CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
ELEVENTH SESSION, HELD SEPTEMBER 19TH, 1870.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND, BY
Short-hand Writers to the Court,
ROLLS CHAMBERS, No. 89, CHANCERY LANE.
THE POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE
REVISED AND EDITED, BY
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, September 19th, 1870, and following days.
BEFORE THE RIGHT HON. ROBERT BESLEY, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; The Right Hon. Sir FITZROY KELLY , Knt., Lord Chief Baron of Her Majesty's Court of Exchequer; Sir ANTHONY CLEASBY , Knt., one other of the Barons of Her Majesty's Court of Exchequer; Sir JAMES DUKE , Bart, THOMAS QUESTED FINNIS , Esq., THOMAS FERNELEY ALLEN , Esq., WARREN STORMES HALE , Esq., Sir BENJAMIN SAMUEL PHILLIPS , Knt., SILLS JOHN GIBBONS , Esq., WILLIAM JAMES RICHMOND COTTON , Esq., and THOMAS SCAMBLER OWDEN , Esq., Aldermen of the said City; THOMAS CHAMBERS , Esq., Q.C., M.P., Common Serjeant of the said City; and ROBERT MALCOLM KERR , Esq., LL.D., Judge of the Sheriffs' Court; 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.
BESLEY, MAYOR. ELEVENTH 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, September 19th, 1870.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
The prosecutor being called on his recognizances did not appear.
NOT GUILTY .
701. THOMAS ASHTON (33) , Unlawfully, within three months of bankruptcy, mortgaging 3000 dozen pairs of gloves, with intent to defraud his creditors. Two other Counts for encumbering and charging the same.
MESSRS. MONTAGU WILLIAMS and STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution; and
MR. METCALFE the Defence.
RICHARD THORNTON . I am assistant to Mr. Austin, a messenger of the Court of Bankruptcy—I produce the proceedings in the defendant's bank-ruptcy on his own petition, dated October 21st, 1869—the adjudication is the same date—all the papers are here—the examination of the bankrupt is dated 28th November, 1869—the order for this prosecution is dated 4th July, 1870.
JOHN BLACKSHAW . I am an umbrella manufacturer, of Monkwell Street, City, in partnership with Mr. Earl—prior to July, 1869, I knew the prisoner, not intimately, I had business and money transactions with him; if he brought a Manchester cheque, I have given him my cheque in exchange, nothing beyond that—a day or two previous to 10th July, 1869, he came to me, and said he had got a quantity of goods in pawn at Messrs. Harris & Sweeting's, about 500l. or 600l. worth, that he owed them 250l., he wanted to redeem them, and had not the means, and would I let him have the money to redeem them, as he had sold a portion of them to Messrs. Ward & Sturt, of Wood Street, enough to pay me the money back, which he would do in three days—I refused, for several days, to let him have it; he came repeatedly about it, and pressed me very hard to lend him the money; he said he did not know what he should do if I did not, that he was ruined if he did not get them out—I ultimately consented to go and pay the money
myself to redeem them, which I did; I went with him, and paid the cheque—I went twice; the first time Mr. Harris or Mr. Sweeting were not in—this (produced) is the cheque I gave, it is for 262l. 9s. 8d.; 12l. 9s. 8d. was for expenses—at first I was to hold the goods as security—afterwards he said they had better not go to my place, as he had got to my place, as he had got to re-box them before they went to Messrs. Sturt—Harris & Sweeting gave me a receipt for the money—the defendant handed me a list of the goods, but he had it back again to see that they were correct; I have never seen it since—he did not give me any memorandum, or any security for the advance—I did not have a halfpenny as discount—after two or three days I called at the defendant's premises—I don't think I saw him the first time, I called again and saw him—he said he had not sent the goods in yet, he had not got the boxes—I took his word—I saw him repeatedly afterwards; he kept on making excuses; at last he said he had sent the money to his father, that he had received from Ward & Sturt—I said he ought to have known better, he ought to have paid me—he made no reply to that—he said he was going down to Manchester, he had got some money there, and he would bring me the money up—I met him with his father, in Falcon Square, three or four weeks after the money ought to have been paid, and the father thanked me very much for my kindness to him, and told me I should not lose a penny, if it was the lost stick he had to sell he would pay me—I called afterwards at the defendant's premises from time to time—sometimes I saw him, sometimes I saw his clerk—I asked him every time for my money—I did not get it—on one occasion he said he was going to Manchester, to sell his stock there, which he did—he did not give me the money out of that—he was taken and put into Whitecross Street, with the money in his pocket, directly he came from Manchester—about Sep-tember or October I heard of his having executed a bill of sale to his father, and went to Messrs. Weeks, my solicitors—a letter or two was subsequently received from the prisoner's father, in consequence of which I waited some time longer—the letters were before I heard of the bill of sale—on 22nd September I went to the premises in Castle Street, and found the whole of the stock had been removed—I made inquiries, and traced the goods to Messrs. Honey & Humphrey, accountants, in King Street—I went there with my solicitor, and ascertained that the goods were to be sold on the following Saturday, by tender—I subsequently saw the prisoner's father, with my solicitor—I did not see a bill of sale of these goods—there was a bill of sale shown at his father's house when I saw his father—that was on the furniture—I never saw the bill of sale—I gave my solicitor instructions to take proceedings against the prisoner in bankruptcy, when we found he had filed his own petition—I was appointed assignee in the bankruptcy—there were no assets—I received nothing—I have never received a shilling of my advance.
Cross-examined. Q. I thought you received 49l., the proceeds of the sale? A. I did not, my solicitor did—I lent the prisoner this 250l.—I did not ascertain in any conversation with the father that he was security for the payment of his composition—I heard nothing about it—I have since heard it, and I have filed a bill in Chancery against the father, to upset the bill of sale—that is the bill of sale on the furniture—the father was a farmer in Devonshire—I am now aware that at the meeting of creditors, in December, 1868, the prisoner made a composition, and that his father secured the last two instalments—the father had a writ issued against him
on those bills—I don't know that he paid the instalments—I know that he took possession of the goods, and removed them to Honey & Humphrys, the accountants—I don't know that the prisoner protested against their removal, and requested his father to give him further time—I have never said so—the father has since died—the bill in Chancery refers to the bill of sale—that I am now charging the prisoner with fraudulently executing—the father was a farmer, of good means; he is dead, and his executrix also.
THOMAS HENRY WERKES . I am a solicitor, in Newgate Street—I have acted for Mr. Blackshaw throughout the whole of the bankruptcy proceedings—I was present at the prisoner's examination before the Registrar—he had a full opportunity of giving explanation then—he was represented by a solicitor on both occasions—I have also conducted the proceedings in Chancery for Mr. Blackshaw, as assignee—the bill was filed on 17th January last—the defendant died about March—the suit was revived in July last against his executrix—she has since died, and the suit has abated; but we propose reviving it against her administrator—in November, 1869, in consequence of what I heard, I made search at the Queen's Bench office, with reference to a bill of sale—this (produced) is it—it is dated 5th August, 1869—I found that it had been registered in the ordinary course—this is the original, and here is the office copy also.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know that that was given to the father to secure him against the money he had paid for his son? A. I believe that was what it was done for—I don't know what amount the father paid.
JOHN ROBINSON CLARK . I am a member of the firm of Honey, Humphrys & Co., accountants—in December, 1868, I was instructed by the prisoner to prepare a statement of his affairs—that statement showed liabilities 379l. 19s. 4d. against assets 2039l. 8s. 3d.—that leaves a deficiency of 1752l.—that statement was laid before the creditors at a meeting held on 1st January, 1869—at that meeting it was agreed to accept a composition of 8s. in the pound; 3s. payable at three months, 2s. 6d. at six months, tod 2s. 6d. at nine months—the first composition of 3s. was paid by the bankrupt's own promissory note; the other two were joint promissory notes of the bankrupt and his father, Lawrence Ashton—the notes were all dated 12th January—there were three promissory notes given to each creditor—the amount of composition was calculated upon each creditor's claim, and three promissory notes, divided into three, six, and nine months, was given to each creditor—I had no direct communication with the bankrupt after this till September, 1869—at that time the bankrupt's father called at our office; and in consequence of communications he made me, I went and removed certain stock from Ashton's warehouse—I believe we received instructions from the father to sell some goods—they were for sale by tender—I can't say that the father produced a bill of sale; but I believe he did—I can't give the date when the stock was removed—I believe it was removed to our premises in King Street—this is one of our printed lists—it was not made out by me—I can't say by whom; no doubt, by one of our assistants—I did not see the stock—I did not see Mr. Blackshaw and his solicitor before the sale—I believe they called at the office and made some communication—the goods were ultimately sold by tender on 25th September, at a discount of 42 1/2 per cent, off the selling or stock-book price—
that would be 462l. 7s. 2d.—the selling price would be 804l. 2d.—the 462l. would be handed to us, and our firm would hand it, I believe, to Lawrence Ashton, the father—the stock was hosiery—I did not see it.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you, as accountants, prepare the first statement of accounts in December, 1868? A. We did—a composition was accepted by the creditors, and the father became liable for five-eighths of that money, 5s. in the pound; that would make somewhere about 900l.—he gave promissory notes—I have heard to-day for the first time that an action was commenced against the father on one of the notes—I believe the father paid some of the notes—I have not been over the accounts since; I have had nothing to do with the bankrupt since—I believe the bankrupt pressed his father very much to give him time, and it was very much against his wish that his father removed the goods at the time he did—he said if his father gave him time he should be able to pay him, and continue his business.
WALTER ONGLEY . I am a glove manufacturer and warehouseman, 25, Castle Street, in partnership with Mr. Rudd—I was formerly warehouseman and clerk in the defendant's employ, at the same address—I was not present when the advance was made by Mr. Blackshaw to the defendant—I saw Mr. Blackshaw there from time to time afterwards—the defendant has been away several times—I have had conversation with Mr. Blackshaw, and hare written letters to him, I can't say by the defendant's direction, but by his father's—the goods were sent to Honey & Humphrys by direction of the defendant's father—I saw them go, they were gloves, I can't say the number; they were removed by a van—the defendant carried on the business of a glove manufacturer—it was the glove stock that was removed—he also had property at Torrington, Devonshire, that was principally cloth and Lisle fabrics for gloves—I should say the place at Torrington was Mr. Rudd's, who is now my partner—the goods at Torrington were made over to Mr. Rudd by the meeting of creditors on 1st January, and it was afterwards taken by Mr. Rudd and myself, and finding there was a surplus of about 200l. over and above the amount owing to Mr. Rudd, we paid that 200l. to Mr. Ashton's father in two bills—the prisoner was there at the time—I don't know that it was in consequence of anything he said that we paid the money to the father; he knew of the transaction—Mr. Pitman was present, the prisoner, and his father—I know the prisoner's handwriting—the signature to this bill of sale is the prisoner's handwriting—I can't say positively when I first saw this bill of sale—I think it must have been in September last year—I first heard of its existence about September; I can't speak positively—I heard it from the father—I assorted the goods at Honey & Humphrys'; it was part of the stock that had been at Castle Street.
Cross-examined. Q. Before they were removed, you were placed in possession, were you not? A. I was, on behalf of the father, under the bill of sale—I entered the sales in the day-book—I was in possession up to the time the goods were removed to Honey & Humphrys'—I don't know the exact dates, but I should think I was in possession four or five weeks, it might have been more—when the goods were proposed to be taken away, the prisoner objected, and wished his father to retain them—he said the business was good, and if time were given he could get over his difficulties—I don't know that his father pressed him to give the bill of sale as security—I paid one promissory note of 100l. for the father; that was not before the bill of sale was given, it was in existence then—I don't know that he
paid one before that—the one I paid was with the father's money from Torrington—while I was in possession I paid the prisoner, not exactly a salary, but 3l. or 4l. a week—I allowed him what might be required for the maintenance of his family, and so on, by his father's direction—I think I received about 16l. from Mrs. Ashton after the prisoner was taken; that went into the business—I was not present at the meeting of creditors on 1st January, 1869—Mr. Rudd was a creditor at that time.
EDWIN RUDD . I am a glove manufacturer, at Torrington, in partnership with the last witness—in December, 1868, the defendant was indebted to me 1070l. 19s. 6d—I had stock of his in my hands at the time to the amount of 777l.—the amount due to me was the difference between those two sums, about 207l.—after the deed of composition was given, in January, I received my composition in three sums—I don't remember the amount—I afterwards found that the goods in my possession were worth 200l. more than the amount owing to me, and I handed that sum to the prisoner's father in 1869—there were two different debts, one in 1868 and the other in 1869—before I handed the 200l. to the father he had given me notice that there was a bill of sale—the 200l. was paid by two promissory notes of 100l. each.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you present at the meeting of creditors on 1st January, 1869? A. Yes—it was agreed that the father should become security for 5s. in the pound—nothing was said then about his receiving security from the prisoner—I have heard it reported since—I have heard the father say so, and the son as well—I paid the 200l. to the father because he claimed it under the bill of sale—I knew at that time that he had paid money for his son.
The bankrupt's examination before the Registrar was put in and read: he stated that his father being surety for the last two payments of his composition, he gave him the bill of sale as security, and that he took possession of the goods a fortnight afterwards.
The bill of sale being proposed to be read, MR. METCALFB objected to its reception, in the absence of the attesting witness, the Common Law Procedure Act (17 and 18 Vic., sec. 26) which dispensed with the necessity of calling the attesting witness, applying only to civil, and not to criminal proceedings; he also submitted that it was inadmissible, there being no proof of registration. MR. STRAIGHT contended that it was admissible, as a document proved to be signed by the prisoner; but if the original bill was objected to, the office copy was also in evidence, and to that no objection would apply; he tendered both the original and the office copy. THE COMMON SERJEANT considered if the original bill was to be put in evidence, it was necessary to have the attesting witness, and that the production of the office copy did not dispense with that necessity; but he would receive the documents, and reserve the point if necessary.
GUILTY . Judgment reserved. The defendant was released on recognisances, to await the judgment of the Court.
703. JOHN GEORGE BURGHALL (25) , to feloniously forging and uttering three orders for the payment of money, with intent to defraud— Six Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
704. WILLIAM ANGEL (19) , to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of John Oldland, and stealing a coat and other articles— Nine Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
705. GEORGE YOUNG (23) , to stealing a post letter and forty sovereigns, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General — Five Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
706. PATRICK O'BRIEN (41) , to stealing a post letter and 119 postage stamps, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General— Five Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
NEW COURT.—Monday, September 18th, 1870.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
NOT GUILTY .
JOHN MOYSER . I am barman at the Clarence public-house, Charing Cross—on Sunday, 21st August, between 8 and 9 o'clock, the prisoner came in and called for a pint of four half, which came to 2d.—I knew him before, and suspected him—he gave me a shilling—I tried it and found it was bad—I had seen him before, on 7th June, when he gave me a gilt sixpence, representing a half-sovereign—my master gave him in custody with the gilt sixpence.
Prisoner. Q. When you put the change on the counter, did I touch it? A. No, I did not give you time to take it—I told the Magistrate it was a counterfeit sixpence, but I found it was a good one, gilt—you did not say that you wanted change for a sixpence.
WALTEB NOAD (Policeman G 61). Two months ago I was in the A division—the prisoner was given in my custody, on 7th June, for trying to pass counterfeit coin—Mr. Moyser gave me the half-sovereign, and I gave it to my inspector, and took the prisoner to the station—no more coin in found on him, and the charge was not pressed.
Prisoner's Defence. I gave the sixpence for a sixpence, and wished for my change. The barman said "Do you know what you have given?"I said "A sixpence, and I wish for change for a sixpence. "I looked at him with surprise when he put down change for a half-sovereign. I never touched the change.
NOT GUILTY .
house—the prisoner came in about April, I cannot say the day exactly, for 1d. worth of tobacco—he gave me a sixpence—I told him it was a queer sort of coin, and tried to bend it between my teeth, but could not, so I gave him the change, and put it on the mantelpiece by itself—it afterwards changed quite yellow, and I gave it to Monroe.
Prisoner. He is taking a false oath; I was in the House of Correction for nine months at the time.
MARIA TOWNSEND . I am the wife of Joseph Townsend—on 28th or 29th July I served the prisoner with a half-pint of half-and-half, which came to 1d.—he gave me a sixpence—I did not think it good, and asked him what it was—he said "A sixpence, can't you see?"—I gave it to my husband—the prisoner said that it was all the money he had about him, and that he was in the habit of calling at our place every evening for a pint of half-and-half—we both told him we had never seen him before.
JOSEPH TOWNSEND . I keep the Sydney Arms, Poplar—about 27th July, I saw the prisoner there, and my wife gave me this coin—I showed it to the prisoner—he said "God forbid that I should come offering any bad money to you! I was here last night, and had two pots of half-and-half with some women"—I gave him in charge, but as I was not at all well I did not press the charge as he had got no more money about him.
LOUISA FITCH . I am barmaid to Benjamin Roe, of the Iron Bridge Tivern, East India Dock Road—on 20th August I served the prisoner with 1 1/2 d. worth of gin—he gave me a shilling, which was very plain on one side—I put it in the till, where there was no other shilling, and gave him the change, and he left—he came in a few minutes afterwards for a half-pint of ale, and gave me a shilling which was like the first—I took them both to my master—he had a conversation with the prisoner, who then put a shilling into his mouth.
Prisoner. Q. Did not you take a Victoria shilling from me? A. No, my master did that.
BENJAMIN ROWE . I keep the Iron Bridge Tavern—my barmaid gave me two bad shillings—the prisoner was there—I showed one of them to him and said "What do you call this?—he took it up, put it in his mouth, and swallowed it—he put a good shilling down, a Victoria one—I said "This is the fellow to it; you don't swallow this one as well," took hold of his arms, and gave him in charge.
JAMES HILTON . Mr. Rowe gave the prisoner into my charge—he said "I want change for my two shillings, and the shilling I gave the landlord I received in change for a half-crown"—I found two halfpence on him.
Prisoner's Defence. He is swearing my life away, by saying I was in his place in April.
MR. COLERIDGE stated that he would withdraw the charge as to April.
GUILTY of the second uttering. He was further charged with having been convicted of a like offence, on 20 th September, 1869, when he was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment to which he
PLEADED GUILTY— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MESSRS. COLERIDGE and WEIGHTMAN conducted the Prosecution; and MR. W. SLEIGH the Defence.
JAMES BRANNAN . On 2nd September I went with Miller, Holder, and other officers to the White Horse beer-shop, Wheeler Street, near the Eastern Counties Railway, about 7.15, and saw the prisoner standing at one end of the bar, with another man—Miller and Holder seized him by each arm, and Miller took four small packets from his coat pocket—they contained coins, with paper lapped between them in the usual way; two packets were taken from another coat pocket, sealed and fastened—I opened them; they contained ten florins—this bad half-crown (produced) projected from his hand—two good florins, a sixpence, and a penny, all good, were taken from his trowsers pocket—I said "Huxley, my name is Brannan, I have received instructions from the Solicitor to the Treasury to look after you as a dealer in counterfeit coin; we come here with a search-warrant, signed by the Magistrate; you are entitled to have it read, if you like"—he said "All right, Mr. Brannan, it does not matter, it is a bad job"—at the station Miller made a further search, and found in his coat pocket another sealed packet, containing two packets, also sealed, each containing ten half-crowns—I said "You will have to account for the possession of this, it is counterfeit"—he said "You will have to prove that I knew it was counterfeit"—Miller also took out a piece of sealing wax, corresponding with the wax on the packets—he refused his address—while he was being searched this piece of paper (produced), which appears as if coin had been wrapped in it, fell from him—the coins have all undergone the process of slumming with lamp black and grease, to give them the appearance of having been in circulation.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you had a good deal to do with these cases in your time? A. Yes—there was a landlord there, and the warrant applied to him, too; and if we had got him, you would have to defend him—I do not think the prisoner is married—he lives with a woman who is supposed to be his wife, and who carries on this business with him—I do not know whether he has three children—the woman had a child in her arms—I have heard from another branch of the family that she is not his wife.
WILLIAM MILLER . I went with Brannan and five others to the White Horse, and saw the prisoner there—I seized him, and Inspector Holden held his arms while I searched him, and found four parcels with ten bad shillings in each, and in his breast pocket a parcel containing ten bad shillings, and two other parcels containing three half-crowns in each—in his trowser pocket I found a good florin and four good shillings—I held him while Holden and the other officers searched the place—he pretended to faint, and sat down, and said "This is a bad job"—as we went to the station he called out, "Go and tell my wife they have got me to rights"—at the station I found in his coat pocket two parcels, each containing ten half-crowns.
GUILTY **— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MESSRS. COLERIDGE and WEIGHTMAN conducted the Prosecution.
on 9th July I served Bailey with three half-quarterns of rum, which came to 9d—I put it into her bottle, and she gave me a florin—I gave her a shilling and three pence, and she left—shortly afterwards Irvin came in, and I gave him the florin, which was the only one in the till.
Bailey. I do not know this person or the house. Witness. I do not know which of them it was.
GEORGE IRVIN (Detective Sergeant H). On 9th July I was at the door of the Bridge House Hotel, and saw Bailey go in—I knew her by the name of Davis—I saw her served by Bishop—she put down a bottle, and I saw her pick up the change and walk out—I then went in, and was shown a bad florin—I followed Bailey and watched where she went.
HARRY C. STINTON . I am a tobacconist, of 50, King Street, Hammer-smith—five or six weeks ago Bailey came in for an ounce of tobacco and give me a florin; I gave her the change and she left—I then examined it and found it was bad—I followed her and took her fifty or sixty yards off—I said "You have tendered me a bad florin"—she said "I did not know it was bad, my husband gave it to me"—she gave me a good half-crown, I give her the change and the bad florin and let her go.
FRANK SAWYER . I am a butcher, of King Street, Hammersmith—on this afternoon I served Baker with a half-pound of steak—she gave me a bid florin—I told her it was bad, and she gave me a good shilling—I bent the florin and returned it to her—she said she had taken it somewhere and would return it—she left the shop and I afterwards saw her with Bailey—I saw a piece of steak at the station which I identified as the piece I had served her with.
Bailey. Q. Was the steak by itself? A. There were two separate quantities of steak, but the piece I sold was in paper—the piece of steak I sold to Baker was found on you.
ELIZABETH BOSLBY . I am apprenticed to Mr. Smith, a draper, of King Street, Hammersmith—on 9th August, about 5 o'clock, I served Baker with a pair of socks, which came to 4 3/4 d.—she gave me a half-crown—I gave it to Elizabeth Palmer, who gave me 2s. 1 1/4 d., and put the half-crown on a desk—a constable came in soon afterwards, and I gave it to him.
Baker. I am unfortunate; I got the money from a gentleman.
ELIZABETH PALMER . I am an apprentice in the same shop—I saw Baker served—she gave a half-crown, which E. Bosley gave to me—I laid it on a desk, and gave her the change—after Baker left a constable came, and I tent to the till where I had put the half-crown; there was no other there—I gave it to the constable—I noticed that it was rather smooth.
BARTHOLOMEW AYRES (Policeman T). On 9th August I received information, and followed Baker—I saw her meet Bailey, and give her a parcel—I followed them to King Street, where they met a man who gave Baker something—she went back and joined Bailey—Baker then went into a linendraper's shop where the two last witnesses are engaged—I went in, spoke to them, and received this bad half-crown—I then followed the prisoners, and told Baker I should take her for passing bad coins—she said "Oh, God help me," and commenced crying—a woman searched her at the station, and found 3s. 2 1/2 d., and on Bailey 12s. 6d. in good money, two separate half pounds of steak, and a loaf—Baker said that she took the money from a gentleman over night, as she was an unfortunate, but before that she said that she had taken it from a shop in King Street.
Baker's Defence. I did not know it was bad; I got it from a gentleman.
Bailey's Defence. I might have been near this woman, but I am a perfect stranger to her; I was not implicated in the case in the least as to the tobacconist's shop I was at work at the time.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. WEIGHTMAN conducted the Prosecution.
LOUISA CARR . I am barmaid at the Two Chairmen public-house, South Bruton Mews—on 7th August I served the prisoner with a half-quartern of gin—she gave me a bad half-crown—I called her attention to it, and she said "Oh, I will have two-pennyworth then, I have not sufficient money"—she asked for the half-crown back, but I would not give it to her—she went out, and I gave it to the landlady.
Prisoner. I never was in the house; I don't know you.
JENNY GRANTHAM . I am barmaid at the Red Lion public-house, Union Street—on 12th August, I served the prisoner with a half-quartern of gin—she gave me a bad half-crown—I took it to Mr. Gibson, who came and spoke to her.
SAMUEL GIBSON . I am landlord of the Red Lion—the last witness give me this half-crown, and I asked the prisoner if she was aware it was bad—she said she was not—I marked it, and gave it to a policeman.
THOMAS SMITH . I was in the bar of the Red Lion, and saw that the prisoner had a bad half-crown in her hand when she came in—she said she lived at the corner of Queen Street—the landlord asked me to follow her because he was busy—I followed her, and gave her in charge—the constable brought her back.
Prisoner's Defence. I did not know either of them was bad; one was given me by a gentleman; it was not me who gave the other.
GUILTY .— Six Months' Imprisonment.
MR. WEIGHTMAN conducted the Prosecution.
HENRY HARRIS . I keep the Victoria beer-house, Burdett Road, Stepney—on 5th September, about 10 o'clock, I served the prisoner with a glass of ale—he gave me a bad shilling—I gave him the change—my wife bit it, found it was bad, and I went after him—I had put it in the till first, and I do not rightly know that it is the same.
EDWARD DUGAN (Policeman). I took the prisoner on 5th September, and found on him these seven bad shillings, in three different pockets (produced), two of which were wrapped in thin paper, separately, 4s. 1d. in good money—four of the bad shillings were in another pocket, with two halfpence—there was good money mixed with each parcel, in each pocket.
JAMES DUGGIN . I am a fishmonger, of 21, Burdett Road, Stepney—on 5th September I served the prisoner with 2d. worth of fish and bread—he gave me a shilling—I gave him 10d., and put the shilling on the shelf—he picked up the change, and afterwards asked me for 2d. more, and gave me another shilling—I noticed that it was bad, and then looked at the
first, and that was bad also—I went round the counter and told him he must give me a good shilling for the bad one I had changed, and after some time he did so—I laid the two shillings on the counter; he picked them up, and put them in his pocket—I had bent them—these are them (produced)—he went into the Burdett Tavern; where he was stopped.
Prisoner. Q. Was I sober? A. I did not know what to make of you, I think you pretended to be drunk.
JOHN RUDD . I keep the Middleton Arms beer-shop, St. Ann's Road, Stepney—on 5th September, about 6.30, I served the prisoner with a pint of half-and-half—he paid me 2d., in good coin—afterwards my wife served him with a 1/2 oz. of tobacco, and in my presence he gave a shilling—she placed it in the detector, bent it, handed it to me, and said she thought it was bad—I said that it was good, and told her to put it in the till—she give the prisoner change—I afterwards went to the till, saw the bent shilling there, and found it was bad—I gave it to the constable next morning.
The prisoner produced a written defence, stating that he was drunk, and lost the money at a card match; that he gave a sovereign in payment, and received the bad money in exchange.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, September 20th, 1870.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
719. JOHN WILLIAMS (21) , to attempting to steal a watch, the property of Frank Burman, from his person, having been before convicted— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
720. ARTHUR LYSANDER HALE (17) , to stealing eight Peruvian consolidated 5 per cent bonds, of the value of 5000l., the property of Lawrence James Baker, and another, his masters—Recommended to mercy— Fifteen Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
721. HENRY WESTLEY (24), WILLIAM WESTLEY (55), THOMAS GABRIEL (28), WILLIAM DENHAM (30) , Stealing 120 glass bottles, and six pints of lemonade; 180 bottles and ninety pints; ninety-two bottles and forty-six pints, the property of John Perrett. Second Count—Receiving the same.
WILLIAM WESTLEY and GABRIEL PLEADED GUILTY .
MESSRS. H. S. GIFFARD, Q.C., and BESLEY conducted the Prosecution;
MR. PATER defended Henry Westley; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS defended Denham.
JAMES EDMONDS . I am a mineral water manufacturer, Norfolk House, Globe Road, Mile End—I have been in the habit of supplying Mr. Perrett at the London Bridge Refreshment Rooms, and the Broad Street Refreshment Rooms, with mineral waters—Westley senior has been in my service some time—his son was also a paid servant of mine—the boy Humphries was not in my service—he was paid by the Westleys—Gabriel was in my service—
he was employed to deliver express orders—the Westleys had commission as well as a salary—Gabriel had no commission at all—the Westleys have been six or seven years in my service, and Gabriel four to five—Gabriel had a book supplied to him for the delivery of mineral waters—there was a particular book for Mr. Perrett supplied to him—this is it (produced)—Gabriel used to drive a one horse van and the Westleys a pair horse van—my brother, who was the manager, would superintend the loading of Gabriel's van—he would take an account of the goods put in the van—on the 20th August, 23rd August, and 2nd September, Gabriel took out goods to deliver to Mr. Perrett—he had no goods to deliver to any other place—when he goes out in the morning the counterfoil which is left in the book is unsigned—the other part is left with the customer as an invoice—I find some of the counterfoils in this book signed by Denham, who was Mr. Perrett's cellarman at London Bridge Station, and Trodd, who was the cellarman at Broad Street Station—the book is brought back after the delivery with the counterfoil signed—I don't know Denham's writing—Gabriel had no right to transfer any portion of the mineral waters on either of those days to the Westleys' van.
Cross-examined by MR. PATER. Q. The younger Westley was employed by you, and was partly paid by you and partly by his father? A. Yes—he has been employed about six years in that way—I never had any reason to find fault with him—Westley was one of the carmen—he would have his regular customers to call upon—he knew his customers and went hit rounds—some of the customers were brought by him—the son was acting under orders from his father.
Cross-examined by MR. M. WILLIAMS. Q. Are you in a very large way of business? A. Moderately so—the carmen would take out a certain quantity of lemonade, ginger-beer, and other waters, call at the different trades-men, and leave on their premises as much as they required—that would apply to the Westleys, not to Gabriel—Gabriel went to specific customers with a specific quantity of goods, and if he took more than was wanted he would bring the remainder back—Mr. Perrett deals very largely with me—sometimes he has as much as three or four hundred dozen a week—it all depends on the weather—July and August are very nice months—we allow for breakages—Gabriel would have to deliver all the goods to Perrett's—it was his exclusive duty—he had been in my employ five or six years, and I confided in him—this book was kept entirely for Mr. Perrett—there is twelve dozen of lemonade left at Mr. Sutton's, and some to Mr. Parnell—all the others are deliveries to Mr. Perrett.
ROBERT EDMONDS . I am the brother of the last witness, and am manager of the business—on 20th August I superintended the loading of the one horse van which Gabriel drove—he took out fifty dozen—he brought the delivery book with the signature of Denham for fifty dozen delivered to Mr. Perrett—on 23rd August he took out fifty dozen to Perrett's, and brought back the book signed by Denham—on 2nd September fifty-six dozen was taken out—he did not come back with the book that day; he was taken into custody before he returned—he had no goods on either of those days to deliver to anyone but Mr. Perrett—there was no other book in his possession but Mr. Perrett's—he would not take goods out without bringing back a receipt—there are entries of goods delivered to two other persons, with those exceptions it is Mr. Perrett's book only—Mr. Perrett is one of our largest customers, we have no customers named White or Harris.
Cross-examined by MR. PATER Q. When Gabriel went out he generally took a larger quantity of goods than were required? A. Yes, it might be so—it was not the rule with him—it happened at times that more soda water was taken out than was required.
Cross-examined by MR. M. WILLIAMS. Q. Were the empty bottles always returned? A. There was no account taken of the bottles—they are of more value than the contents, but there was no account taken of them—the delivery book is not the only book that we have—when goods are sent out I place it on a slate, so many gone—I don't put the number of dozens on the counterfoil, I put them on the slate—if I was going to send out fifty dozen by Gabriel, I should put fifty dozen on the slate—there is nothing written on the counterfoil when he goes out, only the name of Mr. Perrett—the rest is left blank till he has the goods, and puts down the number of dozens—if the whole amount taken out is not signed for we expect the difference returned—if fifty dozen went out fifty dozen would appear on the slate in my handwriting—if thirty dozen were kept twenty down would be returned, and I should book the thirty dozen from the slate, and rub out the entry on the slate—I should enter the thirty dozen in the diary which I keep—I have the diary here—all the entries are in my handwriting—I have other books—this is the book for credit accounts—it is entirely in my handwriting—Mr. Perrett is a credit customer—I place the entries in the diary first of all from the slate, and I take it from the diary into this book—Mr. Stone, the clerk, keeps the ledger—there is an entry in the diary, to Mr. Perrett, forty-four dozen and six dozen seltzer—the forty-four dozen refers to lemonade, soda water, and ginger beer—there is also "Broad Street, eighteen dozen"—that is another refreshment place belonging to Mr. Perrett, at Broad Street Station—the entries are crossed out in this book when they are entered in the ledger—I have the ledger here—the ledger does not give the amount of goods delivered, it only says "To goods," and the cash is carried out—I did not have a conversation with Denham a week before 23rd August—I did not tell him that the detectives were employed to look after Gabriel—I knew Denham by going there years ago—I had not seen him for some time—Gabriel was the carman who took the goods to Perrett—I placed great confidence in him—the entries in the books are made after the van returns—there is nothing in existence until the van returns, except the entry on the slate.
MR. BESLEY. Q. There could be nothing; until he brings back the signature you could not tell what Mr. Perrett had taken? A. No—I had the memorandum on the slate for fifty dozen, and when the book came back signed for fifty dozen I should know that fifty dozen had been delivered—fifty dozen was signed for as delivered on 20th August, and fifty dozen on 23rd August—on 2nd September, the day Gabriel was given into custody, he took out fifty-six dozen—on 20th August Gabriel delivered goods at no other place but Perrott's—he took out fifty dozen, and brought back a receipt for the whole quantity—it was the same on the 23rd—he did not bring any back on either of those days.
JOHN PERRETT . I keep the refreshment rooms at the London Bridge Station and at the Broad Street Station—Denham has been in my service, at London Bridge, twelve or thirteen years—he received all goods, and had entire charge of the cellars—it was his duty to receive the goods, see if they were correct, and sign for them—I have dealt for some time with Mr. Edmonds, both at Broad Street and London Bridge—George Trodd was the
person in charge at Broad Street—Denham went there occasionally to put him right—in consequence of deficiencies within the last twelve months, I have discharged several servants, principally barmaids—I was aware of the deficiency, but I could not trace it until I received information from the police—I gave Denham into custody on 2nd September, about three weeks after I had received information—the signatures on the counterfoils of 20th August, 23rd August, and 2nd September are in Denham's writing, and also the figures on the counterfoils—on 23rd August there is forty-four dozen and fix dozen seltzer; that is in Denham's writing—the figures on 2nd September are also in his writing—Denham had the sole control of the cellar, and no one else.
Cross-examined by MR. M. WILLIAMS. Q. Was there any cellarman under him? A. Yes, one man, named Arnold—he is not a witness, that I am aware of—Denham occasionally went to Broad Street, but no good were received in his absence; the goods always came in the morning, and he would go in the afternoon—there are four refreshment bars at London Bridge, two on the South-Eastern and two on the Brighton side—the cellar supplied all the bars—sometimes they would consume 200 dozen a week—it was Denham's duty to count and sign for those—they were generally put in boxes, and he would count them in the boxes—he would count the boxes, and see that each box contained its quantity—he then had to store them away—it was his duty to tick them off as they were carried in—it was not a great deal for one man to do—he never came earlier then 6 o'clock in the morning at any time—he might go away at 6 o'clock in the evening if he thought proper, or 7 or 8 o'clock—sometimes he would stay as late as 8 o'clock; it would depend on himself.
MR. BESLEY. Q. He would never have 200 dozen to take in at one time? A. Certainly not—he never said that he was overworked or underpaid—the mineral water is put in 4doz. boxes, and you can see whether they are full or not at a glance.
JOHN DAVIES (City Policeman 921). On Saturday, 20th August, about 8 o'clock in the morning, I saw the prisoner Gabriel driving a horse and van—I followed him to London Bridge—about 10.30 I saw him coming back over London Bridge, with his van—he went into Moorgate Street, where he met the two Westley's and Humphries—he stopped his van, got off, and spoke to them—they were waiting with a two-horse van at the Swan's Nest, a public-house in Moorgate Street—Gabriel spoke to the elder Westley—he then drove into Fore Street, and then to Cripplegate Buildings—at that time the Westleys and Humphries were with the other van in London Wall—I saw Gabriel take from underneath some sacks in his van two boxes containing four dozen each—he took them to the Westley's van, and the elder Westley received them—they then drove away in different directions—the younger Westley stood at the corner of Philip Lane, five or six yards off—I should think he could see what happened—after the boxes had been put in the van the younger Westley got up, and drove away with the other—on 23rd August I again followed Gabriel—I saw him meet the Westley's at the same place, after he had been to London Bridge—he took a box containing four dozen from his own van to the Westley's van—he had stopped in Cripplegate Buildings, and the others in London Wall—the younger Westley stood by, and saw the first box removed, and he spoke to Gabriel—I then saw a second box, carried by Humphries, which Gabriel gave to him, from the one-horse van, and he took it over to the two-horse van, and
gave it to the elder Westley—I then saw Gabriel count out three dozen, and put them in a basket, and carry it to the two-horse van, and give it to Westley—the younger Westley was then in a public-house—after the conversation with Gabriel he left, and went into a public-house; he came out of the public-house, got up in the van, and drove it away in one direction, and Gabriel went in another direction—on 2nd September I was in company with Lawley—I saw Gabriel deliver goods at London Bridge on that day, at Mr. Perrett's stores, in Joiner Street, Tooley Street—before he went there I saw him deliver two dozen at a coffee-shop in Duke Street, Tooley Street, to a Mr. White—he then went to Mr. Perrett's, where he delivered four dozen of lemonade, in two boxes—I then saw Gabriel go through Snow Fields, Union Street, and through all the back streets, to Southwark Bridge, where he met the two-horse van and the Westleys and Humphries—they went to Upper Thames Street, where they had a conversation for four or six minutes, and then the younger Westley drove to Southwark Bridge again—Gabriel followed behind with his van—they stopped in Sumner Street, Southwark, and young Westley left the ran and stood about twenty yards off—I saw Gabriel and the elder Westley pass four boxes containing lemonade and soda from the one-horse van to the two-horse van—Gabriel also put two dozen of soda water in a basket, and put them in the two-horse van—the younger Westley could see what was being done—when he saw the first box come from Gabriel's van he started away and stopped about twenty yards off—I went up to him where he was standing—I told him I was a police officer, and I should take him for being concerned in receiving a quantity of lemonade and seltzer water from Gabriel—he said "I have had nothing to do with this transaction, and I have told them both of it many a time"—I then went up to where Lawley had stopped the two-horse van—I told the prisoners I should take them down to the station, and we did so on the van—on the way to the station young Westley said to his father "I have told you not to do this, and it is through you I have got into trouble"—about 2 o'clock the same afternoon I went with Lawley to Mr. Perrett's, where I saw Denham—I had seen him before open the door to Gabriel at the stores—I saw him when Gabriel delivered the four dozen lemonade—I told him we were police officers, and asked him what he received in Joiner Street on that day from Gabriel—he said "I don't know him by that name; I know Tom. I received a gross of lemonade"—I said "How did you receive it?"—he said "In three boxes of four dozen each"—I said "Did you receive any seltzer water?"—he said "Yes, two dozen"—I said "Did you count them?"—he said "Yes"—I said "I have only seen you receive from Gabriel four dozen of lemonade, and no seltzer water, and I have been watching you all the time"—he made no reply—something then passed with Mr. Perrett, and he was given into custody.
Cross-examined by MR. PATER. Q. Did not the younger Westley say "I told him I should have nothing to do with it? A. Yes, he did—the father made no reply to that—he said to his father "I have asked you not to do it."
JOSEPH HUMPHRIES . I have been employed by the elder Westley about two years—I used to go out with the van—on 22nd August I was outside Mr. Edmonds' yard, Globe Road, and I heard Gabriel say to the Westley's "I will meet you where I met you on Saturday"—young Westley said "I will have nothing to do with it"—I had been out with them on the Saturday,
and met Gabriel and his van in London Wall, and on the Tuesday following the conversation we met again in London Wall.
JOHN PERRETT (re-examined). I produce a diary kept by Denham—on Saturday, 20th August there is an entry of sixty-four dozen and six dozen seltzer received from Edmonds, in his handwriting—on the 23rd August I find an entry in his writing of sixty-four dozen lemonade, soda-water, and ginger beer, and six dozen seltzer—on the 2nd of September he was taken into custody before the book was made up.
Cross-examined by MR. M. WILLIAMS. Q. Where were the stores at London Bridge? A. One was under the Brighton Refreshment Rooms, and one under the South Eastern—ho had nothing to do with the stores at Broad Street, they were kept by Trodd—one of the two stores at London Bridge was the Joiner Street Stores.
Henry and William Westley received good characters.
DENHAM— GUILTY— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
HENRY WESTLEY— GUILTY — Three Months' Imprisonment.
WILLIAM WESTLEY and GABRIEL— Five Years' Penal Servitude each.
GABRIEL also PLEADED GUILTY to three other indictments, and WILLIAM WESLEY to one other.
GASHION PLEADED GUILTY . He was further charged with having been before convicted, to which he
PLEADED GUILTY*— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. COOPER, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence against
GAIR— NOT GUILTY .
MR. LILLEY, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence— NOT GUILTY .
For the trial of Margaret Waters and Sarah Ellis, in the Old Court, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, see Surrey Cases.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, September 20th, 1870.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
725. WILLIAM ADAMS (32) , to embezzling the sums of 1l., 11l. 7s. 3d., and 2l. 14s. of James Legasick Shuter and another, his masters— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
726. HARRY LANGLEY ASH (17) , to two indictments, each for stealing 15 cwt of paper, of William Henry Bond, his master. He received a good character— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And
727. WALTER KIMBER (19) , to feloniously sending a letter to David Robinson, threatening to burn his dwelling house; also, to sending him another letter, threatening to burn a rick of oats— Two Years' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. WEIGHTMAN conducted the Prosecution.
FRANCIS BKNTINI . I am a confectioner, of 100, Strand—on 5th August I served the prisoner with a bottle of ginger beer and a 1d. ice—they came to 2d.—he gave me a half-crown—I told him it was bad—he said it was
not, but afterwards said he would change it and give me a florin—I gave him in charge with the half-crown.
LEONARD INSKIP (Policeman E R). I was fetched, and Mr. Bentini gave the prisoner into my charge with this half-crown (produced)—he said he did not know it was bad, and paid with a florin—I found, in his inside coat pocket, a shilling, two sixpences, a 3d. piece, and a penny, besides the change for the florin—I took him to Bow Street—he was remanded to 8th August, and discharged.
WILLIAM SMITH . I am a greengrocer, of 6, South Molton Street—on 13th August I sold the prisoner a lemon, which came to 2 1/2 d.—he gave me A half-crown—I said that it was bad—he said "Oh, I have another," and handed me a good one—he said "I just took it from my governor"—I said "Where does your governor live I"—he said "The other side of the water"—I gave him in charge.
JOSEPH BENGER (Policeman). Mr. Smith gave the prisoner into my charge with this bad half-crown—he said he was very sorry, it was money he had received from his last employer—I found on him a good half-crown, a tobacco pouch, and a letter.
Prisoner. Q. Did you find my address right, and where I bad been working? A. Yes.
Prisoner's Defence. I was taken to the House of Detention. They asked me my name, and I told them, and two days afterwards they had me down, and said I had been there before. I said I had not They said they would prove it; they had my name down. My arm has been broken nine years, and they said that it had been broken since I had been there.
COURT to J. BENGER. Q. Did you ask the governor about him? A. Yes, he said that he had been acting as potman at Great Peter Street, Westminster about five weeks; that was all he knew of him.
Prisoner. He was here yesterday to give me a character. I know nothing about the first case, and do not know where the shop is.
GUILTY* of the second uttering — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. WEIGHTMAN conducted the Prosecution; and MR. F. WILLIAMS the
HANNAH WARE . I am a widow, and manage a dairy for Mr. Evans, at 7, Elizabeth Street—on 11th August I served the prisoner with three 1d. eggs—she gave me a half-crown, which I put in the till, where there was no other, and gave her the change—shortly afterwards I gave the half-crown to the girl Carty, who brought it back as bad—I am sure the prisoner is the woman—I put the half-crown on one side, and on Thursday, the 25th, the prisoner came again for three 1d. eggs, and gave me a bad half-crown—I accused her of coming there before—she stoutly denied it—I called Mr. Evans, who gave her in charge with the two half-crowns.
Prisoner. Q. What time did Mrs. Ware give it to you? A. 2 o'clock, and I gave it to my mother at 3 o'clock—I took it back to the prosecutrix about 4.15.
mother of the last witness—she gave me a half-crown on 20th August—I took it to a pawnbroker, who refused it—I found it was bad, and took it back to Mrs. Ware—I had no other half-crown.
Prisoner. I did not refuse it, I said I would give it at another time.
The prisoner produced a written defence, stating that she was not in the shop on the 20th, and did not know that the second half-crown was bad.
GUILTY of the second uttering. — Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MR. WEIGHTMAN and MR. F. WILLIAMS conducted the Prosecution.
JEMIMA DOUGLAS . My mother keeps a tobacconist's shop in Packington Street, Islington—on 9th August I served the prisoner with some tobacco, which came to 4d.—he gave me a half-crown—I gave him the change, and put it in a drawer, and he left—I afterwards tried it, marked it, and showed it to my sister and her husband, who said it was bad—I put it on a shelf by itself—on 18th August I saw seven men at the station, and picked out the prisoner from among them—I gave the half-crown to the sergeant—this is it—I know it by my mark.
KATK M'CLANE . I am the wife of Alexander M'Clane, of 54, Packington Street, and am the sister of the last witness—I saw her serve the prisoner on 9th August—he came again on the 18th, and I served him with a 1/2 oz. of tobacco, which came to 2d.—he gave me a florin—I tried it, and told him it was bad—he said that it was good enough—I went to the next shop, showed it to a neighbour, and found it was bad—I went back to the prisoner, told him it was bad, and gave him in charge with the florin—I told the policeman, in the prisoner's presence, that he was the same man who had passed a half-crown before—he said he was never in' the shop before.
SAMUEL CROW (Policeman). On 18th August Mrs. M'Clane charged the prisoner with having passed this florin (produced), and also with having passed another coin on the 9th—he said he received the florin from a costermonger, but said nothing about a half-crown—he said that he was never in the shop before—after he was brought to the station, Mrs. Douglas was sent for, and picked the prisoner out from seven others—she gave me this half-crown (produced).
Prisoner's Defence. If I had known it was a bad florin should I have stopped in the shop full twenty minutes while the woman went out? I showed her the man who gave it to me about two minutes walk from the shop. I asked the man to come with me, and I would show him the man who gave it to me, but he would not.
JURY to S. CROW. Q. Was Mrs. Douglas in the house when he gave the last florin? A. No—she did not see him.
GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been convicted in July, 1869.
DANIEL BRADFORD (Policeman N 463). I produce a certificate (Read: "Central Criminal Court, 12th July, 1869, George Austen, convicted of uttering counterfeit coin, One Year's Imprisonment")—The prisoner is the person, he pleaded guilty—I was present.
Prisoner. I never saw you in my life; I once had six months for a false case, as I told the officer, hut I never was convicted as George Austen.
GUILTY**— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
731. JAMES STONE (18), WILLIAM LOVETT (19), GEORGE HUMPHREYS (19), and MARGARET MACK (19) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Charlotte Watkins, and stealing therein 12 lbs. of bacon, and other articles, her property, to which
STONE And LOVETT PLEADED GUILTY .
MR. MOODY conduced the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS
CHARLOTTE WATKINS . I am single, and live at 15, Fitzroy Place—I keep a general shop—on 4th August, about 11 o'clock, I bolted my doors and windows—I was aroused about 4 o'clock in the morning by a noise—I got up, and missed a jar containing 3s. worth of farthings—I also missed half a Dutch cheese, a piece of German sausage, 12 lbs. of butter, and a 1/4lb. of tobacco—there were marks on the fanlight, over the door.
FRANCIS GORE (Policeman S 283). On the morning of 5th August, about 2.30, I saw three of the prisoners in Fitzroy Place, three doors from Mrs. Watkins', and I saw Humphreys at 4 o'clock—I asked them all if they were not going to get home, and an answer was made: "We are going in doors"—Humphreys came up at 4 o'clock, after the burglary had been discovered, and the prosecutrix was speaking to me—he said "That is something, too."
Cross-examined. Q. Are they all neighbours? A. Yes.
JAMES BARRETT (Detective Officer). On Saturday evening, 20th August, I took Mack at 26, Fitzroy Place, where she lives, and told her it was for receiving cheese, and other articles, the proceeds of a burglary on the morning of the 5th—she said she was not aware when Lovett gave her the bread and cheese that it was stolen—I told her I should take her to the station—she said "Have you got Lovett?"—I said "Yes"—she said "Then I suppose he has rounded?"—I said "I know all about that."
JOHN CHARLES MOORE . I am a carman, of 139, Whitfield Street, Tottenham Court Road—I have seen the prisoners before—I was at 17, Tottenham Place on the morning of the 5th, and saw Lovett and Stone—Stone asked Humphreys if he was going to have any breakfast—Humphreys said "Where have you got it?"—Stone said "I got it at Thornton's old shop"—that is the shop now occupied by Mrs. Watkins—they had break-fast, bacon and eggs—Humphreys told me he got 2d. out of the job, and he would sooner give the 2d. back to be out of it—the three walked out together, and Humphreys carried the bacon, which was left from the break-fast—Stone had some money wrapped up in a handkerchief; coppers, by the sound.
THE COURT considered that there was no case against
MACK and HUMPHREYS. NOT GUILTY .
732. JAMES STONE , and WILLIAM LOVETT were again indicted, with JAMES SMITH (33) , for burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-bouse of John Hines, and stealing therein two coats, and other articles, his
property, to which
STONE PLEADED GUILTY *— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
LOVETT PLEADED GUILTY **— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. MOODY conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN HINES . I am a greengrocer—on 4th August, about 11 o'clock, I saw my house safely fastened up—I came down at 6 o'clock, and found the parlour in confusion—I missed an overcoat, with a sealskin lining, and a light coat—a window was open, by which access had been gained.
JOHN CHARLES MOORE . On the morning of 5th August I was at the corner of Seymour Street, Euston Square, and saw Lovett and Smith—Smith asked me if I knew anybody who would buy a coat—I fetched George Spencer, who said he had more coats than he wanted—Smith had the coat on his shoulder, it was a kind of a black sealskin.
SMITH— NOT GUILTY .
MR. HUNT conducted the Prosecution; and MR. COLLINS the Defence.
JOSHUA HENRY WRIGHT . I live at 3, Havelock Terrace, Stratford—on the evening of 12th August I was in High Street, Shoreditch, walking towards the station, and about midway between the street and the station felt a blow behind which knocked my hat off—I saw the prisoner in front of me—he snatched at ray pocket, and pulled my chain, which was a very strong one, over my head—he took my watch and chain, worth 12l., and ran away—I informed the police, and afterwards went to the station and recognized the prisoner, who was with five or six others—it was a light night, there was a full moon—I have not got my watch and chain back.
Cross-examined. Q. Where had you been? A. I had left the White Horse, at the corner of Church Street—I had been there a half hour or more—I had been to at least a dozen public-houses before that, it is my duty to go there—I daresay I had something to drink at each; when I go to a public-house I always call for something, whether I drink it or not—I am collector to a brewery, and know the landlords—I wish each landlord to take something—I drink something at most of them—I had nothing but beer, except some port wine and water at Bryan's house—that was on the top of beer, but a long while after—I am fond of pale ale—beer and port wine is all I recollect having—I left the White Horse about 11.10, to catch a train—that public-house is not 100 yards from where I lost my watch—the blow did not stun me, but it knocked my hat off—there were at least twenty people about—I did not see the man who knocked it off—I stooped to pick it up, and the prisoner was in front of me, and as I was stooping my watch and chain went; the whole thing was over in less than a minute—the person who took it had something white on—I think the prisoner's dress (a smock frock) is the very thing—he ran away immediately, but I saw his face and his white smock frock—I told the police he had a white smock frock on, and he had it on when I went to the station—I recognized him in an instant by his face, not by his smock frock—he was a perfect stranger to me.
JOHN THOMAS (Policeman H R 4). I received information from Mr. Wright, and took the prisoner by the Great Eastern Railway Station, Shoreditch—he said "All right, I will go quietly"—I told him the charge, and he made no reply—he had tried to run away before I seized him—I
arranged him at the station among six others about his own size, and made two of them take their coats off—he identified him at once.
Cross-examined. Q. Had he any coat on? A. No; a dark smock frock, not like the one he has now—he said he did not do it.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BRINDLEY conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM BRANSOM . I am a furniture dealer, of 59, Cable Street, St. George's—on 6th September I returned home about 9.45—as I went into the house I heard glass falling—I stood and listened, but heard nothing more—I unlocked my bed-room door, against which I keep a large bedstead; that had been moved away, and I saw the shadow of a man outside my window, with his arm through the glass—I said "Who is there?"—he jumped down, and I went to the yard-door and caught him—he said "What is this; here is a shilling; here are two shillings, I only fell against the window; let me go"—it was the prisoner—I said, "I want to see what damage you have done"—a lodger came down, and I went and looked at the back window, keeping hold of the prisoner—I found that two squares of glass were broken, the catch was put back, and two gimlets, which were put to keep the catch down, had been removed—he said "You see I have only broken a window"—I shut the door, bolted it, and said "I shall give you in charge"—I called a neighbour, and my wife fetched a constable—two gimlets, a screw, and a bar of iron 2 ft. long, were found outside the window—he must have got the gimlets from the inside, he could reach them through the broken glass—I knew the prisoner before, coming to a lodger in the house.
Prisoner. Q. Is there any opening into the back yard? A. Yes—you did not say you came to see a lodger, Mr. Rose—you frequently did come to see him, but he has left my place five weeks; that is the reason you knew the ins and outs of the place so well—you may have lodged in the house with my mother formerly.
THOMAS BURKE (Policeman H 226). I was called, and the prisoner was given into my charge—I found a square of glass over the catch broken, and the catch put up, and a square broken at the bottom—I found this bar, and marks corresponding with it—I also found this other bar, which is part broken off the first—there were marks both on the top and bottom sash, which might be caused by this bar—the prisoner said that he went to water there.
Prisoner. Q. Was I drunk or sober? A. You appeared sober.
T. BRANSOM (re-examined). These iron bars do not belong to me; but the gimlets do.
Prisoner's Defence. I went there to see a friend; I have been in the habit of going to the house. I am innocent I had just come out of the back room.
He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a previous conviction at Clerkenwell in May, 1867, in the name of William Richman— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
735. WILLIAM DODSON (22) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Samuel Lewis Lavenberg, on 29th November, 1868, and stealing therein eighty-six watches and other articles, his property.
MR. HUNT conducted the Prosecution; and MR. BROMBY the Defence.
was formerly a pawnbroker—on 29th November, 1868, I came down stairs, and found the iron bar removed from the parlour window, which was open—the parlour had been entered, and the door broken open, and then the shop and the window had been emptied of nearly the whole of the jewellery, between eighty and 100 watches, several watch guards, and other articles, value 300l.—I have got about 50l. worth back—they were all safe the night before—this gimlet (produced) was left behind.
Cross-examined. Q. Was it 7 a.m. when you found your house had been broken into? A. Between 7 and 8 o'clock.
ROBERT SMITH (Policeman K 47). On the morning of 29th November, 1868, I was in Charles Street, St. George's-in-the-East, about three quarters of a mile from Mr. Lavenberg's shop—I saw the prisoner and three other men—as soon as they saw me one came over to the side where I was, and the prisoner walked up the east side with the other two—I remained against a lamp, and they came up to me—I walked by their side to the next lamp, and looked at them—not liking the appearance of the other man, I tried to get in front of him, when one of them said "Look, the b——tumbles" and all three ran away—I ran a mile, and caught one of them, and found eighteen watches and fifty gold rings upon him, and various other things, which Mr. Lavenberg identified—I examined the house; it had been entered by the back shutters, by turning a bolt from the outside, the nut would take off—I found this gimlet lying on the counter—I have been looking for the prisoner ever since, and went to his house, 4, Hope Street, Stepney; but did not see him till the 15th of last month, in King David Lane Station, with ten or eleven other men—I identified him.
Cross-examined. Q. Was this at 3.45 in the morning in November? A. Yes—I was walking by their sides.
JAMES BRYDEN (Policeman). On the night of 26th November, 1868, I was in Bull Lane, Stepney, with two other officers—I met the prisoner, and knowing him, I stopped him, searched him, and found in his pocket this gimlet—I marked it with my thumb nail—I asked him how he came by it—he said that he bought it in Whitechapel Road, and gave 6d. for it—I gave it him back—when Sergeant Smith asked me who it belonged to, I told him I knew, for I had marked it—I arrested the prisoner last month, and told him he was charged with the robbery at Mr. Lavenberg's—he said that he did not know what I meant—I was there when Smith identified him—ten or eleven men were present.
Cross-examined. Q. At what o'clock did you see him? A. Between 10 and 11 o'clock—it was about 100 yards from where he was then lodging.
Witness for the Defence.
MRS. DODSON. I am the prisoner's mother—he came home one evening, and told me he was stopped in Bull's Lane by a policeman, who asked him what he had got; looked at the gimlet, and gave it back to him, and told him he should like to give him seven years—my son left the gimlet with me—I was badly off, and a young woman sold it for me for 3d., and I never heard any more of it till my son was taken—I told the officer so, and offered to send for the young woman, but he said "No, serve him right"—I asked him to call on the young woman, as I had rather he should see her before I saw her, so that he could not say I had put the words into her mouth.
Cross-examined by MR. HUNT. Q. Did joy give evidence before the Magistrate? A. Yes—I did Dot say that the prisoner had been stopped in Bull's Lane, Stepney; they would not allow me to say all' I wished to say; but the young woman is in Court who sold the gimlet—this might be a year and ten months ago—I took no account of the time.
COURT to R. SMITH. Q. Did she offer to send for the young woman? A. No.
MRS. DODSON. Mr. Bryden was present, and he heard me.
J. BRYDEN (re-examined). I do not recollect her saying anything of the kind.
DODSON. I sold this gimlet at Emhleton's iron shop, in Bull's Lane—I asked 6d. for it, and they offered me 3d.—I said I would take it and see—I took it to Mrs. Dodson, and she said that would do.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know the prisoner's brother? A. Yes, I am married to him.
NOT GUILTY .
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, September 21st, 1870.
Before Mr. Baron Cleasby.
736. JOHN JOSIAH PYE, SARAH PYE, ELIZABETH WADLEY (27), and WILLIAM HENRY IRVIN SHERIDAN (31) , Feloniously administering to Eliza Perch certain drugs, with intent to enable John Josiah Pye to ravish her.
MR. BESLEY conducted the Prosecution; MR. SEBJEANT SLEIGH appeared for
J. J. Pye, and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS for Wadley and Sheridan.
NOT GUILTY .
737. JOHN JOSIAH PYE, SARAH PYE, ELIZABETH WADLEY , and WILLIAM HENRY IRVIN SHERIDAN were again indicted for feloniously assaulting Eliza Perch, with intent to ravish her, upon which MR. BESLEY offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZABETH BUTLER . I live at 19, Gibraltar Walk—I was married last Monday five weeks—I met the prisoner in Birdcage Walk, between 10 and 11 o'clock at night—I had seen him several times before—I bade him "Good night"—he followed me, and called to me by my name—I felt a pain through from my chest to my back, and do not remember any more—I was taken to a doctor, and then to the hospital—I found I was stabbed in my chest—Edward Hines was near me as well as the prisoner—I saw nothing in the prisoner's hand, it was quite dark—I can give no reason why he did this—I had not been in private with him, I have only met him and spoken to him—I was friendly with him, so far as to speak to him when I met him—I bad not given him the a lightest cause for this.
Prisoner. I have had connection with you at different times. Witness. It is a false—it is about three years since I first saw you.
EDWARD HINES . I am a shoemaker, of 71, Bethnal Green Road—I was with Elizabeth Butler and the prisoner in Birdcage Walk—I bade them "Good night," and the prisoner after wards came up to me and said "You
had better go back to her; do you hear that man calling her?"—I said "Yes," and there was a man calling her; but his voice was a long distance off—I went back to her, found that she was stabbed, and took her to a doctor—my little girl came up to me at the time.
LYDIA HINES . I was with my father, and saw the prisoner strike Mrs. Butler in the chest—I could not see what with—I saw him go to my father afterwards; but did not hear what he said—my father was three doors from where the prisoner struck Mrs. Butler.
JAMES WARE (Policeman). On 8th August, from what Mrs. Butler said I went to the prisoner, at the Three Crown beer-shop, Hackney Road—I asked him if his name was Robert Jordan—he said "My name is Bob*—I told him I wanted him—he said "All right"—I asked him if he knew what for—he said "All right"—I did not tell him the charge; but going to the station he said "I did it"—I cautioned him that what he said in my presence I should use in evidence against him—he said "Well, I don't care, I intended to have murdered her; it is all through jealousy, and I intend to do it; it is through that Mr. Mines, who she is living with, that I did it"—he said that he told her before that he should do it, and he intended to do it—he took this knife out of his pocket, gave it to me, and said "That is the knife I did it with; I bought it on purpose, and gave 2 1/2 d. for it—he also said that Mrs. Butler got 4s. a week from her husband, and spent it on Hines, and he was determined to put a stop to it—I took him to the hospital, where Mrs. Butler was in bed, and he made a statement.
Prisoner. I remember being taken to the station; but I do not remember saying what he says.
COURT. Q. Did he appear to know what he was about, and to under-stand what he was saying? A. Oh yes, he was perfectly aware of it; he had been drinking; but he was not drunk.
MR. COOPER to ELIZABETH BUTLER. Q. Have you been living with Edward Hines? A. No—I have known him ever since I was a child, ever since I can remember, he was a neighbour of my mother—I have been married eleven years.
WILLIAM LEAPINGWELL . I was house surgeon at the London Hospital—I saw Mrs. Butler there on 8th August, about 10.30—she was stabbed in the right side of the abdomen, over the liver, and had lost a great deal of blood—the was in great danger for some weeks—this knife would produce I the wound; but I do not think it did, as there is no varnish on the handle, and I think it would have been very much stained—this handle is perfectly clean—the stab went to a great depth, and she had a very narrow escape—I do not believe the blood could have been removed from the knife by it being drawn through the clothes, because the woman was covered with blood, from the wound downwards.
JURY. Q. Would not the outside of the clothes prevent the blood from getting on the knife? A. No, the blood would be wiped, but the handle not being varnished, would he stained.
COURT. Q. If the dress was not penetrated by the handle, might not the handle remain without any marks of blood on it? A. It might if it was withdrawn immediately.
Prisoner's Defence. This day six weeks I met the prosecutrix. She told
me she had been out over night, and was refused to be let in, and she remained with me till the night this happened. I took lodgings purposely for her. We all three came away from the brewery together, I, Mrs. Butler, and Hines.
WILLIAM LEAPINGWELL (re-examined). The prisoner was very drunk indeed, at the hospital, while they were taking the deposition; he was supported by two constables—I asked him if he wished to ask any questions—he merely bowed his head in a very ridiculous manner—he did not appear to know what he was about; he seemed very muddled, but slightly sobered by what had taken place.
GUILTY on the Second Count — Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, September 21st, 1870.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. HARRIS conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM JAMES . I am a compositor, and reside at Bridgewater—I am at present staying at the Cathedral Hotel, Six Paul's Churchyard—about 1.30 in the morning of 16th August, I met the prisoner in St. Paul's Churchyard—I had my pocket-book containing some letters, and a purse containing 4l. 10s. in gold and 17s. or 18S. in silver—the prisoner pressed her company upon me, and wanted to enter into conversation—I gave her 1S. to get rid of her—I was with her five Or six minutes—she saw me put my purse in my pocket, but I don't know how she abstracted it—when she left me, a police-officer came up and asked if I had lost anything—I said "No"—he said "The woman that has left you is a bad character, and I advise you to search your pockets"—I felt for my purse, and found it was gone—we ran towards the woman, and I took my pocket-book out of her hand—the policeman seized her hands, and did not let them go until she reached the police-station—at the station she took the purse from her bosom and gave it up—this is my pocket book and purse (produced)—there was not the same amount in the purse as there had been previously.
Prisoner. He gave me the purse.
JOHN FROST (City Policeman 567). On the morning of 16th August, I saw the last witness and the prisoner in Old 'Change—the prosecutor was sober—I saw the prisoner come from a doorway—I stopped her, and asked the prosecutor whether he had lost anything—he said "No"—I asked him to examine his pockets; he did so, and said "I have lost my purse"—I caught hold of the prisoner's hands, and conveyed her to the station, where she produced the purse.
She further PLEADED GUILTY** to having been before convicted, in April, 1868— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. METCALFE conducted the Protecution; and MR. PALMER defended
proecipe is dated 20th December, 1869, purporting to be the entry of an action by John Harris against James Chapman for 21l., and signed by John Harris—the next document is dated the same day, and purports to he the consent of the plaintiff for entering up judgment against Chapman for 21l., and 1l., coats—it is signed by James Chapman, and witnessed by Henry Banks, 2A, Well Street, Cripplegate—upon that consent an order is drawn up, and upon that order the judgment is signed—if the cause of action arises out of the City the judgment is removed to one of the other courts.
Cross-examined. Q. Is there anything suspicious on the face of those documents; it happens in thousands of honest actions that consent is takes to a judgment? A. No doubt—the consent appears to be a genuine document, and I felt myself bound to draw up the order upon it—I did not see that I had any right to refuse its being drawn up—it is perfectly regular—it is rather suspicious to see the judgment and all on the 20th December, but suspicion did not arise in my mind until the mischief was done, and then I had no right to stop.
MR. METCALFE. Q. Were there a great number of cases by Banks at that time? A. Yes, during the last three months before December—there was a rush to avoid the new Act—I am familiar with Banks' handwriting—I can't say that he had some hundreds of cases.
BERTRAM ROBERT JOHNSON . I am a clerk in the Court of Baukruptey—I produce the proceedings in Chapman's case—the date of the petition is 22nd December, 1869—it is his own petition in formd pauperis—the date of the deposition, taken before the registrar in the prison, is 23rd December—the date of adjudication is also 23rd December—the three days' state-ment is the same date—it contains a list of creditors—the first creditor on the list is John Harris, of Ball's Pond Road, 25l.—there is an affidavit verifying the three days' statements dated 23rd December—the ten days' statement was filed on 12th January—the first item there is John Harris, Ball's Pond Road, 25l., money lent in 1869—there is an affidavit verifying that at the end of the proceedings, dated 26th May.
Cross-examined. Q. Have you upon the file the examination of Chapman before Mr. Registrar Roche, on 24th June, 1870? A. Yes—I have the part where he says "I never received any money from Mr. John Harris; I never owed him any."
MR. METCALFE. Q. What is the date of that? A. 24th June, of the present year—six months after the ten days' statement.
VINCENT METHOLD . I am an officer of the Court of Common Pleas—I produce an affidavit in the case of "Harris against Chapman" for the removal of judgment from the Lord Mayor's Court to the Court of Common Pleas, dated 21st December—the execution issued from our Court.
HENRY HERRICK . I am officer to the Sheriff of Surrey—on 21st December, I arrested James Chapman on a writ from the Court of Common Pleas—the warrant is dated the 21st, the same day as the arrest—I found him in Stamford Street—there were one or two with him, and they accompanied him to the prison—I don't remember that Banks was one—I did not see Banks or Harris when I got to the prison—I saw him afterwards in the neighbourhood—a lad came to my house, and told me where Chapman was to be found—I know Banks, but I never saw Harris till I saw him at the Police Court—I had seen the lad before—he had been to our office in other cases of Banks's—our office is in Stamford Street—the lad came in, and said I should find Chapman outside, and I went outside and found him
there, and took him off to Horsemonger Lane Gaol—I called him by name—he said "Yes," and we went down to the gaol together—we did not have a cab—I think we walked down, and the other men who were there followed—there were a great many arrests about that time, and I can't recollect who the men were—I suppose Banks had two or three arrests at that time, not more.
Cross-examined. Q. The matter about the cab and so forth you have no distinct recollection about? A. No—I spoke about the little boy coming to my office at the Police Court—I arrested two or three persons on that day—I had the warrant for Chapman on the day he was arrested—no one came before the lad came and said Chapman was outside—I was first spoken to about my recollection of the facts so as to give evidence in August last—I they came to me a day or two before, and said I was wanted at the Police Court—that was, in August, and the arrest was in December.
Q. Did you execute that warrant yourself? Do you know whether you did or not? A. That is my signature to it, and that is all I can go by—the warrants are never signed by me and executed by a deputy—either me or my father would go down with him—I think I must have arrested him because I see my signature there.
MR. METCALFE. Q. You have no doubt that you did go down with him? A. Yes, I did.
JOHN KEEN . I am the Governor of Horsemonger Lane Gaol—a person named James Chapman was brought in custody on 21st December, and this document was left when he was brought—it is the petition in the Bank-ruptcy proceedings, and was sworn before me—the affidavit in formd pauperis was also sworn before me—he was discharged on 23rd of December—the discharge is signed first by the Sheriff, and then by a clerk from the Sheriff's office.
Cross-examined. Q. I suppose you have no recollection of this transaction except from these documents? A. None whatever—I don't remember Chapman.
JOHN HARRIS . I am at present in Holloway Prison—I have been convicted of offences similar to this—I know Banks and Chapman—I was present when Chapman was arrested in Stamford Street—I saw him taken by the Sheriff's officer to Horsemonger Lane—Banks and Lawrence were there with me—Lawrence was the attorney—he was also convicted with me—we went down together to Horsemonger Lane—I have seen Chapman before that in Whitecross Street after a previous arrest—I was there some time with him—this is a consent by Chapman to a judgment at my suit—this John Harris on it is not my writing—I don't know whose writing it is—I never saw it before to my knowledge—it is witnessed by Henry Banks, but it does not look like his writing—I think the signature is his, but the other part is not in his writing—Chapman never owed me any money, and I never lent him any—I don't think I lent him money at any time—I was not present when the consent was given—I never saw it until the other day at the Police Court—at the time Chapman was arrested I was not aware that it was at my suit—this deposition, made after the arrest, and immediately before the adjudication is filled up in Banks' handwriting—it is chiefly printed, but it is filled up by Banks—it is Chapman's deposition, sworn before the Registrar in Horsemonger Lane Gaol, after the arrest and before the adjudication—it is dated the 22nd December—the signature, "John Harris," to that is my writing, but the rest is filled up by Banks—the residence
of the executing creditor, "Ball's Pond Road," and the amount, "25l.," are in Banks' writing—there is a question, "In what Court?"and the answer, "In the Major's Court, London," is in Banks' writing—"John Harris, Ball's Pond Road," is the first creditor in the three days' statement—that is in Banks' handwriting—the affidavit verifying that is in my writing, all but the signature—the first name on the ten days' statement is "John Harris, Ball's Pond Road, 25l., money lent in 1869"—that is my filling up—the whole of the page is in my writing—the general affidavit of the 26th May, verifying the proceedings, is filled up in Banks' writing.
Cross-examined. Q. You knew Chapman in Whitecross Street some times before these proceedings? A. I suppose twelve months before—Banks and myself had some proceedings taken against us at the last Sessions—I believe that Banks is considered skilful in getting persons through the Court—some hundreds of persons had availed themselves of his services in going through the Court—he usually receives from 6l. to 10l. for doing so—I was em-ployed by him as servant, and did what I was directed to—no one but Chapman was ever prosecuted that we took through the Court—these forms that were used were kept in the office—they are common with solicitors—we kept a large quantity of them in the office—I was Banks' clerk at the time of the arrest, and at the time of these proceedings—I did not make any arrangement with Chapman that he was to be outside the office on perpose to be arrested—I don't think Herrick was the person who arrested him—I think it was one of his men—Banks and Lawrence were present at the time—I don't remember whether Chapman objected to be locked up—I did not instruct any boy to go and point out Chapman as the person to be arrested, to the officer—I don't know that any boy was sent, and I don't remember a boy being there—with the exception of myself, John Harris for 25l., there are only three other creditors, "Holmes, the ironmonger, 6l.; Mr. Guyatt, the Secretary of the Alum and Ammonia Company, 109l.; and Messrs. Wontner & Son, of Cloak Lane, 20l."
MR. METCALFE. Q. I thought there was a creditor of the name of Foreacres? A. No—there are only four creditors in the three days' statement, and also in the ten days' statement—Foreacres was not one of the creditors to be paid in full—there are extras, 11l. 5s. contracted in 1869 for rent—the front sheet of the ten days' statement is not in Banks' writing, nor in mine—there are no assets—I am not certain whether I went with Chapman to Stamford Street—I went with Banks, but I can't say whether Chapman went with us—we went straight from Banks' office to Stamford Street—Chapman was not at Banks' office—the consent to judgment was signed on the 21st—I don't know whether it was signed at Banks' office—I don't know whether it is Chapman's signsture—the proecipe is in my handwriting—it is dated the 20th December—I did not hear any arrangement made with Chapman that he should go to Stamford Street—I went there with Banks—I have no doubt he said we should meet Chapman there.
THOMAS GUYATT . I live at 15, Coleman Street, and am Secretary to the Alum and Ammonia Company—Chapman was formerly in the employ of the Company, as manager of the works—I know his handwriting very well—the signature, "James Chapman," to the consent to judgment, is in his writing—the petition of bankruptcy also bears his signature, also the deposition, the three days' statement, and the affidavit verifying it—the affidavit to the ten days' statement is also signed by Chapman—he was first of all arrested
at my suit, and placed in Whitecross Street, about twelve or fourteen months ago—he petitioned the Court of Bankruptcy, and that was dismissed—and fire me some bills and a warrant of attorney for the debt and costs—the bills have not been met, and the warrant has not been paid—I have received no money—he was not arrested on this Bankruptcy at my suit—I first knew of it in May—I knew nothing of his consenting to judgment, and being discharged on 23rd December—Chapman was the manager of the works at Bow.
Cross-examined. Q. I believe those works at Bow had been carried on for some time? A. Yes, for several years—it was carried on for some time under private hands, and was converted into a public company—Chapman was a plumber by trade—he was the plumber at the works, prior to being appointed manager—he was manager about three years, up to 1868—about that time he made some statement with reference to me and the accounts, and I brought an action against him for slander—prior to that I had requested him to resign his office of manager, the directors being dissatisfied with him—I asked him to resign, telling him at the same time that he would be dismissed if he did not—he was offered a sum of 50l. to resign—he was not asked to resign because the works did not pay—he declined to resign—he was receiving 150l. a year at that time, and, latterly, a bonus of 30l. or 40l. every six months—he did not produce from the raw material sup-plied to him what he ought to have done, and the directors were dissatisfied—he knew nothing about the accounts—he said nothing about them not being properly kept until after his dismissal, and he then made a statement that I had falsified the accounts, and I brought an action against him, and recovered 10l. damages and 66l. coats—that was the foundation of the debt of 109l.—that money has not been paid, or any part of it—I took four bills from him for this debt—they were accepted by Mr. Wood—I am not aware that Mr. Wood was sued—Chapman was discharged on 26th May, from bankruptcy, and I applied to the Court of Bankruptcy for leave to prosecute him—they gave me leave to do as I liked—the debt has not been paid, not a penny.
MR. METCALFE. Q. The slander was a matter personal to yourself? A. Quite—he said, after he was dismissed, that I had falsified the accounts—I brought the action, and recovered judgment against him—I knew nothing about this conspiracy—I know Banks as being connected with the security given by Wood.
CHAPMAN— Six Months' Imprisonment. BANKS— Sixteen Months' Imprisonment, concurrent with his former sentence. (See page 387.)
MR. BRINDLEY conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM CANNON . I am a painter, and live at 47, Moorgate Street—on 8th September, about 9.35, I was in Finsbury Pavement, with a friend—two men came up and wanted to fight—a crowd came round—the prisoner was in the crowd—he came behind me, and took hold of my chain and tried to pull it out—I got my pocket torn—the men who were fighting wanted to hit me, and I ran away—they halloaed "Stop thief!" and I was stopped by a constable and brought back—the prisoner was then walking on the other side of the road—a waterman said "There is the man who tried to take your watch"—the prisoner then began to run—he was followed and taken into custody.
Prisoner. Q. Were not the two men who had been fighting running after you crying "Stop thief?"A. Yes—you stopped me, and we came back to the crowd—I was hustled and pushed about, and you took hold of my chain—I charged you at the time—I ran down towards Coleman Street because the men were after me.
MR. BRINDLEY. Q. Did the prisoner put his arm round you before or after you ran away? A. After—that was on the Finsbury Pavement—I had been brought back when he seized my chain—there was no policeman there, only a crowd of persons.
JAMES MOORE . I live at 59, Canal Road, Kingsland, and am waterman at the cab stand, Finsbury Pavement—shortly before 10 o'clock on this night my attention was called to a crowd on the Pavement—I saw the prisoner there—I had seen him before, a number of times—when I got into the crowd, I saw the prisoner with his arm round the prosecutor—I said "Your watch is going" and I caught the prisoner's hand on the chain—the prosecutor ran away, and was brought back by a policeman in plain cloths—I touched him on the shoulder, and said "That is not the man you want," and I pointed out the prisoner on the opposite side of the way—he ran towards Fore Street, and the constable caught him.
Prisoner. Q. Did I take hold of the prosecutor's watch before he was brought back by the policeman? A. Yes—I accused you of it at the time—I kept my eye on you; I did not detain you.
ROBERT DELAMORE (City Policeman 117). I was on duty in plain clothes on this night—I heard a cry of "Stop thief!" and stopped the prosecutor in Coleman Street—I took him back to Finsbury Pavement—the waterman said something to me, and I saw the prisoner running—I stopped him, and charged him with stealing the watch—he made no reply—on the way to the station he said "All I done was to keep him from falling."
Prisoner. I did not see anything of it.
EZEKIEL LAW (City Policeman 151). I saw the prisoner in Finsbury Pavement—I was with the last witness—the waterman spoke to me—as soon as he did so the prisoner ran away towards Fore Street, and he was caught by Delamore.
The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he saw the prosecutor running, followed by some persons, crying "Stop thief!" and he stopped him; that he never tried to steal the watch, but was trying to hold him.
NOT GUILTY .
742. WILLIAM FOLEY (15), and RICHARD HERMITAGE , Feloniously throwing stones at certain carriages being used on the Metropolitan Railway, with intent to endanger the lives of certain persons travelling in the carriages.
MR. LANGFORD, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
PLEADED GUILTY . To enter in their own recognizances in 10l. each to appear for judgment when called upon.
MR. LANGFORD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS
GEORGE THOMAS KEELE, M.R.O.S . I live at St. Paul's Road, Islington—a little after midnight, on Monday the 15th August, I was called to attend William Colson, the prosecutor—he was brought to my house—he had lost a great deal of blood, and was then losing blood—he had four incised wounds at the back of his neck—two were bleeding very much—one in particular—I had very great difficulty in stopping the blood—it was dangerous from that cause—it was about an inch in depth—the wounds were such as would be inflicted by such a knife as this—there was a slight graze to the man's side, and the clothes were cut through—I attended him for a fort-night—the wounds are quite well now.
WILLIAM COLSON . I am a coachman, and live at 1, North Cottages, Canonbury—on Sunday night, 14th August, I was in Upper Street, Islington, going home, about 11.50—my wife, my aunt, and uncle, and cousin, were with me—as we went along we passed the prisoner and another man, named Holliday—the other man said to my uncle "Halloa, you have got it on you; you are walking with a stick"—I turned round and looked At the prisoner, and he said "You can go home and take your b—w—of a wife home with you"—I knew the prisoner before by sight, but I had never spoken to him—I turned round and struck Halliday, the man who was with him and Wood ran away—I tried to catch him, but could not, and we went on towards home—the prisoner came up again before we had gone very far—I ran after him, and caught him by his coat—he threw himself down—I walked away, and left him there—when we got to the comer close to my house, he came up alone—he said "You have grossly insulted me"—before I could turn round he jumped on me, and commenced stabbing me—he put his arm over my left shoulder and stabbed me with his right hand—I felt it was a knife—I felt four blows at the back of the head, and one in the side—I felt the blood flowing—I called out "See what he has got in his hand, "and my cousin and uncle pulled him off me—I was taken to the doctor's—the prisoner was behind me while he was stabbing me—my uncle, in pulling him off, pulled me down, and him on the top of me—my wife tried to get the knife away.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the prisoner hurt at all? A. No—it was 11.50 when he first assaulted me—we were all sober—the prisoner had been drinking, I think—I can't say whether he was smoking—I can't say that he was smoking the end of a cigar on the end of his penknife.
EDMUND OSBORN . I am an innkeeper, at. Daventry, in Northampton-shire—on this Sunday night I was with Colson, his wife, and my nephew, in Upper Street, Islington—we passed the prisoner and another man—one of them said "Are you taking your b—w—of a wife home?"—Colson turned round and asked him what he meant by insulting him, and he collared the other man—the prisoner ran away—we went on—the prisoner came up again and said he had been grossly insulted—there was a bit of a struggle, and the prisoner fell on his back—he followed us down to Corapton Square, when he came up, threw his arras round the prosecutor, and commenced stabbing him—the prosecutor called out "There is something in his hand"—I caught hold of his hand, and the knife cut me—I pulled the prisoner down on the ground, and held him till the police came, and I gave him in custody—this (produced) is very much like the knife—it was picked
up four or five yards from where he was stabbed—we got a caudle and looked for it.
Cross-examined. Q. Was there any struggle? A. The prosecutor struggled to get away—I did not see the prisoner take the knife out of his pocket.
Cross-examined. Q. Had he been drinking? A. Yes, very freely.
GUILTY — Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
MR. BRINDLBT conducted the Prosecution.
MART HENDRY . I live at 8, Three Dragons Court, Fore Street—about 1.30 in the day, on 17th August, I went into Mr. Collins' shop, at 10, Huggin Lane, Cheapside—I saw the prisoner in the shop, putting on a coat—he had his right arm in one sleeve—he was standing about a yard and a half in the shop—I caught hold of him, and asked him what he was going to do with the coat—he said "Nothing, let me go"—he dropped the coat, and ran down Huggin Lane as fast as he could.
CHARLES COLLINS . I assist Mr. James Collins, a tailor, of 10, Huggin Lane—about 1.30 on this day I was below, in the basement—I heard a noise in the shop, and ran up—I saw Mrs. Hendry at the shop-door, with a coat on her arm—she pointed down Gresham Street, and I saw the prisoner running—I ran after him—I spoke to a policeman at the corner of Alderman-bury, and I saw him stopped and brought back.
Prisoner's Defence. I went into the shop, and I picked up the coat, that I should not tread upon it. The woman said "What do you want?" and I ran away. I went in to get a situation as porter.
GUILTY . He further PLEADED GUILTY to having been before convicted is January, 1870— Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.
ALFRED WINKLER (Policeman C 162). On Saturday morning, the 17th September, about 12.30, I was in Leicester Square—I heard a woman scream, and saw the prisoner knock down a woman—he ran across the road and hid himself between two cabs—I ran after him, and took him hack to the woman—she got up, and I asked her if that was the man that knocked her down—she said "Yes; where is my chain?"—he said "If you will let me go I will give up the chain"—he took the chain out of his left-hand coat pocket—I took it from his hand—I found a knife and 3s. 6d. on him.
MARY ANN HANLON . I live at 3, Argyle Street, Euston Road—this chain is mine—it is worth 6l.—on the night in question I was the worse for liquor, and I don't remember what happened—I had this chain on when I was sober.
JAMES SPENCER (Policeman C R 30). I saw the prisoner knock the last witness down—she screamed—he ran away and was taken—I am sure he is the same man—I was with Winkler—he was charged with stealing the chain, and he denied it.
Prisoner. Q. What did you first Bay to me? A. "What have you been doing?"—I did not say "Which way has he gone."
Prisoner's Defence. I was passing through Leicester Square. I saw the prosecutrix lying on the pavement. I found the chain in the gutter. I lifted her up, and went with her to a public-house, and gave her some gin. I went back with her to the same place, and she kept pulling me; I pushed her away from me, and on account of her being tipsy she fell down. I went across the road, and a constable came up to me, and asked me who I was, and if I was with the woman. I said I was the man, and he took me in custody.
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, September 21st, 1870.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
748. THOMAS HALEY** (35) , to stealing three glass pot stands, the property of Alfred Lewis, after a previous conviction in May, 1864—(He had been eighteen times convicted) Seven Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
749. ALFRED PURLEY (24) , to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Thomas Bootle, and stealing therein one shawl, his property.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
750. SAMUEL GOBELL (24) , to three indictments for feloniously forging and uttering orders for the payment of 5l. 15s., 7l. 15s. 6d., and 10l. 5s., with intent to defraud.— Five Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. WOOD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. GRIFFITHS the Defence.
WILLIAM J. ROBERTS . I am a wine merchant, trading as T. F. White & Co., at John Street—on 4th August the prisoner called on me, and said he wanted the brandy for a Mr. Smith, of the Marquis of Wellesley—a quarter cask of '65 brandy—I knew Mr. Smith—I let him have the delivery order, which is for 12l., and on the same day he was to bring the money back, but he did not, and I communicated with Mr. Smith, and obtained a warrant for the prisoner's apprehension.
Cross-examined. Q. Was Mr. Smith an acquaintance of yours? A. No—he was a customer of a friend of mine, a Mr. Barnes—the prisoner was in Mr. Barnes' employ—I do not know that the prisoner has disposed of wines before to Mr. Smith—he must have had transactions with him or Mr. Barnes—I have never known an instance of Mr. Smith having bought a cask of brandy from Mr. Barnes—the 12l. was to come through the prisoner's hands—I trusted him only on the representation that the brandy was for Mr. Smith—I made out an invoice to the prisoner—this is the invoice (produced)—it is a little torn at the bottom—it says "Sold for the account and the risk of J. G. Rossi"—my clerk wrote that.
NOT GUILTY .
752. WALTER SCOTT (24), GEORGE JONES (23), and THOMAS HULLER (28) , Burglariously breaking and entering in the dwelling house of Richard Solby, and stealing therein 60 yards of silk, and other articles,
his property, to which
WALTER SCOTT PLEADED GUILTY .— Two Years' Imprisonment.
MR. BOTTOMLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. GRIFFITHS the Defence.
HKNKY SHEPHERD . I am a builder, of 4, Union Terrace, Commercial Road—on the morning of 25th August, I saw, from my bedroom window, a trap at the side of the premises, in the rear of the house in Rosamond Street, Stepney, at 5.45—two men came out with a black sack, and put it on the truck, on which they put a fish box and a basket, to cover it—there were three men—they pulled the truck away—I called my son up, finished dressing, and made after them—it had got a quarter of a mile away, and finding I was watching, they took to running—I did not capture them—I followed the goods—I can identify Scott—I picked Ruller out of twelve or thirteen men at the station—I will not swear to him now.
GEORGE LONG . I am manager to Horrock & Seeley, Commercial Road—on 25th August I fastened up the house, and was called up next morning at 5.58, and found the shop was in great confusion, and I missed about 100l. worth of goods.
Jones. Q. Did you see me there? A. No.
EDWIN DILLON (Policeman K 19). I saw Scott brought to the station—I examined the premises, and found a burglary had been committed by getting over a low wall from Grosvenor Street, thence into an open coal cellar under the ground, and cutting a hole in the shop floor large enough to admit a man—I found these instruments (produced) on Scott, also a skeleton key, a lantern, and other things.
JAMES VINCE . I am a mill-band maker, of 9, Grosvenor Street, Stepney—I saw Jones on 25th August, with a man who I believe to be Scott, with a barrow, at a side door leading to Mr. Horrock's premises.
HENRY SHEPHERD . I am the son of the first witness—I rose at 5.45 on the morning of the 25th August—I looked out of the window, and saw two men standing outside with a barrow—I went down, and followed, and caught Scott—I cannot identify either of the other prisoners.
MATTHIAS SHARP (Policeman L 99). I searched for Jones and Ruller—I found Jones in a half-way public-house in Waterloo Road—he said "If I had not been known, and was going to Hart's house, I should not have been mixed up in this mess"—I took Ruller—he said he knew nothing about it, and said he would give 20l. to be out of it.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he give a correct address? A. I went to the house, and they said that he did not live there.
JONES and RULLER— NOT GUILTY .
MR. GRIFFITHS conducted the Prosecution.
CATHERINE BUCK . I am the wife of Benjamin Buck, of 7, Mount Square—at 8 o'clock on Sunday evening, 28th August, I was in Brick Lane—the female prisoners came up and took hold of me, and the mail came to my right side—I had my purse in my left hand—a man who is not in custody put his hand round my throat—I struggled—I believe Hall took my purse away—McCabe said "Do it quick, she has got a purse in her hand"—when the man who has got away put his arm round my threat McCabe hold my arm—the man held my right hand, and I lost my purse.
THOMAS HEPY . I live at 71, Jamaica Street, Commercial Road—on this Sunday evening I was passing along Orman Street, and saw the prosecutrix walking rather slowly—the three prisoners were behind her—after a bit Hall went up, caught hold of her hand, and said "I want your b—purse;" one of the men then came up and caught hold of her over the mouth, and Hall took the purse—they walked away, and two minutes after that Maccabe came up and said "What are you following Hall for?" and Mrs. Buck said "I have lost my purse," and that woman over there struck Mrs. Buck a violent blow—the man kept the crowd back, so as to let the prisoners escape—Maccabe gave her a violent blow—she went away to a public-house, and after she came out Maccabe came up and gave her another blow—then up came a man, who said "What the b—h—are you waiting about for? you'll get taken up." Hall. I never saw him before in my life.
Evans. Q. You saw me come out of a public-house on a Sunday evening? A. No, I have not said so—you kept the crowd away—there were fifty in the crowd—I did not see you handle or touch the woman—you walked away with the man not in custody—I did not hear you speak to him, because you walked away so quick.
Maccabe. I did not strike the woman, I pushed her, and she fell down, and I went into a public-house, and when I came out she said "You b—h, you have got my purse," and she pushed me, and I pushed her down.
WILLIAM EDWARDS . I live at 3, John Street, Spitalfields—on 28th August I was passing up Orman Street, and saw Maccabe hit Mrs. Buck—she threw her out in the road, and hurt her very much, and hit her up against a brick wall—Hall put her hand into Mrs. Buck's bosom, and Maccabe said "Do it quick"—after that Evans put his hand over the woman's mouth, so that she should not halloa—I saw another man in a light coat, holding her—he was behind, and had his knee in her back.
Evans. Q. Did I not take the other man's hand away from that woman's mouth? A. You pulled the man's hand away—you took your hand off the woman's mouth—you had one hand here, and one over her mouth—you went away, and came back again, and said to that woman "You b—h, you'll be run in."
COURT. Q. There were forty or fifty people present, they all saw her attacked, and not one of them interfered in the slightest way whatever? A. No.
JOHN THOMAS (Policeman H 4). I saw Mrs. Buck on this afternoon——she said, in the presence of Evans and Maccabe, that she had been robbed—I heard her screaming, and I ran up, and then she said "That woman has robbed me of my purse and 4s. 6d."—as soon as I apprehended them, Maccabe rushed up, and said "I have the b—purse, you b—h"—I took them to the station—they were very violent, and while Mrs. Buck followed behind me they struck her—I had great difficulty in preventing evens striking her—Maccabe said to her "If I get six mouths for you, I will be the death of you."
Maccabe. Q. Did I say, at the station, "You are locking me up for nothing?"A. No—you struck her three times, coming to the station, and you also struck a little boy, in Lamb Street, who followed us down—Maceabe had been drinking.
Hall to MRS. BUCK. Q. At the station, the inspector requested me to
take off my bonnet; did you not say that you could not swear to me? A. The inspector said that, and I said that I was almost sure it was the woman, but I could not swear for certain.
COURT. Q. Do you swear that she is the woman? A. I do.
Hall. Q. Did you not swear, before the Magistrate, that you would not swear it was me that robbed you? A. Well, I could not swear; I said she had a lighter dress on.
Maccabe. Q. When you lost your purse, was I not coming up the street as you came down it? A. No—you struck me a violent blow and knocked me down.
Hall. Q. Did I not say "I will go with you; I got wringing wet on Saturday night, and did not get out of bed till 12 o'clock on Monday?" A. No—the Magistrate put the case back for me to fetch this woman, and she was not there—she would not stop there, being afraid that she would be taken for the same thing.
Evans't Defence. I did see the transaction going on, as well as many others, and I did no more than anybody else. I went up, and took the man's hand away from her mouth.
GUILTY — Twelve Months' Imprisonment each.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, September 22nd, 1870.
before Mr. Baron Cleatby.
754. JOHN FITZGERALD (58) , Feloniously casting away a vessel, the property of Hector Gillies, with intent to defraud certain underwriters; and HECTOR GILLIES , feloniously inciting him to commit the said felony.
MESSRS. H. S. GIFFARD, Q.C., LEWIS, and MACRAE MOIR conducted the Prosecution; MESSRS. RIBTON and ST. AUBYN appeared for Fitzgerald, and MR. METCALFE for Gillies.
THOMAS GAUNT . I am a clerk in the office of the Registrar-General of Seamen—I have here the first register of the Admiral Napier in September, 1854—she appears to have been built at Leith, in 1854—Hector Gillies became the owner on 10th May, 1867, and ceased to be registered owner on 16th May, 1870, when she appears to have been transferred by Bill of Sale to Alexander Bow—she was 87 tons.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Have you Fitzgerald entered as captain? A. Yes, on 19th May, 1870, and Somerville before that—he is entered on 16th March, 1870, and Henry Altwell on 27th April, 1870—M'Kcnzie was captain immediately before Somerville, on 30th December, 1869, at Middlesborough.
ALEXANDER M'KENZIE . I am a mariner—I have been at sea twenty-five years—I had the Admiral Napier in 1869—Gillies, the owner, employed me—he was a stranger to me up to that time—the bargain between us was to sail the ship by shares—she was laden on that occasion with a cargo of iron from Middleaborough—he shortly afterwards asked me about insuring the vessel—I asked him how much he was insured for—he said "700l."—I said I did not think the Insurance Company would give any more, as that was about her value—he told me to try and get another 300l. insurance on her.
MR. METCALFR. Q. You had nothing to do with the voyage during which the ship was lost? A. No—I went one voyage in her, and left her before she left Newcastle—I left before March, 1870—she was then perfectly safe.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Did he at any time make a proposition to you to destroy the ship? MR. METCALFE objected to this question, it being a suggestion made, not to the prisoner but to a witness, six months before the trans-action under investigation, and relating to a different voyage. MR. RIBTON also objected to the question on the ground that it was not relevant to the issue it being evidence of some attempt in reference to another felony at a different time, and under different circumstances; if the vessel had then been lost it could not be given in evidence in a charge of the loss of a second vessel, and therefore evidence of an attempt could not be given.
THE COURT considered that the evidence must be admitted, as it showed a motive.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. What did he say? A. He asked me if I would do away with the teasel as she was mining him, and he would give me some thing for it—I said that I would see about it, I did not say that I would do it—he said I was not to do it until such time as I heard from him at Middlesborough—I was to get 50l. for doing it, and the promise of a new ship—I spoke to him about the danger of doing such an action as that, and he said that it was a daily occurrence—after that I went to Middles-borough in the ship—Gillies had told me to call at the post office there for letters, and I found these letters (produced) waiting for me there.
ALEXANDER BOW . I know Gillies, and have seen his writing—I believe these three letters to be his writing—(Read: "Dingwall, 13th December, 1869. Captain McKenzie. Dear Sir, I trust you are by this time in Middlesborough all safe, and that you got her chartered at a good freight. This is now your time when you leave Middlesborough to do as I ordered you, and to do it right, and you may depend upon my paying you what I promised, to a penny. I think it safe to have the ship surveyed before she leaves Middlesborough, to be on the safe side, in case of any dispute afterwards; however, you will ask your brother if that is necesary. I have a good vessel in view, much larger than the Admiral, and which I can buy very cheap. She is almost new; and if I get quit of the Admiral, I am sure to buy her. She will carry upwards of 200 tons; and if you will be a smart man, and do as I advised you, you will get the command of her at once, besides giving you what I said. Please write on to Portree, Skye, in direct course of post, stating what you intend to do in the matter, and tell me if you can insure a few hundred pounds upon her, for the passage, and at what rate also the freight. You are not to leave port till you hear from me, and till you know that the ship is insured"—no signature);—("16th December, 1869. Captain Alexander McKenzie, yours of 14th instant is to hand, &c. I wrote to you at the post office, Middlesborough, about what we were talking about when I saw you last, and I hope you will be as good as my promise to you. You will go to the post office, Middlesborough for the letter, on your arrival. Mind, you have no time to spare; but be off with all possible speed. Awaiting your reply, yours truly, Hector Gillies.")—("Portree, 23rd December, 1869. Captain Alexander McKenzie. Dear Sir, I hope you got my letter from Dingwall, addressed to the Post Office, Middlesborough, and that you considered its contents; and write me in course of post what you intend to do in the matter. I am going to give you the command of a ship worth three
of the Admiral, and nearly twice her size, besides giving you what I promised. I am to insure 300l. more on her before she leaves Middlesborough, so you are to write me, on receipt hereof, your real mind on the subject, &c. Hector Gillies.")
ALEXANDER BOW (re-examined). These letters appear to be in Gillies' writing—(These were dated 28th December, 1869, and 1st January, 1870, addressed to Captain McKenzie, and signed "Walter Gillies;" they contained the following expressions: "I am just after writing to the insurance company, to insure 300l. more upon the ship, for two or three months, as I cannot get it done for the voyage; so you see that this is your time to do a a I told you on your passage from Middlesborough, as I cannot be throwing away my money on insurances for nothing. The 300l. will cost me 15l. of premium, in three months; the two other policies will expire on the last day of February, 1870, so that I will have to renew them on that day, which will cost 75l.; so I hope in goodness that you will save me that expense, by doing as I told you."—"The same chance will never occur again, having 1000l. insured upon her, which I will never do again, if this chance is missed."—"It is now high time to get rid of the Admiral, us she would never pay."—"I hope you will make a clean job of it; and if I live, you will never have a cause to repent. I am just waiting to hear of the Admiral fate, before I buy the new ship."—"Tell me candidly what do you intend to do, as it is a great pity to insure more upon her, at such a high rate, if you don't do it. I write you in strict confidence, hoping that no living person will see your letter."—"See that you will act the man now, and I will act the friend to you."—"I trust you will not let the first chance of accomplishing my orders pass without performing the job, and that cleanly, without any traces of her to annoy us afterwards.")
ALEXANDER M'KINZIE (continued). I afterwards went to Aberdeen, and got these letters (produced) at the post office there—(These were signed "Hector Gillies," and contained the following expressions:"I hope you will make a clean job for me by the middle of February, and you will not lose by it. I am arranging for the new vessel, which will be ready when I get rid of the Admiral."—"The thing must be done by the end of February; you need not be afraid but I will make you up for more than in wages if you do the job right"—"If the thing is done before this month (February) is out it will save me upwards of 70l.")—I gave up the command of the vessel about the end of February—I passed my word to him that I would do it; that I would see what I could do, I did not really intend to do it.
Cross-examined by MR. ST. AUBYN. Q. Where was your last voyage from? A. From Aberdeen to Newcastle, laden with iron—I did not go ashore at all—I had no accident of any sort.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Did the vessel make any water? A. Just a little—she was not in first-class condition, but in very good condition; the hull was good—we were obliged to use the pumps sometimes—I went three voyages in her, to Middlesbrough, and from there to Aberdeen, and from Aberdeen to Newcastle, where I left her—she was loaded with pig iron—I was not complained of for being drunk and absenting myself from the ship; I complained of being unwell out Awdeeu, and requested to give up command of the vessel—I was not unwell after being absent eight or nine days—on my oath I was not absent eight or nine days after
she took in her cargo—I was considerably in Gillies' debt—Mr. Atkinson told me that he had orders from Mr. Gillies to dismiss me, but I had told him that I could not go any further—he did not complain that I had taken all the freight and spent it in drink, and absented myself; there was no freight—he asked me what I had done with the freight—I had laid out 50l.—20l. was in the men's wages—Mr. Gillies had given me no money, the 50l. was all I had—I suppose I spent some of it—the ship was detained nine days in consequence—I did not get drunk at Aberdeen, nor yet at Newcastle—I did not say to Mr. Atkinson, or to Mr. Fernie, the agent at Aberdeen, that I went out on the spree—I left the ship, certainly, but not through drink—I was not away any time further than doing my business—the crew all left the vessel because I was not to go in her, it was myself who engaged the other crew—I was not dismissed with the crew—I was with Mr. Atkinson when he engaged the other crew—the whole of the first crew knew that I was not going in the ship—Somerville came on board while I was there—I was on board with him every day, I think, and at night too.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Were you to sail the ship on shares? A. Yes, and of course I received the freight at Aberdeen—I had to pay the wages, and all other expenses incidental to the ship, and we were to divide the rest—there was a little profit on the freight in his favour, but I had to lay it out in the men's wages and other expenses—I am in his debt still by having a share—I had nothing to do with this prosecution, or giving information in any way—I was abroad when it began—(MR. ST. AUBYN here stated that under his advice Fitzgerald would withdraw his plea, and would be happy to give evidence for the Crown; and Fitzgerald having stated that he was guilty the COURT directed a verdict of
THOMAS SOMERVILLE . I was appointed to the command of the Admiral Napier about the middle of last March—I saw Gillies at Weymouth first—we had several conversations for thirteen or fourteen days—he told me he should want 300l. in two months, and if I would make away with the ship he would make me a handsome present—I asked him what he meant—he said 20l.—I said that 20l. would not pay my expenses to get me into another ship—he said he would make good all my losses—I asked him about the crew—he said "Damn the crew"—I told Captain Hawkins what he had said, who advised me to do no man's dirty work—that character of conversation was repeated for thirteen or fourteen days running—he afterwards said if I would be a man, and do what he wished me to do, he would double his first offer—that I concluded to be a 40l. offer—he said that he expected to get another ship for 1000l. with the insurance money—I took the chart on to the cabin table, and he showed me where be proposed my putting her on shore on the road from Weymouth to Dublin—he spoke about various points—I made no journey in the ship—I did not give up my command, but another man took it on 20th April.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Directly he asked you this, I suppose you left him, and reported it? A. No—I do not keep to the ship still—I did not go any further than Weymouth, where we put in to repair in consequence of her leaking—I complained to Gillies of her making water—I reported to him what the carpenter said—I first mentioned the proposal Gillies had made me on the morning afterwards—I communicated it to the gentlemen at Lloyd's since the ship was lost—I lodged with Gillies at his house at Weymouth, after he made this suggestion, for eight or nine days
—we had some dispute, and I was discharged—he discharged me after knowing that he was in my power, and even then I did not communicate it till the vessel was actually lost—I went direct home to South Shields, where I came from before I went into the ship—I relieved M'Kenzie of the command, a policeman advised him to leave the ship—the policeman was called because he was making some bother—he was not there previous to that as my friend—I never saw M'Kenzie in my life till I saw him in the ship—he came on board in spite of me—I got into trouble about a mutiny in March, 1867—a complaint was made against me that I had induced the crew to mutiny—I was not punished for it, nor the crew either—justice was not done—we were not sent home as a mutinous crew at Carthaginian; we were sent home as passengers—I made complaints also—I have not been unlucky, but I had the misfortune to sail with a blackguard—I waited three weeks at the sailor's home, and then received a letter stating that the case was dismissed—we were not sent home in custody, or with direction to be taken in custody, and try us when we arrived, it is the first I have heard of it—I was taken out of the Lord Seaton, not by a Spanish vessel, but the crew left her voluntarily—I was taken by carabineers to the gaol at Carthagena—there was no mutiny going on, but we objected to sail further with the captain—the police vessel took us out of the ship, and to gaol, and we were taken before the Consul, and sent home, I and eleven of the crew—I had a claim against the owner when I left—there was a dispute between us—notwithstanding Gillies had put himself into my power he discharged me and appointed another captain.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. What was the complaint at Carthagena? A. He captain of this vessel was a very drunken man, and was in the habit of jumping about the deck with a revolver in his pocket to shoot myself and the crew—I protested against it, and Garwick advised me to leave—the morning after we arrived at Carthagena, four soldiers took me and landed me in prison, and the crew came ashore and protested against the captain—I was taken out of prison, and sent on board a vessel with eleven others, not in custody, but as passengers—I lodged a complaint against the captain, and demanded a Board of Trade trial when I landed at Liverpool—I was supported by the Board of Trade while I was at Liverpool, and from that day to this I have never been accused about the matter—I did not like to venture an assertion to the underwriters which I could not prove; but I wrote to Mr. Atkinson, who I understood was the insurer of the ship, shortly after she was lost—I had not then heard of proceedings being taken.
HENRY ATTWELL . I have been a master mariner forty years—I live at 6, Oakley Place, Weymouth—in April last I first saw the ship Admiral—Mr. Gillies, the owner, was then living at Captain Hawkins' public-house—I saw him there on 13th April, and met Somerville there—I was introduced to Gillies by Captain Hawkins, as the owner of the Admiral Napier—I was to be employed with Captain Hawkins to survey the ship, and see what repairs she needed—she was in a very bad state—the result of the survey was put into writing—this is it (produced)—it is signed by me after the repairs were done, to testify that what we ordered to be done was done—I went on board, and saw that they were done, and then we signed it—she was then fully sea-worthy, or else I should not have allowed her to go to Dublin—on 21st April Gillies asked me to take her to Dublin if the other master, Somerville, did not—there was some altercation, and I said that if Somerville was discharged I would pilot her to Dublin—Gillies said that he had
incurred nearly 100l. expenses, and was getting short of money—I went with him to the ex-Mayor, to know whether he would advance the money—I sailed for Dublin on 23rd April—Gillies asked me if I was acquainted with the coast—I told him I knew every rock—he said that it would be no trouble for me to get rid of his ship if that was the case—this was on Weymouth Quay—I offered him 300l. for the ship, and told him to go home and be a gentleman along with his wife—he said that he had no wife—I said "Take my 300l. and be a gentleman"—I also said that it would be no trouble for me to do it, but I said "Nonsense, we shall get 400l. for the ship in Dublin"—he asked me if I knew anybody in Bristol, where he could communicate with me—I said "I know Mr. Edwards, a ship-broker"—he said "Go there, and stay till you get a telegram from me"—I was to go to Bristol from Weymouth—I know Carter, he was on the survey—he held a policy for 75l., and Gillies said that after Carter's bill was paid I was to have the balance if I lost the ship—I said "Nonsense"—I left Weymouth on 26th April, and went to Mount's Bay, Captain Hawkins name on board there, and, in consequence of his communication, I bought a new log-book at Penance; he gave me strict orders to keep one—the vessel got to Dublin on 9th May—she made no water during that voyage—she was perfectly tight all the way—I saw Gillies in Dublin the day I arrived—he met me very coldly, I was not welcome at all—he said that I put him to great expense—I said "Sir, the vessel could not come without me, and I got the men very cheap;" but everything I did was wrong, because I brought the ship safe to Dublin—I said that he ought to sell the ship, and offered to buy it—I intended to give him 400l. rather than he should destroy her—when I said that I would give him 400l., he said that she was insured for 500l., and one policy had run out, and he could get 300l. more in half an hour, from the ship's broker, in Dublin—one evening, at Dublin, I took down the chart, on board the vessel, and showed him the Liverpool banks—he asked me if I would put the vessel in the Liverpool bank—I said that I could put her on what bank I liked—I understood putting her on the bank to mean destroying the ship—the conversation lasted two hours—I told him that it was a piece of nonsense, and we had better drop the subject—I said "You know I belong to a master mariners' club"—he said "You will get 20l. from the club if you lose your clothes," and asked me the difference whether a ship is run to shore or whether she is lost by misfortune—I said that it was as different as dark and daylight—he said that I should have a lot of money, 70l., and said "See how long you would work for 70l."—he offered 50l., and 20l. from the master mariners' club would make 70l.—this offer was for casting away the ship on the voyage from Dublin to Liverpool—I did not entertain the proposal, I did not entertain a thought about it, and I did not believe that he did—I considered 3001. to be the value of the ship, because she was run out of gear, and she had no sails.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. You did not entertain it; but you put down the chart, and showed him the banks you could run the snip on to? A. Yes—I pointed out the different places—he did not begin to propose it directly he met me—we had been in Dublin two or" three days—I had never seen him till we were at Weymouth—I only drank a glass of porter with him, perhaps two; but not at the same time—I thought the deed was too bad to perpetrate—I did not think he could think about such a thing in reality—I begged him not to do so, and offered to buy the ship—my certificate was cancelled in 1865, and I was
fined 15l. besides—I will not disown it—it was not for producing a false agreement, it was because I violated the Board of Trade—I did not come here on that subject—I have not got a certificate since—I could have, by coming to London; but I would not take the trouble—my knowledge was sufficient without that—Gillies complained that I was a long time on the voyage, and that both the masts had gone; but they had not—he did not discharge me, I think I left—he never chastised me for being drunk—that never came out of bin lips.
COURT. Q. What did he mean by saying that both the masts had gone? A. He was pointing out to me the expense he had been put to, and said she had better be made away with.
MR. METCALFE. Q. Did not he say that he bad been deceived in you and that you had been drunk, and a very long time on the voyage? A. He complained of the passage; I was a long time, but I could not help the wind—I was very glad to discharge myself—I left the ship at 5.30 next morning—he never discharged me.
JAMES RUDDY . I am a seaman of twenty years' standing—I sailed with Fitzgerald, in the Admiral Napier, as mate—we had on board another able seaman, an ordinary seaman, and a cook; that was the whole crew—we left Liverpool on 2nd June, this year, on a journey to Aberdeen—it was fine weather all the time—we went on steadily till about I o'clock or 1.30 on 7th June, when a leak began—the captain then came on deck, and asked me if she was pumped at 12 o'clock—I said that it was not my watch on deck, but I did not see the decks wet from her being pumped—he told me to call the crew to pump her—I went to his cabin, but the door was locked—I went into the cabin, and heard water underneath the captain's berth, just as if it was coming through a force-pump and running against a beard—the crew went on pumping as hard as we could till there was other work for us to do—the captain told us, between 5 and 6 o'clock, not to kill ourselves, it was no use—the vessel went down about 1.30 or 2 o'clock on the morning of the 8th—there was nothing in the character of the weather to create a leak—we were towing a small boat with our clothes in it by the side of the vessel—we had not struck on anything, that I know of; I never felt it—I know Gillies—I saw him on board the vessel before she left Liverpool on this voyage to Aberdeen, and he was at Dublin when I engaged with Captain Fitzgerald—he came in the vessel from Dublin to Liverpool—he slept in the captain's berth every time that I saw him—on the voyage from Dublin to Liverpool, we pumped some water out of her which drained out of the wet sand ballast, but the vessel did not leak in any way till the afternoon of the 7th.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Did you run between the Isle of Man and the Bahama bank? A. Yes—we never saw the light-ship, but I believe there is one—we went before the Coast Guard at Lamlash first—the captain made a statement—I went to Glasgow—I did not make a protest there; I signed a paper which they gave me at the office—I was not sworn to it, or told the concents, I was only asked to sign it—I was fetched by the clerk of an office, I went before a gentleman, and was asked if that was my signature—this is the document, and this is my signature, I can only write my name—I was asked nothing about it—there was no difference about signing it; I was glad to get my wages—I did not understand it—the weather was a little hazy on laud on the 4th—we were then six or seven miles from Mangold Point—we pumped regularly twice a watch every
day, in case she made water—those were the captain's orders to me—we try the pumps, and if there is no water there is an end of it—on 4th June, when we pumped there was only a few strokes of water, which is expected from any vessel—on the 5th there were a few strokes, but nothing extra, and the same on the 6th—no one sounded her, but we pumped her—on the 7th all hands went to the pumps—we were not tired, but we had other duties to perform, bracing the yards—I did not tell the notary' that the captain had cast away the ship, I was not asked—I first said it to the owner and the captain, standing at the office door; that was on the day they paid me part of my wages—I did not get my month's wages, I got up to the morning she went down—after the owner had paid me part, and would not pay me the rest, I said that the captain had been behaving badly with the vessel—he gave me an extra half-Crown to help to pay my passage home—I told him he would never get a halfpenny of the insurance—I told him in a public-house, before he gave me the month's wages, that I would prevent him getting the insurance.
MR. LEWIS. Q. What did you tell him? A. He asked me in the public-house if I was going to make a poor man of him, and I asked him if the vessel was insured—he said he thought she was, but in a club, and when I found that out I told him that she was wrongly done away with.
WILLIAM LACEY . I sailed on board the Admiral Napier from Liverpool to Aberdeen—we left on 2nd June—we had the finest weather all the time that I ever had—the vessel began to make water on a Tuesday; I believe it was 7th June—there was nothing in the character of the weather to strain the ship, nor had we struck anything that I could feel or see—I was standing on the platform when the mate fold the captain that the water was coming into his bunk—I heard where it came from, but I could not see it—it came from the starboard side where the captain slept—the captain's cabin was locked—he put a new lock on at Liverpool—we left the vessel before he went down, and I put the tools on board of the Lambert, and the captain took up an auger, and threw it overboard, saying that it was no good—after we arrived at Glasgow I had a dispute with Gillies about wages—I told him he was a rogue, and the captain also, that they had done away with the vessel between them, and that evening he took a paper out of his pocket, and said "After signing that you can do me no harm, but you can do your countryman harm; "I am an Irishman.
COURT. Q. What did you tell Gillies at Glasgow? A. That they were two rogues, and that I would stop their nonsense if I could, and I asked him for a shilling to get my supper, and he gave me one—when he pulled out the protest he said that I could not hurt any one, only my own countryman, that is Fitzgerald, and I could go to b—y—he did not tell me why I could only hurt my own countryman—this is the paper—I cannot read, but I know my own signature—this is it.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Was that after he refused you the extra month's wages? A. I asked for no extra wages—I said "Mr. Gillies, are we going to get home this evening?"—we had slept under a shed the night before—I rather liked that; I have slept in worse places than that—I asked him to pay me, as I had small wages coming to me, and he said he would treat me decent—he offered me half a month's wages, and I would not take it—he paid me half a month's wages the next day—he did not pay me all I asked him for, or he would have paid my passage home—I called him a rogue, both before and after that—I had been before the
notary before that, and signed the protest—I do not know whether it was read over to me or not—the gentleman said "Is it right?"—I said "Right" like the rest—I did not swear before the Magistrate that it was read over to me, did I?—I said that it was right, and after that I went for my wages—I said nothing to the notary at that time about Gillies being a rogue—I will tell you the reason—there was a gentleman in Glasgow, and we told him the way he was treating us, and he said we should have to sign a protest, and then I told the captain what he had done.
JOHN FITZGERALD (The prisoner). I have been a sailor since 1824—I was engaged by the prisoner to act as master of his vessel—I have confessed myself guilty of having destroyed this ship, and I wish I had done it long since—Gillies first made the suggestion to me when the ship was about half loaded in Liverpool—he asked me if I would do something for him—I asked him what he meant, and he partly told me—I said that I did not understand such work—when I asked what he meant, he said he had had the vessel a length of time, and she was doing nothing, if I could do something for him he would make me a present—I said that I did not understand his presents—that was all that passed then—he came to me again next day, and asked me if I would do something for him, and do away with the vessel—I said I could not think of doing such a thing—he asked me why—I said I should lose my certificate and my character, and he swore his Maker that he would haul the vessel up and get her round in Dublin—I asked him if he would pay me off; he said he would not—nothing more passed on that day—he told me he would make me a present amounting to 30l. or more if I would do for her—after being at anchor he told me I might do a good turn for him—I asked him to buy a few small tools for me, for there were none in the vessel—a large screw auger, an American one, was hanging up—I asked the price of it—he said "3s."—I said "It is too much," and I went away—he called me back, and said that we should have it for a half-Crown—he asked me if I had any money in my pocket—I said "Yes" and I paid for the auger, fetched it on board, and left it in his stores, and I gave way to take 60l. and a present—he bored a hole with the auger and put a plug in the hole, and I meddled with the plug, and could not get it in again.
Q. While at sea, you took the plug out? A. Yes, and tried to get it in I again, but could not.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Have you been a captain several years? A. About thirty-two years—the first vessel I had was called the Scallen—she belonged to Michael Scallen—I left him because I lost two anchors, and we had a dispute—I was two years and eight months with him—she was a new vessel, I got her off the stocks—I had five of Mr. Conley's vessels in less than six months—I fell in with Gillies accidentally, and about seven or eight days afterwards he made this suggestion to me in Liver-pool—I did not denounce him immediately, because he told me that as soon as I got to Glasgow he would meet me there and give me 30l. and get 30l. more afterwards—it was the money induced me to destroy the vessel—I did not know that there was a penny insured upon her—I did not insure the freight or my clothes—I belong to the Sailor's Society—I never asked them for anything for my clothes—I have paid 16s. a year for seventeen years. (MR. METCALFE here stated that he could not struggle with the facts of the case.)
Gillies. I am quite innocent of the charge. There is a parcel of Irish-men who can do anything. I implore of you to have mercy on me. it is
not likely that I should tell a stranger to do away with the ship. I am a Scotchman, and am not a seafaring man. This will ruin me for life; it is too bad.
GILLIES GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
FITZGERALD was recommended to mercy by the Prosecution, having borne an excellent character for thirty years, and being very poor.— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
THIRD COURT.—Thursday and Friday, September 22nd and 23rd, 1870.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. H. S. GIFFARD, Q.C., BESLEY, and STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution; and MR. BROMBY the Defence.
JOHN CRUTTENDEN . I am clerk to Messrs. Blaker & Sons, solicitors, of Lewes—I produce the proceedings in bankruptcy at the Lewes County Court, of Thomas Parse—the date of the petition is 10th May, 1869—the affidavit that he has not the means of paying is dated the same day—the warrant on which he was a prisoner in the gaol at Lewes, is dated the 8th May, and it describes him as a builder out of business—there is a statement which says "The property at Lancaster Road, Notting Hill, is mortgaged to Messrs. Ford & Lloyd for 200l., but I don't anticipate that any money will accrue to the estate after releasing the mortgage"—I find on the proceedings the formal adjudication dated 11th May, 1869—the order for innulling the adjudication is dated 16th November, 1869—the last examination was on 10th August, and the final order on 16th November.
Cross-examined. Q. In the affidavit made on presenting his petition at Lewes, do you find that he swore he was not able to pay the fees usual in the London Court of Bankruptcy? A. Yes—there is nothing about his not haying 5l. in the world—an advertisement has to appear in the London Gazette before he can get his adjudication—the Gazette is not filed with the proceedings—it has to be produced in Court—the words used when the adjudication is annulled, are "Now I being satisfied by the answers made by the said Thomas Pearse, do grant him protection from arrest, or any claim, debt, or demand"—it is on a printed form—the adjudication at Lewes was afterwards dismissed, and the matter referred to London.
MR. BESLEY. Q. Did he make an affidavit that he had not the means of paying the fees and expenses? A. Yes, and in another place he says "I have no estate or effects whatsoever."
BERTRAND ROBERT JOHNSON . I am clerk in the Record Office of the Bankruptcy Court—I produce the proceedings in relation to Thomas Pearse—the date of the petition is 2nd June, 1869—the petitioning creditor is John Henry Moore—the date of the adjudication is 21st June—there are the usual cash and goods accounts appended to the proceedings—the date of the several examinations of the bankrupt were 27th September, 1869, 14th October, 1869, and 13th May, 1870—he filed his accounts on 28th January, 1870, and further accounts on 2nd June—he passed his last examination on 14th June—there is also an order of the Court to prosecute.
Cross-examined. Q. Before he posses his lost examination all the accounts filed are examined and found to be correct? A. Yes—he filed a full cash account and deficiency account.
EDWARD TAYLOR . I am managing clerk to Messrs. Clark & Co., patentees of the revolving shutters, and dealers in Venetian blinds, Rathbone Place—at the time of his bankruptcy the defendant owed us 54l. 0s. 6d., made up of two items, one on 23rd March, a patent self-acting wood shutter, 11l. 0s. 6d., and on 27th May sixty-six Venetian blinds, including fixing at Golburn Road, 43l.—they are houses in Golburn Road belonging to the defendant—I produce two letters of the bankrupt, of April 28th, 1869, and May 3rd, 1869—I know his writing—they purport to be signed by him—(Read: "28th April, 1869, 59, Lancaster Road. Gentlemen,—Will you be good enough to finish the blinds, at 9 and 7, Golburn Road, this week, and I will settle your account. If you can't do so I must withdraw the order, and give it to someone else. Thomas Pearse."—"May 3rd. Gentlemen—Will you send your man, and put the fastenings to the shutters, as the gentleman intends to open the shop this week, and oblige yours respectfully, Thomas Pearse")—The completion of the work did not take place till the 27th May, 1869—we were delivering the blinds up to that date—I should not have parted with the blinds if I had known he was going to Lewes to become a bankrupt, or if I had known that he had been disposing of the houses to the clerk of Messrs. Lake & Kendall.
Cross-examined. Q. The orders were not completed till the 27th May? A. No—this was the first transaction I had with the defendant.
JAKE JEFFERIES . My husband is a stone and marble mason, at 173, Lancaster Road, Notting Hill—I manage the business—on 28th April, 1869, Pearse came and settled a small account of 12s. with me, and be then ordered twenty-four mantelpieces—I put them in hand, and eight of them were delivered at his premises, on 10th May—I received a letter on 7th May, in consequence of the chimneypieces not being sent, and the eight were sent in consequence of that—when the arrangement was entered into with Mr. Pearse, the question of cartage was spoken about, and a deduction was made in the price, if Mr. Pearse would send his own cart for the goods—I promised that they should be ready on a Friday—Mr. Paarse sent for them; but they were not ready, and we sent them on the following Monday—I have not been paid the 18l. due for those mantelpiece—I should not have sent them if I had known that he was going down to Lewes to be made a bankrupt—I sent a man down on the morning of 11th May to fix the mantelpieces, and when he got there he found the place in a state of confusion, and everyone taking away what they could get—I went over for the purpose of getting them back, and when we got there the place was boarded up, and we were told we could not have them—I waited till 11.30 to see Mr. Pearse; but I could not—I have never got the chimneypieces back.
Cross-examined. Q. Were persons taking away what they could get? A. Yes—I was told to get an order from Mr. Wheeler—these goods were sent to Twickenham—I have had transactions with him before, and the goods have been sent to Golburn Road—we have been paid about 150l. by Mr. Pearse, and the balance now due is 18l.—Mr. Pearse's cart was to call for the goods, to take them down to Twickenham; but they were not ready in time, and we sent them afterwards—I don't know that they were put into the stables—they were put into the houses—twenty-four chimneypieces were ordered; but only eight were delivered.
MR. BESLEY. Q. What were the terms of dealing? A. On a former occasion we had a three months' bill—the arrangement here was that we
were to deliver some portion of the goods; and if we were in want of money before they were all delivered, we were to have drawn a bill as soon as enough had been done to enable us to do so—there were twenty-four ordered, twelve at 2l. 5s., and twelve at 2l. 7s.—the account would have bean a little over 50l.
ANDREW CRIGHTON . I am warehouseman to Messrs. Pearson, ironmongers, of Netting Hill—they are returned as creditors by the bankrupt, for 32l. 14s. 6d.—that is the correct amount—there were three deliveries: 27th April, 2l. 13s. 6d., for nails, delivered to Mr. Pearse's carman; 28th April, 4l. 14s. 6d., for cut nails and iron frame pulleys, delivered at the stable, in Lancaster Mews, by the carman; and on 5th May, 25l. 6s. 6d., for four ranges, also delivered at the stable—I produce the book signed by the bankrupt—the terms were 50l. monthly account and three months' bill—the account was opened on 26th April, 1869—we have never had a farthing of the money—we should not have sent the goods on 5th May if we had known he was going to Lewes on the 10th—we did not know anything about that—the goods supplied were not to exceed 50l. a month.
Cross-examined. Q. The payment was to be by bill, to become due in three months? A. Yes—I don't know Pearse's foreman, Warlow—his carman came for the goods—I did not see Mr. Pearse after the first transaction—the other transactions were by written orders—they were signed by Mr. Pearse—I have not got the orders, I gave them up at Guildhall—I don't know that some of the goods were delivered at the end of May, at his house, and declined to be taken in—all the orders that we had were delivered—the carman came and took the goods away in his cart—we did not deliver any goods by our own carman—I am not aware of any goods being refused by the bankrupt or his wife—they may have been.
MR. BESLEY. Q. Are those the orders on which the goods were sent? A. Yes—they are dated April 28th and May 1st—one is "Please send by bearer"—I sent those goods and they have not been paid for.
THOMAS MAYNARD . I am a brick-maker, at Paddington—in January, 1869, I received a letter from Pearse—I refused to have dealings with him at first, but he made a second application, and I had dealings with him in bricks from 10th February, 1869, down to 9th April—he was to give me a bill at three months—he has returned me as a creditor in the Bankruptcy proceedings for 387l.—the correct amount is 289l. 1s.—he was indebted to me in that amount at the time of his bankruptcy—174l. 11s. 6d. is for bricks supplied within three months of the bankruptcy in London from 12th March to 9th April—I had some bills from him, but they were no good, and I have received nothing out of the 289l.—I received this letter from him on 5th April, in consequence of a communication I had made to him about sup-plying more bricks—he was going to give me security if I supplied them, but I never had it—I met him on 6th April, and I refused to give him farther credit without security—he said he would give me security, but I never got it—he said he was about having an improved groundrent which would secure payment, and he would give me an order to receive the money—in consequence of that I supplied him with the bricks on 9th April—he never led me to suppose that he was going to become bankrupt on 10th May at Lewes.
Cross-examined. Q. Where were the bricks delivered? A. At Twickenharm, on Mr. Wheeler's ground—I knew that the defendant was carrying on large building operations, and I delivered the bricks to be used in building
those houses—I think the property has Improved at Twickenham of late years—I don't think property has improved about London—I think it has at Netting Hill since the opening of the Railway.
ROBERT LITTLE . I am a brick-merchant, at Windsor—I am returned in the bankruptcy accounts as a creditor for 161l. 5s. 6d.—the real amount is 183l. 3s. 6d—that is for bricks delivered from 29th March to 5th May, in cursive—I had no previous dealings with him—the terms were a month's account and a three months' bill, and I was to have security from Mr. Swanston, on whose ground he was building, but it did not come—I have never got any money—I drew a bill on 1st April, but no notice was taken of it—I produce a number of letters requesting me to send goods as soon as possible, as he wanted them—I should not have parted with my goods if I had known he was going to Lewes in May to be made a bankrupt.
Cross-examined. Q. Were those bricks sent to Twickenham? A. I put them on at Ditched Station to go to Twickenham—Mr. Pearse told me they were to be used on buildings at Twickenham, and I believe they were—he gave me a reference—I applied, and found the reference satisfactory.
MR. BESLEY. Q. Was one of the references Messrs. Lake & Kendall? A. No, Buckland & Sons, of Windsor.
CHARLES WALTER . I carry on business at the Hounslow Lime and Cement Works—I am returned by the bankrupt as a creditor for 50l.—the correct amount is 92l. 16s. 8d., for goods supplied between March 2nd, 1869, and 7th May, 1869—the goods were delivered to his men at my wharf—there were goods supplied to him on the 3rd, 5th, 6th, and on 7th of May—I have never been paid—my terms were a month's account and a month's credit.
Cross-examined. Q. What goods were these? A. Lime, cement, and horse-hair for buildings—he told me he was carrying on building operation in a large way—I knew the things were going to be used at Twickenham on Mr. Swanston's Estate.
MR. BESLEY. Q. Did he tell you of any marriage-settlement? A. No—I knew nothing of how he was disposing of his property.
WILLIAM ELLIS ELLIOTT . I carry on business in partnership with Mr. Collier, at Brentford, as slaters—we are returned by the bankrupt as creditors for 160l.; the real amount is 156l. 18s. 7 1/2 d., between the 28th April and 26th May inclusive—I had no previous transactions with him—I never had any money from him—I got some bills, but they were returned, and not paid—he was to pay cash, and when the work was done I could not get cash, and I consented to take a bill to accommodate him—that was not paid—I knew nothing of the way he was dealing with his property, or of any assignments, or of a marriage-settlement—I knew nothing of his going to Lewes until after he had been there—I should not have parted with my property if I had known the facts.
Cross-examined. Q. Was the account for slates, nails, and labour? A. Yes—for slating houses at Amyand Park, Twickenham—I sent the slates there and put them up—my carts took them, and my men put them on the roof—I supplied slates at Amyand Park, and also on Mr. Swanston's estate at Twickenham—I think I slated twelve or thirteen houses for him.
STEPHEN WALKER . I manage the business of Messrs. Montgomery & Sons, timber merchants, at Brentford—we were returned by the bankrupt as creditors for 165l.—the correct amount is 160l. 4s. 10d., for timber supplied to Twickenham, from 20th April to 5th May—I did not know of
his going to Lewes and filing a petition in bankruptcy there—he called on me about the middle of May, 1869, and said he was going to make a composition with his creditors—he said nothing about the proceedings at Lewes on that occasion—this was the first transaction I had with him—I was to have had cash at the end of the month—I have not had a penny.
Cross-examined. Q. The last you supplied was on the 5th May? A. Yes—he called about the middle of May, about a composition—he did not ask me to supply any more goods after 5th May—I supplied him with timber to be used for building his houses at Twickenham.
FRANCIS DOWRY BUCKLAND . I am agent to Mr. Charles Meeking, brick merchant, at Langley—he is returned as a creditor for 115l.—the amount really due to him is 113l. 10s.—the first transaction with reference to this account was 12th February, and the last was 17th April—between 2nd March and 17th April the amount is 62l. 1s.—there was about 50l. between February and March—we had had transactions with Mr. Pearse for nearly two years previously, and the arrangement was that he should pay by a two months' bill for each mouth's account, and have the usual discount for cash—he made one or two payments in cash, and the rest in bills—he told me he had some interest in some property at Windsor through his wife, but that he had no wish to touch that—I produce a letter of 28th May, which I received from him—(Read: "Gentlemen, I propose offering my creditors a composition, as I am convinced that it will not benefit them by keeping it up, and as soon as my solicitor has prepared my statement I will call on you with it, and give all the information I can. Hoping you will be kind enough to accept the composition, I remain, yours, Thomas Pearse.")—I went to his house to see him on the subject, but I could not find him—I knew that he had been made a bankrupt at Lewes, but I did not know under what circumstances—I did not know that he was disposing of his property, as I have since ascertained, or I should not have parted with my goods.
Cross-examined. Q. You had the letter long after the goods were supplied? A. Yes; five or six weeks after—I knew the defendant two years before February, 1869—I have had large dealings with him, amounting to 200l. or 300l., which he has paid—the bricks were put into trucks at Datchet station, and consigned to Twickenham—I think some of them went to Brent-ford station—I knew they were going to be used for building purposes—I don't know that they have been.
SAMUEL GOLDNEY . I live at Box, near Chippenham, in Wiltshire, and am manager to the Bath Stone Company—we are returned by the bankrupt as creditors for 40l.—the real amount is 60l. 6s. 4d.—we supplied him with goods from January 13th down to May 12th—the amount of goods supplied within three months of his bankruptcy is 34l. 15s.—that has not been paid—in addition to that amount there is an acceptance for 25l. 11s. 4d., which has been dishonoured—we supplied him with stone for building purposes.
Cross-examined. Q. Where were the goods delivered? A. They were fetched from the wharf at Paddington by Pearse's cart—they were delivered at Twickenham, not at Richmond station—the entry on 12th May is for 15ft. of stone, at 15s. 8d.—we have receipts for the goods when they are delivered.
JOHN GALLOWAY . I am in the service of Messrs. John Ruttie & Co., timber merchants—the bankrupt returns them as creditors for 158l.—the real amount is 171l. 3s. 0 1/2 d., for goods supplied between 2nd April, 1869, and 1st May, inclusive—we had no previous transactions with him—the
terms were one month's credit and six months' draft—we have received no money—when the account was opened he referred me to Messrs. Lake & Sons, solicitors, of Lincoln's Inn—I have seen Mr. Holmes, their clerk—I was not aware of the proceedings previous to his going down to Lewes—I knew nothing about his transactions.
Cross-examined. Q. This timber was delivered at Twickenham, I believe? A. Yes, on the estate where he was building—the reference which he gave me seemed satisfactory.
DONALD MUNROE . I am manager to John Munroe & Co., lime and cement merchants, at Richmond—we are returned in the bankrupt's account for 55l.—the real amount is 54l. 14s. 8d. for goods supplied from January, 1869, to 7th May, 1809—the amount of goods supplied within three months of the London bankruptcy is 30l. 14s. 8d.—these were the first transactions—the prisoner's carman, named Warlow, came and fetched the things away—I did not know when the goods were supplied, on the 7th May, that the defendant was going to petition the Court of Bankruptcy at Lewes—I had notice of it some time afterwards.
Cross-examined. Q. Were these things delivered for building purposes? A. Yes—there was lime, and cement, and pipes—I knew that they were going to Twickenham.
WILLIAM SIBLEY . I am manager to Messrs. Tatham, lime merchants, Paddington—the amount due to us from the bankrupt is 91l. 14s. 8d.—with the exception of 301. 5s. fie/, for a returned bill of exchange, that was for goods supplied between 1st March and 5th May, 1869—we have not been paid.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you had dealings with the defendant before? A. For three or four years; as long as I have been there—he has done business in a large way—I don't know the terms on which he dealt—the payments were mostly by bills—the things supplied were lime, bricks, and building materials—I knew that some of the things went to Twickenham, and some to Portobello Road—three or four years ago he was carrying on building operations at Netting Hill—at the time these goods were ordered he was building at Twickenham.
ALFRED HARRIS . I am a corn-chandler, at 8, Orchard Street, Netting Hill—lam returned as a creditor, in the accounts, for 11l.—the right amount is 9l. 0s. 7d.—I have supplied the defendant with corn, from 23rd March down to 11th May—I have had dealings with him for about three years—he paid me cash at first, and then I began taking bills of him—I had four or five bills, but only one was met—there was one for 20l. 10s. which was dishonoured, in March—I sued him for it, and he paid it—he then asked me to open an account for a month, and he would pay me it the end of the month, as he was going to make some heavy draws on some buildings at Twickenham—he did not say he was going down to Lewes, to be made a bankrupt there, or that Warlow, his foreman, was suing him—he was in very good spirits, and seemed to be doing very well indeed.
Cross-examined. Q. Was that in March? A. Yes—the goods supplied on 11th May amounted to 1l. 5s.; it was com und hay for the horse—I have sued him two or three times—the last time was for the 20l. 10s.—I have been paid, and trusted him again.
GEORGE TAPLEY COURT . I am superintendent of the South-Western Railway, at the Twickenham station—the bankrupt returns the Company as creditors for 38l.—the real amount is 61l. odd, for carriage for the two
months April and May—I should observe the arrival of the trucks with goods in them—larger quantities of things came during the last two months in comparison with the former arrivals—the Company issued this writ, dated 15th May—I received information on 8th May, that the prisoner had gone down to Lewes to become bankrupt—we had a cheque from the prisoner for 8l. 8s., on 7th May, which was dishonoured.
Cross-examined. Q. When the cheque was dishonoured, did you detain goods which stood in his name? A. I should have' done so, but after I got the cheque I let the trucks of bricks go—I think there were twelve—they went away on 8th May—there was some stone left at Richmond, part of that was detained—I knew he was building a large quantity of houses at Twickenham, some on Mr. Wheeler's estate, and some on Mr. Swanston's estate—the goods were carted by Pearse from the station on to both estates.
JAMES BURTON . I am clerk in the Middlesex Registry—I produce an indenture, dated 25th March, 1869, from Thomas Pearse to Henry Holmes; it is an assignment of the leasehold of a piece of ground and two houses thereon, known as 3 and 11, Herbert Terrace, Golburn Road—it is signed by Thomas Pearse, and the attesting witness is Richard Truine, clerk to Messrs. Lake & Co., 10, New Square, Lincoln's Inn—I also produce a memorandum dated 6th May, 1869, which is an assignment of 9 and 10, Amyand Park Road, Portobello Road, Twickenham, by a person named James Haggard upon the direction of the defendant to J. Levi—I also produce an assignment dated 1st May, 1869, of a message in Amyand Road, known as 15, Chepetow Terrace, and 16, Chepstow Terrace, from Swanston to Sexton—also a deed dated 30th April, 1869, Sexton to Warlow, of 14, Chepstow Terrace—I produce an assignment dated 7th May, 1869, between Thomas Pearse of the one part, and George Alfred Wheeler of the other part—it describes him as of Amyand Park, Twickenham, builder—it relates to three building agreements, dated 5th January, 19th March, and 3rd April, made between George Alfred Wheeler and Thomas Pearse, of certain houses, being a portion of the estate known as Amyand House, on which Pearse agreed to erect certain houses and assigns to Wheeler, all the right and interest of the said Thomas Pearse there under—I have also an indenture dated 1st May, 1869, between Swanstonand Sexton, of 17, Chepstow Terrace.
Cross-examined. Q. Haggard is the freeholder, and he lets the ground to Wheeler, and Wheeler grants it to the defendant? A. Yes—and the defendant re-assigns to the lessor all the benefit that he had under these buildings.
HENRY HOLMES . I am clerk to Messrs. Lake & Co. solicitors, 10, Lincoln's "in—I have known Pearse about three or four years—I am the attesting witness to this deed of settlement of 2nd January, 1869, for the benefit of the wife of Thomas Pearse, and purports to be an assignment of leasehold premises to her, the trustees being Frederick Sexton and Richard Warlow—I only saw Sexton when he executed the deed—I understood from Pearse that Sexton was his brother-in-law—I don't know what relation he was to Warlow—I never knew Warlow as Pearse's servant—on 19th February, 1869, I entered into this agreement with the prisoner—(This was an, agree-ment between Thomas Pearse and Henry Holmes for the sale and purchase of 3 and 11, Golburn Terrace, for 150l., purchase to be completed at Lady-Day; 50l. to be paid at once, and the remaining 100l. At Michaelmas, and the houses to be complied by Thomas Pearse)—There is a receipt at the bottom for 20l., in part payment of the 50l., which I paid; and also a receipt of 3rd March,
1869, for 30l., which I paid—there is also a receipt of 7th May, 1869, in part payment of 100l. payable at Michaelmas, in which the defendant says, "I undertake to do the work required in the agreement, and put Venetian blinds to the houses 3 and 11, Golburn Terrace"—that 60l. was paid—I paid 35l. by cheque, and 15l. was deducted, because I was not bound to pay the 50l. till six months afterwards by the agreement—I was not aware at the time I paid the 35l. that Pearse was getting Venetian blinds from Mr. Clark—I did not know that Warlow was suing him, or of the expedition to Lewes—I was not applied to personally for a reference as to Pearse's re-spectability—on the last trial a witness stated that he had applied, but I can't find any reference in our books—I had nothing to do with the preparation of the bankruptcy accounts—I was not aware that he had not disclosed the receipt for that 35l.—the assignment is in the possession of the mortgages—I think I owe about 20l. on this agreement now—I have owed that ever since 7th May—I owed it on the 10th May, when he made the affidavit that he had no property at all.
Cross-examined. Q. Was that deed drawn up in your office? A. No; it was prepared by Counsel—I received instructions from the defendant to have it prepared in November—I laid it before Counsel, and got it back some time in December, and it was executed on 2nd January—it was for two houses—the amount of money paid in May was 35l.—the balance of the debt I have not paid up to the present day—the Venetian blinds have not been put in—the house property at Notting Hill has depreciated about a third in value—they have over-built it—the houses must have been commenced in 1868—the whole block of houses was mortgaged to clients of Messrs. Lake & Co.—there were six houses mortgaged on the 4th July 1868, for 3400l.—the mortgages referred to in the agreement were 750l.—those were the houses at Golburn Road, Notting Hill—I don't think that they would realize more than the mortgage upon them, taking into consideration the depreciation in value which those houses have undergone—if they were put up for sale they would not realize more than they were mortgaged for in July, 1868.
MR. BESLEY. Q. Were you wrong in giving 150l.? A. I don't think I should give that amount now—by the agreement he was to put Venetian blinds to my houses—they have not been put up—I have not made a deduction for that—I have not noticed whether the other houses have Venetian blinds to them.
SAMUEL HIGGS . I was a photographer and picture dealer, at 6, Queen Street, Cheapside—I have since sold my business—I have known Mr. Pearse about three years—I have advanced him various sums of money, on the security of the deed of settlement, made by him to Warlow and Sexton, as trustees, on behalf of his wife—between March and June I advanced between 300l. and 400l.—I held the deed of settlement as security—none of that money had been repaid to me—Mr. Swanston paid a portion of a former loan for the prisoner—I did not consult with Warlow or Sexton about the deed—I had no knowledge of the deed at all—I merely took the document, and looked at it when it was brought to me.
Cross-examined. Q. This money which you advanced, was it to carry on these building operations? A. I don't know—I supposed that he did require the money for that—I had not seen the accounts which he filed.
1869, an agreement was made by which he was to have a portion of the land which I had taken from the freeholder—I produce the agreement—it is for four plots, for the erection of eight homes, Nos. 7 and 8, Victoria Road, and 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14, Amyand Park Road—there was another agreement on 19th March, 1869, which I produce, with reference to land, for two bouses at the upper end of Amyand Park—I hare not got any money for those houses—on 3rd April, 1869, there was another agreement for a single house, at Victoria Road, Twickenham—on 7th May I paid Pearse 76l., and he then made a re-assignment of the houses over to me—I paid him the 75l., and took possession of all the property mentioned in the three build-ing agreements, and also the materials on the place which had not been used, such as bricks, and other things—he did not tell me that Warlow was suing him, or that he was going down to Lewes; if he had done so I should not have paid him the 751., because I should have had the houses under the agreements—I have seen Warlow at work for Pearse; but I know nothing of him—he acted as Pearse's head man.
Cross-examined. Q. The agreement provided that, in the event of his becoming bankrupt, you could take possession? A. Yes—I don't think he had a great many workmen on the ground at that time, only two or three on 7th May—before that there were forty or fifty men on my works—he was also carrying on work on Mr. Swanston's ground—he was building an equal number of houses there, and employed about the same number of workmen—the houses were not completed on 7th May—some of them were only half a storey high—the defendant took the land from me to build houses upon; and as the houses got nap, floor by floor, I advanced him 75 per cent, on the amount he spent—all the interest he gets is between the 75 and 100—I daresay I advanced even more than 75 per cent—I shall be 800l. out of pocket by the transaction—house property has depreciated very much in value there—I should fancy that would be so with Mr. Swanston's estate also—I could not say how much the defendant was paying to his workmen for wages, I should think something like 200l. a week.
MR. BESLEY. Q. You are assuming that he was paying the wages, of the men you saw there? A. Precisely—I can't say whether he paid them or not—I have heard some complaints—I know Henry Bucker, a stonemason—I have seen him at work there—I know Joseph Payne, of Hounslow, a bricklayer—he superintended the bricklayers—I have also seen Mr. John Smith, a bricklayer, of Netting Hill, there—the property is getting worse every day—I lent Pearse my name for 100l. on the 10th May.
HENRY BUCKER . I live at Isleworth, and am a stone mason—I was introduced to Pearson at the end of January, 1869, by Mr. Wheeler—I entered into an arrangement with Pearse, and did work for him at Amyand Park and Queen's Road, Twickenham, and on Mr. Swanston's Estate—I found the men to do the work, and he was to give me money to pay the men as the work progressed—I began to work for him in January, and went on up to the bankruptcy—I had about fourteen men working for me—I asked Pearse for some money on 8th May—he had paid me about 100l. before that—I asked him for 20l. on account, he gave me 10l. and promised the other on Monday, the 10th—I met him in Shoe Lane on the Monday, and he told me to put more men on, that he was going to receive some money, and would pay me—I put extra men on, but I never received any money after 8th May—Pearse only
had five or six men working for him at Twickenham—the subcontractors employed their own men.
Cross-examined. Q. He paid you Oyer 100l.? A. Something like that—his statement is 113l.—there were only about six men employed by Pearse—I mean the ground men—the others were employed by the subcontractor!.
JOHN SMITH . I am a bricklayer, of Whetstone Street, Portobello Road, Netting Hill—I entered into a subcontract with Pearse, and employed men under me, and paid them their wages—early in May he told me to increase the number of men, because he wanted to get the buildings on faster—I put on two or three extra men—I had about fifteen men then—on 8th May I asked him for 20l.—he paid me 12l., and said I should have some more on Monday—I never got any more money—he owes me between 70l. and 80l., for materials and labour, which I have paid out of my own pocket.
Cross-examined. Q. Were there large operations going on? A. Yes—I have received about 150l. from him—there were seven or eight subcontractors employed—I did not receive the exact amount of money from Pearse each week—he paid me on account—he employed about six or seven men of his own, as excavators.
JOSEPH PAYNE . I am a bricklayer, of Hounslow—I entered into a con-tract with Pearse to do work for him at Amyand Park, Twickenham—I employed about fifteen men—about the end of April he said he wanted the work got on with as quick as he could—I put on more men in consequence—on Saturday, 8th May, I asked him for 30l.—he gave me 15l., and said he would give me the other on Monday—I saw him on Monday; but could not get the money—he owes me about 30l.—I saw him at Notting Hill on tho following Friday, and he paid me 1l.—with that exception I received no money after 8th May—he employed six or seven ground workmen, excavators—I saw Warlow three times while I was at Amyand Park—he came down with Pearse—he never did anything there—I believe he is a carpenter—I know Sexton, he in a carpenter—he recommended me to Pearse.
Cross-examined. Q. Has he paid you a large sum of money at different times? A. Sometimes 20l., sometimes 10l.—I should think he has paid me about 190l.—I paid my own men—I don't know how many there were it work there besides my own men.
WILLIAM FREDERICK GEORGE . I am an auctioneer and appraiser, of Cambridge Road, Kilburn, in partnership with Mr. Whitehead—on 28th July, 1870, I was put in possession of certain household goods and furniture, the property of Thomas Pearse, at Notting Hill, by Mr. Tilley, the solicitor for the assignees under the bankruptcy—I took stock of the things—I found several things in the stable, ranges, closet pans, and fittings and stock in tradé—I took possession of 1, Childish Terrace, and sold the furniture on 30th July—no impediment was thrown in the way of the sale by Pearse, and no claim was made to the furniture by a person named Hughes—the furniture was sold for 25l. to a Mr. Hubbard—I have his receipt.
Cross-examined. Q. The goods you found in the stable were worth about 12l.? A. Yes.
THOMAS BRIDGEWATER RICHARDSON . I am a builder, and live at 113, Queen's Rood, Bayswater—I have known Mrs. Elizabeth Hughes twelve or fourteen years—I saw her at 10.30 last night, at her house, Hereford Road, Westbourne Grove—she is about fifty-five or sixty, and suffers from palpitation of the heart—from my knowledge of her I think she would be unable
to attend here, she would get in such an excited state that it would cause her death.
CHARLES VALLANCEY LEWIS . This document is in my writing—it is dated 17th June, 1869—on that day I received 48l. from Mr. Peane, which I was told came from Mrs. Hughes—I forget how I received it, or whether I receded it from the defendant, or his wife—when I said I received it from Pearse, I meant through him—I kept that money—I put my signature to the document the day I received the money—I think I received 20l. from the defendant just prior to his bankruptcy in Lewes—I was not attorney for the plaintiff, I believe Mr. Harrison was—I gave an undertaking to appear and consent to the judgment the day the writ was issued, and the result was the defendant was only in prison a few hours; when the Insolvent Court was in existence, in 1861, that was an every day occurrence—this (produced) is an inventory of goods, at 59, Lancaster Road, Netting Hill, the property of Thomas Pearse, a bankrupt—that was the house he used to occupy.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you acting as the solicitor for the assignees? A. Yes; under the bankruptcy at Lewes—it was by my advice that he went down to Lewes, and sought the protection of the Lewes Bankruptcy Court, as being more expeditious and less cost—Mrs. Hughes is a debtor of the defendant's to a large amount—this inventory was to be given over to Mrs. Hughes for the money she had advanced, but it was found not to be a good assignment, and the assignees in the London Bankruptcy took pensions, so that neither Mrs. Hughes nor the defendant got any of that furniture at all.
WILLIAM CLARK . I am clerk to Mr. Robert William Ediss, an architect and surveyor—he is the sub-lessor of the property at Twickenham, of which Captain Haggard is the freeholder—certain sums of money were advanced by Captain Haggard to Pearse from time to time—on 16th April, 1869, 80l. was advanced, and also a cheque for 66l. on the same day—they were cheques payable to Wheeler, and are endorsed by Wheeler—they were advanced to Wheeler for Pearse—on the 8th May there was a further sum of 100l.—the back of that cheque is endorsed by Pearse.
Cross-examined. Q. Mr. Wheeler is the lessor? A. Yes—the money which Wheeler advanced to Pearse came in reality from Captain Haggard—that is the 75 per cent, which Wheeler mentioned which was advanced as the houses progressed—Mr. Ediss was the architect of the houses—he had to certify that the progress had been made before the advances were paid.
LANCELOT THOMAS BAKER . I live at Heath Road, Twickenham, and am agent to Mr. Swanston, the ground landlord of the Twickenham estate—in April, 1869, I went and saw the houses, the leases of which have been proved—the leases are not granted until the houses are roofed—Mr. Swanston was ill in bed at that time with rheumatic fever, and I attended to the business of granting the leases, on 30th April, to Warlow, 14, Chepstow Terrace, built by Peane, on 1st May, 15, 16, and 17, Chepstow Terrace, to Sexton, also built by Pearse, and on 6th May,' 9 and 10, Amyand Park Road, to Mr. Levi—on the 3rd of May I paid Pearse a cheque for 172l.
Cross-examined. Q. Was that for the ground rent? A. The improved ground rent—I was not examined at the last trial, or before the Magistrate—there were seven houses built by Pearse on Mr. Swanston's estate—170l. was all the money paid to Pearse by Mr. Swanston at that time.
MR. BESLEY. Q. Did you see Pearse more than once? A. Yes—he was urgent to get the leases granted.
RICHARD LYNE . I am one of the trade assignees under the London Bankruptcy—the creditors took proceedings in London to get rid of the Lewes petition, and for the purpose of investing the bankrupt's affairs—with the exception of the money realized on the property found in the stable, and the furniture I have not received a farthing—a proposal was made at a meeting at the Guildhall Coffee House by Mr. Vallancey Lewis for a composition of 3s. 6d. in the pound, one-half to be paid down, and the other half at a certain time—I advised the creditors to take nothing of the kind, and went on with the proceedings—I have lost about 20l. by the bankruptcy.
JAMES YALDEN . I am one of the firm of Norfolk & Yalden, accountants, London—I have seen the accounts in the bankruptcy proceedings, and the banker's pass-book delivered up by the bankrupt—the cash account filed by the bankrupt shows receipts to the amount of 12,345l. 3s. 7d., for twelve months preceding the bankruptcy—that is incorrect in this way, it includes the balance which he had at his banker's in July, 1868, and 33l. 7s. 11d. which was overdrawn in July, 1868—there is no trace in the cash account of a receipt for 50l. from Mr. Hicks—the 100l. received from Levi appears in the bank-book—there is no account of 75l. from Wheeler on 7th May, or 35l. received from Holmes on 8th May—there is no account of Mr. Swanston's cheque for 172l.—there is no entry of a payment to Mr. Hicks on that day on the other side—I have deducted his account from the banker's pass-book, and the gross payments in the twelve months ore 5344l.—I have examined the detailed cash account which was filed—it is not identical with the pass-book—the balance at the banker's is not brought in in the first instance—the result of the examination tends to show that he has received a great deal of money which he has not accounted for—I find that on the 8th May, the date of the adjudication, he had in his hands 417l. 16s. 10d., which he ought to have given up to the assignees—therein several mistakes in the casting up of the accounts—I have examined the deficiency account—he brings in items there which are absent in the cash account—cheques in favour of "self" amount to 5386l., and there is no indication of where they have gone to.
Cross-examined. Q. What is the amount he has paid away in wages? A. 4340l. during the year—I have had no books whatever—he had put down in the account "Workmen's wages, about 150l.," and so on—there is "May, 1868, paid workmen's wages during this month about 170l.," and there are three cheques drawn out of the bank on that day—the unsecured creditors are brought into the deficiency account, which is wrong—there is an entry of property in the hands of Messrs. Lake & Co., six houses in the Golburn Road, 525l. per house, 3150l.—he gives the amount which those houses cost him to build, and passes it to the account of creditors holding security—the deficiency account is not a deficiency account at all—there is nothing to show what the deficiency is.
JONES EVERETT PAGET . I am messenger in the Official Assignees' office—I am sent here to produce the bankrupt's books and papers—the only book delivered up was the banker's pass-book and some newspapers, which I produce.
27th September, 1869, and took notes of the questions and answers put to him—this is the transcript that I made—there was another examination on 14th October, and another on 13th May—I have compared the transcript with the shorthand notes, and it is correct—(The examination of 29th September, 1869, was read, and part of that examinations on 14th October and 13th May).
Cross-examined. Q. Were there three separate examinations? A. The first in September and the last in May—there are upwards of 1700 questions and answers.
WILLIAM STROUD . In August, 1869, in consequence of something I heard from a man named Warlow, I went to Pearse—when I saw him he said "I want you to go with me to see Mr. Levi about the furnishing of a pair of villas at Twickenham," and we went together—the prisoner said "The contract must be in your name, as I am a bankrupt"—I was to receive my wages daily, as a working man—I am a carpenter—I was not present at the discussion between Levi and Pearse—Mr. Pearse went in and saw Levi, and left me in the hall—I signed the contract, and I worked there several months—I had worked for Pearse before he was a bankrupt—I was paid while I was at work—the money was brought to me by Pearse—50l. was given to me by Levi to pay wages, and I paid the men with it—I handed it to Pearse; he took it from me—I signed my name' at the back of that cheque—I handed it to Pearse when I got it.
Cross-examined. Q. Was that contract finished when you left? A. I don't think it was—Mr. Pearse had the 50l., but he brought me the money the next day to pay the wages—Pearse did not get the money himself—I paid the wages most times—I think by the contract Levi was to pay 400 odd pounds—I did not see the contract after I signed it—I can't say how much I paid in wages—I paid every week—there were sometimes eight men, sometimes twelve at work—it would be 14l. or 15l. a week—since Pearse has been bankrupt he has been working as foreman on the works, not as master—I believe he has been making his living like that ever since he has been a Bankrupt.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Do you mean that you remember paying 50l. to work-men after changing the cheque? A. Not the whole—I might have paid 20l.—I paid a portion of my own wages out of the money I received—I have no account of what I paid.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you employed as the defendant's carter? A. Yes—I know Warlow, his foremen—they were generally together—I used to get orders from one or the other—I went to Mr. Pearson's the iron-monger's—I could not say who told me to go there; they were both together, one of them told me to go—I put the things in the stable according to their orders—Mr. Pearse said "When you come back put the things in the stable, you will find the key in the house, and lock the door, and put the key back again"—Warlow and Pearse wore together when he told me that—I did according to his orders—I locked the door and gave the key to the servant—she gave it to me, and I gave it to her again.
MR. GIFFARD. Q. Whose servant? A. Mr. Pearse's, at his house in Lancaster Road.
GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
FOURTH COURT.—Thursday, 22nd September, 1870.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
MR. BOTTOMLEY conducted the Prosecution.
MATTHEW BROWNFIELD . I am Divisional Surgeon of Police—on the 12th instant I was called to see the deceased at his house—I found him in bed, suffering great pain down the left side, and very ill—he died on the 26th—I made a post-mortem examination, and found the boy had had pleurisy, and a contused abscess on the left side, and also inflammation of cerebellum.
COURT. Q. Might pleurisy have been the cause of death? A. It might.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. HUMPHREYS conducted the Prosecution and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAM the defence.
HENRY VINING BRYANT . I am a surgeon, at 353, Hackney Road—on Sunday, the 4th September, I was called to the diseased at about 1.25—he was then dead—I made a post-mortem examination, in conjunction with a friend, on the Monday following, and could not find anything to account for his death—all the organs were healthy.
Cross-examined. Q. In your opinion, was death caused by fear? A. Yes—he fell out of the window 3ft., and that might have been another cause of death.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BRINDLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. THORNE COLE the Defence.
JAMES BERESFORD RILEY, M.D . I reside at Rectory Place, Woolwich—I made a post-mortem examination of the deceased child—it was about three months old—a male child—I saw the prisoners at their house—Elizabeth Saville said she was the mother of the child—the child was in an extremely emaciated condition, smaller than a child of its age ought to look—there were no external marks of violence—it died from the effects of neglected diarrhoea—there was no food in the stomach—but food quickly passes away during diarrhoea, and some may have passed away out of the system—it was healthy in every other respect, and capable of all the functions of life—I should say it had been suffering a week or ten days—I asked the mother if she had had a doctor—she said no, her peculiar notions precluded her from sending for a medical man—I ascertained they gave the child wine and arrowroot—I never found that they gave it medicine, but they gave, it other things—I think they gave it castor oil, but there was no immediate treatment in the last week or two of its death—had the child been treated in the ordinary way I think there is no question about it that its condition might have been ameliorated, and its
disease checked; but whether life would have been saved from it I cannot say—the child was not a suckled child, and it is probable this artificial food was not good for it.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. E. P. WOOD conducted the Prosecution.
ELLIN WELLING . I reside at 26, Clarendon Road, Bayswater, with a person named Chile—the prisoner acknowledged she was the mother of the deceased—she lived in the same house with me, in a room over me—I have known her three or four years—the child was born on the 5th April last—he was four months old—the prisoner if not married—a man named William Ware was its reputed father—I saw no change in it the first two months, but the two months prior to death—I saw it before it was taken by the mother to Dr. Lyle—when he saw it he said, after feeling its pulse, "Take it away, I will have nothing at all to do with it, take it to some other medical man"—the mother used to leave it at 10 o'clock, and not attend to it till the next morning, and it would scream and cry all that time—I used to feed it myself for the first two months, but not after—it was neglected in its food, and fed from a very dirty bottle—the mother lived on what she could get—the doctor gave me a powder, which I gave it.
Prisoner. Q. Were you in while my child was crying? A. Not every night—I have told you you would get into some trouble with your child if you did not take more care of it.
ANNIE MARIA DICKSON . I live at 15, Clarendon Street, and am a single woman—I have known the prisoner for eighteen months—I saw the baby a week before it died—it was in my place the whole of the week with the mother—she stayed in my place throughout the day, to have her food with me—she never fed the child as she ought to have done—she made its food out of a dirty bottle—one morning I saw it drawing the dirty water from it, sour milk, and I cleaned the bottle, and the child drank very hearty—then she came in I showed her the curds in the bottle—I told her that she did not feed it properly, and so did a young man—she never answered—I changed the child—it made me reach, it had such a dirty napkin on—the child was strong some time before this, and was a nice little fellow.
Prisoner. Q. Did you not say that new laid eggs, beat up in milk, would do the child some good, and I did so? A. It was not eggs in the milk, it was nothing but curd milk and sour.
JANE GARRING . I am the wife of a coal porter, and live at the same house as the prisoner did live, in the next room—I have known her for four months—she lived with a man named Ware, in the house, who was a baker—she treated the child very cruelly—she used to go out at 10 o'clock at night, and leave it till 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning, and it became quite exhausted.
WILLIAM CHIEL . I live in the same house as the prisoner—I am a horse-keeper, out of work, in consequence of a rupture, and in the work-house through it—while there the prisoner was confined in the workhouse—I saw the child after she came out; it was a fine boy—it was called "The champion of the ward"—I have seen my wife feeding the child—I have observed a lot of black curd at the bottom of the bottle, and my wife often cleansed it—it was very sour and not clean—the prisoner left the child every night till morning—she had means to support it—she drank, and was locked up, and the child fetched to the mother by the police—I saw
a kind of finger mark under the eyes, which the prisoner said the father had done—I saw the neck of the child, it waft like anything withering away—it seemed to be no bigger round than my finger—I spoke to the mother several times, and said "Mary, you will get into trouble some of these days," and she never took any notice of it.
Prisoner. Q. How do you know I was out every night? A. Because I used to see you in Westbourne Grove—I don't believe you were in two nights after you came out of the workhouse the first fortnight.
WILLIAM VASEY LYLE . I am a registered physician, practising at 2, Marlborough Terrace—I was consulted on the 13th of August, at 9 o'clock in the morning, by the mother—I examined the child carefully; it was hopeless, and past all remedy—she said it had not been seen by a doctor before—it appeared to be ill nourished—there were sore marks on the bottom, but not to any groat extent—I found the brain healthy, the other organs also—there was no disease to lay hold of and say it was the came of death—this was six days after the death—we could not make that examination we wished of its bowels, as they were broken to pieces by decay—the glands were slightly enlarged, but not sufficient to say that that was the cause of death—there was also a slight wasting—it had not had sufficient food, and what it had had was not of the right kind—the digestive organs were not in a good condition.
Prisoner. I took the child to Dr. Phelps, and he told me to come again in the morning. It had the whooping cough. I went home, and it died about 12 o'clock at night. I had a person to look after it while it was ill. I was not rich, and I gave it what I could afford.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. E. P. WOOD conducted the Prosecution.
EMILY SCOTT . I am a single woman, and live at 10, Western Road, Ealing—I am the mother of the deceased child—it was one year and eleven months old—it died on the 15th August—I was in a situation at Ealing—my wages were 12l. a year—I left the child in the care of the prisoner—I paid her 3s. a week for it—I saw it on the day it died—I saw it a week before then, it was not very well at that time—my attention was not called to any circumstances affecting it.
Prisoner. She had no other home but mine, and it was her's and the child's too. Witness. That was so—I could not go home, and I lived with her four or five months before I went to service—I did not pay my board—I have since paid her as regular as I could—I saw the child as often as three times a week—I did not observe anything—it was always a delicate child, and he seemed to be properly fed; I thought so—it had whooping cough very bad when it was about three months old—it has never been well since, and has always been ailing.
SARAH KEMP . I am a widow, and live at Column Green—I saw the deceased child once a week, until a week before it died—my impression was that it was not properly fed—I form that impression by its appearance—it looked thin, and did not feed well—I saw it eating a slice of bread most hungrily.
MARY SIBLEY . I know the prisoner and the deceased child—I saw it last on the 14th, a day before it died—it was in the prisoner's arms—it was well then—she told me it had eaten a hearty dinner—I have occasionally taken it in a little pudding, or broth, and that—it seemed then as if it had
an appetite, and liked to eat—when I was at work one day they thought the child was going to die—my husband was in Brompton Hospital, consumptive—I sent for the prisoner, and she came, and the child went to her—it put up his arms as if fond of her—she spoke to me about the state of the child on several occasions, how bad it looked, and thin it had got—I never saw her treat it unkindly—I told the daughter a month before it died I would put it in the union—I thought it would get more nourishment there—the poor woman was working hard, and she could not afford it much—she was having parish relief at that time—her own children are strong and healthy, and well fed.
JOHN SPENCER FERRIS . I am a registered surgeon—I hare known this child twelve months—I attended it in September and October, for the whooping cough, and then again not till July—in July it was suffering from wasting away, from diarrhoea—that was the 10th, up to August the 4tb—the diarrhoea then stopped—at the latter part of my attendance I came to the conclusion it did not have sufficient food—I told the prisoner to give it up to the mother, or take it to the union—I said I should insist on her doing so—I spoke to the constable, and he said he could do nothing—I spoke to the curate of the parish, and I called on the 10th August, and found it had not been given up to the mother—she always said the mother was coming for it at the end of the month—I called on the 10th, got the mother's address, and gave it to a clergyman of the parish—I heard nothing of it till its death—I thought it had been starved to death; but I was told it died from diarrhoea—I am the pariah doctor—they might have had my assistance by sending for me at any time—I have attended the members of the family for a long time, and no complaint of the ill health of the child hid been made to me—I made a post-mortem examination—the child weighed 11 lbs.—it was terribly emaciated, and nothing in the body—I have heard that it was fond of feeding, and had a ravenous appetite—I attribute death to want of food, and I think if it had had it it would have prevented it—there was nothing particular in the bowels—the child was very weak and thin—there was nothing in the lower bowel—it was healthy—the stomach was full of gruel; it must have had food a few hours before.
Prisoner. Q. The child had diarrhoea, and nothing would keep on its chest; it was always delicate, and it could not hold bread and milk; you said it was to have a quart of milk a day, and I asked you to allow me something, and you said Oh no, the mother was to have it? A. Yes.
COURT. Q. Did you see this child when you attended the other members of the family? A. Yes; but I was not sure it had been starved till afterwards—I did not observe anything about it when I went there, except that it was always thin and emaciated—I did not order food for the child, because I thought these were not people of very good character, and that the child would not get it—I thought it much better to take it to the union, and thought it would have got all its nourishment there.
EMILY SCOTT (re-examined). The prisoner spoke to me about going to the union—I would not give it up—I thought she was doing a mother's part to my child, and I would not allow it to know the horrors of a work-house, for I have been in myself.
NOT GUILTY .
For cases tried in New Court, Friday, see Surrey cases.
FOURTH COURT.—Friday, September 23rd; and
NEW COURT.—Satur-day, 24th, and Monday, 26th, 1870.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
MESSRS. METCALFE and STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution; MESSRS. MACRAE MOIR and MEAD appeared for J. T. Avery, MR. HORACE BROWN for Jordan, MESSRS. COLLINS and DOUGLAS for Bodger, MR. HARRIS for Parsonage, and MR. MOODY for Edward Avery.
GEORGE MELHUISH . I have been a clerk to Messrs. Blagg & Edwards, solicitors, for two or three years—a little before the 16th July I saw something which I communicated to Inspector Russell—I got tickets from Jordan—they are all initialed with my initials on the back—Jordan was a ticket clipper at the Fenohurch Street Station of the Great Eastern Rail-way Company—Bodger relieved him—when I got the ticket from Jordan it was in the condition it now is—(ticket produced)—he gave it me by the booking-office, down stairs—he was on duty there, clipping—I came to know Jordan through Parsonage, who told me he could show me how to travel for nothing—that was some days before I got the ticket from Jordan—he introduced me to Jordan in a public-house opposite the station—I then told Mr. Russell what I had seen—the date on the ticket is 16th July, No. 9015, thirdclass, half return—I met Mr. Russell by appointment, and he and I initialed the ticket—on 18th July I had a meeting with Parsonage at Fenchurch Street—Bodger was there, in uniform, at the clipping place, between 4 and 5 o'clock in the afternoon—I saw something take place between Parsonage and Bodger—Bodger gave Parsonage tickets, and Parsonage gave me one—it was a thirdclass single ticket to Blackwall, No. 7092 (produced)—I always handed these tickets to Mr. Russell after I initialed them—Parsonage and I travelled together to Blackwall—at the time these tickets were given by Bodger to Parsonage and handed to me, they were clipped—I did not go all the way to Blackwall, I alighted at Shadwell or Stepney—Parsonage went on to where he lived—on 27th July I went to the Blackwall bookingoffice, in Fenchurch Street—I received this ticket (produced)—I cannot say from whom—it is No. 5278, half-return from Fenchurch Street to West India Docks, third-class—I went either to Shadwell or Stepney—on 28th July I received this ticket from one of the prisoners (produced)—it is not initialed—I did not use it, I travelled with a legitimate ticket—J. T. Avery went by the name of "Little Joe"—I remember on oth August going to Foster's public-house with J. T. Avery—I received these two tickets (produced) from "Little Joe," one at the public-house and one elsewhere—No. 8029 is a thirdclass half return from Black-wall to West India Docks, August 5th—one or two days previous to this I saw Jordan, when I was going out, and he said "I shall not be here to-morrow, I will make it all right with Joe"—the other number is 5611, thirdclass, to Poplar, 5th August—Jordan introduced me to Joe—we went and had a glass together—Jordan said "Call in the afternoon, the tickets will be all right"—I called, and they were there for me—Avery told me to come in the office when I liked—he was a bookingclerk at Fenchurch Street—I
think I saw Jordan and Avery on a Saturday, between 9 and 10 o'clock—A very said something about going to Gravesend, and would give me a couple of tickets if I came on Monday—I asked him for one on the Saturday morning, and he said "They are not up yet"—he said they would be up shortly—A very soon after that gave me one ticket, and Jordan gave me one—the one from Jordan was No. 604, first-class half return, Shad well, and the one from A very No. 3413, third-class to Black wall—I am not sure if they were clipped when given to me—I went on with a legitimate ticket—on 9th August I went to the Fenchurch Street Station—I saw J. T. A very—I got two tickets from him, third-class half returns, Nos. 1473 and 1541, to Blackwall—they were both clipped when I received them—I saw him give two tickets to two girls on this date—they passed through the window at the bookingoffice; but paid nothing—I believe they were clipped tickets—I cannot positively say—on 10th August I saw A very give a man a ticket whom I had seen on the line repeatedly—he did not pay for the ticket—on 12th August A very gave me two half tickets, second-class returns from Fenchurch Street to Blackwall, Nos. 9316 and 9317—on 13th August I took a man named Carter with me, and I found A very and Jordan at the side of the booking-office, in Fenchurch Street—A very said "How are you, old fellow; are you going down the-line to-day?"—I said "Yes, this is a friend of mine"—he said "Is it all right?"—I said "Yes"—he said "The proof of the pudding's in the eating"—after that J. T. Avery gave me two tickets—he gave me four on the 13th—the first ticket I got from Jordan on the 13th was put by him under the lining on the top of the stool, which is just inside the door where he nips the tickets—he said "There it is, under the stool"—I then went into the booking-office, and Avery gave me one; he pulled several out of his pocket, and gave me a first-class—all the tickets he pulled out of his pockets were nipped tickets, and different colours, and for different stations—the two tickets given to me by Avery and Jordan were for the East and West India Docks, Nos. 9152 and 9153, first-class, 13th August—I put them in my pocket, and travelled with legitimate tickets—I went again, later in the day, to the booking-office—Carter was with me—I saw J. T. Avery, who gave me two more tickets, first-class returns to West India Docks, 9159 and 9164—I did not go down with the train, and gave the tickets to Mr. Russell—I saw Avery again, later in the day; he gave me a ticket to Limehouse—I never paid anything for these tickets—they were all clipped when I received them—on 21st July I saw Parsonage at the Fenchurch Street Station—I made these notes in my pocket-book when I went home—I also saw him on 22nd July—on the 21st he got two tickets; on the 23rd he got three tickets—Parsonage got the tickets by the side of the booking-office—on the 23rd Parsonage got three tickets from Jordan, one was for me, and one for a person named Knight, whom Parsonage had introduced to me, and one for himself—I lighted at Shadwell, and let thein go on—they were followed—on the 30th I received some tickets from Jordan—two nipped ones—one is produced—one was given up in mistake—Jordan was on duty as usual—I have re-peatedly seen Jordan take tickets out of his pocket—on 2nd August I received two tickets from Jordan, firstclass, Fenchurch Street to Blackwall, 6329—on 2nd August I received two tickets from Jordan, one nipped and the other not, Nos. 9389 and 9390, second, half returns, Fenchurch Street to West India Docks—on 4th August I went with Jordan to a public-house, and he gave me two halves of tickets, 2415 and 2454, first, half returns, to
Blackwall; and later on the 4th, he gave me a third half return, Line, house, 2932—I knew Parsonage first of all, some months since; he is a cigar merchant, and is in the Customs—he lived at Stepney—he said he had paid seven threepenny fares in fifteen years, that he had travelled the line, and had used the line four and five times a day, he used, at night, to bring up spirits by it—I think it was 18th July when I first received any tickets from Parsonage—in that month of July I was on the platform at Stepney, and a ticket collector named Rutterford said to Parsonage "Look out, there's a b—detective on the platform"—on the same day, when Parsonage got to Fenchurch Street, he said to a ticket collector named Treadgold "Come down, old fellow, and have a glass of ale"—we all three went together, and while in the public-house Parsonage said to Treadgold "Look out, old fellow, there is a detective after us; you had better warn the people; it has already been done at Stepney," and Treadgold's reply was "Don't trouble, all the b—'s on earth can't catch us"—on that morning Parsonage did not take a ticket at Stepney—I have never seen Parsonage take a ticket, though I have travelled with him several times, nor go near the ticket clippers to have his ticket clipped—Jordan and Bodger were on duty at the Fenchurch Street Station on one occasion, and a man named Hollingshead was there—I saw him take out a lot of tickets from his pockets, and give away one or two—I never saw Parsonage go by the Tilbury line—I have seen Edward Avery repeatedly in the booking-office—when Parsonage introduced me to Bodger, he said I was a friend of his, it was all right—I have seen Bodger put his hands into his pockets and pull out tickets, on several occasions—I have seen J. T. Avery pull out hundreds at a time, and sort them out—I have seen Bodger hand tickets to Parsonage—I received this first-class ticket from Jordan on 10th August, No. 7061, first, single to Blackwall—that was given to me at Fenchurch Street, just at the nipping place.
Cross-examined by MR. MACRAE MOIR. Q. You said you are a solicitor's clerk? A. I am—my employers have offices at St. Alban's—I am in their London office—I get 30s. a week, and extras for overtime—I am manager of the London business—I am twenty-one years of ago—I have been with them two or three years—I entered their service when I came to London in April or May, 1868—hours ten to four—I have known Mr. Russell since 1868, when I was witness against a man stealing a watch—he was at a friend's house having supper; I said "I wish I knew somebody connected with the Blackwall line," and I made up my mind to give information—I knew Mr. Russell was connected with the Great Eastern Railway—I was lodging with a cousin of mine, a friend of Mr. Russell's—I met Mr. Russell two or three times at my cousin's—no one offered me anything to take up this case, I did it on public grounds—I have had, in all, 5l. 17s. 6d. for expenses—I bought five or six boxes of cigars from Parsonage—I paid him 16s. a box—Parsonage buys and sells spirits—I owe him money now—I first knew Bodger through Parsonage—when Jordan introduced me to "Little Joe" I may have asked for tickets then—Joe said "Never take a ticket on this line, I will make it all right for you"—I never told Avery to go over to the public-house and they should have beer—I might have asked him to have a glass with me—I will not say I did not pay for it every time—I cannot say I ever saw any person give J. T. Avery money for tickets—I saw something pass from a man to him, I cannot say it was money—I stood within 2 ft. of these girls, and saw him give them nipped tickets—this was the 9th or 10th
August, about 4.30 or 5 o'clock—I had left my business early that day—I would not atop these girls, because the bubble would hare burst, and that would have spoilt it—J. T. A very has repeatedly told me that he has passed people up and down the line for nothing—they all three told me never to pay for a ticket—I gave them drink to get all the information out of them I could.
Cross-examined by MR. COLLINS. Q. Did you receive any money, in 1868, from Russell, over the conviction for watch-stealing? A. I have received 5l. 17s. 6d. up to now—I did not run away to make these entries in my pocket-book—my house was close to the station.
Cross-examined by MR. DOUGLAS. Q. Will you tell me when your first entry was made in that book? A. The first memorandum I put down was about Bodger, 18th July—that is the time when I went there and Parsonage was with me—I nave no entry here of the 16th July; anything I saw to enable me to recognize a man again I put down—I initialed the tickets so as to remember—it was on the 18th of July I first saw Bodger, who handed me a ticket—I will not swear that on any other occasion Bodger handed a ticket to me—I have no other entry bearing reference to Bodger in my book—I thought once quite sufficient—had I known I was coming to this Court I might have kept a better account of what did take place—on the 18th July Bodger handed a ticket to Parsonage—I saw him on two other occasions do the same thing, but I cannot positively swear to them—I do not think I ever saw Bodger hand my friends tickets—I hare repeatedly seen Bodger pass things, but I cannot say what—I say that I have heard Parsonage make a brag in a public-house of travelling up and down the line for nothing, before three or four people.
Cross-examined by MR. HARRIS. Q. Have you known Parsonage long? A. Several months—it may be eighteen months—I did not meet him first of all at Mr. Rosetti's—I have no ill-feeling towards him—I owe him money—he has made application to me for it through his solicitors—I have offered to pay his wife—she would not receive the money—I have known Davies since February—he was introduced to me by Parsonage, for me to get him a situation—he threatened to sue me for not getting him one—I did not promise to get him a situation; I said something would be going on at Captain Armstrong's in May, and this did not take place till June, and he would not accept it—I did not take him on in our establishment as a hired man—he used to come down and see me, and wait to see the Captain till late at night—he wrote to Mr. Edwards; I intercepted and opened the letter—it was my business—that letter alleged that I had made a false representation, and threatened proceedings—it was not Mr. Edwards' business, and I did not show him the letter—I have not got a receipt of the 11th July, 1870, "Received from I. N. Edwards, by payment of Mr. Melhuish, the sum of 5l., on account of 8l. 9s. 7d. Signed. H. Davies," but my employers may be able to produce it—I paid him sooner than have a row about it—I asked Davies if Parsonage had advised him to take proceedings against me; he said No, Mr. Deane had—Davies was the first man to tell me Parsonage was travelling without paying—it was either the beginning or middle of July when Parsonage told me he travelled for nothing—I will not say it was not a few days before the 17th July—Davies and I called one night to see a Mr. Stokes, when Mr. Russell was with us—I did not say to Davies "Its all right, he won't hurt you"—Russell asked Davies if he could say that Parsonage had travelled up and down without
paying; I do not recollect that date—I think it was the first time we went to the Red Lion public-house, in the beginning of July, that Rutterford said "Look out, there is a detective!"—it might he the middle, I am not sure—I know Mr. Smaile—I first knew him five or any years ago—I never had any of his books and accounts—I have not got any of his papers—I once collected money for him, paid him, and he has since borrowed money from me—he owes me money—I did say I was in the Herts Conservative Association—I did not promise Davies a guinea a week as a clerk to that association—I never kept the postage stamps which ought to have been used for the circulars—I deny tearing them up—t know Edwin Rowden, he had a watch in pledge about eighteen months ago—he asked me on the last day to redeem it for him—I did so—he did not give me 50s.—I kept him for five weeks, and paid his washing—when I was taking the watch home I broke it, and my brother took it to a watchmaker's to be mended—he has applied to me for it once or twice—he has not offered me the money for it—I do remember collecting 9s. 6d., for Mr. Smaile, but he borrowed money from me, and that struck the balance—I took a set of studs out of pawn for Rowden last year—I paid for them out of my own pocket—I stuck to the studs—they are at my house now—he might have asked for them—I bought the ticket of him—he had not got a penny in the world—he gave me 5s. worth of stamps, but not at this time—he took them out of pawn, and gave them to me—I did not steal the studs—I lent him my clothes, paid for his wash-ing four or five weeks, and kept him—he said he had a ticket for studs in pawn, I gave him a ring and money to take them out—I told him he could have them back again by paying for them—he gave me the 5s. worth of stamps to buy him a pipe and pouch with—I did not send it down to him—he gave it to me—if he had come home and taken it he might have had it—I wrote and told him so—I owe Mr. Sharland, of Oxford Terrace, King's Road, Chelsea, jeweller, 6l. 10s. for three months—he wrote and told me I might have till 1st October to pay for it—I did return sundry articles of jewellery—he has applied twice or so for the money—I did not tell him that I was going to have a lot of money from the Company, and would pay him then—I did not say, as an excuse for not paying him, that I had written to the Company for payment of money they had promised me—I did not flourish a letter before him which I had received from the Company, saying I might have 5l. if I called—I did not say the Company had advised me not to take money till after this trial—I just know William Alfred Webb—I have seen him once with Rowden—I did not tell him it would be a good job for me when this case was settled, as it would be the means of getting me a situation—I did not say the station master was a friend of mine, I don't know him—I have not had a minute's peace since the case commenced from my creditors—I do not owe 10l. in the world—they followed me every day from my door—I did not say I should be able to pay every one of my creditors when this was settled—I do not expect to get a single penny from the Company.
MR. STRAIGHT. Q. Was Davies in the habit of using tickets in this way and travelling with Parsonage? A. Yes—I had seen Davies travelling about before the 16th July—he has brought an action against me—since the committal from the Mansion House, Parsonage's debt was pressed against me—his wife came to see me, and told me I should have fifty guineas if I left the country, as my evidence would ruin him, he would be bound to be convicted upon it—I told her I would have nothing to say about it—I am
still in Mr. Edwards' employ—I explained all to him—to the best of my belief Bodger handed me those two tickets dated 29th July, 3826, 3897, third half returns, West India Docks—I have not been able to go outside my door but I was followed—it has always been by the same people—my employers have been told that I have been in the habit of staying out late with women, trying to get me dismissed, and everything they can do—I have seen the same persons following me when I came out of my house.
JOHN CARTER . I am employed as a clerk in the police department of the Great Eastern Railway, and in consequence of instructions received from the railway, I went on 13th August to Fenchurch Street Station—I saw Melhuish there—we went into the booking-office of the Blackwall line, and passed Jordan, who was acting at the barrier, in uniform—Melhuish said "He is a friend of mine"—"All right," said Jordan, and we went into the office where J. T. Avery was—we had a conversation, and afterwards Melhuish, Jordan, Avery, and myself, went to Foster's public-house—I paid for something for them to drink—I heard Melhuish say to Avery "We shall be going up and down two or three times"—he said "All right, old boy, as often as you like"—we went back to the booking-office—we were at the door—I saw Melhuish speak to Jordan—Jordan said "Look in the stool"—I had previously seen Jordan sitting on the stool—I saw Melhuish put his hand in the top of the stool and take out a half return firstclass ticket, which ticket I afterwards initialed, and gave to Russell—No. 9159—Avery was inside the office when Jordan did this—after we got this from the stool we went into the booking-office, and Jordan remained outside—Melhuish spoke to Avery; what I did not' hear—I saw Avery put his hand into his right-hand waistcoat pocket, I did not see what he pulled out, as Melhuish was between myself and Avery—we came out and went up stairs towards the platform—we passed Jordan, and he did not look at our tickets—he said "All right"—when we got to the train Melhuish showed me the other ticket and this one, No. 9164—there were four on that day—this one I received from Avery, which Melhuish gave me—I gave them all up to Russell—I went through to Shad well and back—I again went to the booking-office when I got back to Fenchurch Street—Avery was there, and he and Jordan, Melhuish, and myself, went over to the public-house to have some more drink at my expense—I heard Melhuish say to Jordan we should want to go to Gravesend on the Monday—Jordan said he would see what he could do for us—we went back to the booking-office; the door was a little open—we went in—Avery said twice to Melhuish "Keep dark, keep dark"—I saw Avery take four halves of first-class tickets from his right-hand waistcoat pocket—we left then—we again passed Jordan, and he asked for no tickets—the numbers of these two tickets are 9152 and 9154—they were all clipped when we received them—we made use of other tickets which I bought in the morning—on 27th July I was at Stepney Station, at 9.50 up train—I saw Parsonage going through the door in the yard—he then returned to a man named Daniels, who was on duty as a ticket collector—I saw them speaking together—I saw Daniels take a number of tickets from his right-hand trowsers pocket, twenty or more, and give one of them to Parsonage—it was a third-class ticket, from the size of it—he did not take a ticket at the booking-office—he went up the steps, and passed a man named George Rutterford, and went on by the 9.55 train to Fenchurch Street—I went by the same train
—he waited till nearly all the passengers had gone out, and passed at the barrier a ticket collector named James Sherringham—he gave up no ticket, but put 3d. into his hand—on five other occasions, on five different days, I followed Parsonage, on the 23rd, 26th and 27th July, and 11th and 12th August, from Stepney to Fenchurch Street, and at no time has be taken a ticket or paid money—when he got to Fenchurch Street, on two occasions, he gave money, and on up other has he produced a ticket—on 27th July I followed him down—he took no ticket, and passed Bodger—he produced no ticket, but spoke to him, and passed on—at the Stepney end he produced no ticket, and passed a man named French, and said "How are you?"and gave up no ticket—I saw Edward Avery on 10th and 15th August, in and out of the booking-office, and conversing with Jordan.
Cross-examined by MR. MACRAE MOIR. Q. Melhuish introduced you to "Little Joe?"A. Yes—Melhuish did not say "Keep dark;" it was Avery—I don't remember that Melhuish said anything particular to Avery in the public house—he was speaking to Jordan—it was not Jordan that said "Keep dark"—it was on the 13th August that Avery made that remark—the prisoners never told me that they had return tickets given them by gentlemen—Melhuish and I paid for all the drink.
Cross-examined by MR. HARRIS. Q. How long have you known Parsonage? A. I saw him first on the 23rd July—he was pointed out to me by Inspector Russell—I saw him leave his house, at Stepney, about 9.15—he went without a ticket that morning—I followed him—I was outside the Stepney office when I saw him enter—this is a correct view of the station (looking at a plan)—I have seen him five times going up, and once going down—on the 20th I saw him pass a ticket to Rutterford—I saw him at 9.40 a.m. at Stepney on the 26th July—I am quite sure he did not take a ticket—Rutterford was not the ticket clipper on the 27th, when he had to show his ticket—a man named Sherringham was on duty in London that day—on the 26th he had to pass Bodger—he had no ticket—I saw him on August 11th, at 9.50, at Stepney—he passed Rutterford—on the 12th August he passed Rutterford and French—on the 12th August I saw him pay 2d.—I am sure he did not pay anything at any other time—if a clerk gave a ticket that was not clipped he would have to pay for it himself—Rutterford and Sherringham would know what their duties were, to clip tickets—they were in the Company's service up to the committal of these men, perhaps a fortnight after—I do not know if they were sent for by the Company—I do not know if they were discharged because they would not give evidence—they were discharged because of reports made by themselves and others connected with these matters.
Cross-examined by MR. MOODY. Q. How long have you been engaged to keep a look out? A. Since the 23rd July.
CHARLES RICHARDSON . I am employed in the police department of the Great Eastern Railway—acting under orders, I kept a record each day of what had occurred (produced)—on the 19th July I watched Parsonage from his house to the Stepney Station at 9.20—when he got to the station he passed through to the platform without taking a ticket, and travelled by the 9.35 train—he had no ticket clipped by Rutterford—I travelled with him—Treadgold was on duty in London—he gave no ticket up—on the afternoon of the same day Parsonage went by the 4.15 train—Jordan was ticket-clipper—he did not show or take any ticket—I travelled in the same carriage—when he got to Stepney he got out, but gave no ticket—French
was on duty—on the 21st July I followed Parsonage from his house to the Stepney Station—he took no ticket, had no ticket clipped, and went to Fenchurch Street—he returned in the evening by the 4.45 train—he took no ticket, had no ticket clipped—on the 22nd July he went up by the 9.20 train—he did not take a ticket, or have a ticket clipped—he pawed Tread-gold in the morning at London, and did not give up a ticket—in the after-noon be came to Jordan, and got some tickets from him, and he gave one to Melhuish—they left by the 5 o'clock train—Melhuish got out at Shadwell—Parsonage went to Stepney—he gave up no ticket at Stepney—on the 26th I did not see him till he got to Fenchurch Street by the 9.35—he passed Treadgold, and did not give up' any ticket—on the afternoon of the 27th Parsonage went to Jordan, and Jordan gave tickets to Parsonage, and Parsonage gave one to Melhuish—Melhuish got out at Shadwell, and Parsonage at Stepney—Melhuish I saw give up his ticket at Shadwell—Parsonage did not—I saw Parsonage leave Stepney on the 28th at 9.35—he took no ticket—he got out at Fenchurch Street—Sherringham was on duty—he gave up no ticket, he gave him 2d. or 3d. in his hand—on the 29th July Parsonage and Melhuish went up together by the 9.35 train—Melhuish took ft ticketParsonage did not—when the train reached Fenchurch Street Sherringham was on duty—Parsonage gave up no ticket—Melhuish did—on the afternoon I saw them return by the 4.45 train—Bodger was the ticket-porter on duty, and Parsonage did not show him a ticket—I went down to Stepney—he gave up no ticket there—on the 30th July Parsonage was in a great hurry—he ran through the office, took no ticket—the train was on the platform—he got in—he gave up no ticket to Shecringham—on the 1st August I was at Stepney in the morning—Parsonage left at 9.20, he took no ticket—Rutterford was on duty at Stepney, no ticket was produced to him by Parsonage—Bodger was on duty at London—he gave no ticket up to him, he clenched his hands together—I was unable to see if he gave him anything—on the 2nd August I saw Parsonage leave by the 9.35 train—Rutterford was on duty at Stepney, Parsonage took no ticket, and showed none—Bodger was on duty at London—I could not see if he gave him anything, he clenched his hands so tight—in the afternoon I saw Jordan, Melhuish, and J. T. Avery at Foster's public-house—Melhuish went by the 4.45—after he went I saw Parsonage speak to Jordan—Jordan was in the middle of the booking-office—he asked for a ticket, and Jordan said "Do you want a single or a return?"and Parsonage replied "A return.;" and Jordan went over to the public-house, and left a porter in charge of the tickets, and did not give Parsonage any ticket—Parsonage went and got a ticket, and went by the Bow line, and paid for it—on the 3rd August I saw Parsonage in the waiting-room of the station for about eight minutes—Bodger was on duty—he did not take a ticket—on the 4th August Parsonage left by the 9.35 from Stepney—he did not take a ticket, or have one clipped, nor did he give up or show a ticket to Bodger—on the 5th August Parsonage left by the 9.35, did not take a ticket, and did not show one—when he got to Fen-church Street I lost sight of him—I saw him leave on the 10th by the 9.35, he took no ticket, and did not show one—he was the last passenger out of the train—at the Stepney Station it was Rutterford's duty, or the other man's, to clip tickets before passengers got into the train.
Cross-examined by MR. HARRIS. Q. The evidence that you give from that book, did you give before the Magistrate? A. Yes—the deposition in which I said, acting under orders on 16th July, should have been 19th
July—I am sixteen years old—on 21st July I saw Parsonage in the train with Melhuish—I have not said this morning that it was the 19th I saw Parsonage and Melhuish—I saw Melhuish but he did not travel with Parsonage—there is nothing in my deposition about seeing Melhuish on the 19th—I have mentioned today about seeing Melhuish with Parsonage on the 22nd, in the afternoon—Parsonage left by the 9.20 train on the 22nd—the 22nd is not in the deposition—on 1st August he left by the 9.20 train—it is the same in my book—I was standing sometimes inside and sometimes outside the station—a pretty good many passengers passed in the morning—I went up and down every day on the dates I have mentioned—I have been there on one or two occasions, and I have not seen him—on the 20th I was there but did not see him—on August 1st I was unable to see what he gave, or see anything—August 2nd I could not see what he gave, because he pinched his hands so tight.
Cross-examined by MR. HORACB BROWN. Q. You say that Jordan left a porter at the barrier while he left; did he call any particular porter? A. No, the porter he generally left there—I never saw Jordan give any directions.
Cross-examined by MR. DOUGLAS. Q. You have spoken of 2nd August, that Parsonage went up to Jordan at the Fenchurch Street Station, and was asked by Jordan whether he wanted a single or a return? A. I am sure he did not give him any ticket, because he went and purchased one—Parsonage never took a ticket, and the reason why I did not think he had a ticket was because I did not see him purchase one—when he passed Bodger I could not see whether he put anything into his hands or not, because he put his finger and thumb into his hand, and he clenched it lib that (showing) when he went past—other passengers don't clench their fists like he did—he always carried his hands in that position to make believe—I could see when he pulled his hands out of his pocket whether he had a ticket or not—I was next passenger behind him, and he clenched his hand like this, while the other passengers had their hands like that—I adhere to the statement that I could not see what he gave him—that was when be passed Bodger on all these occasions, but he did put out his hands as if be were giving something to him.
MR. METCALFE. Q. On other occasions when he passed Bodger did he put his hands into Bodger's at all? A. No, he passed without producing any ticket—each date of the transaction was written in this book directly after the occurrence, directly I got back to the office—I showed it to my superior officers after I had written it, from time to time—I hadn't got it at the Mansion House, and I commenced giving my evidence without it, and afterwards the book was produced, and I looked at it and read from it—I only saw Parsonage buy a ticket on one occasion, and that time was when he went by the Bow line—that is a different booking-office, has a different entrance, and different collectors—he would not have to pass either Jordan or Bodger.
JOHN CARTER (re-examined.) On Monday, 15th August, I went to Feu-church Street Station at 1 o'clock, and waited till 2 o'clock for the witness Melhuish, by appointment—ho did not come, and I saw Mr. Heading-ton and Mr. Russell outside the station—from instructions I received from them I went to the booking-office, and outside I saw Joseph Avery and Jordan—I spoke to them, and took them both to Foster's public-house, near the station, and paid for some drink for them—I there told them that I
was going down the line—I went back to the office and stood talking with Jordan at the tool for some few minutes—I told them I was waiting for a friend who was going down the line—Jordan asked me where I was going to, and said "Wait till this train has gone; I have not got anything just now; Joe has got them"—about 2.20 I went into the booking-office, and there saw Joseph and Edward A very—while I was in the booking-office Jordan came in, took off his uniform coat, and hung it on a peg over the table, and put on a plain one, saying he was going off for the day—I noticed the plain coat—I went outside the office after him, and he said "It is all right, Joe has got the tickets"—I went in again and told the prisoner Joseph A very, that I was going to Blackwall or the Docks, and he took from his right-hand waistcoat pocket a ticket—it was a Poplar half third-class ticket, No. 7708, dated 15th August—I could see from the bulky appearance of the pocket that there were more tickets in it—this (produced) is the ticket I refer to—I afterwards gave it to Mr. Headington—I left the station by another route, and communicated with Headington and Russell.
Cross-examined by MR. MEAD. Q. You cannot swear that there were tickets in the right-hand waistcoat pocket, can you? A. No, I cannot; it merely appeared bulky.
Cross-examined by MR. MOODY. Q. You say you saw Edward A very in the office, what office was that? A. The booking-office—he was close to me then his brother gave me the ticket.
JOSEPH RUSSELL . I am an Inspector of the Police of the Great Eastern Railway Company, and also of the Metropolitan Police, and have been so seven-teen years—I met Melhuish on one occasion in July, at the house of a mutual friend—he said something in my presence—I said nothing while the ladies were present, but afterwards I made inquiries, and asked for an interview with him—in consequence of what he said I gave him directions, and from that time until the prisoners were taken into custody he was acting under my directions, and met me from time to time—the 16th July was the first day upon which he showed me a ticket—he produced it to me on the day on which it is dated, about 4.30 in the afternoon, and I initialed it and saw him write on it; I met him just as he alighted from the train at the Stepney Station; I received from him from time to time all the tickets he has mentioned—I received each ticket on the day on which it bears date, about five or ten minutes after he arrived at the station where I appointed to meet him—I initialed every one of them, and saw him write on them—on Saturday, 16th July, I saw Parsonage leave his house, 26, York Street, Stepney—I followed him through the Stepney Station to Fenchurch Street—he passed the booking-office, and took no ticket and gave up none—Melhuish was walking with him—I next saw him on Monday, 18th, at Stepney—I followed him from his door—he passed as on Saturday, took no ticket, and gave none up—Melhuish came up with him; Melhuish took a ticket and he gave it up—when we got to the top of the staircase I saw one of the Company's servants, Rutterford, point to me and call Parsonage's attention to me—he made some observation, but I could not catch what it was—I followed on till we got to the Fenchurch Street Station—Parsonage alighted from the train, and he kept looking round as if looking to see if anyone was behind him—I got into the carriage again, and got out on the other side, so that I had an opportunity of seeing him when he was walking on—I passed through
on the same platform as he, within a yard of him, as he passed the barrier he passed a man of the name of Treadgold, whose duty it was to take the tickets—he passed him without giving up any ticket, or even taking his hands from his pocket—he went outside, and into Austin's public-home with Melhuish, and was in conversation for some time—they were then joined by Treadgold—I then went some little distance from the station, where I was then joined by Melhuish, and made arrangements as regards the evening—I met him at 4.45, at the Stepney Station—he then handed me a third-class single ticket, No. 7092, from Fenchurch Street to Black-wall—this is the ticket—on 22nd, about 5 o'clock, I received a ticket from Melhuish for Shad well Station—I received all the tickets from Melhuish I have repeatedly seen Melhuish and Jordan in Foster's public-house; when I have been standing at the private bar—on 4th August, about 7 o'clock in the evening, I met Melhuish at Fenchurch Street; he went into the book-ing-office—shortly after he came and joined me at Foster's public-house, and brought me two first-class tickets, Nos. 2415 and 2445, from Fenchurch Street to Black wall—I gave him certain directions—he returned to the station—I saw him enter the station, and I took a cab, and went to Shad-well Station, where I met him again a few minutes after—he then handed me another ticket, which I now produce, No. 2932, third-class from Fen-church Street to Limehouse—on Saturday, 13th August, I saw Melhuish, A very, and Jordan, in at Foster's public-house, drinking brandy and soda-Carter was there also—after they left, Carter came back to me and handed me three firstclass tickets, Nos. 9159, 9152, and 9164, from Fenchurch Street to the West India Docks—shortly after receiving those from Carter, I received this one from Melhuish, No. 9154, first-class—that was the fifth ticket I received that day from Melhuish—after giving him directions as before, I took a cab and joined him at the Shadwell Station—Carter, Melhuish, A very, and Jordan, after leaving the public-house, returned in the direction of the booking-office, and went in there—shortly after I saw A very come out of the booking-office with a tall gentleman; I saw him give him a first-class ticket, the same description as this—I saw the gentleman hold it up, and I could see distinctly that it was a firstclass ticket, and clipped—he went into the public-house with the gentleman, and had some brandy and water with him—I did not on any occasion see Parsonage with any tickets, or do anything with any, nor Jordan or Bodger—on Monday 15th August, Carter made a communication to me as I was in Foster's public-house, which induced me to enter the booking-office—he at the same time handed me a ticket—when I went into the booking-office, I saw Joseph Avery, who was the booking-clerk—he put his finger and thumb in to right-hand waistcoat pocket, and I saw that he had tickets between his finger and thumb; he being known by the name of "Little Joe," I said "No, Joe, let them be," and I seized his hand and took twenty-two tickets from it, which had all been clipped and used—I have all those tickets here, and produce them—thirteen of them had been issued on that day, and eight dated the 13th—the 15th was Monday—the Saturday return tickets would not be available—while I was searching him Edward Avery ran out of the office as fast as he could go, followed by Mr. Headington, the superintendent—he was brought back into the office—I saw hint throw two first-class tickets under the office table—they were also clipped, and dated that day—I believe they were first-class tickets from Fenchurch Street to Blackwill—I then went outside the booking-office door, and found ten other tickets
on the partition that projects out from the boards, just outside the booking-office door—he had passed close to it—they were found within reach of where he was passing—every one of them were clipped, and all of them issued that day—I saw a coat hanging on a peg in the booking-office—I asked Joseph Avery whose coat it was—he said Jordan's.—I afterwards spoke to Jordan about it, and he said it was his coat—I felt it, and felt some tickets, and Mr. Headington took them out, six single tickets, all had been clipped—I took possession of the coat—I told the two Averys I should take them both into custody for stealing these tickets—I took them to the station—the charge was taken—Joseph Avery put out his hand as he was leaving the police-station, and said "I hope you won't be hard with me"—the other said nothing—after the Averys were locked up, I returned to the Fenchurch Street Station—I saw Parsonage enter the station—he passed the booking-office where the tickets were issued, through into another lobby, till he got to the bottom of the staircase where Bodger was collecting tickets, and where he would nip them—he said something to Parsonage, and pointed towards me—Parsonage then returned to the window where the tickets were issued, and took a ticket, again joining Bodger at the bottom of the staircase—they had some conversation—both their backs being towards me, I walked up between them, and remarked to Parsonage, "Parsonage, you are obliged to take a ticket at last, are you"—he made no answer—I then turned to Bodger, and said "Bodger, you have allowed this man to pass prior to this some hundreds of times, without even asking him for a ticket"—he made no reply—I did nothing with them then—on the morning of the 17th, I met Parsonage at the Stepney Station—I told him that I was an inspector of police, and apprehended him for being concerned with others in stealing a quantity of tickets, the property of the Great Eastern Railway Company—he stood still, made no reply for some little time; when he recovered, he said "What do you charge me with?"—I repeated it—he made no answer—we got into the train and proceeded to London—on our way he said "It is a bad job, I suppose I shall lose my situation"—on the 18th I apprehended Bodger—I told him also he was charged with being concerned with others in stealing tickets—he made no answer—I took him to the police-station—the charge was read over to him by the inspector who took it; his reply was "I hear what you say"—Treadgold, Rutterford, and the others who have been mentioned, have been dismissed—inquiry was made—no proposal was made to take their evidence—that is the subject of another inquiry, I think, hereafter—I gave Carter directions, he was a clerk in the police-office—I also gave Richardson instructions—they communicated with me from time to time—I went with them to the station they departed from, and met them on their arrival—Carter gave me these tickets on the day they were dated—I saw their reports daily, as they were made—on Joseph Avery I found some money done up in small paper packages, 5s. 6d. in one and 6s. in the other, in his trowsers pocket—I asked him what he was going to do with the paper done up in parcels in his pockets—he said he was going to pay it away—I found altogether 6l. in gold, these two packages, and about 11s. or 12s. in loose silver, upwards of 7l. altogether.
Cross-examined by MR. MEAD.—Q. You only saw Joseph Avery give a ticket away on one occasion? A. No; that was just outside a public-house, to a gentleman—I don't know his name, or who he was, at present—I have not said that it was a half first-class return to Black wall—that was what was
given me by Carter; the same description as the one I have got in my hand—the ticket was given just outside the public-house, behind a blind that was up inside—I think Joseph Avery has been in the employment of the Company about fourteen years—he received his salary every fortnight, I believe—he was taken into custody on Monday the 15th, and he had received it the Friday before—I know there was a day fixed for the collectors to receive their salary.
Cross-examined by MR. HARRIS. Q. Look at this plan. Do you under stand that? A. I understand the building better than I do the plan—I me where the inspector stands and nips the tickets—I am speaking of an oceasion when Parsonage went there, and I was pointed out, and he went back and got a ticket—the inspector was standing just inside the door, against the steps—I was not so well known on the line by these gentlemen—personage, I believe, has been in the Customs about sixteen or seventeen years—I am not well-known by all the ticket-collectors and porters on the line between Fenchurch Street and Stepney—neither of these prisoners knew me—I don't do much on the Fenchurch Street line—I am positive of it, or else they might have noticed what I was doing—I was pointed out on the 18th July, they were apprehended on 17th August—they never saw me on the line afterwards, because I was never there, so they could not see me—on the 18th July I was pointed out to Parsonage by Rutterford, at the Stepney Station—I don't know when Rutterford and Treadgold were discharged—my suggestion was that they should be discharged the very next—I don't know that they were in the service of the Company up to last Friday week—you asked me at the Mansion House if they were still in the service, and I said "Yes"—they were not discharged for more than a fortnight after that, but I suggested that they should be, directly after the others were committed—I was never present at any conversation between some persons connected with the Company and Rutterford, Daniels, and Treadgold, as to the evidence they were going to give—Melhuish was the man who gave me all the tickets which I now produce, with the exception of the one given me by Carter—I said to Bodger, when I had Parsonage in custody, "This thing has been going on for a considerable time; you have allowed this man to pasta a number of times without showing his ticket"—I did not say that to anybody else; that I swear—I asked Treadgold how he came to allow him to pass—Treadgold said "I don't know him;" and when I brought him there, I said "This is the man I spoke to you about"—I did not say to Treadgold when I took Parsonage past him, "You have allowed I this man to travel without a ticket a number of times," or words to that effect—I said "This is the man that I spoke to you about"—Treadgold did not say "I never allowed him to pass"—I did not go, after Parsonage was in custody, to Treadgold, and say that I would imprison him also, and charge him with defrauding the Company, if he did not give evidence against the prisoners for the Company—I told him he would be charged, and I any so now—I did not say "If you give evidence against them it will be nothing out of your pocket;" certainly not, I should not be quite so childish—I did not say "You have got a chance of either being in the dock or in the witness box"—I told French, Daniels, and Rutterford they would be charged at some future day—I don't believe I spoke to Rutterford when I passed him with Parsonage on 17th August—I told him before Parsonage was in custody that he would be charged, and with what—he denied it, and said he never allowed him to pass—he was in the employment of the Company, and he now stands for something else.
Cross-examined by MR. H. BROWN Q. Then these tickets, as they were clipped, were of no further use? A. Yes, in the same way as the others had been used; not in a legitimate manner—Jordan was not there then, he was on leave; gone away for the afternoon—I did not know where to find him—he is a single man, and I did not know his address—I knew that he would he on duty again when his turn came, and that I could take him I when he came on, in the course of a few hours—I did not, I was acting I then under the instructions of the Company's law clerk—I think he was taken into custody the next day; but I did not take him.
Cross-examined by MR. DOUGLAS. Q. On 16th August you were at the Fenchurch Street Station when you saw Bodger and Parsonage? A. Yes—I said that he had allowed Parsonage to pass some hundreds of times—I did not speak from my own knowledge; but I think I could prove it, from that Melhuish told me and other persons—I believe it is true that he has allowed him to pass hundreds of times—I never saw Bodger and Parsonage together before that day.
Cross-examined by MR. MOODY. Q. You went to the Fen church Street booking-office on 15th August, in the company of Superintendent Heading-ton and Cocks? A. Mr. Cocks accompanied us—he called at the office to see us, on a friendly visit—he was there at the time I went in, and Superintendent Headington, too—they were not in uniform—Mr. Heading-ton works on that branch of the line—he was not known to the prisoners so much as me—he belongs to the Great Eastern—it is all under our care—he has the arrangement of the whole of the police and the correspondence—he was very seldom up and down the line; I don't suppose once in two months, unless he was sent for—I won't say even so often as that—Mr. Cocks is not here to-day—he belongs to Bow Street—I addressed Joseph Arery as "Joe"—I knew him quite well—it was while I was taking some tickets out of his pocket that Edward Avery ran out of the office—he ran pretty sharp, he wanted to make a clear escape—when he was brought into the office he had the two tickets in his hand—I saw them leave his hand, and I swear he did not put his hand in his pocket—the ten tickets which I found in the woodwork of the partition were just stuck in, as if anybody running by had put them in—they were not there a few minutes before; that was what I was told, I did not observe it myself—they were tickets from different stations to Fenchurch Street—there are a number of platforms at the Fenchurch Street Station—the trains run in between two platforms—I don't know how passengers get out; it all depends on the platforms they arrive at—I can't tell you anything about that.
MR. METCALFE. Q. Do you know as to Treadgold, Rutterford, and the other man, a case was submitted, to ascertain whether they should be included in the charge? A. It was; and it stood over, for the purpose of ascertaining that.
JOSEPH HEADINGTON . I am superintendent of the Great Eastern Railway Company's police—on Wednesday, 27th July, I went to Fenchurch Street Station at about 3.45—as I was standing outside the Blackball booking-office, I saw Jordan acting as ticket nipper—about 4.15 I saw Parsonage standing outside the lobby of the booking-office, with Melhuish and a man of the name of Knight—they stood there for a second or two, and then Parsonage went inside to Jordan—there was some conversation—he returned shortly after, went up to the other two, and I saw him give each of them a railway ticket—they then went up the staircase, followed by Parsonage—
they passed Jordan—it was his duty to nip their tickets, but he did not—I followed, as I went on to the staircase I saw Parsonage speaking to Jordan—I went on and remained at the top till Jordan repassed me—I then saw them get in—I can't say that they all got into one carriage, but when they arrived at Stepney I got out, and I saw Parsonage and Knight leave the station, they were the last that left—they passed me, and when they arrived where the ticket collector stood, I saw them deliver up two tickets, which I believe were the two I saw them receive—they were both nipped—they held them up in that manner, I don't know why, a second or two before they came to the collector, so that I saw them distinctly before they gave them up—I think Daniels was the collector at the Stepney Station—this is the ticket which was delivered up by Melhuish on that day—I saw Mel-huish get out at the station before he arrived at Stepney—I found the tickets in Jordan's coat, about 2.40 on Monday, August 15th—they were six single second-class from Fenchurch Street to Blackwall—they were dated that very day—I was unable to see Jordan that day, but on the following morning I saw him, and asked him if he could give me an account of the six tickets that I found in his pocket—I showed him the tickets—he said he knew nothing about them, if I found them in his pocket someone most have placed them there—Jordan's was a uniform coat that was hanging up in the office—I was present when the Averys were taken into custody on 15th August—I went in with Russell—the elder A very was at the window, booking, the younger Avery was standing at the end of the desk—as I and Russell went in, he attempted to go out—I stopped him—I said "Remain here a moment, I shall want to speak to you"—I went up towards when Russell was standing, I heard the door bang, and I found young Avery had gone out—I went after him, and caught him in the lobby of the booking-office—I brought him back, and placed him with his back to the table, and said "You stand there"—he placed his hands in that position, and immediately after I saw Russell stoop down and pick up two first-class tickets-Russell said something to him, but I forget what it was—he had no right whatever in that office—he was not a servant of the Company at all—I am certain there were no tickets under the table when I placed him there.
Cross-examined by MR. H. BROWN. Q. Jordan knew you? A. I inferred so, from his saluting me when I passed—I did not know that he knew me—I did not say before the Magistrate "I had some conversation with Jordan, who knew me"—that must be a mistake of the clerk's—I signed my name—I did not read it over—it was very unwise of me, but I did not do so.
Cross-examined by MR. MOODY. Q. You have told us some tale about Edward Avery today, have you ever told that story before? A. I have not—I did not say it before the Police Magistrate, I had not a chance—he has heard it now for the first time—I went after him immediately I heard the door close—I lost no time—I don't know that Joseph Avery knew me by sight—I am not much on that branch of the line.
WILLIAM HAWKINS . I am a booking clerk, in the service of the Great Eastern Railway—I was in the Tilbury office on 15th August, until after Avery was taken in custody—I was then put for a short time in the Black-wall office—I produce the book in which the entry of tickets is made from day to day—from 16th July to the day Joseph Avery was taken in custody, it is in his writing, excepting when he was relieved—on 18th July the first single third-class ticket issued was No. 6945, and the last was 7433—on 30th July the first single first-class ticket to Stepney, was 6315—No. 6329 was issued, and is entered on that day.
WILLIAM SAUNDERS (Porter G E R 122). I was porter at Limehouse Station on 15th August, and saw Edward A very there, coining up the stairs—I had seen him before that, frequently using the line—I saw him at 2.30 or 2.45 at Fenchurch Street—he went by the train to London—the train got there about 2.30—I have only seen him once at Limehouse Station—I have not been down the line—I was on duty at Fenchurch Street, and saw him there.
STAPLES PRATT . I am ticket collector at the Weat India Dock Station—I have known Edward A very about two months, and have seen him frequently at that station in the front office, of an afternoon—used tickets, which come into my hands there, are put in a bag which hangs behind the screen, they are afterwards put into a box in the front office—they are sent up to London in the bag—that bag used to remain open, and was accessible to anybody who got into the office, but it is not so now.
Cross-examined by MR. MOIR. Q. Whose duty is it to put the ticket in the bag? A. The ticket clerks—Joseph A very had nothing to do with the tickets after they were issued.
Cross-examined by MR. DOUGLAS. Q. Is it the practice at all the stations, whenever the tickets are put into a bag, to hare been transferred to the station where they are issued? A. A bag or a box—persons would have to go out of their way to put their hands into it.
WILLIAM DAVIS . I am a booking clerk at Fenchurch Street Station—I was learning my business last July, in the same office with J. T. Avery—I remember his being apprehended on 27th July—during the three weeks previous to his apprehension I saw Edward Avery in the office some-times twice a day—he remained sometimes an hour and sometimes more—his brother was there at the time—I mean nearly every day—I have seen him sitting there, that is all—I know Jordan, I have seen him there, too—I have seen Bodger there when he was on duty, the same as the others.
Cross-examined by MR. MOIR. Q. You never saw Thomas Avery give away any ticket of any sort? A. No.
FREDERICK SMITH . I am a ticket collector in the service of the Great Eastern Railway—I am a relief man, and am sometimes at Blackwall, sometimes at Poplar, and sometimes at the West India Docks—I have seen Edward Avery at those three stations during the two or three months before the prisoners were apprehended—I am not always there at one hour—I sometimes saw him between 12 and 1—taking the three stations together I have seen him sometimes twice a week and sometimes not once—I have seen Joseph Avery with him at the West India Docks and at Blackwall, more than once at each station—at Blackwall it has been in the afternoon when the clerk Avery has been absent, and he has come down on the pier with the children between 12 and 1 o'clock, or 1 and 2 o'clock—when I collected tickets at the West India Docks I put them in a bag which hangs up open in the waiting room—I have seen Edward Avery in that room after the tickets have been put there—at Blackwall Station the tickets are also hung up in a bag, and at Poplar Station, too—I have seen Edward Avery at the West India Docks Station, not at the other stations.
Cross-examined by MR. MOODY. Q. How often do the ticket clerks put them in these bags? A. Every quarter of an hour—every time I collect my tickets I put them in the bag—that goes on from 7 o'clock in the morning till the trains stop at night—the collectors put their tickets into the bags at
intervals all the time the trains are running—when I have seen Edward Avery there it has been after the tickets have been put there of a morning—the bag is hung up in the waiting room where the passengers wait for trains, not secured in any way whatever—it is the same at Blackwall—at Poplar it is hung at the top of the stairs as you go out into the street.
DANIEL EVERETT . I am platform inspector at Fenchurch Street Station—Bodger and Jordan were employed there on the departure platform, as ticket-nippers—I produce a correct list showing the dates when they were on duty.
Cross-examined by MR. DOUGLAS. Q. Do you go round, and put it down in the list immediately? A. No; the list has been made out recently—I know it is correct, because the men all have regular turns to be there—it is because it was his regular turn, that I say so.
MR. METCALFE to W. HAWKINS. Q. I want to know the practice; if you are going to Black wall, the faro is the same as to any other station? A. Except Shad well—we issue a ticket entitling a person to go to Blackwall or any other station on the line, except Shadwell—tickets for Poplar and the West India Docks are all marked "Blackwall"—after the ticket has been used and given up at the office, and returned to Fenchurch Street, it is utterly impossible to say at what station it has been given up.
MR. HARRIS called the following whiteness on behalf of Patronage:
JOHN WESTCOTT SMAILE . I have been in the Inland Revenue, Somerset House, five years—I have never seen Parsonage—I have known George Melhuish from his infancy, and from what I know of him I would certainly not believe him upon his oath.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. What are you? A. Assistant keeper of wills and papers in the Legacy Duty Department—I hare been there five years in October—I have been suspended during that time—it was not for giving a false certificate of health; my medical attendant got drunk, and wrote a certificate while he was in that state, and did not spell his own name or address correctly—his name was Webb, of the Lower Wandsworth Road—I do not know his Christian name—he has since been sold up—I have no knowledge of his residence now; it was in Nine Elms' Road, six or eight months ago, I do not know the number—I know he is sold up, because the house has changed hands, and I heard the circumstance—I was recommended to him—I never saw the certificate; it was enclosed-and given to me, and I forwarded it to Somerset House without having the opportunity of looking at it—he was administering to me during my illness—I forwarded the certificate without knowing what was in it, and the authorities at Somerset House did not much like it, and suspended me, because it seems it was a very bad thing on the face of it; in fact, Wands-worth Road was spelt Wander worth Road—I saw it afterwards, because I asked the ground of complaint against me and made application, and the Board gave me the opportunity of seeing it—I had some bill transactions with a person named Medford—I did not let him in; we paid it between us—I did not tell it to the Somerset House authorities; I do not know that it concerned them—it was for a loan to me—I have known Melhuish from infancy—I knew his father, mother, and grandfather—I saw a great deal of him up to 1865, when I left; and since he has been in London I have seen him occasionally up to the present time—up to 1865 he was too young for me to associate with, and he occupied a very inferior position to mine—I have seen him in London since that time.
MR. HARRIS. Q. What have you seen of him, what transactions? A. I told you the first transaction—I understood he was in London without any employment, and his cousin, Mr. Rosette, did everything he could to get him into an office, but failed; and the young man fastened on to me and stuck to me till I did something for him—on account of his abilities in electioneering matters, I wrote to Mr. Bennet and the Earl of Abergavenny, and I was sent to Parliament Street to tell them to give him employment on account of his ability in electioneering matters and registration—he was not in the employment of Blagg & Edwards—I got him employed by Captain Armstrong, the London secretary of the London and Westminster Conservative Association—he continued till the general election came on, and he shewed himself clever in the management of the books—I do not know whether you understand the matter, whether you have ever been a candidate, but I apprehend Mr. Straight does, he shewed himself to be very quick and clever—that is not the reason I do not believe him on his oath—a man may be clever in one thing but not in another—I did not believe him on his oath, but I believed in his ability—I would not have taken his word at that time—I heard after that that Mr. Edwards had engaged him and I know that he is with Mr. Edwards still—I do not know whether Mr. Edwards has come up to-day—I saw him this morning.
MR. HARRIS. Q. Are the most unscrupulous men generally the best for canvassing? A. Yes, you do not intend persons to tell the truth in electioneering, it is a most unwise policy—I live at Tiverton, and am a life trustee of the town, appointed by Royal Commission—I have had papers and books taken away from me by. Melhuish—I was suspended about a week until I had the opportunity of showing the Board that the fault was attached to the medical attendant, and not to myself—the medical attendant wag not believed, and I was retained—a character is necessary to a person in my position—I have had a rise since that.
EDWIN ROWDEN . I am clerk to Blagg & Edwards, solicitors—I have known Melhuish all my life, and from my knowledge of his general character I would not believe him on his oath—this letter to me is in his writing—he had a watch and some studs of mine, and if his Lordship would like to know how he came by my watch I will tell him.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Are you in the service of Mr. Edwards stilt? A. Yes—he is here—Melhuish was in the service—Mr. Edwards knows I am here—I had no quarrel with Melhuish—I began to disbelieve him on his oath several years ago; I never heard him tell the truth, unless it was by accident—I have never told my master he was such a bad character that I would not believe him on his oath—I have not been for years in the same office with him, only for a few days, when I was sent up from St. Alban's, and worked with him in Westminster—I have been clerk at St. Alban's about twelve months, and about three times in twelve months I came to the office in London, and then I could not help working in the same office with Melhuish—I did not say a single word to my employers about his being such a bad character, it was not my place—I shall be twenty-one next month—I was an apprentice—I did not run away from my apprenticeship—I did not finish it; I left it because I was not treated as I ought to have been by my master, and an arrangement was come to between him and my father, and the indentures were cancelled between them—I was not go to the Sessions, or before a Magistrate—I do not know that I was recommended by anybody to Blagg & Edwards—I should not like to swear
whether Melhuish did or did not recommend me there—I was doing some work for Melhuish, the man who I would not believe on his oath, and Mr. Edwards came into the office and saw me at work; I was out of place, and he said "Well, young man, you are out of a situation?"—I said "Yes"—he said "I suppose you are here to get into one"—Melhuish did not testify to my character.
MR. HARRIS. Q. Did the solicitor you were at work for give you a character? A. Yes—Melhuish never paid me the money for working for him, he only gave me some ale and a crust of bread and cheese in the morning, and that is what he alluded to when he said that he kept me for five weeks—I have come from St. Alban's to give this evidence, and have been here the whole week under a subpoena—I would have come without a subpoena, if I had known that the trial was coming on—I do not know Parsonage.
WILLIAM SHARMAN . I am a jeweller, of 20, Oxford Terrace, King's Road, Chelsea—I have been threatened Joy Melhuish to-day—I knew him several years ago, in Tiverton, but I did not know him further till he came to London, and called on me one day—he has had dealings at my shop, and paid me—from my knowledge of him, I would not believe him upon his oath.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. In consequence of some quarrel about a piece of jewellery? A. No, he has always been a liar to me from beginning to end—he is no associate of mine—he has been to my shop on several occasions, and told me so many lies—one day he told me he had two guineas a week, and another day 2l. 10s.; another day he said that he was twenty-five years old, and another day nineteen—I had known him it Tavistock, but did not know whether his age was twenty-five or nineteen.
COURT. Q. Are those the lies you rely on? A. Yes—he told me when he came to buy a hat once that his master only paid his bills once in six months, and he could not pay—I heard him say that in the shop.
MR. METCALFE. Q. Is it true that you were threatening him, as Superin tendent Headington says? On your oath, did you or did you not say anything to him? A. I did not, on my oath—he said "Halloa, have you got a holiday about a mare's nest?"and I said "Mind your own business"—it is not true that I said I would indict him—if Superintendent Headington says so, he is telling what is untrue—if he says so, I deny it—I have not employed Melhuish to write letters for me within this week—I wrote a letter and asked him to do something for me in the way of business, and offered to take 10s. off what he owes me if he would do the little business transaction—it was to call on a Mr. Godfrey—not to get the money for a clock for me, I would not trust him to do that, but to explain the matter.
COURT. Q. Suppose he said that he would call and he did not, you would not believe him? A. I should have known from the man—I sold a clock before I gave up business, and the man said he would call for it—I wanted Melhuish to call and arrange the matter—I should soon know from the roan whether he had had the clock.
MR. METCALFE. Q. You employed this man to do business for you, whom you would not believe on his oath? A. Yes—I was ordered out of Court yesterday, and I went—I did not stand at the door and put my ear to it, and keep it three or four inches open—I will swear I never heard a word all day yesterday—I am not carrying on business at present—I gave it up a month ago—I disposed of it about six weeks ago to Mr. Godfrey—I am not carrying on any business now, but I buy and sell just
the same, and have a great many private customers—this young man was negotiating that business for me—that is what I sent him about.
COURT. Q. Do you mean to say that Melhuish negotiated with Godfrey for the purchase of the business? A. No—I sent him because I thought somebody ought to go, and I thought it would be putting something in his way—I knew I never should get any money, and I thought he would do that for me just for the sake of turning out some of the money.
MR. HARRIS. Q. Has Melhuish said anything about having any money from the Company? A. Yes—he told me he had got a letter from the Company, wherein they asked him not to apply for any money from the Company till after the case was over, and that he was to receive 50l. from the Company after the case was over, for being a witness in the case; he did not say for being a spy.
WILLIAM ROBERT SHERLOCK . I am housekeeper and hall-keener at 6 A, Victoria Street, Westminster, where Melhuish is employed—I have seen Parsonage there once or twice; he is no friend of mine—I have known Melhuish about a year and a half—from what I know of his character I should hesitate very much to believe him on his oath.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Why? A. So many contradietory tales he has told parties that have come, and me also, in the way of being at home—when he has been at the office he has desired me to say he was not at home—I should hesitate on that account to believe him on his oath—I never said I was not at home when I was—I am sorry to say I have not told the truth always during my life; possibly you might get some-one to say I was not to be believed upon my oath.
MR. HARRIS. Q. My friend asked why you would not believe him on his oath, and you say that is one reason; is that one of many reasons? A. Oh, many little things that I could not enumerate—I know he is a great liar—I don't base ray knowledge on that alone—I don't know anyone particular case that I could name, but upon his general habit of lying—I could not give you one instance; the only thing is that he has told me on frequent occasions to say he was not at home if anyone called; that is the only instance I can give.
WILLIAM ALFRED WEBB . I am a builder, at St. Alban's—the first time I saw Melhuish was on 6th September—I accompanied Bowden to Messrs. Blagg & Edwards' office, in Victoria Street, Westminster—something was said by Melhuish about the Great Eastern Railway fraud—he said the station-master or inspector was an intimate friend of his, and it would be a good job for him; it would be the means of him getting a good place on the line—ho said he was hard up just then, but when the case was over be should be able to pay everyone.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Did he say anything about what he had been offered by Parsonage? A. Yes—he did not mention anyone's name—he said he had been offered by the wife of one of the prisoners fifty guineas to leave town for a month, or go away for a month, I can't say which, but he had not taken it—Rowden told him he was a d—d foul not to take it; that he might get in a row through the case—Melhuish said "You don't know how the case stands; it will be a good job for me when it is over."
WILLIAM VENN . I lodge at 26, York Street West, Stepney—the house is rented by Parsonage—I went there about 29th March, 1869—Parsonage's tenancy commenced about a fortnight before—when I went in his goods were not unpacked.
WILLIAM EDWARD HAWKEY . I have known Parsonage about three years—I know nothing of his character—I simply knew him as a neighbour—he was living at 50, Mile End Road, originally Sight's Terrace, but the numbers have been altered—this line of railway would not be the direction to his house.
CHARLES FREDERICK WHYCHELO . I know Parsonage—from 1866 till 1860 he lived at 32, Grange Road, Bermondsey—I have known him twenty years, and his father before him, and never heard a word against him—he is a liveryman of the Bakers' Company, and has a wife and nine or ten children—I believe, according to rule, in the Civil Service, after twelve years they come into a pension.
Cross-examined by MR. MITCALFE. Q. Does he deal in wine and spirits? A. Not that I know of—I know he used to deal in cigars and tobacco, years ago; he had a shop—I don't know where he bought them from; I never knew any of his transactions—he has been in the Customs for a long time.
WILLIAM JOSEPH FYFIELD . I live at 18, Havering Street, Commercial Road East—I have travelled up and down the same line with Parsonage on many occasions—I have got in with him at Stepney, and I have seen him take a ticket, at the same time as my own, on every occasion when I have got in with him—I have got in on several occasions at Shad well, and happened to meet him by the same train; I don't always go by the same train—when I have travelled with him from Stepney, I have seen him take his ticket in the proper manner, and I have seen him deliver his ticket when-ever he has travelled with me.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. During how long a time do you speak? A. I should think, somewhere about the last twelve or fifteen months, at least; I have known him that time—I have not travelled with him the last two or three months—I can't say when I first travelled with him—I should think I have travelled with him from Stepney, altogether, about twenty times—I have on many occasions got into the booking-office at the same time; I could not say for certain how many, I can say several times; I could pledge myself to half-u-dozen times that I have seen him take his ticket—we passed through the barrier together—I could not say that we went up to the booking-office and each took a ticket at the same time; sometimes I was before him and sometimes behind him—I did not say that I saw him take a ticket on every occasion that I travelled with him; I did on every occasion that I have got in with him at Stepney; I don't doubt that—if he got on the platform before me, I could not see whether he took a ticket or not—I said "Every time I travelled with him I have seen him with a ticket"—I don't mean that he produced the ticket to me when he got into the carriage—I travelled in the same carriage with him, generally in a stand-up, smoking carriage—he has not produced his ticket to me; I have seen him deliver it up—I walked side by side with him to the barrier; I can't say always—I don't know Treadgold, the ticket collector, by name; I might know him if I saw him; I know none of them by name (Treadgold was called in)—I know him by taking the tickets—I have not frequently been about with him—I have not been in public-houses with him, that I know of, until I have been here—I have never been in public houses with him at Stepney—I know nothing more of Parsonage than by travelling up and down the line—I have never been with him at a public-house in Fenchurch
Street—I can't say when I first made his acquaintance; it was only by travelling with him in the train—I never knew anything at all of him, and never knew his name, till Saturday—I knew him as a passenger, the same as I might know you—I might notice whether you took a ticket, if I had been used to travel with you; if I met you at the door, and we both took A ticket at the time, of course I should notice it—I haw seen him take tickets—I would not pledge my oath to the amount of times; I will pledge my oath to once, and more than once; on several occasions.
MR. HARRIS. Q. Every time he has been with you, has he either taken A ticket or given one up? A. Decidedly; he has had a ticket, the same as myself—I have seen him deliver more up than I have seen him take, because I got in more at Shadwell—I have always teen him deliver up a ticket when he has gone through the barrier with me; that may be twenty, thirty, or forty times.
MR. METCALFE. Q. That would be a clipped ticket? A. I don't know anything at all about that.
ISAAC NEWTON EDWARDS (ex-amined by MR. METCALFE). I am one of the firm of Blagg & Edwards, of St. Alban's—we have a branch in London, too—we are attorneys—Mr. Blagg is Registrar of the County Court and Clerk of the Peace—Melhuish has been in our employment since January, 1868, and is so still—he bears a very good character.
Cross-examined by MR. HARRIS. Q. You know that he opened a letter that was addressed to you? A. I have heard so within the last few days—he had no authority to retain persons as servants without my authority—I have understood that he induced Davies to come and work there, telling him he had authority from me—Davies applied to me for the money; be wrote me a letter; I can't recollect exactly the purport of it; it was complaining of having been inveigled into my service by Melhuish stating that he had authority from me—Davies said he was there several weeks; he sent in his account afterwards, and I have paid him the whole of it, I believe; I would not have anybody in my office without being paid, and therefore I immediately authorized the money to be paid—I never authorized Melhuish to employ him at all—I do not recollect the 15th July in particular—I have a receipt that was given by Melhuish to me for the 8l. 9s. that I paid—this is it: "Received, 15th July, of Mr. I. Edwards, in full discharge of all claims within mentioned;" on the other side is the letter Davies sent me at the time he was in the office: "187, Fairford Road, Bow. Sir.—In compliance to your request, I beg to submit the following estimate of the time I was actually employed at your office, 6 A, Victoria Street, so far as my memory will allow. From 24th January to 26th February, four weeks. In this interval four or five days. From 16th March to 2nd April, two weeks four days. From 7th April to 16th, three days. This, Sir, in as near as I can tell, and I am positive, on the whole, I have underrated it," signed by Davies—Melhuish gave me that receipt—I was certainly under the impression that the money I gave to Melhuish, and for which that is the receipt, had been paid to Davies—I am under that impression—I have not heard Davies swear that he has not been paid—on 15th July I directed Melhuish to pay it—I might say this as a rule, Melhuish had money in hand of mine—I don't say that Melhuish gave me this receipt ou the 15th, it might be some days afterwards—I have no doubt whatever that Davies was employed in my office, I saw him myself two or three times—lie must have been employed by Melhuish, he was not employed by me—he was
doing some registration work for the Conservative Association—Melhuish told me that he did not employ him, that he was there as a friend originally—I saw him there twice, at work—there was no one else there to set him to work but Melhuish, he was the only clerk in the office.
MR. METCALFE. Q. I understand you to say that Melhuish said he was there as a friend? A. That was the explanation he gave me—when Davies preferred this claim, I immediately sent for him, and finding he had been there, I immediately ordered him to send in his account, and the money was paid him—I have retained Melhuish from that time to the present, knowing those circumstances—this gentleman (the prisoners' solicitor) came down to me with Parsonage—they did not endeavour to induce me to discharge Melhuish—they told me certain information that they had against him—they told me about this 8l. 9s., and also several little things which I don't exactly recollect now—I can't say what induced them to come to me.
WILLIAM HENRY TREADGOLD . I was a ticket collector, in the employment of the Great Eastern Railway Company, at the Fenchurch Street Station, up to the 16th of this month—I was a ticket collector for two years and a half, and the last of the time I was in the telegraph office—I first went there in 1868, on 1st January, I think—there has never been a report against me—I have known Parsonage a few months, as a casual traveller he has never passed me without delivering up a proper ticket—I can't remember the day that Russell came to me; he has been to me two or three times—I remember Parsonage and Russell passing me, together, one morning in August, when Parsonage was apprehended—Parsonage gave up his proper ticket then, a third-class return from Stepney—Russell stopped him, tapped him on the shoulder, and said "This is the man I accuse you of passing without a ticket"—I said "Never; I never passed that man without a ticket"—he turned round to Bodger and said "You as well"—Bodger said nothing at all, he turned away to have his breakfast—one afternoon, about 2 o'clock, I can't remember the date, Russell sent to me down at the secretary's office, and told me I could please myself whether I was in the witness box against these men, or whether I was in the dock as a prisoner with these men; whether I was in the dock with them, or in the witness box against them, for the Company—I told him I knew nothing about the affair—then he said be would give me half-an-hour to consider my answer—he never came back; I waited two and a half hours for him—I hare never been charged at all—Parsonage never said to me, in Melhuish's presence, "There is a detective after us"—he never said anything of the sort.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Where were you stationed? A. At Fenchurch Street, at the egress barrier, some part of the time; some-times on the platform, attending to the trains; always at Fenchurch Street—there is a double barrier there—two or three porters acted on the other side—Jordan, Bodger, Sherringham, Barry, a policeman, and two or three others—Jordan, Bodger, and Sherringham were the usual men, and occasionally a policeman, when anyone was ill—I never passed Parsonage in my life without taking a ticket from him—sometimes he went through one way—he did not always come my side, that I saw—when he came my side I always had a ticket from him—he gave his ticket open, like the other passengers, as you hold your hand for them you take the ticket.
Q. Is it true that he put his hand in yours, and that you squeezed it in a different way to that in which you squeezed any of the other passengers?
A. No, not particularly, not to be noticed—many persons when they go by put their hand in yours, like that, merely for a piece of fun—I have seen Melhuish here; but, to my knowledge, I never went with him to a public-house; I am positive of it—I know Foster's public-house—I never went with him there, to my knowledge; I may have gone with Parsonage—I did not know him otherwise than as a passenger—passengers ask you many times to go down and have a glass of ale—I mean when I am at the barrier—we always leave one there, and the other goes on to the public-house with the passenger who asks him—I may have gone to public-houses with Parsonage—I can't say how many times—I don't say several times—I don't remember Melhuish and Parsonage going with me on one occasion to the public-house—Parsonage never said to me, when we got there, "There is a detective after us"—not when I have been with him—I did not say "Oh, the devils can't catch us, it is impossible, the way in which we do it"—I never made use of such words in my life—I may have been with him at the public-house; but I never used any such expressions—I knew Russell well by sight—I have had two cases at the Mansion House with him—I knew he was a detective—Parsonage never on any occasion spoke to me about Russell, or about a detective—I have seen the lad Richardson here—I never knew him before I saw him here—he was pointed out to me.
Q. Just remember that several persons have watched you, Russell, Richardson, Melhuish, and others; do you mean, on your oath, to say you have never passed that man, Parsonage, without a ticket? A. I will be on my oath that I never passed him without a ticket—he never passed me without giving up a ticket—if Russell has sworn that he saw him pass me twice without even taking his hands from his pockets and without giving up a ticket, it is untrue—Parsonage was not constantly backwards and forwards, sometimes I have not seen him for two or three days—he lived at Stepney—he came up of a morning and had to go back at night, but there are other conveyances from Stepney besides the train—sometimes I have not seen him for two or three days; I swear that—I may have been on the platform—he did not go up and down several times a day, especially in the evening; that is not so—I don't know of it—I have only seen him once a day when he has come up in the morning—I never saw any clipped tickets passed at all, only what we receive at the barriers—they are all clipped at the station—I can't remember the date when Russell came and asked me to give evidence—no one was present—it was opposite the secretary's office at the end of the station—it was a day or two after these men were given into custody—he told me I was a young man, the youngest man on the collection at Fenchurch Street Station, and I must consider my situation; and I could please myself whether I was placed in the witness box against them, as a witness for the Company, or in the dock with the prisoners—I said I had a character to uphold, and he said "Oh, you won't have one long"—I can't tell exactly when this took place—it was a day or two after they were given into custody, after Avery was in custody—I don't think it was before Jordan was taken, I am not certain, I can't say, I don't remember—it was before Bodger was taken—Sherringham is not here; he is very ill in bed with rheumatic gout, he can't move—I called to see him the other evening—I heard that he was subpoenaed—a party came to me and gave me a paper, that gentleman (the solicitor)—Parsonage did not come, too—I have seen Parsonage outside the Court here—not at my house—he has been on bail—I
have not been to public-houses with him—we hare all been opposite—we did not come up together, we came at different times—Parsonage's wife has not been at my place; no one connected with the case has been at my place—this gentleman found me at the Stepney Station one evening—I was there on business—I am doing nothing now; I am dismissed—I went there on a little business—I came down by the train from Stepney, and was talking there with the men, two or three men there—they asked me if I had anything to do, men employed on the railway, not Rutterford, he was discharged then; they asked me if I had got anything else to do, and I got talking to them—I did not go down to see them; they were two or three of the men on duty as I was passing—I did not go there on any business in particular; I went to see two or three of the men there, that was all, Morgan and Snow, to have a talk with them—I paid my fare down, not on purpose to talk with them; I live near the Stepney Station, in the Commercial Road, and I took a ticket down and saw these men, that was all—Rutterford lives somewhere at Poplar—I have not been with him since I was discharged—I have seen him up here, and Daniels, he was at the Stepney Station—he lives at Kingsland somewhere—I have been outside with him—Sherringham has not been here—I lived about ten minutes' walk from Parsonage—I have never been to his house—I know he lived at Stepney, opposite the station, that was what they told me; I mean the parties I have beard talking about it at Stepney, I can't name who they were; I can't say whether Rutterford and Daniels were some of the parties that were talking of him—when this gentleman came to me I offered a statement to him; he did not offer it to me; he did not bring a statement written out, and ask me to sign it; he wrote it out in my presence; no one else was present—I know York Square, Stepney—I very seldom go to a public-house there, I may have done; when I was employed in the Railway we used to go there of an evening, to the Queen's Head sometimes, when we had done duty—I never saw Parsonage there; I swear that; I never came in the same public-house with Parsonage.
MR. HARRIS. Q. There seems to be a wonderful point made about this little business; you were out of a situation, I understand? A. Yes, and I went down to Stepney to see if I could hear of anything—I was subpoenaed by the attorney for Parsonage before I was dismissed from the Company—I was on duty at the Fenchurch Street Station at the time I was subpoenaed; it was after that that I was threatened to be discharged, and to have my character ruined if I did not give evidence for the Company—it is a fact that Russell threatened to ruin my character, and I was threatened to be dismissed if I did not give evidence for the Company—a policeman named Halfyard fetched me to have this conversation with Russell—I have not seen Sherringham this morning.
SAMUEL HALFYARD (City Policeman). I know Mr. Russell—a day or two after some of these men were taken into custody, he asked me to go up stairs and tell Treadgold that he wanted to speak to him—he came down with me, and went and spoke to Mr. Russell, and of course I walked away.
GEORGE HOLLINGHURST . I am a porter in the employment of the Great Eastern Railway Company—I am still in their employ, and have been so ten years last July—I slightly recognize Parsonage as a passenger—he is no friend of mine—I have done duty as a ticket nipper and collector, not at the barrier, but at the bottom of the stairs, at the North London door,
and the Black wall door—Parsonage has passed me there as a passenger—he has never passed me without showing his ticket, and having it nipped by me.
Cross-examined. Q. What times were you on duty? A. My duties it these doors were half an hour relieving each door at tea; some days from 4.45 to 5.15, and other days from 5.15 to 5.45, while the collectors were it tea, either Bodger or Jordan, or the other collectors that might have been on at the time—I could not swear as to dates, but I believe Sherringham used to be there.
WILLIAM FRENCH . I was a ticket-collector, in the employ of the Great Eastern Railway Company, at Stepney Station—I was discharged without notice, on the 16th, a week last Saturday, after these men had been committed for trial, and after I was subpoenaed by Parsonage, and my evidence bad been taken by his solicitor—I don't know why I was discharged—I was about six years in the Company's service—I have known Parsonage as a passenger, not as a personal friend—he has passed me many times as a passenger—he has never passed me without producing a proper ticket.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. You were at the Stepney barrier, were you? A. At the Stepney door; the barrier has lately been erected—I took the tickets of persons coming out of the station—he would give up a clipped ticket—the ticket would have been clipped previously—he has never passed me without giving up a ticket; never on any occasion, I swear that—I never checked the tickets of persons going from Stepney—if Richardson swore that Parsonage got out and passed me and did not give up any ticket, it is not true—it is false that on 3rd August Parsonage went down from Fenchurch Street by the 4.45 train, got out at Stepney, and passed me, and gave up no ticket—I say positively that Parsonage never passed me without giving up a ticket when I was at the Stepney Station.
GEORGE RUTTERFORD . I was a porter and ticket-collector at the Stepney Station—I have been about twelve years on the line—I was discharged on the 16th of this month, without notice, after I had been subpoenaed by Parsonage to come as a witness, and after my statement bad been taken down in writing—I have known Parsonage as a traveller—it was my duty to see that passengers had their tickets, and that they were nipped by me—Parsonage has never gone by me without producing his ticket and having it nipped—I have never passed him without a ticket—I remember Russell tying to go by me without a ticket, about a month ago—I would not let him pass—he did not accuse me at that time of having passed persons without their tickets—he did on the morning Parsonage was arrested—after I had Dipped Parsonage's ticket he beckoned me to him and said "That is the man you have passed"—he stated it distinctly three times, and I denied it each time—I had never done such a thing—I never said to Parsonage "Look out, there is a b—detective," never, to the best of my knowledge—I never did say so—I never remember using such an expression—I should remember if I had—I never have, and I never let him pass.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Not that you remember, you say? A. No—I could not have pointed to Russell and said "There is a b—detective," and forgotten it—on my oath I never said so—I renumber seeing Russell on the morning he told me he was there—he was there about a month previous, but I don't know the dates—Russell told me that he was there a month previously, and that I had passed the man—I remember
stopping Russell for his ticket or pass, a month previously—I did not find out then that he was a detective—I saw his pass, and found out he was a Great Eastern servant—I saw his name was Russell, but I did not know that he was a detective—I stopped him—I did not say anything to Parsonage after I had seen his pass—I did not speak to Parsonage at all—it is untrue if Russell has sworn I spoke to Parsonage after I had seen him—I have spoken to Parsonage as a passenger, very seldom—merely to ask him for his ticket—I have never spoken to him, except to ask him for his ticket; I swear that—I never have held any conversation with him, or spoken to him, except to ask him for his ticket; that I swear to—I did not pass Parsonage on the Its July without a ticket, when I saw Russell and looked at his pass—I saw the ticket in his hand at the time he passed—I did not clip his ticket—I could not collar two persons at one time, it was a thing impossible, a moral impossibility—I did not clip it that morning because I had got Russell in my grasp—I can't say whether I let anyone else pass without clipping their ticket that morning—then might have been some—I saw Parsonage's ticket in his hand as he paid—I did not let him pass on the 16th July, two mornings before, without a ticket, or without clipping his ticket—he has never passed without my clipping it, except on one occasion, the morning when I collared Russell—that was the only occasion, and that was the 18th—I did not pass him on the 19th July, or on the 21st, or the 22nd, or 23rd, or 26th, or 27th, or 28th, or 29th, or 30th, or the 4th August or 5th August, or 10th, or 11th, or 12th August—I never saw Mr. Carter before—I have always clipped Parsonage's ticket except that once—a lawyer came down to me about this, to come here—Mr. Sparlow I believe his name is; that is the gentleman—I can't say the date, the gentleman can inform you about the date—I had not told anybody my evidence before he came—I was surprised at a visit from him—I live about two miles from Parsonage, as near as possible—I live at Poplar—I only know Parsonage as a passenger—I have seen his wife here, at this place—she has not called on me—I have seen her at this Court, no where else—I have seen Treadgold across the street-we have not all been together continually—Parsonage has not been in the public-house with me—I have not been in his company.
JAMES HENRY DANIELS . I was a ticket-collector and nippemacrr in the employment of the Great Eastern Railway Company at the Stepney Station, up to last Friday—I was discharged without notice after those men were committed for trial, and after I had been subpomed by the defendant and made my statement—I was on duty at the time I was subpoenaed—I had been in the Company's service turned fifteen years—it was my duty to collect the tickets and to nip them—I have known Parsonage as a passenger—he has often passed my barrier where I nip the tickets—he has never passed me during the time that I have known him without producing his ticket in the proper manner and having it nipped—never.
CHARLES LAVENDER . I am a ticket-collector, now in the employ of the Great Eastern Railway Company at the Stepney Station—I have been in the service about five years—I have known Parsonage as a passenger for a considerable time—during the time I have known him he has never passed me without producing his ticket and having it nipped when I have been on duty.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. What was your station? A. Clip ping tickets at the Stepney Station on the Tilbury Line.
MR. HARRIS, Q. Then would Parsonage pats you in coming to London? A. No—I can't say how often he has passed me, a number of times—he hat always produced his ticket.
ALEXANDER RAWLINSON . I am booking-clerk at the Stepney Station—I book over a thousand passengers a day—I can't say the number before 10 o'clock—the generality of them go up in the morning before 10 o'clock—I have seen Parsonage as a passenger—his face is familiar to me—I should not notice him unless he came to my window for a ticket—his face is familiar to me, but he may never have taken a ticket at all—I have said I would not sign a statement, because a statement was made out that I had frequently booked him, and I said I could not say that, as there were over a thousand a day—I said I could not swear that I had frequently booked him—on one occasion the solicitor came to me in the morning, and said "If you were to book a panenger would you know him?"—I said "Most decidedly"—Parsonage was standing outside the window at the time, and he said "You would know that man?"—I said "His face is familiar to me"—he said "I shall subpoena you," and a night or two afterwards he came and made out this statement—he said "I suppose you have booked him"—I said "I may have done so, but I don't notice every passenger; one in a thousand"—I said I could not swear to any statement that I had booked him repeatedly; it would injure me with the Company, and I refused to sign it because he said I had repeatedly booked him—I said it would injure me—I was under the impression if I did not sign that statement he could not subpoena me; however, he put the subpoena down, and said I should have to attend—this paper (produced) was made out in the booking-office, and there art several alterations made—it was made out from what I said in the offers, with my pen and ink—it is true that I said it would injure me with the Company.
COURT. Q. What would injure you with the Company? A. If I was to go and swear I had booked him repeatedly, it would injure me with the Company; but I can't swear that I booked him repeatedly—he may have gone there, and I may never have noticed him; I don't take notice of every passeuger, it is not likely.
MR. METCALFE. Q. You say Parsonage was standing outside at the time? A. At the time the solicitor came, and he asked me if I—had booked him, and I said I could not say positively.
HERBERT HENRY DAVIES . I live at Fairford Road, Bow—I know Melhuish well—Parsonage introduced me to him about 29th June this year—Melhuish then employed me at a salary of a guinea a week, as clerk to the Herts Conservative Association—he only paid me partly—he paid me about 6l. 10s.—this was after I wrote to Mr. Edwards—he paid me for his own work—he owed me 9l. or 10l.—I could not get the money, and wrote to Mr. Edwards, to ask him if he authorised him to employ me—my total claim was nine guineas—a guinea a week—he paid me 6l. 10s., and I had his I O U for two guineas as the balance of the whole claim—one morning Melhuish come to me in Mr. Stoke's cellar, it is a winemerchant's; he took me by my left arm as soon as be came down, and whispered in my ear, "Be not afraid, it will be all right for you"—I did not know what he meant—shortly after that Mr. Russell asked me if I knew Parsonage—I told him I did—he said "Do you know that he has been in the habit of travelling up and down the line without paying"—I said "No, Sir, I do not"—I recollect Melhuish having some circulars sent to his place, he said
they had to be addressed, and he tore them up—I do not know whether he kept the stamps, I suppose he did—they were directed by me, and he told me that they were to be sent by post; but he tore them up, and put them in the waste-paper basket.
JOSEPH WILLIS . I am a managing clerk—I have known Parsonage eighteen months—his character is very good; he is honest and respectable—I have several times ridden on the line with him, and he has always paid for his ticket.
HUGH PIPER BERNARD . I am a teller in Her Majesty's Customs—I have known Parsonage nine years—I have acted as first teller, and have had to trust him with sums of money, and always found him truthful and honest he has been in the Customs fourteen or fifteen years, I believe, and he has been in our office four or five years—he is entitled to a pension—I have entrusted him with 40l. or 50l. at a time, but should have no hesitation in trusting him to any amount—when the clerks come of a morning they have to enter their names in a book.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Are you in the Customs? A. Yes, in the same department as the prisoner—I am a teller, and he is a messenger—he would not have to go down to the Docks from our department—I do not know whether he would before he came to our department—I never heard of his dealing in wine, or cigars, or spirits—if it was known in the Customs that he kept a shop, or dealt in wines or spirits, it would not be tolerated—I did not go down with Frost and Parsonage to St. Alban's—I was down there at my friend Mr. Isaac Edwards'—I was aware that Parsonage was coming down, and promised to give him an introduction to Mr. Edwards.
MR. HARRIS. Q. Is Mr. Edwards a friend of yours? A. A great friend, and he was security for me for 1000l.—I was going to visit Mr. Isaac Edwards and his father that day—I introduced them to Parsonage—I merely introduced Parsonage for him to make his own statement—I would not make any statement against Melhuish myself, not an exporter statement; I heard Parsonage make a statement against Melhuish to Mr. Edwards—Melhuish was not there.
HENRY ROBERT POOLE . I am Temporary Receiver-General of Her Majesty's Customs—I have known Parsonage since 1866, during which time, as far as I know, he has borne an extremely good character—the men have to sign a sheet at the time they come, 10.10 or 10.15—I have the sheets here (produced)—on Tuesday, 20th July, Parsonage was there punctually at 10 o'clock—he writes his name here himself, and the hour at which he arrives—I am there, and check it—I do not exactly see him, because there is a screen between my room and the table they sign on—a person cannot come at 10.10 and sign at "10," because the sheet is brought into my room at a few minutes past 10 o'clock—Parsonage or another messenger would have to open the door before 10 o'clock—I am able to speak to the accuracy of these sheets, to a minute or two—he was there on the 27th punctually at 10 o'clock, and on Thursday, August 11th, he was there at 10 o'clock—I cannot tell you how far the Custom House is from Fenchurch Street Station—Parsonage has been entrusted with money at the Custom House; but I cannot say to what amount—he does not give security.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. You say it is brought to your office shortly after 10 o'clock, what margin is allowed? A. A very short margin
—it depend not depend upon the time I get there—should I be late, another gentleman sits in my room, and would receive it—it is possible that he might be late, too; but very improbable; by a few minutes—I do not mean ten minutes—the sheet is brought in when the signatures are on it—some times there are five or six waiting to sign at one time—Parsonage's salary is 75l.; it commences at 70l., and is increased to 80l.—I did not know tha he was dealing in spirits or wine, or cigars—it would not be contrary to that rules of the Customs for him to sell, or keep a shop for the sale of wine and spirits—he had not to go to the Docks in the course of his duty—each of these signatures are in Parsonage's writing—each signs his own name—on 11th August there were eighteen present at 10 o'clock, three at 8.30, and one at 9.
MR. HARRIS. Q. What rank in the eighteen does Parsonage hold? A. The messengers stand at the bottom of the sheet, and sign, separately—I this sheet would be delivered to me at 10.5 or 10.6, and I initial it—if there is a conviction, he will, most decidedly, lose his situation and his pension.
CHARLES BENNETT . I am a surveyor—I made these plans—this plan of Stepney Station is correct—I have got the Ordnance map here—from Fenchurch Street Station to the Custom House is a quarter of a mile, 206 yds., and 1 ft, according to the scale.
GEORGE KINHHOTT . I am a messenger in the tame office—I have known Parsonage about six years—Melhuish used to call for him night after night, to take him out, much against Parsonage's inclination, and he would insist on waiting for him.
Other witnesses deposed to the good characters of Parsonage and Joseph Avery.
GUILTY . J. T. AVERY, JORDAN, and BODGER— Twelve Months' Imprisonment each. EDWARD AVERY— Six Months' Imprisonment. PARSONAGE— Two Years' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. MOODY conducted the Prosecution.
MARY ANN LEE . I am the wife of Henry Lee, and reside at Leyton—on Thursday night, 18th August, about 10.50, I saw the house fastened——the front window was quite secure—I came down between 7 and 8 o'clock in the morning and found the place in confusion, and missed a musical box, a pocket book, a pipe, and two dresses, some money, and a number of other articles, valued at about 28l.—these (produced) are some of the things—they were safe when I went to bed—an entrance had been gained by the front parlour window.
CHARLES FODEN (Policeman A R 201). I received information of a burglary at Mr. Lee's house, and I went to the Sultan's Head public-house, Upper Clapton, about 10 o'clock at night, on 19th August—I saw the prisoner there—he had this musical box on his knees, and was playing a tune called "Not for Joe"—I took him into custody—he resisted very violently, and called on the people to throw open the doors and rescue him
—he tore my trowsers—I had a constable with me—we handcuffed the prisoner, and took him to the station—he said the musical box had been given him by another personal found a pawn ticket in his pocket, referring to this dress, pawned at Stoke Newington—on the way to the Court the next morning, he said "I was led into this by two others. I did not enter the house, but I stood at the window and received the property, and conveyed it away."
WILLIAM REEVES (Policeman N 143). I assisted in apprehending the prisoner—he resisted, and injured me in the hand by biting me—at the station I found this pipe in his pocket—when we took him out of the cab at the station this book was picked up close to the cab—Mrs. Lee has identified it—on the way to the Police Court he said he did not get into the house to take the property, he merely stood outside to receive it and convey it away.
GEORGE FREEMAN . I live at Bickeridge Road, Leyton—I call Mr. Lee up every morning—on 19th August, I went there about 6 o'clock, and saw the prisoner tying up a bundle inside the forecourt of the house, just at the gate—I saw the parlour window open, and I said "Is Mr. Lee up?"—he said "Oh yes, they are all up, Mr. Lee will be down in a minute"—I wished him good morning, and went on—it was perfectly light then.
Prisoner. I should have thought, if you saw me tying up a bundle, you would have asked me what I had. Witness. My impression was that you were a friend of Mr. Lee's, and I thought you were going off by the train.
GUILTY . He further PLEADED GUILTY to having been before convicted in January, 1865.**— Ten Years' Penal Servitude. There were four other indictments against the prisoner for burglary.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. COLERIDGE conducted the Prosecution.
JANE BELL . I am barmaid at the Royal Mortar, Woolwich—on 6th August, about 3.30, I served the prisoner with a glass of ale, which came to 1 1/2 d.—he gave me a half-crown—I told him it was bad—he said be got it from Millwall, and gave me a good one—I kept the bad one and put it by itself in the bar, and gave it to my master.
THOMAS UTLEY . I keep the Crown and Anchor, High Street, Woolwich—on 26th August, I served the prisoner with a pint of half-and-half, and he gave me a half-crown—I took it to the other end of the bar to try it, and he slipped out of the house without his change—I got a constable, went with him to the pier, about thirty yards off, and gave him in charge with the coin, which I marked and broke.
PATRICK DAVIS (Policeman). I took the prisoner, and asked him how it was he went away without his change—he said he intended going back for it, but he was going in the opposite direction—I saw it handed to Mr. Maptson, who handed it to me—I received this other half-crown, gives to Miss Bell, from the summoning officer.
He also PLEADED GUILTY to having been convicted of a like offence in July, 1868.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerrt Esq.
MR. BRINDLEY conducted the Prosecution.
SARAH HUNTER . I am the wife of John Hunter—I live at 1, Nelson's Terrace, Sydenham—on Thursday, the 25th, I put some clothes out on the fence of my garden, and among others a pair of trowsers; between 2 and 3 o'clock in the afternoon they were safe—I saw the prisoner go past the door as I sat at my needlework—my daughter spoke to me—I went out to find him, but could not—I saw him next day—I accused him of taking the trowser—he put his fingers in my face, and said "You did not see me take them"—I said "No, but my daughter did"—he called me all sorts of bad names—my husband was abed at the time, and got up, and I gave him into his custody—the trowsers have not been found—the value of them is 4s.
Prisoner. I did not say a word to her; it is her husband who has put her up to all this.
ELIZABETH AMELIA HUNTER . I am daughter of last witness—I was up stairs making beds on this afternoon—I saw prisoner take the trowser off the fence—he put them under his coat—he went away—I went down to my mother.
JOHN HUNTER (Policeman P 262). I took prisoner into custody from my wife, and charged him with stealing the trowsers—he said "When did you see me take them?"—I said "No, but my daughter did"—he said "You will not trace the trowsers."
GUILTY .—He also PLEADED GUILTY** to a previous conviction.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. E. P. WOOD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. ST. AUBYN the Defence.
WILLIAM KIMPSON (Policeman R 304). On 8th August, I received information, and on searching prisoner's place found a pair of boots behind a box—the prisoner was out—I waited till 2.30 next morning—I went into the house with the boots in my hand, and told him I should take him into custody—he said "Very well"—he came down stain—his wife wanted to speak to him—after she had done so, he said "I am guilty; I stole the boots"—on the way, to the station, he said he went with another man to sweep the chimney, and stole the boots and put them into the sack—I afterwards showed the boots to Mr. Hitchman's servant.
Cross-examined. Q. Is Mr. Hitchman here? A. No—the other con-stable was 135 B—he is not here—he heard this conversation I had with the prisoner—I received this information on the third day after the robbery—my hands were all over soot when I caught hold of the boots—he was quite sober.
were safe on Thursday night—on the Monday I missed these boots—I did not give them to the prisoner.
GUILTY .—He also PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction.— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
WILLIAM FORD . I am a collector of rents, and also act as bailiff—I live at 1, Russell's Place, Block heath—on 30th August I received from the prosecutor a bill of sale, and he requested me to make arrangements with the prisoner for a settlement of the amount, 100l.—I mentioned about the bill of sale—he said he owed Mr. Moody nothing—I asked him how he made that out—he said "Will you walk to my house"—I did so—he said "Let's see the bill of sale"—I showed it in my hand, and held one corner of it—he snatched it out of my hand—he pushed me and rushed passed me—I followed him, and saw this lying on the fire—I saw him tear the bill of sale—I retained this, that I now produce of the bill which I snatched from the fire.
Cross-examined. Q. Did he not say that this bill of sale was a mere fiction? A. He told me that he owed Moody nothing—Moody has seized for himself since this committal, eleven days ago—there are many things deficient.
WILLIAM MOODY . I am a basket-maker, residing at East Street, Green which—I have known defendant for a number of years—about seven years ago I borrowed some money from him, about 20l.—I gave him a bill of sale upon a portion of my property at that time, and afterwards paid him back the money and got a receipt for it—about eighteen months ago I lent him 50l. in gold, there might have been 3l. or 4l. in silver—I received this I O U (produced)—it is in defendant's handwriting—(Read: "July 17th, 1868. I O U William Moody, fifty pounds for value received. 120, New Street, Deptford. T. H. Griffiths.")—Mr. Rutledge was present when I lent him the money, and my wife—I lent him a further sum of 18l.—I received this I O U—I lent him a further sum of 32l. when the bill of sale was drawn up, making in all 100l., and he gave me that bill upon his furniture—my wife and I were present when the 13l. and 18l. were paid—Mr. Rutledge and my wife were present when I paid him the 32l.—he took that sum in his pocket, and I told Rutledge to lead him a bag; he did so—these fragments represent portions of the bill of sale—his signature is on it—I have received none of that sum of 100l. back—I made personal application to him for it—the attesting witness to the bill of sole is Mr. Ives; he is an accountant, living at Peckham—I applied to the prisoner for the money a fortnight before I put the man in possession—he said he wished he could raise some money on his furniture, about 150l.; and if someone would advance that sum, he would redeem the goods out of a portion of it, and pay me—he did not pay me.
Cross-examined. Q. How long have you been living where you are now A. About twenty months—I paid him 50l. on July 17th, 1868—I received 125l. from the Kentish Insurance Office—this was in March, 1868—I have not been bankrupt twice in fourteen months—I was insolvent on 18th August, 1807, and did not pay any dividend—I was bankrupt on 18th May, 1864—no dividend was paid then—I took up my discharge on 21st
December, 1865—I was bankrupt on 17th August, 1865—I paid every man what I owed him then—I should think I owed defendant 21l. 9s.—I should think he was not put down in my schedule for that sum—I owed him the money; he lent me 20l. on my pony and out—I got the 69l. from my trade—I have paid every man that I owed—I will not swear I did not write to the defendant asking him to concoct a bill of sale while I was in prison, to satisfy the Registrar—I brought an action against a man for slandering me in 1868—it was tried two months ago—because they wanted security for costs, and I was making up my mind whether I would get security or not—I paid Mr. Pook—the action was for calling me "Fire Insurance Billy," and that I had got a lot of my money from Insurance Companies—I got 5l. for that slander—I brought an action against Mr. Detherick for tumbling down a sewer, and settled the case for 50l.—I brought an action last March for tumbling over some bricks, and they compromised that by paying me 10l—I got 50l. for the amount of suffering I went through from the Creek Bridge Company spraining my foot—I had a fire in Eveling Street, Deptford, in 1859—I got about 11l.—in 1863 I had a fire in Bridge Street—I got 125l. for 350l.—the bank-ruptcy was before that—I got the money to build the wharf in this way—my wife was injured in an accident on the Brighton Railway—she got 125l.—I was not bankrupt then—I had a fire in Dacre Street, and got 50l., in 1864—this was after my discharge.
Q. (Handing him Bill of Sale, dated 16th February, 1864.) Was not that a friendly concern? A. No—I did not write to ask Griffiths to make out an account because the Registrar would not pass me—(looking at a litter) that is ray writing—I called in Eldridge to see the money paid over this bill of sale—the money was lent at 5 per cent interest, and the first instalment was to have been paid on 1st February, and the second in May, and the next in August—they were not paid—I never received a peony interest on it—there was a mortgage on his property by a Mr. Musgrave—I did not say "Let us make out a bill of sale or he will be down on us"—it was left with me after it was executed—I once left it at Mr. Griffiths' on his table, though he had not paid me the money—I owed a Mr. Mason 20l.
MR. COLE. Q. You say in 1865 you paid every penny in that bankruptey? A. Yes—my house that was burnt and some other property worth 300l., and I only got 125l.—the date of that fire was about six months before this bill of sale was drawn out—the fire at the wharf was not my fault—I never made any claim—I lost my horse and cart there—in another action I had my horse killed by a waggon running into it—I told Mr. Pook that the reason why I could not go on with my action was on account of my poverty—I did not tell Mr. Pook I had a bill of sale—all the lot that I got from the sale of the furniture was 7l.
ELLEN MOODY . I am the prosecutor's wife—in July, 1868, I remember my husband lending defendant 50l., for which he gave an I O U—Mr. Rutledge was present—I saw the 50l. handed over—Mr. Rutledge saw it handed over—in November, 1869, I saw the defendant receive 32l. from my husband, and he received a bill of sale at the time—I think the second sum was 18l.—I saw it handed over in March—Eldridge was present—that was the third time money was handed over.
Cross-examined. Q. It was the 17th July, 1868, you saw your husband Hand 50l. to defendant? A. It was. Q. Do you know that your husband brought an action on the 16th July, which he could not carry on for want
of money the very day before? A. I know they required security for costs—Eldridge works for us—he was present when the 32l. was paid—I saw that bill of sale—I am positive the defendant did not take that bill of sale home In his pocket—the attesting witness nor the other gentleman did not see the money paid over—I had to go up stairs to get the money—it was an open place, and I do not generally bring the money down first.
JOSEPH ELDRIDGE . I live at 18, Round Street, Greenwich—I am in the prosecutor's service, and have been for five or six years—I saw the sum of 32l. paid by the prosecutor to the defendant—it was paid in gold—I lent defendant my bag to carry it in—this is the bag (produced)—he put the money into it—I have asked him a dozen times for the bag, and his reply was he had lost it—I use the bag to put money in, on purpose to pay for the road when I go to London—I got it back at the time of removing Mr. Griffiths' furniture; I found it in a little chest of drawers after he was committed for trial.
Cross-examined. Q. The bag was found two years after? A. No—no one was present when I asked for it—I think this is the bag—I have been a basket-maker for two or three years—I used to work at Mr. Green's, the farrier's, before—I saw the money paid in three lumps of gold—Mr. Moody called me in to see it paid, in a room next to the shop—only Mr. and Mrs. Moody, and myself, and Griffiths then present—Mr. Moody said "Hi! Joe, just lend Mr. Griffiths that bug to put his money in; it is not worth his while to have the money loose in his pocket"—my master is in a pretty fair way of business—I daresay I make fifty or sixty baskets in a week—I made more than two last week—I get a guinea a week—I cannot read or write—I did not read the bill of sale, and did not know anything about it.
MR. COLE. Q. Do you believe that this is the bag your master provided you with to take money to buy rods? A. It was similar to that—a week does not pass without my making a basket—I make them for market gardeners.
THOMAS RUTLEDGE . I reside at 36, Upper Street, Deptford, and am an asphalted manufacturer—I was present on the 17th July, when the prisoner borrowed money from Mr. Moody—it was 50l.—I saw it handed over—it was gold and 4l. or 5l. in silver—I saw Mr. Griffiths write out the I O U for it at the time (I O U produced)—this is my attesting signature.
Cross-examined. Q. How long have you been out of employment? A. About two years—I have lived on my money—I got 30s. and two guineas a week as a foreman to a composite paving company—I saved up 700l. or 800l.—I had not that sum when I gave up the business of asphalting—I had saved 200l.—I lived on that—I have been a witness before for Mr. Moody—I swore I heard the defendant say that Moody had burnt down seven houses—Moody told me he wished to have me present at the time this 50l. was transacting, the day before—Mr. and Mrs. Moody, Griffiths, and myself were present—I saw no purse and no bag let to carry the money away.
PHILIP WILLMOTT . I am a house agent, living at 2, Queen's Terrace, Commercial Road, Peckham—in October last I prepared this bill of sale at the instance of Mr. Moody and Griffiths—it was attested by Mr. Charles Ives—these fragments are part of that bill of sale—I saw Griffiths sign that.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you there some time? A. I was, perhaps three-quarters of an hour—Mr. Ives was there—we left together—no money passed in my pretence, that I am aware of.
CHARLES IVES . I am an accountant—I recollect attesting a bill of sale in the house of Moody—Mrs. Moody, Willmott, myself, and I think there was a young man sitting in a chair at the back, were all present at the attestation—I did not see any money handed over—I saw Griffiths sign the bill.
Cross-examined. Q. How long were you there? A. Three-quarters of on hour, waiting for Griffiths—Mr. Moody said there was no occasion to wait for Griffiths, as they would settle the money matters after—he said "We shall have to go into some accounts," and that I need not wait to see the money paid—I signed the receipt, as a mere matter of form, for the 100l.
COURT. Q. Did he admit owing 68l.? A. Yes.
JURY. Q. You waited at Moody's for Griffiths to come? A. Yes, and he kept us quite an hour and a half—I read over the bill of sale, bat saw no money pass.
WILLIAM WHITE . I reside at 2 and 3, South Street, Blackheath—I recollect the prisoner in Whitsun week showing me a bill of sale—he said he wanted to raise some money on it—I pointed out that it ought to be in the possession of Mr. Moody—he told me it was a friendly concern—I would have nothing to do with it.
Witnesses for the Defence.
SARAH LYDIA MALINS . I live at 35, Edward Street, Deptford—I was at my father's house on the 11th October, 1869—defendant is my father—I saw Moody there—the said "How are you?"—I said "Quite well"—he said that old Musgrave said he would come and take the furniture, and "I have persuaded your father to make a bill of sale"—I said "Father owes no money"—he said "You don't know what he might want; he will be able, by that bill of sale, to save his goods and get the deeds from Musgrava"—on the 17th December I visited my father again, and saw on the mantel—piece the bill of sale—my father's signature was attached to it, and Mr. Ives witnessed it—there were two red seals and a stamp in the comer, and 100l. on it—my father said it was only a friendly concern between he and Moody—on the 15th April I saw the bill of sale in my father's hands, and again on the 14th August—I advised him to destroy it, because I knew if Moody got hold of it he would not have it again.
Cross-examined. Q. Why did you not go to the Magistrate and have him up? A. Because he was not sitting—I first saw this bill of sale in October—my father has been out on bail—I was not called as a witness at the Police Court.
JOHN MALINS . I am husband of last witness, and a coppersmith—I was at ray father-in-law's house on the 4th December, 1869, in the evening—he showed me a bill of sale for 100l. between himself and Moody—I saw the document again on the 14th August—I then advised him to destroy it.
THOMAS CHILLMAN . I live at Deptford—am a wheelwright—I was present at a conversation in April last between Moody and Griffiths, and heard Moody say that if it were not for the friendly existence of that bill of sale Musgrave would be the ruin of him.
Cross-examined. Q. Were you examined at the Police Court? A. Yes, but not upon oath—the Judge asked me a few words.
GEORGE JOSEPH GRIFFITHS . I live at 5, Portland Place, Deptford, and am a traveller to a pewter manufacturer—in April last I was at the Greenwich County Court; I heard the case of "Musgrave v. Griffiths"—we all adjourned to a public-house—I saw the defendant and prosecutor there—Moody asked me
what I thought of my brother's case—he said "Me and your brother do our little friendly concerns together"—that was because I thought the case was going against him—he said it would be all right, it would be settled—he lost the action—we again adjourned to the Prince of Orange public-house to have some tea, and afterwards a conversation took place at my brother's house about the bill of sale, and I advised him to destroy it.
Cross-examined. Q. This is the first time you have appeared to give evidence? A. Yes.
The prisoner received a good character.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BRINDLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. POLAND the Defence.
GEORGE JOHN ALEXANDER FAIRBURN . I am in service at Brockley Hall, Lewisham, as head gardener to Mr. Nokes—the prisoner was under gardener—I had known him some two years previous to going there—we were on good terms, and had no quarrel—on 4th September I was in the gardener's house, asleep, on the bed up stairs—I had a straw hat over my face—I heard a report between 2.0 and 2.20, that awoke me, frightened—I thought I felt it over my head that something had struck me—I jumped off the bed to go down stairs, and a second shot was discharged over my shoulders—I was struck in the shoulder—I went down stair into the kitchen—on my return, up stairs, I saw the prisoner in the little room, with the door shut, adjoining the room in which I had been asleep—I pushed the door, and he seemed to hold it slightly—I asked him what he had shot me for—he followed me down stairs into the kitchen—I said "I never have done you any harm"—he said he did not mean to shoot me—he went down on his knees, with his hands together, and begged to be forgiven—he said he had a feeling come over him that he must shoot the gardener, and that he got the gun, and did not remember any more—he was sober—there was only one barrel loaded when I last used the gun, on the Sunday morning—the other had been loaded—he seemed a little sleepy and confused—I have never noticed anything peculiar about him since I have known him—I worked with the prisoner at Sir Joseph Hawley's, and had him under me there.
Cross-examined. Q. You saw a letter that he had been writing? A. Yes, it was lying on the kitchen table—he had commenced that before I went up stairs—we parted quite good friends, and I wished him to call me in half an hour—I knew him to be a quiet, well-conducted young fellow—we always dined together—I made the remark to the coachman what a happy Sunday we had spent together—he wanted to wash my wounds—he worked for a Mr. Williams before I engaged him—(The letter written by prisoner was read; it was a sensible letter, addressed in very affectionate terms, to his grandmother and grandfather)—I do not know that he was employed in hot houses at Mr. Williams'—the gun was not usually kept loaded.
GEORGE ELSTONE (Policeman P 26). On Sunday, the 4th, I was fetched by the coachman, to Brockley Hall—I saw the prosecutor and prisoner sitting down together in the house—I told prisoner I should take him to the station for shooting the prosecutor—he said "Really, I don't know anything about it"—I cautioned him that anything he said would be used against him—he said he was sitting down, writing a letter, when he felt faint and queer, and at once something told him he must shoot George;
be got up from the table, took the gun that was standing in the cupboard and went up stairs, and he did not remember anything more until he saw George's head bleeding, and he found he had shot him—he was perfectly sober and rational—he conversed with me to the station as reasonably as I am doing now—this is the gun, and this is the prosecutor's hat that he was wearing (produced)—the hat is shattered, and blown right out of the side.
ARTHUR BEADELS . I am a Member of the Royal College of Surgeons—I live at 11, Park Road, Forest Hill—I was sent for to Brockley Hall on 4th September—I found a gun-shot wound in the right side of the prosecutor's head, and also one in the left shoulder; but the wounds were such that it could not have been caused by the full charge—the full charge, I saw in the room, had gone over his head about half an inch—when prosecutor was standing up, the other gun must have been fired from his head about 3 yds.—there were fifteen or twenty shots in his shoulder, altogether—I saw the hat—a very slight alteration in the direction would have been his death, especially the first shot—I dressed his wounds, and have attended to him since.
Cross-examined. Q. It was a very small room? A. Yes—he could only have received the outside of the charge, it could not have been the full charge.
EMILY BETTS . I am wife of Thomas Betts, coachman at Brockley Hall—on Friday, 2nd September, the prisoner came and asked me for some paper, and asked if my husband had any caps—he came over in a quarter of an hour, and I gave him these.
NOT GUILTY . Ordered to be detained till Her Majesty's pleasure be made known
Before Lord Chief Baron Kelly.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE, with MESSRS. POLAND and BBASLET, conducted the Prosecution; and MESSRS. RIBTON and PATER the Defence.
CHARLES WILLIAM INMAN . I am clerk to Messrs. Wontner & Sons, solicitors, who are acting in this matter as agents for Her Majesty's Trea-sury—on 11th August I served upon each of the prisoners a notice to produce, of which this is a duplicate—(This was a notice to produce various documents referred to in the evidence.)
ROBERT TASSIE COWEN . I live at 1, Langholme Villas, Loughborough Road, North Brixton—I am a musician, and hold an appointment in one of the volunteer regiments—I have a daughter named Janet Tassie Cowen—she is unmarried, and is now seventeen years of age—in April, this year, she was in the family-way—in consequence of that she went to 164, Camberwell Road, to be confined; at a midwife's, Mrs. Castle or Mrs. Barton's; the name of Barton was on the door—my daughter was confined on 14th May—before her confinement I endeavoured to find a place to send the child to—some time early in May I saw this advertisement in Lloyd's Newspaper of 1st May—I saw it on the day of the issue of the paper—I answered that advertisement to a certain address, and afterwards received this letter (produced) by post—I wrote another letter, and afterwards went to the
Camberwell Station; no one came there—I then received another letter, making an appointment at the Brixton Railway Station—I think I destroyed that letter—I went to the Brixton Railway Station—I can't say the day of the month—I think it was on the Thursday after the advertisement—I there saw the prisoner Waters—I saw her arrive by a train from the City—I had the letter with me.
THOMAS BASSETT . I am a clerk in the advertising department of Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper—I produce a number of manuscript advertisement, there are twenty-seven of them—I know both the prisoners—I have seen them at our office a great many times, sometimes together, and sometimes separately; they brought manuscript advertisements, and paid for them, 5s. each; they were afterwards printed in the ordinary way in the paper—I can speak to these drafts which I produce as being brought by them—I can't speak to all of them; some of them were brought by them—these papers of 1st May and 5th June, were published by us on those dates—I have the two drafts of the advertisements appearing in those papers on those days—I can't say which of the prisoners brought them—I can speak to one of an earlier date.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you received advertisements of a similar kind before 1st May? A. Oh yes, for years, from other persons, who professed to take the care of very young children; from a great many different person—I have seen the prisoners together at our place two or three-times—I can't say whether I had known them before 1st May; that may have been the first time I saw them—I can't say how many times I saw either of them subsequently to the 1st May—I was not called upon to identify them when they were in custody—I believe Sergeant Relf communicated first with me in reference to this; not with me, with our manager—I was not told that there were two women in custody whom I was required to identify; it way that I was to produce the manuscript of the advertisements—I was not taken to see the prisoners, or examined as to their identity—I saw them at the Lambeth Police Court—I was desired to go there by a gentleman from the Treasury, I believe, to take two manuscript copies of advertisements—I saw the prisoners there, at the bar—I was not asked to identify them—I recognized them at once, directly I saw them at the bar—I don't know the dates at which I saw them at our office; I saw them there regularly every week, either one or the other, in April, May, and June, and earlier than that, from January, 1869, to June, 1870—I never saw them anywhere else—I can't swear positively that I saw either of them to fore 1st May in the present year; not to identify them—I can't say that I saw either of them between 1st May and 10th June—I saw one or other, or both, almost every week for more than a year, or thereabouts—I saw them regularly week by week—I have not the slightest doubt they are the persons I saw; I swear that positively—we have had advertisements of the same sort spread over a number of years, from persons professing to undertake the care of children—I can't give any notion of the number of different persona that I have received such advertisements from; a great many—I could not undertake to identify them all, because we had a great many from different persons, who came one week and did not come another.
MR. RIBTON. Q. How often have you seen her write? A. Only once, I saw her write a receipt to me for a hood and shawl, and a receipt for three pawn tickets, on Goth August—she wrote it all—(Read: "August 6.
Received from Sergeant Relf one hood and one shawl, Margaret Waters,") and this receipt for three pawn tickets.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Just look at those twenty-seven advertisements, do you believe them to be in the handwriting of Waters? A. I believe them to be in the handwriting of either one or the other—I do Dot know Ellis's handwriting—I believe this advertisement of 1st May to be Waters' writing, and also this one of 5th June, and these letters of 2nd May.
Cross-examined. Q. Where was show when she wrote these receipts? A. In Horsemonger Lane Gaol—I did not make her write them for the purpose of getting her handwriting—it was in answer to a letter that I received from her—I took the hood and shawl to the prison in consequence of the letter, and also the three pawn tickets, and delivered them to her, and she gave me these receipts.
(The advertisement in the paper of 1st May, 1870, was read as follows: Adoption.—A respectable couple desire the entire charge of a child to bring up as their own. They are in a position to offer every comfort. Premium required, 4l. Letter only. Mrs. Willis, P.O., Southampton Street, Camberwell.")
ROBERT TASSIE COWEN (continued). I answered that advertisement to that rawness and address, and received this letter in reply—(Read: "To J. P. W., Fenton's Post Office, Brixton. Monday, 2nd May. Sir, In reply to your letter, beg to say we are not willing to give our address. In taking a child we wish to do so entirely, never to be claimed. We have been married many jean, but are without family, and have determined upon bringing a little one up as our own. My constant care shall be for the child, and everything which will be for the child's comfort shall be strictly studied. Should you think more of this, and will write saying where and when I can see you and how I shall know you, we shall feel obliged. We have had several letters, so are anxious to decide which child we shall take. Yours respectfully, M. Willis.")—On the receipt of that letter I wrote an answer, and went to the Camberwell Railway Station, but did not see either of the prisoners—the next morning I received another letter—I think I tore it up on my way to the station—it was precisely in the same handwriting as the one of 2nd May—it was making an appointment for that day at the Brixton Station, at 1 o'clock—I am almost positive I tore it up after reading it—I am quite positive I have not got it now—it was signed M. Willis, the same as the previous one—in consequence of that I went to the Brixton Railway Station, and saw the prisoner, Waters come by a train from the City—I had in my hand the letter I had" received that morning—I must have been in error when I said I tore it up on my way to the station—I tore it up after I met the prisoner—I addressed her as Mrs. Willis (I had previously spoken to the ticket collector)—she replied "Mr. Cowen"—we then sat down, and she said "I have had the letter," and I then told her the circumstances about my daughter, I told her that my daughter had been outraged, that she had left me early in the year on a visit, at sixteen years of age, that the child was not yet born, but that it would be in about a fortnight, and she was then at Mrs. Castle's, waiting to be confined—I said, "I mention these circumstances so that you may not adopt an illegitimate child without knowing it"—she replied, "That will make no difference with me"—she then told we that her husband was a representative of a shipbuilding firm, that they
had been married thirteen years, and were without family, and were extremely anxious to adopt a child as their own—she still refused to give me her address, but said she would do so after a short time—she said she should not like the child to be taken from them after they had learnt to love it, or words to that extract—she said that the name she hood signed in her letter was not her name, but the would also give me that when she gave me her address—I said as doom as the child was born I would communicate with her, at the same post-office in Camberwell—I gave her my name and address—she laughed, and said "How funny, I live within a stone's throw of you, and I can almost see your house from my windows"—we then separated at the station—my daughter was confined on the Saturday week following, the 14th May, of a male child, and on the Sunday or Monday I wrote by post to the name and address given in the advertisement announcing it (The letter was called for bed not produced) it was merely to inform her of the birth of the child, and requesting her to call at my residence—she did call on the Tuesday, the 7th, between 2 and 3 o'clock in the afternoon—I told her of the birth of the child—she asked when she could have it—I replied "When will it be convenient for you to take it?"—she said "To night," and an appointment was made for 9.30 that evening, at the Walworth Station, to receive the child—that same night I went to Mrs. Castle's, 164, Camberwell Road, with my land-lady, Mrs. Guerra, who brought out the baby, and I went with her in a cub to the Walworth Road Station—Waters had not arrived—we waited there forty minutes, she then came—she looked at the baby and admired it—she said it was a beautiful child, and she wrapped it up in a large shawl and took it away—she promised to call on me in two or three days—it was about 10.15 when she took charge of the baby—I believe there never was born a more healthy child, so I was told; I don't know, myself, I did not look at it—Waters did not give me any address at that time, she was to call on me—she did call two or three days afterwards—it was on the Tuesday she took the child, and she called I think on the Friday following; I saw her and asked how the child was—she said she was delighted with it, it was a beautiful baby, and that her husband was equally fond of it, "In fact," she said, "it is all a boy"—I then asked when she would bring it, when I could see it she said she was busy making nice clothes for it, naming certain articles, I forget what they were, a hood, a pelisse, and something—I said "Allow me to make it a present of those"—she said "No, I don't require it, I have bought the materials, and I am having them made up"—I then took two sovereigns from my purse and put them on the table before her—she pushed them back to me, and refused to take them, saying "I know you have taken at a great expense, and I won't take it"—she got up to go away and I forced the 2l. upon her, and as she left the room she returned with the 2l. in her hand, offering it back to me—I refused it, and told her to spend it on the child, and when she brought me the child I would give her 2l. more—she then left, and took the 2l. with her—during the whole of the interview she was speaking in praise of the child—as she was going away she said "I pass nearly every day, and I suppose if I call with it you won't turn me away"—I said I should be glad to see her, and it, at any time she called—she did not call again I neither saw or heard of her afterwards—up to that time I did not know where she lived—on the Thursday in the following week, the 26th, toe officer Keef called upon mo—I told him the facts, and in consequence of
what he said I wrote a letter to the name and address mentioned in the advertisement—I posted it in the regular way; it came back to roe through the dead letter office—on Friday, 10th June, at Relfs request, I met him at the Camberwell New Road Station, and there saw the prisoner Ellis—I noticed that she had on the same dress that I had seen on Waters—Relf spoke to her, not in my presence—I afterwards followed her to 4 or 5, Frederick Terrace, Gordon Grove, Holland Road, Brixton; that is about seven minutes' walk from my house, by the public road, but you can walk it across the fields in two or three minutes less—I did not go into the house that night—next morning, Saturday, the 11th, I went to that same house with Keif and Mrs. Guerra—I waited outside, and they went in; in about half an hour they came out and made a communication to me, and we walked along the road past my house—in about an hour afterwards I went to the house and found Relf and Dr. Puckle there, and both the prisoners, and they both had babies in their arms—Waters had the baby that was represented to be my daughter's—I noticed the state it was in, it was nearly dead—I said to her "You appear to be murdering this child"—she said "All I received from you, Mr. Cowen, was 2l., was it not"—I said "Don't speak to me, I won't answer you"—I did not speak to her any more—she was speaking to Dr. Puckle, telling him what food she had given the child, but I really don't recollect what she said—I said to Dr. Puckle, in her presence, "What can be done to save this child?"—he said "A wet nurse"—I sent for one at once, Mrs. Rowland, I remained there till she came—Dr. Puckle, at my request, examined her to see that she was in a proper condition to suckle the child, and the child was given up to her—Waters told me it was the child she had received from me as my daughter's—Mrs. Rowland took it away to her own place to nurse it—I requested Dr. Puckle to attend it—it died on 24th June, a fortnight after—I did not know the child by any name—I did not register it, I wrote to the Registrar to do so—when I was at the prisoner's house I saw ten other children there besides the one I was interested in—I was not at all aware, when she took charge of my daughter's child, that she had other children.
Cross-examined. Q. I suppose, in point of fact, you did not ask her whether she had any other children or not; nothing was said upon the subject? A. There was some conversation of that sort, but it was with reference to children belonging to her sister—she said her sister had a family; that was at the second interview—I had not asked her any question—she volunteered the statement that her sister had a family—I really forget whether she said how many—that was all that was said with reference to family—I did not ask her any more questions—Mrs. Castle is the name of the woman where my daughter was confined—I found her out by an advertisement which was pointed out to me—the child was born on Saturday, 14th May—Mrs. Guerra, my landlady, went with me for the child on the Tuesday following—the distance from that house to the railway station where I met Mrs. Waters, is abduct a mile—we were out altogether about forty minutes before she came—it was not a cold night—I did not make inquiries about her, or attempt to find her out until the policeman called upon me—it was only a few days—she was to have called upon me again—if you understand that I should have taken no further trouble about it, you understand wrong—the only sum of money that was mentioned was 4l., in the advertisement—on my first interview with Waters at the Camberwell Station, when I told her of the circumstances of my daughter, she
said "I want no money; I have merely mentioned the 4l. nominally, to keep a number of applicants from applying"—when I gave her the 2l. subsequently, it was I who first mentioned money—it was not at her solicitation at all—I proposed to make it a present to the child for the clothes she was about to supply—I was in a position to have paid her the 4l. if she had required it, or more—there was no offer made to give her clothes—a parcel of clothes was delivered to her with the child on the night she got it, not by me—I don't know what it consisted of.
CAROLINE GUERRA . I am a widow, and live at 4, Langholme Villas—Mr. Cowen lodges at my house—I remember the prisoner Waters coming there in the early part of May; I can't tell whether it was the 17th, it was on a Tuesday—Mr. Cowen asked me to see her in his presence—when I went into the room she was there with him—he addressed her as Mrs. Willis, and she answered to that name—she said she wished very much for a child, that she had been married a great number of years, and had no family, told both her husband and her were very anxious to have one to adopt and bring up as their own, and they were both passionately fond of children—it ended in some arrangement being made that she was to take the child—that same evening I went with Mr. Cowen to Mrs. Castle's, and took the baby from Mrs. Castle's to the Walworth Road railway station—Mr. Cowen and I went together in a cab, and Waters met us there—Miss Cowen was confined on 14th May—I was present at her confinement, and saw the child; it was a very fine, healthy child indeed, and was so when I took it away—it was not expensively clothed; it had sufficient clothing, and there was a small parcel given with the child—when I handed the child to Waters, she looked at it, and said what a beautiful baby it was; she wit delighted with it, and said it should have every care and attention possible—she took it away with the small parcel of clothes—I saw her again on the following Thursday, the 19th, at my house, with Mr. Cowen—she said both her and her husband were very delighted with the child, it was a beautiful baby; that they were both very much attached to children, that she would do everything in her power for it, and she had been buying it a bassinet, a baby's basket, and a nursing chair—Mr. Cowen then offered her 2l., which she refused, and said that she did not require either money or clothes, all that she wanted was a baby that she could bring up as her own, that they were in a very good position—she eventually took the 2l.—she said she would come again in two or three days, and Mr. Cowen said she should then have the other 2l.—she said it was not money she wished for at all, she did not wish for any money—she did not come again—I did not see her again till Saturday, 11th June, when I went to the house, 4 or 5, Frederick Terrace, with Sergeant Keif—I did not go up to the door with Relf, I waited some little distance off till he beckoned me; I then went in—Relf asked Ellis for Miss Cowen's baby—she said that her sister was not there, and she did not know anything of Miss Cowen's baby—Relf said he; should not leave the house till he saw it, he knew that she was there, and he insisted on the baby being brought forward—she then went to the top of the stairs, and called "Margaret, bring Miss Cowen's baby," and Mrs. Willis then came in with the baby in her arms—by Mrs. Willis I mean the prisoner Waters, the same person to whom I had given the child at the station—it was in a most emaciated condition—I said "Mrs. Willis, you must have been starving this child to death"—she said "Pray don't say such a thing as that, for I have taken every possible core of the child; it
has been very ill, suffering from diarrhoea;" she said that she had had a doctor attending it, and she had also spoken, the day before, for a wet-nurse for the child—I did not take much notice how the child was clothed at that time, I only noticed its appearance generally, it was so dreadfully emaciated and deplorable—I then 'went away, and returned to the house later in the day with some things for the child—on that occasion I went down to the lower room of the house, what they call a breakfast parlour, below the level of the earth; the front kitchen—the room I had been in before was the parlour—in that lower room I saw four or five infants—I think there were three on a couch, and two on chairs, on a bed made up for them—I saw four other children out in the back yard—they were older, I should say from two to three years old; one was four years old—they were merely running about, playing—I asked Waters, who went down with me, what on earth she could want with taking Miss Cowen's child, already having such a number there—she said that the others were children that were paid for weekly, and they were taken away from her after some time; but she wished Miss Cowen's child to be brought up entirely as her own—I knew, at that time, that the child had been removed from the house in the morning—she said she had done everything that was possible in her power for the child—this was about 4 o'clock in the day—I remained there about ten minutes—I saw a child in Ellis's arms; she said it was her own baby.
Q. Will you give a description of Miss Cowen's child when you saw it just before it was taken away? A. It had scarcely a bit of flesh on its bones, and the only thing I should have known it by was the hair; it was not crying or making any noise, not any of them, that I heard; it appeared to be dying almost; it could not make any noise, it was much too weak, I think, to make the slightest sound; it was scarcely human, it looked more like a monkey than a child—when it was born it was a very fine fat baby, and when I saw it there it was a shadow, not a bit of flesh on its bones—it would be much lighter in weight.
Cross-examined. Q. Are you married? A. I have been, I am a widow—I have had a child—this child was never suckled at all—I don't know that taking it away three days after birth, and bringing it up by hand, would be attended with very considerable danger—there are many children brought up by hand that are very healthy—no doubt many are lost—I have not Lad much experience of children—Mrs. Castle handed me the child—I saw the mother—the child was handed to me in the same room with the mother—at that time it was very well indeed—it was dressed the same as all other babies, I suppose; it had everything that was requisite—I don't know that I saw a child named Rose at Mrs. Waters'—there was one baby there which they said was only three or four days old, that was a very nice baby indeed—I think Waters said she had only had it the day before—she told me she bad seen a woman the day before, and she was coming again on that day to take Miss Cowen's child to wet-nurse—she did not mention her name—Mrs. Rowland was the wet-nurse that came neit day and took the child away—I believe Mr. Cowen had sent for her on the Saturday morning.
MARIA EDWARDS CASTLE . I am the wife of William George Castle, and live at 164, Camberwell Road—I am a midwife—the name up outside is "Mrs. Barton, Accoucheuse"—that refers to me—the young woman, Janet Tassie Cowen, came to my house on 18th April, for the purpose of being confined—I attended upon her—she remained until 2nd May, and went
away not confined—she returned on 14th May, and oil that day was confined of a male child—I attended her in her confinement—it was a very fine baby—nobody but myself attended her at the birth—the child was taken away on the 17th May; up to that time it had been fed with milk and water and loaf sugar—it was taken away by Mrs. Guerra—it was quite well then—the food appeared to nourish it, it digested well, it never returned-Miss Cowen remained with me till the 28th—the child was registered in my presence by the Registrar that morning, I think in the name of John Walter—on Monday, 13th June, I was sent for to the Lambeth Police Court—I went to the Brixton Workhouse, and from there in a cab to Mrs. Rowland's, where I saw the baby—it was in a dreadful state, emaciated and weak, it cried very little—Mrs. Rowland had charge of it—afterwards, at the request of the police, I went to 4, Frederick Place, the prisoner's house—I did not go in, I was in a cab with Mrs. Rowland and the baby—another child was brought out and given to me in the cab—I was at the Police Court with the children the whole day—I assisted in removing another child from the prisoner's house to Lambeth Workhouse—(Upon the witness being asked alto the state of this other child, MR. RIBTON submitted that it was not relevant to the issue; the sole question for the Jury was whether this particular child met it death in consequence of the negligence, intentional or otherwise, of the prisoners.
THE LORD CHIEF BARON could not exclude evidence of the treatment of other children who were in the prisoner's cltarge at the same time as the deceased; at the same time, he should warn the Jury not to be influenced by anything done to other children, except as it would tend to throw light upon the question, whether the deceased child met its death in consequence of the treatment to which it was subjected)—The other child that was given to me was about three weeks old—it was in a very dirty condition, and in a sleep that it was impossible to wake it from the whole time it was under my care, which was from about 10 o'clock in the morning, till 4 or 5 o'clock in the afternoon, when it was left at the workhouse—it was considered the second worst came—it did not cry at all—it was the last baby that died at the workhouse—all the children came under my observation on the 13th—I took part in their removal; there were five cabs and several women engaged in removing them—altogether ten children were removed from the prisoners' house to the Police Court, including Miss Cowen's child—I forget how many of them were babies—they were all in a similar state—one child, about three months old, looked very well—four babies appeared to be in an unhealthy condition—they were all asleep—they roused a little and took their bottles a little at the police-station—that was nut so with all of them, two would not suck at all.
Cross-examined. Q. How long have you been in the habit of receiving ladies? A. Five years—during that period I have received a great many; I am in the habit of advertising—and those advertisements bring me the ladies—some stay with me five, or six, or seven months—I have two or three in the house at the same time—I don't know what becomes of the babies, they are taken away sometimes; I can't say in the same way this child was—I know nothing about them after they leave me—(MR. RIBTON proposed to ask the witness whether, in lier experience, sums of money were often obtained from persons wishing to adopt children. THE LORD CHIEF BARON considered that any answer to such a question would be inadmissible; no practice or system of procuring children for the purpose of selling them could affect the pre-sent case; if it could be proved that that was that object in this particular
instance it might be admissible, but it was not competent to the witness to prove the existence of such a practice. A further question at to whether the witness herself had not obtained turns of 60l. and 100l. for that purpose was also decided to be inadmissible)—When this child was removed it was in its nightdress; children never wear anything else at that age—it was well wrapped up; it had on a set of proper baby linen, with a flannel square, and a good shawl—the child that was about three months old, was a very nice baby, it was wide awake; that was the only one of the babies that looked well, the others were all under a month old, I should think, from their appearance—I saw nine, not at the house, at the police-station—I should think the oldest was about three years and a half, that was a very nice boy, a fine, healthy, strong child—there was another little boy about two and a half—he was very thin, but be appeared well and strong, running about; and there was a little girl, about fourteen months old, fat and well, and two others about eighteen months old—I can't say whether they were boys or girls; one of them looked very pale and sickly, the other did not appear to be ill; it did not look very well, nor yet very ill—there were five, I think, running about; no, two were running about, and the other three were sitting the whole time—they were all right, I did not see anything particular the matter with them, they ate and drank plenty; they were hungry, of course, they had not had their breakfast when we took them away—I had not known Mrs. Waters before this—I know she lived in Addington Square about six years ago—I have seen her there—I don't think I knew her—I called on her from an advertisement that appeared in the Telegraph, to take a child to nurse for one of my patients, but it was not placed with her—I don't know why—there was only one interview—that was the only transaction I had with her, and that is six years ago—the did not take the child; we did no business together, at any rate—she did not decline to take it, my patient declined to give it her, on account of the terms, I think; but I really cannot remember so long back.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. There had been an advertisement in the Telegraph which one of your patients had seen? A. Yes; and in consequence of that I waited on Mrs. Waters—I had never seen or known her before—I don't know what name I asked for; I think it was an initial, at 21, Southampton Street, a stationer's shop—she said it was her advertisement.
ANN ROWLAND . I am the wife of Henry Rowland, of 14, Alma Terrace, Camberwell—on Saturday, 11th June, I was sent for to 4, Frederick Terrace; a servant came—I went there, and received a child from Mr. Cowen, which I was to treat as a wet-nurse—that was the first time I had seen it—it was very dirty and very thin; it had on all new clothes—its person was dirty, I could not get it clean up to the day of its death—it was dirty at the bottom, the thighs, and underneath its arms, and behind its ears was very bad—it did not look as if it had ever been washed—it was dirty behind from not being washed after its evacuations, and under the arms and behind the ears, where children most need washing—it had on a nightgown and flannel, a napkin, a roller, and a flannel belly-band—they had never been washed—they appeared as if they had been recently put on, just as they had been bought—the child's person was wet, and when I came to wash him he was very sore—the child was very thin, his bones were coming through—it could not cry or make the noise of a child of that age—it was asleep—it continued in that state four or five hours before I could rouse it—I
tried—I took it home with me to nurse and to take care of—I have been married twenty years—I had been confined seven weeks at this time—I have had four children, and have brought them up—I have never seen a child in a condition that I could not rouse it or wake it up in four or five hours; I never saw any child in that condition before—I gave it the breast every ten minutes or quarter of an hour—it would just rouse and take the breast—I first gave it the breast four or five hours after it was put into my hands; as soon as it could take it; as soon as it was sensible—the child improved for two or three days; it took the breast very eagerly, and got on well for three or four days, and then fell off—it kept gradually going off after the third or fourth day into the same state of stupor or insensibility—I did all I could for it—Dr. Puckle attended it every day whilst it was with me, and I followed his directions—the child died on 24th June—I had it the whole time, from the 11th to its death—it was under my care and the directions of Dr. Puckle all that time, and everything that could he was done for it.
Cross-examined. Q. You say you were sent for on the Saturday? A. Yes—I had not had any communication from either of the prisoners before that Saturday—I never saw them till the morning I was sent for—I had seen Mrs. Ellis come in for the washing, but I had never said anything to her—I had never been to the house before the Saturday—my daughter was there on the Friday, and she came home and told me that Mrs. Waters wanted me to take a baby to wet-nurse, but she did not come home till late at night, as we were going to bed—her name is Eliza White; she is married—she had been working for Mrs. Waters; I can't say how long—that was the first time my daughter had ever spoken to me about being required as a wet-nurse—the name of the child was not mentioned, nor the sex—my daughter asked me to go there in the morning as soon as I could—in the morning, about 10 o'clock, I was sent for again, and found it was for this child; I saw Mrs. Waters; she asked me to take the child, and then Sergeant Relf came in—I took charge of the child about an hour or as hour and a half after 10—Sergeant Relf was not there when I first went; he came in about five minutes after me—Mrs. Waters told me the child was suffering from thrush and diarrhoea; that was just as Relf was coming in—she said she thought the child required to be suckled, and asked me to undertake it; I did not come to an arrangement as to terms; the sergeant came in before woo could finish the arrangement—I did not see her wash or dress the child—she put the clothes on it; that was after the sergeant came in, while he was up stairs—thrush is a disease that children suffer from—it was suffering from thrush; that and the dirt accounted for the state of its hinder parts; it was also suffering from diarrhoea—some persons use fuller's earth and some use powder for children in that state—I don't think it had been applied to the child, or it would not have been so bad—I took it home to suckle—I suckled my own child at the same time—I had plenty of milk for the two—the bringing up of children by hand is attended with danger to a great many—some thrive, and a great many do not—my own is a healthy child, a fine baby—I am suckling it still, and have always suckled it—I don't think that the taking the child away from its mother at night, to be fed by band, would be likely to endanger its health; if it was well wrapped up it would not catch cold—if it did catch cold, it would not be attended with great danger—Waters did not tell me that the child had had a severe cold
—it had a little cough—none of my children were brought up by hand—both the children slept with me—I made a little bed at the aide for my own, and kept Cowen's child in bed with me—for the first two or three days it seemed to improve—I can't account for the change after three days—it took the breast up to within the last two days of its death—it kept taking the breast very eagerly.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Did it appear to be suffering from cold when you took it? A. No, the symptoms were those of diarrhoea and thrush—thrush is a disease of the mouth and the other extremity—I could not get the child clean, he was so weak and so bad—the dirt did not arise from the diarrhoea; but from not being washed—Its breath smelt very bad; I don't know of what.
MR. RIBTON. Q. After you commenced to suckle it, did the diarrhoea cease? A. After two or three days—I don't attribute that to the suckling—Dr. Puckle gave me some stuff to stop the diarrhoea—it did not stop for a few days—it did not stop altogether, it got a little better, and then it went off.
RICHARD RELF (re-examined.) In consequence of instructions I received I watched the house of Mrs. Castle, the midwife—I found out that Miss Cowen had been confined—I subsequently saw this advertisement in Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper, on 5th June—(Read: "Adoption. A good home, with a mother's love and care, is offered to any respectable person wishing his child to be entirely adopted; premium 5l., which sum includes everything. Apply by letter only, to Mrs. Oliver, P.O., Gore Place, Brixton "On 8th June I wrote a letter to that address, and on the following day received this letter (produced)—I replied, making an appointment to meet the writer—I received no answer to that, and wrote another on the 9th, appointing a meeting at the Camberwell New Road Railway Station—I went there, and met the prisoner Ellis—I told her that I wished to put a child of mine out to adopt—she said she would be happy to receive it—I asked where she lived—she said she could tell me so far, that she and her husband lived in the neighbourhood of Herne Hill, and that he was a house decorator and painter, in a large way of business—at that time I had toe letter dated the 8th in my hand—I held it up in my hand and said "Are you Mrs. Oliver?"—she said "I am; are you Mr. Martin—I said "I am"—I had taken the name of J. Martin—I said "I have received this letter, is it yours f'—she said "It is"—(Letter read: "To J. Martin. P.O., Southampton Street, Camberwell; Wednesday, June 8th. Sir. In reply to your letter, I beg to say that it would give me great pleasure to adopt, as my own, your little boy, if he is not too old. You omitted to state the child's age, and I wish for one as young as possible, that it may know none but ourselves as its parents. The child would be well brought up, and carefully educated; he would learn a good trade, and be to us in all respects as our own. We have been married several years; but have no family. We are in a comfortable position, have a good business, and a home in every way calculated to make a child happy. We arc both very fond of children; and should you entrust your little one to my care, you may rely upon his receiving the love and care of a mother. Any place you like to appoint for an interview will suit me. I can meet you at any time or place, and should he very glad to have the matter settled as soon as possible. Hoping to have an early reply, I am, Sir, respectfully yours, K. Oliver")—There is no address on the letter—I asked her if she could satisfy me where she lived
—she said "I can't do that; but I will tell you thus far, that it ie in the neighbourhood of Heron Hill;" but she said she did not like anyone to come and claim the child after she had got it—she said she had been married several years, and had had no family; that they wished particularly to get a child to bring up as their own; and if I entrusted my child to her care, it would have a mother's love; it would learn a good trade, and no doubt have her husband's business in time—I promised to bring the child and 5l. on the following night, between 9 and 10 o'clock, and asked where I should meet her with it—Mr. Cowen was in the neighbourhood it this time, so that he might see the woman—I then parted with her, and went into the railway station—this took place at the Camberwell New Road Railway Station—I was to bring the child to her between that station. and the railway arch, and she told me to bring as many clothes with it as I could get—after parting with her I turned and followed her; she turned the corner of the Camberwell New Road; and as I followed I met her returning again, at the corner of a public-house—I invited her to come in and take a glass of ale, and I had some convention with her, and afterwards I traced her to her home, 4, Frederick Terrace, Gordon Grove, Brixton—I saw her go indoors, about 9.30—I passed the house twice within about five minutes—I am not aware that anybody saw me—on the following morning I went to the house, accompanied by Mrs. Guerra and Mr. Cowen, but he remained outside—I went to the door and knocked; it was opened by Mrs. Ellis—the house was a very nice house outside, but there was hardly any furniture in it, and it smelt very offensively—there were six rooms, including the two kitchens, two room on a floor—the basement story consisted of a front and back kitchen—there was a front and back room on the ground floor, and two bed rooms on the floor above that, and a small ante-room—the basement floor was below the surface of the room; that was furnished, there was a sofa, and table, and chair—the house smelt badly; that applied more particularly to the base-ment story, and the bed-rooms—on the ground floor there was hardly a vestige of furniture—when Ellis opened the door, I said "Does Mrs. Willis live here?"—she said "No"—I said "Do you take children in here to adopt f—she said "No, what put that in your head—I said "Is Miss Cowen's child here?"—she said "No, but I know where it is; will you step in and wait?"—I said "No, I shall not leave you a second till Miss Cowen's child is produced"—she then took us into the front room on the ground floor, and called out "Margaret, bring up Miss Cowen's child," and a child was brought up by the prisoner Waters; it was very emaciated, and very dirty, in fact, filthy—it was wrapped up in some old clothes, and was a mere skeleton, mere skin and bone—it was quite quiet, and did not appear to have power to cry, or make any noise—Mrs. Guerra said "You have been starving this child to death"—Waters said the child had been ill, and had been attended by Dr. Harris; that it had plenty of milk, which her milk bills would show—I then asked her if she had got any more children in the house, and she said "A few"—I said "I should like to see them"—she said I could, and I went down stairs into the front kitchen; when I first went in I saw nothing, but I thought I could see something that looked like the shape of a head under some black clothes on a sofa—at last I removed some clothing from the sofa, and there laid five infants, all huddled up together—the clothing I removed was some old black stuff like an old shawl—three of the infant were lying on their sides along the sofa, all close
together; the other two laid on their backs, with their mouth open, at the lower end of the sofa—they were all together, only the three were more towards the head of the sofa, and the others lower down; all five lay in the same direction—they were all quiet, and all appeared to be asleep from some cause—they all had some clothing on, infant's clothes, and very dirty indeed, saturated with wet, and smelt very offensively—I did not see any appearance of food about—two of the infants appeared to me to be dying, the two that were lying on their backs; they were in an emaciated condition—I did nothing towards awaking them at that time—I said "To whom do these children belong?"—Waters said she did not know who the parents were—I said "Are these some more by adoption?"—she said "Yes"—I then said, in the presence of Ellis, "Have you any more?"—she said "Yet, a few; there are some older ones in the yard"—I went into the back yard, and there found five more; they appeared in better condition, one boy was a very fine child—I said to Waters "These children look better, how do you account for that?"—she said "We have so much a week with these"—I then left the house, and fetched Dr. Puckle, the medical officer of the parish—I returned to the house in about two hours with Dr. Puckle, and Mr. Cowen—I believe we were again let in by Ellis, but I am not positive—little Cowen was brought into the room; it was not in the same condition in which I had seen it before; it was cleaned up, I mean it had got clean clothes on—I did not observe any difference in any part of its person—I noticed the child's head particularly, for I have children of my own, and it did not appear to me that its head had ever been washed—the child was very dirty, particularly about the head; it had a good crop of hair, but it looked like a shrivelled up monkey—it was in the same state as before, it did not appear more lively—Mr. Cowen said "Mrs. Willis, you have been murdering this child, "and he shed tears when he saw it—Waters said that the had not; the child had been ill, and she had had Dr. Harris to attend to it; and also that she was going to put it out to wet-nurse that day—I then went down stairs; I found the five infants still there—they had all got nice' clean clothes on then, and were laid in rows on the sofa, and feed-ing-bottles by their sides, and teats in their mouths—I believe three were on the sofa, and two in a little crib by the side of the sofa—they did not appear to be in any different state, except the clothes—they were all in this quiet state, apparently asleep; I mean they appeared to be all void of any feeling, in a state of torpor, unconscious, in a state of stupor—I did not see that they were using the bottles; they contained food—I observed this bottle (produced) on the table, with the cork out and lying by it—this was in the kitchen where the infants were—I smelt it and thought it was laudanum—Dr. Puckle also smelt it; he marked the bottle and gave it to me, and it has been preserved—Dr. Puckle said the only way that might save Miss Cowen's child's life was by putting it out to wet-nurse, so that it could have its natural food—Waters said she was going to put it out to wet-nurse that day, and had sent for Mrs. Rowland—Mrs. Rowland was ultimately sent for again, and came, and Cowen's child was delivered over to her—one of the other five infants was the prisoner Ellis's, and that was in the same state as the others; she said it was her child—it was me of the five that laid on the sofa; it was quiet and asleep the same as the rest—Ellis took possession of it, and the other four remained there till Monday; I then came with the divisional surgeon, and had them removed to Lambeth Workhouse—asked Waters if she could tell me who the children belonged to—she said she
could not, she did not know who the fathers or mothers were—I asked her if any of the children had got any names—she said "No"—I said "How long have you been in this business?"—she said "About four years"—I said "How many have you had in that time?"—she said "About forty"—Ellis said "Oh, more than forty"—Waters said "Oh no, say forty"—I asked whether she could tell me what had become of any of the other children—she said some had been sent away, and some took home—she did not tell me where any of them were at that time—I felt it to be my duty to consult my superior officers as to what course I was to pursue; and having done so, I returned to the house on Monday, in company with Tyers, 195, Dr. Pope, and Captain Baynes—the door was opened to us by Waters—I said to her "Mrs. Waters, I shall take you into custody for not providing proper food and nourishment for the illegitimate male child of Janet Tassie Cowen, whereby his life was endangered"—she said "Very well"—she also said that the children had been attended by the doctor, and repeated that they had plenty of milk, which her milk bills would show—at that time Ellis came up stairs—I told her that I should also take her into custody for being concerned with her sister in having four infants in their possession and not providing proper food and nourishment for the same, whereby their lives were endangered—at the station, after the charge was read over to the prisoners, Waters said "Believe me, what my sister has done has been entirely under my direction; I am the sinner, and I must suffer"—they were searched by a female, who handed me seventy-nine pawnbrokers' duplicates and a marriage certificate, a purse containing 11l. odd, and another purse, found on Ellis, containing 5s. 10d.—I sent the whole of the ten children to the Police Court, and nine of them were taken to Lambeth Work-house, Ellis's child remained with her—as the children had no names, they were numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9—after the prisoners were taken into custody I searched their house, and found there seventeen pawntickets, a receipt, and a medical certificate of attendance on 'Waters' husband—I took possession of a quantity of children's clothing and a milk bill, which I produce—I traced two persons who supplied milk to the house—I saw little Cowen constantly afterwards until 24th June, when he died; I saw it about three hours before it died—I saw the other nine children frequently at the workhouse—I did not get the articles out of pledge that the seventy-nine duplicates refer to; I have seen them in pledge, and there are some here—I produce a list of the articles found in the house, and the things are in Court—(The lift consisted of a large quantity of articles of children's clothing)—They were all dirty—I saw the whole of the articles to which the seventy-nine duplicates related—a great number related to furniture—the best part of the articles are here—I have a list of such as relate to babies' clothing, extending from about January last year to May this year; they amount to about 7l. or 8l.—I produce a detailed list of them; they were pledged with a variety of pawnbrokers.
Cross-examined. Q. At what time on the Saturday did you first get to the house? A. About 9.30—I was in plain clothes—Ellis did not know I was a constable—Mrs. Rowland was there when I arrived—I went there as the Mr. Martin that Ellis had met over night—I had not appointed to go—I had seen her as Mrs. Oliver the night before—I had not given her any notice that I intended to come on the Saturday, no doubt my visit was quite unexpected—I went into the front kitchen, where Mrs. Rowland was—the child Cowen was taken away by Mrs. Rowland on that Saturday—I
went again to the house with Mr. Cowen two hours after my first visit—Mrs. Rowland was not there then, she was sent for while I was there, and came—I did not hear her say that she had been sent for before my visit-as near as I can guess it was between 11 and 12 o'clock on the Saturday when she took the child away—I did not see it every day afterwards; I dare. say I saw it five or six times, for I took a great interest in it—I saw it the game night at Mrs. Rowland's—the next time I saw it I was in company with Dr. Pope, on the Monday—the house was taken by Waters in the name of Margaret Blackburn.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Was this agreement (produced) found in the house? A. Yes, it is signed "Margaret Blackburn," to the best of my belief in Waters' writing.
GEORGE PUCKLE, M.D . I am Medical Officer of Health for Lambeth—Brixton is within that district—on Saturday, 11th June, I was called upon by Sergeant Relf—in consequence of what he said I went to 4, Frederick Terrace, shortly after 11 o'clock—I went down stain to the front room, and there found the two prisoners, and five babies, besides one which was Ellis's—they were all together in the front kitchen—Ellis had hers in her arms, the others were lying in a row, three on the sofa and two in a cot adjoining, or in chairs made up as a cot—one of the five was pointed out to me as Miss Cowen's child—Waters took it out of the cot and brought it to me—I examined it minutely, sufficiently to form an opinion—I examined its lower parts; I took the clothes partly off—it had on the ordinary clothes of a baby of that age, a night-dress—they were quite clean—the body of the child was very much emaciated, extremely wasted, the besides almost coming through the skin—it was a miserably wasted child, no flesh hardly on the bones, the bones almost protruding through the skin, and it had that aged appearance in the face which made it difficult to form an opinion of its age; but I took it to be a month old, and I was informed that was its age—it was not a small child with regard to the size of its bones, I should say it had been a fine child, but at the time I saw it, it was no miserably wasted, that it was nothing but skin and bone—it was in a thoroughly insensible state; the eyes were closed, the limbs hung down, and it appeared in a very profound stupor—I raised the eyelids, and found the pupils very much contracted, not in a natural state—I should say that in ordinary sleep the pupils would be somewhat contracted, but they were contracted more than ordinary, very much contracted—I endeavoured to rouse the child, and used considerable endeavour for that proceed it would not at all rouse with a slight endeavour—I should think it was untter my observation on that occasion quite twenty minutes—I succeeded slightly in arousing it, just to show it was not in a natural sleep—neither diarrhoea or thrush would account for the state it was in—my opinion is that the child was in a state of narcotism, arising from the administration of some narcotic poison—laudanum would be the very thing that I should suppose had been administered, from the appearance of the child—it would be a very improper thing to administer to a child—supposing it to have been affected by thrush or diarrhoea, laudanum, to produce insensibility, would be a very improper remedy—it would be difficult to say what amount had been administered, some would be under its influence with a smaller dose than others—I asked Waters about the child having been ill—she said it had suffered from diarrhaea and from thrush—I saw that it had suffered from thrush, but the thrush was somewhat improving—I asked what food she
had given it, and what medicine; she said she had given it no other medicine than what Dr. Harris had ordered; that he had been attending the child, he had seen it previously, and she expected him that day—I asked her if she had given it any sleeping medicine, or any soothing syrup—she said she had not, she said she had given it cornflour, arrowroot, and plenty of milk, as her bills would prove—from the state of the child, I formed an opinion that it had been either improperly fed, or that it had been fed on such food as had not nourished it—I noticed the other children slightly—I noticed one other child; it seemed very ill—they were all very quiet, I did not examine them thoroughly—they were all quite quiet, and it afterwards struck me as being a very remarkable thing that they should be so very quiet for such a length of time—I was in the room I should say nearly half an hour, so as to know that there was no cry all the time, nor any motion of the children—Cowen's child was given to Mrs. Rowland to take charge of—I ascertained that she was a healthy woman, and capable of nursing the child—I thought her a very suitable person, her baby being only seven weeks old—she had sufficient milk for her own baby as well as this one—at the request of Mr. Cowen I attended the child while it was with Mrs. Rowland—I saw it daily—it rallied for a time, it improved for some days, then there was a return of the diarrhoea, but not very excessively, and the child went off again and did not rally; the day before its death it became in an insensible state, with convulsions—it died on 24th June—in my opinion it died of a combined cause, atrophy, or extreme wasting, with exhaustion and congestion of the brain—my judgment has been formed upon a general view of this case, and the cases of the other children—there is no doubt that many children brought up by hand will die of atrophy; still, my judgment would also be formed from what I saw in this case alone, seeing that the child was narcotised at the time I saw it—in my judgment death arose from want of suitable food sufficiently early, and also from the improper administration of a narcotic—many children die that are brought up by hand; I mean a disproportionate number to those that are suckled—I am unable to form a decided opinion as to the proportion—there is no doubt that with great care a larger proportion would be saved—where a number of children are brought up by hand together, the chances of living would be less—I saw very little of the other children who subsequently died; but I heard of their state from the medical men who attended them, and I also saw them several times—they wore under the care of Dr. Bullen, and Dr. Pope also saw them on several occasions, and from what they told me, and from what I saw of them myself, I have formed an opinion of the cause of their respective deaths—(MR. RIBTON objected to this evidence, at it would open an inquiry into the antecedent circumstances attending the con-dition of each of the children, and would not assist the Jury in arriving at the cause of the death of the child in question. THE LORD CHIEF BARON was clearly of opinion that the evidence was admissible, if the same mode of treat-ment was pursued towards all the children, then the effect of that treatment upon the others became important, in relation to the cause of the death in question)—My opinion is that there was congestion of the brain in the other four children—I was present at the post-mortem examination, and the congestion of the brain formed a very important part of the cause of death of those four infants—I had noticed the condition of those children whilst living, and they all appeared to have been more or less subjected to the same
influence as the infant that was entirely under my charge from the time of its removal, the kind of stupid condition, which led me to believe that narcotic had probably been also administered to them, as I was certain had been in this case—I attribute the cause of their death to a want of suitable food, and probably also to the administration of narcotics—when I went into the front kitchen, with Sergeant Relf, I noticed on the table a small phial, lying with the cork beside it—this is it—I marked it—it contained a few drops of a fluid, which I was of opinion was laudanum—I subsequently examined it more thoroughly, and I am certain it was laudanum—I think it is tincture of opium, which is laudanum—there were only about three drops in the bottle—I don't think it was in a diluted state—I think it was as it would be sold as laudanum—after smelling the bottle, and handing it to Relf to smell also, I again asked Waters if she was quite sure she had not given the child anything to make it sleep—she said she had not—cleanliness is very important with a child, whether brought up by hand, or in the ordinary way—this child was not kept well clean, under the arms and behind the ears, and generally it had not been well washed.
Cross-examined. Q. You say "not well washed;"I suppose then we may conclude that it had been washed? A. I have no doubt it had been washed to some extent; but not habitually well washed—I have no doubt it had been washed at some time; but not as frequently as it ought to have been—a child suffering from diarrhoea would require it more frequently than others—a child taken from its mother three days after its birth, and exposed to the night air, would be liable to catch cold—a good deal would depend upon the kind of evening, and partly on the constitution of the child—a strong child would probably be less liable to take cold than a weakly one—the circumstances of the mother during the period of gestation may in some cases have an influence upon the constitution of the ohild; but this appeared to be a remarkably fine and healthy ohild; I believe it has some influence mentally upon the child; I mean on the nervous system—that might be the case without its exhibiting external signs of it—in the case of an illegitimate child, the mother, endeavouring to conceal the matter, and being under alarm and apprehension, might act upon the child she was bearing—I had no means of discovering whether this child had been so affected or not; it might have been, without my being able to discover ft—in the bringing up of a child by hand it might make a slight difference if it was affected in that way—the bringing up children by hand is attended with very considerable difficulty and danger in all cases; there is a greater risk of the child not living—in all cases it is attended with some risk—I have had a great experience, medically, as regards children who are brought up by hand—it is not a fact that the majority of them die—I cannot give you the percentage—milk and water and sugar would agree, at first, with many children, and disagree afterwards—if the digestive functions became deranged, then the milk Would very likely not agree with it—if the milk was the cause of the derangement, I think it would appear within three days—cow's, milk agrees with most children, with sugar and water—a little sugar is added, because infants will not take cow's milk—it is not sweetened, as a rule—there is more saccharine matter in the human milk, and therefore sugar is added to approximate the cow's milk to it, which would probably make it more likely to agree with the child—I don't think it would have taken the milk without sugar; but if the sugar was discontinued after two or three days, I don't think it would make that difference that it would
disagree with the child—I don't think it would have any injurious effect upon the digestion—if I found an alteration in the food, upon which the child did not do well, I should be disposed to attribute it to the change of food—anything that deranges the digestive organs of a child of that age would be likely to produce diarrhoea, and derange the whole system—thrush may arise from that cause; but it will also frequently arise in infants without any apparent cause—soothing medicines are not usually given to children suffering from diarrhoea, they are given to keep them quiet—I believe it is not an unfrequent thing for those who have charge of them to give them Godfrey's cordial, or syrup of poppies (it goes by different namet), and laudanum sometimes, I suppose—I should never give it to a young infant, I can't say what others would do—a small amount of laudanum might have a tendency to stop diarrhoea; but I think that would be very much counterbalanced by the injury it would do to the digestive functions—a small amount of laudanum might be given by some medical men, for diarrhoea; but not to produce narcotism, or insensibility, or what I witnessed in this infant—if nurses give anything of the kind, they probably do it to keep the children quiet—if given in excess, for the purpose of stopping diarrhoea, it would produce stupor—at the time I saw this child it was Mid to be suffering from diarrhoea; but when it was removed there was not much diarrhoea, at first, when I attended it; very slight, indeed—I think it is probable it had been suffering from diarrhoea—if it had, it had been checked—there was less at the time I took charge of it—I can't say positively that it had suffered from it, or that it had not, I only took the statement that I received—I could not speak with certainty, from my own observation—laudanum forms a principal ingredient in the soothing medi-cines I have named—syrup of poppies is not laudanum; but the active principle is very much the same, it is a narcotic—it is more often than not made up artificially with opium—poppy and opium are different things—you can extract an opiate from poppy—the syrup extracted from poppies is very like laudanum—it is sometimes given by nurses in excess—I am of opinion that there was nothing in this bottle besides laudanum or tincture of opium, which is almost the same thing—either, diluted, would be a very improper thing as a narcotic, and under any circumstances, it would be a very improper thing to give to a child—it would never be proper for a nurse to give Godfrey's cordial or laudanum to a child, not if it was diluted, or to give any soothing syrup—it would be most improper in all cases, unless a medical man had ordered it—I consider that a nurse never should give laudanum to any child of her own accord—I did not know Dr. Harris; I never spoke to him till yesterday—diarrhoea will of itself produce ema-ciation, more or less, according to the length of time it exists, and according to its severity—if an opiate had been improperly adininia-tered for the purpose of checking the diarrhoea, and had checked it, the counter effect would be a still greater derangement of the digestive system—the direct effect of an opiate is to render the liver torpid; that would, in a child of this age, still further increase the emaciation—if an opiate had been administered to check the diarrhosa, I should not be surprised to find a child in a state of emaciation—I had never seen Mrs. Rowland before that day, to my knowledge; I considered her a healthy woman; I depended upon what she told me, and also from an examination of the state of the breast as regarded the state of her milk, and also from examining her infant, which was a very healthy one—I cannot
recollect her age—I think she said she had four children—if a woman has plenty of milk and her health is good, I think she might fairly suckle two children; a good deal would depend upon the nourishment given to her; she would require a greater supply, and she had it—the child improved the first two or three days while with her, it improved when it had the change of food; I account for its not continuing to improve, from the state it was in at the time I first saw it—the diarrhoea returned, but very slightly; it had a little astringent medicine for that, only on one day—catechu, with a small quantity of ammonia; no opium—that was administered, I think, about a week before its death; it checked the diarrhoea—a very small quantity was given; there were several doses at intervals; Mrs. Rowland told me they were given at the proper times—they did not appear to have any other effect than to stop the diarrhoea—one of the injurious effects of opiates improperly administered would be congestion of the brain—laudanum is never applied externally to infants in diarrhoea, to my knowledge; I have never ordered such a thing—I should think a flannel with brandy on it and a few drops of laudanum, bound round the bowels was improper, but it was not on the bowels of the child—I could not undertake to say it was not at any time; I think if it had been it would have been improper; it could do no good—if the laudanum was applied in a concentrated state to the surface, a certain amount might probably be absorbed, which might produce some stupor.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Will you state exactly what took place on the subject of this child having had diarrhoea? A. Waters told me that it had suffered from diarrhoea, that it had been under the care of Dr. Harris, who had seen it the previous day, and she expected every minute he would call again to see it that day; she said she had not given it anything except what Dr. Harris had ordered; she said that on the Saturday morning, I am quite sure of that, because I pressed her very much, knowing that laudanum was on the table, and seeing that the child was suffering—that was her exact answer, that she had not given the child anything but what he had ordered, as far as medicine was concerned—she did not, at that or any other time, say that laudanum had been used in relation to the children, or Nothing syrups, or anything of the kind; I particularly asked that question; I mentioned soothing syrup and sleeping or composing medicines, or anything to make the child sleep; she told me so on two separate occasions, for I pressed her very much; I said "Are you quite Bure that you have not done so?"because I was equally sure that the child had had it administered.
HENRY HARRIS . I am a member of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, and practice as a surgeon and general practitioner at 2, Northampton Terrace, Denmark Hill, about three quarters of a mile from where the prisoners lived—I know both the prisoners—I first saw them on 9th Hay of the present year; I knew Waters by the name of Mrs. Lackburn—I was sent for to the house on 7th May; I went on the 9th; it was to see a child about two and a half years old—at the same time I saw another child, about a year and a half old, and an infant a few weeks or a month old, which was Mrs. Ellia's; it was a small child—I was not called on to attend the child a year and a half old, I merely saw it there; the one two and a half years old was the one I was called in to attend—on 1st June I was out, and when I arrived home I found I had been again sent for—I got there about 10 o'clock at night—I saw Ellis she said they
had a child suffering from diarrhoea and flickness, which her Bister had brought up the previous evening from Bristol; she said it was about three weeks old—I was then shown a child about that age; Ellis had it in her arms in the front kitchen when I went in—a friend of mine called with me—there were some children in the room at the same time; two young infants, on the sofa—this was in a room below the ground, on the basement—I don't think I saw Waters that night—I did not take much notice of the two children, they appeared to be asleep—I have no means of knowing whether the child I law at that time was Cowen's child, only from what the prisoners have told me—it was a male child, and it appeared to be about three weeks old, and I have heard since from one or other that it was Cowen's child; it was not very lively—I heard that it had diarrhea and sickness, and I prescribed for it a preparation of mercury; the black oxide of mercury, triturated, in the form of a powder, to be dissolved—I took it out of my pocket, and mixed it with water, in the house—I did not administer it—it is not a soporific—it was intended to stop the diarrhoea—this was all on the same day, 1st June—I left directions if the child was not better that I was to be sent for the next morning—I ordered it to have milk and water, with sugar of milk dissolved in it—I was not sent for the next day—I went again on 3rd June, to see another child, my first patient—I don't think I saw this child on that occasion; I was told it was better—I did not make inquiry about the two children I had seen on the sofa, on 1st June—Ellis told me, without inquiry, that they had been left with them for a day or two, until a home could be found for them in the country—I know nothing of the number of children that were in the house—I can't say positively that I saw Cowen's child after the 1st of June—I new prescribed opiates for it, or for any other children there—I should not like to swear that I never saw it again, but I feel sure in my own mind that I did not; I am sure I never saw it professionally—I was not there at all on 10th June; I was there on the 8th, and saw Mrs. Ellia's child—I did not see Cowen's child on 10th, and prescribe for it—I was not expected to call and see it on the 11th—I saw Ellis's child on the 8th; it had diarrhoa—I directed beef tea to be given to Cowen's child—I think that was on my second visit, without seeing it.
Cross-examined. Q. On 1st June, I understand you to say, you did see Cowen's child? A. Yes—it was apparently suffering from diarrhoea; I was told that it was—children brought up by hand are very subject to diarrhoea—it was not more prevalent among children at that time than at any other—the medicine I have named was the only medicine I ordered—I prescribed again, the second time, without seeing it, not the same medicine; I think I altered it then, and prescribed podophyllum, a new American medicine—I think it is in the pharmacopoeia—that was on my second visit, on 3rd June; it was in the form of a tincture; it is called vegetable mercury by some persons—we don't use it as an astringent, we use it more to act on the liver—it is not calculated in any way to produce torpor, or even sleep—I am a homoeopath—podophyllum has been in use as a medicine for several years—it is recognized in our branch of the profession; I can't say that it is universally—I mixed so many drops in water for a tea-spoonful to be given at a dose, so many times a day—I can't tell how long the child took it—I gave about enough to last three or four days—I think I was told afterwards that the child was better—I will not swear positively that I did not see the child after the 1st—I don't remember that anything was
said about thrush; I did not treat it for thrush especially—I ordered sugar of milk; that is not a medicine, it is an article of food sold at the chemists' with printed directions for its use—the effect of it is to make the cow's milk I nearer approach to the mother's milk; I ordered it for that purpose—I thought it very likely that the cow's milk was disagreeing with the child; it will disagree with a good many children, even when diluted—if I heard that a child had had cow's milk, with merely the addition of water, and that it was suffering from diarrhoea, in the absence of any other cause, I should attribute it to the milk—that would be a sufficient cause in many cases—I really did think at the time that the cow's milk was disagreeing with the child—that was my reason for ordering sugar of milk—there are, no doubt, some points of difference in the milk of different cows; the milk of one cow to-day and another to-morrow, might disagree with a child—when I saw the child on the 1st it was in a moderate condition as to cleanliness; I did not strip it—it seemed tolerably clean—I don't think she complained of its food disagreeing with it; she told me of sickness and durrhcea—I don't know what sort of sickness—I daresay I asked her at the time, but I do not remember now—I don't remember that she said its food disagreed with it, and that it was wasting away; she did not say much about that, because I understood she had only had it the previous night—she did not say she had had it three weeks; she said it was three weeks old—I called on the 8th—I don't remember that I made any inquiries then about the child; it was for Ellis's child then—I ordered sugar of milk for that—I did not inquire about the child I had ordered it for before; I supposed it was well then, I had not heard any more about it—I don't know of my own experience that soothing syrups, are often given by women and surces improperly to children—I don't remember saying before the Magistrate that I thought I had not seen the child more than twice—I don't think I did, but I can't swear it; it is possible I may have seen it twice—I went a second time for the purpose of attending another child—I am quite certain I did not twice see Cohen's child professionally—it was Mrs. Ellis I saw when she showed me Cohen's child—I did not see Waters that night—I have seen her, but I can't say on which day—they professed anxiety about the state of its health—diarrheoa is a common complaint with children brought up by hand.
COURT. Q. Did you, when you heard of this child having diarrhoea, desire to gee its motion? A. No, I think not—on the second occasion, I was told it was much better—I believe I did see the motions of Ellis's child.
COURT to DR. PUCKLE. Q. Supposing mental emotion or distress of mind in the mother, during the period of gestation, to have affected the nervous system of the child, which you have said is quite possible; would Rich an effect being produced on the nervous system account in any way for any of the appearances of which you have spoken, for the emaciation, and the stupor? A. No, it would not manifest itself in any such way.
EDWARD POPE . A. I am a surgeon, of 19, Manor Terrace, Brixton, and am divisional surgeon to the police—on Monday morning, 13th June, I was communicated with, and went to Mrs. Rowland's a little before 9 o'clock—I there saw Miss Cowen's child, and examined it—it appeared in a very weak and emaciated state; it appeared to be conscious at that time—I weighed It at the Police Court, the same day, and it weighed 6 lbs. 4 OE.—the proper weight of a child of that age would be double that, I should think—I saw it twice that day, and did not see it again before its death—I was present at the post-mortem
examination—in my opinion, the cause of death was severe congestion of the brain, and emaciation—I considered the peculiar congeition of the brain to be due to the administration of a narcotic, and the emaciation to a want of proper and sufficient food—on Monday morning, 13th June, I went with the officer to the prisoner's house, and went down into the front room on the basement, a little before 9 o'clock; they called it a front parlour; it was below the surface of the earth—I think one of the prisoners was there, but I can't recollect, exactly, who was in the room—I found one infant there; it was asleep—I examined it, and found its bowels were out of order—it was in a dirty state, in a bed made up on a chair—one of the prisoners took the child in her lap for me to examine it—I found the motion of the child in a very unhealthy state—I roused it, and it cried weakly—I should think it might have been about three months old—I then went up stairs to a bedroom at the top of the house, and saw four babise in bed—two of them were in a very dirty state, in a small cradle, placed together, asleep—I did not rouse them—I did not examine them; I just lifted a part of the clothes, and found it in a very dirty state, and left it alone—it was quite wet; everything belonging to the cradle was wet and saturated—the children looked very thin, and were soundly asleep—I examined them again, casually, at the Police Court, the same day—I noticed one of the children very torpid indeed—its mouth was parched, and partially open; the lips were separated—I told the Magistrate I be-lieved the child was then under the influence of a narcotic—that was my opinion—I did not observe that the others were so torpid as that—they were afterwards taken to the workhouse—when I saw them at the prisoner's house, they had ordinary feeding-bottles beside them, with tubes reaching to the mouth—I am speaking of the four—I did not especially examine the contents of the bottles at that time; I looked at it, and pronounced it to be a mixture of corn flour and water—I examined them more particularly at my own surgery, afterwards; not the same day, I should think a week afterwards—I noticed that some of them were sour when they were lying by the side of the children; one particularly I smelt, and it was sour—I unfastened the stopper at the time and smelt it—I did not see anything against the kind of food that was in the bottle if it was sweet, it would do occasionally to give a little corn flour.
Cross-examined. Q. I think, when you were examined before the Megistrate, you did not go into detail, as you have done to-day; you were asked, generally, I think, whether you confirmed Mr. Bullen? A. No I was examined before Mr. Bullen—the Magistrate put a great many question to me, and I went into the same detail as I have done to-day—my attention was first directed to this house on the Sunday before the prisoners were apprehended; that was about 12th June, I think—Cowen's child was at Mrs. Rowland's house when I first saw it—I don't recollect whether I was informed how long she had had it—I did not know Mrs. Rowland—I have no doubt it was being properly attended to at that time—I heard Dr. Puckle partially give his evidence—I believe it commonly to be the case, where an unmarried woman is in the family way, and suffering from the usual shame and anxiety, that the child is affected by those circumitances.
COURT. Q. In what way affected? A. Children are often born with large heads and crooked limbs, and emaciated, and sometimes one limb or other is distorted, and sometimes the body itself—illegitimate children are often born so, parhaps more commonly than in matrimony.
MR. PATER. Q. Supposing a child had been suffering for some days from diarrhoea, you would expect the exhaustion and emaciation to increase, would you not? A. Certainly—some children thrive as well brought up by hand as when fed from the mother—there may be exceptions—a number of children brought up by hand die—if it was a fine healthy fat child when attacked with diarrhoea, the effect of that attack upon such a child reported to be better two or three days afterwards, would not be to reduce it to the emaciated condition in which I saw this child—cow's milk sometimes disagrees with children, and will produce diarrhoea—diarrhoea if continued would of itself produce emaciation in the condition of a child, however healthy—if continued for a fortnight, it might account for the emaciation I found in this child—diarrhoea is very common in young infants—congestion of the brain is produced by numerous causes—a child suffering from diarrhoea, baring a weakly constitution, and perhaps having brain symptoms from its birth, would conduce to congestion—there is a natural sympathy between the brain and the stomach.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Would congestion of the brain produced by narcotics be a matter that medical science could ascertain? A. Yes, I think so—the cause of the congestion in this case I consider due to the administration of a narcotic, coupled with diarrhoea.
DR. HENRY ST. JOHN BULLEN . I am a surgeon, and medical officer of the Lambeth Workhouse—on the afternoon of 13th June, nine children were brought there—I was there at the time—three of them were from two to three years old, as near as we could guess; the others we conjectured to be from three weeks to eighteen months old, or it might be rather more—having no names for them they were numbered from 1 to 9—Nos 1, 2, and 3 were subsequently claimed and removed—they were the elder tnes—they appeared to be in very fair health; I did not discover that there was anything specially the matter with them—Nos. 4 and 5 were the next eldest, the younger about eighteen months and the other rather older—a claim has been made to one of them, but they are still under my care—they are very much better—they were not in good health when admitted, far from it, but they have recovered surprisingly, and I think are now out of danger—as to Nos. 6, 7, 8, and 9, the youngest was about three weeks old, and the eldest about three months; they have all died—the first that died was No. 8, a female infant, she died on 23rd June; No. 6, a male infant, died on 26th June; No. 9, a female infant, on 5th July; and No. 7, a female infant, on 11th July—No. 8 we judged to be from three to fire weeks old at the time of admission, on 13th June; it was in a state of great emaciation, and very puny—there were marks of recent thrush about the buttocks, and thush was also present in the mouth and throat; it was in a condition of torpor, inanimate—when I saw it, it had been washed by the nurse—there was a peculiar glazed look about the eyes in the whole four, but in this child especially; the pupil not answering very well to light—the great emaciation was ostensibly attributable to want of sufficient and proper nourishment; and the torpid inanimate condition I believe arose from its being under the influence of some soporific drug—the children were exclusively under my care from the time of their admission to the time of their death—I saw them daily, and several times a day—the first child for the first two or three days appeared to get better under the stimulus of plentiful food; subsequently it rapidly succumbed—the symptoms were occasional sickness, and almost continuous diarrhoea,
which I was unable to arrest—I was present at the post-mortem examination, on 24th June, the day after the death of the child—it was about 22 in. in length; the body and limbs were much emaciated, but there were no marks of violence—there was still the appearance of recent thrush about the bottom part of the person—on opening the head, there was found great congestion of the whole brain structure, both externally and internally the membranes also showed the signs of information; the dura-mater was glued to the skull in some portions, so that it could not be separated, which is an unusual occurrence—those appearances confirmed the view I originally took of the cause of the symptoms—the child weighed nearly 5 lbs.; it was weighed shortly after admission, and again at death; there was not very much difference—the ordinary weight of such a child would be about 12 lbs.—No. 6 was from three to four months old—when admitted it was in a very puny and emaciated condition; the weight takes almost immediately after admission was 6 lbs. 15 ozs.—a child of that age should not have weighed much less than 20 lbs; its length was about 26 in.; it was also suffering from thrush in the same way as the other—the nervous condition was torpid, the eyes having the glazed appearance before described, and there was very little animation about it—it took its sustenance greedily at first, but subsequently the same change took place as in the other; it failed—the alimentary canal was continually disturbed, sickness, and curded slimy dejections—I was present at the post-master examination of that child—I attribute its condition to the same cause as that of No. 8, want of proper and sufficient food, and also a congested state of the brain—No. 9, a female infant, was not so emaciated as the preceding two; its condition, as regards the nervous system, was more lively, and the pupils were not contracted when I observed them—I supposed that child to be from four to five months old—it was emaciated, but, compared with the others, it did not strike the observer so forcibly—the weight of this child, as of all, was not more than that of a new-born child it was about 10 or 11 lbs.—it was weighed soon after admission, not on the day—it had a great deal of diarrhoea; that existed on its admission, and continued with slight intermission, conjoined with occasional vomiting, up to its death—I was present at the post-mortem examination of that child; there was con-gestion of the brain, and also effusion in the ventricles of about an ounce of fluid—I ascribe the death of that child to the congested and inflamed state of the brain, associated with emaciation and diarrhoea—I ascribe the emaciation to want of sufficient nourishment previous to admission into the work-house—from the appearances noticed in this child I could not speak pontively as to the brain having been congested at the time of admission—No. 7 was supposed to be about from three to four months old—I am not certain of the weight of that child at the time of admission; the weight taken at death was 41/2 lbs., but that would hardly indicate what it was on admission, it was so very emaciated—it appeared very ill upon admission, and was suffering from profuse diarrhoea, which was visible upon examina-tion—this child had thrush worse than any of the others, it was quite raw with it, in a fearful condition—they all had slight signs of stupor, with glazed eyes and inanimate condition, but this and the preceding one were not so much so as the two first that I have mentioned—I always connect the occurrence of thrush with the existence of an improper or insufficient dietary; I never knew thrush to arise from any other cause, either through the mother, when at the breast, or when brought up by hand—there was
also a post-mortem examination in this case; the brain was in a much better addition than the others—the cause of death in this case was supposed and believed to be from mesenteric disease, which we found after death—there was an enlargement of the alimentary canal, and induration of the glands—that might be the direct result of insufficient food and nourishment nothing is more common than the result of mesenteric disease, from neglect or insufficient food—none of the children, as far as I could judge, would weigh the proper weight of a new-born infant—from the state in which they were when they came in, I should say they must have been poorly for at least ten days or a fortnight, if not more—they were undoubtedly so poorly that they would urgently require medical attention and care—from the position I hold I have had large experience in the treatment of infants taken from their mothers and brought up by hand—I think the baris of all proper food for infants must be milk, either pure or diluted, according to the age—some farinaceous substance should be added as it grows older—I think a quart of diluted milk per day and night would be suficient for a young infant; half pure milk and half water; that would be sufficient up to perhaps six weeks, after that a larger quantity would be Necessary—I think a pint of new milk, diluted to a quart, would be sufficent for a very young infant, every twenty-four hours, with some form of sugar admixed, and I do not object to a little arrowroet.
Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. I suppose in the workhouse you have a great many children of that age brought in? A. We had some months ago an unusual quantity; there were, I think, four, five, or six very emaciated children brought in the workhouse, and we did not do very well with them—some of them resembled these children very closely—I do—not know where they were brought from, some were found in the street, some were brought by the police—from time to time we have children, from Tarious causes, given to us to bring up by hand; a woman falls ill, and is unable to nurse her child; or she dies, and in that case, unless I can get mother woman to take the child to the breast, we are obliged to bring them up by hand—it is difficult to get children brought up by hand; I think perhaps the difficulty is exaggerated, but I know it is difficult if persons are un-skilled and donot knowhowto manage them—a large percentage undoubtedly die; I should say possibly one-third; but I should wish my opinion taken for that it is worth, because I have not gone into details—I believe, under anycircumstances, even of comparatively healthy children, a large percentage would I not be successfully reared; I should say one-third would not be exaggerating the loss, from whatever cause it may be—I won't say "No matter how carefully they may be attended to,"I find so much difficulty in getting nurses to carry out the instructions of medical men—I don't see why so many should be loaf—nurses may in private houses give soothing mixtures to Moth a child, but in large institutions we do not allow that—I think the great source of loss is from the sourness of the food; nurses are not sufficently particular in that—in the case of these infants, I directed all the milk should be thrown away immediately it became sour—we tried to keep it as sweet as we could with ice and so forth—there is a difficulty in that, in warm weather it will turn sour in a few hours; if put into a bottle for child at night it will be sour by the morning; it requires very great care, and I may say, great skill to do it—children brought up by hand are generally affected by diarrhoea and thrush—thrush is a very common occurrence in infancy, I know nothing more common; even when brought up at the
breast it is common—when the attempt to bring up a child by hand fails, thrush, diarrhoea, and consequent emaciation is the result, and frequent convulsions, and affections of the nervous system—as to one of the children, No. 9, I did not observe congestion of the brain at the time of admission, yet there was considerable congestion at death—possibly it might have been produced while it was in the workhouse—congestion of the brain, I am bound to state, is a very common occurrence with children, and it may re-sult even from advanced thrush, and from prolonged diarrahcea; it may occur entirely unconnected with the use of any narcotic—I do not think the congestion I found in the others might have been the result of thrush and adiarrhoea—in two of the cases there was a result from inflammation, an adherence of the membranes, that must have taken some considerable time; and in the youngest, the first admitted, there was not time for that result to have taken place, at least in my opinion—there was not an unusual number of children dying in the workhouse about this time—I daresay then may have been six or eight deaths in the course of May, June, and July, in addition to those I have named; possibly you are alluding to some establishment connected with the workhouse, but upon that I cannot speak of my own knowledge—children were sent out from the workhouse, and, for aught I know, they are so still—I believe, with the consent of their mothers, a certain number are removed from the breast to some' establishment at Pimlico, conducted by Miss Broughton—I called the attention of the Board to having heard of an unusual mortality there—I did not know it of my own knowledge—I believe some of the guardians went and inquired into it—I do not know the result.
COURT. Q. In any communication you may have made to Dr. Puckle, with regard to those children after they had been placed under your care, was your report perfectly correct? A. Yes, as far as my judgment went.
CHARLES RATCLIFF . I keep a dairy, in Englcfield Street, Brixton—I have from time to time supplied the prisoner Waters with milk in the name of Blackburn; that was the only name I knew her by—it was at 4, Frederick Terrace—this (produced) is one of my milk bills—it is not the last—I left one on 13th June, the morning they were taken into custody—this bill is up to 1st May, it is correct; it amounts to 3s. 6d. for the week, 6d. a day, that is, three pints per day—that was the general quantity I supplied—I sup-plied her continually from 10th April to 13th June—the last fortnight I supplied a quart a day—it dropped off to that.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you keep cows? A. Yes—I have not any of my own, but I have some on the premises—there are several other persons about there who keep dairies—I enter in my books what I sell—I have not got my books here—I am speaking from my memory when I say that I supplied a quart a day for the last fortnight before 13th June—I have not been desired to bring my books here—no one has asked to look at them—no other inquiry was made of me except to know whether this bill was cor-rect—I was not asked what quantity I supplied for any other period—I only received two half-sovereigns from Mrs. Waters all the time I served her—she did not pay ready money—I delivered the milk at the house myself—I live about ten minutes' walk from her—I know her servant—I never saw her at my place—she never sent for extra milk—she had a bill running with me during the whole of May, and down to 13th June—I received the two half-sovereigns at different times, on account—I sent in a bill every Monday—she is indebted to me now 11s. 11d., I think, the balance of the
whole amount during the time that I supplied her—I can't say whether or set she had milk from other places—I sell milk on the premises, my wife and children sell that—my wife is not here—I can't tell whether the prisoner may have sent to my place for milk, or not—I don't think she knew where my place was—people are in the habit of sending for milk and paying for it, I free customers who run bills with me—there are about half-a-dozen other places should that district where milk is sold—the milk I supplied was pure milk.
COURT. Q. the entire sum now due to you, and the sum that has been paid, for milk alone? A. Yes—it was 4d. a quart—that was from about 10th April to 13th June, and the last fortnight they only had a quart a day.
EMILY PICKARD . I like opposite No. 4, Frederick Terrace, where the prisoners live—I sell milk, I have a shop—I have been in the habit of supply-ing to the prisoner's servant, O'Connor—she used to come to my place far it—I can't say as to the times at which I supplied her—it was three points a week—that was the largest-quantity, and the smallest was one pint—the servant always came for it, and always paid for it at the time; there was no bill.
Cross-examined. Q. You were not examined before the Magistrate? A. No-Sergeant Relf made inquiries of me first about this—that was after the injury before the Magistrate had been finished—I am married, and have three children—no other person serves in my shop—I always serve myself—I was there every day, and all day—I have no occasion to leave the shop till it closes—I am only in the next room, where I have my meals, and I go to and fro to the shop while I am having my meals.
COURT. Q. Do you remember for how long a time you supplied the prisoner with milk? A. I don't know—I can't say at all—the servant always had a pint at a time—never less—she came three times a week—I have a great many customers—I can't say how many—I am positive I never served her with more than three pints of milk in a week.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE proposed to call a witness in order to prove the hading under a railway arch the body of an infant, upon which were articles of dotting and papers that would be traced to one of the prisoners. The evidence of tendered for the purpose of shewing a systematic reception by the prisoners of infants, and the disposition of their bodies after death, so as to the inference that in the case of John Walter Cowen, they contemplated kideath. THE LORD CHIEF BARON was of opinion that such evidence was sholly inadmissible, being quite unconnected with the cause of the death of the child in question.
A certified copy was put in and read, of the registration of the birth of John Walter, son of Janet Tassie Cowen, bom on 14th May, 1870, registered 28th May, 1870.
MR. RIBTON requested that Ellen O'Connor, a witness whose name appeared the back of the indictment, should be called by the Prosecution. MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE declined to call her. THE LORD CHIEF BARON, in the absence of any authority to the contrary, was not prepared to insist upon the witness being called. It appeared that although her name was on the back of the bill, she had not been examined before the Grand Jury; it was a matter in the discretion of the prosecuting Counsel, with which he did not feel himself at liberty to interfere.
MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE having intimated that, as representing the Attorney-General, he should claim a right to reply, whether witnesses were called for the defence or not, MR. RIBTON submitted that this right was confined to the Attorney or Solicitor-General, when personally representings
he Crown, and referred to "Reg. v. Beckwith," 7, Cox's Criminal Cases, p. 505, and "Reg. v. Christie," 7, Cox's Criminal Cases, v. 506. THE LORD CHIEF BARON: "I think, in principle, I cannot resist the claim of right on the part of the Crown to reply, if the learned Counsel thinks fit to do so. The true ground it this, that the Crown, by its prerogative from time immemorial, has claimed the right, and whether the Attorney-General appears in person, or by reason of accident or other cause, does not appear, and is consequently represented by some other gentleman (whether the Solicitor-General, a Queen's Counsel, or Serjeant, or an ordinary barrister, is utterly immaterial), the Crown does possets the right, and and the Counsel is entitled to exercise it if Jie thinks fit. No Judge who has ever filled the office of Attorney-General, has ever doubted the existencesof the right: having had occasion to look into precedent, and to consider the principle upon which the right really rests, no one who has for any length of time filled either of the chief law offices of the Crown, has ever entertained a doubt upon the subject."
THE LORD CHIEF BARON considered that there was no evidenee against
ELLIS, and directed the Jury to find a verdict of NOT GUILTY as to her.
The following Witnesses were called for the Defence:—ELLEN O'CONNOR. In June last I was employed as servant by Mrs. Waters, at 4, Frederick Terrace—I did not sleep in the house during the first fortnight; but after that I remained in the house entirely—I was there about three months—for the first fortnight I went at 12 o'clock in the fore-noon, and left about 10—I thought that the children had plenty of food—we used to have three pints of milk every day from the milkman—there was a milk-shop opposite, I used to go there for milk about three or four times a week—sometimes I used to have a pennyworth, that was a half-pint, and occasionally more, when we were short of milk—I did not buy milk any-where else—milk was also delivered by Ratcliff—we had three pints a day from him during the whole time I was there—I left when Mrs. Waters was taken away to prison—we had a pint and a half in the morning and a pint and a half in the evening from Ratcliff—during the last fortnight I was with her we used to have corn flour; the children were ill—we did not have quite so much as three pints of milk a day from Ratcliff during the last two or three weeks—about that time extra milk was taken in the morning, and paid for, in order that the milk bill should not be increased—milk taken in the morning from the milkman was not paid for; it used to be left all the week, and then she used to pay him on a oertun day—when the children were ill, corn flour was given to them—I prepared their food—I remember Cowen's child coming to the house—it used to be fed with a bottle—I used to fill the bottle—it used not to drink sometimes more than two bottles, and I used to mil a little lime water with it, a dessert spooniul—I don't know how much each bottle contained—if he wanted more than two bottles I gave it to him—it used to be asleep the best part of the day—when it was awake it took its food readily—whenever it wanted the bottle re-filled, I did it—Mrs. Waters attended to the child at night—I did not sleep there during the first fortnight of my service, I did afterwards—Mrs. Waters sometimes used to go out, about 10 o'clock, and come back at I—I took care of the children when she was out—wet supper, and went to bed about 2 o'clock—Mrs. Ellis used to give the little boy Cowen a drop of titty—I mean from her breast—I have seenbe do that very often—the child used to cough a little when it was Mrs. Wasters
Waters said it had diarrhoea—that was a fortnight before she was taken to prison—I never saw laudanum used externally to the child—Mrs. Waters said that she hod nibbed the child's chest with laudanum before she came down to breakfast—the child was not washed very often—Mrs. Waters said it was too ill to be washed, and she said that was the reason it was not tubed so often—it was washed three or four times before it fell ill—I thought the children in the house were properly attended to, only they used to be left to lie in bed very long, the young children.
Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. How old are you? A. Getting on for fourteen—there were a few toys, four horses and carts, for the children—there was no other servant in the house besides myself—I did ill the house work, and used to attend to the children very often—Mrs. Waters used to wash them, and I generally attended to them—I did not make the bods—I did the scrubbing and cleaning—there were about four-teen persons in the house, children and grown up, during the three months I was there; there was Mrs. Waters, Mrs. Ellis, myself, and eleven children—that was the case during the three weeks before Mrs. Waters was taken to prison—they paid me 2s. a week—I have a mother and father; they knew the sort of work I had to do, but mother did not know there were so many children there, I told her when I had a Sunday and came home—I remem-ber Miss Cowen's little baby coming—Mrs. Waters brought it—I cant exactly tell what it was wrapped up in—it did not cry when it came, it did soon afterwards—it was a very nice child, a very pretty, fine child—Mrs. Waters took it up stain in her bedroom that night—it was put with the other children that night—there were nine children and Mrs. Ellis's baby in the house when little Cowen was brought there—Cowen's child made the elerenth—the children slept up stairs in the two upper rooms—Mrs. Waters and Mrs. Ellis slept with them always—all the eleven children slept in two rooms at the top of the house, the whole eleven slept there together—I used to help to put them to bed—I used to take one or two up for Mrs. Waters then they were put to bed—they used to put some pillows on some chairs, two chairs, and two pillows laid on them—there was only one child on each—there was a bassinet—there were two in that—four of the others slept at the bottom of Mrs. Waters' bed—Mrs. Waters slept in the room up at the top of the house—two of them used to sleep in the back room on a bed-stead, and the other one used to lie in a little crib; that was little Emily, not Mrs. Ellis's child, another child that is in the workhouse—they were Bought down after breakfast by Mrs. 'Waters—I used to put water on the fo for to wash them—the pillows were put on the sofa, and four or five of them laid on the sofa—Mrs. Waters used to wash them every morning, except Miss Cowen's child—she only washed him the first three or four days when he came, and the child began to get ill—it was taken up with the others every night when it was getting ill, and brought down everyday, and put on the sofa in the same way—it was getting worse from the time it was first taken ill—it was a very quiet baby, a very nice child—from the very beginning it used to cry, when it wanted its food, it used to cry a good deal it left off crying shortly after it came there; none of them used to cry hardly, they all seemed to be ill, the whole of them, except one or two they were the elder ones, that used to run about—there was one of the five on sofa, a little girl, she used not to be very ill, she died in the work-house—the children used to be laid all day on the sofa up till about 6.30, sometimes 7 o'clock—I might hear one of them just begin to cry, and I
would go up and put the teat in its mouth, and it would go to sleep again—they were very silent children—I have brothers and sisters of my own, I have got no young ones—I did not hear Mrs. Waters say anything about their being silent—she never expressed any surprise at it—nobody ever tried to rouse them—I used to take them up sometimes after they had been laid down—Mrs. Waters used to take them up sometimes, and hold one on her knee for about a quarter of an hour—they used not to cry much—Miss. Cowen's child began to be bad at the end of three days—he was very silent, like the rest of them—I never heard Mrs. Waters or Ellis talking about them—I never heard it mentioned that they might die—I thought the children were ill—I used to say "That child is ill, aint it, ma'm?"—that was one particular child—little Cowen I used to say it about—I don't remember when I first said that—she said yes, it was ill; she should send for the doctor—that was two or three days before the doctor came—the doctor used to come once a week to see a little boy named Willy—he was older than those that used to lie on the sofa—he could run about and play—sometimes the children would be asleep when they were taken up stairs, and as we removed them sometimes they would wake, and sometimes they would not; but they very seldom woke—they did not remain awake long—I used to hear one or two of them just begin to cry up stairs, and used to go up and put the bottle in their mouths, and that stopped them—persons used to call at the house sometimes—if anyone knocked at the door a double knock, I was to take the children into the kitchen; that was from one kitchen into the other—she said she could not get another child if they heard the children crying—I always did so when they came—sometimes there would be one a day—someone would come, perhaps, and knock a double knock, and then we would take the children into the other room before we undid the door—that happened several times while I was there—when people came they were shown into the down stairs parlour, the room from which the children had been removed—there were never any more than eleven children while I was there, but there were some taken away—four or five were taken away in my presence; four and Miss Cowen's child—that was taken away by a wet-nurse, and four more besides that—Mrs. Waters took four away, and she brought fresh ones back—I don't know how long that was before she was taken away herself—they were taken away one at a time—there were two taken away one night, and Mrs. Waters said she should be too late to catch the train, and they brought them back—I think there were four children brought into the house while I was there, besides the ten who were there when she was taken away—those four were infants; one of them was six months, and that was taken away by Mrs. Waters about 10 o'clock at night—she came back the same night without the child—the two that were taken by Mrs. Waters when she said she missed the train were taken another night by Mrs. Waters and Mrs. Ellis, each carried one; they took them away about 9.30 or 10, and returned about 12.30 without the children—he took away one on another night, about two or three weeks before she was taken; it was taken away about the same time, 9.30 or 10, and she came back about 12.30—she said she had taken the children home—son times they used to have a cape on, sometimes a shawl and a hood, when they were taken away—I remember a shawl and cape and a hood being brought back—the four children that were taken away were ill; one of was not very ill, but three of them were—I don't know what they were ill of—they used to cry sometimes, and I made them food and put it into the
bottle for them, but generally they were as silent as the other children, and slept a good deal, nearly all day—I used to give lime-water to all of them except Mrs. Ellis's baby and a little girl named Emily—Mrs. Ellis gave me 2d., and I gave it to a man for some lime where they were building houses—I don't know what the lime was being used for—Mrs. Ellis gave the man 2d. and a pot of beer, and asked whether he would be kind enough to give me some lime, and I took that lime to Mrs. Waters, and she told me to put a piece about half as big as the palm of my hand into about a quart of water, and leave it to stand for an hour—I then used to put a dessert spoonful into each bottle, except Mrs. Ellis's baby and little Emily—Mrs. Ellis said she did not believe in it—on the Friday night, before the gentleman came on the Saturday, Mrs. Ellis came home tipsy—I knew Mrs. Waters by the name of Blackburn—Mrs. Ellis came home tipsy about 9.30 on the Friday night—Mrs. Waters said "Who has been making you tight, Sarah?"she did not make any answer, and Mrs. Waters said "Did you meet them at Camden Station f' and Mrs. Ellis said "Yes, and it is all right"—I saw someone walking up and down at the door, and look in once or twice; that was just after Mrs. Ellis came in—Mrs. Waters said "Who was the man looking down?"and she said "You nasty cat, you have ruined me!"—she said that Mrs. Ellis had done her out of 8l. that night—I have been sent for letters very often; I used to go very nearly every morning, and some-times about four times a week—I used to go to the post office in Zoar Place in Brixton, and Cold Harbour Lane, and also one in the Mostyn Road; that was the nearest—I used to ask for letters addressed to Mrs. Oliver at Zoar Place, and at Cold Harbour Lane I used to ask for Mrs. Furley and Mrs. White—I used to get letters—sometimes four and sometimes six at Zoar Place—we used to get about half-a-dozen letters a day—I don't think I ever got more than half-a-dozen—I used to give them to Mrs. Waters—Mrs. Waters used to read them, tear them up, and burn them after she had done with them—I did not hear her say what they were about.
COURT. Q. Mrs. Waters had no husband? A. No—she said she was a widow—Mrs. Ellis said she had been married, and had left her husband.
MR. RIRTON. Q. You were examined before the Magistrate? A. Yes, on two occasions, for the prosecution—I have given my evidence in full to the Solicitor to the Treasury, and I was desired to attend here by the same gentleman—the children that were taken away used to be washed in the morning, and sometimes their faces used to be sponged when they were taken out—they looked very ill when they went away—one was not very ill—Mrs. Waters said she had one child to take care of for two or three days, and the parents of it were going to look out for a home for it in the country; that was one of the four—she used to say she was going to take them home to their parents, or take them to a better home in the country—she said she was taking them home—I don't know how long the two had been with her that she took out when she missed the train—I saw a lady come one Sunday to see a little boy named Willy—she saw him—he was about two and a half years old—he was very delicate—he could run about and play—the lady did not take him away; he remained at the house until they were taken prisoners—he was taken to the workhouse, and claimed—there was a little girl named Emily—she was a year old, I think—she was a fine child, very stout—she is in the workhouse now, I believe—she used to sleep in the crib up stairs, alone—there was another child of the name of Rose; she was four days old—Mrs. Waters only had it on the
Friday night before they were taken—that child was taken to the work-house, and died in the workhouse—that came on the Friday, and she was taken the following Monday—it had its food on the Saturday—Mrs. Waters brought that child about 4 o'clock in the afternoon—Mrs. Waters seemed to be fond of children; four of them used to sleep with her—I have seen her carrying them about sometimes, not very often, and washing them—she washed them all every morning, except Miss Cowen's child, and that she said was too ill to be washed—she seemed fonder of that child than the others—I have seen her nurse it—I told her on one occasion that it looked ill—it was very ill one day, and she sent for the doctor, at Denmark Hill; it was Dr. Harris—he came in the evening, and the child was shown to him—I was in the other room, taking care of the children, when he came, and Mrs. Ellis took the child in to show him—she was in the room with him about ten minutes—he brought it some medicine; it was like water—the medicine was given to the child every morning by Mrs. Waters, a teaspoonfull of the mixture, by itself—there was no other medicine given—she used to send for some brandy sometimes—I used to see her mil up a little drop for the children, about a teaspoonful in a wine-glass of water—she used to give that to the children, with a spoon—she said the child was ill; that was Cowen's child—she used to give the medicine to the child in the morning and in the night, twice a day, for about a week—the child did not seem to get any better; nothing seemed to do it good—she used to mix up a little isinglass with some sugar, sometimes, and give it to it—I used to mix the corn flour, and put it in the bottle—some hot water was put to the milk, to warm it, and some sugar—I used to give it to the children myself—Mrs. Waters might give it to Cowen's child sometimes—she would have the child on her knee, and it used to be lying on the sofa—the bottles were laid on the sofa, by the side of the children; and when they wanted it I used to put the teats in their mouths—Mrs. Waters said the lime water was put in the milk to keep sickness away from the children—Mrs. Ellis did not seem to approve of it—the children were dressed before they were taken away—they had as good clothes as she had to put on them—they used to have flannel on, and a nightgown and a shawl—I mean the four children that were taken away at night—they used to be wrapped in a shawl, and sometimes one of them would have a cape—they were comfortably wrapped up—when they were brought down in the morning they were laid in the front kitchen, on the sofa, and they were taken into the back kitchen and washed, and carried up again at night—I earned them up sometimes, and sometimes Mrs. Waters, and put them to bed—the children that could eat bread food were fed three or four times a day—that was the elder children—the babies were fed once or twice a day, and then they used to have their bottles—they used to have corn flour very thick, and fed with a spoon—I have seen Mrs. Waters give Cowen's child corn flour with a spoon—Cowen's child got very ill after a day or two, and did not seem to improve—the medicine the doctor gave it did not seem to do it any good—it had a little cough—I used to go over to the baker's for sponge cakes—sometimes I got a penny sponge cake for one of the children, and sometimes I used to go for sally lunn cakes—I used to pay a penny for that, and sometimes 2d.—I did not do that every day, very often—I used to sop it, and give it to two or three of the infants, who used to eat sop, some of them that died in the workhouse—I used to give sop to them—the child that came on the Friday night had milk and corn flour.
GEORGE NEWPORT PICKSTOCK . I live in Rye Lane, Peckham, and am a member of the Royal College of Physicians, of London—I professionally attended Mrs. Waters from 22nd September, 1868, to the beginning of this year—I left off attending her about a year ago, and have never seen her since—I have been called in to see infants that were ill, when she lived in the Bournemouth Road, and have prescribed for them—I never saw anything in her conduct but uniform kindness and motherly solicitude—opiates should never be ordered for children—of course, they are sometimes ordered; but under very peculiar circumstances—infants, are so wonderfully susceptible to the effects of opium, it kills them like a shot, almost—there is a mixture called paregoric elixir that is sometimes given, a soothing syrup, that contains a small proportion of laudanum, two grains or a grain in an ounce, or something of that sort—that is given frequently; but very wrongly—I do not hold with giving children any opiates—women will do so upon their own responsibility; but medical men do not—paregoric elixir is prescribed for some children for cough, and, as a soothing medicine; if given in excess, it would produce narcotize, stupor—if children, suffering from an overdose of an opiate, rally for two or three days, I should decidedly think they had got over the stupefying effects of it; reason and experience teaches that—I have not heard the medical evidence in this case—if the stupefying effect of laudanum passes away quickly, the patient invariably recovers—lime water, properly made, is used to check the acidity of the milk—I have heard the evidence about the lime water; it was improperly made—it would not have been improper to put a dessert spoonful of it in the milk, if it had been correctly made—this was too roughly made—there would be nothing positively injurious in it—it would have the effect of neutralising the acidity of the milk.
Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. For how long, alto-gether, did you attend this lady and her establishment? A. I first knew her on 22nd September, 1868, and attended her till the beginning of this year, about a year and three months altogether—she came to me on 22nd September, to engage me to attend a lady in her confinement, and I did not see anything of her then till the confinement came off, that was in November—I attended the child; it died at the prisoner's house in Bournemouth Road—I delivered the lady with instruments; it was a very critical case—the child was delivered with forceps—the mother did not suckle it—she had come up from the country—the child was not taken away from the mother until she returned to the country, about a month or so after the birth—the child then remained with Mrs. Waters; it was brought up by hand, and ultimately died—I thought it could not have lived, it was a very puny child; it did not breathe for half an hour after it was born—there was another instance in which a lady was delivered of twins at Mrs. Waters' house—she was under my care—an aunt, or some relation, took the twins it ay—I did not see them afterwards—those are the only two instances, there were never more than four children at Mrs. Waters'.
MR. RIBTON. Q. Never more than four whilst you attended them? A. Yes—the prisoner was quite a nuisance to me; if I was not at home she would send for other doctors directly—she seemed wonderfully desirous of attending to them—two of the four children died, and two, I believe, were then to her late place.
WATERS— GUILTY .— DEATH .
The Court directed a reward of 20l. to be given to Sergeant Relf.
PLEADED GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Baron Cleasby.
771. ELEANOR GENT (48) , Feloniously setting fire to a certain bed-stead and mattress, and to certain paper in a dwelling-house, under such circumstances, as if the said dwelling-house had been set fire to she would have been guilty of felony.
MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution; and MR. F. H. LEWIS the Defence.
GEORGE GERRARD . I am in the London Fire Brigade—on 5th August I was called by the police from my station in Shepherd's Lane, Brixton, at 10.25—I went with an engine to 2, Mitford Place, Vassal Road, and on arriving there I found smoke coming from the house, which was in charge of a constable—I went into the front kitchen in the basement, and found a sofa partly consumed—the bottom of it, and part of the back, was consumed—standing behind that was part of a French bedstead, which was also partly consumed; the paint on a door was scorched, and the gas pipe across the ceiling was melted—in the back kitchen I found a clothes-horse scorched, and a table close to it, and the ashes of something which had been bunt, were partly on the table and partly on the horse—in the front parlour the window curtains were burnt, and the shutters scorched—one fire could not have burnt those three different rooms—a chimney ornament, and a window curtain in the back parlour were also burnt, and the carpet was turned up against the fender—one fire could not have ignited the other—I inquired for Miss Gent, and was told she was next door—I went there, and saw her—I asked her if she could account for the fires in different places—she said no, she saw a blue light, and heard a report—I asked her if she was insured—she said "Yes, in the West of England Fire Office, for 150l.," and that she held the house on a lease—she was very excited—this was about twenty minutes after I went there.
Cross-examined. Q. Were there any traces of fire on the carpets and flooring? A. No—the fire had burnt itself out through the door being shut—they were very light articles—I should not think they had been on fire above a minute or two minutes—the sofa bedstead and the curtains must, I think, have been on fire a quarter of an hour, more or less.
WILLIAM INCE (Police Inspector). I was called, and found Gerrard at the house—I went over it with him; I agree with his statement—we found traces of seven distinct fires, quite separate and independent of each other—one could not have originated the other—I went to the next hosue and found the prisoner—I asked her if she could account for the origin of the fire—she replied that she could not, except it had been done by a former lodger, who she had to expel for arrears of rent, and who might have done it from motives of malice or revenge—I asked her if anyone else was in the house—she said "No"—I asked her how ir occurred—she said "I heard what I thought to be a knock at the front door, I went there to see what it was, and heard a kind of explosion; I went towards the kitchen to see what it was, and on looking down the steps or stairs, saw a blue light; I attempted to get out of the back door to pre an alarm, but stumbled over something soft in the passage, and became senseless for some time. On coming to myself, I opened the back door, withdrew the bolt, went into the yard, and attempted to give an alarm, but was partly
insensible; and the first thing I remember afterwards was being held in somebody's arms, and brandy being administered to me"—she also said that the errand boy left about ten minutes before she heard the explosion or saw the fire—I asked her if anyone could have got into the house unknown to her—she said that the back door was bolted, and the chain was on the front door, and she did not see how they could have come in after the boy went oat, as she put the chain on the front door.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you ask her if she could account for the origin of the fire? A. Yes; she said she had to expel a former lodger for arrears of rent, and he could have got in with his key before the door was bolted.
JOSEPH FLEXMAN (Detective Officer). On the night of 8th August I took the prisoner at 2, Wilson Place—I told her it was for having set fire to her house on the 5th—she said "Oh, my God! I am innocent of that charge"—on the way to the station she said "Well, I know the house has been set on fire, but I do not know who by. I heard three knocks at my front door, I went and opened the door, but I could not see anybody; I turned round and saw a blue light from the kitchen, and heard something like an explosion, but I do not know what it was."
Cross-examined. Q. Did you take her at her own house? A. Yes; she had remained there from the 5th.
THOMAS DENNYS . I live at 3, Providence Place, Vassal Road, and was the prisoner's errand boy for about a month before the fire—she had no lodgers during that time—I left the house on the night of the fire at about 9.45—there was then no one in the house but Miss Gent, as far as I know—I had not been in the house all day—I saw nobody there but her when I left—I had not been in the house during the day, only till about 9 o'clock—there was a lady in the front parlour, but Miss Gent let her out—I saw no one else there—Miss Gent let me out, and I heard her shut the door—I did not hear how she did it up—I was in the back parlour before I left—there was so fire in the grate—one gas was alight—I did not go into the front parlour or kitchen—there was a paper ornament in the stove in the back parlour—I did not notice the carpet or curtains.
Cross-examined. Q. Used your mother to do the charing for Miss Gent? A. Yes, and my sister used to sleep with her, I do not know how long—some lodgers were coming to the house, but I do not know when—she had had the upper rooms whitewashed and papered ready for them—she is a dressmaker—I had to run very few errands; I had to fetch her beer and things—I used to work in a little shop opposite them.
MR. COOPER. Q. Was your sister at home that night when you went home? A. No, she had gone somewhere—she had not slept at home lately—she slept with Miss Gent—she is about seventeen—she did not go there to sleep that night.
THOMAS RUTTER . I am a carpenter, of 3, Vassal Road, two doors from to prisoner—on the night of the fire I was in my back kitchen—my master's daughter called me—I went to the door, and heard groans in the first back garden—I got over the wall, and saw the prisoner lying down in her garden—I lifted her up, and asked her what was the matter—she said "Save me? save me! my house is on fire! Do hot let me be burnt!"—I left her, and went into the house by the back garden—I went to the front kitchen door, and found the front kitchen on fire, the sofa bedstead was on fire—it was opposite the door as you went in, against the wall, and a French bedstead Was packed away behind it, which was also burnt—I had been in the kitchen
before; the sofa bedstead was in the habit of being there—I put it there myself some months before, but the other bedstead which was packed away behind it was not there before—the room was full of smoke—I ran out, found a tub, and I and some neighbours put the fire out—a policeman came, and I let him in—I stopped till I was nearly exhausted with the smoke and heat—I threw six or eight pails on, and the other people threw water on as well—this was all in the kitchen, no water was used anywhere else—I went into the kitchens and parlours with the policeman—one gas was alight, and the parlour was full of smoke, but I did not see any fire—I went next day, and saw that the parlour curtains were burnt, and the fire orna-ments, and a chair had the bottom burnt out, and several things were burnt in both parlours—they appeared distinct fires.
Cross-examined. Q. What do you mean by the thing being packed behind the sofa bedstead? A. It was put away, it was not used—I do not know where the lodgers had been—there were some once when I went there; but I do not know their names, or whether they slept in the front kitchen—the prisoner said "Do not let me be burnt," not it.
JURY. Q. Did the two parlours communicate? A. There were folding doors; but they were closed—I have never seen them open.
EDWARD HEANEGE . I am a cowkeeper, of 2A, Vassal Road—on the night of this fire, about 9.50, my wife spoke to me, and I heard a moaning—I got over the wall into Miss Gent's garden, and found the prisoner in a kind of fainting state, and spoke to her; but could not ascertain what she said.
Cross-examined. Q. Did you help to get her over the wall, into the next house, where she was afterwards found? A. Yes; she appeared to me to be in a fainting condition.
GEORGE HAZLE (Policeman W 32). I was called to the prisoner's house, and found the passage and the front room full of smoke—I went to No. 1, and found the prisoner sitting in a chair, in the garden—I spoke to her; but she did not answer me—I got over the wall, went into the front kitchen, and found a sofa bedstead on fire, not blazing, only smouldering—I had the gas turned off at the meter—the stuffing of the bed was burning—the gas pipe on the ceiling was melted, and the handles of a tea-pot and coffee-pot were melted, and hanging on the dresser—the fireman came, and I went into the front kitchen, and saw what he saw—on the Tuesday night before this I was called in to the prisoner—she and a little girl were at the door—she said she thought there was something the matter down stairs, and pressed me to go down—I went into the front kitchen, and found it full of smoke—I looked about, but could see no fire—there was no fire in the fireplace—there was a smell of burning rags—I looked about at the boards; but could find nothing—I went to the next house, made inquiries, and then came back—I went to the cupboard under the stairs, in the basement, and found the ashes of some greasy rags which had been burnt—they were not burning then—I found no fire but the gaslight—that kitchen is three yards from the front kitchen—there is a door to the cupboard, which was closed—the prisoner said she thought somebody had been in the house—I went over the house with her, and asked her if she had lost anything—she said "No."
Cross-examined. Q. Were you called in by the prisoner? A. By the prisoner and the little girl, Dennys—they both called "Policeman, you are wanted"—the prisoner was standing at the door—Mr. King came in after wards—she asked me to look over the house, to see if I could discover any
thing—the front kitchen was full of smoke, which, in my judgment, arose from the rags I found in the cupboard—I could see nothing else.
JOSEPH FLEXMAN (reexamined). I went to Horsemonger Lane, and served the prisoner with a notice to produce her policy at the next examination—she told me where it was to be found—I went with Mr. Coleman—we found it in a tin box—it was taken away by the prisoner's solicitor, on the last occasion.
Cross-examined. Q. Did she tell you it could be found at the house, if it existed, and Mr. Coleman could get it? A. Yes—I found it, and also the receipt for the insurance—there are eight rooms in the house, five of which in furnished—the prisoner told me that the unfurnished rooms were to be let to a Mrs. Roach, who I saw, and who said she had advanced some money to the prisoner—the rooms in which there was no furniture had been very neatly papered.
Cross-examined. Q. How long has she been insured? A. About eighteen years, she and her sister; for the same premises, but not for the same amount—she has been insured for 150l. since 1861; before that it was for 100l.
WILLIAM DOWEY . I am a valuer and collector of rents for South Lambeth parish—on 6th August last, the prisoner called me to make a valuation for a claim for fire—I went into the kitchen, and found some of the furni-ture was destroyed—the parlour window-curtains were burnt—the parlour is above the kitchen—things were burnt in both kitchens, but very little in the back—the frout and back kitchens do not communicate; you have to go out into the passage—a sofa bedstead was burnt in the front kitchen, and part of a French bedstead, and the handles of a coffee pot and tea-pot were banging on the hooks—in the back kitchen, part of a table was burnt, and part of a clothes-horse, but so small a portion of them that I did not put them down—I should not put down the damage in the front kitchen at more than 2s. 6d.—the clothes-horse was not burnt more than it would be from being used—it appeared merely as if a towel had been thrown there, not with the intention of setting fire to it—the back kitchen could not have set fire to the other parts of the house—there was nothing on the chimney-piece; the chimney ornaments ware trifling; I took no notice of them—they were merely burnt by the heat of the curtains—I had been into the house three months before, to collect the rates, and I think there was a cheffonier there then, which is not there now.
Cross-examined. Q. Did the fireman go round with you, and show you 'hat had been burnt? A. Yes—I called at the house some time before the fire—the prisoner did not tell me she expected some lodgers in a few Hays—I merely asked her for the rates in the usual way.
The prisoner received a good character.
GUILTY—Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of her character — Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
Upon the opening speech of MR. F. H. LEWIS, for the Prosecution, THE COURT considered that evidence of stealing could not be given upon this indictment, it being the subject matter of another indictment.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. F. H. LEWIS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. GRIFFITHS the Defence.
RICHARD WILLIAM WITHERS . I live at Shadwell, and am a builder—on 22nd August I was at the Canterbury Arms, and had some gin there—I do not recollect seeing the prisoner there—my watch was safe, and my purse, with some cheques in it, which were drawn to order, and some sovereigns and silver—my watch was fastened with a cross-bar to my button-hole; it was worth about 20l.; it cost nearly 27l.—I do not consider I was drunk; I had had some drink—I do not recollect that the landlord refused me any more—I do not remember what time I left—I recollect nothing afterwards—I do not recollect walking home to the prisoner's house, and I do not believe I did—I have a sort of half-recollection, a sense of being on a bed without power to help myself—I felt somebody feeling over me without my having power to resist it, a perfect consciousness of mind but no power of body—when I was conscious I found myself walking in the street—I spoke to the first man I met, and informed him of my loss, which I had then discovered—I gave information, and my wife went for Mr. Garty, the doctor—I had vomited at that time, and part of the vomit was preserved—I was wearing the same shirt when I saw Mr. Garty as I were the previous night.
Cross-examined. Q. Are you married? A. Yes—I have one daughter—I think I got to the Canterbury Arms about 12; I am not sure—I had left my house about 4 o'clock—I had not been drinking more than what I had at dinner—half a pint of ale—that was two hours previous to my leafing home, and I think I went to my office—I had about two-pennyworth of gin about 4.30 o'clock at the Canterbury Arms, Brixton—that is not the same place—there were several in the room, but no one that I knew—I did not treat anybody there—I met a gentleman outside, and was with him the whole evening afterwards—Mr. Wills, my tailor—he is not here—I west with him to his house, and we left there at 11, and had two-pennyworth of gin at The Queen, Stockwell, about 11 o'clock—I had nothing to drink between 4.30 and 11—I left him at the public-house; he crossed over to go home, and I went away—I did not treat anyone there—I walked from there to Bolton Street, which is two miles or more—I mean to say that I walked two miles without having two-pennyworth more gin—from there I went to see a lady named Wilson—I did not see Harriet Taylor there—I knocked at the door, and somebody who I could not see answered from the window; it was dark—I wanted to see Mrs. Wilson about a child of hers which I had heard was ill—I admit that it was my own child—I am married—I was not so drunk that I did not know what I was doing—the person answered from the window where Harriet Wilson used to live; she said "23, Royal Road," and I went there, but could not find her—I will not be sure whether I saw a man or a woman there, because I called at one or two No. 23's; there were several 23's in the street that night—from there I went to the Canterbury Arms, Walworth—I do not remember treating any men there; I will not say that I did not—the landlord did not refuse to give me anything more to drink because I was so drunk—I do not know that he did not give me any more—when I started I had nearly 2l. as far as I recollect, besides the cheques, which amounted to about 140l.—one was for a deposit of 14l. odd—my purse was picked up in the street, close to where I stood when I was telling the men
of my loss—they brought them to me next morning, and the cheques were ill right inside it, but not in the place where I put them; the money was gone—one sovereign and nearly thirteen shillings—there were no females on the bed to my knowledge, but while I was unconscious I can't say—I Saw no woman and know of none—I remember something like a bed, I have a half recollection—I have not the slightest recollection of being accused of slighting the women—I was about two and a half miles from home when I lost my money—I did not walk home, I took a cab—I did not call a policeman, as I was under the impression that the two men were detectives—I was not quite myself—I did not think of driving to the station under the excitement I was in.
CHARLES HARVEY . I keep the Canterbury Arms, Walworth—I remember Withers coming there—I served him with liquor; he drank half of it, and left the rest—he wanted more, and I refused to serve him—the prisoner was there, with others—Withers treated them—I served them once, and then refused to serve anyone at his expense, as I considered him drunk—I recollect his leaving; the prisoner left a minute or two after him—I saw no signs of his having been hocussed—they all left at the same time—I have known the prisoner nine or ten years, and have always considered him, a honest, hardworking man—if there had been any hocussing I must have seen it, and my man is here, who stood beside the prosecutor the whole time he was in the house.
MR. LEWIS. Q. What is the prisoner? A. He works for a builder at jobbing work—I do not visit him—I do not know where he lives.
FRANCIS BOYELL GARTY . I am a surgeon, of Agar Terrace, Brixton—on 23rd August, at 8 o'clock in the morning, I was called to the prosecutor's bedroom, and found him lying on his back in a very exhausted state—his feet and hands were cold, he was almost pulseless, and the pupils of his eyes were firmly contracted—on inquiry I found that he had had stertorous breathing during the night—I asked for the vomit, but it had been thrown away—when I took his hand out of bed to feel his pulse I smelt chloroform—I felt his shirt, put it up to my nose, and found chloroform on both sleeves—my judgment is that he had been drugged first with morphia, and after, to destroy sensibility entirely, had chloroform given to him—a small room like a public-house, with the fumes of tobacco or gas in it, would cause morphia to take effect upon him very shortly, as such things deteriorate the Atmosphere—morphia would increase the amount of vomit—the utensil did not smell of alcohol, such as gin or brandy; I should have detected it by the smell if it had been thrown up.
Cross-examined. Q. Morphia will increase bile, or I suppose beer would not be a good thing for a bilious person? A. No, it would increase it—drunken men vomit a good deal, and if there is bile it would be apt to come up with the beer—I ascertained that he had vomited a good deal—that would decrease his pulse—when a man has been very tipsy over night, you do not expect to find his pulse strong in the morning—I did not examine the room, but am certain he had no bottle of chloroform there—the only trace of it I detected was the smell of his shirt—chloroform is highly volatile, but I detected it in the folds of the shirt.
COURT Q. Is it used for a variety of purposes? A. Yes, but I had been attending him and his family so long that I think he would have consulted me before using it—it is used for toothache.
Walworth Road—on 23rd August the prisoner brought a watch and chain to me, and said he wanted to pledge it for 1l. or 2l.—I asked him if it was his property—he said it was—I told him I did not think so, and asked his name and address—he said Agar, 2, Little Pitt Street—he partly proposed going to the police-station when I told him I could not lend him any money—he again said at the station that it was his property.
Cross-examined. Q. He gave you his name and address, which was correct? A. He said he would go to the station, but he demanded the watch back first, and I said I would not let him have it—I have seen him in the shop before—he came in about four years ago, and said he was going to America, and wanted a few things to complete his equipment, and I gave him credit.
THOMAS BERRY (Policeman). On 25th August, I met the prisoner, and told him I was going to take him for stealing a watch and chain, on the Monday night previous—at the time he was at the station the police had received no information of the robbery—I traced the watch by the maker's name, and the number—he said he was in the Canterbury Arms, and a gentleman came in and had some gin, and paid for a pot of beer, and he had some of it, and when he came outside the gentleman was drunk, and wanted to go home—he said I asked him to come home with me, which he did, and when he got into my room he fell on the bed, between my wife and daughter—there was a row, and the light was put out—I got a light again, and it was put out again; and when I got a light again I saw the gentleman exposing himself—he said he was very sorry, he had got no money, and he gave me his watch, and said I could make 3l. or 4l. of it—I asked him if he knew the gentleman—he said no, he never saw him before, and knew nothing of him—he said "He left my house, and went away, and I never saw anything more of him."
Cross-examined. Q. Did not he say "He had got no money, he was very sorry for what he had done, and gave me his watch and chain to go and pledge?"A. I think those were the words—I do not think anything was said about the gentleman coming in the morning to bring the money, but I think I understood him that he expected the gentleman in the morning—I examined the prisoner's house—there are two or three little cottages all on one floor—there is only one small room, and as soon as you enter from the street you come into it—the prisoner lives in one room, that is all he has—he and his wife and daughter sleep in that room—the daughter's age is seventeen.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate: "When he came into the Canterbury Arms he was the worse for liquor. He called for wine; he was not served. Does not that show he was drunk? I had a drop, and he had the same. He would have me go home with him. I said, 'No;' but he took hold of my arm, and would stick to me. I said, I have no bed for you, but you can come home and sit in the chair.' When I went in I went to the mantelpiece and got a light. He saw the bed and took a view, and dashed the candlestick out of my hand, and got into my bed. My wife and daughter jumped out in a fright. He lays hold of my wife by the middle of the back, and got her up against the bedstead. I said,' My good fellow, what do you mean? I thought you were a different sort of a man.' He said, 'I am very sorry for what I have done; I have got about me; here is my watch; take it to the pawn; you will get 4l. or 5l. for it; I am very sorry.' I said, 'You had best go away, and take your
watch with you.' He said,' No, I won't take the watch with me.' I said, Well, I'll keep the watch till 12 o'clock to-morrow for you; and if you don't come then I will go to the pawn with it.' I followed him out with his hat. He was in such a hurry to go out, I believe nature overpowered him. I think he was too fond of the ladies. He pat on his hat, and walked away as well as I could. He had too much wine in him. If I had meant anything wrong, I should not have gone to the pawn with it, nor to the station afterwards."
EDWARD BORMAN . I am a cab driver—on 23rd August, about 1.20, I was in the Avenue Road, and the prosecutor came up very much excited—he looked as if he had had a drop of something to drink, and had been to sleep, and had just recovered himself—he said he had been robbed of his watch and chain, and purse with a lot of cheques in it, between 100l. and 200l.—that was about 200 yards from Pitt Street—I went back, and picked up the purse where he first spoke to us, when he turned his pockets out, and said that had been robbed of everything—I took it to him—he opened it, and said that everything in it was perfectly right—I saw nothing drop when he spoke to me.
Witnesses the Defence.
MARY AGAR . I am the prisoner's daughter, and live with him—I was before the Magistrate, and was bound over to give evidence to-day—this gentleman and my father came to the door—me and my mother was in bed—they came into the room—I said "Is that you, father"—he said "Yes"—I said "the candle and matches is on the mantelpiece"—while my father was lighting the candle the gentleman came over to the bed and catched hold of me and shook me—I said "Who is that, father?"—the gentleman said "Hold your tongue, and don't halloa; I will give you my watch if you will let me do so and so"—we saw the candle in my father's hand, and I jumped out of bed—he went over to my father, and knocked the candle out of his hand—I went to light it again, and while I was doing so my mother was screaming, and when I had lit it I saw that the gentleman had got hold of her round the middle—he tried to throw her on the bed, but instead of that he threw her against the bedpost, and when he saw the candle alight in my hand, he turned round, and his trowsers were all open, and he had his shirt tucked up in his hand—my father said to him "My good gentleman, I thought you were a different man to what you are, the best thing you can do is to go, because you are a very bad man"—he said "I am very sorry, Agar, if I have committed myself; I have no money about me, here is my watch, you can go to-morrow and raise 4l. or 5l. on it"—my father said "I do not want your watch nor yourself either, so you can go"—he said "Take my watch, because I have committed myself, and I am very sorry for it"—and he took the watch, and the gentleman went out and shut the door after him and he never came for the watch till about 7 o'clock in the evening.
Cross-examined by MR. LEWIS. Q. How old are you? A. Fifteen last April—there is only one bed in my father's room, in which he and my mother and I sleep—there is no other place to sleep in the room, and when my father brought somebody home he must bring him into the bedroom—he never brought anyone into the bedroom before—my mother and I are generally in bed before 12 o'clock—my father knew that my mother and I would be in bed—we have no chloroform in the room—the prosecutor was drunk—when he came up by the side of the bed my mother was in bed with me—he was outside the bed—the candle was out—there was only a
little light from the fire for him to see that the bed was occupied—I saw that he was drunk—he spoke afterwards in the most sober manner, and said "I know, Agar, I have committed myself"—ho made use of my father's name—I did not know him before—my father had not told him his name in the room—I do not know how he came to know it.
MR. GRIFFITHS. Q. Was there much row in the room? A. No—my mother screamed while I was lighting the candle.
JONATHAN CROOK WHITTAKER . I am potman to Mr. Harvey, who keeps the Canterbury Arms—the prisoner came there on Tuesday morning, 23rd August, between 9 and 10 o'clock—I had seen him there the previous night—he wanted a half-pint of beer; but had got no money—he wanted to borrow some, and he did; but I cannot say of who—the barman told me that he had a watch and chain, which the prosecutor had given him overnight—the barman has been here the whole week.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BESLEY conducted the Prosecution.
MESSRS. COOPER and BOTTOMLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. COLLINS the Defence.
EMMA JAMES . I am not single—I have been living with the prisoner formerly, and left off living with him eighteen months ago—I began to live with George Meyer five or six months ago—I do not know where the prisoner lived at this time; but recently he lived in Kent Street, which is about three minutes' walk from Violet Place, where I lived with George Meyer—during those five or six months I have washed a shirt for the prisoner occasionally—he gave them to me to do, and threatened me if I did not—during the four or five months I have lived with Meyer the prisoner has spoken to me when he met me, and said "Do you intend to live with me any more?—I have said "No, I do not; anything I can do for you I will; but I do not intend to live with you any more as a wife, for I was so ill-treated, that I will not"—he said that if I did not he would do something to me" and likewise your man, too"—ou Saturday, 27th August, I was coming along Kent Street, and the prisoner came up to me, and struck me two blows on the head, saying that he wanted the duplicate of his shirt; but I had not got one of any shirt of his—he knocked me down; but I regained my feet, and went home, and George Meyer, the deceased, said "Emma, you are excited"—I made a communication to him, and between 9 and 10 o'clock that evening the prisoner came and knocked at the door—I threw the window up, and saw him outside the door—Meyer ran down stairs, in his trowsers and shirt, without his boots—he returned in a few minutes and said "Emma, give me my boots"—I said "No, George, I shall not," and I threw them under the bed; but he got them, and took his waistcoat off the bed, putting it on as he went down—I tried to stop him, and got before the door; but he threw me—presently, somebody said to me "Mrs. Meyer, your husband is fighting;" and when I got to my room Meyer was holding his bowels in and said "Emma, my dear, I am stabbed"—I laid
him in bed, unbuttoned his trowsers, and saw his poor bowels projecting out—I ran to a doctor and told him, and Meyer was taken to Guy's Hospital on a stretcher—he died on Tuesday morning, 30th August, between 7 and 8 o'clock.
Cross-examined. Q. How long did you live with the prisoner? A. Between five and six months—I left him eighteen months ago—I do not know that be fell off a scaffold and injured himself, but he has a dent on top of big head—I did not go with him to a public-house on this Saturday night, but I went in when he was standing there—he asked me about a duplicate; I made him no reply, because I had no duplicate of a shirt—this was a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes before I saw him at our window—I had washed a black and white shirt for him lately; he asked me to do so, and I did it in pure fear—he asked me if I would pledge a jacket for him—I said "Why don't you go yourself?"but I did go and pledge it—that was about a week before—the prisoner had been drinking on this night, but I cannot say that he was very much intoxicated; he staggered—Meyer had been drinking, and was very tipsy at 2 o'clock in the day, but he had four hours lying down—Mrs. Hutchings called to me, and said I was wanted down stairs—I then looked out at the window, and saw the prisoner at the door, and Meyer smoking a Pickwick at the window—directly he knew it was Bailey he ran down without his boots or waistcoat—he did not remain away more that five minutes, and then ran up to our room again—it was then that he insisted on putting on his boots and waistcoat—about four minutes after he ran down, people called to me, they did not come up—I was on the first floor.
MR. BOTTOMLEY. Q. What do you mean when you say that the prisoner was staggering when you looked out? A. He was staggering, he was by the door—I do not think he saw me look out.
WALTER HUTCHINS . I am sixteen years old, and live with my parents, it 3, Violet Place—on Saturday night, 27th August, I was standing at the door, and the prisoner came up—I knew him well—he asked for Emma—I went to the bottom of the stairs, and called "Emma"—Mr. Meyer came down stairs directly—he was undressed—he went up again, and when be came down he said to Bailey "What do you want 1"—Bailey said "I want a shirt"—Meyer said "I will give you a shirt," and went up stairs—while he was gone up Bailey walked a little way down the street, and back again in the middle of the road—Meyer came down in about two minutes, and went into the road to the prisoner, who was about three yards from the door—I could distinctly see all that passed, but could not hear what they said to each other—I saw Meyer strike Bailey on the ear; it seemed a hard blow—I saw nothing more till I saw Meyer holding his stomach—he said "I am stabbed," and was stooping—until Meyer struck Bailey, Bailey had done nothing—they both went down the Dover Road—after a time Meyer came back, stooping a little and still holding his stomach—he said "Oh, he has stabbed me," and went up into his room—I saw no more of Bailey till the policeman was taking him along the street, at a little before 10 o'clock.
Cross-examined. Q. When the deceased came down first, without his waistcoat or boots, was be very angry? A. Yes—when Meyer said he would go and bring a shirt, he did not bring one—the prisoner had gone a little way down the street, away from the door altogether, and then Meyer came down with his boots and waistcoat on—he was very angry then, and went up to where the prisoner was standing and struck him a violent blow
under the ear, and then the whole thing was over in a minute—Emma did not come down when I called her; she never came down at all—I only heard him ask for the shirt, not for the duplicate of it.
ROBERT CRANSTON . (Policeman M 77). On 27th August I was on duty in Kent Street—I went to 3, Violet Place, and saw the deceased with a wound in his stomach—I went to a lodging-house in Kent Street, and took the prisoner, at 9.50 at night—he was coming into the passage as I was coming out—I said "Your name is Bailey"—he made no answer—I said "I shall charge you with stabbing a man named George Meyer, at 3, Violet Place"—he said he knew nothing about it—I took him to the station, and charged him—he has lost his left arm—I took him to Guy's Hospital about 10.30 the same night, and took him up to the bed where the deceased man was, who said "That is the man who stabbed me with something he drew from his breast pocket"—the prisoner never said a word—I had searched him, but found no knife—on the Sunday Meyer grew worse—Mr. Benson, the Magistrate, went to the hospital, to take his deposition, and I accompanied the prisoner there—the deceased was sworn—his statement was written down, and Mr. Benson signed it—the prisoner had an opportunity of cross-examining the dying man—(Deposition read: GEORGE MEYER on his oath saith, "I live at 3, Violet Place, Dover Road. I am a porter, in the Borough Market. Last night I was at my house, about 9.30. Emma Jones, the woman I am living with, ran up to me; she seemed to have had a blow in the face. The landlady called out, 'Mr. Meyer, you're wanted.' I then went down to the front door. I saw the prisoner there; he said 'I want the ticket of a shirt.' I said she had not got one, I said 'If you don't go away, I'll give you a ticket.' He said 'Will you?' I said 'Yes, I will.' I ran up, and put my waistcoat on. I came down again. I gave him a punch on the side of the head. I said 'Now go, or I'll lock you up.' Immediately I said that, he put his hand into the breast pocket of his coat. He then carne close up to me, and gave me a plunge in the stomach. I felt that I was stabbed, and my entrails were coming out. He made no motion of opening a knife beforehand; it all happened in a minute. I put my hand to the wound. I walked 100 yards or so, to look for a policeman. I then went up, and laid down. I did not see what became of the prisoner. Some constables came, and took me to the station on a stretcher. Some people stood by, but nobody was near me but the prisoner. I have lived with Emma Jones about six months. The prisoner has quarrelled with me about it. I have heard him twice say he'd have his revenge.—George Meyer.")
ALFRED ASHBY . I was housesurgeon at Guy's Hospital on 27th August—George Meyer was brought there a little before 10 o'clock that night in a collapsed state—I had him put to bed, and found a punctured wound an inch and threequarters long, an inch below the naval—the bowels were protruding about two feet through the wound—it appeared to be caused by a sharp instrument—a table knife must have had a very sharp end to produce it—he died on the 30th—I made a post-mortem examination, and found that the wound had caused inflammation, which was the cause of death—I found a cut through his trowsers assimilating with the wound—it seemed to be cut by a sharp instrument.
GUILTY of Manslaughter — Five Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. POLAND and WEIGHTMAN conducted the Prosecution; and MR. W. SLEIGH defended Edward Hart.
HENRY LONSDALE (Detective Officer). On 2nd September, I received information, and on the 3rd I watched 10, Cross Street, Battersea—I saw the prisoners leave together about midday—Ovinger and I followed them for a mile down the road—I then took the woman in custody, and told her it was for passing a counterfeit half-crown in the Wandsworth Road, and attempting to pass another on the 31st—she said "Nt me"—I received this bad half-crown (produced) from Mrs. Scott, and the searcher gave me this other—the prisoner Julia said that Edward Hart was her husband, in his presence, but she afterwards said he was not, and they were only living together.
MICHAEL OVINGER (Policeman W 172). I was with Lonsdale, and took the male prisoner—I told him I should charge him with trying to pan a bad half-crown at Mr. Perry's shop in the Wandsworth Road—I afterwards said I charged him with being concerned with the woman at Mr. Perry's shop on the 30th—he said "I was not there"—I searched him at the station, and took these five half-crowns from his hand, each separately wrapped in paper—he said "Take it, that is what you want."
Cross-examined. Q. Did he open his hand and offer them to you before you asked for them? A. No, he had taken off nearly all his clothes before he gave up the money; he was feeling the sleeve of his shirt as I got to his wrist, and then he gave them to me—I do not know whether they are man and wife—I do not know the woman.
MARIA SCOTT . I am in Mr. Perry's service, a greengrocer, of Wandsworth Road—on 30th August the prisoner bought some potatoes, and gave me a half-crown—I gave her the change, and she left—next day I served her with some potatoes and onions, and she gave me a bad half-crown—I asked her where she got it—she said "My husband gave it to me"—I asked her husband's name—she said "Brown"—I asked where she lived—she pointed down the New Road—she only took 2d. worth of potatoes, and paid me with copper—I kept the half-crown, and sent Smith to watch her—I marked it, and afterwards gave it to the constable—I saw nothing of the man.
JOHN SMITH . I am in Mr. Perry's service—on 31st August the last witness beckoned me into the shop, and I heard her ask the female prisoner there she got the half-crown from—she said "My husband gave it to me," and that his name was Brown—I went with her to 10, Cross Street, which she told me was where she lived.
Cross-examined. Q. Do you know the man? A. Yes, for years in Lam-beth—he is a costermonger—I know nothing else of him—I cannot say whether this is his wife.
MR. POLAND. Q. By what name do you know him? A. Hart—I cannot say whether he was at work in September.
GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude each.
778. HENRY SEARLE (45) , to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of the guardians of the poor of the parish of Camberwell, with intent to steal; also to burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of the said guardians, and stealing therein sugar-tongs and other articles, their property— Nine Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
779. WILLIAM EVANS (28) , to stealing three tame geese, the property of John Wells; also to feloniously assaulting the police in the execution of their duty, with intent to resist his lawful apprehension, having been before convicted— Fourteen Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
780. GEORGE MASON (40) , to receiving a watch and other article, the property of Sophia Eliza Baker, knowing them to have been stolen— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
781. NORTON WESTON (34) , to feloniously marrying Mary Ann Parsons, his wife being then alive; also to feloniously marrying Charlotte Rota, his wife being then alive— Twelve Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
782. JOHN COLLINS (18) , to unlawfully assaulting Charles Clark Austin, a constable, in the execution of his duty— To enter into recognizances to appear for judgment if called on. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
MR. BOTTOMLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. GRIFFITHS the Defence.
MARIA BEEDEN . I am barmaid at the Castle public-house, Camberwell Road—on 31st August, the deceased came in with a female—he called for liquor—the prisoner came in, and I served him with liquor, too—while I was serving another customer, I heard a blow and a full—I turned round, and saw the prisoner dragging a woman to the door from the compartment where the old man had been—when I saw the old man, his head was leaning on the table—I rang for the potman to fetch water to bathe his face—I found him motionless—he was dead—he was talking to the prisoner's wife when he came in.
Cross-examined. Q. Had you known Lewis before this? A. No—I had seen him and the prisoner's wife there before, together—I heard no words between Lewis and the prisoner.
EDWARD CHABOT . I am a surgeon, living at 129, Camberwell Road—I was called on the 31st August to the Castle public-house—I found a dead man there, lying on a table—he had a recent bruise on the forehead, a little abrasion on the nose, blood hanging about the nostrils, a bruise on the face, and the pupils of his eyes somewhat dilated—I made post-mortem examin-ation on the 2nd September—the cause of death was effusion of blood over the anterior part of the brain into the ventricles, which I attribute to the blows.
COURT. Q. It may have been caused by a sudden shock to the system? A. Yes, concussion and hemorrhage—the brain was healthy.
Cross-examined. Q. Used the prisoner and his wife to lodge in the same house? A. No, in one of Mr. Lewis's houses in Islington—Mr. Lewis used to be frequently at the house, twice a week in general—I do not know if he was very often conversing with the prisoner's wife—I only saw her once with Mr. Lewis—she was with him for collecting rents—I did not see her collecting rents.
THOMAS BERRY . I am a detective officer of the P division—I went to the Castle public-house on the 31st August—I saw deceased on the table, dead—I went in search of the prisoner, and found him next morning about 9.30 in a stable in Robin Hood Yard, washing himself—I said "John, I am going to take you into custody for causing his death"—he said "Very well, I am quite willing to go with you, I done no more than any other man would have done; last night I went home a little earlier than usual, found my wife out, and went in search of her; I saw her with the old gentleman, they were laughing and talking, I crossed over the road and allowed them to go past, and when I came back I saw them again, all at once I missed him, and went into the Castle to have a half-pint of beer, and saw them at the bar having a half-quartern of gin; I went round into their compart-ment, I could not stand it any longer; I went towards my wife and hit her in the face. The old gentleman got up and said 'Don't hit the woman,' that was the first thing he said, I then hit him two or three times, he dropped down on to the side of his head, fell on to the table, and his nose bled, but I did not think I had killed him; I then got hold of my wife and dragged her out"—on the road to the station he said "I used to five with that old gentleman in Islington, I removed from there; one day I was at home with a stiff neck, a little girl came to the door to see my missis, I put my head out of the window and saw the old gentleman beckoning her round the corner with his finger, I then went out and caught the two talking together; I cautioned him then that if I ever caught him along with her again it would be the wont for him.
Cross-examined. Q. He said he had only given the gentleman a thrashing? A. Yes.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. BRIXDLEY conducted the Protection.
LAVINIA TALLEY . The prisoner is my husband—I lived with him at 10, New Place, Rotherhithe—on 14th August, I had gone out to meet him—I was at the top of the court at 10 o'clock—he was the worse for liquor that night—he went into the room and sat down—he was talking to himself, and halloaing and singing—I asked him to go to bed—he began raving and calling me names—I hit him with a piece of wood across the shoulders—he got up and struck me with a can across the head till I was insensible—I was taken to the hospital.
CHARLOTTE TALLEY . I am the prisoner's daughter—on this Thursday evening my father came home about 10 o'clock, the worse for liquor—my mother asked him to go to bed—he jumped up, halloaed, and I ran out—he said he wanted two bits of iron to poke mother's eyes out—I took them with me out of the room—I saw mother strike father with a piece of wood
—when I went up stairs mother was bleeding—she was up in the corner, lying on the floor—she was not able to speak to me.
SAMUEL LILLEY . I am a Fellow of the College of Surgeons, and live at 70, Union Grove, Rotherhithe—on 4th August, I was called to 10, New Place, and found the first witness lying in a corner, in a fainting state, bleeding copiously from a wound on the head—the artery was severed—she was afterwards sent to the hospital.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate: "I was at work very hard till 8 o'clock in the evening, and only had two pints of beer."
GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. — One Month's Imprisonment.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, 24TH OCTOBER, 1870.