then crossed the road again towards going home—Smith crossed with me—the prisoner came out and crossed the road, as if he did not know which way to turn—he walked past us where the tree was—the prisoner did not cross the road first, nor did Smith and I follow him; we followed him after he had passed us for about thirty yards, and then he made a reel against the shutters—we were about four yards behind him then—he said, "I will fire"—I did not hear him say "If you don't stand off I will fire"—I stood on the kerb, and Smith in the road, and Stacey came up and asked what was the row—I did not see Stacey on the other side of the road—I will swear that he was not on the other side of the road with us—we said nothing to the prisoner as we followed him across the road—we had no words with him in the public-house, no more than I asked him to sing a song—there wore other persons in the public-house—the prisoner made a rush at me immediately after he said he would fire—I put out my hand and stopped him, and then Stacey came up—when the prisoner said "I will fire," I believe
I said "Fire, you b——, fire"—I pushed him away, but I did not strike him—that was about a minute before he struck Stacey—I did not hear the prisoner say "Why are you following me?" when we went across the road—I won't swear he did not—I will swear I did not run across the road after him.
MR. GRIFFITHS. Q. Are you sure you saw the prisoner make a rush at Stacey? A. Yes; I saw the knife in his hand.
GEROGE STACEY . I am a labourer, of Hammersmith—on Saturday night, a little before 12 o'clock, I went into the Hand and Flower public-house, Fulham—I saw the prisoner there—I had no words with him at all—he left first, and I went out two or three minutes after, and saw him and two men a-head of me, going down the road—I was on my way home—when I got to the corner of the North End Road, I heard the prisoner say "I will shoot"—I went up and asked what was the matter—I had no sooner said that than the prisoner stabbed me in the stomach—I heard him mutter something, but could not tell what it was—I was taken to the hospital—I am getting better now—I have not done any work since—I am not under the doctor's hands now.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you in the public-house before Smith and Kirkley came in, or did you come in after them? A. After—the prisoner and the two young men were talking amongst themselves—I did not know any of them before—when I came out the prisoner and the two men, Smith and Kirkley, were about thirty or forty yards a-head—they were then on the same side as the Hand and Flower—I walked faster than they did, and overtook them—the prisoner was then standing against the shutters, and the other two in the road—he was saying "I will shoot," and I thought I saw something in his hand—I am sure they kept on the same side of the road all the way—I will swear they did not cross the road together after the prisoner—I did not see Kirkley strike him at all—I was had up once for stealing some coal, about three months ago, but it was a mistake—I was with the young man I work with—I left work at 9—since that time I had been to my friend's house.
MR. GRIFFITHS. Q. You say you were had up for stealing some coal; were you taken before the Magistrate? A. Yes—it was sent for trial, but did not come on—I was innocent of that; it was a mistake—I did nothing at all to irritate the prisoner.
JODEPH BEDBOROUGH . I am a carpenter, of 3, Portland Place, North End, Fulham—on Saturday night, 11th July, I was at the top of North End Road, about two hundred yards from the Hand and Flower—I came up with a friend of mine about 12 o'clock, and saw two of three men come up against the shutters of Mr. Williams' shop—a second afterwards, Stacey sung out "I am stabbed," and held his hand against his side—the prisoner was about a yard from him then, with a knife in his hand—he backed himself against the shop door, and held up the knife, and said he would shoot the first man that came near him, the same as he would do dogs and cats—I walked round in front of him, turned round, and caught hold of his arm, and called out for them to knock the knife out of his hand—the knife then went down in the road—he then threw me down in the road, and said he would bite me—he just grazed my knuckles—I held him till the police came up—he had been drinking, but was not drunk.
said it was his—it was not open then—it was a very wet night—I went to the hospital and saw Stacey.
Cross-examined. Q. Did the prisoner say he did it in self defence? A. Yes—I examined the knife, but saw no blood on it.
ISAAC SMITH . I am a labourer, of 2, Henrietta Street, Hammersmith—I was in the Hand and Flower with Humphrey on the night in question, and saw the prisoner there—he called Kirkley a West End thief and bloodsucker—we stopped there about half an hour, and then left, and stood by a shed to protect ourselves from the rain—we then crossed over the road to the shelter of some trees, and the prisoner passed us—we then walked on; Kirkley was ten or twelve yards a-head of me—the prisoner was about twenty yards in front of me—I saw someone speak to Kirkley, and they walked on together—I heard someone say he was big enough to eat the lad—the prisoner turned round all at once, and seemed to fall against the shutters—I heard him say he would shoot the first man that came near him—I saw him coming towards us, and slipped out in the road—I then heard Stacey say "I am stabbed"—I helped to take him to the doctor.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you chaffing the prisoner, in the public-house, at all? A. No; we were talking loud—Kirkley asked him to sing "The Sailor's Grave"—the prisoner looked like a seafaring man—the prisoner came out after us, and walked down the middle of the road, towards Hammersmith—he passed us when we were under the trees—we then walked on—Stacey came up and spoke to Kirkley, and walked on with him; they were about seven or eight yards from the prisoner then—they said the prisoner was big enough to eat the lad—I do not know what made them say that—I did not hear the prisoner say, "Why are you following me?"—I did not see Kirkley strike the prisoner—I was close to him—I did not hear Kirkley say, "Come on, hold my coat, and I will wop him like a b——sack"—if he had said it I must have heard him—I took Stacey to the hospital directly he was stabbed.
JOHN WYMAN . I am house-surgeon at the West London Hospital, Hammersmith—about 12.30 on 12th July, Stacey was brought there—I examined him—he had a wound in the abdomen, about half an inch in length—it had penetrated the cavity of the abdomen—it was a very dangerous wound—he was in the hospital thirteen days, and has attended once or twice since—a knife of this description would inflict such a wound—he was out of danger on the 25th.
Witnesses for the Defence.
JAMES KING LONGFORD . I am a labourer, of Yarwell, in Northampton—on 11th July, I was at Hammersmith, where I had been working about three years—I went into the Hand and Flower, about 11 o'clock, and saw the prisoner there—I had not known him before—Kirkley and Smith were also there—Kirkley was jeering at the prisoner all the while they were in the public-house—Kirkley and Smith went out, and the prisoner came round to where I was, and took off his chain, and put it out of sight: he then went out, and I followed—I saw Smith, Kirkley and Stacey standing close to the door, all together—the prisoner fastened up his coat and crossed the road, walking very fast, and the three men followed him—Kirkley said to Smith and Stacey, "Come on, hold my coat, and I will wop the b——toper," or something of that sort—I did not see them stop under the trees at all—I kept sight of them all the way—the prisoner started to run away, and the three men ran after him and, when he got near some shops, they surrounded
him, knocked him about, and got him up against the shutters—the prisoner said, "If you don't keep off, I will fire"—he was holding out his hand then—Kirkley said, "Fire, you b——, fire"—he said, "No, I won't if you keep off"—the prisoner then walked on, and was going over towards North End, when Stacey struck him again, and they both fell on the kerb—Stacey got up and said, "Hold that man, I am stabbed"—Bedborough came up, and took hold of him—when the prisoner was on the ground, Kirkley kicked him on the hand and arm—I did not know any of the men before; I only came up from the country on Monday night.
Cross-examined. Q. When did you go down into the country? A. On the following Tuesday—I did not go before the Magistrate because I was going away—I first told this to the solicitor—I had a letter from him—I did not hear the prisoner call Kirkley a West End thief—I won't swear that he did not—I did not hear him say he would have a row with somebody—I won't swear he did not—I will swear that the men did not go and stand under the trees—there are trees all along—they were standing outside the public-house when I came out, and then they followed after the prisoner—Stacey was with them—I am sure of that—it was a very dark night—I can't say that they were near any gas lamps—I was about eight yards from the prisoner, and Kirkley four or five—the prisoner was only knocked down once—after Stacey was stabbed they all went down in the road—I was with William Walker and another young man—we did not go and help the" prisoner, because we thought we might get shot.
MR. METCALFE. Q. Are you quite sure that Stacey was on the ground with the prisoner before he called out that he was stabbed? A. Yes, I am quite certain of that—I was going towards my own house—I did not know Stacey or Kirkley before.
WILLIAM WALKER . I live at 4, Willow Place, North End—on Saturday night, 11th July, as I was coming home from work, I went into the Hand and Flower—I saw the prisoner and several other men, talking rather loud—the prisoner offered me and two or three other men a shilling to drink his health—I saw him go out and cross the road—Smith and Kirkley were then standing outside the door—the prisoner went towards Hammersmith, and I saw Kirkley, Smith, and Stacey follow him—when he got a little way he asked them what they were following him for—when they got a little further, the prisoner put his back against the shop, and said, "I will shoot the first man that comes near me"—Kirkley said, "Shoot, you b——shoot"—Kirkley then struck the prisoner in the cheat—the prisoner then went on a little further, till he came to the comer of North End—Stacey ran at him and struck him on the eye—he then called out, "I am stabbed"—he was taken to the hospital—I did not know the prisoner before—the last witness was with me—I was examined at the Police Court.
Cross-examined. Q. How many times did the prisoner fall on the ground? A. Twice—that was after the man was stabbed—I was close by and saw everything that took place—I did not see the prisoner run towards Stacey at all—I went into the public-house about 11.50—I saw Stacey there—Smith went out first, and then Stacey and Kirkley—when the prisoner went out he crossed to the middle of the road—the other men were then just outside the public-house—they were not under the trees when he came out.
The prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding.— Three Months' Imprisonment .
OLD COURT.—Thursday, August 20th, 1868.
Before Mr. Justice Lush.
MESSRS. POLAND and BEASLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MESSRS. RIBTON and CUNNINGHAM the Defence.
GEORGE GROSSMITH . I reside at 11, Artillery Passage, and carry on the business of an eating-house keeper—the deceased, Emma Grossmith, was my wife—she was forty-five years of age—the prisoner was in my service for about five months, to do anything that would be required to be done in the kitchen—we used to call him John; my wife called him John—his proper name is Alexander Arthur Mackay—we had no other servant at this time—on Friday, 8th May, I left home at 9.10 in the morning—I left no one at home but Mrs. Grossmith and the prisoner—he was cleaning the shop window when I went out—my son had gone on an errand, I believe, and came home after I went out—I did not notice that he was at home when I left—on the Wednesday before this there was a conversation between the prisoner and me about some potatoes that he spoiled—my wife found it out first—he used to hide the potatoes, and spoil the rest—I can't say whether my wife said anything to him about it in my presence—I spoke to him about it; I could not say on what day it was—I don't remember my wife saying anything to him about it—on the morning of the 8th he threatened the children; Mrs. Grossmith came and told me so; I did not hear him—I was absent forty minutes that morning—it was 9.50 when I came in—I found Mr. Lubbock, Dr. Jackson, and Mrs. Sandiford in the house, attending upon my wife—they would not allow me to see her then—I saw her about an hour afterwards—she had then been put to bed—I could not describe the state in which she was, it was so fearful—I could not recognize her at all, not a feature—three days afterwards, I think on the Monday, she made a statement to me—she was very sensible then—she died on the 17th; that would be the following Sunday—she told me at the time that she should never get over it—she first asked me what I thought of her—I said, "I think it is dreadful"—she said, "Do you think I shall ever get better?"—I said, "I hope so," and she said, "I never shall"—I made no answer to that—she said almost directly after, "I shall die, I shall die, the pain is so great;" and also a hundred times, I should think, during the time she lived—her words on the Monday were, "I shall die through the pain at the back of my head."
MR. POLAND, proposing to give in evidence the statement of the deceased as a dying declaration, MR. RIBTON objected, and submitted that the evidence, at it stood, was not sufficient to render the statement admissible; but that it must be clearly shown that, in the opinion of the person making the statement, she was on the verge of dissolution, and that her death was imminent. MR. JUSTICE LUSH considered that before receiving the evidence it would be better to hear the medical testimony.
Cross-examined. Q. Was there any other servant in the house? A. There was not—there had been during the four months—I could not say how many there had been during the four months—we were very unsuited with female servants—we might have had three or four—there
were no disputes with them that I am aware of—if they did not suit us, we did not keep them—there were no quarrels that I am aware of; if they did not do their work, of course, like other people, we complained of them, and they left—I can't say whether three left in four months—we have a servant now that has lived with us seven years—I could not say whether there were more than three during the four months—they were all female servants—at this time we had none—there was not a servant who was pushed down stairs with a pail of water that I am aware of—I never heard of such a thing—I don't recollect such a thing happening to one Julia Barnes—there might have been a servant of that name; I don't recollect their names—I did not notice their names; they did not stop above a day or two if they did not suit, because they came on trial—I don't recollect the name of Barnes, or Julia—we called all the servants by the name of Ann—I never remember a girl being pushed down stairs with a pail of water, and then being made to work in her wet clothes—I think I must have known it—Mrs. Grossmith did not attend to the whole management of the place; I assisted—she and I together attended to the cooking—she had a good deal to do—I don't remember whether Julia Barnes was there when the prisoner came; I don't remember the name of Barnes—Mrs. Grossmith had a good deal of annoyance and trouble with servants—she was a little hasty, rather quick tempered, but nothing more—I never told the prisoner that he must not take much notice of what Mrs. Grossmith said, it was only her temper; I told him to do what was right—I said, "Take no notice, Mrs. Grossmith is rather quick tempered"—I believe I did say those words—this was the usual morning for him to go out and sell the bones—I could not say who took them that morning—I know they were taken and sold that morning, and the money for them brought back—it was found on the table in the shop—the prisoner usually took them.
WILTER GROSSMITH . I am eleven years of age—I live at 11, Artillery Place—I was there on the Friday morning—the prisoner threatened to strike me that morning, because I asked him to get me some water—mother liked him why he would not get it me—I did not hear what he said—I heard him say if mother did not mind she would get into the wrong box, and get something for her trouble—I think those were the words—I think that was somewhere near 8 o'clock—mother gave him a pudding-cloth to wash, and he never washed it clean, and she asked him to do it again—I don't know what he said, or whether he did—I usually go to school of a morning—on this morning I did not go straight off to school—I think it was about 9.30 when I started to go—my father was out then—I left my mother and the prisoner in the house—I did not go above two doors off—while I was there I saw the prisoner cleaning the windows—he was inside the shop—I think he said to mother, "The boy is not gone to school"—I don't know if he saw me; he might have done—my mother came to the door, and said, "Walter, go to school," and I went—I think my mother went into the kitchen to make puddings—she went straight up the shop; that leads into the kitchen—when I went to school, my mother and the prisoner were the only persons in the house—she had not been making puddings before I left, that I am aware of.
Cross-examined. Q. You say you think, but are not sure, that you heard him say you had not gone to school? A. Yes—I think he saw me—he had not said the same thing on other mornings, that I am aware of; he did on chimney-sweeper's day, that was once before.
MARY STEPHENS . I am a widow—I reside at the chapel in Artillery Street—there is a room belonging to the chapel, which joins the back of Mr. Grossmith's premises; it is one of my rooms—the window of it overlooks Grossmith's yard—on Friday morning, 8th May, about 9.30, or a little later, whilst I was in that room, I heard something, apparently from Grossmith's yard or kitchen—it was a great crash, as though something had been upset, I could not say what, but there was earthenware or crockery broken, and I heard a voice distinctly say three times, "Oh, don't!"—it was Mrs. Grossmith's voice—I knew her voice, and can say it was her's—I went directly to the window to try to see, but saw nothing—I did not remain at the window more than a minute; I left the room directly.
MARY ANN MASON . I live at 13, Artillery Passage, two doors from Grossmith's, in the same passage—I am servant to Mrs. Sandiford—on Friday morning, about 9.30, 8th May, I was at the back of the house, on the leads, which are ten or twelve feet from the ground, and I heard Mrs. Grossmith groaning—I heard her call out "Murder," and then I heard her say, "Oh, John, you will kill me"—he said, "Hold your row"—I knew his voice, I had heard it several times, and am quite positive it was the boy's voice that lived at Mr. Grossmith's.
MARY SANDIFORD . I am a widow, residing at 13, Artillery Passage—I knew Mrs. Grossmith—last witness was in my service—Between 9 and 10 o'clock on the morning of 8th May, she came down and said something to me, upon which I proceeded to Mrs. Grossmith's shop; there was no one in the shop—I went to the kitchen, which is behind the shop, the door was shut—there is a small glass at the top of the door, I did not see anyone through that glass—the prisoner opened the door—I had called out, "Where is the mistress?" before he opened it—he was in the kitchen, and opened the door from within—I looked round to my right, behind the door, and saw Mrs. Grossmith lying on the floor, covered in blood—I said to the prisoner, "Oh, John, you have done this"—he said, "No, Ma'am, I have not"—I said, "Where is Mr. Grossmith?"—he said, "Round the corner, I will go and fetch him"—I said, "Make haste, don't be a minute," he went, and I saw no more of him; I went to the street door to look for someone to send for a doctor—I remained there about a quarter of an hour—Dr. Jackson came, and I left him there—the prisoner did not return—I did not see him again till he was at Worship Street—when he went out, I saw that he had either a slight scratch under the right eye, or a spray of blood, I can't say which, for was I so agitated—my assistant, Mr. Cull, came, and I sent him for Mr. Lubbock, the chemist, and for Dr. Jackson—the prisoner's manner, when he spoke to me, was quite cool and collected—I did not go back into the kitchen.
COURT. Q/ When you went into the kitchen, could you see all round it? A. I did not look all round, I looked to see Mrs. Grossmith on the floor, and I was so agitated that I ran back again—I am quite sure there was no other person there.
JACOB MIDDLEBROOK . I live at 3, Little John Street, Whitechapel, and work for Mr. Price, a dry-salter, of 9, Artillery Street, Bishopsgate—on Friday, 8th May, about five or ten minutes to 10, I was standing at the gate where I work, right opposite Artillery Passage, and saw the prisoner running round Artillery Passage into Artillery Street, in a direction from Grossmith's house—I saw blood on the right side of his face, just by his cheek—he was
running, and just putting his coat on—I did not notice any waistcoat—I saw nothing more of him until he was at Worship Street.
THOMAS CULL . I am in the service of Mrs. Sandiford—on the morning of Friday, 8th May, about 9.35, I was going from Artillery Street into Artillery Passage, and saw Mrs. Sandiford and the prisoner together at the door of Grossmith's shop—Mrs. Sandiford beckoned me to hurry quick to the door—I went up to the door—I heard her saying to the prisoner, "Ran quick, run quick"—he passed me in the passage, coming from the door—I noticed that on his left cheek he had a few splashes of blood, a few small spots—he seemed a little confused, not much; and just under his right eye there was a kind of little scratch, I suppose about half an inch, not a very bad scratch; of course I only had a momentary view—I did not notice whether he had a waistcoat on or not—I saw nothing more of him till the present time—in consequence of what Mrs. Sandiford said to me, I went through the shop to the kitchen, and there saw Mrs. Grossmith lying down, with her head towards the sink; the whole of her limbs were all of a work, wriggling, trying to move, and the place was all covered with blood—I spoke to her, and said, "For goodness sake, what is the matter, Mrs. Grossmith?"—I saw an iron rake, or bar, on the floor, lying towards the body, and a broken basin lying against the sink—I picked the bar up and pulled it away from the body—it was close to the body, on the floor—this is it (produced)—I did not notice anything else on the floor—I fetched Mr. Lubbock, the chemist, and afterwards Dr. Jackson.
CHARLES BRANT . I reside with my father, at 9, Artillery Street—I know the prisoner—on Friday morning, 8th May, about 10 o'clock, I saw him at the corner of Artillery Passage—he was putting on his jacket—he ran round towards Raven Row, down Artillery Passage; that is away from Grossmith's—he had some blood on the right side of his face—I did not notice whether he was wearing a waistcoat or not.
JOHN ASHLEY LUBBOCK . I am a chemist and druggist, at 1, Raven Row, a few doors from Grossmith's place—on Friday morning, 8th May, about 9.45, I was sent for and went to Grossmith's shop—there was no one there then but Mrs. Sandiford—I went through the shop into the kitchen, and saw the deceased lying on her left side, with her face all covered with blood—her face was very much cut about, the upper lip completely divided to the nose, and a severe laceration of the forehead—she appeared in a sinking state—I thought she was dying—I spoke to her, and she answered me—she said, "Give me some brandy, or I shall die"—as soon as I saw the condition she was in I immediately sent for Dr. Jackson, and he came within about five minutes—the floor of the kitchen was all covered with blood—I noticed some irons lying about, I did not notice what they were—I saw a rolling-pin lying on the floor—the police came shortly after—I was not present when they came.
JOHN JACKSON . I am a Fellow of the College of Surgeons, and live at 30, Church Street, Spitalfields—on Friday morning, 8th May, I was sent for to Mr. Grossmith's—I got there about 9.45—I went through the shop into the kitchen—I found the deceased lying on the floor, covered with blood—I did not examine her minutely then—I felt her pulse: at least I could not feel any pulse—she appeared to be dying—I waited till she rallied a little, and then had her moved up stairs—before she was moved I saw on the floor a rolling-pin, an iron bar, and some broken crockery—they were covered with blood, and the room generally was covered with
blood—the blood had spurted I should say from six to eight feet, very nearly to the ceiling, on the walls—I continued to attend her until her death—at the time I first saw her I thought the probabilities were that she would not live from minute to minute. till the afternoon; she then recovered her consciousness—she retained her intellects afterwards perfectly, with the exception of the Tuesday evening; she then had a little delirium, and on the day of the accident she wandered in her mind—with that exception she retained her intellect till the time of her death—when I visited her on the Tuesday evening, she made some incoherent remarks to me—I can hardly say how long she wandered, she did not answer my questions intelligibly while I was examining her—on the day of the accident I think I saw her six or seven times, besides stopping with her several hours; and subsequently I saw her two or three times a day—on one day I may have seen her only once, I can't say what day that was—about the middle of the week following the injury I thought there was a chance of her recovery, I think about the Wednesday or Thursday, but she then began to sink—she died on the 17th, about 6 o'clock in the evening—I afterwards made a post-mortem examination—I have my notes of it here—the nose was divided by a contused wound at the junction of the middle with the lower part; the upper lip was divided from the left nostril into the mouth; there were two contused wounds on the left side of the upper lip, about an inch long; part of the left ear was cut off; the cheeks and eyelids bruised; the right cheek bone, the bones of the nose, and of the upper jaw fractured; on the forehead was a wound laying bare the bone over a triangular space which measured three inches vertically and four inches transversely; the periostum, the membrane that covers the bone, was torn off from the bone at the upper part; there was a transverse wound about an inch long above the left brow; on the head, on the left side, there was one wound two inches long, and two wounds one inch long; a little further, but on the right side of the head, was a wound laying bare the skull to the extent of seven inches from before backwards, and five inches transversely; the periostum was torn off in three places at that wound; the scalp on that side of the head (the left) was so contused as to be in the condition of a pulp; the neck was bruised on both sides; the right arm had bruises on the back of the elbow; there was a superficial wound on the left forearm about two and a half inches long, small superficial wounds on the left forearm and hand, and bruises and a wound on the left elbow; there were bruises on the back of the trunk and legs, but no bruises on the chest or abdomen; there was no fracture of the skull—that was the superficial examination—this was afterwards—"No effusion of blood into the interior of the skull, and no laceration of the brain—the organs in the chest and abdomen were healthy"—She must have received a great many bruises—I found sixteen wounds in all, some of them were very slight—the nasal bones are easily broken, but to fracture the upper jaw bone great violence must have been used—she died from the injuries which she had sustained—I have seen the rolling-pin and the iron bar—in my judgment those instruments would have boon quite sufficient to inflict the wounds I saw—a chopper was shown me, it was an ordinary kitchen chopper—I think that had not been used—there were merely a few spots of blood upon it, nothing on the edge—the rolling-pin had a quantity of blood and hair upon it, and the iron bar also—I was shown a waistcoat in the kitchen, on the morning when I first went there, I think it was hanging up, as far as I remember—I did not pay much attention to those
particulars, I had so much to do with the patient—I think there was blood upon it, but I did not pay particular attention, and cannot speak to that.
Cross-examined. Q. Was any of the decased's hair torn out of the head? A. I did not see it—a little hair had come off, but not a great deal, because I had to direct the hair to be removed to pay attention to the wounds.
COURT. Q. At what time did you see her on the Monday following the occurrence? A. It is not in my notes, but I was in the habit of visiting her generally between 10 and 11 in the morning, and again in the evening, about 8 or 9, and sometimes in the afternoon—I should say her condition on the Monday was better than on the two previous days, though not so good as it was in the middle of the week; she was improving—I encouraged her, and gave her hopes of recovery, as soon as she was able to understand what I said—I cheered her as much as I could, as soon as she recovered consciousness—as she was improving on the Monday, I might probably have encouraged her more—I don't remember saying anything particularly to her on that day—I don't remember what she said to me on that day as to her hope of recovery; she did once, I think towards the middle of the week, say something about having a hope that she might get through it, but I can't say positively what day, for I did not make a note of it.
MR. POLAND. Q. When you gave her hopes before, did she say anything? A. Not to me—she expressed a conviction that she should die, at the early period of her illness—about the middle of the week she entertained some hope of recovery, but I can't say the day—on the day of the assault, she said she should die, and she said so subsequently, I am not positive when; but until she began to improve she decidedly had the impression that she should not get over it, until about the middle of the week—it was subsequent to the Monday that she expressed a hope that she should recover—previous to that, particularly on the day of the assault, she said she should die.
MR. RIBTON. Q. Were there any marks on the back of the head? A. The whole of the back and side of the head were bruised—I imagine that the bruises about the trunk, arms, and elbow were probably caused by a fall; I don't think it likely the injuries to the head could be, nor any of those on the face; they were too large—the back of the head was generally bruised—there was a copper in the corner of the kitchen, near where the body lay—if she had fallen against that, It might have given her a bruise, but it could not have given her the wounds on the head—some of the appearances might have been caused by a fall.
WILLIAM BROAD (Police Inspector H). About 11 o'clock in the morning of 8th May, I went to 11, Artillery Passage, and found a number of things, which I produce—the iron bar, chopper, and rolling-pin were in the yard; they had been removed—this waistcoat I found behind the door in the kitchen, on the floor—this iron saucepan handle was in the kitchen, and these pieces of head comb broken in two or three pieces; that is a comb for the back of the hair—this piece of side comb and a hair pin I also found in the kitchen, a sack and an apron, which appears to have blood on it—the waistcoat is torn down from the arms—I found some hair in the kitchen; to all appearance, it is woman's hair—I delivered all the things to Dr. Letheby, in the condition in which I found them—there was a great deal of blood on the floor, and on the walls, up to eight or nine feet high, spurts of blood—the things in the kitchen were very much disarranged; some crockery
was lying on the floor broken, and the bottom hinge of the door was broken—I tried to find the prisoner, but failed—Somerfield, another constable, wag there before me.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you find blood anywhere else? A. Only in the kitchen—I looked for traces of it elsewhere; there was none in the yard—the door with the hinge broken was the door leading from the shop into the kitchen; it was an iron hinge—this is a woollen waistcoat; it is torn from the arms downwards, completely to the bottom, on both sides; it is not torn by the neck at all; there are no sleeves to it—I found the hair on the floor in the kitchen—there is a door from the kitchen to the yard.
THOMAS SOMERFIELD (Policeman H R 25). On Friday, 8th May, about 9.15, I was in Artillery Passage, and saw the prisoner at Mr. Grossmith's—he was standing with his foot on the doorstep, and had a cloth in his hand, as if he had been cleaning the window—he had a waistcoat on, the one that has been produced—I said, "Good morning" to him as I passed by—about 9.45 I heard what had happened—I went into the kitchen, and saw Mrs. Grossmith lying on her left side, with her feet to the kitchen door and her head towards the copper; and I saw a rolling-pin, an iron bar, and a chopper on the floor—I took them out into a small yard at the back—I did not see the waistcoat.
Cross-examined. Q. Is there a door from the kitchen into the yard? A. There is a doorway; I can't say whether there is a door—the kitchen is a very small place—I can't exactly state the size of it; it is about four yards one way, and two another; it is not exactly square—I did not measure it—that was the only time I was ever in the place—all these things were in the kitchen, lying by the side of the woman.
GEORGE GROSS with (re-examined). There is no back way out of the yard—there is an open doorway from the kitchen into the yard, but no door—there is no means of getting out at the back—I had a conversation with my wife, about 4.30 on the Monday afternoon—she said, had not Mrs. Sandiford come in he never would have left her—I was not up stairs when the doctor was there that morning—I don't think I ever went up with Mr. Jackson—when I went up to her on the Monday afternoon, she asked me if I thought she should get over it—I said, "I hope so," and she said, "I never shall."
JOHN LEB (Policeman H 42). I remained with Mrs. Grossmith on the Friday after this matter happened, from 10 in the morning till 10 at night—she made a statement to me, at 3 o'clock in the afternoon, which I put into writing—she was then in bed—she appeared perfectly to understand what she said.
Cross-examined. Q. Was Dr. Jackson with her? A. Not when she made the statement; he was there part of the time I was with her—there was another constable with me—she was unconscious during part of the day—a Magistrate came to take her deposition that same day, but she was not able to tell him anything, she was not collected enough—after she became collected, I put questions to her—she became exhausted a second time, just after she had finished the statement—Mr. White, the superintendent, sent for the Magistrate—he only came once, that was at 12.30; he left because she was not able to state anything—I had no orders to send for the Magistrate again—she became conscious at 3 o'clock, and remained so about 10 minutes, or from that to a quarter of an hour—during part of that tune I questioned her—she became conscious again at 4 o'clock the
same afternoon, and remained conscious about the some time—I then questioned her again—she became conscious a third time about 6.30 the same evening, and then I questioned her again—I was not desired to do so—I was told to take down in writing anything she said—I put questions to her without any authority from anybody.
COURT. Q. Before she made the first statement to you, at 3 o'clock, did she say anything as to her condition? A. No, not as to whether she expected to live or die—she said once or twice that she thought she should never get over it; that was after 3 o'clock, after she had made the statement to me, and during the same interval of consciousness.
JOHN REEVE (Policeman HR 42). I was with the deceased on the nights of the 8th, 9th, and 10th, from 10 in the evening till 9 in the morning—she made some statements to me—she did not at any time say anything as to what state she was in with regard to her illness—she was quite sensible when she made the statement—I took it down in writing—it was made about 3.15 a.m., on the 9th—this is the first time I have been examined.
COURT. Q. Was any statement made to you afterwards? A. No—she frequently talked about the same thing over again—she had not said what she felt, or what she supposed her condition was.
This being all the evidence with reference to the state of the deceased at the time of her making the statements or declarations in question, MR. JUSTICE LUSH, having consulted THE RECORDER on the subject, was clearly of opinion that the two statements last offered were not receivable. It did not sufficiently appear that the deceased had such a conviction of the imminent peril of death at would make the statements receivable. As to the other statement, made to the husband, he entertained considerable doubt. His inclination would be to exclude it rather than reserve the point; but, if pressed to do so, he would receive it. MR. POLAND, after the expression of doubt from his Lordship, did not desire to press the evidence; it was therefore not given.
DR. HENRY LETHEBY . I am professor of chemistry, at the London Hospital—on 27th May the inspector brought me the iron bar, rolling-pin, chopper, and waistcoat produced—I have examined them all—this hair is long hair, like a woman's—some of the hairs appear to have been torn out by the roots; but, as to the greater part, it appears to be cut through—there is blood on it, and it is blood which has coagulated there, therefore it must have been living blood when it was on the hair—this iron bar is about three feet eight inches long—I find hair upon that, the same kind of hair as the other, human hair—there are marks of blood on the iron, not to a very large extent—there is a patch of coagulated blood—the chopper has only a few spots of blood upon it—the rolling-pin has a good deal of blood on it, chiefly at one end and on one side—there is a good deal of coagulated blood on the waistcoat inside, and on the back inside; as far as I can make out there is not any blood on the outside—here are some pieces of broken comb.
Cross-examined. Q. Some of the hair, you say, seams to have been torn out by the roots? A. Yes, I have a note of that—with regard to that on the iron bar, it seems to have been caught in the bar, and twisted round it, and pulled out by the roots—I don't say that of the lump of hair produced—I would not say that none of the hairs were torn out, they seem to have been cut through—it is in the same state now as when the constable gave it me, on paper, with blood on it—I have not examined every one of the hairs—there may be some torn out by the roots, for aught I know—the
inside of the right lappel of the waistcoat is stained with blood—there are buttons to it; they are not torn off—the inside of the back is also much stained with blood.
THOMAS SOMERFIELD (re-examined). The prisoner had a waistcoat on when I saw him at the door—it was open, not buttoned in front—that did not strike me as extraordinary—I spoke to him, he did not speak to me, he walked into the shop—he had an apron on—I did not see any apron found; there is one here.
DR. LETHEBY (re-examined). I have examined this apron, there is blood upon it—not much, it is at one corner.
HENRY RATCLIFF . I am miller and warder at the county gaol at Maidstone—the prisoner was brought there on 28th June—he was going by the name of George Jackson—about five weeks after he had been there, I went and asked him his name (I had seen a photograph)—he said his name was George Jackson, from Greenwich—I asked if he had ever gone in any other name—he said, "No"—I did not say any more to him them; but, in consequence of my suspicions, I had him up before the governor, and he was afterwards sent up to London—I spoke to him in consequence of having seen a photograph of the prisoner.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you there the whole time he was in the prison? A. Yes—I can't say whether the doctor was attending him at all.
HENRY ELLERMAN (examined by MR. RIBTON). I live in Artillery Passage—it was the custom of the prisoner, or somebody from Mr. Grossmith's, to come to me every Friday morning with bones—he came as usual on the morning this happened, at about 8.45, put them in the scale, and I paid him 1s. 2d. for them, gave him a ticket, and he left—I saw him shortly after that outside his master's shop, cleaning the window—he showed no excitement whatever.
GUILTY . Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his youth— DEATH .
MR. POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. LILLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. DALY the Defence.
GUILTY . Seven Years' Penal Servitude .
THIRD COURT.—Thursday, August 20th, 1868.
Before Mr. Common-Serjeant.
702. ANN DEVONPORT (47), and ALICIA HOLLOWAY (54), PLEADED GUILTY to stealing 15 teapots and other articles of Samuel Alexander Benetfink, the master of Devonport. DEVONPORT Eighteen Months' Imprisonment .HOLLOWAY Nine Months' Imprisonment .
703. JOHN PRATT (19) , to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Henry Tucker, and stealing therein 19 postage stamps and other articles— Twelve Months' Imprisonment . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
704. RICHARD ASTON (16), and THOMAS ISRAEL (17), to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Richard Trewolla, and stealing therein 7 spoons, 12 forks, and other goods— Nine Months' Imprisonment each . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
706. HENRY CLARKE** (21) , to stealing a coat, the property of James Robinson, having been before convicted on 8th July, 1861— Seven Years' Penal Servitude . [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
MR. COLLINS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. BESLEY defended Smith.
JOSEPH WAKEFIELD (Policeman G 37). On 10th July, I was on night duty in Leather Lane, Holborn—I had received instructions to watch Messrs. Elmslie's tin foil factory in Union Buildings, Leather Lane—I examined the premises about 10 o'clock—they were fastened up safe then—the factory door was locked, and I placed a private mark upon it, so that I could tell if it was opened—about 1.15 next morning I examined the door again; the mark was not disturbed—about 1.40 I examined it again, and found the door had been opened, and the private mark gone—the door was locked—I called up a man named Pitt, obtained the key from him, went into the factory, and found this piece of tin foil just inside the gate, ready to be taken away—I did not touch it—I then searched the factory with Pitt, but found no one—I locked the door, and gave the key to Pitt—I then stood outside to see if anyone would come out till 3.45—I then went and asked the housekeeper to give me the key again—when I opened the door I found that the tin foil which was against the door was gone—I obtained Kibby's assistance, and searched the factory thoroughly—on the bottom floor there is a sort of horse box—between that horse box and the ceiling there was a small space, about a foot high—I got upon the manger, looked in, and saw Smith's legs—I pointed it out to Kibby, and we got some steps on the other side, and there I saw Davis—I took Smith to the station, and Kibby took Davis—I searched Davis at the station, and found a latch key and a skeleton key on him—I found that the skeleton key opened the factory door—I afterwards returned to the factory, and found the tin foil, which I had seen near the gate when I first went in, on a bench on the second floor, covered with hay.
Cross-examined. Q. How did you know the place had been entered? A. By the mark I put on the door—Pitt was with me when I found the tin-foil close to the door—he is in the prosecutor's service—it was lying on the floor, doubled up with a piece of string through it—I did not move it—it must have been moved after I left—I don't know whether Smith was asleep when I saw him—he was quite sober when I took him—he got down from the loft and walked very well to the station—I am sure he was not drunk—Davis was sober.
and am manager to Messrs. Elmslie—the premises are entered by large gates or doors from the street—there is a communication between the private house and factory—the workmen leave at 6 o'clock, but I do not leave until eight—on 10th July I left five or ten minutes after eight—I locked the factory gate and gave the key to the housekeeper, Mr. Pitt—I know the place where the officer says he saw the bundles of tin foil tied up—they were not there at eight o'clock—I do not know Davis at all—Smith has been a workman in Messrs. Elmslie's employ about four years—he left work on 4th July, saying that he was ill—he had not worked regularly for some weeks before—on the morning of 11th July I found that the factory had been broken into—I searched it, and found under a flight of stairs, near the entrance gate, a chimney pot with this piece of tin-foil in it, worth 5l. or 6l.—we have a workman named Anthony—on 17th July he handed me these four keys—he had been searching the place by my order.
Cross-examined. Q. I understand you cannot swear that the tinfoil had not been in the chimney-pot for a long time? A. Yes, I can—it was not there the night before—the prisoner had complained of illness—I had no reason to suspect that it was untrue—he came to us with a good character—he had worked for the firm that Messrs. Elmslie took the business of, seven or eight years off and on.
GEORGE ANTHONY . I am a porter in the prosecutor's employ—previous to 11th July, I had orders to search the loft over the horsebox—there was no tin-foil there then, and no keys—on 17th July I again searched it, and found these four keys (produced), two of them are skeletons.
Cross-examined. There are a good many things in the loft, are there not? A. Yes.
JAMES DAVIS . I am a workman in Messrs. Elmslie's employ—on the evening of the 10th July there was a large quantity of tin-foil on the bench where I worked—I marked some of those sheets with my thumb-nail—I have examined the metal produced and find my mark on it—I found that they had been moved from the bench on the 11th.
Davis's Defence. I went to have some drink with Smith, and being ill it took effect on him. We went into Union Buildings, and I saw the gate open. I thought I would take Smith in there, and let him sleep. I took the key out and put it in my pocket. We got behind some packing cases, and I heard no more till I heard the policeman come up; and when he took me he said it was not the first time the place had been broken into. I said I did not know anything about it.
DAVIS was further charged with having been before convicted in September, 1866, to which he PLEADED GUILTY**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude . SMITH— Two Years' Imprisonment .
MR. WOOD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. W. SLEIGH the Defence.
GEORGE LEGG (City Policeman 863). About 9 o'clock on Tuesday night, 21st July, I was in Bury Street, St. Mary Axe—I heard a cry of "Stop thief," and saw the prisoner running, and several persons running after him—I stopped him, and took him back a few yards, when Hart came up and said, "He has just stolen some shirts from our shop, and has thrown them
away"—he made no reply—I took him to the station—as he was being locked up he said, "I took the shirts because I was hungry"—I searched him, and found 6d. on him.
CHARLES HART . I am assistant to Thomas Page, hosier, of Aldgate—on the evening in question, I saw the prisoner loitering about outside the shop—he then ran into the shop, took some shirts from the counter, and ran off—I followed, and saw him taken in custody—the shirts were brought to me about half an hour after by a seaman—they are worth 7s. 6d. each.
Cross-examined. Q. How far did you run? A. I suppose I ran for about five minutes—about twenty people joined in pursuit—the shirts were lying on the counter—I was behind the counter—I did not see the shirts thrown away—he turned a good many corners.
GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted, in November, 1867, to which he PLEADED GUILTY.*— Two Years' Imprisonment .
MR. COLLINS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. CUNNINGHAM the Defence.
JAMES TOPD . I am a plate-layer, in the employ of the London and North-Western Railway Company—myself and three others have charge of the line between Primrose Hill and Kilburn Station—on Monday, 29th June, about 5 in the afternoon, as I came out of the Primrose Hill Tunnel, in the direction of Kilburn Station, I saw the prisoner on the line, stooping down; when he saw me he ran away—I went to the place and found this bolt lying on the top of the rail—I went a few yards further, and found two other bolts also on the rail—I took them off—the express train came up about five or ten minutes after I had moved them—it ran over the rails on which the bolts had been placed—after the train had gone, I got up the wall, and saw the prisoner—I have no doubt that he is the boy I saw on the rails.
Cross-examined. Q. You say you saw the prisoner stoop? A. I did; and when I got to the place, I found the bolts on—I did not see him place them on—the second bolt was four or five yards from the first, and the third further still—I only saw the prisoner over the first bolt—the bolts are not left on the line by the men after they have been working—there is a hut to put them in, about forty yards away—there were two other boys on the wall, but I never saw them on the line—as I was going into the tunnel, I saw them on the wall, and I said, "You young b—if you don't go away I will lock you up"—the prisoner ran away when I came out of the tunnel—I saw a boy there named Keen; he was taken in custody and discharged; he was not taken before the Magistrate—it was in consequence of a statement made by him that the prisoner was taken—a summons was taken out against the prisoner the same night—he was taken about eleven days after—I took Keen to the station, and he was discharged that night—I knew he was not the boy I saw on the line—I took him to find out the other boy's name—if I had not been there, the train would have been thrown off the line.
MR. COLLINS. Q. You never charged Keen with placing the bolts on the line? A. No—I was in the tunnel about an hour, and when I came out I saw the prisoner on the line—the line was clear before I went in.
WILLIAM MARTIN (Policeman S 334). I had a warrant delivered to me, and took the prisoner in custody in Kentish Town—I said he was charged on a warrant with placing some iron bolts on the London and North Western Railway—he said, "I did not do it, the others did"—I asked him who, and he said, "Keen; he brought them from the elder-tree, and I put them on the line."
Cross-examined. Q. Did you get a summons to serve on the prisoner previously? A. No; there had been a summons taken to his house, but he could not be found, and then a warrant was issued—I think we had some conversation on our way to the station—I did not urge him to admit that he put the bolts on the line—I did not say that I would drive him fifteen miles in a cab—he said "What shall I get?"—I said, "I do not know; it is a very dangerous thing to do"—he afterwards said that Keen brought them and put them on the line.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. It was not me who put the bolts on the railway line, it was Thomas Keen. I went to take them off, but the engine came along, and it was too late. The engine knocked it off the line, he put it on again, and I took it off. He ran to the elder-tree and picked some berries, and put another on the line and got on the wall, and I got on the wall. That gentleman came out, throwed them off the line, and called me a young b—, and said he would lock me up, and I got over the wall and ran away.
GUILTY .— Five Days' Imprisonment .
MR. GRIFFITHS conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM PHILIPS . I am assistant to Mr. Samuel Lewis, draper, of Holborn Hill—on 4th of August, I saw the two prisoners standing outside the shop, about 4 o'clock, p.m.—I saw the man take this piece of check stuff, which was just outside the shop door, fastened to a string—I went out—I heard him say, "Put it down," and I found it on the pavement outside—Wells was standing by his side—I took hold of Kelly, and took him into the shop—Wells ran away, and one of the other assistants ran after her.
JAMES LAMMAS (City Policeman 324). I was called to Mr. Lewis's shop on 4th August, about 4 o'clock in the afternoon—I found Kelly in custody—Wells was brought in by one of the assistants—I had seen her running as I went to the shop—Kelly said, "She knows nothing about it, I am guilty of taking it"—at the station Kelly asked her if she had any money, and she handed him some halfpence—he said several times, that the woman knew nothing about it—he gave a correct address, but a false name—I found a shilling's worth of halfpence and a key on him.
Kelly was further charged with having been before convicted in, August, 1866, to which he PLEADED GUILTY .
KELLY**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude .
WELLS— Six Months' Imprisonment .
MR. CUNNINGHAM conducted the Prosecution; and MR. PATER the Defence.
WILLIAM LONG (Policeman HR 37). About 11 o'clock on the night, 3rd July, I was in Clement's Lane—I saw the prisoner coming toward Clement's Lane, with four others—he had his arm straight down by his side, as if he was trying to conceal something—I asked him what he had under his coat, he said, "Nothing"—I took hold of his coat and found these trousers wrapped in paper—he said, "I found them in Carey Street"
JOSEPH WOOTTON . I live at 3, Sheffield Street, Clare Market, and am a jewel-case maker—on Friday, 3rd July, about 10.45, I saw a gentleman opposite my house, walking along rather the worse for liquor—he had a paper parcel under his arm—I saw the prisoner and four others near him, and saw the prisoner trip the gentleman up—they then ran away with the parcel—I have often seen the prisoner before; I am certain he is the same man.
Cross-examined. Q. You never make a mistake, I suppose? A. I have, very often—I don't think this is a mistake—Sheffield Street is a crowded thoroughfare at times, but it is not so busy in the evening.
THE COURT considered that it was only a case of suspicion, and there was no proof that the prisoner had stolen them.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Friday, August 21st, 1868.
Before Mr. Justice Lush.
The prisoner PLEADED GUILTY to the attempt and Mr. Griffiths, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence on the felony.— Eight Months' Imprisonment .
MR. GRIFFITHS conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM GEORGE . I am a labourer, at Edmonton—on 27th July I was in a field of Mr. George Ellis's, of Edmonton—the prisoner was employed there bagging the wheat, I was looking on—I had a few words with the prisoner at dinner time, and he struck me—after that he went for some beer, and asked me to stop till he came back—when he came back, William Barker, who was with the prisoner, began blackguarding me, and asked why I had pushed the boy down—I had pushed a boy down on the wheat because he was saucy—while I was talking to Barker, the prisoner came and took hold of my shoulder with his left hand, and struck me with the bagging hook in his right, this is the hook (produced)—he struck me over the shoulder with it; it went right down the shoulder, and the point of it went into my short ribs—he said, "You b—, I meant you when I came back"—I saw the blood running down, and ran to my father and mother, who were working in another field—I dropped from loss of blood—the prisoner was the
worse for liquor, but knew what he was doing—this was three or four hours after we had had the words.
Prisoner. Don't you live along with my eldest daughter? Witness. Yes, I do—I did not tell you I would turn her out; I said you could have her at home—I have lived with her two years, and I should have married her if it had not been for you—you said you would not have her home, she should go into the Union first.
MARK MISSION . I am a labourer, at Edmonton—I was in the field when this happened—George pushed a boy named Baker down on the wheat for flinging stones at a man named Cousins—when the prisoner came back with the beer, Barker wanted to have a row with George, and the prisoner got up took up the bagging hook and struck him over the shoulder with it, saying, "You b—, I meant it for you when I came back," and when he was running to his father and mother in the other field, the prisoner said to Barker, "I have given one at last, Joe"—he was a little the worse for liquor, but not so bad but he knew what he was after.
Prisoner. It is no use asking him questions, they are brothers-in-law. Witness. I am brother-in-law of George.
EDMUND JACKSON KENT . I am a surgeon and apothecary, and assistant to Mr. Morris—on Monday afternoon, 27th July, I was sent for to Church Lane, and saw the prosecutor lying on his stomach on the grass by the side of the footpath—he had dropped down from exhaustion from loss of blood—there was a great deal of blood on his clothes, and also on the grass—I lifted his clothes and saw a wound on the edge of the blade-bone, on the right side, about seven inches long, and very deep, dividing several large vessels and deep muscles at the back, it reached the ribs—it was a very dangerous wound—I dressed it, and sent him to the infirmary—he was in danger for a fortnight, and is under my care now—I see no danger now—the wound must have been caused by such an instrument as this.
JOHN HOWLEY (Policeman Y 17). I apprehended the prisoner the same evening—I told him the charge—he said he had been waiting for me, he would not run away—he was very much the worse for liquor—I received this bagging hook from one of the men in the field; there was blood on it
Prisoner's Defence. I was so drunk I did not know what I was doing.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment .
MR. WOOD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. PATER the Defence.
GUILTY .— Seven Years' Penal Servitude .
MR. MOODY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. COLLINS the Defence.
KATE MAY . I live at 30, Princes Street, Lisson Grove, and am a dress-maker—I know the prisoner and his wife—I had left 8s. 6d. with Mrs. Tayon—on Monday, 3rd August, between 10.30 and 11 o'clock in the morning I went to the prisoner's house to see a young girl named Ellen, who was lodging there—the prisoner opened the door—I asked him if I could see Ellen—he asked me to come in—I went into the passage, he went
into the parlour and got a piece of lead with a string to it tied round his finger, and a bottle with some stuff in it—he struck me on the nose with the lead, and threw the stuff out of the bottle over me, it went on my jacket and dress; none of it came on my face or hands, I was not burnt at all—he then seized me by the throat and dragged me into the parlour, and threw some more stuff over me from the same bottle—he said he would kill me before I went out of the house—he struck me on the shoulder with the poker—Mrs. Tayon was in the parlour at the time, no one else—I screamed out "Murder"—some young women and a young man at last broke open the door and got me out of the prisoner's hands—he had got me between the mantlepiece and the cupboard, standing before me with the poker and a knife in his hands—I gave him into custody the same day.
Cross-examined. Q. You say you are a dress-maker, who do you work for? A. I work for anyone who brings things to me—I was quite quiet when I went to the house—he had the bottle, in his hand, and shook his hand and threw the stuff over me—this is the jacket I had on (produced)—I have the frock on—none went on my hands or face—he was quite close to me when he shook the bottle over me, and he had the piece of lead in his hand at the same time; he had the lead in the same hand with which he seized me by the throat, and the bottle in the other hand—I screamed out—I could not run away, because he was standing before me—I tried to pull him away from the door, but I could not, he was standing by the door, and it was fastened—I did not think of running up stairs—I tried to get out, and I asked him to let me out—there was no one on the stairs—I did not see Betsy Capel there, I know her—I used to life in the house—I did not have warning to leave—I had left-about a fortnight—my cloak fell off in the passage—I did not, when the prisoner opened the door, try to rush past him—he did not stop me, nor did my cloak come off in the struggle—he deliberately held me by the arm and shook the stuff over me—I did not strike him at all—his face was not bleeding—I had not said to anyone before this that I would go and kick up a b—row—I don't know who the persons were that broke open the door, they were no companions of mine; they are not here—they were before the Magistrate the first day, but were not called—the parlour door was shut while I was inside, and the prisoner fastened it with a nail—he got the nail off the drawers—his wife was helping him to hit me; she hit me on the face—I did not charge her, I thought if I charged him that would do just as well—I have not mentioned before to-day about her hitting me, I was not asked—she went and stood by the table, and called out, "Don't, don't"—that was after he had thrown the stuff over me—I was trying to get away from him, I was not fighting with him—I don't know whether she was saying it to him or to me—my cloak was thrown out of the parlour, I can't say whether I or the prisoner threw it out—I had it on my arm in the parlour with only one sleeve on—it is torn across the shoulder—it came off when Mr. and Mrs. Tayon were both on me—it was pulled off and thrown down in the passage, and got kicked into the parlour, and kicked out again—I don't know what became of the bottle or the lead—the bottle was full when he brought it out, I can't say whether any was left in it.
MR. MOODY. Q. You say your cloak came off in the passage? A. Yes—I picked it up and put it on one arm—I had it on one arm when he dragged me into the parlour—it came off in the parlour, and got kicked into the passage while he was fastening the door—he threw the stuff over it,
before ho fastened the door—it was after I had called "Murder" that he put the nail in the door—I had not heard any knocking at the door, only the people outside halloaing, and saying "He is killing her"—it was then he put the nail in the door, and while doing so he kicked my jacket out into the passage—it is not a very long passage: it is a six-roomed house—I was bleeding when I spoke to the policeman.
THOMAS CHARLES KIRBY . I am a licentiate of the College of Physicians, and Divisional Surgeon of Police—this cloak was sent to me on the 3rd by the Magistrate, to ask me what acid had been used to discolour it—I tested it, it is a strong solution of oxalic acid—I have not examined the dress.
Cross-examined. Q. If a strong solution of oxalic acid was mixed with water, would it whiten the coat of a dog? A. Yes, I think it would take the stain out of a poodle—the cloak is not burnt in the least—all these stains would be removed by a solution of ammonia, and will restore it—I rather think it would do it good—it will not burn the skin.
NOT GUILTY .
718. FRANCIS TAYON was again indicted , for an assault on Kate May . JOHN WILKINS (Policeman D R 50). I took the prisoner into custody on 3rd July—I met the prosecutrix in Manning Street—she was bleeding from the bridge of the nose—I did not see any other bruises on her—she had her jacket on her arm.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the prisoner bleeding? A. No; I did not see any bruises on him at all—I took him at his own house—there was a crowd there—I saw his wife; she pretended to be very ill in bed, and could not get up, but as soon as I took the prisoner she got up and came after him.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he strike you hard with the poker? A. He left the mark on my shoulder—I did not show it to a surgeon—this is the poker (produced), and this is the nail he fastened the door with—he only struck me once with the poker; he then put it on the drawers—he did not hit me after that—he seized me very violently by the throat, and left the marks there; there were scratches—I have not mentioned that before; I did not think it mattered—his wife struck me with her hand on the side of the face—it was not very violent, because she did not reach me well; only her fingers caught me on the face; they did not make any mark—I did not strike her, or try to do so, or kick her—I was trying to push the prisoner away from me, and that was all—I made use of no bad expressions.
Witness for the Defence.
BETSEY CAPEL . I lodge at the prisoner's house—on the morning of the 3rd August, about 10.30, I went up Manning Street to post a letter—I met Kate May—she said, "Tell Madame and Tayon that I am coming round to give her and him a b—good hiding"—I then went back to the house, and about half an hour afterwards I heard a very loud rat-tatting at the door; it was Kate May—the prisoner went to the door, and she said, "You old b—, I have come for the purpose of giving you a good hiding"—I was on the stairs—she was very violent, and squared her fists at him—he had a bottle of some white stuff in his left hand, and the cork out of it—he was using it to clean a white dog that he had—she rushed past him into the room where his wife was very ill in bed, and during the time she was there,
a young man came in, and struck Mr. Tayon on the mouth with his full force with his right hand—I saw the whole transaction from beginning to end—the prisoner did not strike her, or use any violence more than he could possibly help—he tried the same as I should have done myself, to push her out of the door into the passage—Mrs. Tayon got up from her bed, and took hold of May, and said, "For goodness' sake, be quiet"—she said, "If you don't look out, I will give you a b—smack in the mouth"—the young man I spoke of came in with May, and several very loose girls as well, when she first came to the door—she came in with very great violence, and Mr. Tayon of course shut the door to keep the mob out.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you lodge there? A. Yes; I have been there about nine weeks—when May came in, she wanted to let the mob in, and Mr. Tayon fastened the door with a nail—she struck him as violently as she could with both hands, and said, "You old b—, if you are a man, come outside, and I will take it out of you"—she said that after he tried to persuade her to be quiet—she made use of fearful bad language.— NOT GUILTY .
MR. WOOD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. LEIGH the Defence.
WILLIAM STRANGE . I live at 7, Arthur Street, Chelsea, and am a bricklayer—on the evening of 1st August, I was outside the Six Bells public-house, in King's Road, Chelsea—I saw the deceased Stephen Soper come out, and several other men—William Kingham was one of them—they all stood talking for some few minutes—I could not hear what they were talking about—I saw the prisoner strike Soper in the face with his fist, and he fell on the back of his head heavily—the prisoner walked away directly—the deceased was then taken home—on the Wednesday night I went to his house, to see how he was—I remained from 4 o'clock on Wednesday afternoon until Thursday night at 12—he was insensible, and had a great many fits the whole time—I went again on Friday, about 8.30, and he was dead—the deceased never struck the prisoner at all—I believe both of them had had a little to drink, but they knew what they were about.
Cross-examined. Q. In what part of the face was he struck? A. I can't say—I did not say before the Magistrate it was in the mouth—they had a few words, nothing like a quarrel—I was not in the public-house—I did not see Soper do insulting things to the prisoner—Soper was not drunk.; he knew perfectly well what he was about—I went to see the deceased about 4 o'clock on the afternoon of Wednesday—I was not told that he had a fall out of bed—I believe he had fits before I went there; he had them all the time I was there.
COURT. Q. Have you known Soper long? A. Fourteen or fifteen years—I never knew him to have fits before—they were talking loud outside the public-house, not quarrelling—they were not very friendly.
WILLIAM KINGHAM . I am a labourer, and live at 14, Arthur Street Chelsea—I was in the Six Bells, with the deceased and the prisoner, on the evening of the 1st August, between 8 and 9—a man named Street came in, and three or four others—Street began talking about his two horses, and Soper said, "The grey mare is twenty years old, I know"—he then pulled some money out of his pocket, and said, "I'll bet you five guineas the grey
mare is twenty years old"—I then touched him on the shoulder, and said, "Let's go home"—I walked out of the door, and Soper followed—the prisoner had said nothing—he followed out after Soper—I walked on a little way, and whether they did have any words outside I can't say—when I had got ten or twelve yards, I turned round and saw Soper on the pavement, on his back—I did not hear any challenge or preparation for a fight—I picked him up, and took him home—nobody struck him while he was in my hands—I put him on the bed, and left him for that night—I saw him on the Sunday, and asked him if he was hurt—he said, "No, not particularly," only he felt a little giddiness in his head—I saw him on the Monday evening, and he then said there was nothing the matter with him, only he felt giddy in the head—he was lying on the bed then—I believe he went out that day—I saw him on Tuesday evening, about 7 o'clock, and he said the same thing—I went on Wednesday, and sat up with him all night—he had fits then several times—he was a good deal worse then—he never spoke after he began having the fits—on the Sunday I noticed some blood on a little cut on his lip.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the deceased sober? A. Yes—the betting, in the public-house, was between Street and Soper—the prisoner did not enter into it, as far as I heard—I did not see Soper shoving his fist into the prisoner's face, and making him bet against his will—it was Soper who first spoke about the betting—the prisoner seemed quiet enough—I have known Soper thirteen or fourteen years, and the prisoner seven or eight years—I don't know that he is married—he was always quiet, as far as I know.
MR. WOOD. Q. Was anything the matter with Soper on the Saturday? A. No—I did not hear him say that he was giddy.
MARY FROWETT . I live at 3, Brittain Street, Chelsea—I was in the Six Bells—I saw some men quarrelling about a horse—I was not there many minutes, and then I went next door to get some things—as I came out, I saw Mr. Soper talking to a man, and the prisoner came out of the public-house, and struck him down as if he was dead—he hit him under the mouth—he ran out, and did it immediately.
Cross-examined. Q. Soper was drunk, was he not? A. They seemed to have had a little—I don't consider either of them were sober.
MARRY ANN HOOPER . I lived with the deceased for five years before his death—he was brought home, on 1st August, by Mr. Kingham, and Mr. White, a lodger—he was insensible—when he recovered his sense his head was giddy—he never complained of that before—he was a very strong man—he had a cut at the corner of his mouth, as if from a blow; it was not there before—he went out quite well, to buy a pair of wheels for a truck—he did not get up on Sunday; he complained of giddiness—he went out on Monday, and came back in about an hour, and fell in the parlour—I got him to bed—he said he was so sleepy and drowsy, and still complained of giddiness—on Tuesday night I gave him some pills—he was no better then—on Wednesday, about 2 o'clock, I went to get some chops for dinner, and while I was gone he had a fit, and fell out of bed—I found him on the floor when I came back—he never spoke after that—he had fits every half hour—as he got weaker, the fits got stronger—he died from a more violent one.
Cross-examined. Q. Had he a drunken row a few weeks before? A. Yes; he took a little more than usual—he was out rather more than an hour on the Monday—I don't believe he drank anything while he was out—when he was brought home on the Saturday, he seemed to be in liquor; he was
stupid; he was very sick—he did not fall on the kitchen stairs on the Monday—he fell out of bed on the Wednesday—he was going on pretty well up to that time—he fell out of bed in a fit, and had them afterwards—he had not had them before.
MR. WOOD. Q. How high was the bedstead you spoke of? A. It was a low French bedstead—there was a mattrass on it—there was carpet on the floor—I was not in the room when he fell out.
GEORGE RAWBONE . I am a surgeon, practising at 171, King's Road, Chelsea—on Wednesday, 5th August, I was called to see the deceased—he was in a state of insensibility—he was suffering from pressure on the brain—he died on Friday, the 7th—I afterwards made a post-mortem examination—there was a bruise on the mouth, and an effusion of blood on the right side of the head—there was also a bruise on the back of the head—the effusion was very slow, as it was only a small vessel—giddiness and sickness would be constant symptoms of effusion.
Cross-examined. Q. The wound on the mouth was not severe? A. No—as a general rule, you would expect a man with effusion on the brain to be stupid—it must be very slight indeed to make him delirious—effusion on the brain would not show for some days—there was the mark of a blow on the mouth—I am not prepared to say it was a slight one—the effusion came from a bruise at the back of the head—I did not see him before the Wednesday—he was insensible then.
MR. WOOD. Q. Would a fall from the bed on which he was cause such a bruise at the back of the head? A. I think not—it would have required a heavier fall than that.
WILLIAM OPIE (Police Sergeant T 6). I took the prisoner into custody on 8th August—I said I should take him on suspicion for having caused the death of Stephen Soper, by striking him on the head with his fist—he began to cry, and said, "I did strike him, and I have been very sorry ever since.
The Prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY —Recommended to mercy by the Jury— Three Months Imprisonment .
NEW COURT—Thursday and Friday, August 20th and 21st 1868.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. M. WILLIAMS conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM BROWN (Policeman H 82). About 2.45 on the morning of 11th July, I was on duty in Commercial street, and heard a breaking of glass—I went to the corner of lamb street and saw the prisoner running from the prosecutor's door, 5, commercial street, with something bulky under his coat—he ran through corbet court, and threw something away up peeke Yard—I followed him—he stopped, very much exhausted, and said, "All right; what is it?"—I said, "Come back with me; you have been into a warehouse"—he said, "All right; I do not Know anything about it"—I took him to the station, went back, and found five skins of leather, where I saw him throw something away—I examined the prosecutor's warehouse, and found 62 skins partially removed through a fanlight, and overhanging the street—the glass was broken, and there was a hole big enough for a man to get through.
Prisoner. Q. Did you see anybody else? A. Another man came out of the court, but whether he was with you I cannot say—I am sure you are the man I saw coming from No. 5.
JOHN EUSTON . I am a shoemaker, of No. 5, Commercial Street—on 10th July, at 7.45, I saw my premises safe—I missed 65 skins next morning—these skins are mine, and were safe when I left—I found a large piece broken out of the fanlight next morning—it was cracked the previous night, but not perforated—the skins could be reached by placing an arm through.
Prisoner. Q. What is the height of the fanlight? A. Over 7 feet—I do not see how you could reach it alone—the bars would prevent you getting through the hole—they are only 5 inches apart, but the hole was large enough.
ROBERT TUTTLE . I live at No. 5 Commercial Street—on 10th July I went to bed about 10 o'clock at night—everything was safe—the fanlight was cracked, but there was no hole—in the morning I found the fanlight broken, and a quantity of leather hanging out, so that I could reach it.
ROBERT ROPER . I live at No. 11, Royston Street, Bethnal Green—about 3 o'clock on the morning of the 11th I saw the prisoner jump down from the door of No. 5, Commercial Street—he ran across the road, turned back, and the constable took him.
Prisoner. Q. Where were you going? A. I was waiting for the carts coming to market—I carry sieves—I never lost sight of you—nobody was with you—I did not see you throw anything away; you had a bump behind your coat.
Prisoner's Defence. I was waiting till the market was open, and sat on the door-step and fell asleep. I awoke and saw a man rush past me. I saw it was getting daylight, and went on, and the policeman took me. The policeman said he had to get a ladder to reach the window, and he is much taller than I am.
GUILTY of Stealing — Six Months' Imprisonment .
MARY TUCKER BORRADAILE . I lived at 7, George Street, Hanover Square, when these proceedings were taken—I am the widow of Colonel Borradaile—we resided in India six years—I have been married twenty-two years—I first became acquainted with the prisoner in 1864, through an advertisement, and knowing that she was perfumer to the Queen, I saw her twice in 1864, at her shop in New Bond Street—in 1864 she merely gave me some powders and two or three boxes of soap, for which I paid her—I saw her twice in 1865—in May, 1866, I remember going to her shop, and having a conversation with her—she asked how much money I had to spend—I said I should not spend 10l., but as I had then paid her about 170l., I hoped she would do something with my skin—I paid that in 1864 and 1865—she told me to call again, and in two or three days I called—the second time I called, she told me that a gentleman loved me; Lord Ranelagh—I was very much surprised, and asked where he had seen me—she
said before my marriage and after; that he had seen me very lately, and she would introduce me to him in a few days, next time I called—she said he was a very good man, and a rich man—nothing, at that time, was said about marriage—I saw her in two or three days afterwards, in the small sitting-room, and she said, "I will now introduce you to the man who loves you"—she opened the door, and said, "Lord Ranelagh"—her daughter was there, as was also Madame Valeria, a Russian woman—I said to him, "Are you Lord Ranelagh?"—he replied, "Yes, and here is my card"—he handed me the card; I looked at it and returned it to him—the gentleman I then saw was the same I recognize in Court as Lord Ranelagh—after he had given me his card, Madame Rachel closed the door again—on my returning to her room, she said he would make me a good husband—on several occasions I saw him there, and once to speak to—at the second interview Madame Rachel told me to go and take a bath, and return to her—I went to Mrs. Hicks's, Davies Street, took a bath, returned to the shop, and found Lord Ranelagh was there—she said, "I must again introduce you to Lord Ranelagh"—he made a bow to me—I forget the conversation; it was not much—she again said he would make me a good husband, and asked me if I would like to have him for a husband—I thought, as he was a good man and a rich man, and being in a good position, it would be a good thing for my daughter—she will be eighteen in October—the prisoner said he fancied me; she very often told me that—about the end of May, or the beginning of June, she said it was necessary that I should be made beautiful for ever, before I married Lord Ranelagh; for if I was not, it would only be money thrown away, and I should be sent into the country, where I should never be seen—I think she said he also wished it, but I cannot be sure about that—I was to pay 1000l. for being made beautiful for ever—at that time I had money in the Funds—I have since known Mr. Haynes, a solicitor—the prisoner introduced me to him in June, after the conversation about being made beautiful for ever—Mr. Haynes and Madame Rachel accompanied me to the City in a carriage—she said he was a solicitor, but did not say at that time he was her solicitor—I went to the City to sell out the money I had in the Funds, amounting to 1300l., which I sold for 963l.—money was very scarce, and many banks had failed at that time, and I lost by selling out—when I came from the City I went to Madame Rachel's sitting-room with Mr. Haynes—I told him I was sorry I had sold out the money—the 963l. was net handed over to me; I never had any of it—I gave this order to him—it is not my handwriting, but it is signed by me—(Read: "June, 1866. Mr. Haynes, I request you to pay Madame Rachel 800l., on account of 963l. 2s.11d. received this day. M. T. Borradaile.")—That was given to Mr. Haynes at her shop, in her presence—the receipt produced is in my writing—it was written in Mr. Haynes's office, but I don't know when—Madame Rachel was there, too, and made the mark at the bottom—he was sitting in such a position as to see it written—Madame Rachel told me how to word it, because I did not know what was to be done—I think Mr. Haynes supplied the stamp—(This was a receipt for 800l., a balance of 1000l. received from witness, for bath preparations, soaps, powders, sponges, perfumes, and attendance, to be continued till Mrs. Borradaile was finished by the process.)—I had received no consideration whatever for that 800l., beyond what I had previously paid for in 1864 and 1865—Madame Rachel said we were to be married by proxy—she said it was to be done by letter writing; that she had married two parties before
by proxy, and that I should be the third—about a month after that receipt was signed I began to receive letters—I received some of them before the jewellery was ordered, which was to cost 1400l.—Madame Rachel said the letters would only be signed "William," in case they should be left about—I knew at that time what Lord Ranelagh's Christian name was; it is Thomas—I received this letter from Madame Rachel, who said it had come from Lord Ranelagh, and she gave me a vinaigrette and a pencil-case, stating they had belonged to Lord Ranelagh's mother: "Mount-street. My only dearly beloved Mary, The little perfume-box and pencil-case belonged to my sainted mother, she died with them in her hand. When she was a school-girl it was my father's first gift to her. Granny has given the watch and locket to me again. Your coronet is finished, my love. Granny said you had answered my last letter, but you had forgotten to send it. I forgot yesterday was Ash Wednesday. Let old Granny arrange the time, as we have too little to spare. My adored one, what is the matter with the old woman; she seems out of sorts? We must keep her in good temper for our own lakes. She has to manage all for us, and I should not have had the joy of your love had it not been for her, darling love. Mary, my sweet one, all will be well in a few hours. The despatches have arrived. I will let you know all when I hear from my heart's life. Bear up, my fond one, and I shall be at your feet, those pretty feet that I love, and you may kick your old donkey. Two letters, naughty little pet, and you have not answered one. You are in sorrow about your brother. With fond and devoted love, yours till death, William."—Madame Rachel was "Granny"—I also received this letter from Madame Rachel's grand-daughter in her presence—Read: "My own dear Mary. Granny tells me that you were to be with me at the Scotch Stores this afternoon. I waited outside 7, George Street for two hours. I give you one warning; if you listen to your family, I will leave England for ever. Mary, my love, I have to play a double game to save your honour and my own. It is now 6 o'clock, and I am wet through, walking up and down George Street I have been asked all manner of questions. You must write and tell Lewis & Lewis you do not want them to interfere further in your affairs, as we are betrayed; and think of your position and name, and think of your daughter. Cope is at the bottom of all this. Mary, for the last time, choose between your family and me. If you value your own life or mine do not admit Smith; he is the paramour of your greatest enemy. My heart's life, I will be at All Souls' tomorrow. I was at Randall's on Saturday last—a dirty corncutter's. If ever you go there again I shall sense to love you if I can. If I call on you with a gentleman be sure to deny all knowledge of me, as otherwise we are lost. It is your name I study. With fond undying love, your devoted, William" I received one letter after that—my family had been communicated with, and I had consulted Messers. Lewis & Lewis—that letter was received after I had parted with all my money and securities—Mr. Randall is mentioned in it; he is a chiropodist, I had called on him one day—he advised me to go to Lewis & Lewis—almost all the letters were in a different hand writing—every letter I received I supposed came from Lord Ranelagh—Madame Rachel told me he had hurt his arm and could not write very well, and that Stephens, his servant, wrote some of them—I also received this letter from Madame Rachel—"My own Mary, I will be with you to-morrow as soon as possible. Yours until death. Edward. In haste. My dearest beloved, write me a line (kisses)."—I remarked to her that one of the letters
was signed "Edward," and she replied that was necessary, lest I should lose or leave them about—this letter I received in August, before parting with the 1400l.—"Mount Street. My darling Mary, my own pet, do what I ask. I wish you to burn the letters; and all you do is I dare say for the best. My darling pet love, many thanks. I know you will keep your promise. My sweet love, I will devote my love and all my life to you. I cannot express my love to you. I cannot find words to do so. My devotion in years shall tell my heart's fond love for you. Darling sweet one, I will tell you all at your feet. My own loved Mary, with fond devotion, ever yours, with lots of kisses. William." On the envelope "With love and kisses"—I wrote answers to the letters, which answers Madame Rachel always dictated in her sitting-room—she always kept the letters, saying she would give them to Lord Ranelagh—this is another letter: "My dearly beloved Mary, I was in hopes I should have had the pleasure of seeing you this day, but I am doomed to disappointment. I hear you are grieving, my own darling pet. Am I the cause? I would rather be shot than cause you one minute's pain. Do you regret the confidence you have placed in me! You say you have no desire to reside at Cheltenham again, my love. You make what arrangements you think proper, and I am satisfied. I thank you, my love, for going to Covent Garden, Let me know by return, my pet, when you have finished with Mr. Haynes, as I find it impossible to wait any longer. Hope deferred makes the heart sick. I hear all is arranged for the country, my own darling love. Do not let me have to chide you. Only say what you require, and your slightest wish shall be obeyed. With fond devoting love, you affectionate and loving William.—I remarked that the spelling of the letters was bad, and she said that his servant used to write them—it must have been in July, August, and September that those letters were written—Madame Rachel had told, me on one occasion that Lord Ranelagh was going to Belgium with the Volunteers—I received this letter from Madame Rachel: "Mount Street My darling Mary, what made you suppose that I would go to Belgium without you? It is cruel of you to think so. But after our disappointment of yesterday I was in hopes that you would have complied with my wishes. I have left the message with Rachel. She told me last night that she expected you there for true to-day. I have called there twice and I find you have not been. You said you would come after church. My own darling I did not go to church this morning, as you know what prevented me from doing so. You must see Rachel to-night, as I may be ordered off by five in the morning. Pray, sweet love, call on her at once. I had rather be shot like a dog than leave England without you. I am half distracted at not finding you. There is no time to lose. Your devoted and loving friend for ever, William"—I also received this from the same source: "My own beloved Mary, Do not upbraid me. Any sacrifice you have made on my account I will not give you cause to regret I am, dunned to death at the thought of 'the bills,' and it all lies under a nutshell. I will show my love for you in such a way that you shall not regret all you have done for me, and I will repay it with love and devotion. See that fellow in Oxford-street, and tell him you will pay him in a day or two, and so you will. I am not angry with you, my own dear love. I will be with you sooner than you think. Your slightest wish shall be obeyed, but I cannot understand why you prefer Mr. H. but I leave all to you. My love, do not get into any mob. I heard you were insulted by a cabman in Oxford Street. I wish I
had been there. With my fondest love, your devoted and loving William"—That letter was not so early in the correspondence as the others—Madame Rachel told me that a cabman had been rude to me in Oxford Street, but I do not recollect it—Lord Ranelagh's name was mentioned about the cabman—I also received this letter: "Birdcage Walk. My own dear love. My sweet darling Mary, I called at Rachel's to-day, and she looks as black as thunder. What is it, my sweet love? My own dear one. What you said last night I thought was in joke; is it the bill that has annoyed you? What am I to do? I tell you again and again that you are the only woman I love. You have never been the same to me since you listened to all the slander. What is it you want? Write at once and freely. There should be no disguise, my sweet pet. I love you madly—fondly. Why do you trifle with my feelings, cruel one? Yours ever loving, and most devoted and ever affectionate, William. What have you done to offend Rachel I—That was written about the same time the Volunteers were in Belgium—I think it was a few days before they returned—she would never give me any explanation about the bill—I have seen a man named Bower at her shop; she ordered 380l. or 400l. worth of lace of him—she said I should require lace, as all ladies had lace—I have since paid Bower's bill for the lace, but I never saw it—Madame Rachel had it; it was sent to her house—she never told me how much it was—I thought it was about 25l.—I have since been sued for it, and was arrested and went to prison—I have paid for it, but I never had a yard of it—this letter also came from Madame Rachel: "Mary, my heart's life, is it your wish to drive me mad? Granny has my instructions; do as she tells you. Four letters, and not one reply; what is the meaning of the delay at the eleventh hour? Granny lent me the money. You shall pay her, my own sweet one. Get the lace to-day. I fear nothing. It will be 35l. I will explain all to your satisfaction, my own sweet one. I have the acknowledgments for every farthing. Granny is our best friend, go you will find. We cannot do without her until we go away. I have some pretty little things for Florence. Light of my heart, your sister and her husband have behaved very badly towards you, if you knew all. I tell you, love, if you are not careful they will divide us for ever. Go to the Strand to-day. Leave all to me, my own love, and fear nothing. If you have lost all love and confidence in your ugly old donkey, tell me; but this suspense is terrible. I receive letters every day telling me that you only laugh at and show my letters. Mary, beloved one of my heart, do not trifle with me. I love once—I love for ever. Leave all to me. I guard your honour with my life. With fond and devoted love, I am your devoted, William. No. 109, Mount Street"—My daughter's Christian name is Florence—I did not go to the Strand; Madame Rachel asked me to go to many places, but I never went and I did not see Lord Ranelagh there—I think that letter was written about July—I received this letter, having the coronet and Lord Ranelagh's cypher, at the end of January or the beginning of February last year—there was another with a coronet or coat of arms, Madame Rachel took that from me one day, and would not return it—Read: "My own darling Mary, Why do you not do as Granny tells you? Why do you put obstacles in the way of your own happiness? Sign the paper; I will pay everything, my own darling love. If you marry, your pension will be stopped; therefore it will not matter if you sign the paper, my own heart's life. I will pay everything. Not the value of a coin shall be touched belonging to you or yours. You have ever been loving and confiding. Why do you
doubt my honour and sincerity? What motive can you have, my love, for retaining those miserable scrawls of mine? I requested you to return them, and for the first time you refused to do so. Mary, love, if you have sent them to your family, say so. If you wanted my life I would lay it down at your own beautiful little feet Mary, you are my joy. I place your letters with your likeness in my bosom every night Granny told me she would arrange everything to our satisfaction. Why need you fear, my own sweet love? I will not believe that you expose my letters. Darling, say you do not, with your own pretty mouth. This week will settle all. Yours devotedly, William"—I also received this: "My darling Mary, I was ordered off at eleven o'clock last night, but I would not, nor could not, go without you, my love. I would rather resign than leave without you, my love. Granny promised me the trial trip last week; can you possibly arrange it for one night this week, my own sweet love t Mary, darling, my health is giving way under this dreadful suspense. I have offered the money three times over, and they refuse to take it. Granny will see to this, and we can pay her when all is settled. What you have done for me I will double with love and devotion. Get the lace from the Strand; you cannot possibly do without it Granny has behaved very well with regard to money affairs, and she loves you as though you were her own child. The old fox is very clever, and will laugh at the Welshman. If you do not be careful and be guided by me, love's labour is lost. The expenses will be 4000l., and I am working day and night to save every shilling for you, my heart's life. Be sure to get the lace. Stephens has got the P.O.O. Have you done with my three letters? With fond and devoted love, I am your devoted, William."—I received that at the beginning of 1807—that means to get the lace out of pawn—Madame Rachel told me that it was pawned—I do not remember whether she said that she had pawned it—I always understood that it was pawned for Lord Ranelagh; Madame Rachel told me so, and she asked me to go to the Strand, and take it out for 35l.—she told me that he had 400l. of mine, and the expenses would make up the remainder—I asked her what "the expenses" meant, but I never could get anything out of her, or any explanation—this letter is one of the early ones: "Mount Street. My darling Mary, One would suppose that all the people in your house were dead. I was at your door at 4.45, and we could not make anyone hear. My darling, my sweet love, I was more grieved than you were. Will you keep up your spirits? I have been very much fagged, but I leave everything to you till to-morrow evening, or Wednesday morning. Did Rachel tell you of the scene to-day? She is an old fox; but you quite understand each other. My own sweet love, I am worried to death about money matters; but it will be all settled before we leave town. With my fondest love, and many kisses. Not one line from you to-day. You must quiet Rachel a little. I think the little lady has been talking to her to-day. I have no wish to offend her, sweet love. I am ever yours, William."—Madame Rachel told me that the little lady was the Duchess of Manchester. I do not like to tell you what she said—these are the envelopes—they all came by hand, and the only one which was dated is not here—I never received any letter by post purporting to come from Lord Ranelagh—Madame Rachel gave me the rest, and once her granddaughter gave me one—I received many more, but Madame Rachel always took them away from me—at the end of July, or beginning of August, she said it was necessary I should have diamonds, as I was to marry Lord Ranelagh—she said the
would send for Mr. Pike, a jeweller in New Bond Street—he was sent for, and he brought the diamonds into Madame Rachel's sitting-room—there was a coronet and a necklace—Madame Rachel told him what was required, and I ordered them—she put them round my head, and asked me how I liked them—Mr. Pike said the price was to be 1200l., or 1260l., I am not sure—I had not at that time 1260l., but I had some property at Streatham—I afterwards went with Madame Rachel to Mr. Haynes's again—that was about the end of July or the beginning of August—I went there to sell my property at Streatham to pay for the diamonds—I saw Mr. Haynes from time to time, and negociated with him for the sale of this property, but always with Madame Rachel—the property sold for 1540l.—I had given Mr. Haynes an order to pay for the diamonds; and Madame Rachel knew I had written it—I wrote it in her presence—everything I wrote was in her presence, but she always insisted on my directing from my own house—I handed it to Mr. Haynes—I do not know whether she was present—Read: "My dear Mr. Haynes, Will you kindly pay to Madame Rachel 1400l. on my account? M. T. Borradaile."—After the property was sold Madame Rachel said I should have Lord Ranelagh's mother's diamonds, and she showed me an old-fashioned coronet, which she said should be altered—she said Lord Ranelagh would not allow me to have those ordered from Mr. Pike, but did not say why—I paid 100l. forfeit to Mr. Pike for not taking them—I asked what had become of the money I had given for the diamonds, but received no satisfactory answer—some time after that Madame Rachel asked me if I would authorise her to give it to Captain William Edwards, whom I understood to be Lord Ranelagh—that was the name he always went by between us—she said he wanted it for the Volunteers—she told me that the man adored me, and worshipped the very ground I stood upon, and I authorised her to let him have it—I had given her 10l. and 20l. at a time, which she always said was for Lord Ranelagh, for the Volunteers—on one occasion she sent a servant to me, and I gave her 10l., Madame Rachel having said on the evening before that it was for Lord Ranelagh—in the course of the day I told Madame Rachel that the servant had had the money—she wanted more, but I could not afford to give it her. (Two receipts were here put in for 10l. each from the witness, signed with Madame Rachel's mark, and dated July 1st, 1866, and Oct. 14th, 1867)—She always said, "Will you give your dear William some money, say 20l. or so? I told her I could not afford to give him 20l.—I was induced to do it from the belief that it was for Lord Ranelagh—Madame Rachel told me she would get the trousseau for my marriage with him—I ordered clothes and lace and jewellery, and the linendraper (Proctor) sent all the articles to Madame Rachel's shop—I have never had one of them, though I paid 160l. for them—she told me some of them would be sent to Folkstone, and some to London, and his servant would call for them—I have often asked for the goods, but have never been able to get them—I have also frequently asked her to return my money—she always replied that I must ask my dear William for it—I had some plate—I took it to Madame Rachel's in a cab, but I walked—it was for the Volunteers; at least, Madame Rachel said so—she had asked me what plate I had, and where it was—I said that a greater part of it was at Cheltenham, where I had been staying for a year—she said I must send for it, and when it arrived she said I had better send it to her—I was induced to send it for one reason, which was, as she said, that we had better have everything together, as we were going to be married—she had some rings of mine—
they were given to her to pack with the trousseau—the said she would pack everything for the wedding, and I gave them to her—I have often asked her for the plate and rings, but could not get them back—the always said I was to ask the man who loved me for them—I received an account from Mr. Haynes—I think the clerk brought it to Madame Rachel's when I was there one day—I remember✗ Madame Rachel on one occasion bringing me a lighted cigar, and saying Lord Ranelagh's love for me was as warm as that cigar—she said Lord Ranelagh had sent it—I was in the sitting-room, and the said, "Here comes Lord Ranelagh"—I did not see him—I think that was in February, 1867—I remember calling on Mr. Randall, a corn-cutter in Regent Street, and in consequence of a conversation with him I went to Messrs. Lewis & Lewis—I afterwards executed a bond, and gave it to Madame Rachel in December—(A written authority, signed by witness, and addressed to the prisoner, to pay the sum of 1400l. to Lord Ranelagh or Captain William Edwardes was enquired for. The counsel for the defence said they had not got it.)
GEORGE HENRY LEWIS . I am the solicitor for the prosecution—I served this notice personally on the prisoner, in Newgate, this day week—(This was a notice to produce a bond, signed by the prosecutrix in favour of the prisoner, dated 28th November, 1866.; MR. D. SEYMOUR stated that the prisoner could not produce it, as Mrs. Borradaile had it back.
MRS. BORRADAILE continued). I never got the bond back.
MR. D. SEYMOUR. Q. Just look at that document, and tell me if that is your writing? A. Yes. (This was a receipt dated 6 th February, to Madame Rachel, for a bond for 1600l., and bills, and I 0 U's given for value received. Signed, M. T. Borradaile. MR. HAYNES declined to product the bond, claiming the privilege of his client; upon which THE COURT ruled that secondary evidence was admissible).
MR. M. WILLIAMS. Q. Have you ever, in fact, received the bond back from Madame Rachel since you gave it to her? A. No, I have never seen it since—I understand nothing about business; Madame Rachel said she would do my business for me—the bond was for 1600l.—she said that she had handed all my money over to Lord Ranelagh, and she wanted the 1600l. for what she was going to do for me, make me beautiful for ever, for one thing—this (produced) is a letter written by me to Mr. Haynes when I was his client, but Mr. Cridland was my attorney at that time—(This was dated 7, George Street, Hanover Square, 9th February, 1867, from the witness to Mr. Haynes, and said, "When I called on you yesterday, I forgot to tell you that the bonds, bills, and I O U's I gave Madame Rachel have been cancelled therefore I will not trouble you further about them." "I skill be obliged if you can sell the reversion.")—The first thing I was arrested for was the lace; that was in 1866—I was arrested four times—I was arrested on this bond in December, 1867—the prisoner came to see me in prison, and was there a whole day—while I was in prison I executed another document with the view of getting out, and that I did at Madame Rachel's suggestion—she said that as I was going to be married it did not matter, and that I should lose my pension through being married—I saw, in prison, a lawyer or lawyer's clerk—I do not think I heard his name—one gentleman used to have something to do with Madame Rachel; and very late one evening a gentleman came, and I executed a document, on which I was released from prison—(This was a warrant of attorney to secure the payment of 1600., dated 6th December, 1867.)—While Madame Rachel was under
remand on this charge, I was again arrested on her suit for 15l., but afterwards released—I have a cousin, Colonel William Edwardes—I never once corresponded with him in 1866 or 1867, nor saw him for three or four years—I wrote in answer to those letters, but every answer was dictated to me by Madame Rachel—I often asked her what they meant, and she said that I must trust to her, and place confidence in her, and I should never repent it—there was no other person, except the person I believed to be Lord Ranelagh, to whom I was writing during that time—there was no gentleman staying at my house, or who I was visiting during that time—she always told me that William was Lord Ranelagh, and never told me of any other person—she often mentioned Mrs. Lilley, and a person named Stevenson, as Lord Ranelagh's servants, and said that he had promised in their presence to marry me—I do not know them—taking the whole of these sums and goods, and the diamonds, I have never received anything back which I gave to Rachel, nor have I received any consideration for them; she has shown me jewellery, sometimes which she has told me was mine, but I never received any of it—she once took me to a livery stable near her shop, in New Bond Street, to select a carriage for the marriage with Lord Ranelagh; I selected one, and she said that Lord Ranelagh's arms would be painted upon it—I parted with my money for the man that adored me, Lord Ranelagh, on the representations made to me by Rachel about my marriage; every sum.
Cross-examined by MR. D. SEYMOUR. Q. I hope you will not think me guilty of impertinence if I ask your age? A. It is a very rude question, there is no use in your pressing me on the subject—I was married in 1846—it was not 1841—the age of the bride is a question I shall not answer—I was married twenty-two years—I was not married in my teens, but I was a very young person when I married—I have been a widow, seven years last May—I have been to India, and have always associated with people of the highest principles and rank—I am acquainted with the style and usages of polite society, but I know nothing about business—my maiden name was Edwardes—I never heard of Madame Rachel till I saw her in 1864—I went to her shop as I was suffering from a little eruption on my face—I saw the Queen's name up, and I had seen the advertisements—I made enquiries of Madame—I recollect her giving me a book, but it was not till the next year—I do not think I had any conversation with her about her process—I do not recollect that she told me that "It did not consist, as many persons have been led to suppose, in stopping up the pores of the flesh with dangerous cosmetiques, neither is it in plastering up the system by painting the face, which must be disgusting to all right-minded women gifted with common sense; on the contrary, it is principally accomplished by the use of the Arabian bath, composed of pure extracts of the liquid of flowers, choice and rare herbs, and other preparations equally harmless and efficacious"—She said that her process was chiefly cleanliness, assisted by baths—I only saw her twice in 1864—she gave me a book, and I enquired about her process—I think I had two or three baths under Madame Rachel in 1864—I thought her charges were very expensive—she did not, at that time, tell me that there was a regular scale of charges, that her regular charges were published for her patronesses, and were from 100l. to 1000 guineas, because she was not going to make me beautiful for ever then—she told me, in 1866, that her regular charge was 1000 guineas for the whole process—I think I had seen her advertisement when I first went and saw her—I went there
merely to get something for an eruption on the face—I only stayed a short time in London in 1864—I never ran up a bill with her, I paid her always at the time for what I had, and I had her receipts, but she took them from me—I received a letter from a person named Richards, in 1864, when I was in Pembrokeshire—I was not residing there under the name of Borradaile Goderich, but he directed so; I was residing at a place called Goderich—I have never gone by any name but Borradaile since I married—I was not a penny in her debt when I heard of the solicitor in the ease—I took two or three baths in 1864—I was introduced to Lord Ranelagh about 18th or 20th May, 1866; I cannot be sure—I never took a bath at Madame's own house, but she had baths in her house; I heard her say so—I never saw a bath there, because I never was anywhere except in the shop and the small sitting room, where there is no room for a bath; but I heard her say that she was giving baths to ladies in her house; she told me so—I heard her say that she had been giving a bath to a lady, and I thought she was in the house—she sometimes said to me, "You shall have a bath here," and afterwards she said, "No, you shall go to the public bath"—I have heard her say that she has been bathing ladies, and I always understood her in her house; I thought she said in her house, but I will not swear it—when, I took baths I took them at the public baths in Davies Street—I was attended there by a matron or superintendent; everything was conducted with propriety—but what have baths to do with these swindling transactions?—I was before Mr. Knox as a witness—something was said about baths there—I heard something said about gentlemen being allowed to peep at ladies when they were taking their baths—I think Mr. Cridland had am anonymous letter, telling him so; more than one letter—something was said at Marlborough Street by my Counsel, about gentlemen being allowed to peep at ladies in baths—I only know what Madame said—I noticed no impropriety when I was in my bath at Davies Street; nothing ever occurred while I was having my bath there to lead me to think that any gentleman was allowed to look at me—I know of no facts for such an assertion only from Madame Rachel herself—I do not know that I am obliged to tell what she said—she never mentioned other ladies; she only mentioned about myself, and I had rather not say what that was—I forget what she said—I will swear she said something about gentlemen seeing me in a bath; she said it about six months ago, or it may be seven—I have not seen her for five months, except at the Police Court—it may have been in February or March—I will not tell you what she said; I really forget; but I recollect she did say something to me about the bath, and she mentioned a person in connection with it—I did not take a bath after that, only at the Argyle, not at Davies Street—I have not been there for a year and a half—I was never told that they would not supply me with a bath there—the last time I saw Mrs. Hicks was at Madame Rachel's shop—she did not say the last time I went that she would not allow me to have a bath after what I had said about peeping at me—I know Mrs. Hicks very well—I saw her here, and spoke to her—she did not refuse to let me have a bath in the house—I am speaking the truth, and I never speak anything but the truth—she did not tell roe that she was instructed by the superintendent not to let me have a bath; nothing of the kind—she may swear it, if she likes—I do not recollect that I ever told anybody that anyone had been peeping at me in my bath—I had rather not swear that I did not; I may have forgotten it—I may have said that somebody
told me so; I forget all about it—I forget whether I mentioned it to Mrs. Hicks; it is a long time since—I met Lord Ranelagh in 1866, and was a few minutes in the shop in his company—he gave me his card—I swear that; and I looked at it, and gave it back to him—he was talking to two ladies in the shop—I asked him if he was Lord Ranelagh—he said, "Yes, I am; here is my card"—he said nothing more—I regarded him as my intended husband after that interview; but she introduced him again to me a few days afterwards—I had a conversation with him, but I forget what it was; there was very little said, and what was said was said by Madame Rachel; it was not about perfumes, or the old china there—Madame Rachel said that there were some theatricals going on at Beaufort House, but they were not good enough for me to go to—he had no particular conversation with me—those are the only occasions when I have been with Lord Ranelagh when any conversation took place—he came up from Aldershot one day to dine at Kuhn's, in Regent Street, and she said, "Lord Ranelagh, go round to the shop door"—I saw him, but did not speak to him—I did not see him go away—I went out at one door, and she was talking to him in the shop—I thought she was coming, too, and I did not want it—I believed then that he was going to marry me; I believed it all along—she told me that he knew me before I was married—I cannot say that I ever saw him in my husband's lifetime—I saw a great number of men—I do not think so—I do not see what my late husband has to do with these swindling transactions—the memory of my husband is sacred; let the dead rest—I resided in Brompton during my married life—my husband may have mentioned Lord Ranelagh's name there; I cannot say—he was ill for some time there—he may have done so, but I forget; it is a long time ago—I had about that time become a mother.
Q. Let that refresh your memory? A. I have been a very virtuous and prudent woman all my lifetime—a copy of a letter was sent at that time—I know nothing about any unpleasantness with which Lord Ranelagh's name was mentioned; I forget—I cannot swear that I knew Lord Ranelagh by sight at that time—I did not know him when I was in Brompton, or see him at my house—my husband introduced me to no gentlemen at all at Brompton—I cannot tell you whether Lord Ranelagh's name was mentioned there in connection with a private matter—it was nothing about my child.
Q. On your oath, was there not something about information which your husband had received from Lord Ranelagh, and a threat about somebody else? A. My husband did not tell me anything: he kept everything from me—Lord Ranelagh did not at that time give information which led my husband to threaten somebody else—until Madame Rachel introduced me to Lord Ranelagh I knew nothing about it—I do not remember anything of the kind occurring—I am told that something was said, but I had rather not swear that it was not in connection with that child that Lord Ranelagh bad given some information about somebody else—I agreed that Madame Rachel was to have 1000l.—I do not know what benefit I derived from her treatment; very little—my skin is no better now than it was—she gave me some soap and some powder, and something to put into the baths—I paid for the baths myself—I thought at one time that she had done my skin some good—I had a little breaking out on my skin—nothing was done to my hair—it has been cut by Mrs. Taylor, of Berners Street, Oxford Street, and for 15 years; it was never cut by Madame Rachel, and
it is all my own hair, and the native colour; there is no improving tint—I have used a little of the Auricanus—that is hair wash—the letters of William which have been read were, I thought, all from Lord Ranelagh—the first letters were badly spelt, but Madame Rachel told me his servant wrote them for him—I did not believe that an English nobleman would make love through his footman, but she said that he had hurt his arm, and I did not think she would tell me stories—I knew that he was living in London—I look at the Peerage sometimes—Lord Kensington and I are of the same family—I know that Lord Ranelagh's name is the Hon. Thomas Heron Jones, and not William or Edward—I do not remember him at all in my husband's lifetime—I do not know where Birdcage Walk is where this letter is dated from—I do not know whether I have ever walked there; I believe it is somewhere by Buckingham Palace—these letters from William were in 1866 and 1867—I never borrowed a shilling of Madame Rachel—in 1866, when I first had to do with her, I did not know what an I 0 U was—she asked me to put my initials to something, as it was of no consequence, and I did it, but I never had a shilling—she got me to sign things—this bill is in my writing. (This was a bill of exchange to Mr. Haynes for 500l. dated 13th June, 1866, signed and accepted by the witness.) This receipt is also in my writing—(Read: "June 18th, 1866, received of Madame Rachel 500l., for which I nave given her a bill payable on demand at Messrs. Grindlay and Co.'s.—Mary T. Borradaile") I never had a shilling from Madame Rachel—she had an immense influence over me, and used to get me to write things.
Q. Then, when you wrote, "Received 500l., for which I have given a bill," you wrote what was false? A. I did not know what I was writing, I should think—I gave a receipt for my pension at Grindlay's—I have only been spending a guinea a week all this time—this letter is my writing (Read: "London, Sep. 21, 1866. I, the undersigned, authorise Sarah Rachel Leverson to dispose of all the property she has in her possession belonging to me, a bunch of seals, a ruby ring, a gold chain and cross, silks, linen, boxes, baskets, and sundry items, of all of which a full list has been given Mary Tucker Borradaile.")—I think this long account is also in my writing: Nov. 27, 1866. An account rendered this day by Madame Rachel to Mrs. Borradaile. Aug. 13, received 500l. 1866. Sep. 1, 700l.; 21st, 50l.; Aug. 18, 200l.; Sep. 17, 10l.; July 18, 18l.; Sep. 7, 85l.; Oct. 17, 80l.; Oct 18, 70l. Amount received up to Oct. 10, 1665l. Bills given to Madame Rachel for 600l. Sep. 20, an undertaking from Mr. Haynes to Madame Rachel, 700l. Aug. 9, 300l. Paid for under-clothing, to Toms, 50l. The following account has been rendered by me to Madame Rachel."—It looks like my writing; I cannot say all of it—the whole may be mine, I have written things which I have no recollection of—I never tell lies; when I am not sure, I will not say—it is not a true account, I have never had a penny from her—I am on my oath; never willfully would I tell a lie—this letter is also in my writing: "7, George Street Hanover Square. Mr. Haynes, Dear Sir, I have instructed Madame Rachel to place in your hands the mortgage for 1600l. I gave her on the reversion. Will you ask her for the bills and I O U's she has of mine, and please cancel them. I authorize you to give Madame Rachel an undertaking for 700l. Messrs. Lawless, Nelson and Goodman will hand you the proceeds of the reversion, &c. Yours truly, M. T. Borradaile."—I wrote that under the influence of Madame Rachel, she dictated it, word for word—every letter was written in her shop, or small sitting-room, though
they are dated George Street—I never wrote any letter at all in George Street—I mean to say that she bewitched me—I believe I wrote it under a fa✗cination—(Mr. Froggett was called into Court to produce a letter from the witness, dated June 14, but declined to do so)—I was at Mr. Haynes's several times; three, four, or five times with Madame Rachel, and several times without her—I told Mr. Haynes that I was going to be married to Mr. Edwardes—I did not say he was my cousin—I mentioned Mr. Edwardes, because it was the name assumed—it was the name Lord Ranelagh always Went by.
Q. Did you know that he was going by the name of your own cousin? A. I knew it was the same name—my cousin never had a penny of my money.
Q. Do you mean to say that you thought Lord Ranelagh was making use of your cousin's name? A. I thought it was in case my letters should be laid about—I never thought about the name of Captain William Edwardes being used to hide Lord Ranelagh's name—it was certainly the same name—I believed he took that name as he might take any other name—I did not tell Mr. Haynes that I was going to be married to Captain William Edwardes, my cousin—he is a relative of Lord Kensington, but I do not recollect telling Mr. Haynes so—I do not think he asked me—I always thought Lord Ranelagh was Captain William Edwardes, spelling his name with "des" at the end, and I spelt it so—I do not recollect Madame Rachel referring to my extravagance, in my presence, to Mr. Haynes, I will not swear she did not—I never remember her saying that I was squandering my money on my paramour, I cannot swear that she did not—this letter is my writing—(This was to Mr. Haynes, dated January 23rd, 1864, stating that the witness had given Madame Rachel a mortgage for 1600l. on the reversion, making her joint-mortgagee with Mr. Haynes, and that she had instructed Messrs. Nelson, Lawless & Goodman to sell the reversion, Mr. Haynes being ill)—That was dictated too, word for word—it is crossed—I have relations in Wales named Cope—the arrangement with Mr. Haynes about paying 1400l. was made, I think, at the end of August, 1866—I do not know whether Madame Rachel received the money till the end of the next year—my brother-in-law, Mr. Cope, came up to London the first week in September, 1866—I saw him, and went with him to St James's Street—I did not go into the Carlton Club—I do not think he wished me to accompany him—he wanted to know what kept me in London, as I had never been in London before I came up to town; and I told him I was going to be married—he said that he came up to London because he heard I was in bad hands—I think this letter if in my writing; it was dictated to me by Madame Rachel—(This was dated 3rd September, 1866, and began "My own dear William."—It referred to the visit to London of Mr. Cope, and to her telling him Lord Ranelagh was then out of London, and the people at his town house had not seen him for a week; that Mr. Cope had bought his lordship's photograph in Regent Street, and did not like his nose and was under the impression that the people at the house and poor Rachel were in league to fool her into a marriage with his Lordship; that they would not leave town until they made her go with them to Mr. Haynes, but he was fortunately out of town)—That was every word written at Madame Rachel s, of course Madame Rachel communicated with my brother-in-law—you must cross-examine him to know whether she was the means of bringing him up, to find out who my paramour was—she was not the means of bringing him up in September, 1866; it is false—she had nothing to do with Mr. Cope coming up the first time—he knew I went to Madame
Rachel's shop, and he knew I was in bad hands, and that made him come—Madame Rachel told me that I must trust her, and I wrote the letters entirely in consequence of that—I believed her because I did not believe she was such a woman—I mean to tell the Jury that when I wrote that letter I thought I was writing to Lord Ranelagh—this other letter I suppose is my writing: "36, Davies Street, Berkeley Square, Sept. 6th. My dear William, I have just received a letter from my sister, Mrs. Cope, with a postscript from her husband. He says that he will be in town shortly after I receive this. He comes up in consequence of Madame Rachel having sent him the copy of the letter I wrote to you just after they left for North Wales, last Monday. She has exposed the whole affair about the lace, the very thing I did not wish him to know. It was most foolish of her exposing my affairs to my family. She said she did it to prevent my being arrested. This affair has nearly broken my heart. With fondest love, believe me, your affectionate and loving Mary T. Borradaile. P.S. I did not know until this minute that you were ill, or I would not have upbraided you for coldness and unkindness, as I thought that you were neglecting me."—Madame Rachel wrote two or three letters to my family, which they were very much disgusted with—you must ask Mr. Copt about them—I have never seen the lace she ordered for me—this letter looks like my writing—(This was dated September 12th, and commenced, "My own dear William, I shall be able to leave town with you to-morrow at any hour you may think proper to appoint;"—it alluded to some neck-ties and socks which she had bought for him, and said, "Thank goodness they are paid for.")
Q. Neck-ties and socks for Lord Ranelagh? A. I wrote that at her dictation; every word—I did not order any shirt fronts of Rogers; Madame Rachel had them brought to the shop—some shirts were brought to Madame's shop—I cannot swear whether I called and ordered them.
Q. Going for gentlemen's shirts is a thing a woman does not do every day? A. I think I did—I think I was there and saw some shirt fronts—they were for Lord Ranelagh, to Madame Rachel said—she told me he wanted ties, and shirts, and socks—I really believed that he wanted them, because I had found out that he was not so very rich about that time, and Madame Rachel said that he would like me to select them—I recollect going to the shop—I forgot it when you first asked me—I do not know whether I had this bill to Mrs. Colonel Alfred Borradaile—I do not recollect having seen it—I know nothing of these shirts being taken to my lodgings in Davies Street—I was at 28, George Street when they were ordered—I gave Rogers an address at my lodgings, and Madame Rachel was present when I did it.
Q. Now I will call your attention to this letter: "Sept 13. My own dear William, I shall see Mrs. Lilley as you desire. She will no doubt be of service to us. I am sorry that her son is ill. I am told that it was in consequence of your putting yourself into such a passion this morning. You know there are such things as talking birds. My darling, I was very sad this morning. I feel better now, since you tell me we shall leave Charing Cross early to-morrow. Will that morrow ever come? To me it seems an age. There are a few things of consequence that Rachel has to get for me this evening that I should like to have before I leave London. I send you what you ask for, though I frankly tell you that I did not intend giving you any more until we went away, but it seems that you know the overland route to my heart It is of no use to regret. I find it hard to deny you anything. You wish me to write a line to Mr. Moon. I will do it; it shall
be short and sweet. I send it to you; if you approve of it, send it: if not, tell me what alterations you wish. With fondest love, believe me, your affectionate and loving Mary Tucker Borradaile." A. I never remember writing that—I have been the overland route to India—I may have thrown in a word now and then in the composition—Mr. Moon is a solicitor—he is not solicitor to Mr. Cope—I was at Mr. Moon's with Mr. Cope, and was asked to tell who dear William was—at first I said that I would not tell—Mr. Cope knew about the marriage with Lord Ranelagh—I only refused to take any proceedings against Madame Rachel because I thought I should get my clothes; I thought I would wait—I did not know what to do at that time—I forget whether I said that I would not sanction any proceedings against Madame Rachel; my brother-in-law will tell you. (Another letter was here read, from the witness to Dear William, dated September, stating that she was very miserable, but that his letter had made her much happier, and alluding to having travelled with him)—I never travelled with Lord Ranelagh, or any man except my husband—Madame Rachel introduced a lady to me as Lord Ranelagh's sister—(Another letter, dated October 6, 1866, was put in, addressed "My own dear William," and contained the following:—"I am sorry that you are ill." "I am informed that you are now, and have been, keeping a woman with my money." "It is well known in Portsmouth that I have been living with you for some months; you cannot wonder at that when you consider the life we have been leading?" "Am I to believe that the woman you travelled with, and whom you introduced me to as your sister, was your mistress?" "It is well known in Pembrokeshire that I have been living with you some months")—When I wrote that letter, I thought I was writing to Lord Ranelagh—I cannot remember that letter at all—I remember Madame Rachel introducing me to a woman in her shop, who she said was Lord Ranelagh's sister—I can swear that every word of that was written by Madame Rachel's dictation; she told me to trust her, and I should never repent it—(Letter continued: "I am not surprised at you forgetting me, as I have forgotten myself")—I have never done anything improper; I have been a virtuous woman all my life—I wrote to the Plough, at Cheltenham, to engage a bed for Lord Ranelagh and myself, when we were married—(Letter continued: "You may remember that I am the widow of a Colonel, and though I have disgraced myself and my family, by having anything to do with you, I am still far more humiliated by being introduced to such people as you associate with. I have not one person in London to speak to, and dare not return to Wales, but can live in Paris on my pension")—When I wrote that, I thought, on my oath, that I was writing to Lord Ranelagh—Mr. Cope was never at Rachel's but once—she did not, in his presence, upbraid me with spending money on a lover, paramour, nor on anyone—no one's name was mentioned but Lord Ranelagh's—she did not charge me with squandering my money—she did not, in my brother-in-law's presence, say that I was spending my money on a man who I ought not to be associated with, not Lord Ranelagh at all; my brother-in-law will contradict it—nothing was ever said about my wasting my money—we went first to Madame Rachel's, and afterwards to Mr. Moon's—I was never in company with Lord Ranelagh at Cheltenham, or at all—a man at the corner of High Street, Cheltenham, cut my hair once or twice—Madame Rachel told me that Lord Ranelagh used to be shaved by that barber—this is one of my unfortunate letters: "Oct 18, 1867. My own dear William, It was very kind of you to take care of my comb and frizzette, which is my own hair"—
Madame Rachel dictated that—I volunteered to-day that it was my own hair, and I will take my bonnet off and show you.—(Continued: "The man who keeps the hairdresser's shop at the corner of High Street, Cheltenham, made it for me, the man who used to share you when we were there")—I meant that he shaved Lord Ranelagh—Madame Rachel told me that he was at the Plough Hotel when I was there, when my daughter was at school.—(Letter continued: "I had more hair on my head than I wanted, my love, therefore I had it cut off.")—This letter is also mine. (This was without date, and was commenced: "My own dear William, You will see by the enclosed letters that I managed to screen your name; you are quite put aside. Mr. Cridland intends bringing an action against Madame Rachel, not Lord Ranelagh, as poor Tommy wishes to get into Parliament, and my family are led to believe he has had my money and clothes. Mr. Cridland thinks it would not be kind to expose him. The result will be ruin to me and my daughter. Madame Rachel has a great motive in keeping them, and I am sure she will send them to Mr. Cridland")—Madame Rachel dictated that—I brought an action against her in the Queen's Bench—I do not think she appeared to it. (Letter continued: "I am very sorry I did not go with you to Hull; I had rather stay in Kentish Town")—I was not going with Lord Ranelagh to Hull, and was never in Kentish Town with him—("I am pretty sure that Madame Rachel gives her money to tell her everything")—she dictated that—this letter was written to Lord Ranelagh—poor Tommy was Lord Ranelagh—I thought I was writing to him when I called him poor Tommy—I always thought he had my money—I suppose this letter to be mine (This was addressed to dear William, dated 12th December, and stated: "Had you married me, as you declared you would do more than a year ago, in the presence of your three sisters and Frank, I should not have written to Cheltenham to prepare the rooms. Remember, I could not be in the same room with you without being married. I wish I had been a little cut-away monkey.")—When I wrote that letter I thought I was writing to Lord Ranelagh.
Q. "I could not be in the same room with you without being married;" did your daughter say that to you? A. I have seen very little of her—I think she may have written to me; I think she did write it, and say something of that sort—she was not sixteen then—I wrote all this by Madame Rachel's dictation.
Q. She could not tell you what your daughter had written to you? A. Do you suppose I did not know that without my daughter telling me—how many more things have I put down which are silly and ridiculous?—it requires a very clever person to do with Madame Rachel—this letter if also mine—"Dear Madame Rachel,—I went to Mr. Cridland's yesterday, and to my horror found Lord Ranelagh there. He certainly was intoxioated, and made use of very bad language, &c. I really thought he would have struck me. If he had, Mr. Cridland would have given him in charge. Lord Ranelagh told me that there was a dear William as well as a dear Tommy, which was very cowardly of him; but when he mentioned William's name, I told him he was a liar and a thief. If he forgot he was talking to a lady, I treated him as an unmanly vagabond. M. T. Borradaile."—The greater part of that letter was dictated by Madame Rachel—she not only dictated the letters I wrote to Lord Ranelagh, but letters I wrote to herself—I did call Lord Ranelagh a thief at Mr. Cridland's office.
Q. Then Madame Rachel did not suggest that letter to you? A. She
said he had had my money—Lord Ranelagh said that there was a dear William as well as a dear Tommy; but I called him a liar and a thief before that—it was not when he mentioned William's name; I will swear that—Lord Ranelagh was not very complimentary to me, for he called me a liar—I said that dear William and dear Tommy were the same person, and that I knew no one of that name—the first time I heard that Lord Rauelagh denied that he had allowed his name to be mentioned as intending to marry me, was when Mr. Smith, the solicitor, wrote to my mother this year—I did not know, in 1867, that Madame Rachel had told my family that I was in communication with some other person, and that there was no foundation for Lord Ranelagh's attentions to me—she always led me to suppose that he was my affianced husband—that was after Mr. Cope bad been to town in 1867, and much later—besides the letters to Dear William, I wrote others to Dear Tommy, and directed them to Lord Ranelagh, in New Burlington Street—there were a good many letters written to him this year—I wrote three, I think, after I had seen him at Mr. Cridland's office, and told him I did not want to have anything more to say to him, and to give me my clothes and my money—I was at Mr. Cridland's office last about February, I think—he has been very ill, but I think you will see him at this trial—I dare say I wrote a dozen letters to Lord Ranelagh, as my Dear Tommy, up to the end of February—in the beginning of December, a summons was taken out at Marlborough Street Police Court, for some clothes of mine—(The summons was dated, 3rd December, 1866, taken out against Sarah Rachel Leverson, for unlawfully detaining certain goods of Mrs. Borradaile's.)—That was after Mr. Cope had gone back to Wales—Madame Rachel afterwards told me she would arrange it amicably, and the summons was withdrawn—we afterwards had a meeting at Mr. Haynes', with a view to an amicable arrangement—I had not a great deal of correspondence with Mr. Haynes—I wished him to arrange things amicably if he could.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE objected to the production of the letters the witness wrote to Mr. Haynes, and THE COURT did not think Mr. Haynes should be called upon to produce them. MR. D. SEYMOUR then proposed to read one of the letters, which had come into their possession at Marlborough Street, and which bore the Magistrate's signature. MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE objected, on the principle that anything communicated to an attorney was sacred, and that, even if he were willing to hand over private documents, the law prevented him. THE COURT, having consulted MR. JUSTICE LUSH, considered that the objection was well founded. It was the client's privilege, and not the attorney's; the attorney could not be asked to say what the client had said to him; and in the same way, if the communication were a written one, it could not be used without the client's consent.
MR. D. SEYMOUR. Q. Are these two letters your writing? A. Yes—(The first was dated 17th December, to Dear William, stating that the witness had called on Lewis & Lewis, as she had promised him; it continued: "Mr. Lewis read a letter to me, which he said was written by Lord Ranelagh, and he said it was a very insolent letter, &c. Fortunately I had my veil down, or they would have seen I could not help laughing." "He abused poor old Tommy. I saw him at Rachel's yesterday. I told him, on Saturday night, that he wanted a wife to look after him, My darling, if you were not so jealous you might trust me with Randall." "I have puzzled the lawyers with my clever little head." "Your sister will send George and little Harriet")—You must ask Madame Rachel who George and little
Harriet are; I know nothing about them, and never enquired—it was Madame Rachel's suggestion that I had puzzled the lawyers—I believed I was writing all those foolish letters to Lord Ranelagh.
Q. "Friday night, 8 o'clock. My own dear William, It is impossible to tell you how much I have endured for your sake, and you say you were jealous of Mr. Randall, the corn-cutter. You thought I did not see you, but I did." You saw Lord Ranelagh go into the corn cutter's? A. No.
Q. "I went twice to All Souls' last Sunday," was that the case? A. Yes; I always go to church twice on Sunday.
Q. "I shall dine at the Scotch Stores to-morrow for a change," had you ever dined at the Scotch Stores? A. I have dined there occasionally, but I never met anyone there—I say, "I shall be at the Scoth Stores at 2 or half-past"—I did not go there—this letter is also my writing: "4th Feb., 1868. Mrs. Borradaile writes to inform Madame Rachel that she has instructed Mr. Haynes to apply to her for the restoration of a box containing letters and bills, left at her house by Captain William Edwardes for Mrs. Borradaile"—Those were all the letters which have been received to-day—she told me they had been left there, and I communicated with Mr. Haynes—this letter is also my writing.
Q. "7, George Street, Hanover Square, March 13th, 1868. Mrs. Borradaile will thank Madame Rachel to send her some powder, soap, and a bath." You kept on friendly terms with her down to the time of the prosecution? A. No; I have not seen her for six months, but I wrote that letter—I gave her little boy a book about December or January—I have been in Paris, and called at the French house there to see if I could get some soap and powder, which she refused to give me—after the enquiry before the Magistrate I was going to take a bath in Argyle Street, and I told Williams the cabman to stop at 50, Maddox Street, as I wanted to get my needle boxes, and I thought she was in Newgate—I did not drive there to see her—I asked whether she was in the house—besides Mr. Haynes I consulted Mr. Bennett, of Red Lion Square, and he recommended me to go to Lewis's—at the time of the enquiry at Marlborough Street I was residing at 7, George Street, but I thought it was too near Madame Rachel, and I went to 31, Devonshire Street—I had been before at 28, George Street, before that I came up from Cheltenham to London, and went to a coffee house near the Great Western, which was very full, to save expense—I was there for a few days; they were Dutch Jews—some of my letters were dated from the Great Western—I was not staying there, and wrote none of them there; Madame Rachel did that—my eldest brother goes there very often.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Some letters have been produced of 3rd, 6th, 12th, 15th, and 19th, September, and the 6th and 18th October, 12th December, and some others in 1866, all directed to the person you call William, were they written from time to time, or all at once? A. From time to time, at Madame Rachel's—they were put into envelopes, which Madame Rachel fastened herself—I saw three or four fastened—they were all directed "Capt. William Edwardes, care of Madame Rachel"—I had no notion that Madame Rachel was keeping them in her own possession—she never said a word to lead me to suppose she kept back a single letter—I received from time to time what purported to be answers to those letters—I got the answers from her own hand, except those which were left at 7, George Street—I was three months at 28, George Street, and a year and nine months at No. 7—that was the greater part of the time
that I was in the habit of going to Madame Rachel's—neither at my house or at Madame Rachel's, or at any other place have I had any communication with anyone answering to the name of William—I do not know any one in London of that name—I have never directed or desired a letter to be sent to any other person—Madame Rachel used to take the letters herself, and say she was going to see my affianced husband—I never saw William or any person answering to that name at her place—she never introduced me to anybody but that single person, Lord Ranelagh—I do not know George or Little Harriet—I have never been three months living with anybody—all the time I have been in London I can account for—I have never slept out of the house one night, never been out of my room—I have never frequented coffee-houses or places of improper resort—I first came into London in the middle of May, 1866—I came up for a week—I had been very little in London before—I had always been in the country—I never heard anything said about peeping at ladies in bathssome person's name was mentioned in relation to myself—am I obliged to mention it?—well, it was Lord Ranelagh's—Madame Rachel told me, last February, I think, that in the eyes of the Almighty, Lord Ranelagh was my husband, for he had seen me a dozen times in my bath—on the first occasion of my introduction to Lord Ranelagh, two ladies were present, Madame Rachel's daughter and Madame Valeria—Madame Rachel's daughter was always in the shop—they could not both hear what passed when I was introduced to Lord Ranelagh, because the door was closed; but when she opened the door and introduced Lord Ranelagh they must have heard her say, "This is Lord Ranelagh"—Lord Ranelagh gave me his card in the presence of those two ladies—I did not live with my husband down to the day of his death, because he died in India; he was coming home after me—a year before he died I came over to this country alone; he was coming after me, but he died—there was never any charge by him about a child not being his; nobody has ever cast such an imputation upon me—if it has been cast upon me it is false—Madame Rachel told me that Lord Ranelagh had circulated a report that my first child was his; that is the only matter in connection with any insinuation that I have heard, and that was after I had been to Mr. Cridland's office—I never borrowed cash or banknotes of Madame Rachel; not a shilling—she told me my money was put into Scott's bank for Lord Ranelagh—she never told me that she had a banker—I paid a guinea a week for the year and nine months that I was at 7, George Street; and I did not pay so much at 28, George Street; and I have not spent 20l. a year on my personal expenses—I used to dine at the Scotch Stores, because it was less expensive—the room was always nearly full of ladies, but there were a few gentlemen—it is a very respectable place.
MR. SEYMOUR. When Madame Rachel said that in the eyes of the Almighty, Lord Ranelagh was your husband, for he had seen you in your bath a dozen times, did you believe her? A. I did not—I believed long before that that she had told me a great number of falsehoods—it was said in her sitting-room—this letter is in my writing (This was addressed "Dear Madame Rachel" and dated Feb. 20, 1868;—it stated "I enclose you Mr. Cridland's letter, &c. I have written to Mr. Cridland and told him of the cruel affair that took place between Lord Ranelagh and my dear husband, and you will see that Mr. Cridland will keep it secret. I wrote it in haste, and only told him a part. You know I told you some years past, when I
returned from India, the whole affair, &c. By referring to the card enclosed you will see that the dates are correct")—I did enclose a card—this is it. (Read: "I was married 22nd Dec., 1846, first child born Dec. 20, 1847, at Brompton, second child born October, 1849")—I wrote that card and the letter in her room—she was by my side all the time—this is what I enclosed in her room—(This was a letter from Mr. Cridland to the witness, enquiring whether he was to sign judgment against Madame Rachel or not, and stating "I am sorry to hear your account of your late husband's unfortunate connection with Lord Ranelagh")—It is true that I wrote to Mr. Cridland through Madame Rachel.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Had you told Mr. Cridland anything about Lord Ranelagh and your late husband? A. Not till I had been at his office—this letter is in Mr. Cridland's writing, in answer to that letter I wrote to Madame Rachel—I wrote what Madame Rachel told me—I had not heard any scandal of the kind till she mentioned it—Adjourned.
Friday, August 21st, 1868.
JAMES MINTON . I live at 3, Aberdeen Place, Maida Hill—I first saw Madame Rachel about January, 1867, at 47A, New Bond Street—no one was with me—I went there several times of an evening with letters from Mr. Taylor, the auctioneer, with whom I then was—Madame Rachel was there, and she used to ask me to write letters on more than one occasion—a young man was present, and on one occasion Madame Rachel's daughter—I wrote one letter asking for money, one to ask why money had not been received, and one was copying a letter which had been written—I gave them to Madame Rachel—one of them had been handed to me to copy—I copied it in her presence, and handed it to her—she handed it to Edward, who was sitting by the fire—he is a young gentleman—I call him Edward, because he is generally called so, and I thought he was Madame Rachel's son—she said that it was written like a schoolboy—he said that he would make a better one than that, and folded it up and put it in his pocket—I heard that they expected Mrs. Borradaile there—here are two letters that I recognize in this bundle, and this is the one I copied from.
Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. Q. Have you seen that before to-day? A. Yes; I was called at Marlborough Street before Mr. Knox; the letter was not shown to me there—I saw it last Saturday, at Mr. Lewis's office, among some others—I saw it before that, when I copied it—I am able to speak to it still, because I know what the writing was about—I am now at Mr. Lewis's, a wholesale draper at Holborn Bars—I was in an attorney's office about four months, in 1866—I copied different things there—I then went to Mr. Taylor, the auctioneer, in Grosvenor Street—Mr. Taylor, I believe, could not get an account from Madame Rachel, and I took letters about it—Madame Rachel did not tell me not to come again; she never charged me with being impertinent in calling so often, nor did anyone there.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. How do you know that one of the persons was Madame Rachel's daughter? A. Because she always called her so—nothing was said when the daughter was there about my writing the letters—I am second in the flower department at the draper's—I get no wages.
known her from the beginning of 1866—in June, 1866, she brought Mrs. Borradaile to my chambers, and said the lady owed her 800l., and if I would make an appointment for the following day to go to the city to sell out stock, she would pay me 125l. rent which she owed me, or which would become due on 24th June—I went with Mrs. Borradaile next day, and sold out stock to the amount of 963l. 2s. 11d.—of that I paid Madame Rachel 800l.—the stockbroker gave Mrs. Borradaile the cheque, she handed it to me, and I paid it in to my own bankers—on 14th June Mrs. Borradaile called—she was being sued for some debts, and she saw me about raising money on property at Streatham, on which I ultimately raised 1340l. Madame Rachel, about 18th July, called with a letter from Mrs. Borradaile asking me to advance some money—between 800l. and 900l. was paid to Madame Rachel; the rest was left in my possession, and ultimately paid to Madame Rachel—this is my account, declaring a balance against Mrs. Borradaile of 544l.—some negotiation took place then about a mortgage deed which she executed, and which was handed to Mr. Longman, the purchaser—the property was sold for about 1400l.—I received it, paid a 1200l. mortgage, and the balance is charged in my account against Mrs. Borradaile—there was a balance—I paid myself 544l., and 700l. to Madame Rachel—on September 15th I debit her with 544l.—there were other expenses, not my expenses—I was not at that time her debtor for 900l.; she gave me an order to pay Madame Rachel, which was not paid at that time—I know nothing of the bond subsequently given.
Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. Q. In September, 1866, how much had you received of that 1400l.? A. 850l.—I had received about 700l. on 1st September—I was told by Mrs. Borradaile that she wanted money to pay her debts; she said she owed money to Madame Rachel, 800l.—it was said that the 1400l. was wanted for money paid by Madame Rachel for Mrs. Borradaile—Mrs. Borradaile said that she had given Madame Rachel bills and notes, which were to be delivered up when the 1400l. was paid—I first saw Mrs. Borradaile in June, and she told me, about July, that she was going to be married to her cousin Captain William Edwardes, who was a cousin of Lord Kensington; that she was related to that family, and her name was Edwardes before marriage, which is the family name of Lord Kensington—about the time the reversion was about to be sold, Madame Rachel and Mrs. Borradaile were at my office; Madame Rachel was very angry with her, and remonstrated with her about her extravagance, as I had done previously—there was a very noisy scene, and Madame Rachel said, "You are spending your money on your paramour—I said, "Madame Rachel, you ought to be ashamed of yourself"—to my surprise Mrs. Borradaile was silent—I heard from Mrs. Borradaile that an account was made out between them, and that there was a balance due to Madame Rachel, but I did not see it—I think I recollect a letter from Madame Rachel, in which she refers to what took place at the scene, after which it was a subject of conversation, and I acted upon it; but I do not recollect saying to Mrs. Borradaile that I had received it, and referred to the contents of it—a letter of September 3rd was alluded to yesterday; I was out of Court at that time—I heard of Mr. Cope calling; his name is in the call book.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I think you are a little mistaken about paying Madame Rachel 800l. up to 1st September; I think 400l. is the amount? A. Yes, but the rest was to be added to the amount—it was 480l. by September 1st; there is nothing between the 1st and the 3rd—the rest
was not charged till 29th September—I never saw Mrs. Borradaile in custody—I have supplied copies of the letters from her to both sides—I was summoned to produce them, and they were given up to Mr. Digby Seymour—I have tried to get them back, by all means in my power—the bundle was produced, and taken from me—(Mr. Seymour stated that he handed them to the Magistrate)—I was asked to produce one particular letter which was in a bundle; the bundle was taken possession of, and I have not had them back—I thought I was bound to produce them—I have been an attorney twenty-five years—I said to Madame Rachel, "You will have some day to account for these large sums"—she said, "I have every receipt for all moneys that I have paid.
VISCOUNT RANELAGH . My name is Thomas Heron Jones—I have been frequently at Madame Rachel's shop—I never authorized her to use my name in any way as representing a desire or intention on my part to marry Mrs. Borradaile—I never authorized Madame Rachel, or any person, to request the loan of 10l. from her—I made no representation on the subject of jewels, or desired that it should be made; nothing of the kind—I never desired that I should be considered to pass by the name of William or Edward—I am very anxious to see the letter stated to bear my cypher—I had no paper with my arms upon it, if I have any paper, it is with the direction of the street and my monogram—I have a monogram with two R's reversed and the coronet, and if I had been in the habit of writing to Mrs. Borradaile or Madame Rachel, they would have known the correct one.
Cross-cxamined by MR. SEYMOUR. Q. What was the attraction that took you to Madame Rachel's? A. I stand in rather an unenviable position, I have been so "enamelled" by this public scandal that I am glad to tell you—I had the same curiosity as any other gentleman to see the prisoner, who had been able to get so large a sum of money out of a lady in a trial which took place some time ago: curiosity led me to the shop—I never went into her shop to be enamelled—I originally went in from curiosity, and after that Madame Rachel has received different articles on commission, and once or twice I bought two or three articles of china—from her house being close to me, and the door being always open, I have often gone in and had a chat with her, as I do in many other shops in London—I never handed my card to Mrs. Borradaile—I once saw her in the shop, and once at the family solicitor's office, Mr. Cridland's, but never at Madame Rachel's to speak to her—I have no recollection of her being twice introduced to me—on 30th November, 1867, I communicated with my solicitor, Mr. Smith, as Mrs. Borradaile had made a claim against me on November 27th; that was the first letter I received from her—it had come to my knowledge accidently, before calling on Mr. Smith, that my name had been mentioned in connection with Mrs. Borradaile—I have received eight or ten letters from her altogether, they are here, with the exception of one or two which ought to have been returned to me by Mr. Cridland—these (produced) are Mrs. Borradaile's letters; I am too glad for the public to see them.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Am I quite to understand you that you never handed a card to Mrs. Borradaile? A. Never—I remember an occasion when Madame Rachel and another lady were present—I rather think the lady was a sister of Mr. Fechter, the actor, a lady of position—the only intercourse I had with Madame Rachel was in the shop—she has a shop in Paris and a house next door—I have never been to the Opera with her or her daughters.
CAPTAIN WILLIAM EDWARDES . My family is very distantly connected with Mrs. Borradaile—I never knew anything of these transactions till I saw the reports in the newspapers—I rather wished to make that statement.
Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. Q. Is your family name spelt with an "E"? A. With a capital "E" and a final "e"—from what I have been told my great-grandmother and Mrs. Borradaile's great-grandmother were cousins—I am not sure whether they were fourth cousins.
WALTER SMITH . I live at George Street, Hanover Square—Mrs. Borradaile occupied appartments in my house for nearly two years—I did not take down when she left—she lived the whole of 1867 with me—she had no regular male visitors—one gentleman came once, and stopped a short time—I should not know him—her habits were regular.
ROBERT RANDALL . I am a chiropodist, of Regent Street—Mrs. Borradaile came to me on 14th February—Mr. Sleigh was there at the same time, to whom I presented 5l. for the poor—Mrs. Borradaile made a communication to me, and a person afterwards called at my house.
ALEXANDER COPE . I am Mrs. Borradaile's brother-in-law—I knew her while she was living in Mr. Smith's house, George Street—I called on her there on one occasion—I came up to see her on Saturday, 1st September, 1866—I had a communication with her, and subsequently went to Madame Rachel's with her—an appointment was made; we reached there at 12 o'clock—Madame Rachel shook hands with Mrs. Borradaile, and was anxious to shake hands with me, but I declined—she said did I want a private interview—I said, "Certainly not; my object in coming to town is to ascertain what you have been receiving such large sums of money from Mrs. Borradaile for"—she said, "I am sorry I cannot see you now, will you call again at 2 o'clock?"—we called at 2 o'clock, and my wife accompanied us—I immediately commenced enquiries of Madame Rachel what she had received all these large sums of money for, and whether there was any truth in the introduction to Lord Ranelagh—she denied receiving the money, and as far as I recollect, she said that she knew nothing about it, and had not received it—I then said we had better leave the place, and put the affair in the hands of a solicitor—we left, and Mrs. Borradaile-accompanied my wife and myself to our hotel, in Great Portland Street—I am Chairman of Quarter Sessions, but never was in this Court before—nothing further took place in Madame Rachel's presence—nothing was said at that interview as to whether my sister-in-law owed her any money—no claim of that kind was made.
Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. Q. Had you come up to make enquiries about Lord Ranelagh? A. Yes—I had not received a communication or a copy of a letter before I came up the first time—I went home on Monday, 3rd September, taking a return ticket, and on the 5th September I received the copy of a letter from Madame Rachel, which brought me up to town the following day—I called on Mrs. Borradaile, and enquired whether that was really a letter of her own writing—she said that it was—I enquired how she could be so foolish as to write such a production—I received a letter, or a copy, from Madame Rachel—I did not see Madame Rachel on that occasion—I then knew that my sister's name was connected with Lord Ranelagh's—Madame Rachel made no allusion to my sister's extravagance when I was there—I don't recollect the exact words that
passed—we were there a very short time, I was too thankful to get out of the place—she did not say that she knew how Mrs. Borradaile had expended the money—I afterwards called on Mr. Moon.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. In the interview at Madame Rachel's, was the name of anybody mentioned? A. Not by Madame Rachel; but I enquired if there was any truth in the introduction to Lord Ranelagh.
COURT. Q. When she said that she knew nothing about it, was that with regard to the introduction to Lord Ranelagh, or the receipt of the money? A. Both.
MR. SEYMOUR to MRS. BORRADAILE. Q. I asked you yesterday, before the rising of the Court, about a letter of February 20th, in which you had enclosed a card, and which was written in the presence of Madame Rachel; did that letter go through the post? A. She took it from me, and told me she posted it, but I do not know—this letter (produced) is my writing; it is addressed to Madame Rachel, and has been through the post—I never posted it—it was directed by Rachel—these envelopes (Addressed "Captain William Edwardes, care of Mrs. Lilley") are in my writing—I know Mr. Williams, a hair-cutter, of Mount Street, who used to cut my hair—I received no letter in Mount Street—I know no one by name, or otherwise, who resided there—I think I wrote these four letters (Read: "8th December. Madame Rachel. I instructed Mr. Cridland to sell the reversion, in order to pay my debts, as I have no other way of meeting them. Let me assure you that circumstances over which I have no control have led to this unpleasantness. If Mr. Cridland has sent you any disagreable notice, it is not my doing, as I have not seen him for a week, nor have I written to him.—Yours truly, Mary Borradaile. My messenger will wait your reply."—"Friday Evening. My own dear William. I declare positively that I did not mention your name to Lewis and Lewis. I went there to satisfy my family and to screen you, my love. I did not think Madame Rachel would return to England, as I thought she was going to reside in France, and if Lewis and Lewis write to her she is sure to tell them the truth. With my fondest and dearest love, ever your loving and affectionate, Mary Tucker Borradaile. P.S. I just came out because I did not wish to see Mr. Smith, Lord Ranelagh's solicitor."—"My dear William. My sister and her husband, Mr. and Mrs. Cope, have but just left me. To my great surprise, they called upon me to-night. They came from North Wales, on their way to Scotland. They are staying at Nelson's Hotel, Portland Place; but I would rather be with you. They were very anxious to know what detained me in London, and the name of my lover, and how I had become acquainted with you. I said that you were a friend of my husband's, and that you used to visit us in India, and that you were in the army. They wanted very much to know your name; but I declined to tell them, my love. I wish you had been there, and seen the face I put upon the whole affair. I do not think you would be so angry with me as your unkindness to me leads me to suppose, for refusing to comply with your demand when it was not in my power to do so; and I have never refused you anything that you have wanted. I must see you to-morrow, or you will not see me before I go to Cheltenham, which will be on Monday without fail. We ought to have been there to-day. With fondest love, believe me, your loving Mary Tucker Borradaile. Saturday Morning, September 1."—"7, George Street, Hanover Square, September 26. Dear Rachel, I arrived here between six and seven o'clock yesterday
evening. I called upon you to-day, but you were engaged. I left a pretty little album with some photographs for your dear little Elsie, and a nice little cross for Leonti. I cannot tell you how grieved I was to hear of your sad accident, and so was my friend William. He will call upon you to-morrow; pray be kind to him for my sake: you know how much I love him, dear Rachel, and I never thanked anyone who would wish to separate me from the only man I love. With kind regards, your sincere friend, Mary T. Borrodaile.")—These two letters (produced) are my writing—I did not post them myself—I only wrote one letter, which I posted—I did not post these: "December 3rd, Tuesday evening (addressed to Lord Ranelagh) My own dear Tom. I feel assured that no one but Mr. Harrison will advise you for your good. I know you love me, but you must remember that you are not the only man who loves me. You may think the Duchess of——very charming; you ought to have found her out by this time. I could have told Mr. Smith a great deal more about money matters. I thought the less I said the better. I have told you over and over again that I would never deny you a favour. Why did you show my letter to Mr. Smith? And you know the letter was never intended to be posted. It was very unkind of you to tell Mr. Smith that you did not know me. You have forgotten that you saw me in my bath in Davies Street. If I had taken Mr. Smith to Mrs. Hicks, she would have told him a different story. If you allow a man like Mr. Smith to speak about me in a lawyer's office, that does not show much friendship on your part. If you had not shown my letter to Mr. Smith, no one would have been at all the wiser. Your friendship, indeed! I should be very sorry to serve you as you have served me. You say you are a woman's friend. It makes me believe what they say—you are a general lover. Not that I ever sought your love—far from it. It really is unkind of you, to say the least of it. I think you were more frightened than hurt; and I will only say you are a naughty old Tommy. So I conclude with, Mary Tucker Borradaile. My sister sent me some fowls! Would you like one?" "13 December 1867. My dear Tom, I cannot find words to express my astonishment when I saw the letter which I wrote to you in confidence, in Mr. Smith's hands, which you told me you gave him to make use of as he thought proper. If you did not give it him, pray tell me who did. I did write to William last night, and I told him that it was dishonourable and unmanly on your part to give my letters to your solicitor, and to tell him to write to my family, to make use of vulgar words—a parcel of lies—merely to screen yourself. So mean of yon to put it upon other people. Thank goodness, William does not require your pity any more than I do myself. How can you deny that you have not exposed my letters? The consequence is that Messrs. Lewis and Lewis will write a sharp letter to you to-morrow, which letter must be answered by yourself. They told me they would not take an answer from anyone but yourself I have one favour to ask you, Tom, and I may never ask you another. It is, I implore you not to compromise William, as I have never mentioned his name to any solicitor. If you go to Lewis and Lewis's office, and I should be there before you, leave me to manage: you are aware I can do that, as you have often told me I had a clever little head. Should you be there before me, Tommy, be sure say as little as possible, and all can be arranged quietly. "Blessed are the peacemakers." The less said about our affairs the better, for you know I love William dearly, and you know Tommy, I have
not been unkind to you, you donkey. But you are like all the men—always exacting, and never satisfied. I found my umbrella. I told Mr. Smith I had not been to Duke Street. He told me I asked for a very ugly gentleman. I said I thought he was a very good-looking man, which I think put him on good terms with himself, for, indeed, I do not wish him to write any more letters to my family. I did not tell him William was waiting for me at the corner of the street. It was only a wonder he did not walk up stairs, to see what kept me so long amongst the Land Conservatives, as he calls them. One thing I am sure you will be glad to hear, that William says he is sure of winning all my money back again next season, if the horses run which he has backed. Any man may have a run of ill-luck. The Marquis of Hastings lost more in one day than my poor William ever had to lose; but we must not be too hard upon him. I have one, and it is a great consolation, that he loves me dearly and fondly, and that his friends and advisers and my family have not the power to separate us. So do as I tell you—be manly and generous, and you will always have the friendship of one who has always endeavoured to keep her promise. Did you get home safely? If you have not taken the cough mixture, take it and put a little flannel on your chest. You are always angry when I tell you you are not getting younger. I never say anything to you to insult you. You have not a wife to take care of you: it is time you had. Where is the Duchess of——? I suppose Mr. Smith knows what a good wife she-will make. She will take such care of you. I hope you will invite me to your wedding. I hope the Duchess will make a good mother to your children. My sister, Mrs. J. Edwards, told me she saw you and your daughter in the park. Dear Tommy, will you say as little as possible? I most remind you once more, for you know you are so nervous. You remember The Telegraph paper, in which it mentioned I took you from the prison to the church. Be kind, for indeed my fingers ache so: with kind love to the Duchess and your children, believe me, yours sincerely, poor little Mary Tucker Borradaile.—That is her dictation too, every word, both "Dear Tom" and "Dear William"—the letter of 13th December, was written the day after that of 12th December—I knew no William, the only person I knew was Lord Ranelagh.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Do you recollect this letter which has just been read? A. Yes—I recollect writing it in Madame Rachel's sittingroom in her presence—she sometimes asked me to fetch the paper—there is a small shop near her, and sometimes I brought it from Gee Street—nobody else was present—there was sometimes a servant coming in and out, but Madame Rachel would not allow anybody to be present—it was not my suggestion to do it, always Madame Rachel's—before I began to write the last letter she told me that Lord Ranelagh had a cough and a sore throat, and I may have said that a little flannel would be a good thing—there is nothing in that about William—I always told her I was writing foolish letters, and she said that unless I did so I should never get on.
COURT. Q. Can you give any explanation of your using such words as these, "You know I love William dearly, and you know, Tommy, I have not been unkind to you?" A. That was to create jealousy, Madame Rachel told me.COURT to MR. HAYNES. Q. What was the property which you say you sold for 1400l., out of which you paid a mortgage of about 1200l.? A. The reversionary interest on some property at Streatham—the first mortgage was on a sum of stock which had been invested for Mrs. Borradaile for life—there
were three sums, the first, 963l., was from the funds; the second sum of 1300l. was obtained by the mortgage of a reversionary interest, and part of the Streatham property to the Railroad Company; the third sale was of the remaining part of the property by auction.
Q. There was a reversionary interest in the remainder? A. Yes—all those are quite distinct from this mortgage, but this mortgage was subsequently released by a judgment being taken.
The Jury having been locked up more than five hours without being able to agree, were discharged without giving any verdict .
THIRD COURT.—Friday, August 21st, 1868.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. WARTON conducted the Prosecution; and MR. F. H. LEWIS defended
JAMES ANDREWS . I am a dairyman, and live at 16, Leigh Street, Brunswick Square—on Sunday morning, 12th July, I went down, about 5.30, and found the place had been entered—I had fastened up safe the night before—when I came down, the door of the shop was unbolted and unlocked; it was on the latch—I first observed the till had been taken out—I had left 15s. or 1l. in it; that was gone—I went into the parlour, and found my desk had been opened, and some stamps, a seal, and a ring taken away—I also missed some pocket-handkerchiefs—this seal and ring (produced) are my property—the name has been torn off this handkerchief, and I cannot swear to it—I had similar handkerchiefs.
Cross-examined. Q. Is not the seal brighter than when you lost it? A. I think it is—I have not worn it for ten years—it was kept in a drawer with the receipt stamps.
ROBERT CARTER (Policeman E 117). On Tuesday, 14th July, about 11 o'clock, I was in Cromer Street, in company with Chamberlain—I saw the three prisoners talking together—I crossed over the road, and told them I wanted them for breaking and entering 16, Leigh Street, last Saturday night, and stealing a gold seal, and three handkerchiefs, 15s. in money, and twenty-four postage stamps—Fitzgerald said, "All right, Mr. Carter, I will tell you all the truth. I got on the door step, Barrett got on my shoulder, and lifted the fanlight, and got in that way"—I then took Barrett and Fitzgerald into custody, and Chamberlain took Bateman—the other two said nothing—I have examined the fanlight—an entrance could have been made in that way—I know where Mrs. Rudland lives—she could command a view of the prosecutor's place from her window—Fitzgerald was searched at the station; nothing was found on him—I have known him eight years.
WILLIAM CHAMBERLAIN (Policeman E 163). I was with Carter on this Tuesday evening, and saw the three prisoners together—I took Bateman—he said he knew nothing about it—I asked him if he had bought a seal of
anyone—he said, "No"—we got a few yards on the way to the station, and he said, "Yes, here it is," and handed me two small pieces of cigar, wrapped up in paper—at the same time, some other lads came up, and he tried to pass something to them—I caught hold of his hand—he put his hand into his pocket again, and I kept hold of him till we got to the station—just before we got there he said, "Yes, I did buy a seal, and I gave 8d. for it, and am going to sell it to another man"—I said, "Are you aware that it is gold"—he said, "Yes, I have tried it"—Fitzgerald said, "We were stopped by one of your sergeants, but he did not find anything, as I got the handkerchief up my coat sleeve"—I searched Bateman at the station, and found this seal in his right hand coat pocket—he said he was going to sell it to another man—I also, found a watch, which I believe was his own.
Cross-examined. Q. Was it his watch and chain he was trying to pass? A. No—I can't say what it was—I found the seal in the same pocket he put his hand in—I saw the other two go up and speak to Bateman—I had seen Fitzgerald alone for a considerable time—that was the first time I saw Bateman—he said he had bought the seal of somebody for 8d.; he did not mention any name—I believe he was in employment at this time—I was in plain clothes—he did not offer to let me have the seal for 8d.; nothing of the kind.
RICHARD SALT (Police Sergeant E 16). About 3 o'clock on Sunday morning, the 12th July, I was on duty in Judd Street, with Inspector Shenton—I met the prisoners Fitzgerald and Barrett at the corner of Leigh Street and Judd Street—I asked them what they were doing out then, and Fitzgerald said, "We have been to the theatre, and are locked out"—I asked them what they had got about them—they opened their coats, and said "Nothing"—I let them go—the inspector took a handkerchief from Barrett's pocket, but gave it back to him again—they were about thirty yards from the prosecutor's house—I did not see Bateman at all.
SARAH ANN RUDLAND . I am the wife of James Rudland, and live at 6, Judd Street—I can see the prosecutor's house quite plainly from my window—on Sunday morning, between 2 and 3 o'clock, I got up, and went to the window—I saw two lads in the street, talking to a young woman, a few yards from the prosecutor's shop—they left the young woman, and went up to the shop, and I lost sight of the tallest of the two, but the small one remained on the doorstep—I could not say who they were—I saw them come off the step, and talk to the young woman again, and then they went down Judd Street—I saw the two boys stopped by two policemen—I am positive they were the same boys that were on the door step—the lads were about the height of the two prisoners, Barrett and Fitzgerald.
MAURICE CAIN . I live at 17, Derry Street, Regent Square, and get a living by singing and dancing at a penny reading room—I got up at 5 o'clock on Sunday morning, and went through Wellington Square—that is about two hundred yards from Judd Street—I saw Fitzgerald and Barrett, and another one who I do not know, playing at pitch and toss—I stood and looked on a little time, and Fitzgerald came up and asked me to buy this handkerchief—I gave him a penny for it—just before he gave it to me he tore something off—I did not see what it was—I saw that there was a name, but could not see what it was.
Fitzgerald. On Sunday morning you were with us. Witness. I bought the handkerchief before I went with you. I met you at 7.30, at the Endell Street Baths, and you bought some clothes in Dudley Street
Bateman's Statement before the Magistrate:—"I bought the seal from a respectable man, and never knew it was stolen. I wore it openly on my chain, and passed the prosecutor's house several times."
BATEMAN received a good character— NOT GUILTY . FITZGERALD— GUILTY . He was further charged with having been before convicted, on 7 th March, 1867, to which he PLEADED GUILTY**— Six Months' Imprisonment and Five Years in a Reformatory . BARRETT— GUILTY **— Three Months' Imprisonment, and Three Years in a Reformatory .
MR. COLLINS conducted the Prosecution.
HANNAH SANDS . I am the wife of Thomas Sands, and live at 32, Clement's Lane, City—on 12th August I was in Lower Thames Street, about 12.30 o'clock in the day—I was wearing a watch and chain under my mantle—the prisoner came up in front of me, took the watch out of my pocket, snapped the ring which connected it with my chain, and ran across the street—I called out, "Stop thief," and a constable came up—I saw the prisoner stopped by someone—I never lost sight of him—he dropped my watch on the pavement, and the constable picked it up—this is my watch (produced)—the chain, key and seal fell on the pavement.
JAMES BARHAM . I am a constable at Billingsgate Market—I saw the prisoner about 12.35, and heard a cry of "Stop thief"—I saw him in the hands of a constable, and saw him drop the watch on the pavement—I took charge of him until 731 City came up.
GUILTY . He was further charged with having been before convicted, on 9th February, 1867, to which he PLEADED GUILTY.**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude .
MR. THOMPSON conducted the Prosecution.
FREDERICK WILSON . I live at 5, Houghton Street, Strand, and am a compositor—on the afternoon of 13th July I was in a boat on the Thames, about 4 o'clock, between Vauxhall and Chelsea—I saw a woman in the water, about two yards from the shore—she was trying to reach a chain that was attached to the wharf, and she succeeded—we rowed towards her, got her out of the water into the boat, and then went ashore—a constable came up, and I gave her into his charge—she said she would attempt it again if we let her go, and had come all the way from Somers Town to do it—I went with the constable to the station—I believe she was quite sober.
WILLIAM HARTLEY (Policeman B 152). I was called to the assistance of the last witness, and he gave the prisoner into custody for attempting to drown herself—on the way to the station she said two or three times it was a good job I had taken her, for if she was left alone she would do it again—she was quite sober.
Prisoner's Defence. I had four glasses of rum and half a pint of beer. I
came up with my husband. As for coming from Somers Town to do it, there are plenty of places there.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Imprisonment .
JAMES REEVES . I live at 18, Beer Lane, Southwark, and am a carman in the employment of Moses Bernard—on 20th July I was in the Bayswater Road with a load of straw—I left the load in the road to fetch another van—the straw was on a van, and it had got so much on one side that we could go no further—I left it about 9.30 or 9.45—1 returned with the other van about 1.30 in the morning—I then endeavoured to shift the load from one van to the other—while I was doing that I heard something on the other side of the van, and went round—I saw prisoner on the other side, and two men leaning against the-Park railings—they halloaed out, "Look up, Jack"—I looked at the prisoner, and saw a box of matches in one hand, and he was in the act of striking a match against the box—the van was close against the kerb, and he was standing close to the van with a lot of straw in his hand trying to set fire to it—if the match had ignited it must have set fire to the straw in his hand—I did not see the match light—when the men called out the prisoner made a jump into the road, threw the box of matches away, and ran off—I ran after him and caught him, and gave him into custody—I said, "What did you do that for?"—he said, "You never see a light"—I found that some of the straw had been burnt on the top of the van—the constable showed me where the fire had been, and I got up and looked at it—the value of the straw was about 6l. 10s.—there were 138 trusses on the van.
JOHN JONES (Policeman D 56). I was on duty in the Bayswater Road, about 2.30 on the morning of the 21st July—I saw the last witness there—he gave the prisoner into my custody for attempting to set fire to a load of straw—the prisoner said, "You never see me light it"—I asked him what made him get behind the van, and he said, "Fun"—he was searched, and the witness Cox handed a piece of touchwood to me—I found a hole burnt in his shirt—he was quite sober.
WALTER COX (Policeman D 101). On the night of the 20th July I was in the Bayswater Road, about 11 o'clock—I saw a load of straw standing in the road, and I went across to look at it—I saw fire on the top of it—it was flaring up—I put it out—I found a large piece of touchwood on the top of the straw—I saw the prisoner and another man about an hour after pass the load, one on one side and one on the other—they passed by when they saw me—I saw him again in custody.
Prisoner's Defence. I am innocent. I had nothing on me, and there was nobody with me. I saw the straw in the road. The man came up to me, and I said, "What do you want?" He said, "I will let you know what I want," and gave me into custody. There were two cabs standing by.
GUILTY .†*— Six Months' Imprisonment .
MESSRS. POLAND and STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution; and
MR. COLLINS the Defence.
HENRY ALLEN . I am a licensed horse-dealer, and live at Hitchenden Mews, Notting Hill; I have lived there 20 years—I was married about 15 years ago; my wife's name is Catherine—in April this year I had a deposit account at the London and Westminster Bank, St. James's Square, of about 900l.—I did not authorize anyone to draw it out—the signature to this document (produced) is not my writing—I did not authorize anyone to sign it—it is my wife's writing—I first saw it at the bank about 2nd July, when I came home from Spalding Fair—my wife left me on 1st July—I was at Spalding Fair that day; I went from there to Thorney, in Cambridgeshire—I sent some horses home—I came home with them that night, and next morning I found my wife was gone, and everything they could pack up in three boxes—previous to that the prisoner had been in the habit of visiting at my house, and been on intimate terms with me: he lived near me, and had a stable within 30 yards—he is a butcher—I have sold him horses and carts, too—when I found my wife had gone, I made enquiry for Prince—I could not find him—I never authorized my wife to receive this money or take it out of the bank; I was trying to make up 1000l., so that the should have it if I got kicked or anything happened to me.
Cross-examined. Q. I believe she managed your money matters, did she not? A. No; she never took money to the bank; once I believe she did take 200l. when I was not at home, and I signed for it when I went to St. Martin's Lane—I have at times asked the prisoner to change a cheque for me—my wife has never done so to my knowledge—I might have asked him three or four times to give me money for a cheque.
MR. POLAND. Q. To what amount were those cheques? A. Sometimes 15l. or 16l. or 8l.—I have taken them to his shop and got him to change them because I wanted the money.
MR. COLLINS. Q. Not many Sundays before July did not the prisoner give you 40l. for four 10l. notes? A. I can't deny it—when you go into Wales to buy a few colts, they like sovereigns instead of notes, and I generally take sovereigns with me.
AUGUSTUS DELVALL . I am a cashier at the St. James's branch of the London and Westminster Bank—Henry Allen has had a deposit account there for some years—on 18th January he had 700l. there; 200l. was paid in on that day, increasing the amount to 900l., that was paid in by his wife—upon that I issued this receipt for 900l.—the receipt for 70l. was brought to me, and I issued this in lieu of it—on 27th April Mrs. Allen came to the bank and produced this receipt for 900l., signed as it is now, "Henry Allen"—the signature is against the order for the payment of money—on the production of this I filled in the figures 900l. and 2l. 9s. 3d., the amount of the interest—I compared the signature with the signature book—I thought at the time it was genuine, and I knew the person presenting it to be the wife of the depositor—I gave her the 902l. 9s. 3d.—I have the book here to show the way in which I paid it; I made the entry at the time—I paid it in eight 100l. notes, ten 5l., and five 10l.—among the 100l. notes is one No. 72,799, dated 19th November, 1867—early in July the prosecutor came to the bank and made some enquiry about his deposit
account—unless I had believed this was a genuine order by him, or by his authority, I certainly should not have paid the money.
Cross-examined. Q. In fact it was obtained from the bank by means of a forgery? A. It was.
WILLIAM BENNETT . I am a cattle salesmans' banker—I know the prisoner—I have seen him frequently, and had dealings with him—some time in May he purchased some sheep, or somebody for him, of a customer of mine for 55l. 7s.—the money came through my hands—this 100l. note has my writing on it "Prince, Notting Hill"—I received that from the prisoner, or someone for him, and gave him the difference.
Cross-examined. Q. You say the prisoner bought some sheep from a customer of your's? A. Yes, or someone for him—I don't know that he bought them himself; I was not there to see—I received the note, and wrote "Prince, Notting Hill," on it—that is all I know of the transaction.
MR. POLAND. Q. You would not have given a stranger the change? A. Not a perfect stranger, I should not—I knew the prisoner very well, and it is my firm belief that it was he who paid me the note.
WILLIAM HENRY CAMPBELL (Police Sergeant). I accompanied Sergeant Langley to Queenstown, and came back with the prisoner and Mrs. Allen by rail to Dublin, and by boat from Dublin to Holyhead—on the way the prisoner told me that he had received the 100l. note from Kate (alluding to Mrs. Allen), and that he had paid it away for some sheep that he had bought at the cattle market, and received the balance—she was present at the time—there was a good deal of conversation about the transaction altogether.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he say he had given her change for it? A. No, nothing of the sort—I did not make any memorandum of what he said—I have not been examined before on this case—he said that Allen was in the habit of coming to him for change, and cashing cheques; that he had had several money transactions with Allen—he did not say he had given change for this note; that I swear positively—Mrs. Allen was present, and Patrick Mahoney, of the Irish constabulary.
PATRICK MAHONEY . I am a constable in the Royal Irish Constabulary—early in July, I received a telegram, in consequence of which I went on board the City of Cork steamer, at Queenstown, which was on its way from Liverpool to New York—I saw the prisoner and Mrs. Allen on board—they were passing as Mr. and Mrs. Prince—I got from Mrs. Allen a bag, which I examined and found to contain six 100l. notes, and some tens and fives—afterwards Sergeant Campbell came, and came up to London with the prisoners—there were seven 100l. notes mentioned in the telegram, and after I had cautioned the prisoner, I asked him about the 100l. note that was miming—he said, "That must be the note that I changed at Bennett's," a banker, or something, he called him—he said he got it from Mrs. Allen—he did not say anything further about it—in coming across from Dublin to Holyhead, he spoke about the note in the presence of Sergeant Campbell, and said that he had paid it off for some sheep that he had bought.
Cross-examined. Q. Just let me hear the words he said, about this 100l. note, on board the ship, in the presence of Sergeant Campbell? A. He spoke about changing it at Bennett's office, and paying it off for some sheep—I thought that important—I mentioned it at the police-office—I don't think they took it down, because I did not find it—I mentioned it at Marlborough
Street—he stated it in my presence to Mrs. Allen—I mentioned it about four times, I think, at the police-station and at the Police Court—I don't know whether it was taken down or not; I could not swear to it—I saw Mr. Bennett at the Police Court—I had mentioned about the note several times before; I did not say it then; it was in the hands of the London detectives—I said, "He did not say anything about the property, he said the boxes belonged to him and his wife"—that was what I found on him—I mentioned several times about the 100l. note—I gave my evidence to the statement that he made—there was more than that omitted out of the evidence that should he in it—I saw afterwards that this was omitted, and other things that should be there; I made a remark to Sergeant Campbell about it at the Police Court—I remembered it well when I was examined—I was in the hands of the counsel then—I was examined by a solicitor—I had told him several times about this conversation.
MR. POLAND. Q. I understand you were examined once against the wife, and once against the prisoner? A. Yes; when I was examined against the prisoner there was no charge about the 100l. note—I was only asked about the property found in the boxes—he had 70l. 10s. in gold by him.
MR. COLLINS submitted that the two first Counts, charging the prisoner with stealing this 100l. note, the property of Henry Allen, must fail, at it never was or could have been his property or in hit possession; it was, in fact, obtained by the wife's forgery; neither could it be said, at charged in the other Counts, to be a stealing from the bank, or a receiving; it might have been charged at a receiving of the note obtained by forgery or false pretences, but the bank had clearly parted both with the property and the possession of the money, and therefore it could not be laid in them. Even supposing it was the property of Allen, the wife could not steal the property of her husband, nor could the prisoner receive it knowing it to have been so stolen. MR. POLAND contended that the property had not passed out of the corporate body of the London and Westminster Bank These notes were their property; the cashier, at their servant, had authority only to pay the money to the depositor, or some person authorized by him, and even if by fraud the servant was induced to part with the property, he not having authority to do so, did not, in law pass it. (See "Q. v. Longstreet," 1 Moody's Crown Cases, 137, and "Q. v. small," 8 Carrington and Payne, 46).—if this were not the case of a corporate body, but of a master, the master might have power to part with the property, but the servant could not, his power must depend upon the authority of the master; here the clerk had no authority to part with it, and therefore, in law, could not do so. It was for the Jury to say whether, when the prisoner received the note from the wife, under the circumstances of the case, he must not have known that she had obtained it dishonestly. He further contended that, property obtained by fraud or forgery by the wife would, as against a wrongdoer, be properly laid as that of the husband, and that her possession would be his possession in law. MR. COMMON SERJEANT: "But the chattel has never been his." MR. POLAND: "Except by being in her possession, she claiming it as her property." MR. COMMON SERJEANT: "The foundation of the case is her fraud, the chattel was never in his possession, and was not out of the possession of the bank with hit authority. MR. POLAND: "It was not in her possession with his knowledge, but from 27th April it was in her possession, and, in that sense, in his, and his
property, and she could not, in law, give away her husband's property to an adulterer." MR. COLLINS: "There is no proof of adultery from 27th April to 25th May; if it is admitted that the property passed from the bank into the possession of the husband, then she could not steal from him, and the prisoner could not feloniously receive from her. As to the latter Counts, I contend that the bank parted with both property and possession; that the clerk' had a discretionary power, that he was the agent of the bank for this purpose, and that the payment by mistake makes no difference. I further say there is no legal proof of the existence of such a corporation as the London and Westminster Bank."(See "Q. v. Adam "Denison's Crown Cases; p. 38.) MR. COMMON SERJEANT: "My impression is that this was in point of fact, a mode of committing larceny adopted by the wife, that she "thereby stole the property of the bank, and went away with it with the prisoner, who feloniously received it from her, knowing it to have been stolen. I have consulted MR. JUSTICE LUSH, and he agrees with me that on the two first Counts there is no case. As to the other two Counts, he also agrees with me that there is a case; the forged order is a mere mode of committing the larceny, and the prisoner may be convicted of receiving the property of the bank—but the point shall be reserved."
HENRY ALLEN (re-examined). I never sent cheques by my wife to the prisoner to be cashed, or notes; she never changed a note in her life—she did not get the 40l. for the four 10l. notes—I never sent her after any money there, or anywhere else.
GUILTY . Judgment reserved .
MR. LILLEY conducted the Prosecution.
SOLOMON ESCOURT (Policeman B 74). On 10th July, between 6 and 7 o'clock in the evening, the prisoner was brought to the Police court, Rochester Row, on a warrant, charged with wilful damage—she was placed in a cell by herself—I visited her several times. about 8 o'clock I went to the cell, and found her lying on the floor insensible, with a wound in her throat, and blood flowing from it—I found those scissors laying beside her, there was blood on the point—I took her in a cab to the Westminister Hospital, she remained there till the 16th, and was then taken before the Magistrate and committed—I think she had been drinking—she has a husband—she said she could not think what made her do it.
Prisoner's Defence. I did not mean to do it. It was all through my husband cohabiting with another woman. I had a little brandy, and did not know what I was about. I will never do such a thing again.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Saturday, August 22nd, 1868.
Before Mr. Justice Lush.
MESSERS. GIFFARD, Q.C., and MURRAY conducted the Prosecution; and
MESSRS. MATCALFE and COLLINS the Defence.
The London Gazette, dated 31st July, 1857, was put in, containing the
advertisement and adjudication of bankruptcy of the defendant on the 29th July, 1857.
CHARLES FRANCIS FISHER . I am a clerk in the registrar's office in the Court of Bankruptcy—I produce the proceedings in the bankruptcy of Alexander Robinson—the date of the petition is the 28th May, 1857—it is the bankrupt's own petition for an arrangement.
WILLIAM HOWARD . I am assistant manager of the London and County Bank—in April, 1865, the prisoner opened an account with us by letter—I have not got the letter—I did not see him until June—I considered the account opened in April, but in June we transferred it into another form in the books—I have the ledger here—on 13th June, 1865, 60l. was paid in, and on 15th June we transferred from our deposit account 2172l. 7s. 4d.—the next sum paid in was 38l. on 19th June—the prisoner drew on his account from time to time—further sums were paid into his account until 15th September of the same year—the actual amount to the credit of the account was 1366l. 19s.—they were not all sums paid in—some were loans we made him—the money actually paid in was 1067l. 9s. 6d., including the interest that we received on certain stock of his which we held—there is a balance of 19s. 3d. in his favour now—the account was closed on 13th December, 1865—in June, 1865, we purchased some foreign bonds for him by his direction—this is the order signed by himself—(Read: "2nd June, 1865. Please purchase for me 1000 Spanish active bonds, 1000 Portuguese 3 per cents., 1000 Old Mexican 3 per cents., and 1000 Canada 6 per cent, bonds, and charge the costs to my account. Alex. Robinson")—we did purchase those bonds—the numbers of them are endorsed on the back of the order of purchase—the Mexican's cost 248l. 13s., the Portuguese 491l. 5s., the Canada 952l. 10l., and the Spanish 498l. 10s. 6d.—I handed all those bonds to Mr. Robinson on 15th September of the same year—I have not got the receipt here, we have it in a book at the bank, which is in daily use, or I should have brought it—I did not personally see him receive them, our stock clerk did; but I can swear that his handwriting acknowledged the receipt—on 3rd July we received 29l. 10s. dividends on the Canada bonds—the interest is included in the amount I have given.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you corresponded with Mr. Robinson before this transaction? A. We had a letter from him in April, 1865—I did not know that he was carrying on business in Alexandria—the money was remitted from abroad somewhere—I can't say where, we can't find the letter—I think it was from Ceylon or Alexandria—we have searched for the letter in the office, but being an old matter it has got mislaid—we have our reply to it—I did not produce the letter at the police office—I produced a second letter that we had from him, which I presume is now in the hands of Messrs. Murray, the attorneys—when the account was first opened he described himself as a gentleman residing somewhere at Notting Hill—he afterwards described himself as an agent for the sale of steamships—the first letter we had from him directed us to answer to him "Post Restante, Marseilles"—from that I took it that he was on his homeward voyage—the money came in the shape of two bills on Glyn & Co.—I cannot tell when they were drawn, we have no entry, merely that Glyn & Co. had to pay them—we do not take the full particulars—we received the money from Glyn's.
there about fifteen or sixteen months ago—while be was in the prison, by his direction I sold certain coupons of foreign bonds—I got them cashed for him—in June or July he gave me two coupons of Turkish Bonds, I think of 2l. 10s. each—I took them to the Ottoman Bank in Princes street—they were not paying them at that time, and referred me to Messrs. Samuel and Montague, of Cornhill—I took them there, and got 4l. 13s. or 4l. 14s. for them—this is the cheque I received; it is for 4l. 15s. 10d.—it was a crossed cheque, and I got a friend of mine to cash it for me, and I handed the money to Mr. Robinson—at the end of 1867, or it might have been in 1868, he gave me five coupons, I think Turkish ones—I see by this cheque it was the 24th February, 1868—I took those five coupons to Messrs. Samuel and Montague, and got this cheque for 11l. 19s. 7d. for them—I got it cashed by Mr. Botting, as before, and handed the money to Mr. Robinson—in March I received two Mexican coupons from him—I took those to Messrs. Baring Brothers, and received this cheque for 9l. 16s. 8d. for them on 18th March—I had perhaps received the coupons a week before—I also received a document for 5l.—I handed the money to Mr. Robinson, at before—I don't know the numbers of the two coupons—I got this form (produced) from Baring Brothers in September—Mr. Robinson sent me there at that time, and they required a form filled up—I took it back to him, and he gave it me again, when I got the money—I don't know whether these numbers were on it when he gave it to me, or who put them on—I pledged a gold watch for him while he was in prison—I think that was about four or five months ago—I don't remember the date—I pledged it with Mr. Rose, I think, of Redcross Street, and also a gold chain, I think; not at the Same time—I got 5l. for the watch, and 4l. for the chain, and gave it to Robinson—I have also paid money to Mr. Grant, a pawnbroker, by Robinson's direction—I think it was for five or six months' interest on some cloth; 5s. 6d. each time—the cloth was pledged for 12l.—in March, he gave me a leather portmanteau—I was to take it to my baker's—it was tied with a piece of string, and sealed with two or three seals—I saw him seal it—I don't know what it contained—I can't give you the day I took it—I don't think it was the day the search was made in the prison by the Bankruptcy officers—I was not there when the messenger made the search—I took it to my baker's, and left it there—I did not see it again till Messrs. Murray and Hutchins' clerk came down with the messenger from the Court of Bankruptcy—I think that was about a month ago—the messenger seized it at Mr. Lane's, the baker's, in Whitecross Street.
Cross-examined. Q. Did not you take some duplicates to the pawnbroker's to redeem property that was there? A. Yes; I have redeemed once or twice for Mr. Robinson—I think I have heard him say that he had purchased those duplicates from some of the other prisoners—they were not in his name.
JOHN FRAWLEY . At the commencement of this year I advertised for a situation, in consequence of which I saw the prisoner some time in January, and made an arrangement with him to enter into his service—I was to transact various matters for him; anything that he required—in the event of his requiring me only a couple of days in the week I was to receive 10s., and if longer 1l., and he was to give me 5l. in the event of my getting a writ of habeas corpus—he told me he should then very likely require me altogether, and he would give me a salary of about 200l. a year—in February last I took a portmanteau to the prisoner—I got it at a pawn-shop of the
name of Lawley, in the Farringdon Road; it was in pawn there—I paid 5l. on it and the interest, which came, I think, to about 10s.—Robinson gave me the money to pay for it—I heard from him that it contained six cases of surgical instruments—I took the portmanteau and all to him, and it was examined by the governor—I then took them to the house of Mr. Merrilies, 37 1/2, St. George's Road, Hyde Park—the prisoner said they were to be left there, and no person was to see them without his written order, or except I went with them—that might be a few days after I brought them from Lawley's—I took them to the Monte Video Consul a day or two after I had redeemed them—the prisoner told me I was to ask 40l. of the Consul for them, and if he did not purchase them I was to take them to Merrilies, which I did—the prisoner told me he was lodging there at the time he was arrested—he told me I was to endeavour to sell them to one of the surgeons of Bartholomew's Hospital, or to any other surgeon—I consulted with some friends, and did not do so—I released two gold watches out of pawn for Mr. Robinson, and he afterwards gave me instructions to dispose of them if possible—I think there was also a gold Albert chain—there was a third watch also—I got one of them repaired, and I was to sell the two together, if possible, with two gold Alberts, but for the same reason as I have stated before I did not do so—I was also to sell a gold pin, with a very small particle of diamond in it—I tried to do so, but could not—besides the three watches I have spoken of he has shown me one valuable gold watch, worth about 15l. in my judgment—I never saw him with any more watches, to my knowledge—the two watches that I had redeemed he took from a small parcel lying beside him in the prison—I have released three rings out of pawn for him, one of them a diamond ring—he showed me a large-stoned diamond ring in February—that was not one I had released out of pawn—when I released them I brought them to him—I paid 3l. or 4l. to release them—I got the money from him.
Cross-examimed. Q. Did he tell you that he had bought the duplicates from other prisoners in the prison? A. He did, of the watches and of the different things; I believe all the things I redeemed—I know he told me he had purchased the tickets of the surgical instruments, and also of the gold watches of the different prisoners in the prison—I took those out of pawn, not the valuable diamond ring, but the others.
JAMES MERRILIES . I am the wife of Andrew Merrilies, 37 1/2, St. George's Place, Knightsbridge—my husband is abroad—in February of this year I remember the portmanteau and surgical instruments being brought to my house by Mr. Frawley with a note from Mr. Robinson—that is destroyed—it was merely to say that the instruments were not to be shown to any person without his direction—two gentlemen afterwards came to see the instruments, and my husband showed them to them—they remained at our house until they were claimed by Mr. Chester, the clerk to the solicitors—my husband produced them at the Bankruptcy Court—I saw Mr. Robinson in the prison several times after the portmanteau was left—he said nothing about it to me, all he said was to my husband—I believe he wanted to sell the things—we were to take care of them until they could be sold—they were to be left at our house, where he had been lodging—these are two letters front Mr. Robinson to my husband—(These were dated the 7th and 11th May, 1868. The first was a request not to part with the portmanteau without his authority, and the second was a request to bring the portmanteau and other luggage to him at the prison, and everything that was of value)—These letters
were received after the claim was made to the portmanteau by the creditors.
JAMES COOPER . I am one of the messengers of the Court of Bankruptcy attached to Mr. Commissioner Goulburn's Court—on Friday, the 27th March last, I received directions to go to Whitecross Street Prison in search of the portmanteau belonging to the defendant, in his possession—I saw Mr. Constable, the governor, and explained my object, and afterwards saw the prisoner—I told him who I was, and read the warrant to him—I first called him out, and told him I had a disagreeable duty to perform, and I was desirous of doing it with as little annoyance as possible—we went into a private room with Mr. Chester, and one of my clerks—after I told him what I wanted he made some exclamation, and rushed down stain—when we recovered our surprise we followed him into the ward, and saw him rush behind a seat, lay hold of a portmanteau, and throw it behind him; at the same time he seized a knife that was lying on the table, and, flourishing it about, said that no person should touch the portmanteau—he was very excited, and called us thieves and rogues, and said he would defend the portmanteau with his life—I explained to the governor the state of things, and he told me the warders had no authority to assist us—I did not think it prudent to insist upon the search—he was quite entrenched in the position where he stood, the table on one side and a high partition on the other, and I left.
Cross-examined. Q. I think you said that your salary from the Country did not cover that sort of risk? A. No—m my examination before the Lord Mayor Mr. Murray asked me that question, and I said I did not think it did—the warrant I had with me was dated September, 1867—I had originally received a warrant in 1857—the knife he seized was on the table—I can't gay whether dinner was laid.
HENRY HORATIO WETTENHALL . I am a stockbroker, of 13, Copthall Court, Throgmorton Street—in July, 1865, by the prisoner's direction, I purchased 1000l. Turkish 5 per Cent. Scrip, No. 0838, at 47 per cent, amounting to 470/.—my commission was 25s.—the prisoner paid me the amount, 200/. in notes on 11th or 14th July, and 271l. 5s. by cheque shortly afterwards, and I banded the scrip to him.
WILLIAM BERRIDGE . I am clerk to the General Credit and Discount Company—it has since been blended with the General Credit and Finance Company of London, who were contractors of the Turkish 5 per Cent. Loan of 1856—the loan was issued to the public in scrip, which, when paid up, was exchanged for bonds—among the scrip issued was a No. 0838 for 1000l.—in December, 1865, that scrip was presented by some person, to be exchanged for bonds—I can't say whether I saw the person who presented it—this list paper was left by the person—(This was also signed "Alexander Robinson, 51, Fenchurck Street)—Ten bonds of 100l. each were given in exchange for that scrip, numbered 12911 to 12920, inclusive, and this receipt was given for them—(This was also signed "Alexander Robinson")—The interest payable on those bonds was payable on 13th July, and 13th January, each year—half-yearly coupons were attached to the bonds, with corresponding numbers—the loan was for thirty-seven years at five per cent.
ALFRED CLARK . I am clerk to Messrs. Samuel, Montague &Co., bullion dealers, of 21, Cornhill—on 17th July, 1867, Mr. Davey sold us two coupons, of 2l.10s. each, of the Turkish 5 per Cent. Loan of 1865, for which we paid him by this cheque for 4l. 15s. 10d.—they were due on 13th, and were
not payable in London after that; we had to send them to Constantinople for payment—on 26th August, 1867, we bought five Turkish coupons for 2l. 10s. each, of the same stock—they were presented by a person who gave the name of Robinson, 37, St. George's Place, Hyde Park—we paid them by a cheque for 11l. 19s. 7d.—on 24th February, 1868, we bought coupons of Davey for 12l. 10s. of the same stock, and paid for them in the usual way, with a crossed cheque for 11l. 19s. 7d.—on 5th March, 1868, a person who gave the name of B Silk, Cathedral Hotel, St Paul's Churchyard, sold us five coupons of 2l. 10s. each, and six coupons of 11l. 5s. each, of the same stock, for which we paid by a cheque, 19l. 3s. 4d.
JAMES GOSS . I am retired from business—I was in the provision and ship chandlery trade—I have provided goods for one of the prisoner's ships—I don't know what he was—I can't say exactly to what extent he was indebted to me at the time of his bankruptcy; something over 100l. I think—I made an affidavit of the amount—I have not been paid anything, to my knowledge—I had two partners at the time—the books will show—in fat, I am certain nothing was paid.
Cross-exaimntd. Q. Do you know anything about it? A. I have nothing more than the books and the returns—my two partners are dead—the books can be produced if required—the debt was for general stores, ship's provisions—dome body told me a debt of 100l. was contracted—I never saw the prisoner—I can't exactly tell you when I proved my debt—my partners had the principal management of the business—I made an affidavit on 8th July, 1868—I can't say whether I took any steps before that; my partners may have done so—I can't state that there was any steps taken before last month—the solicitors, Messrs. Murray and Hutching, came to me to make the affidavit—they sent me notice to attend a meeting at their office—I went, and met the rest of the creditors—I know nothing about the original bankruptcy in 1857—I was a sleeping partner at that time.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. You say you attended a meeting of creditors; how many were there, do you suppose? A. I should think about four or five.
Cross-examined. Q. What was it for? A. Oils and paints, supplied for various ships of his at that time—he was a shipbroker, and, I believe, a shipowner—I proved my debt in 1857—I believe my proof was received without any condition—I can't recollect at this distance of time whether Mr. Strang proved for the firm of Gilmore & Co.—I know the firm of Gilmore and Rankin—I can't recollect whether they were among the creditors—I know the firm of Halliday, Fox, & Co. by name, not personally—they were not in difficulties in 1857; I should say not for some years after wards—I don't know that their drafts were dishonoured immediately before the bankruptcy—I can't speak positively to their having a branch firm of Halliday, McMillan, & Co., in India—McMillan was the trade assignee in Robinson's case—I understood that he was connected with the house if Halliday, Fox, & Co.—I don't know that the reason of the prisoner's going to the Bankruptcy Court at that time was the repudiation by Overend, Gurney, & Co., of a bill accepted by Halliday's; I never heard of that—I have no recollection of who proposed McMillan, it is so long ago—I don't know who were solicitors for Gilmore, Rankin, & Co.—my proof was prepared by one of the solicitors at the table in the Bankruptcy Court; I don't
know who—I was not aware that Gilmore & Co. proved on the bill accepted by Halliday's; I am not aware that that proof has been expunged—I have not gone into the cash affair, because I thought it was a bad thing altogether—I know nothing of the recent sale of a ship belonging' to the prisoner, or of its realizing 1000l.—I did not attend the meeting a short time ago—I did not give a power of attorney; my partner might—(looking at a paper) this is my signature—I see I did give a power of attorney to Messrs. Murray and Hutchins to vote in the choice of assignees—I had no recollection of having done so—Messrs. Murray and Hutchins must have come to me to procure it.
GEORGE BLAGRAVE SNELL . I am the official shorthand writer to the Court of Bankruptcy—I took the notes of the bankrupt's examination on 20th and 27th February—this is a correct transcript of my notes—I have the original notes here.
Cross-examined Q. When did you prove your debit? A. At the bankruptcy, about 10 years ago—I attended a meeting about 18th May to expunge claims—the bankrupt was in attendance—they tried it on to expunge my claim—I was at the meeting on 8th July last—I received a letter from Messrs. Murray and Hutchins—I did not hear the number of debts or anything about the sale of a ship for 1000l.—I heard something about a ship before 18th May; I know nothing about the amount it was sold for.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. What became of the efforts to expunge your debt? A. They were not successful; they tried to expunge other debts, with the same result.
Cross-examined. Q. When did you prove? A. About six weeks ago—I took no steps until then—I took steps, I think, in 1857, but Robinson had gone away, and the proof was never made—I proved six weeks ago in consequence of what I heard from Mr. Gibson—my proof was not opposed—Mr. Murray prepared my proof.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. You went up to the Bankruptcy Court and found Mr. Murray at the table? A. Yes, and he prepared the proof upon my statement of facts.
RICHARD MILLS . I am a shipwright—the bankrupt was indebted to me at the time of his bankruptcy from 100l. to 200l.—I received 40l. on account of the debt—I can't say when—it was not after the bankruptcy—I think my debt was about 160l. or 168l. at the bankruptcy, as far as I can ascertain—I have not received any dividend.
Cross-examined. Q. When did you prove? A. I have not proved at all—the debt was for shipwright's work done—I employed men to do it—I have not got my account here—Mr. Robinson had it at the time; I think in 1855—1 heard of the bankruptcy, but did not think it worth while to prove—I should not have been here if I had not been summoned—the solicitors sent me a notice to be at the Bankruptcy Court last month—I did net go—I shall prove now.
The examination of the prisoner before MR. COMMISSIONER GOULBURN on
20th and 27th Feb. last was put in and read. He refused to answer the questions put to him, and asserted that he had been improperly adjudged bankrupt.
GEROGE JOHN GRAHAM . I am the official assignee—up to December, 1867, I had 518l. 9s. in hand—that was received on 17th September, 1867, the produce of the sale of a vessel called the Cathcart—I had to pay claims upon it—the balance realized was 623l. 10s., and the sums I have since paid made it 518l. 9s. in December—those sums were paid to two persons who had claims on the Cathcart—I have not received any since.
Cross-examined. Q. I believe you were appointed in March, 1867? A. I think I was; it is on the files—there had been an interregnum from 1861—Mr. Pennell retired about 26th December, 1861, there being nothing to do in the case, and I was not appointed till March, 1867—I was appointed on the suggestion of Messrs. Murray & Hutchins—I don't know for whom they were acting—Mr. Murray was solicitor to the trade assignee, and that firm succeeded him—I don't know when the trade assignee dieda trade assignee was appointed a month or two ago, I think—(MR. HUEBOCK. I am the trade assignee.)—Mr. Murray first applied to me in the matter, telling me that there was certain property of Robinson's—I do not know Wolfe & Smith—I don't know whether they were moving in it—I know nothing about the inception of the matter—I find by the proceedings that creditors proved their debts on 5th May, 1868, amounting to 1228l. 16l. 11d.—the debt of Gilmore, Rankin & Strong, of 1265l., expunged on 7th May, 1868—this is the order of the Court (Read: "On the application of William Daniel, solicitor to the bankrupt, and upon hearing the admission of William Strang that he and his co-partners had received the amount of the debt proved herein, on 29th June, 1867, from Messrs. Halliday & Co., the acceptors of the said bill of exchange referred to in the proof; and upon hearing William Murray, solicitor for Mr. Graham, the official assignee, and of Messrs. Gilmore, Rankin & Strang, the creditors in opposition thereto, it is ordered that the said proof for the sum of 1265l. be expunged.")—I was present on that occasion—it was admitted that the bill had been paid by the acceptor—in the proof, it is described as two bilk, for 1000l. and 250l., drawn by Robert Haggerty at six months, accepted by Halliday & Co., payable to the order of the prisoner, and endorsed by him; and the consideration was for moneys advanced and paid by the deponent and his partners in taking up the bills, and for interest on the sum of 1000l.—200l. was paid in by the petitioner at the commencement of the proceedings—there was an application to the Court to confirm the agreement about the Cathcart—that was filed by Messrs. Murray and Hutching while 1 was official assignee—(This set out the proceedings in the Admiralty Court, and requested the leave of the Court to carry out the compromise with Messrs Wolfe and Smith.)—I accepted the sum of 1000l. in discharge of everything, or rather, I received 623l., which was the 1000l. less the costs of the petitioner—Messrs. Murray were advising me in the matter—I paid 50l. to Price and Gibson for giving information—I don't know what they are—they were introduced through Messrs. Murray, and it was through their advice I paid them—they did not say they came from Wolfe & Smith—I paid by cheque to Murray & Hutchins—a sum of 4000l. was claimed as a debt due to the bankrupt's sister—I should say that was not allowed—there is no document on the proceedings from which you can gather the amount of debts due; you can
gather the amount proved, and the amount the bankrupt acknowledged to be due—I know of no getting in of good debts—I before good debts are returned by the bankrupt to the amount of 836l.—his books appear to have been given up, by the proceedings, but they cannot be found.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Look at the balance-sheet does it purport to be a balance-sheet from 1st January, 1855 to 28th May, 1857, the date of adjudication? A. Yes, it does—the first item is, "Creditors unsecured, 1228l. 16s. 4d. then "Creditors partially secured, 4325l. 13s. Creditors to be paid in full, 30l. Liabilities, 3126l. 8s. 5d.? Liabilities partially secured, 2839l. 10s. 9d. making together, 5965l. 19s. 2d, Claims against me admitted, 1773l. 7s. 7d.—On the other side there is, "By debts, good, 336l. 15s. doubtful, 1320l. 2s. 5d. bad, 36261 19s. 5d.; Cash paid to official assignee, 200l.; less creditors to be paid in full, 30l. Bills receivable, 500l. Balance at bankers, contingent on payment of bills receivable, 92l."—Among the creditors partially secured is Eliza Robinson, spinster, 4000l. and among the liabilities is the 1000l. bill referred to, drawn by Robert Haggarty on Halliday & Co.—I don't know whether Price & Gibson claimed more than 50l.—persons giving information are entitled to a per-centage on the property discovered.
GEORGE CLAY . I am clerk to Messrs, Murray and Hutchins—I served the bankrupt personally with a notice, of which this is a copy—(This was, a notice dated 22nd January, 1868, from Mr. Graham, that, as official assignce, he was entitled to all the bankrupt's property and effects, and requiring the delivery of the same within three days).
JOHN FRAWLEY (re-examined). I have seen the prisoner write, and know his hand writing—the signature to this receipt for the 1000l. bond is his, also those other papers—(Letter read. To. Mr. Graham from the prisoner: "Whitecross Street Prison. 24th January, 1868. Sir, In reply to your notice, I beg to inform you that I dispute your right to my present estate and effects, and I hold you, and all others connected with you, responsible to me for the spoliation of my property and deprivation of my liberty, and I call upon you to reinstate me in possession of the Cathcart; and I require my body to be set at liberty, and ample damages to be paid me for the unjust deprivation of my liberty. I delivered up the whole of my property in 1857, which, if properly cared for and administered, should have left me a surplus of many thousands. I repeat I then gave up all my property, I concealed no part of it, and my books, lodged in Court, were correctly balanced. No charge was ever alleged against me, but owing to an improper trade assignee being appointed, and other unjust doings, the unjust decision adjourning me sine die, &c. I shall look to the Court for full remuneration. It is now upwards of seven months since you told me you did not wish to keep me a prisoner, but that Murray and Hutchins held me—whose fault is it now?"
EDWARD CHESTER . I am in the office of Messrs. Murray and Hutching, and have been, with slight intervals, since November, 1857—I have more particularly attended to this bankruptcy—the terms upon which the claims of the Cathcart were compromised were these: in the first place, we gave notice to the mortgagee's solicitors, who were defendants in the suit, that we claimed the ship, and the damages payable to the prisoner: then, after a little time, we entered into some negotiations to settle the claims between the parties, hearing that there was to be an appeal by the mortgagees against the decision of the Court of Admiralty: at that time there was not one
farthing of estate to pay the expenses of any defence to the appeal; that was one reason why it was considered advisable that a compromise, if possible, should be effected—we made enquiries as to what would be the probable amount of the damages awarded to Robinson: I also more than once wrote to him for an account of what damages were claimed; I could get no reply from him—I saw his solicitors in the suit in the Court of Admiralty, and talked the matter over with them, and ultimately an offer was made of 500l. nett to be paid to the estate, in discharge of the ship, the ship to be made over to the mortgagees—at that time we had had the ship valued at 1660l. the mortgagees' claim was 2200l.—I was told that the damages would not amount to 500l., and if I could get 500l. I should make a very good settlement upon it—that arrangement went off for two or three months—they wanted us to take 400l.—the arrangement ultimately carried out was, that 1000l. was to be paid by the mortgagees, they were to have the ship, and the assignees were to pay Robinson's charges in the Admiralty Court, and the possession fees; 1000l. was paid over to the mortgagees, out of which 250l. was paid to Robinson's solicitors for their charges, a little better than 150l. for possession fees, and the ultimate result was, about 620l. received for the benefit of the estate—I may say that I saw the Registrar of the Admiralty Court on the subject, and he said it was a very good arrangement; it was not only the best that could be made for the creditors, but, I think, was a very fair arrangement—Wolfe & Smith were the mortgagees of the ship—so far from our acting in connexion with them, we were acting very much against them; we acted throughout in opposition to them, to get as much is we could from them.
Cross-cxamined Q. Who gave you notice of this A. Mr. Gibson and Mr. Price gave the firm notice of the Cathcart affair—I know very little of Gibson further than I know he was a bankrupt, and Mr. Price was hit solicitor—it appears that under Gibson's bankruptcy Robinson was examined, and the Commissioner recognized him, and it came out that he was an uncertificated bankrupt—Mr. Price searched the records, and came and told us of it, and of the prisoner's claim on the Cathcart—Price and Gibson came together—they both got the 50l. for that reason—I thought it a very fair sum; it was the sum which perhaps they might claim under the Act of Parliament, 5 per cent—I took the opinion of my principals upon it—neither Wolfe or Smith communicated with me about it; with one exception, I have never seen either of that firm—Gibson told us of them; he knew Robinson's affairs, and of the proceedings in the Admiralty Court—he was examined at the Police Court, but merely to prove the handwriting of these documents—I think the judgment in the Admiralty Court was somewhere in February, 1867, and Gibson came to us in March 1867—notice of appeal was given and entered—I received a notice of it from the proctor for Wolfe & Smith, and from time to time they obtained an extension of time to lodge their appeal—the official assignee was appointed immediately after that—we had a meeting about a month ago for the purpose of appointing a trade assignee—I believe Mr. McMillan, who was appointed, is a member of the firm of Halliday & Co., who were the acceptors of the bill of 1000l. for which Gilmore and Co. were pressing—that pressure was not the reason of the prisoner petitioning the Court, or of his trying to make an arrangement; I swear that—I swear boldly, from the documents put in my possession—an action was not being brought on the bill at the time he presented his petition; Gilmores were instructing
us in the matter—I am only speaking from documents, because all this was four or five months before I entered the office—I have examined all the proceedings—Gilmores took up the bill, I believe, on behalf of the acceptors—we knew that at the time they were proving—the proof was admitted when I entered the office—we opposed the proof on behalf of Gilmore; I was in Court at the time—we opposed the proof of the sister's—it has been recently held that a person taking up a bill to the honour of the acceptor has a right to sue the endorser—it appears from the proceedings that we compelled further and better accounts to be furnished from time to time—I did not do it personally, the solicitors did it; we instructed Counsel to do it—we were then acting for the estate—I can't say who proposed that McMillan should be trade assignee; I was not in the office at the time; I only know as a fact that he was appointed—Gilmores voted for the choice—I should think it was not done at the instance of our firm—it must have been known at that time that the bill had been taken up; they had net dishonoured the bill, they had got it taken up—it must have been dishonoured before it was taken up.
Q. Do you mean that you, a solicitor, knowing that the bill was dishonoured by Hallidays, proposed a member of Hallidays' firm to be trade assignee, when you were acting for Gilmores, who were pressing this man on that bill? A. I see nothing wrong in that—you ask me whether we did so; it appears so—I believe Hallidays afterwards stopped, about three years ago, about eight years after that transaction—I don't know that they were in difficulties at that time; it does not show that they were by dishonouring an accommodation bill—I can swear that I am perfectly unaware that they were in difficulties—McMillan has a house in the East Indies, and he went there—I believe there were two or three partners; one partner came home, and another went out—McMillan afterwards became managing partner of the firm abroad; he did not file any receipts; he could not; he had no right to receive any money: I say that as a lawyer—the Admiralty judgment says that the damage shall be assessed by the registrar and two merchants—it never was asesessed—nothing was done formally, but we could approximate from our knowledge of the way in which they do business in the Admiralty Court—I was told by the bankrupt's own solicitor that if we received 500l. we ought to consider ourselves fortunate—Wolfe & Smith are not acting in this prosecution in the slightest way—they know nothing of it—they have not given a farthing towards it, to my knowledge; I swear that most positively.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Have you acted all through with reference to the benefit of the creditors, and without any reference to Wolfe & Smith? A. Quite so, I know nothing of Wolfe & Smith.
COURT. Q. Were there any assets? A. The only assets I received were 200l. paid in with the petition, the 500l. returned as a good debt, turned out nothing; except that, there was not the slightest property.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. About the 1000l. bill, you allowed that to stand as against the bankrupt as a liability, how came that to pass? A. It was a bill for which the acceptor received no consideration whatever—we allowed it to stand that the acceptor might get the benefit of the dividend through the holder of the bill, through Gilmore's proof—there is a clause in the Act of Parliament which allows it.
MR. METCALFE. Q. I see in the balance sheet it is stated that certain hips were on their way, and there were expected assets, do you know
whether McMillan received any of those? A. He had no power to do so—does it appear on the balance sheet? show it me—I have not the prisoner's books, they have been lost, and it is presumed they were lost between the accountants—I am not so sure they have not been lost by the prisoner's fault—they were given up to the Bankruptcy Court, but the accountants had to make out the assets—Pulling & Co. were the accountants—I am not aware that it was stated by the prisoner that there were ships on their way home; and cargoes which would be available—I have heard of a ship called the Free Trader in connection with certain transactions of the prisoner's—I am not aware that he alleged that he had any claims upon it—I believe some of the bills were given in connexion with it—I am not aware that he was to have the cargo, or any part of it—I never heard of such a statement.
MR. METCALFE submitted that as the official and trade assignees, who were originally appointed, had both died, and an interregnum had occurred before the appointment of fresh assignees in 1867, there was no person in whom the property could vest, and therefore there could be no embezzlement or concealment of property by the bankrupt during that period; and that the official assignee recently appointed had no legal right to deal with the property, which was by law vested jointly in him and the trade assignee; and further, that as the property which the prisoner was charged with concealing, was acquired subsequently to the bankruptcy, the parting with it did not entail a criminal prosecution, the term" concealing, &c." applying only to the property in his possession at the time of the bankruptcy. MR. GIFFARD contended that it was not necessary that then should be any assignee, the term "embesdement" was not used here in its technical sense, it meant a fraudulent appropriation of what was in a certain sense the bankrupts own property, and if that was parted with, with the intention of preventing his creditors, whoever they might be, deriving any benefit from it hereafter, the offence was complete. MR. JUSTICE LUSH. The case must go to the Jury, and the question for them will really be whether the bankrupt concealed or fraudulently appropriated to his own use this after acquired property, with the intention to defraud his creditors, whether there was any assignee or not.
GUILTY .— Fifteen Months' Imprisonment .
MR. STARLING conducted the Prosecution.
HARRIET PEACOCK . I am a cook, in service at Eltham—in November last I had a child born—I suckled it for about fourteen days—the doctor then ordered it to be weaned, and shortly before Christmas I gave it to the prisoner to take care of; it was then eleven weeks old, and named George—I was to pay her 3s. 6d. a week, she afterwards agreed to take 2s. 6d.—I paid her first 3s., then 5s., then 8s., and then 12s.—the last sum I paid her shortly before the deceased died—she never requested me to take it back again, or said she could not afford to keep it—indeed she said if I never paid her a halfpenny her husband would keep it for nothing—it was very well and healthy when she first had it—I saw it at different times between December and May—it seemed healthy, but rather thin—the last time I saw it at her place was on Easter Monday, it looked thin, but she said it was well—on Thursday, 18th June, Mrs. Booth brought it to my place, it was then very bad, and it died on the Sunday—the prisoner always seemed
fond of the baby, and her husband particularly so—they had no children of their own.
Prisoner. The money she gave me was to buy things for the child. I had nothing for its keep.
RACHEL BOOTH . I am the wife of Richard Booth, a general dealer—my little girl used to work for the prisoner—in consequence of what my girl told me I spoke to the prisoner, and told him the child was very ill, why did she not take it to a doctor—she said she was forced to neglect it for her work, and likewise the money the mother allowed her did not support it—I saw the child on Whit Tuesday, and gave it a halfpennyworth of milk; it seemed to take it ravenously—on the 17th June I saw it in my little girl's arms at the door; it was very dirty, neither washed or dressed, and I took it to its mother, and fed it with pound-cake and arrow-root, and it took it very ravenously, and was very thin—I took it to the doctor, and had it at my place afterwards till it died.
REBEOCA BOOTH . I am the daughter of last witness—I am thirteen years old—I worked at the prisoner's at bead-trimming—she had the baby while I was there—she treated it very well up to Easter—she fed it on boiled bread; sometimes she would give it a little milk and water in its bottle.
MR. STARLING (in reply to the COURT). stating that this was the general nature of the evidence, the Jury found the prisoner NOT GUILTY .
MR. STARLING conducted the Prosecution; MR. WOOD the Defence. The Surgeon in the ease dating that the death of the deceased (who was an idiot>, 14years of age) might have resulted from natural causes the Jury found the prisoner NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Saturday, August 22nd, 1868.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. SERJEANT ATKINSON and MR. RIBTON conducted the Prosecution: and MR. SERJEANT SLEIGH and MR. M. WILLIAMS the Defence.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. PATER conducted the Prosecution; and MR. COLLINS the Defence.
CHARLES BLAKEY . I live at 78, Grafton Street, Mile End—I had a brother named Richard Blakey—I saw him dead on the 22nd July at 1, Maldon Court, Nightingale Lane—he and the prisoner lived, I believe, as man and wife—the prisoner was there—I do not know on what terms they lived—I saw but very little of them.
JOHN EDWARD IRVING . I am house-surgeon at St Bartholomew's Hospital—the so-called husband of this woman was in a public-house, and she came in to persuade him to go home—he was very abusive; and when she
got outside, through aggravation at what he called her, she struck him—he called her the vilest of names he possibly could; in fact, he struck her first with his fist—he was drunk—she then persuaded him to go home, and then something, which I did not see, happened, and then she kicked him, I am not certain where—the kick was given in the house—I do not think it produced any result, but that he fell on the floor through his drunkenness—he lay on the ground, and I examined him, and found a bruise on his left hip—this was sometime in the evening—he was helped up; he was stupid with drunkenness, but not insensible—I went home, and did not see him again.
LINTON BRUNTON , M.R.C.S. I live at 5, Norway Place, Commercial Road, Limehouse—on Tuesday evening, 21st July, between 7 and 8 o'clock, I was called to the deceased's house, and saw him and the prisoner—he was suffering much from a swelling at the lower part of the abdomen, about the size of a small fist—it appeared to have been done within a few hours' and was undoubtedly the result of violence—it certainly was inflicted within two or three days—the prisoner said that it was caused by a kick—I prescribed the usual remedies, and left; and next morning I was sent for, and when I arrived he was dead—the prisoner was there, and said, "He had been in the public-house, and when he came home we had some words about some change, but I undressed, and got into bed, while he sat in a chair by the bed-side, and called me foul names. I told him if he called me them again I would knock him out of the chair; he said them again, and I jumped out of bed and kicked him; I thought it was on the knee, but found it could not be so"—She said that this occurred on Tuesday night, 20th July, and that she did not expect to find that he would die—when I saw him on the second occasion he was partly dressed—some female who was in the room said that he intended to go to the hospital, and being impatient at the delay, he jumped out of bed—the prisoner said that being in so much pain he intended to go to the hospital, and the cab not coming at the time ordered, he got impatient, and partly dressed himself—a person suffering from an internal injury would aggravate it by the exertion of dressing—on the Thursday morning, by the Coroner's direction. I made a post-mortem examination, and found that the left kidney was very much congested and inflamed, and part of the bowel was dark and congested—the abdomen contained from a pint to a pint and a half of fluid.
COURT. Q. The cavity of the abdomen? A. Yes; that was the result of inflammation—there was also a recent rupture on the left side—there was a swelling there and much discoloration when I examined him before.
MR. PATER. Q. How was the scrotum? A. It was very much swollen and inflamed on the left side—death was caused by peritonitis, or inflammation of the lining membrane of the bowels, accelerated no doubt by his movements in dressing—the appearances that were presented at the time I examined him might be caused either by a kick or a blow—he appeared quite strong—I was present at the Coroner's Inquest when the prisoner made a statement; she was not under suspicion then—she said that she did not intend to injure him—I did not hear her say that she gave him some water after kicking him—she said that she never thought a kick would hurt him, as he had a bran poultice on, and that she went for some cholera medicine.
Cross-examined. Q. You thought that death would not result? A. I thought it was a serious injury, but did not expect death so soon, or that it
would be necessarily fatal—it would be a very extraordinary injury to be inflicted by a woman's naked foot—a blow would produce the injury, but I do not think a fall would, but it is possible if against a sharp corner, or a fall in the public house; against steps might do it, or against anything sharp anything projecting—that would be much more likely to cause it than the naked foot of a woman.
COURT. Q. She says that the man was complaining of very great pain, was not the injury such as to be plain on the first examination? A. Not the character of the injury—the sole injury had been inflicted when I saw him the first time—if a man was falling and was drunk, the injury would not necessarily be more severe—the injury was very severe altogether—the fluid found in the cavity of the stomach was the waste of the tissues, which was very rapid—it is highly improbable that a woman's naked foot could have produced it, but it is quite possible that the foot with a boot on might.
CHARLES ABBOTT (Policeman K 332). I took the prisoner on 28th July—the sergeant had told her what I was taking her for—she said that the kicked the poor fellow, but not with any intention of hurting him—he was a good father to her children, and she thought she only kicked his knee—I said "You could not have caused that injury with your toes''—she said, "No, I put. my foot in this way (with the sole); I had had some words with him."
Cross-examined. Q. Did not you say. "Did you put your foot to him like that," and did not she say "Yes?" A. She put her foot out and so did I—I said before the Magistrate "In this way," showing the flat, of my foot—I put my foot out, and she adopted it—she said, "I thought it caught him on the knee."
NOT GUILTY .
THIRD COURT.—Saturday, August 22nd, 1868.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. DOUGLAS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. WARNER SLEIGH the Defence.
JAMES HARRIS . I live at 31, Carnaby Street, and am a tailor—on Saturday night, 8th August, I was in Carlisle Street, Dean Street—a crowd came up, and began fighting at the corner, then came across the road to where I was standing, and knocked me down—the prisoner caught me in front, and took my chain and run away—I called "Stop thief"—he run round Carlisle Street, into Surrey Square—I ran after him, caught him, and gave him into custody.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you returning from work? A. No, I was leaving a public-house in Queen Street—I had been out a couple of hours, and during that time I had been at the Carlisle Arms, in Queen Street—when my chain was taken the crowd ran across the street—I never saw the prisoner before to my knowledge—I never lost sight of him—I did not see him throw the chain away—the persons all began to run when I called "Stop thief"—the prisoner ran into the arms of a policeman—I then caught hold of him, and he said he would give himself in charge—I asked him for my chain, and he said he had got it.
JAMES DAVIS . I live at 54, Wardour Street—I was with Harris, in conversation at the corner of Carlisle Street, when a crowd came round—there were about ten—they were sparring and swearing, but did not strike one another—I heard Harris call out "I have lost my chain"—I saw a man catch something that glittered—I ran after him, but lost sight of him—I saw the prisoner amongst the crowd.
Cross-examined. Q. How long had you been with Harris? A. From about 10.45—this was about 12.30 or 1 o'clock—we had been having a drop of beer—I suppose I had a pint and a half—we both noticed the crowd, and I think I said, "This is a get up"—we were about bidding one another good night—we all parted, and I got three or four yards from Harris—I did not see him knocked down—I did not see him after, nor did I see the prisoner taken into custody—I went after another man, and when I came back I found Harris was gone, and I went home.
MR. DOUGLAS. Q. Were you quite sober? A. Yes—when I was in conversation with Harris he was wearing a chain.
DAVID WOODS (Policeman C 66). The prisoner was given into my custody by Harris—he had just caught him by the shoulder when I came up in a different direction—he said, "This man has knocked me down and taken my chain, and I shall give him in charge"—the prisoner said, "I shall go with you to the station, and shall give myself in charge."
Cross-examined. Q. Did you see mud on the prosecutor's clothes? A. I did not notice any—there were a lot of persons running, and a lot crying "Stop thief"—the prosecutor had only run a few yards, he was not out of breath.
The prisoner received a good character. GUILTY .— Eight Months' Imprisonment .
MR. GRIFFITHS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. DOUGLAS the Defence.
WILLIAM GREEN (City Detective). On 7th July, about 7 o'clock in the evening, I saw the prisoner in company with two other men, in the Fairingdon Road—a mob had assembled there round a horse which had fallen down—I saw the prisoner take off his overcoat and place it over his arm, so as to cover his hand—he then went amongst the crowd—I saw Mrs. Coutts standing by the horse's head—I saw the prisoner place himself on the right hand side of Mrs. Coutts, and place his left arm in her dress pocket—the other men were by his side, covering him—Emery was with me—I saw him seize the prisoner, and I pursued another man, and took him—the prisoner was taken to the station—nothing was found on him—he gave an address, which I found to be incorrect.
Cross-examined. Q. There was a great number of people, were there not? A. Yes—the coat covered the prisoner's hand—it was a light overcoat—I was looking over his shoulder, and saw him put his hand in—I caught hold of him first, and then gave him to Emery, and ran after the other man—the other man's name was Leonard—he was discharged by the Magistrate—I took him for being concerned in picking the pocket—he was with the prisoner—I saw them speak as if they knew each other—I had been watching them some time.
took bold of the prisoner—I saw this purse drop from his left hand—I picked it up, and found it contained 2s. 101/2d., and a tradesman's bill.
SARAH COUTTS . I am the wife of Joseph Coutts, dairyman, living at 30, Lower York Street, Rotherhithe—I was in the Farringdon Road, in a cart, on the 7th July—the horse fell down, and I was thrown out—after the horse was got up I stood by its head—this purse (produced) is mine—it was in my pocket just before I was thrown out—I had it out to send for some brandy for my mother-in-law; she was so shaken by being thrown out—I don't know exactly what it contained, only silver and copper.
Cross-examined. Q. You say you took your purse out to send for some brandy? A. Yes, I am sure I put it in my pocket again.
GUILTY . He was farther charged with having been before convicted on 4th December, 1866, to which he PLEADED GUILTY.**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude .
MR. CUNNINGHAM conducted the Prosecution.
CAROLINE BARKER . I am a widow, living at 3, Parker Street, Newport Market—on Wednesday evening, 15th July, the prisoner came to my house—I had known him between three and four years—he asked me to have some drink with him, and I refused—he then left, and came back again the same evening, and asked to have the door open, and I think my little daughter opened it—he came and sat down in a chair, and said, "You are all b——clever"—we were all in bed, and had been for two hours—he began undressing himself—I Mid, "What are you up to?"—I told him to go away, and defied him to stay in the place—be had no business in my room—we had a few words, and then he said, "I will go, but you b——I will give you something first"—he hit me a blow with hit fists, and I fell down almost insensible—I called out "Police," and he got the poker and gave me a blow—my little girl came up, took the poker out of his hand, and threw all the fire irons on to the landing—he then took up a large knife, and said, "I will rip your guts up"—I saw the knife coming, and took the candlestick to prevent the blow, and the knife went into my mouth and then fell into the fender—he took the candlestick out of my hands, and beat me about the head and back till he broke the candlestick over me—I was covered with blood—I went to go to the door, and he seized me by the throat, and took the flesh out of it—I was taken to the hospital, but how I got there I don't know,
Prisoner. How long have you known me? Witness. I think about three or four years—I will swear that you have not been in the habit of sleeping with me.
COURT. Q. Was he sober? A. He did not appear intoxicated—I have never had a quarrel with him before—he has always been pretty quiet—I have been a widow five years.
EMILY BARKER . I live with my mother—on Wednesday night, 15th July last, the prisoner knocked at my mother's door, and I let him in—we were all in bed, and he said we were all very clever—he began to take off his boots and get into bed—my mother told him to get out and go away—he said, "I will finish you before I go"—he went to the bed, and punched her on each side with his fists until she fell insensible—he then took
up the poker—I took it away from him, and threw it on the landing—he took up a knife from the table, and said, "I will rip your b——guts out," and mother took the candlestick from the shelf and I ran down stairs, and when I came back mother was in a pool of blood in the passage.
Prisoner. Did you see me strike your mother? Witness. I saw you go to the bed and beat her with your fists—your shirts and other things are at our place—you came one day and asked my mother if she would mind those things till you got a lodging.
GEORGE HAMILTON (Policeman C 56). I was called to the prosecutrix' house; as I got there she staggered and fell in a pool of blood—she said, "I am stabbed"—I went up and saw the prisoner—I told him the charge, and he said, "I did it; it is not so bad as persons make it"—he was perfectly sober.
CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM CALTHORPE . I was resident medical officer at the Charing Cross Hospital—on the morning of the 16th, the prosecutrix was brought there a few minutes after 12, bleeding very much—I found three severe wounds on the head, which had divided all the structures down to the bone, and also two raised bruises on the scalp—there was also a wound on the lip, a piece almost out—that was done by a sharper instrument—on the back there were other bruises—she was in a very weak state—she was in the hospital about a fortnight—I think she was in a dangerous state for the first few days—there was a probability of her getting erysipelas—the would then very likely have died—the wound on the lip was done by some sharp instrument—the wounds on the head were likely to have been caused by some blunt instrument, but those on the back were as if it had been kicked.
The Prisoner, in his Defence, stated that he had cohabited with the prosecutrix up to the present time; that she was drunk when he went in, and struck him with the candlestick herself, and he had used it in self-defence, and that the wounds on the head were caused by her falling on the fender.
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment .
MR. WOOD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. DOUGLAS the Defence.
MARY ANN OLIVER . I am a widow, and keep a lodging house at 81, Bloomsbury Street—on Saturday night, 11th July, about 9.30, I was sitting in the front kitchen, down stairs—I heard some footsteps, and went on to the ground floor—I saw the parlour door open—I had closed it a few minutes before—a young lad came right against me from the parlour—I caught him by the shoulder, and called out "Thief!"—he pulled me to the street door, and opened it—another lad then came out from the same parlour—he passed me and went into the street, and ran to the right—the other one got away from me, and I lost sight of him—I did not leave the house—I next saw him on Monday, at Bow Street—I cannot say that it was the same lad—there was some linen on the parlour table—I had taken it in a few minutes before—it was rolled up in the table-cloth when I saw it again—there was a light in the passage, but I was too excited to notice the boy at all—the street door was fastened by a latch—I had fastened it a few minutes before.
Cross-examined. Q. You cannot undertake to identify the prisoner at the person you had hold of? A. No; I am quite sure the linen had been moved, because it was rolled up in the table cover—one of the lade ran to the right, and one to the left—the one I had hold of first ran to the left.
ELIZABETH TURKENEY . I am the wife of Peter Turkeney, and live at 45, Charles Street, Fitxroy Square—on Saturday night, 11th July, my husband and I were passing the proseoutrix' house, 31, Bloomsbury Street—I saw the prisoner scuffling in the lady's hands, in the hall—he got away, and went to the right—my husband and I went after him, and kept him in sight till two gentlemen stopped him in Oxford Street—I saw a constable come up and take him from the two gentlemen—he was running when he was stopped.
GOLDEN PALMER (Policeman E 134). On Saturday night, about 9.45, I was on duty in Oxford Street—I heard a cry of "Stop thief?"—I saw the prisoner pass me on the opposite side—I gave chase, just before I got up to him two gentlemen stopped him—that was about two hundred yards from the prosecutrix' house—the last witness told me she had just run from Bloomsbury Street—I took him to the station, and then went to 31, Bloomsbury Street—I went into the parlour, and saw the linen rolled up in the table-cover—I found on the prisoner 1s. 6d. and a pocket-knife—I did not see how the house had been entered.
Cross-examined. Q. Were there a great number of persons about? A. Yes—I was standing at the comer of Church Lane, and the lad ran past me on the other side—a lot of persons were running after him, crying "Stop thief?"—he was the only one taking the lead.
GUILTY *— Twelve Months' Imprisonment .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. LANGFORD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. SHARPE the Defence.
JAMES MCINTYRE . On Saturday night, 4th July, I was in High Street, Stratford—two men came up to me—I crossed the road; they followed me—one came in front of me, and took my watch—this is it (produced)—my money was also taken—I had been at a dinner party, and had been drinking.
Cross-examined. Q. Did they meet you, or come up from behind? A. I was trying to pass them on the pavement, and found it necessary to run out of their way, and they ran after me—it was 12, or as near as I can say—I did not say before the Magistrate that it was 11 o'clock (The deposition stated, "On Saturday night, about 11 o'clock")—If I said so it must have been a mistake, for it was about 12—the public-houses were closing.
ROBERT RHODES . On Saturday night, 4th July, about 12 o'clock, I was near the Green Man, at Stratford, and saw Mr. Mclntyre trying to get in at the Green Man—Hennesey went and hustled him under the arms; he; led, and got away into the road—a horse and cart came along; they
halloaed, and caused a confusion—Hennesey caught him by the waist, carried him on to the pavement, and said, "You silly man, you will be run over"—he went to Better's shop, a greengrocer's; the door was on the jar, and just before he got there they closed the door in his face—Hennesey caught him in his arms, turned him round, put his hands in his waistcoat pocket under his arms, took something out, and some money dropped on the pavement—I said, "You scamp, you ought to be ashamed of yourself to rob an old man like that"—I saw his watch chain hanging down—I have known the prisoner ever since his childhood; I am sure it was him.
Cross-examined. Q. Did not you say first that the prisoner assisted McIntyre on to the pavement? A. Yes, at the time the horse and cart came along—after that Mclntyre went along the High street, and Hennesey followed him, a yard or two behind, and harrassed him along—he kept on touching him, and wanting to know where he was going—I was four or five yards behind Hennesey—I was only the width of the pavement, two or three yards from him when he put his arms round Mclntyre's waist—I saw no watch—I mentioned before the Magistrate that he twisted him round—I caught hold of the prisoner's smock, but he got away and went down the Marsh.
FRANK STEPHENS . I am assistant to Mr. Bessir, a pawnbroker, of Stratford—on 7th July, Mary Hennesey brought this watch and chain, and asked 12s. upon it—I asked her whose property it was; she said, her son's—then she said, her son's lodger's—I told her I should detain it till the owner came—no owner came, and I gave it to the police.
COURT. Q. How long have you known Mrs. Hennesey? A. Eight or nine years—there are no lodgers in her house, to my knowledge—I know nothing about her.
JOHN TAAFE (Policeman K 317). I took Mary Hennesey on 8th July in the street—she asked me if it was about the watch—I said that her son was in custody—she said that she pledged it at Mr. Bessir's, and it belonged to a lodger.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know that she keeps lodgers? A. She lives with her brother.
CATHERINE FRANK . I live at 18, Panl Street, West Ham—on Saturday night, 4th July, about 12.30, I was in High Street, Stratford—I saw a crowd, and Daniel Hennesey standing looking after something—I asked him what was the matter—he said, "The gentleman has only dropped some money"—he then ran down the street, and two men after him—this was opposite the Bird-in-Hand.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you see him with his arm round Mclntyre's waist? A. No; nor with his hand in his pocket—I did not see Rhodes or anyone take hold of the male prisoner—the male prisoner looked for the money for two or three minutes, and then ran down the street, when Mclntyre complained that he had lost his watch.
The prisoners received good characters, but the police stated that Daniel Hennesey was the constant associate of thieves.
DANIEL HENNESEY †— Twelve Months Imprisonment .
MARY HENNESEY— One Month's Imprisonment .
740. CHARLES LEVISON LUDFORD (21), PLEADED GUILTY to stealing a horse and cart of Robert Harrisson ; also to stealing 100l. of said Robert Harrisson in his dwelling-house, having been before convicted of felony.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude .
JAMES BURFORD EVERETT . I am a builder, of Low Leyton—on the night of 21st July, at 11.30, I saw the house safe and went to bed—I was called up about 3 o'clock by the policeman, and found the back kitchen window open—I misted these articles (produced)—in this coat was a pocket-book, which we cannot find.
JOHN WEST (Policeman NR 77). Early in the morning of 22nd July, I was in Wilmot Road, and saw the prisoner and two others carrying something—they all three had their boots off—they were about forty yards from the prosecutor's house—on seeing me they turned and ran away, and threw sway these things as they ran—I saw the prisoner throw this shawl and pair of boots away—I caught him, and found this pinafore in his pocket—he said he had found the things going to the station—he said, "We watched one constable by, and we thought then we were safe; we did not expect to see you there"—at the station he said, "We got the things from a house not far from where you caught me"—I found the other things near the prosecutor's house,
GUILTY .**— Eighteen Months Imprisonment .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant
MR. WOOD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. WILDERWRIGHT the Defence.
JOSEPH CASEY . I am a pawnbroker's assistant, and reside in the Hackney Road—on Saturday, 9th July, I was in company with the prisoner, and had a little to drink—he invited me to go to his house to sleep—he lives at Barking—we all lay down about 12 o'clock—there was another young man with me—as I was getting into bed, I noticed the prisoner put his hand into my friend's pocket, and then put some money on the table—I then took out mine and laid it on the table, and three keys—I partially undressed myself; I took my coat off and laid it on the back of a chair—I had a watch in my waistcoat pocket; I wore that as I slept, and a black chain attached—I had 5s. in a pocket-book in my coat pocket, and about 2s. 5d. in my waistcoat pocket—I went to sleep about 12, and did not awake till 6—I got up, and found my chain was left, but the watch was gone, and the money as well; the purse was still there—the window was shut when I went to bed; it was partially open when I woke—I woke the prisoner, and asked him where my watch and money was—he said, "Where's my wife?" I told him I knew nothing about his wife—she had not been in the house—I saw her the night before—he quarrelled with her, and she left—he appeared to know nothing about my watch—I informed the police, and enquiries were made—this (produced) is my watch—I saw it at the Barking Police Station four days afterwards.
Cross-examined. Q. How many public-houses had you been into that afternoon? A. About two—I dined in London about 2 o'clock—the prisoner was not with me then—I reached Barking about 7 in the evening—I
have been drunk on one or two occasions—I was assistant to a pawnbroker named Bird, in Barking—I gave notice to leave—I did apply there once for a character, but it was not satisfactory; Mr. Bird said I had got intoxicated, and the gentleman was not satisfied—we went into two public-house, and were about half an hour in each—we had a few glasses of ale—one of them was called the Barge Aground, and the other the George, as far as I can remember—my friend's name was Bryan—he is not here—I was quite sensible when I went to bed—I had been with my friend all day—we had not drunk much—he was completely intoxicated, but I was not—he was sick all over his clothes—when the prisoner took the money out of his pocket, he said, "There is 51/2d. belonging to that young man, which I shall lay on the table"—I had been down in the country—I have been out of place about five weeks.
MR. WOOD. Q. When did you first meet the prisoner? A. About 9 or 10 o'clock; and from that time to 12 we were with him—he invited us to go to his house because we lost the train.
THOMAS BEADLE . I am a fishmonger, of Barking—this watch was offered to me for sale on 9th July, by the prisoner, between 2 and 3 o'clock—I told him I had no money—I was at that time with Mr. Batchelor—he offered it to him for 25s.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know the prisoner? A. No—I have seen him before, but did not know his name—I have not been in public-house with him to my knowledge—I know the prosecutor by sight; I never spoke to him—he never asked me any price for it—he showed it me, and I said I had no money.
Cross-examined. Q. He offered it openly did he not? A. Yes, he did.
WILLIAM GOTWARD (Policeman K 186). About 2 o'clock on Monday morning, 6th July, I was coming up the New Road, and saw the prisoner standing at the top—I asked him what he was standing there for—he said he was waiting for his wife—after that I went round the town—about I o'clock I passed the house, and saw the ground floor window wide open—I was going to call the people up, when the prisoner's wife put her head out of a window opposite—I saw the men all asleep on the floor.
BENJAMIN SQUIRRELL (Policeman A R 741). I received information, and took the prisoner on 10th July—I told him I wanted him respecting the watch he had offered for sale the previous day—he said, after sometime, that he had not got it—after a time he said that it was pawned at Woolwich, at the pawnbroker's adjoining the churchyard—I went there, and found the watch produced, pawned in the name of Wilson for 10s.—it was produced the next day, and identified by the prosecutor—the pawnbroker was examined at the Police Court; the Magistrate did not think it necessary to bind him over—the prisoner told me when I took him that he stood outside while another man went in and pawned it.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you made enquiries, and found that the watch was offered for sale in several public-houses? A. Only in the Blue Anchor—I asked him if he pawned it himself, and he said, "No, I stood outside."
GUILTY .—Recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor.—Four Months Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Justice Lush.
The prisoner stating, in the hearing of the Jury, that he was GUILTY of the attempt , they found that verdict; and MR. HARRIS, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence on the felony.— Nine Month's Imprisonment .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. HORRY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. PATER the Defence.
JOHN ATCHISON . I am a baker, in the Plumstead Road—the prisoner has been about six months in my employment—his duty was to carry out bread, and receive money from customers, and account to me for it every night—I have never received 6s. 4 3/4d. from Mrs. Freeman, or 4s. 7 3/4d. and 5s. from Mrs. Daley, paid on the 24th July—he accounted for other sums on the 24th and 27th, but not these—I gave him a bill for Mrs. Freeman—this is not the one I gave him; this is his writing—my account was 9s. 3 ¼d. with Mrs. Freeman—it does not agree with my book; I have the book here—I have not received the balance—I have received no parts of those sums—I accused him of it, and he said if I let him off this time, he would pay the money back again, if I would not give him in charge.
Cross-examined. Q. Are these entries all in your handwriting? A. Yes; one or two of them are in my wife's—I spoke to him on Sunday, 2nd August—I think I asked him if he had received 5s. on Mrs. Daley's account, and he said he had not—he then went out—we send a good deal of bread out—I believe he was two yean and a half with his former master.
MART FREEMAN . I am the wife of James Freeman, 120, Burridge Road. Plumstead—I deal with Mr. Atchison and I generally have my bill brought once a week—on the 24th July I paid the prisoner 6s. 4 3/4d.—this is the bill he delivered to me; he signed it, it was dated the 27th.
JULIA DALEY . I live at 35, Plumstead Road, and deal with Mr. Atchison for bread; the prisoner has been in the habit of delivering it to me—on the 27th July I paid him 4s. 7 3/4d. he signed his name "Wood" to it—I afterwards paid him 5s. for my account of July 11th, and he signed it in the same way.
Cross-examined. Q. Is this the book which you keep to check the money paid to the baker? A. Yes, the book is mine; I keep it—these marks are made by the prisoner.
WILLIAM POLE (Policeman R R 31). I took the prisoner into custody—I told him he was charged with embezzling various sums of money from his master—he said he was very sorry and hoped his master would forgive him, and he would pay him back.
GUILTY . Recommended to mercy on account of his previous good character— Four Months' Imprisonment .
745. GEORGE MURPHY (43), GEORGE MURPHY the younger (18), CHARLES MURPHY (15), and WILLIAM MURPHY (16), Stealing 60 lbs. weight of lead, being fixed to a building, and one copper, the property of John Theodore Clemmison.
MR. PATER conducted the Prosecution; and MR. F. H. LEWIS defended George Murphy.
JOHN THEODORE CLEMMISON . I am a caryer and gilder, at 19, High Street, Deptford, and am owner of an empty cottage at Greenwich—I was at the cottage on the 29th July last, it was under repair at that time—I went at 8.30, the lead and copper were safe then—I went again the next day about 7.30 in the evening, and discovered that a portion of the lead in the water tank had been cut away—the copper had been left in a shed attached to the cottage—the look was picked and the copper gone—it was worth about 18s.—and the lead about 9s., but the damage done to the tank would be about 5l.—I gave information to the police and next morning went to a marine store dealer's in South Street, Greenwich—I saw some lead there which I compared with the lead left in the tank, and it fitted—the copper was shown to me at the same place—I could not swear to that, but mine, was like that one—the prisoner lives about five minutes' walk from the cottage—the father has done work for me at times.
Cross-examined. Q. He is a master gasfitter, is not he? A. Yes.
HENRY HATCHER . I live at Greenwich, and was working at this cottage and adjoining buildings—I last saw the lead and copper on the 29th July, about 8.30, in the evening—I found it had been cut away on the 30th, about 6.30 in the morning—I noticed that the shed was open where the copper was kept—I saw the lead compared afterwards.
WILLIAM WHITE . I am a marine store dealer, at 5, South Street, Greenwich—I had sixty pounds of lead brought to me, on 29th July, by William and Charles Murphy, on a truck—I believe the name of Murphy was on it, but I know it well as belonging to the elder Murphy—I asked them what made them so late, and they said, "Father came late home from the job"—I weighed the lead, and gave the money to Charles—it was 9s. 1d.—the police came next morning—George Murphy junior, brought the copper in the evening—I said, "Where have you brought this from?"—I told him to go back and get a note, and he went back—I weighed the copper—I have the note here—it is in Mr. Murphy's handwriting (Read: "Please to buy the old copper of the lad for J. Murphy.")
Cross-examined. Q. I suppose you have known Mr. Murphy some time? A. Yes, for eighteen years—I have known him as a master gasfitter—he has always borne the character of an honest man.
MR. PATER. Q. Do his sons live with him? A. The youngest does, but the elder one has lived away from him lately.
JAMES HAIZELDEN (Policeman RR 21). I took the prisoners into custody—I told the elder Murphy I had found a copper at a marine store dealer's, and asked him if he sent his boy with one—he said, "Yes"—I said, "Did you write a note for Mr. White to buy it?"—he said, "Yes, I did"—I asked him if he sent his boys with some lead at 10.30 the night before—he said, "I don't know; I so often send, I can't say"—I afterwards took the younger George, on the Monday, at East Street, Greenwich—I told him he was charged, with his father, with selling a stolen copper—he said, "I went to my father's house; my two brothers were having some words about taking a copper to Mr. White's; I said, 'Never mind, give me the copper, and I will take it' "—I had taken the younger prisoners before—I found
this note on William: "Please buy the old lead."—he said his mother wrote it for him.
The Prisoners' Statements before the Magistrate were read as follows: George Murphy's (the elder): "I know nothing about the lead. My eldest son took the copper to Mr. White; he would not buy it of him unless he took a note. He said he got it from a man in the street, and I said, 'I am sure it is come by honestly,' and gave him the note for Mr. White to buy the copper, and heard no more till the policeman came."
Charles Murphy's. "I went with my brother to Mr. White's to fell the lead."
William Murphy's. "We saw the lead and copper lying on the wall. We took it off and sold it to Mr. White."
George Murphy's (the younger). "Mr. White would not buy the copper without a note. Father gave me one, and I took the money to my father's house. The policeman came and took me, and I want to know why I am taken for stealing the copper."
GEORGE MURPHY (the elder) received a good character.— NOT GUILTY .
GEORGE MURPHY (the younger)— NOT GUILTY .
CHARLES and WILLIAM MURPHY— GUILTY .— Nine Months' Imprisonment each .
MR. PATER conducted the Prosecution.
HANNAH ADCOCK . I am the wife of John Adcock, and live at the Central School House, Plumstead—my husband is a bricklayer—on Thursday, 16th July, we closed the house about 11 o'clock, but left the kitchen window open about two inches—I came down about 5.20 next morning, and found the window wide open, and missed a coat, waistcoat, pair of boots, a shirt, and two dresses—they were safe the night before—I went to the policestation, and gave information—in consequence of what I was told, I went there again on the 21st—I saw the male prisoner in custody, and found he was wearing some of my husband's property—I afterwards saw the female prisoner, and found that she was wearing a petticoat and brooch belonging to me—the value of the property stolen was about 32s. 6d.
JAMES MARGETSON (Policeman R 122). I apprehended Smith on 21st July—he was wearing the boots I now produce—I said I should take him for being a deserter—after I got him into the street I told him that he would be charged with breaking into a number of houses in the neighbourhood of Plumstead—I took the boots from him—he said he bought them from some man on the Common—they were identified by the last witness—I told the female prisoner she would be charged with being concerned with the man in stealing a quantity of property—when she was in the dock the brooch was identified by Mrs. Adcock, and she said it was given to her by Smith.
ELIZABETH CARTWRIGHT . I searched the female prisoner on 21st July at the station—she was wearing this petticoat (produced)—it was afterwards identified by Mrs. Adcock—the prisoner said it was her own.
Smith's Defence. I bought the things of a man on the Common, and gave them to the female because she was in want of them.
SMITH— GUILTY . CHAPMAN— NOT GUILTY .
WILLIAM BRASSINGTON . I live at 124, Sandy Hill Road, Plumstead, and am a retired grocer—on Saturday, 19th July, my house was securely fastened about 10 o'clock when we went to bed—about 7 next morning I found that it had been entered, and missed three pairs of boots and an eyeglass—they had been left on a shelf in the kitchen—this eyeglass (produced) is mine—the house had been entered by the kitchen window, which had been forced by some instrument.
JAMES CHARLES FARLEY . I live at 116, Sandy Hill Road, and am a carpenter—I saw the prisoner Smith about 5.30 on 19th July with two bundles, coming down the garden of No. 118—he bade me good morning as he passed—I saw the prints of boots in one of the bundles.
GUILTY of Receiving — Three Months' Imprisonment .
MARGARET HARLEY . I am the Wife of John Harley, 7, Lear Terrace, Plumstead—on 16th July I went to bed about 12 o'clock, and left the house safe—about 6.30 next morning I went down and found the kitchen window open, and missed about seven dozen articles altogether, tablecloths and other things—I saw some of the things at the police station, and identified them.
SARAH GOUGH . I am the wife of John Gough, and live at 1, Nelson Street, Woolwich—I keep a second-hand clothes shop—on Thursday, 17th July, the prisoner came to my shop with a bundle of clothes, and wanted me to buy them—I said, "I have got information from the police that things have been stolen, and I shall detain them, and take them to the police-station—I went to the station, and left him in the shop—when I came back he had gone—at 8 o'clock the same evening he came again, and asked for the money—I said I had not received any from the police, and he must call again—the things were afterwards identified by Mrs. Harley—the prisoner wanted 3s. for them—they are worth about a sovereign.
JAMES MARGETSON (Policeman R 122). I apprehended the prisoner, and asked him about the bundle—he said he knew nothing about it—when Mrs. Gough came and identified them, he said he bought them of a man on Woolwich Common.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude. There were several other indictments against the prisoners.
MR. BESLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. RIBTON the Defence.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment .
JOSEPH GREENHAM . I keep an eating-house at Sydenham—on 16th July the prisoner came to my shop and asked for a pennyworth of pudding—he paid with a bad shilling—I asked him if he had any more of that sort; he said, "No, I was not aware it was bad"—he then paid with a good shilling, and I gave him the change—he left, and I followed him—he joined another man—I spoke to a policeman, and he followed—he was afterwards taken into custody, and I identified him.
CHARLES OLIVER . I live at 9, Hanover Terrace, Sydenham—as I was going home between 5 and 6 o'clock, I saw the prisoner and another man in the Dartmouth Road, Forest Hill, and saw them taken into custody by two constables—I followed behind—I saw something in his hand, and saw him chuck it into a gateway—I saw a little girl pick it up, and she handed it to me—I opened it, and found that it contained five bad shillings—it as a paper parcel—each shilling had paper between—I gave them to the constable.
Prisoner. Did you see me drop the money? Witness. Yes; I was going to pick it up, but the little girl was before me.
JOHN MAJOR (Policeman P 109). On 15th July Mr. Greenham, made a communication to me, in consequence of which I followed the prisoner and another man—I asked the prisoner if he had been to Sydenham—he said he had not at first, and then he said he had come straight through Sydenham—that was about a mile from the eating-house—I took them along the Denmark Road, and the witness Oliver came up to the prisoner, and asked him if he had dropped anything—he said, "No"—he said a little girl had just picked up six shillings, and he handed them to me—I searched Smith at the station, and found two good shillings and a pawn-ticket
Prisoner's Defence. I know nothing about it
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Imprisonment .
MR. WOOD conducted the Prosecution.
EPHRAIM BURGESS (Policeman R 119). About 7 o'clook on Sunday morning, 28th June, I received information which took me to the back of a lodginghouse, where I found the prisoner and a bag of live ducks at his feet—I asked him where he got them; he said he gave 1s. each for them of a man in the Lewisham Road—I took him into custody, and took the ducks to the station—I do not know whether he lodged at that house.
JOHN KELLY . I am in the prosecutor's service—we lost some ducks on Sunday morning 7.45, which I afterwards saw before the Magistrate, and know them to be my master's—they were safe at 9 o'clock on Saturday, the 27th—I gave notice at Greenwich station—I lost six, and found six; they are worth 10s.
Prisoner's Defence. I saw a man on the road with the ducks; he asked
me 18d. each for them; I offered him 1s., and he took it—I have lodged at the same house, Mr. King's, a long time.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. PATER conducted the Prosecution.
MARY ANN TOLLEY . I am housemaid to Mr. John Hollams, Paragon House, Blackheath—on the night of 21st July, about 9.45, I was in Mr. Hollam's dressing-room, preparing a bath—I heard footsteps in the next room—there was a candle in the next room—I looked up and saw a man near the dressing-room door—he turned round, and I followed him, and then heard him jump from the window—I believe the prisoner is the man—I called the gardener, and he went in pursuit—when he was brought back, I recognized him as the man—I had seen him in the bedroom—he could have got in at the bedroom window; it was open.
Prisoner. Did you not state that you thought I was a visitor? Witness. No—the candle was on the mantelshelf in the bed-room, and I was in the dressing-room; you were between me and the light.
WILLIAM STEVENS . I am gardener to Mr. Hollams—on 21st July, I was on| the stairs, and heard the last witness call out—I went up stairs—from what she told me I went out—I met a young man outside who accompanied me—after going a short distance, we met the prisoner coming towards us—I asked him where he had come from; he made no answer—I asked him again, and he said, "What's that to do with you"—I then told him he must come back with me—he said he had been on the heath, and was going to the station—when we met him he was going away from the station—he came back with me, and I gave him in charge—Mary Ann Tolley identified him at once as the man she had seen in the bedroom.
ROBERT CARTER . I am a stable lad, in the service of Mr. Rigby—about 9.45 on 21st July, 1 was standing opposite Mr. Hollam's house—I saw a man come out of a window over the street door of Mr. Hollam's house—I was about five yards from him—I asked him what he did there, and he said, "That is a pretty flower"—he walked a few yards down the road, and then ran—I saw the gardener come out, and we went after the man—to the best of my belief, the prisoner is the man who came out of the window, but I can't swear to him—I was with the gardener when he spoke to him—he had a hat on similar to the one the man had who jumped out of the window.
ALBERT DAVEY (Policeman X 251). On 21st July, the prisoner was given into my custody, for being in the house for an unlawful purpose—I searched him, and found 6d. in silver, 31/2d. in copper, and a ticket from Blackheath to Cannon Street—he refused to give his address, but gave his name—I took him to the station.
Prisoner's Defence. I was shown to the housemaid, while a policeman was holding me one side and the gardener the other, and of course she swore to me. I was 200 yards from the house, coming towards it, when the gardener took hold of me.
GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted, on 22nd March, 1855, to which he PLEADED GUILTY— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment .
Before Mr. Common-Serjeant.
754. SAMUEL ISRAEL, WILLIAM BARNES , and DAVID MORGAN Unlawfully conspiring with JOHN CARTER, not in custody, to defraud William Izzard, William Turton, and Thomas Dodson, of their goods; to which Barnes PLEADED GUILTY — Judgment respited> .
MESSRS. BESLEY and STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution; and MR. LEWIS
WILLIAM IZZARD . I am an inn-keeper, of Weymonth—in February last I had some potatoes for sale—I received this letter (produced) on 1st February—I replied to it, and received this other letter from the same person, and according to the order in the letters, I sent five tons of potatoes on 7th February, and ten tons on the 15th—these are all the letters I received(produced).
THOMAS EDWARDS . I am in business with my father, a dairyman, of 72, Acton Street, King's Cross Road—I have seen Barnes write—this letter of 31st January is in his writing, and the signature to this other letter is like his, but I do not think the writing is—this letter of February 1st is Bares' writing, and so are these others; these two are not.
WILLIAM IZZARD (continued). I sent away twenty-three tons of potatoes, value 115l.—on 4th March I came to London, and went to 2, Angel Place, Borough—I saw Mrs. Barnes, but neither of the prisoners—I went again on 5th March, about 10 a. m., and saw Israel and three other men, but neither Morgan or Barnes—I said, "Are either of you gentlemen Mr. Barnes?"—Israel said, "No; I wish I was Mr. Barnes"—Mrs. Barnes came in, and I asked her if one of those gentlemen was not Mr. Barnes—she said "No," and told me he was expecting large remittances from Ireland in a few days, and them he would send and pay me; I should hear from him—Barnes was in the room the whole time, sitting with his hands upon his knees, the same as Mr. Israel—I came away—I saw Israel next day, and several times afterwards, in and out the passage, Angel Court, but did not speak to him; I never saw Barnes again—I remained all day about the passage, and saw people going in and out, but I did not know which was Barnes and which was Israel—I sent the potatoes loose, according to the order, by the South Western Railway to Nine Elms, I saw them put in the truck—I assisted, and saw them start—I wrote on the truck, in chalk, "Nine Elms Station, W. R. Barnes," and the clerk put on a ticket which I did not read—I have never been paid for the potatoes.
JOSEPH PUTMAN . I am a seafaring man, and live at Bermondsey—I was in Mr. Welch's service in February; he does work with a horse and van, which I drove—I knew Israel four years, before that I lived right opposite him, and have seen Barnes go to his house three or four times a day—about the middle of February Israel told me to take the hone and cart to Nine Elms station, to get some potatoes, and he would meet me there—I did so, and helped my master and Israel to unload them from the truck to the van—they were loose—I only went once—the van was within the station gates; the watchman there does not allow anybody to go out without a pass—I asked Israel whether I should get the pass, he said "No, I will get it"—he went into the place and brought out a pass—he had to sign his name to get it—I took it to Welch's door, and took a ton down to Israel's place, by his
directions; he told me to put them in his back place—he came there afterwards with his own truck and a ton of potatoes, which he got from the same truck as I got mine from; I saw him load them the same evening.
Cross-examined. Q. You had two tons of potatoes, one ton you left at your master's, and one at Mr. Israel's? A. Yes—there was only one ton left in the truck when I left.
MR. BESLEY. Q. Did you see more than one truck full of potatoes? A. Only one.
JAMES BAILEY COURT . I am a clerk at the Nine Elms Station—I produce four delivery orders, signed Izzard, of Weymouth, and W. R. Barnes, dated the 7th, 15th, 18th, and 23rd February, 1868—they would be delivered to the parties bringing the order—these orders were delivered to a man who paid the carriage on them that day—the receipt for the money is in his writing—3l. 0s. 1d., that is the charge for the potatoes on the 8th; 1l. 11s. was paid on the 17th; and on the 20th 1l. 16s., and 4s. 6d. rent for potatoes left from the last lot; and 4l. 16s. 1d. on the 24th—I gave a receipt to the person who brought the order and paid me—he would sign when he loaded the potatoes.
TOM WHITE . I am head porter at Nine Elms goods department—in February three or four trucks came from Weymouth, and a person came several times to take them away—I pointed out to him where they were—Putman drove Welsh's van, and there was a truck likewise—the prisoner Israel signed the sheet, at least I signed G. Symes for him, and he made a cross.
Cross-examined. Q. Did several people come from time to time and fetch away potatoes? A. Yes—I will swear I saw Israel there on 24th February—I said to the Magistrate "I will not venture to swear I saw Israel there that day"—I swear it now, because my recollection is better now than it was three months ago—I had seen Israel before, many times, but did not know his name.
MR. BESLEY. Q. You said at the Police Court that you could not tell it was the 24th February, had you got that sheet before you? A. Yes, but I did not take notice of it—I did not know that the person who put the cross was named Israel till he was in custody.
The Letters were here read:—The first was dated 31st January, 1868, from W. R. Barnes to Mr. Izzard, requesting to know whether he could deliverpotatoes as advertized; another from Barnes to Izzard, dated February 1st, 1868, offering 5l. per ton loose in trucks, and not in sacks; another letter from Barnes, ordering one truck load; another letter enclosing a bill of exchange for 50l.; and another, dated 20th February, ordering eight tons of potatoes, and a bill of exchange for 40l.
WILLIAM TURTON . I am a corn merchant, of East Street, Leeds—in March last I had a quantity of oil seed for sale, and at the latter end of March I received these four letters from Barnes—this card was in the second letter—I do not remember the precise date, but in April I sent by Great Northern railway twenty quarters of oil seed, value 10l. 10s., directed "W. A. Barnes, Angel Place, Borough," and sent an invoice in a letter—I afterwards received communication about the letter, and an order for thirty quarters more, which I did not send—I have never been paid—I saw my
seeds at Clerkenwell Police Court, in the same new sacks that I sent them in.
WILLIAM TURTON (continued). This is a copy of my letter of 1st April, and this is a copy of the invoice—these are copies of the other replies I made—this is a copy of the last letter I wrote, 21st April.
PETER ANDERSON . I am a carman in the service of the Great Northern Railway—on 8th April I was employed to cart 20 qrs. of oil seed from the station to Barnes, at Angel Place, High Street, Borough—this (produced) is the delivery sheet I had given me—I saw Barnes there, who told me to take it round to his stable in Long Lane—I drove there; it was only 700 or 800 yards—Barnes went with me—I only saw a woman there—the seed was delivered at Israel's house on the second floor—Barnes and two other men not here, took it into the house—Barnes paid for the carriage, and signed the sheet.
Cross-examined. Q. Was Israel there at the time? A. No.
WILLIAM JUDD . I live at 34, King Street, Borough, and am a carman in the employ of Mr. Brown—I have known Israel by the jobs I did for him on the 5th and 6th May—I took 40 sacks of hay seeds from his shop in Long Lane to Hendon—I first went on 5th May, but Israel said I could not take it then, because the police were there—I staid about three-quarters of an hour before he told me that—I then went away—I saw no police there—he did not tell me when to come again, but I went at 9 o'clock next morning, and Israel gave me 40 sacks of seed—he chucked some out at the top window, and some out at the bottom—when I had loaded it, Israel said, "Go and wait in New Street, and they will meet you there"—I waited three-quarters of an hour, and then Barnes and Morgan and another man came in a pony cart with a little grey horse, and Barnes told me to go to Hendon—I went there, and saw Barnes and Morgan and another manthere.
Cross-examined. Q. Who is Brown? A. A carman in Western Street; he is the person who gave me directions to go to that place.
Morgan. I went with you to Hendon? Witness. Yes, and the other two were in the pony cart.
DANIEL DUNHAM . I am a firmer, at Hendon—I purchased 40 sacks of hay seed for 8l. on 4th May, at the Metropolitan Cattle Market, of a man named Burridge—on 5th May, not the 6th, Judd brought me the 40 qrs.—they were afterwards taken away in my absence, but I saw them at the station in the same sacks.
THOMAS DOBSON . I live at Brotherton, Yorkshire, and rent some willow grounds—in March last, I had 1200 bundles of willows for sale—I received these letters (produced), and wrote an answer to the first, asking for a reference, which I received—I received another letter, and forwarded 200 bundles of willows, value 11l. 13s. 4d, to Barnes, by the Great Northern Railway, and wrote a letter to Barnes, of which this is a copy—I afterwards saw them at Israel's shop in Long Lane—that was not long after 13th April—I have no memorandum of it—I have never been paid for them—I did
not see Israel At that place—I have had no conversation with Israel, Barnes or Morgan.
Cross-examined. Q. What was the charge you made against Israel? A. Obtaining my goods by false pretences—I am not aware that that charge was dismissed—I entered into recognizances to prosecute—the charge was not dismissed, and I did not then claim to be bound over.
MR. BESLEY. Q. Which case was gone into first before the Magistrate, your's or Mr. Izzard's? A. Mine—I attended four or five times at the Police Court, and heard evidence given by a number of witnesses after I was examined.
GEORGE COLE . On 16th April, I was a carman, in the service of the Great Northen Railway—I delivered 120 bundles of willows to Barnes, at Angel Place, Borough—I saw Barnes there—he said that he had been up to the Great Northern twice that day to stop them, and said, "D——the thing, I did not want them there; take them round to Long Lane, and there will be someone there to meet you"—I went round, and met Morgan there—he held up his hands, and stopped me opposite the rag shop—I did not notice a name over the rag shop—Barnes came up, and as I was putting the things in the cellar of the rag shop, Israel came up, and looked down two or three times—I had finished before the other load came up with the other eighty bundles—I had not to receive any money—Morgan took the sheet, and said that he would get it signed—he brought it back to me, signed as it is now—Bland the carman came up with his load, and asked me a question.
GEORGE FREDERICK BLAND . I live at 75, Binfield Street—on 14th April, I was in the employ of the Great Northern Railway, and took the eighty bundles of willows mentioned in this document to Angel Place, Borough; I cannot say the number—from something said to me there, I went to Long Lane, and saw Cole, and Israel, and Morgan—Israel asked me whether the carriage was paid; I told him "No"—he said, "I do not know what to do; Mr. Barnes is not here"—I said, "I cannot leave them without the money"—he then said something to Morgan, and they both went away a short time—Morgan came back and said, "Back up here, we will pay you the money"—Israel said, "All right, back up, the money will be right"—I backed up, and unloaded the willows on top of a shed, up a gateway, as Israel told me—he and Morgan and another man assisted—Morgan signed the book, "D. Morgan," in Israel's presence, and a lady in the rag shop paid me the money—the shed is at the back of the shop.
Morgan. Did not I say, "As Barnes is not here, does it matter who signs it, so long as he puts his right name down?" Witness. Yes—Israel and the woman both declined to sign it.
THOMAS EDWARDS (re-examined). These three documents produced by Mr. Dobson are in Barnes' writing—(One of these was dated 28th March, from Barnes to Mr. Dobson, enquiring the price of the willows, and another from the same to the same, ordering 200 bolts of willows).
ROBERT PETHER (Policeman M 98). I received information, and watched 2, Angel Place, High Street, Borough, in February, March, and April, at times—it is a very small shop—there are about eight shops in the court—I saw nothing in the shop but two or three milk-pane, and about a couple of quarts of milk—the only business carried on to my knowledge was a little milk—I know Israel very well—I saw him at Barnee' place three or four times while I was watching—I went there on 14th May; there were then
120 bundles of willows in the cellar, and eighty on the roof of the stable—it is a marine store shop—I asked Israel how he came by the willows—he said he bought them of a man named Barnes for 4l. 18s. 6d.—he afterwards said that he had only paid the carriage of them—they were taken to the station, where they now remain—afterwards, by the instructions of my superiors, I fetched 300 bundles of willows from a man named Jerring, opposite Israel's—I did not go to 108, Southwark Bridge Road—there is no firm of solicitors carrying on business there to my knowledge—I know the man you are alluding to, Allen; he is not a solicitor—you can generally see him at the next house, the beer-shop.
Cross-examimed. Q. Were you in uniform when you went to Israel'? A. I think I was in plain clothes, but Israel had known me ten years.
JOHN SHINGFIELD . I am a carpenter, of 1, Angel Place, Borough—I have lived there about seven years—I remember Barnes taking a shop there, two or three months before Christmas, 1867, I think—he remained there about four months—I live at the top of the place—I have seen Israel in Barnes' shop perhaps a down times—I have done carpentering work at that shop, but not for Barnes—there was very little business carried on; there was a little milk, and a dummy butter-tub and some dummy cheeses—I saw Israel take two hampers from Barnes, shop one or two mornings before Barnee left the place—I have seen cases of eggs go to Barnes's—I did not see them carried away, but they were there a very short time—I pay 7s. a week rent for my house—I believe No. 2 used to be 8s., but it is 10s. 6d. now.
SPENCOER ADES . I saw an advertisement in the Clerkenwell News in April, in consequence of which I went to 96, Long Lane—I afterwards went to 2, Angel Place, and saw Barnes there"—I was to meet him next day—I came to terms with him, and the three papers produced were given to me ("Received of Mr. Ades 1l. deposit on shop and fixtures at 2, Angel Place, the remaining portion to be paid on taking possession"—"April 20. Received 7l. for shop at Angel Place." The third paper was an inventory)—This inventory describes all that was there—Barnes said that there was no good-will—I got these things for 8l.—I have lived there since, and have paid 10s. 6d. a week rent—there was two quarts of milk when I succeeded—I asked him whether there was any milk taken out; he said, "No, the cutomers fetch it"—I had called at 96, Long Lane, to know where the place was—that is a rag-shop.
MARY SCOTT . I am the wife of John Scott, of 18, Page Street, Westminster—on 18th April we had a shop and parlour to let, and Barnes called with Morgan—she said, "I cannot give you a decided answer now, because my husband is not at home"—I said, "What do you want it for?"—he said for a milk-shop for his nephew—I said "Where is your nephew?"—he said "Outside"—he called Morgan in, who said that it would do—Barnes said that Morgan was a persevering young man—he came again that day, between 1.30 and 2, and saw my husband, and said, "If you want a reference, you can apply to my solicitor"—he wrote the address, "Allan & Allen, Solicitors," and agreed to take the shop at 6s. 6d. a week—Barnes gave this as his address, but did not say where his nephew lived—the tenancy commenced from 18th April—they came into possession that day, but the shop was not opened—there was no pork or milk; there were three dummy cheeses and two empty hampers, winch they put in the shop—about thirty letters came—there were eight letters on the 27th—they
used to be addressed "Mr. Morgan, Dairy Farm"—they never came to the house to live—there were no goods there—they only came for their letters, and were only there five or ten minutes—three large hampers came on 8th May—I received them, and the man put them in the shop—this direction (produced) was on the hampers from 8th May to the 10th—we had no quarrel whatever, but they came and created a disturbance, and we gave information to the police—I would not let them have the hampers, and Barnes and Morgan took them by force—there were a number of people there who are not here, for they created a mob in the street—I received some other letters, which I handed to Inspector Potter—we did not receive any rent while they were there; that was the cause of the disturbance.
THOMAS AMRROSE POTTER (Policeman Y 81). On 6th May I went to Israel's rag shop, 94, Long Lane, in private clothes—I told him who I was, and I had three officers with me—I asked him whether he had received a piano, and afterwards spoke to him about a harp—after I had sent a quantity of property from his house to the station, I asked him when he saw Barnes—he said that he did not know such a man—I said, "You must know, because this officer," pointing to Barnes, "saw Barnes with you this morning"—he said in the back parlour, "It is no use telling lies about it, I do know Barnes"—I said, "Do not you know Barnes, who lives in Angel Place?"—he said, "I believe I do"—I left officers there and apprehended him on a warrant at 12 o'clock at night on the 12th or 13th, and told him be was charged with being concerned with others in defrauding the Rev. Mr. Pimm of a piano, and I took him on that charge—he begged me not to take him, and going up High Street I said, "How do you account for the potatoes you received at the Nine Elms station, and what about this at the Great Northern," mentioning a person's name who is not in custody—he said, "I did have some from the Great Northern"—an officer with me said, "Where did you get the grass seed I saw in your house?"—he said, "I had it from a relation at Croydon"—I said, "You will be charged on the warrant"—that was the case of the piano—I was present when the grass seed was shown to the owner—it is the same as that brought from Hendon—I took Barnes at Westminster, and found on him this book (produced), this address, and this paper—one page in the book is headed "Sugar and myself"—Morgan goes by the name of "Sugar"—I know 10, Southwark Bridge Road, but there are no solicitors there—we have traced the potatoes but have not recovered them—500 bundles of willow were identified at Israel's place—Mrs. Scott gave me these letters—I opened them—they have the post marks of different towns in England—I wrote to the persons, and got all these letters back—I do not know Barnes' writing—(MR. LEWIS objected that these Letters were only evidence against Barnes, who had pleaded guilty, and MR. BESLEY withdrew them, as THE COURT did not think they were relevant.)
Cross-examined. Q. How long has Israel lived there? A. I have known him eight or nine years in the neighbourhood.
Morgan's Defence. I never knew about the willows, the seed, or the potatoes, till they came to Israel's door, when I helped to unload them. I have been called "Sugar" these ten years.
ISRAEL †— GUILTY — Two Years' Imprisonment . MORGAN— GUILTY — Nine Months' Imprisonment .
MR. THOMPSON conducted the Prosecution.
HENRY JAMES HORNER (Policeman V 100). On the night of 29th July I was on duty in the Upper Richmond Road, about 12.30—my attention was attracted to Tynborough Lodge by a window opening—I went to the gate and tried to open it, but found it was resisted by someone—it was a high gate—when I got it open I found the female prisoner on the other side, holding it—the male prisoner was in the act of getting out of the window, and another man, not in custody, was standing on the area steps—the two men ran away—I ran after them, but could not overtake them—the woman went out of the front gate, and when I came back I took her about 200 yards from the place—I said I should take her for being on the premises of Mr. Cobbold, and she pretended to be very drunk—I asked her what business she had there, and she said she knew nothing of it, and offered me 6d. to let her go—I had seen the male prisoner before that night, about half a mile from the place—I saw him eight days after at the Wands worth station—he was with five men, and I picked him out—I am sure he was out of the men—I ran about two or three hundred yards after the men, but I could not get over a hedge, and they got over and went down the embankment.
JAMES HEAD (Policeman V R S). I took the male prisoner into custody at the Striped Horse, Putney, about 3 o'clock on 30th July—I told him I should take him on suspicion of being in enclosed premises on Tuesday night, the 28th—he said, "I slept over at Kew Bridge; I was there about 11 o'clock—he asked me if I had seen his wife—I said, "No"—he said, "I have not seen her since 1 o'clock on Tuesday afternoon—I took him to the Wands worth station, and placed him with five men out of the street, and the constable picked him out—I took him in consequence of a description—I did not know him before.
HENRY CHEVALIER COBBOLD . I live at Tynborough Lodge, and am a solicitor—on 28th July I went round the premises before retiring to rest, and found the doors all locked—I did not examine the pantry window.
JANE GABLE . I am cook to the prosecutor—I went into the larder on 28th July, and left a plate, bread, and butter and cheese, on a shelf near the window—I don't know whether the window was open—I went in about 8 o'clock next morning and found them there.
HENRY JAMES HORNER (re-examined). I found the things on the ledge outside the window—I gave them through the pantry window to Mr. Cobbold—there was a plate with some butter on—the bread and cheese was by itself,
Caroline Bdbury's Defence. I went with a woman to get something to drink. I remained with her till I got quite intoxicated. I sat down between Wands worth and Putney, and slept for a long time, and the constable came up as I was walking home.
CHARLES EDBURY— Two Months' Imprisonment
CAROLINE EDBURY— One Month's Imprisonment .
MR. WOOD conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN THOMAS HINKLEY . I am a gasfitter and decorator, at 4, St. George's Circus, Southwark—on 20th July I went into a urinal at the corner of Christ Church, Blackfriars Road—while I was there four men came in, two on each side—they pulled my arms back, and robbed me of my watch, my pin, and eyeglass—they then let me loose, and ran away—I came out immediately, and saw the prisoner running with them—they were within a yard of me—I saw two men at the Police Court, but I could not swear positively to them, and they were discharged—I ran after them—I called "Stop thief!"—I lost sight of them, and then waited till I saw a policeman coming along with the prisoner in custody—I immediately recognised him, and said he was one of them—he had only one arm—I noticed that when he was running.
JURY. Q. Did you see the man's face? A. No; I recognize him by his arm—I think I saw his face, but not to know him.
JOHN CHUTER (Policeman L 123). On 19th July, a little after 12 o'clock, I hard a cry of "Stop thief!"—I went in the direction of the cry, and saw a constable of the name of Mansfield with the prisoner in custody—I had seen him about 11.50 in company with four others—two others were taken, but were discharged—Mansfield, the constable, is very ill indeed, and unable to travel; he has broken a blood-vessel—I produce the doctor's certificate—(This was dated 15th August, 1868, and stated that Police Constable L 51 was confined to his bed with spitting of blood.)—I saw him yesterday.
WALTER MANSFIELD'S depositions were put in and read as follow: "About 12.20 last night, at the corner of Cross Street, I heard several running. I saw four or five persons run up, amongst them the prisoner. I got hold of him; the others got away; they slackened their pace as they saw me. I heard no cry. I took him back, and met the prosecutor, who identified him. The prisoner said he was innocent."
Prisoner's Defence. I was going home, and met the policeman. He said, "Come back here with me." I went back with him, and with that the prosecutor came up, and said I was one that joined in robbing him. I know nothing about it."
GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted, on 8th August, 1865, to which he PLEADED GUILTY.— Seven Years' Penal Serviude .
GEORGE MELLS . I am an ironmonger, at 169, High Street, Borough—I have known the prisoner about six years—he was about twelve months in my employment, as traveller—he left about 13th July; he went away without leave of absence—I next saw him at the Southwark Police Court—I have a customer of the name of Restall—I always understood that his name was William, but I find it is Henry Restall—he owed me 22l. 18s. 6d.—I requested the prisoner to get a bill from him—the prisoner always said that Mr. Restall would not accept bills—I at last sent him to tell Restall if he did not pay the account I should put it in the solicitor's hands, and he
brought me back the acceptance—I know the prisoner's writing—the body of this bill is in the prisoner's writing—the signature is my own.
Cross-examined. Q. Do I understand you to say you did not know the Christian name of your customer? A. Yes—I have not got my book here—it contains the names of the customers—I think it was the 15th I told the prisoner to get the bill from Mr. Restall—he was one of the prisoner's customers—it was by my instructions the prisoner drew on Restall—the bill had no drawer's name to it at the time I gave it to the prisoner—I signed it after he had brought it home, after it was accepted—it was drawn and signed after it was accepted—I signed it as drawer when he brought it back—it was then drawn—I can't say whether I signed it as drawer in the prisoner's presence; very likely I did not—I paid it away within a month liter—I did not look at the order-book when I received this, because I knew we had not got Restall's Christian name.
HENRY RESTALL . I am a wheelwright, and carry on business at 129, Stepney Green—I have had dealings with the prisoner about twelve months—I can only read a little—I can write my own name—I know nothing of this bill—I did not sign it, or authorise anyone to do it for me—my name is Henry—I have a grandson of the name of William, but he is only eight years old.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you anyone to assist you? A. Yes, John Henry; he writes bills for me—he is not with me now—I can write my own name—Henry was with me on 15th April—he did a good deal of my writing, and so did other persons.
MR. MOIR. Q. Did you authorize anyone to accept this bill for you? A. No; this is not my signature, and it is not Henry's writing.
JOHN WALKER (Policeman M 30). I took the prisoner into custody—he said his name was Anderson—I asked him if he knew Mr. Mells, in the Borough—he said he knew the name, but did not know him—some person came up, and said, "Good morning, Mr. Mopsey"—I said, "You will have to go with me"—he said, "Very well"—I told him he was charged with forging a bill on Mr. Mells, and he said, "It is a very bad job"—I was not in uniform.
MR. PATER submitted that there was no cast; that the document in question not having been signed by the drawer until after the acceptance was placed upon it, it could not be said to be at that time a bill of exchange. MR. MOIR considered that there was ample proof that the prisoner had committed forgery, forgery being the alteration of any document to another man's hurt and it was for the Jury to say what the intent of the prisoner was. THE COMMON SERJEANT was of opinion that the objection was well founded; the document could not be a bill of exchange at the time the acceptance was written, and therefore upon this indictment a conviction could not be sustained.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. OPPENHEIM conducted the Prosecution.
THOMAS GARNET . I am clerk to Mr. Mellersh, a solicitor, of Godalming—on 7th July, I prepared three cheques for distribution on the effects of Harriet Mitchell, deceased—I wrote this letter, and gave it and cheque to
the junior clerk to post to Mr. Mitchell—the body of the cheque is in my writing, and it was signed in my presence.
WILLIAM MULLARD . I am clerk to Mr. Mellersh—it is my duty to copy and post office letters—on 7th July I made a copy of this letter, put the cheque in, fastened up the envelope, and posted it; it wan directed "Mr. Charles Mitchell, Brook, Mickleham, Surrey.
CHARLES MITCHELL . I am a fanner, of Lower House Farm, Thursley—on the morning of 8th July, I received this letter from the postman—I was standing at a place called Borham Green—I opened the envelope, and took the letter out, but saw no cheque—the endorsement at the back of this cheque is not my writing.
WILLIAM NEALE . I am assistant to Mr. Ballad, a draper, of Godalming—on 8th June, about 4 o'clock, the prisoner came and asked to look at a pair of men's trousers. she selected a pair, and purchased other articles to the amount of 35s.—she handed me this cheque, payable to order—I asked her her name; she said, Mrs. Mitchell, wife of Charles Mitchell, farmer, of Brook, who had authorized her to purchase the goods, and to endorse the cheque if required—I gave her a pen, and she endorsed it in my presence—I took it to Mellersh's Bank, in Godalming, got it changed, gave her the change in full, and she paid for the goods—I sent them by the 6 o'clock train—(Cheque read: "7th July, 1868. Messrs. T. Mellersh & Co., pay Mr. Charla Mitchell, or order, 26l. 14s., share in Re Horriet Mitcheli✗ deceased. Endorsed, Charles Mitchell").
Prisoner's Defence. My father persuaded me to do it; he was with me.
GUILTY . She was further charged with having been before convicted in the name of Ann Poulter.
WALTER SCOTT (Aldershot Policeman). I had the prisoner in custody, and produce a certificate of her conviction—(Read: "Winchester Assis, February, 1866. Ann Poulter, convicted, on her own confession, of stealing a set of sleeve links. Confined Six Months).
Prisoner. That is quite wrong Witness. I am quite sure of it—I knew her before and since—I apprehended her on that charge, and on others as well—she is married now—Poulter was her maiden name.
GUILTY **— Twelve Months' Imprisonment .
MR. O'CONNELL conducted the Prosecution; and MR. COOPER the Defence.
WILLIAM BEVINGTON . I am a butcher, of 3, Cross Street, Royal Row, Kennington—On Sunday morning, 28th June, between 10 and 11, I sold the prisoner some meat, coming to 1s. 8d.—he gave me half-a-crown—I put it on my desk, and directly he was gone I found it was bad—there was no other half-crown there—I kept it by itself in a little box for a week—I noticed a mark on the rose—on the next Saturday night, July 4th, about 11.15, the prisoner came again, and bought 1/2 lb. of steak, which came to 41/2d.; he gave me a half-crown—I saw directly that it was bad, fetched the former one, and said, "Do you remember coming to my shop last Sunday morning?—this is the second time you have tried to pass a bad half-crown on me"—he said, "I have never been in your shop before"—I called a policeman, and gave him in charge with the coins.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you known him before? A. No.
I charge—he said that be bad never been into the shop before—I searched I him, and found three good half-crowns on him.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he not say that he was not aware of this half-crown being bad? A. Yes—he gave me a correct address, Green Street, Kennington—I enquired there, and found he had done no work that week.
Witnesses for the Defence.
ABTHUR FREEMAN . I am a lithographic printer, of 49, Francis Street, Newington—on Sunday, 28th June, I saw the prisoner at his house about 8.15, and walked out with him—I was in his company till 1 o'clock—he went into no butcher's shop—I have known him eighteen months or two years—he is a labourer, and has borne a good character—he lives at Green Street, Kennington, the direction he gave to the police—he has not lived there the whole time I have known him—I believe he lived at Bethnal Green before that.
Cross-examined by MR. O'CONNELL. Q. Where were you from 8.15 till I? A. We left the house about 8.20, went to Camberwell Green, and met a friend there, Edward Coots; we then took a stroll to Peckham, where we saw some more friends, and were there till 12.45—we were not in the open air all the time—we went to a house, 103, Noel Street, Peckham—I parted with him in the Walworth Road—he went to his door and I want to mine—I believe he has been a bricklayer's labourer.
COURT. Q. When did you hear of his being taken? A. On the Sunday morning, for insulting a butcher, I heard—I went to the station and found him—I did not know that he was going before the Magistrate next day—I knew he was charged with passing two coins, but did not know whether they were both on the Saturday night—I heard nothing about the Sunday till after he was committed.
EDWARD COUTT . I am a labourer—on Sunday 28th June about 8.45, I met the prisoner on Camberwell Green with Arthur Freeman—I have known him as long as I can remember—he has borne a good character for honesty—he was with me till near 1 o'clock.
Cross-examined. Q. How do you know it was 28th June? A. It was the Sunday previous to his being taken—I heard on the Sunday afternoon that he was taken, and am quite sure it was the Sunday previous—I have met him on Sunday several times, but I can swear that this was the 28th.
COUR. Q. Did you know that he was charged with uttering it on Sunday? A. No, I was not aware when it was—I did not go before the Magistrate.
COURT to H. BEVINGTON. Q. When did you first recognise the prisoner, when he came in on Saturday night? A. I knew him again directly, and wanted to see whether he would give me a bad one or a good one.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. O'CONNELL conducted the Prosecution.
of gin and peppermint—he gave me a shilling—I tried it, and said, "This is bad, that will not do here"—he said, "Here is another one, we if that will do for you"—I tried it, and that was bad also—I said, "You ought to be ashamed of yourself trying to pass bad money like that we must see into it"—he said that he got them in change for a five-shilling piece—I went for a constable, and gave him in charge with the two shillings—I had them in my hand all the time—he was not drunk.
Prisoner. Was there any person with me? Witness. A woman—she went away the moment I mentioned the police.
JOHN M. WATERS (Policeman M 268). I was called to the Brown Bear, and the prisoner was given into my charge with these two shillings—I searched him in the back parlour, and found in his left waistcoat pocket four bad shillings, each wrapped up separately—he said that he got them in change for a five-shilling piece—I found two good shillings in his other waistcoat pocket, and three-halfpence in copper—he was not the least intoxicated.
The prisoner produced a written defence, stating that he received the coin from the woman who was with him, at the Corner Pin public-house.
GUILTY *†— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment .
Before Mr. Justice Lush.
The prisoner stating in the hearing of the Jury, that he was GUILTY of unlawfully wounding, they found that verdict. MR. DALY, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence on the felony, and stated that the prisoner had acted under the greatest possible provocation.— Three Days' Imprisonment .