CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
TENTH SESSION, HELD AUGUST 17TH, 1874.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
TAKEN IN SHORT-HAND, BY
JAMES DROVER BARNETT
Short-hand Writers to the Court,
ROLLS CHAMBERS, No. 89, CHANCERY LANE.
THE POINTS OF LAW AND PRACTICE
REVISED AND EDITED, BY
EDWARD T. E. BESLEY, ESQ.,
OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, BARRISTER-AT-LAW.
STEVENS & SONS, 119, CHANCERY LANE.
On the Queen's Commission of
OYER AND TERMINER AND GAOL DELIVERY
The City of London,
AND GAOL DELIVERY FOR THE
COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, AND THE PARTS OF THE COUNTIES OF ESSEX, KENT, AND SURREY, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT,
Held on Monday, August 17th, 1874, and following days,
BEFORE THE RIGHT HON. SIR ANDREW LUSK , BART., M.P., LORD MAYOR of the City of London; Sir GILLERY PIGOTT , Knt., one of the Barons of Her Majesty's Court of Exchequer; Sir JOHN RICHARD QUAIN, Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's Court of Queen's Bench; THOMAS QUESTED FINNIS, Esq., JOHN CARTER , Esq., Sir THOMAS GABRIEL , Bart, and Sir THOMAS DAKIN , Knt., Aldermen of the said City; The Right Hon. RUSSELL GURNEY , Q.C., M.P., Recorder of the said City; THOMAS SCAMBLER OWDEN, Esq., and JOHN PATERSON , Esq., Aldermen of the said City; Sir THOMAS CHAMBERS , Knt., Q.C., M.P., Common Serjeant of the said City; and ROBERT MALCOLM KERR , Esq., LL.D., Judge of the Sheriff's 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.
Sir CHARLES WHETHAM, Knt., Alderman.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
LUSK, MAYOR. TENTH SESSION.
A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two start (**) that they have been more than once in custody—an obelisk (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT.—Monday, August 17th, 1874.
Before Mr. Recorder.
500. EDWARD TICKET (17), FREDERICK PETER MILLER (17) , to stealing two post letters containing two orders for the payment of 6l. and 1l. 18s., the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
502. ROBERT POLLOCK (31) , to stealing a post letter containing a shilling and sixpence and thirty-three postage stamps, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General— Five Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MESSRS. POLAND and BEASLEY conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN PYER . I am chief clerk at the Thames Police Court—on the 28th May a woman named Sarah Legust was brought up in custody on a charge of assaulting Sarah Cronin—there was a remand until the 4th June and on that day Browning was called for the defence—he tendered himself and was accepted, and he gave evidence—I took down his evidence—he was sworn—I produce my notes of his evidence, and they are correct (Read: "I live at 43, Martha Street—I am a shoemaker—I recollect Monday, the 25th May—I saw her (Cronin) at 11.30 at night—I heard cries of police and murder from her—I heard her say 'Will no one go for a constable, I am bleeding to death'—I looked out of window—I saw the complainant streaming with blood from a cut of the eye—she vowed vengeance against her husband for doing it—she then turned on the land-lord saying 'he has only got one lung, and I will tear that out of him'—I did not send for a constable, I went to bed,"The case was remanded until the next day, and on that day Browning was recalled, and he said in reply to questions by the magistrate "It was on the Monday night I saw this,
not Wednesday; it was Whit Monday. The complainant is the woman I saw."That was all the evidence—it was read over by the magistrate in the hearing of Browning—he made no remark about it.
Prisoner. Did I not contradict the statement that I saw her streaming with blood? Witness. No—I think on a subsequent occasion he said "She said she was streaming with blood," but at the time the magistrate read the note over he made no remark—he did afterwards when he was charged with perjury—I am sure it was read over by the magistrate after the evidence had first been given—he was asked if it was correct, and I don't think he made any observation—the magistrate usually says "Is that correct?" and sometimes they say "Yes," and sometimes they do not speak—I am quite sure what I took down was what the man said.
SARAH CRONIN . I am the wife of Henry Cronin, and live in Cable Street—on Wednesday evening, 27th May, a person named Legust assaulted me, about 9.15, at the bottom of Dean Street—she ran behind me and struck me with a street door key on the eyebrow, and called me a b----sow—it cut my forehead, and I bled very much—I was taken to the station house after I gave her into custody—I made a charge against her—a surgeon was sent for, and my wound was attended to at the station—I had no wound or mark over my eye at all before that night when the wound was inflicted—that was the Wednesday after Whit Monday—on the Whit Monday I had some disturbance with my husband about 11.30 or 11.45—he turned me out of the room on to the landing—I went down the stairs and I asked for the baby when I got to the bottom—he gave me the baby at the street door and I went straight to the station house to make complaints of him to see what I could do with him—a constable told me I had no marks of violence, and they could not do anything for me—I afterwards went to my sister's, Catherine Keefe—she lives about five minutes' walk off—I stayed there that night, and I did not return to my husband till the Thursday—on the Friday morning I went and gave evidence before the magistrate and described the assault by Sarah Legust—the prisoner was called as one of the witnesses for the defence—it is not true that on Whit Monday night I said I was bleeding to death—I was not bleeding, and I did not say so—I did not vow vengeance against my husband for having wounded me, and I did not make any complaint against him for having wounded me—I did not call out in the street that night after I had got the baby "Police!" and "Murder!"—I went straight to the station house from the street door—Mr. and Mrs. Nodding, who are here, are friends of mine, and saw me on the Tuesday and Wednesday.
Prisoner. Every word she has stated now will be contradicted by my witnesses. I am positive she came under my window on Whit Monday night and called "Police and murder," and she said, "Will no kind neighbour go for a policeman." Witness. I never said such words, and I never went near his window—I did not complain of my husband until I went to the station, and then I complained that he attempted to throw me down the stairs.
HENRY NODDING . I live at 6, Upper Cornwall Street, and am a rope maker—on the night of Wednesday, 27th May, about 9.15 o'clock, I was at the corner of Dean Street—I saw a crowd of people, and I went to look—I saw the woman Legust take a key from her pocket and open the street door, and then I saw her deliberately take the key from the door and strike Mrs. Cronin over the forehead—I saw the blood flow—the woman ran into the
house, and Mrs. Cronin sent for a constable, and I came and took her out of the passage—I did not see any blow on Mrs. Cronin's face before she was struck with the key.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I ought to have got to work that night, but I did not go.
MARY ANN NODDING I am the wife of the last witness—I know Mrs. Cronin—I was at my house on the Tuesday in "Whitsun week, the 26th May, about 11.30 in the morning—I spoke to her—at that time she had no wound or bruise upon her forehead—I am quite sure of that—I saw her again on the following evening, "Wednesday, about 8 o'clock—I met her in Dean Street, and spoke to her—she had no wound or bruise or cut on her face at that time—about two hours later the same evening I saw her again—she then had her forehead strapped up.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. She had no black eye when I saw her on the Tuesday—she had a little swelling on the face.
CATHERINE KEEFE . I live at 17, Sheridan Street, and am the sister of Sarah Cronin—on Monday night, 25th May, she went home with me to my house about 12.30—she had no cut on her face at that time—she stopped at my place for a fortnight afterwards with me—on Wednesday, 27th May, about 8.50 I was with her in Martha Street, where she lived—she had not any cut on her face then till Sarah Legust came and struck her with a key—I was with my sister when she did it-Sarah Legust struck her with the street-door key over the left eye—it bled very much, and the woman ran in the house.
THOMAS SMITH (Policeman K 381). On Wednesday night, 27th May, about o'clock, I was in Martha Street—I saw Sarah Cronin there bleeding from a cut over the eye, and from what she said I took Sarah Legust into custody—she was taken before the magistrate the following day—I saw the wound on Mrs. Cronin's forehead at the Police Station, and I sent for Mr. Mahoney, the surgeon, to examine it.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. Nothing was said about the key until we got to the station; at the station she said it was done with a key.
LAWRENCE MAHONEY . I am a surgeon, and live at 20, Collett Place, Commercial Road—on the 27th May, about 9.30 at night, I was sent for to the Police Station, and saw Sarah Cronin there—she had a cut extending from the inner corner of the left eyebrow upwards about an inch in length—it was quite recent—it was bleeding at the time—it was such a wound as would be inflicted by a door key.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. It went through the skin, but had not penetrated to the bone—I don't think a snake keeper ring would inflict such a wound.
HENRY CRONIN I am the husband of Sarah Cronin—on Whit Monday I had a quarrel with my wife, and I turned her out of the room on to the landing—I did not strike her, or inflict any injury on her, or cut her at all—she had no wound or injury to the face when I turned her out on to the landing—I afterwards gave her the baby, and she went away—I inquired for her and found she had gone to her left the house" about 10 or 11 o'clock—she did not call murder and police, or say she was bleeding, or vow vengeance against me for wounding her.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I had not been fighting with her before.
Prisoner's Defence. I am a widower. I am 64 years of age. On the
Whit Monday about 11.30 I went to bed, and, after I had been there some little time, I heard someone come out next door. My window was up about three or four inches. I heard them come out next door and call out "Police!" and "Murder!" I did not get out of bed then, but when she said "Is there no kind neighbour will get up and fetch a policeman," I got out of bed and lifted the window up and saw the woman in a stooping position, but I did not see her bleeding. As I opened the window she said, "I am streaming with blood"—after people began to run in all directions I slid down the window, and with that I heard her call out most fearfully against her husband for ill-using her and injuring her, and after that she turned on to the landlord, and she said "He has only got one lung, and I will tear that out of him," and after that I sat in my room till past 1 o'clock and she went on most dreadfully, which my witnesses will prove. Mr. Paget gave me in charge and this woman, for stating what we did, and I have got five witnesses to come to-day, and they will confirm everything we said, and the woman she was with after 12 o'clock got a tremendous black eye that ever you saw in your life; and as for Nodding he was not there at all, he went into work. I have applied for summonses to indict him for perjury; he knows that.
MATILDA WATTS . I live at 44, Martha Street, St. George's-in-the-East, right opposite where the Cronins lived—on Whit Monday I went to an excursion, and I came home just about 12 o'clock—I was bidding a neighbour next door good night when a person came from 41 opposite screaming "Murder and police, will no kind Christian go and fetch a policeman for a poor sinner, no one would help me in the house when my husband was beating me on the stairs with my baby in my arms"—I don't know the name of the woman—I knew her by sight—that is the woman (Sarah Cronin)—I did not see any mark on her then—she came and asked for a glass of water, and' it was given to her, and she rinsed her mouth out and spat it in the road—I did not see any blood on her face, it was too dark—she did not leave the street from the time she came out screaming till two policemen drove her away—that must have been about 1.30.
Cross-examined. I saw her again on the Tuesday in the day time—she had discolouration under the eye—I did not see anything on her forehead—the mark under the eye could not have been caused by a had face or toothache—I have had the toothache, but I never had it as bad as that.
JANE NEWMAN . I live at 71, Lucas Street, Commercial Road—Cronin lived opposite my mother's house—I saw her on the Tuesday morning after Whit Monday—I was standing at my mother's door when she passed, and she had a bruise underneath the left eye.
Cross-examined. I did not see any cut or wound over the eye at all.
PHOEBE WATTS . I live with Matilda Watts—on Whit Monday night I was standing at my door, when the woman Cronin came out screaming "Murder!" "Police!" and "Will no kind Christian go and fetch a policeman to a poor sinner?"—it was nearly 12 o'clock—after a little while she came across to the neighbours next door and asked for a drink of water—the young woman next door went and fetched a glass and gave it her, and she rinsed her mouth out and spat it outside the door—I did not see any blood on her face at that time—the next morning she had a bruise on her cheek underneath the eye.
Cross-examined. I did not see anything of the prisoner—the mark under the eye might have arisen from a swollen face, I could not say—there was
no mark or cut over the forehead—it was just on 2 o'clock when me and my; daughter went indoors, and the neighbours next door and we left her outside with a mob that she gathered round—two policemen came—I mear she was there just on two hours.
MARY ANN CARTER . I lodge with Mrs. Watts at 44, Martha Street—on Whit Monday night I was awoke by hearing a noise—I came out of the back room into the front room and opened the window, and I heard Sarah Cronin screaming,"Murder!" and "Police!" and she said, "Is there no kind Christian that will come and help a poor sinner?"—she said her husband was beating her—I saw a crowd round the door—I did not come down stairs—I did not see whether she had any blood, on her face—her hair was hanging down.
LOUISA FINK . I did live at 42, Martha Street, next door to Mrs. Watts—I was there on Whit Monday night—I and my husband were in bed, and about 11.45 we were woke up with the cries of police and murder—we got up and dressed ourselves and went down to the door, and saw Mrs. Cronin outside with her hair hanging down her back, and she said "Will no kind Christian help a poor sinner?" and she put her hands to her face and said "Look at me, look at me; no one would help me while my husband was beating me with my baby in my arms"—she sat down on the stones for a few moments, and then she got up and came across to me and asked for a glass of water—I went up stairs and got a glass and gave it to her—she drank some and rinsed her mouth out, and gave it back to me—she continued her abuse till about 1.45—a few minutes before she left off I went up stairs, but I came down again; I could not sleep.
Cross-examined. We had been in bed a few minutes, and we got up, dressed, and came down stairs—we looked out of window first, but we could not sleep and came down—I did not see anything the matter with Sarah Cronin that night only the bruise—I did not see anything of the prisoner.
CAROLINE WILLHOUSE . I live at 37, Martha Street—Mrs. Cronin was in my house some time in the evening on Whit Monday—I saw her again after her husband had beat her, and she came out in the street—she made a noise in the street, and then she came to my door and wanted to come in, and my husband said "No, where you made your row you must go and finish it," and she went back to her own door—it was about 12 o'clock as near as may be—her face was all swollen and bruised on the right side—I did not see any blood—I stayed till her sister came and took her home, and then her sister came back and got the gown from her husband from the place where she lived—it was her sister, Catherine Keefe, that took her home, and it was Catherine Keefe came back for her gown, and there was no more noise afterwards—it was about 12.45 she came back—she had taken her home and came back for the gown—Sarah Cronin gave a woman a black eye before that, before her sister Catherine came up—the woman came and persuaded her to go in and she would not go, and she turned round and gave the woman a black eye right at my shoulder—I saw no marks of blood about her.
SARAH CRONIN (re-called). I did not have any quarrel with any woman at all—she came to give evidence before the magistrate that I gave her that black eye, and the magistrate would not listen to her—it was a make up—I had a swelled face, but I had no bruise.
brought her home with me, and she stopped a fortnight at my place—she had no mark, and she was not bleeding—I went back to get my own gown that was in her room about five minutes afterwards.
Recommended to mercy by the Jury—Six Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. POLAND and BEASLEY conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN PYER . On the 4th June the prisoner was called as a witness for the defence in the case of a person named Legust who was charged with having assaulted Sarah Cronin—she was sworn, and I took notes which I produce—they are correct. (Read: "I live at 27, Martha-street—I am the wife of John Legon, a waterman—I live six doors from the complainant—at 11.45 on Monday night, 25th May, I heard cries of "Murder!" and "Police!"—I went to my door and saw the complainant bleeding from the eye—she said she would lock her husband up for doing it—I saw no constable there while I was stood there.") That was the evidence on the first day after Browning had been examined—there was an adjournment until the next morning, and she was re-called and she gave this additional evidence in reply to questions by the magistrate. "I am sure it was on the Monday night, Whit Monday—I am quite sure it was complainant that I saw bleeding from a cut over the eye—I am sure she was bleeding—I saw nothing of the disturbance on Wednesday."That was read over to her by the magistrate, and no objection was made—the magistrate asked questions and she answered, and I put the question and answer together.
Prisoner. I believed I was telling the truth.
COURT. Q. Are you a cousin of Sarah Cronin? A. Yes.
The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate: "It is the words I heard the woman repeat—I saw the woman's eye strapped up on the latter part of the week, and I thought from what she said it was done that night."
Prisoner's Defence. I did believe, seeing the woman's eye strapped up, that it was what took place on the Monday.
Recommended to mercy by the Jury—One Month's Imprisonment.
MR. BESLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MESSRS. HARRIS and PEILE the
The libel was read as follows: "124, Marylebone Road, 14th May, 1874. To Mr. A. Micklethwaite, 124, Marylebone Road. Sir,—I omitted last night to give you another extract from the last edition of 'Every Man his own Lawyer,' under the head of Landlord and Tenant. My year's tenancy of your rooms dates, therefore, from the date of the expiry of your notice to quit, viz., from the 24th April, 1874, and from that date I can if I choose, (and I do choose, in consequence solely of the reputed Mrs. Micklethwaite's
disgraceful and cowardly note of last night) remain a year in your house and then prove all the other conditions of your contract with me, but don't be alarmed; you will be met in the County Court on the 21st, and we shall then see whether you and your alleged wife can commit perjury as glibly as I should not be at all surprised at your doing, &c, &c. What your reputed wife is I was told on Sunday night, and the person who informed me declared it to be his intention to set a watch upon her and in time prove her to be what he alleged she had long been and was at present. ROBERT MILLAR, M.D., Surgeon-Major. You little know the kind of man you have to deal with."
ARTHUR MICKLETHWAITE . I live at 124, Marylebone Road, and am a crinoline manufacturer—I have been married since 1871—I was married by license at Broxbourne—in March this year the Defendant became a lodger at my place—I have become acquainted with his handwriting—these two sheets of paper, marked A and B, are in his writing—the papers were handed to me by my servant, Annie Constant—she rapped at my bedroom door and gave them to me—the Defendant was lodging in my house at that time—this letter was also sent to me on 15th July in the Defendant's writing—before he was committed for trial he was bound over by Mr. Mansfield to keep the peace for six months towards me—that was on the 11th June—he was committed for trial after that.
Cross-examined. The dispute between us was that I gave him notice to quit and he would not leave—he said he was a yearly tenant—he never said he would quit for the sake of peace—he did not say "I will quit if I am a weekly tenant, and will pay for the last week I am there," and I did not say "You are a yearly tenant, and shall pay me for the whole year"—I gave him notice to quit on 16th April'—on 27th April there was an action in the County Court for 7l. 6s. for gas fixings and breach of contract—Dr. Millar was the complainant—it was dismissed by the judge with 25s. costs for me—he has entered another action since, and I believe that is now pending in the Court of Common Pleas—I don't know that there is one to be tried in the County Court on the 24th of this month—I have not received any notice—I believe it was on the 16th May there was a summons for an assault—that was when he was bound over to keep the peace—the date of the libel is the 14th of May—I believe the assault was before the libel—on the 22nd May I levied on the defendant's goods—he never proved to me he was a yearly tenant—the judge did not tell me I was wrong—he was nonsuited—I summoned him for an assault on the 3rd June—he took out a cross summons against me, and they were both heard on 11th June, and were both dismissed by the magistrate—I don't know that he summoned my wife last week for an assault—I was abroad—I have been absent three weeks—this letter is in my handwriting. (This was dated 13th April, 1874, and addressed to Mr. R. Millar). I wrote that letter—he had written eighteen infamous letters before that—I said it would do for black women and not for white, because he went about the house naked, without his shirt on, and I had three young girls in the house—one of the girls is here, Annie Constant—I did not hear the magistrate say he would not believe a word she said—there are three sisters, and two of them saw him go up and down the stairs only with a short shirt on—I have seen it myself, and I forbad him, and he spat in my face—I have seen him half-a-dozen times—I saw him on the boat-race day—I don't know the date—he went up and down stairs with only his shirt on, and my girls came and told me, and I saw him go into his
room—he got into his room before I could get to speak to him—it was in March, I believe; it was the boat-race day, at 8 o'clock in the morning—it Was not an Indian dress of calico trousers and jacket; it was nothing but his bare flesh that was to be seen—I swear that—I said in my letter that he went to 120, but they would not let him have rooms for double the rent, as the man was a detective, and he was cautious as to whom he had in his house—I don't know who the detective was, or that the defendant ever went to 120—I thought he was a fit person for the Colney Hatch Asylum—I also said in my letter, "I shall forbid my girls coming in your rooms, and I hope you will do the same, as you have stirred the dirty water so you must drink it"—the girls used to wait upon him at breakfast, and he "went about the room in an abusive manner and a naked state, and they complained to me several times, and I forbad them to go in, and I told him I hoped he would forbid them likewise to go in—I shall know Dr. Millar is married when his wife shows her certificate, and not before—I have always treated her as Mrs. Millar, and I have been told to the contrary—I never told Dr. Millar to his face that his alleged wife was no wife of his—at the time when I forbade the girls to go into his room the lady was living with him as his wife, and also at the time when he went naked about the passages—they had a bedroom, and sitting room and bath room—I don't know that there was any detective living at 120; if there was a street named I could tell—I wrote this, "You have been to 120, but they won't let you have their rooms if you were to pay double, as the man is a detective, and he is cautious who he has in his house"—I wrote that out of my own head—he had written me sateen or eighteen insulting letters, and that was the only one I answered; his abuse has been disgraceful, and when I wanted to correct him he spat in my face—I know Mr. Friar—I recollect him coming to my house on the 16th May—that was after the libel letter—he came there to do some gas work. (The Court ruled that evidence could not he given of what took place after the libel.) I know Dr. Millar's brother—I saw him after the libel—I don't know Mr. Maynard—there was a person came and brought some article of furniture for Dr. Millar—I can't swear whether that was before the libel—I won't swear it was not—part of this letter of the 13th May is in my wife's writing—the bottom part is not; it strikes me that is Dr. Millar's—I did not see my wife write that, and I know nothing of it—I did not tell my wife to write, and I knew nothing about it.
Re-examined, Sixteen or eighteen letters had been sent before I answered the letter which has been put in—sometimes letters came every morning—in my letter of the 13th April I said ""You can leave at once and make room for some one else"—I was willing he should leave because he did not pay his rent—from the 13th April till 14th May when the libel was pinned to the chair I never wrote a word—he is still in my house.
ANNIE CONSTANT . I was living with Mr. and Mrs. Micklethwaite at 124, Marylebone Road—on 14th May, about 7.30, I went into the hall and found these two papers pinned on the stool—Mr. Hearson, a lodger, was there, and he read them—I let him have them to read at the time I found them.
Cross-examined. I found the letter on the 14th May, Thursday—I said before the magistrate it was the 24th, but that was a mistake—I did not swear at another time that the defendant seized my sister by the throat and tore her button off and sprained her wrist—the paper was open, there was no envelope—I did not read it myself—it was pinned on to the stool—I could not read the writing very well myself—it was on the day I found it I took it to Mr. Micklethwaite.
HENRY CHICHESTER HEARSON . I am living at 124, Marylebone Road, and am manager at the printing office of the Church Herald in the Strand—I have been a lodger with Mr. Micklethwaite for twelve months—I saw the papers in the hall on the 14th May as I was going out—they were pinned on the stool—these are the papers I saw—I read them—I had seen other letters there repeatedly in the same handwriting.
Witness for the Defence.
SAMUEL FRIAR . I am a gasfitter and steam apparatus engineer and live at Park Place, Dorset Square—I am one of the defendant's bail—I remember going to his lodging to do some gas work, that was between the 12th and the 20th May—I saw Mr. Micklethwaite there—it was on the day the assault had been committed by the defendant against the complainant—it must have been the 16th.
Cross-examined. The defendant was in his dressing gown when I saw him and he had on slippers and socks—I considered him as decent as any man I know—he has paid, me for my work.
The prisoner received a good character.
To enter into recognizances in 100l. and two sureties in 50l. to come up and receive judgment when called on, and to keep the peace for Twelve Months'.
NEW COURT.—Monday, August 17th, 1874.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
507. WILLIAM SAMUEL MORRIS (46) , to embezzling 220l. and 288l., also 260l. and 320l., also 132l. and 94l. of William Hardwick Bradbury and others, his masters. MR. M. WILLIAMS, for the prosecution, stated that the prisoner's deficiencies amounted to 8,000l. during eight years, 6,000l. of which had been returned to the prosecutors— Five Years' Penal Servitude. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MESSRS. COLERIDGE and COOK conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM HUTT . I am 13 years old and live at 6, White Hart Court, Gracechurch Street—on 24th July, about 9 o'clock I was in Holborn, and the prisoner came and said "Will you go over and get me half an ounce of tobacco?'—he gave me a florin—I went over to the public-house and gave it to the barmaid who put it in the tester and broke it—I went outside with the landlord and said to the prisoner, who had come across the road "This., is a bad two shilling bit"—he said "Where is it?"—I said "At the public-house"—he was walking away and the landlord stopped him—these are the two pieces (produced).—I am sure they are the same he gave me.
Prisoner. I never saw you before. Witness. I am sure of you.
ROBERT DUNTHORNE I keep the Coach and Horses, Holborn—on 24th July Hutt came in and asked the barmaid for half an ounce of tobacco, which came to 2d., and put down a florin—she broke it in the tester as it is now—in consequence of what the boy said I went out with him and he went up to the prisoner who was standing a few paces from the house on the same side of the way—I caught hold of him and told him he had given the boy a
bad florin to change at my house—he said "It is the greatest mistake you ever made in your life"—I gave him in charge.
HENRY DUKE (City Policeman 302). On the evening of 24th July Dunthome gave the prisoner into my custody, and I received these pieces—at the station he dropped seven bad florins, four shillings, four sixpences, and nine pence, from up his left sleeve, and said "That is the bulk, it is enough for you, I should think."
Prisoner. I said nothing about the bulk, I said "Here is a lot more of these things."
Prisoner's Defence. I picked up a parcel with seven or eight florins in it—I did not know they were bad.
He was further charged with having been convicted of uttering counterfeit coin in June, 1872, to which he
PLEADED GUILTY— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
MESSRS. COLERIDGE and COOK conducted the Prosecution; and MR. FRITH
FREDERICK DOWNS (City Policeman 102). For about ten days before 29th July, I and three other constables were watching the Red Hart public house, Fetter Lane, and also No. 7, John Street, Clerkenwell, where Hughes and Kite lived (see next case), and saw Hughes and Kite go out daily and go to the Red Hart—they always left in the morning and stayed at the Red Hart till night, coming out at intervals to get food—I saw numbers of people who I knew in communication with them, one of whom was the prisoner Williams, who has just been tried, and the others were people who I had seen at police courts charged with uttering bad money—I saw them go to the Red Hart on 29th July; they were in and out till 3 o'clock in the afternoon—Reede and Kent entered the Red Hart between 3 and 4 o'clock, while Hughes and Kite were there—they all spoke together, and Kite went out somewhere and returned and spoke to Reede and Kent, who remained together some little time, and a man not in custody came to the door of the Red Hart, looked up and down the street, nodded his head, and Kent and Reede immediately left the house—a policeman followed them down Fetter Lane and Fleet Street to St. Clement's Church in the Strand, where Reede passed to the left side of the road, and Kent remained in the right—I took Reede, and said "I want what money you have about you"—he said "I have got no money," and commenced struggling—I said "Let's have it"—he thrust himself out of ray arms and his hand went to his mouth—I saw some florins in his mouth, pushed him into a tailor's shop, caught him by the throat, and said "If you don't spit them out I will choke you"—he got from my grasp again, and I believe he swallowed them, as he did not spit them out—he then submitted to be searched, and I found only three half-pence on him.
ISAAC GILBERT (City Policeman). I had been watching the Red Hart and 7, John Street before 29th July—T have heard Downs' evidence, and corroborate it—I saw him take Reede—Kent then put his hand in his pocket and pulled out this little paper parcel, and put it up his right sleeve—I caught hold of his hand and said "I will have that paper parcel if you don't
mind"—he said "Who are you?"—I said "I am detective officer of the City police, and I have reason to believe that that parcel contains counterfeit coin"—he endeavoured to get his hand to his mouth, but I prevented him—we had a struggle—a policeman in uniform came up, and then he said "I know this man is a policeman, I will give it to him"—he opened his hand, and the policeman took this parcel out—it contained four counterfeit crowns—I took him to the station, and afterwards went to 7, John Street, Clerkenwell, a coffee shop—I watched for a quarter of an hour, and saw Hughes and Kite come out—Hughes was carrying this box—I stopped him and asked him what he had got in that box—he said "I don't know" Halse, another constable, joined me, and we took them both back to the coffee shop, went up stairs to the room in which they lived, and saw Halse find this other box (produced).—the two boxes were taken to the station—the one Hughes was carrying contained 170 shillings, all done up separately in paper, 40 florins, and 20 half-crowns—it was directed "Mr. Turner, 37, Maynooth Street, Newport, Monmouthshire"—when I took Hughes he threw away this envelope, which bears the same address as that on the box.
DANIEL HALSE (City Policeman 607). I was with Gilbert watching John Street, Clerkenwell, on the 29th—we met Hughes and Kite and went back to the house—Kite gave me this purse, containing a key and 1l. 8s. 4d. in good money—we went up to the third floor—I opened the door with a key which Kite gave me, and saw this box, which I opened with the key Kite gave me, and it contained 55 shillings and 19 half-crowns, all counterfeit, also some duplicates, and an envelope directed to Mr. Hughes, Red Hart, Fetter Lane, the post-mark upon which is "Newport, Monmouthshire"—I found on Hughes 3l. 4s. 0 1/2 d. in sixpences and shillings.
Kent. Q. Did you ever see me in company with these people? A. No.
GEORGE WESTWOOD (Policeman). I had been watching the Red Hart and saw Hughes and Kite there almost daily for eight days—after they were taken I went to John Street, made a further search in their room, and found this counterfeit sovereign.
Cross-examined. Kite lived with Hughes as his mistress—I never saw Reede at my house.
WILLIAM WEBSTER . The whole of these coins are bad—among those found On Kent is a half-crown of 1819, and two half-crowns of 1846; and in Reede's box I find two half-crowns of 1819, and four of 1846, from the same moulds as Kent's—those in the other box found in the room are all bad, there are eight half-crowns of 1819, and five half-crowns of 1846, from the,. same moulds as the others—this is a Sydney sovereign; it is bad.
REEDE— GUILTY —He was further charged with having been before convicted of a like offence, to which he
KENT— GUILTY —He was further charged with having been before convicted of a like offence.
GEORGE WINMILL (Policeman C 21). I produce a certificate. (Read:. James Gollett, convicted at Monmouth Assizes, March, 1847, of making Counterfeit coin—sentence eight years' penal servitude). I was present—Kent is the man—I apprehended him.
REEDE PLEADED GUILTY *— Fifteen Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. COLERIDGE conducted the Prosecution; ME. FRITH defended Kite.
KENT— GUILTY *— Fifteen Years'Penal Servitude.
HUGHES— GUILTY — Five Years' Penal Servitude.
KITE— GUILTY — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. COLERIDGE and COOKE conducted the Prosecution.
MARIA LOUISA FRISBY . I am barmaid at the Hole-in-the-Wall, Chancery Lane—on 26th June, about 10 p.m., the prisoner asked me for 3d. of brandy, and gave me a bad sovereign—I took it to the landlady, who told the prisoner it was bad—he then gave me a fourpenny piece.
Prisoner. I have a doubt that that is not the sovereign I put down on the counter. Witness. You put it into my hand, and I took it straight into the bar parlour, and my mistress took it from me, went into the bar with it, and spoke to you with it in her hand—I had given change for a bad sovereign without knowing it four or five hours before—that coin was put on the mantelpiece by itself, and we have got it now—when you gave me the sovereign I felt that it was light.
EMMA TIVER . I am the wife of John Tiver, of the Hole-in-the-Wall, Chancery Lane—on the night of the 26th June the last witness brought me a bad sovereign—I went into the bar, and told the prisoner it was bad—he said that he got it at the races, and asked me to let him look at it—I refused and gave him in custody—we had another bad sovereign on the mantel-piece—I saw it there yesterday—the prisoner paid with a fourpenny piece.
WILLIAM GOFF (Policeman A 482). The prisoner was given into my custody with this sovereign—he was taken to the Police Court, remanded, and subsequently discharged—he gave his name Henry William Whiting.
ELEANOR MARY SNELLGROVE . I am barmaid at the Devonshire Arms, Denman Street—on 10th July, between 4 and 5 o'clock the prisoner came in for a bottle of lemonade, and gave me a half-sovereign—I said I think, this is a bad one," and handed it to the landlord, who said It is bad"—the prisoner said "I will make you a present of it"—he paid with a sixpence and walked out—he was afterwards given in charge.
Prisoner. I said that I was sorry it was bad, and that it was given to me to get a bottle of soda water. Witness. You did not.
JOHN OLDING . I keep the Devonshire Arms—on 10th July the last witness handed me a half-sovereign—I bent it, told the prisoner it was bad, and asked him how he got it—he said that it was given to him at Newmarket, where he came from that morning, and that he would make me a present of it—he paid with a sixpence—I followed him out—he ran down a court—I waited till he came up again, and gave him in charge—another man was following him, and spoke to him, but I could only manage one—the other man had been in my house to see who was behind the bar, he had a rose in his coat.
Prisoner's Defence. I received the sovereign at Newmarket, and the half-sovereign was given to me to get some soda-water. I know the sovereign was good, but they wanted to put the bad one upon me, because I was drunk.
GUILTY — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. COLERIDGE and COOKE conducted the Prosecution.
LYDIA WRIGHT . I live at 370, Holloway Road—I serve in a confectioner's shop—on the 23rd July I served the prisoner with a twopenny bun—he paid with a half-crown—I discovered that it was bad before, he left, but did not tell him so—I afterwards ran after him, and told him that he had given me a bad half-crown—he said "Oh, have I; I was not aware that I had any bad money about me"—he was going to give me a good shilling, but I held him by the arm, and took him back to the shop—I then took the shilling and gave him the change—I gave the half-crown to my employer.
WILLIAM BEALE . I was called into the shop and saw the prisoner there—the last witness gave me a half-crown—I asked the prisoner where he got it—he said that he took it in a public house two evenings ago—I gave him in custody with the coin.
GEORGE FARR (Policeman Y 416). I took the prisoner and received this coin—I found on him at the police station two other half-crowns made in the same mould—he said "I did not know I had got them on me, or I should have swallowed them.
Prisoner's Defence. The young woman put the half-crown in a box before she gave me the change. As to the other two, if I had known they were in my pocket I should have thrown them away.
GUILTY — Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MR. DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZABETH DAVIS . I am barmaid at the Black Bull, 122, Holborn—on. 1st July I served the, prisoner with a pot of beer—he gave me a florin and I gave him the change—I then sounded the florin and bent it—he was going out, but I called him back, but he ran away—I put the coin on the desk and it was taken out with the rubbish in the morning—on 8th July the prisoner came again for a pot of beer and gave me another bad florin—I gave him in custody—I recognised him in a moment.
HENRY DUPE (City Policeman 302). I was called on 8th July and took the prisoner—I searched him at the station and found on him a pocket-book, a purse, and a latch key, but no money—the last witness gave me this bad florin (produced).—he gave me a correct address—I took two men to the station but the other was not given in custody.
Prisoner's Defence. I should not have had the impudence to go into the house again after uttering one bad coin.
He was further charged with a former conviction of larceny at Lambeth in July, 1873, to which lie PLEADED GUILTY— Nine Months' Imprisonment.
OLD COURT.—Tuesday, August 18th, 1874.
Before Mr. Recorder.
To enter into his own recognizances in 100l. to appear and receive judgment if called upon.
MESSRS. BESLET and J. P. GRAIN conducted the Prosecution; MR. METCALFE, Q.C., with MESSRS. MONTAGU WILLIAMS and STRAIGHT the Defence.
WALTER FREDERICK STOKES . I am a solicitor of 40, Chancery Lane—on 1st July, 1868, a bill of complaint was filed by me on behalf of England—this is a copy of the bill under seal of the Record Office—I conducted the suit up to the decree—property was recovered under it—in September, 1871, I took proceedings against England for my bill of costs—he verbally agreed with me upon terms of payment—a judge's order was drawn up in pursuance—this is the order—it is an order for the payment of 50l. 14s: 8d., 5l. to be paid down, 20l. the next day, and the balance in ten days—he gave consent to that—he only performed his promise as to part, 25l. was left—in consequence I proceeded to obtain a charging order from the Court of Chancery—this is it. (This was dated 16th January, 1872, and ordered a sale of premises in Unicorn Yard, Ossulton Street, and the payment of the proceeds into Court). My costs were afterwards taxed, and this is the certificate of the Taxing Master for 75l. 18s. 6d—the property was put up for sale on 11th April—I was present at the sale—Mr. Levy was there acting for England—on 10th April this notice was served, it is signed by the defendant—it is a protest against the sale—at the sale I saw some documents produced by Mr. Levy—I did not actually read them—there were three documents—Mr. Levy described them to the auctioneer—I am not quite certain whether England was there, I believe he was—I think it was three agreements that Mr. Levy produced—I cannot identify them, because I did not actually see them—I saw them held up in his hands, and he said they were documents relating to tenancies of these premises—Mr. Levy told the auctioneer that he could not sell, that was the substance of it, because there were agreements affecting them—the property was sold for 650l. to a Mr. Carter—I think 120l. was paid on deposit—that was paid into Court under the order of the Vice-Chancellor—in the protest of the 10th April England complains of the order being made in his absence—he did not appeal against the order after the notice, he did before—the order had been previously made by the Chief Clerk, then there was an appeal to the Vice-Chancellor, who confirmed it—at the time he made the protest of the 10th April he had gone through an appeal to the Vice-Chancellor—a notice was afterwards served in the name of Barnes, this is it—I think this came either the day of the sale or the day after—I cannot recollect now—it was no doubt received on the 10th—it is marked by one of my
clerks as received on the 10th—I may not have received it till the 11th, it purports to be signed by William Barnes—there were no other notices at that time from any other supposed tenant besides Barnes—after the sale I received from Mr. Carter's solicitor a requisition of title, the ordinary requisition, as to what the tenancies were, what agreements there were, and so forth—it is here—I could not answer that requisition without having information as to the nature of Barnes agreement—and in consequence of that, I obtained an order on 14th June for affidavits of documents—I caused a copy of that to be served on England—this is it, and this is the original order—by the terms of this order he was to file his affidavits within four days—he did not do so, not for months afterwards. (The affidavit of 17th October, stated that he had not in his possession or power any documents, except two leases of premises in Unicorn Yard.). Those were leases prior to the decree—they were handed to me for the purpose of instituting the suit—there was an assignment to England of those two leases—on 4th November, I obtained a second order from the Court, upon an affidavit of myself and Mr. Reed—this is an office copy of the affidavit, alleging that the defendant's first affidavit was not sufficient; and it is recited in the order of 4th November—it refers amongst others to Barnes agreement—this is the order of 4th November, directing that within fourteen days he should file a full and sufficient affidavit, setting forth whether he had or had had in his possession any such documents—on 6th December he filed the affidavit upon which the first perjury is assigned—this is his signature—the sale was still uncompleted at that time—I was waiting for compliance with the requisition—it was necessary to obtain information as to the tenancies and tenants—on 16th December, this third order was made, and upon that the defendant filed this affidavit of 11th January, upon which there is a second assignment of perjury; this is his signature. (This stated that he had granted certain assignments in reference to the property in question to Barnes, Partridge, Clark, Smith, and Ladd, and that he had no drafts or copies of either of them, and never had in his possession or power any documents relating to them.). After that I took out a further summons before the Chief Clerk for a further affidavit—I am not certain whether England attended or his solicitor—Mr. Lind was his solicitor at that time, represented by Mr. Edward Lawrence Levy—I was not there; but I know he was represented by Mr. Levy, because I met him on many occasions in the matter—I had ultimately to return the 120/. to Mr. Carter, it was paid out of Court by order—no sale was effected, and I have never received any portion of the monies that I am entitled to—I first discovered a week or two before I took out the summons at Bow Street, that during the whole time of these affidavits being sworn, there were documents under his control, or in his possession—I was endeavouring in the meantime to find out where they were; upon discovering it, I proceeded to Bow Street, and took out a summons, I had no knowledge of what Mr. Edward Lawrence Levy would state when I summoned him to the Police Court, except that he had some documents in his possession—I was not aware of the evidence he would give until he actually gave it.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. I really mean that—I took out the summons knowing that he had some of these documents in his possession—I did not know what he had, I knew he had some—I went to Mr. Levy, I cannot fix the date, except that it was two or three weeks before I took out the summons—I cannot tell you now what day that was; it was a long
while after the affidavits, not two years; it was in this year—the last affidavit upon which we charge perjury is 11th January, 1873, the date of the summons is 4th June, 1874—I went to Mr. Levy, I should think two or three weeks before that—I did not know that Mr. Levy had quarrelled with Mr. England—Mr. Lind was concerned in an action in which he was concerned for the plaintiff, and I for the defendant, and we began talking about these matters—I did not know at that time that there was any disagreement between him and Mr. Lind—I have heard it since—what I wanted to get was the agreements or incumbrances in respect of this property—at the sale some papers were produced, which were asserted to be agreements for tenancies—I think Barnes' name was mentioned, but there was such a hubbub—I don't think Partridge's name was mentioned—I did not hear it, or Smith's; the only name I can remember hearing was that of Barnes—I don't know that other names were mentioned—I saw three documents, and I heard that the name of one was Barnes—if other names were mentioned, I don't remember hearing them—I can't recollect whether Barnes was pointed out; I won't swear he was not—I can't recollect now—some other person spoke, but I don't know his name, he spoke from the middle of the room, and said he knew there were some agreements for a tenancy in existence—I am familiar with the practice in Chancery—I could not have got a summons against Barnes to produce his lease; there was no bill filed in this instance, it was an interest to me to sell this property free from incumbrances—I had not been to counsel about it—I did not file any bill against these persons to substantiate their claims, or summon them to produce the documents they held—I did not go to Mr. Levy to ascertain what the claims were—I rested on the affidavits—that is the usual course—I have taken the proper steps—I have not summoned Barnes, that would not be a proper step—I never heard of Barnes till long after the charging order—I asked for an affidavit of the defendant—I never went to Lind or Levy—I could not have got an' order to cross-examine England upon his affidavit, there being no bill—there was a bill originally, but that suit had terminated—the order was made on a summons, not on a bill filed—I took the usual course, to get an affidavit of documents; that is the first thing done.
Re-examined. It is not possible to get an order to cross-examine on a summons—I could have done so if I had filed a fresh bill—I could not get a charging order unless the Vice-Chancellor was satisfied I had recovered property under the original order—I never heard of Barnes till after the order was made.
ROBERT CHARLES SMITH . I am a Commissioner to administer oaths in Chancery, of 5, New Inn, Strand—these affidavits are signed by me—I administered the oath to the person who swore the affidavits—I won't venture to swear to the person.
BENJAMIN HOPE . I am a solicitor, of Serle Street, Lincoln's Inn—I received some documents in the progress of a charging order—I quite forget how they came into my hands—I was England's solicitor at that moment—he afterwards applied to me for the documents—I gave them to him on 4th April,1872—he signed a receipt for them—that receipt specifies the documents, I think four—the name "York" is in my writing—I think that was a memorandum I made at the time that England signified he was going to take the papers to Mr. York, who he employed after me. (This was dated 4th August, 1872, and was an undertaking to return certain papers mentioned,
lent to him by the witness.). Amongst those papers was a copy affidavit of Stokes and Reed—this is it—it has my writing on it—I don't Know that I can identify Mr. Stokes' bill of costs, but I should say that was one of the papers.
Cross-examined. None of these papers were agreements under tenancies or anything of that sort—I never required them again, and did not ask for them.
CHARLES FRANCIS YORK . I am a solicitor, of 242, Marylebone road—I produce a letter which I received from England on 17th-April, 1872—there is a list of documents there—I received them from England in the beginning of April, 1872—they are No. 1, a copy agreement with Mr. Barnes; No. 2, Re Stokes—England, v. Grant, minutes of order; No.3, Mr. Stokes' bill of costs; No. 4, Bill in Chancery, England v. Grant; No.5, ditto, in Stokes v. Jennings; No. 6, copy affidavit of Stokes on summons'—this is the copy agreement with Barnes—I believe that to be the one referred to in the letter of 17th April—the other one is a case for the opinion of Mr. Ince—"Re William Barnes,"That is one of those referred to. (Letter read: "17th April, 1872. Dear Sir. Will you kindly give the bearer the papers I left with you relating to Unicorn Yard, which I got from Mr. Hope, and what I gave you; I will see you on Friday." Signed, "P.N. England.") Those documents left my possession on 17th August, 1872—if England had applied for them at any time while they were in my possession he could have had them—this letter marked" H," dated 17th August, is in England's handwriting.
Cross-examined. I got this memorandum of agreement between England and Barnes, dated 22nd November, 1871, from England—Barnes did not bring it to me—he called the following day in company with England—Barnes did not direct me to take the opinion of Mr. Ince;—they brought the opinion with them—it was taken by another attorney—this is an agreement for a lease—I was to endeavour to settle the matter with Mr. Stokes—I was to call on him and see whether we could settle his claim—I was not to endeavour to get a lease for Barnes—the question then was whether Barnes could enforce the agreement against Mr. Stokes—I was not to see whether he could not compel Mr. Stokes to grant him the lease, I was to call on Mr. Stokes on behalf of England and Barnes, and see whether for 80l. we could satisfy his claim—we could not settle and I returned the papers—the only thing we were to do was to get rid of Stokes, to pay him off, if we could settle with him for 80l.—I did not say that the question raised for me to consider was whether Barnes could enforce his claim against Stokes—I was to see Stokes and see whether, by payment of 80l., he would release this property from the charging order—if Mr. Stokes was got rid of I suppose Barnes could enforce the agreement—these documents were put into my hands to ascertain Barnes' position under the agreement, to see whether he could enforce it, subject to Stokes' lien—I believe it was left with me on 3rd April—the other papers were left with me, I think, on the following day, or it might be the 4th or 5th, all within a day or so—I gave them up on 17th to England's clerk or manager or messenger, Batson, and I know nothing of them from that time—Barnes is a relative of England's, I understand, and a zinc worker—I did not inquire as to his means—I had not been employed by England prior to that—since then I have done two or three matters for him—I am not employed now—I did not take the trouble to inquire whether Barnes lived at Seven Skiers Road, Holloway.
Re-examined. They came to me on the 3rd April—it was before the sale that England wanted me to offer the 80l.—it was with a view to stop the sale—if I could have got rid of Mr. Stokes' order, the matter could have been arranged—but that I could not do—this is Mr. Ince's opinion in the matter of Barnes—I knew nothing whatever of Barnes—I never saw him before England brought him on 4th April, I think (Letter marked H read: "To Mr. Levy: Dear sir, my man waited till 5.30 for Mr. York before he returned to his office, and the six papers were given to him. I think that is all you will require. I beg to call your attention that Mr. Barnes paid the rent due at Christmas last, 12l. 15s., for the yard, and repaired all the roofs, chimnies, and other work.—P. N. England.")
EDWARD LAWRENCE LEVY , I am managing clerk to Mr. Lind, who carries on bis profession at 6, Beaufort Buildings, Strand—at the time of this charging order being obtained by Mr. Stokes, England was a client of Mr. Lind's—I attended as managing clerk to some of his business—when he brought me the order of 14th June I explained to him what was required in his affidavit—this is the copy order that he brought to me—when this was first brought to me I went across to Mr. Hope, because there was a change of solicitor's then, and there was not time to get a change, and the affidavit had to be filed in Mr. Hope's name without his consent, because Mr. Hope had attended to the case when the order was got—I can't say that I had acted for England previous to the sale; it arose in this way; I met him and Mr. Cooper, and he introduced a Mr. Partridge to go down with regard to a sale that was going to take place of some property which Partridge claimed to have some right to; that was either the day of the sale or the day before—England said that they were selling the property, and Mr. Partridge had some claim as well as other persons to the property, and if I would go down and attend the sale for Partridge I would be there to ask how they were selling the property while there were certain rights to it—he said that Partridge had got some agreement, or some interest attached to it—there was some agreement produced—this is the one England gave to me—I was to explain to Mr. Furber that there was this claim with regard to the property—I was not to stop the sale, but to explain that there were certain claims—there were some other agreements shown in the room, I think by Mr. Clark and others—Mr. England had got some more papers when he brought Partridge to me—he said there were other claimants to the property—I had the agreements—there, was one to Clark, one to a man named Smith, and one to Mr. Barnes—this is the one to Mr. Barnes, I think—I won't be certain—there was one to Barnes—whether that is the one I don't know—there was also one to a Mr. Ladd—England said that other persons besides Partridge were going down to assert their rights to the property that belonged to them, and on that occasion I saw the papers in his possession—he did not hand them over to me then, he took them away with him—I think three or four persons got up at the sale—Clark got up and produced his, and several persons were making statements, saying "I hold this" and "I hold that"—England drove us down to the sale—persons said "I have got an agreement for so and so," and they pulled them out of their pockets, and said "I have got a claim for so and so"—I can't distinctly remember how many of the persons I have named were there—I think Clark was there; I won't be certain—I did not prepare this notice signed by England—I know nothing about it—after the sale I saw the agreements again on 17th or 18th April—Batson
brought me some papers and on the following day England came with the others—I then had in my possession a copy of Barnes' agreement, and the originals of Smith's, Clark's and Partridge's—Ladd kept his own, I did not see that then—I kept possession of them for a short time—an opinion was taken with regard to what could be done—Mr. York at first took an opinion—England was not satisfied with it, and we were to see Mr. Townsend as to whether a bill could be filed—I had an interview with Mr. Barnes before that, and I then got the original of Barnes' agreement, I think from Barnes—I don't know whether it was from England or Barnes, they were both there—I don't know which handed' it to me, I think it was-Barnes, but I won't be certain—I had not got them in my possession on 14th June, the time of the order for the affidavit to be filed—they had gone back to England—there was some question, I think, some sheriff or something was coming in, and they wanted the agreements for something', and he asked me for them back again—I returned them before the first affidavit was sworn—this affidavit of the 17th October was prepared in my office—there is a schedule of documents; that was prepared by Mr. Lind—there is no reference made to either of these agreements, because he said he had not got them—I had conversation with England with reference to his affidavit and these documents—I said "You must discover every document you have got, or any copies, where are the original agreements?"—he said "I have returned them back to those to whom they belong"—I said "Have you any copies?"—he said "No, I have not, they were prepared off hand, I have got no copies"—I said, "You must set out everything you have got"—he said' "All I have got are those which were put in the schedule afterwards; two leases—I no doubt had the order of 4th November, I have not got the copy, I produced it at the police court I think—before the swearing of the affidavit of 6th December I had heard the copy affidavit of Stokes and Reed read before the Chief Clerk—that affidavit was prepared in the office; part of it is my writing—the affidavit itself is mine—before it was sworn I told England that an affidavit had been made by Stokes and Reed that some of these' documents were in existence, that that had been brought before the Chief Clerk's notice, and said they must be put forward, he must get them—he said he could not got them, they did not belong to him and he had nothing to do with them—I don't know whether I alluded particularly to Barnes' agreement, I alluded to them all; I said "Cannot copies be got and set' out?"—this affidavit of 11th January is a copy of the other, With the exception of the last paragraph, which was not in the previous one, and therefore the Chief Clerk held it to be insufficient—I put in that last paragraph from a book of forms—the Chief Clerk said it must be put in—I told England that some conversation had taken place before the Chief Clerk, and it would be better, as he had the opportunity of amending the affidavit, to put' in the documents if he could get them, because other proceedings would be adopted—he said he could not get them, and he had no copies and could' not get copies—I was with him when he was sworn to the affidavits before Mr. Smith on 6th December and 11th January—he had previously read them, they were done while he waited in the office, he had them to himself to read—the draft was read over to him before we engrossed' it—I had previously, on both occasions, explained to him the necessity of an affidavit with regard to the agreements with these different persons—I think he was' present on one occasion before the Chief Clerk—I think it was on the occasion when the affidavit of Stokes and Reed was received, the second
occasion, I won't be certain—he was present with me when the subject was under discussion in the Chief Clerk's office—I subsequently saw some of those agreements with Partridge and others some days after the last affidavit had been sworn, they were brought to me by England—there was a copy of, I don't know whether it was an equitable deposit or a mortgage from him to a Mr. Gearer, and these agreements were brought at the same time—I have produced them all, they all come from me—I produced at the police court the original of Barnes' and a copy of Barnes', I produced Partridge's and Smith's—I could not produce Clark's, because he took it away from me, there is a copy of Clark's, the original he took away, he came in as I was having it copied, and when it was being copied and being examined he took up the original, and said "I shall keep my own document," and walked out of the office with it—England was there at the time—by reference to my diary it was on 22nd January that England brought me the documents—when he gave them to me I said "Where have you got these from"—he said "I have got them back again, what do you want with them?"—I said "I never asked you for these, I only asked you for Gearer's"—he said "Cannot these be put in as well, Gearer claims all the property, and he will claim these under the mortgage as well"—I told him I did not want them, he had better speak to his son upon it, because the copy I had got was only a mortgage on the three properties that Mr. Gearer was claiming against the Building Society—Gearer is a son-in-law of England's—that was the matter upon which I wanted Gearer's mortgage—we were filing a bill—I said "As you have got them, you recollect the affidavit you made; you had better let Mr. Stokes know you have got them and I will apply for leave to file a minute affidavit"—he said he would see him d----d or b----y well in hell first before he should have them, or some such expression—I retained the documents from that time until I produced them at the police court—there was some dispute with Clark and England at one time, Clark having received some rent of a house in Union Street, and Clark gave me notice not to part with his agreement—I told England of it and he said "That don't belong to him, it is mine, as well as the others are mine"—I was not to give it up to Clark—that was how Clark got it, by snatching it away—I can't fix the date of this—it was after the last affidavit—I ceased to act for England somewhere in February or March, 1873—I never produced the agreements until I was compelled to produce them at the police court—I attended there upon a subpoena when England was charged—all the papers described in this receipt of England's came together with the agreements—they were all fastened up together—I don't know whether I had a copy affidavit of Stokes and Reed—I had the opinion of Mr. Ince, that is it, and also the copy agreement of Barnes', minutes of order, and the bill of costs, and the bill in Chancery of England v. Grant—these papers mentioned in the receipt were only in my possession a few days.
Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. There is an agreement of Barnes, Partridge, Smith, and Clark, and a copy of Barnes'—I don't know how many are charged in the indictment—I got the original of Barnes some days prior to the 30th April, 1872—I don't think I saw Barnes at the sale on the 11th—I do not recollect—I did not know him at that time, and I don't know whether I should know him if he stood before me again—I don't recollect whether Barnes' name was mentioned as a person claiming, there were so many persons talking—I don't think Smith was claiming at the
sale; there were some persons claiming—Partridge, was the only one I knew before the sale, I am sure of that—I got them about the 19th or 20th April, a few days before the 30th—Smith did not bring his to me—I think Barnes came with Mr. England, and whether he or England gave it to me, I could not tell—I got Clark's at the same time I got Smith's, about the 23rd—there was a bill in Chancery being filed, and I got them for the instruction of Mr. Townsend, and here is the draft bill that Mr. Townsend drew—Clark gave me notice not to part with his, I think in February or March, 1873—if was about the middle of February, or perhaps the end that he took it away—Smith did not take his away—I never saw him about it or Partridge—I never saw Barnes after we found that the bill in Chancery would not be successful—I gave these up about a fortnight or three weeks after receiving them, there was some question about the property, some execution or something coming on—about the middle of May, I gave them all to England; whether Mr. Ladd was with him or not, I don't know, he generally came with Mr. Ladd—I gave them all to England—I can tell you for why they were given—England gave me Partridge's agreement—he brought Partridge down—I gave that up to England also without consulting Partridge, because it was brought to me by England—they were brought to me again on 22nd January, 1873—I did not see them between May and June, 1873, not any of them—I did not give up the case and the opinion, that was Mr. Yorks—I held it for him—I had that all the time, not Barnes' copy agreement, I gave that back to England—I returned the agreements to him all together, Barnes' copy as well—I never saw any of them till 22nd January—I have not my diary of that date here—I have had no notice to produce it—the subpoena was left at the office in my absence—I did not read it—I have not seen Mr. Lind here to-day—I am his managing clerk—I have 2l. 10s. a week, and any business I introduce, I have a third of the profit—the business is not chiefly provided by me—I am an attorney—I was admitted in 1848—I practised up to 1866—I then ceased—it was not then suggested that I had taken a liberty with somebody's name—I got into difficulties through speculations at the opera, and other places, and I left England, and after that a charge was made—I did not before I left England sign the name of somebody else to a bill; I swear I did not—I was not charged with doing so, not before I left England, I was telling you, but you stopped me; I got into difficulties, I did not wish to be made bankrupt or insolvent, and I went away, and while I was away a charge of forgery was brought against me, and I was brought back, and tried before his lordship, and acquitted—I was charged with the forgery of the name of Mr. Lazarus for 150l.—there were not other names besides, not that of Mr. E. T. Smith, I swear that—I was not charged with writing his" name—I had a very fair practice up to 1866—it was in 1866 I took myself off to the Continent—the charge was made against me after I left England that I had committed forgery before I left—I did not hear of it for some time afterwards, three or four months, I think it was, I was lying ill at Switzerland at the time; I did not come back directly, I came to Liverpool in 1868 or 1869, I forget which, not two years afterwards—I did not go to Mr. Lazarus—I passed by the name of Lindon at Liverpool, I remained there a short time, five or six months—I endeavoured to get into the employ of a Mr. Turner, an auctioneer there—he did not charge me with getting into his employ by false pretences—he never made any charge of the sort against me—he made an affidavit against
me, which was sent up to the Law Institution, that I had gone by another name, and not my own—but he made no charge that I had been guilty of anything—I set out in my affidavit what I had done since I left England, and to every one of those the Law Institution sent round to get affidavits to see if it was true or not—Mr. Turner did not dismiss me—I did not remain there—I left him—in 1870 or 1871 I applied to be re-admitted as an attorney—I was refused—I applied again—my first application was made through Mr. Huddleston, it was opposed by Mr. Garth, on behalf of the Law Institution, and refused—the next application was four or five months afterwards by Mr. Huddleston—that was not refused—the Lord Chief Justice was not on the bench, and the Court said as he was not there they thought it was too early to renew the application, but I was not put under any time at which I was to make it—I was at liberty to come up at any time to make it—I made it again in a few months after, in the following January, 1873—that application was made by Sir John Karslake—it was not' refused—it was referred to the Master on my own application—it is before him now, and I believe I shall succeed—the Master has admitted, that the charges brought against me are not proved:—he has said that—before the Master other matters were inquired into, about Mr. Prentis as to the alteration of a fee in a brief—that was the ground on which I was opposed—those were the affidavits, and I answered them—those are not new charges, they are the old charges—the assertion, was that Mr. Prentis' fee had been received and not paid, and that it had been altered from 12 to 15 guineas—the matter about Mr. Turner was not inquired into, because the Court had adjudicated upon that, and that had passed—the matter about the forgery was not inquired into, the Court had had the whole of the evidence printed before them when I made my first application, and if you read the remarks of the Lord Chief Justice you will find what he said—it was in 1870 that I was tried for the forgery in the other Court before his Lordship and acquitted—that was not Mr. Lazarus' charge it was the bank a charge—it was in respect of Mr. Lazarus case—the money had not been paid, not a farthing, either at that time or, to my knowledge, since—there was possibly an action of Ladd v. Cooper entrusted to me by Mr. England—there were a lot of actions—he did not pay me upon that action 160l. To be paid into Court, or to Mr. Lind—he did not make any charge against me that the money bad not been paid into Court, but into my own bankers—nothing of the kind—he did' not charge me with receiving money from him for a specific purpose and putting it into my own pocket.—I will explain to you what it-was, if you will allow me—the trustees of a building society sued Mr. England for something like 1,400l—I got it referred—they, then brought an action of ejectment against the tenants to recover, the property. I went before Baron Martin, and he referred the matter to the Master—we went into the matter, and consented to an award of 1,000l. and 10 guineas costs—the money was to be paid at a certain day; in the meantime I got hold of one of the society's books and found that something like 200l. or 300l. more was charged than ought to have been charged against him, and I said if he had let me have these documents we might have saved more money; he said. "What is to be done," I said "You can do nothing;" he said "Oh, suppose I have got a mortgage of the property, can't I get out of it that way;" I said "Who is your mortgagee?" he said "My son-in-law, Gearer;" I said "Have you got an agreement?" he said "I will get it." His son is a solicitor, and I said to him "Why not do this Chancery suit?"
he said "No; I don't wish to be mixed up with it. I don't want to be seen in my father's affairs"—then I advised that a bill should be filed on behalf of Gearer—when, the matter was about being settled, Mr. Philip England, the son, came to me and said "We have got to pay 600l. or 700l.; now about the 149l. odd." I said "What do you mean, who is to pay all the costs," he said "Oh, you must trust my father, he will, pay you."—I said "Certainly not." The 149l. was kept by me to pay the costs. England said "Let me have the money, and I will pay your bill afterwards." He did find fault when he got it all settled, and when I had saved him 600l. It was prior to that that I left off work for him—there was a case of Smith against the London Omnibus Company tried at the end of Hilary term last—you conducted the case for Mr. Huddleston—I was not in Court—I did not conduct the case—I may have written a letter at the commencement of the case—I was not near the Court—I swear that—the day prior to the trial I was in the Lord Mayor's Court office, and I" left there and never went into the Court—Mr. Lind was there conducting the case—an affidavit was made by Mr. England for a new trial in that case—affidavits have not been made that I suborned witnesses to commit perjury—the case now stands for argument in the Common. Pleas—I have had a copy of the affidavits, and have read them—I am willing to explain what was in them—an affidavit was made by Mr. Philip England, who told me that I should rue it one day for not being a witness in the case for him, that he had been told that I had agreed to give 40 to a "person to be a witness, and that affidavit has been, answered—I believe there are two other affidavits—there was not an affidavit, by the principal witness repudiating what he had said, and stating that I induced him to swear it—I was asked that at the Police Courts and. I told you the same, and they said they would search and find it, and they have not—there, is no such affidavit on the file, and I challenge them to produce it.
Re-examined. The matter of Smith and the Omnibus Company was before I was a witness at Bow Street—my attendance there had nothing to do with that case—I believe Ladd is Mr. England's man—he has witnessed' bills of sale—he is always willing to serve process; and actions are brought in his name—he is the same person who was one of the supposed tenants—I think he lodges in the Caledonian Road—I have had nothing whatever to do with bringing this charge of perjury against England—the allegation about Mr. Prentis' fee was that twelve guineas was altered to fifteen by the clerk, and the clerk said it was done by my knowledge, and that the fee had not been paid—the Master said with regard to that that he was satisfied there was no charge against me—I produced the receipt—with regard to Mr. Turner I gave a statement of what I had done, since I left off practice; I mentioned everybody's name where I had been, and they' went round to every one—Mr. Turner made an affidavit; it came before the Court and; was adjudicated upon—he never made any charge, against me, he only made the affidavit for the Law Institution—I was acquitted of the charge with regard to Mr. Lazarus—I have been summoned for an assault that it was said I had committed since this business of Mr: England's—Mr. England was there, and the whole of my conduct has been sifted upon my application to the Court, and nothing has been brought against me during the whole time I have practised—this is the agreement of Richard Smith that I spoke of—I can't tell you who Smith is—I', have seen him with England, he goes about with him—Clark has signed that
agreement; that is the same Clark who took away his agreement—Barnes is a relation of Eugland, I think his nephew—Partridge, I think, minds the stables for England, he is the ostler I think—I don't know who Clark is, he is always with England.
NOT GUILTY .
517. EDWARD GAHAN (28) , to three indictments for feloniously forging and uttering orders for 10l., 7l. 7s., and 4l. 4s., having been before convicted of forgery— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, August 18th, 1874.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
WHITE**— Five Years' Penal Servitude. HOWARD**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
520. MICHAEL HOLLAND (23) , to a robbery (but not with violence) on David Crawcour, and stealing from his person one watch, his property.— Nine Months' Imprisonment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
521. WILLIAM THOMAS GOODWIN (30) , to two indictments for feloniously forging and uttering orders for the delivery of goods with intent to defraud**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. LYON conducted the Prosecution; and MA W. SLEIGH, the Defence.
CHARLES HENRY MOSS . I am a warehouseman and live at 3, Cross Street—on 2nd August I was in Thomas Street, Hackney Road, about 12.15 with my brother—we met' the prisoner and another man—the prisoner pushed me forcibly into the road—I said "Why did you do that?"—they both spoke and said "What are you making a row about—the man with the prisoner said "Well, I will fight this man," meaning my brother—I put out my hand to signify that no fighting was required, as I could not sing out because I was labouring under great hoarseness, and the prisoner struck me over the eye which staggered me for a time, and when I recovered myself) saw my brother sitting in the road with his left hand behind him and his right arm raised saying "Don't, don't," and bleeding from his mouth and nose—the prisoner was in front of him making a kick at his chest—there were six of them altogether, and two were holding my brother down while the prisoner kicked him—I threw myself on top of my brother right in front of the prisoner to save him from the kick, and received a kick in the seat from the prisoner—I then had a struggle with two or three of them, and put my back against the railings for protection—another man came up and forced me against the railings, and while I was pressed there the prisoner struck me three times, and hit me once on my head and once on my face—he then ran away—I then missed my watch from my waistcoat pocket, and I believe the man who forced me against the railings took it—I went into the Hackney Road and
saw a policeman holding the prisoner and my hat—the policeman said "Have you lost a hat?'—I said "Yes, and that is one of the scoundrels who molested me and took my watch"—I identified the hat.
Cross-examined. This was after midnight—we had been to See bright Street to a private house—I had had, it may have been, a pint of mild ale—my brother was with me from 3 o'clock in the afternoon, but I had been sleeping after 3 o'clock as I work during the night—we only went into one public-house—I said at the police court that when I recovered I saw my brother held down by three men, also that another man was holding me against the railings, and while the other man was taking my watch the prisoner struck at me three times, two of which hit me—I cannot say whether that was read over to me in my depositions—I was not knocked down, but I was sent reeling.
FREDERICK MOSS . I am a warehouseman at 55, Baldwin Street, Battersea—on 2nd August I was with my brother in Thomas Street, going home, and the prisoner and another man shoved against us—I asked them what they did that for, and the prisoner struck me on my forehead, while the other man pulled off his coat to fight me—I did the best I could, but four other men came up and chucked me down in the road—I tried to get up, but they would not allow me—they continued kicking me—the prisoner was one of those who kicked me, and as fast as I got up they knocked me backwards again—I do not know where my brother was then, but when I looked up I saw them all running—I went into the Hackney Road, and a policeman came up with the prisoner and the hat in his hand—the prisoner was taken to the station.
Cross-examined. I saw my brother once after I was struck, but whether he attempted to assist me I don't know—while I was on the ground I saw him standing against a wall with a crowd round him—he had been with me from 3.15—I had one glass of ale about 2.45, and nothing else till 8 o'clock—I did not go to sleep—we had about three glasses of ale between us in the evening—we did not go into a public-house together.
JAMES BENHAM (Policeman H 68). On 3rd August, about 12.30 a.m., I saw the prisoner and two other men running in the Hackney Road—he had this hat (produced). in his left hand—I ran and got hold of him—he threw the hat down and said "It is only a lark"—I said "Come back and we will see what the lark is"—I took him to the corner of Thomas Street, where I saw the prosecutor without a hat, and his brother bleeding from his face and mouth—I said "Have you lost a hat," and he said "Yes, and that is the man who struck me first (pointing to the prisoner). and I have lost my watch as well"—the prisoner said "That was not me, that was the others"—I took him to the station.
Cross-examined. I only saw three running—the parties were all sober, I believe seven or eight persons assembled when the prosecutor came up.
The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I am innocent, I have no witnesses."
The prisoner, received a good character.
Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his character—Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. MILLWOOD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. W. SLEIGH the Defence.
FRANK WILLIAMS . I am a cabinet maker, of 90, City Road—on the morning of 30th July, about 12.45, I was aroused by a noise as if the front door was burst open—I listened for a few minutes and then heard a noise at the inner door as if a person was trying keys—I got out of bed, opened the door, asked who was there, but got no answer—I closed the door again, opened the bedroom window, and saw four men run out of the house—the last one had clothes like the prisoner, a black frock coat—he ran down Cowper Street, and the other three made for Old Street—I went down stairs and found the prisoner in custody—I had secured the house between 9 and 10 o'clock.
Cross-examined. I will not swear that the prisoner is the man.
JOHN MACHLEY (Policeman G 127). On the morning of 31st July, about 12.50, I saw the prisoner and three other men come out of 90, City Road, one after the other, the prisoner was the last—the door was open—on seeing me the prisoner went down Cowper Street, and I went after him calling "Stop thief!"—he was stopped by G 63, and said "Hulloa, old boy, you have made a mistake, I was running after the man came' out of 90, City Road"—there was no man in front of him who he was pursuing;—I had passed there a quarter of an hour before and the door was securely fastened—I am quite sure the prisoner is the man.
Cross-examined. He came out last and there were three others before him—I was about four, yards from the door—there was' no light—I have' been four or five months in the force—I will swear that there is no mistake, and that I actually saw the prisoner come from the threshold and did not lose sight of him.
Cross-examined. I saw nobody running in front of him—I stopped' him nearly 100 yards from the house—the other policeman was nearly twenty yards-behind.
He was further charged with having been' convicted at Clerkenwell in December., 1869; to which he
PLEADED GUILTY**— Eight Years' Penal Servitude.
MR. DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution; and MR. SIMS the Defence.
ROBERT BIRD . I am a general dealer, of 33, North Street, Whitechapel—on the night of 3rd August, about 12:30, I met the prisoner and twelve other men in North Street, Whitechapel—one of them hallooed out "That is the b----y swine"—this was three doors from where my brother lives the prisoner struck me but I got away—three or four of them came after me and the prisoner was the first—they knocked me down and I became insensible—I had a purse and 7s. 6d. in my pocket, and 7 1/2 d., two knives, and a cigar holder—the prisoner took them away—when I came to my senses I was on the ground and my brother was lifting me up—I do not know who took my purse and money—I was kicked on the side of my head, and I had the mark of a boot—my brother saw the chap kick me—the policeman showed me one of my knives at the station.
Cross-examined. I had had a little, but I was not drunk or half drunk—when I said before the magistrate that I was half drunk I meant that I had had something to drink—about fourteen men were around me—I do not
know that the prisoner is quite deaf, but from his conduct before the magistrate I believe that he is deaf—my brother had not been drinking with me that night—he had not been with me—I know Mr. Rolf, a bootmaker, just opposite where this disturbance took place—it is not a fact that the prisoner got away about thirty yards while the mob were assaulting me—I was not using bad language, and I did not challenge anybody to fight—the prisoner and I were not engaged for some time in a stand up fight.
Re-examined, I knew the prisoner by sight.
WILLIAM BIRD . I live at 33, North Street, Whitechapel—I was called up, went into North Street, and saw a mob and my brother lying on the ground and three men holding him down—the prisoner had his hand in my brother's trousers pocket—I pushed the people off my brother and took him in—his mouth was bleeding—they went towards Whitechapel—he had had a little drink.
Cross-examined. There was a mob of forty or fifty people, and I had to push through, them to get at my brother—they were crowding all round him—I will swear that it was the prisoner I saw closest to-him at that time, because I took the prisoner's hand out of my brother's trousers pocket, and looked at him and he looked at me, and I had seen him before and knew him by sight—I had seen two of the others before and recognized them, but I have not seen them since.
ELIZA BIRD . I am a widow and the mother of the last two witnesses—I ran out and saw my son lying on the ground and the prisoner's hand in his pocket—I ran for a policeman—I have known the prisoner by sight for many years and his family, and I am certain he is the man.
Cross-examined. About fifty people were round my son—my other son got to his brother before me, and by the time I got there he was taking the prisoner's hand out of his brother's pocket—other people were holding him down, and I should know two of them, but we cannot find them—several of the prisoner's companions, who I know by sight, were there.
Cross-examined. He went quietly with me—he said that he had had nothing at all to do with it.
Witnesses for the Defence.
WILLIAM ROLFE . I am a bootmaker of 153, Whitechapel Road—I do not know the prisoner at all, and have no interest in the case one way or other—on Monday night, August 3rd, I was up stairs at my bedroom window, and saw a drunken disturbance outside—I lifted up the window, looked out, and saw the prosecutor and prisoner—the prosecutor was challenging the prisoner to fight—I saw the prisoner leave the mob and go on the other side of the road—the prosecutor followed him to the middle of North Street, and challenged him to fight—some of his companions fetched the prisoner back, and he came back to where the prosecutor was—I did not see the prosecutor on the ground—I consider that the prosecutor was the most to blame—the prisoner was brought back to where the prosecutor was, and then all the others closed round, and they turned a corner, and I saw no more—there were about fifty people there.
COURT. Q. You do not live in North Street? A. No; in Whitecbapel Road, next door to North Street—what I saw took place in Whitechapel Road, but I could not see 33,. North Street where I was—they went round into North Street after I saw them—this was just 12.10—mine is the first house
round the corner—I did not go before the magistrate, as my wife was very ill—I had never seen the prosecutor before.
THOMAS DOVE . I live at 15, Collingwood Street, and am a fish smoker—I was going to night work, and heard two young men quarrelling—the prisoner is one of them, and the prosecutor the other—they were at the corner of North Street in Whitechapel Road—the prosecutor drew a whitehandled knife and threatened to run it into Cole, who went to walk away, and Robert Bird followed him with the penknife, and threatened that if Cole or anybody else went near him he would run it through them—they were still in Whitechapel Road—the prosecutor followed him into the middle of the road, but a congregation of people hissed him so much that he turned round and ran towards his mother's door—I saw him fall on the ground, and then I walked away into the middle of the road—I saw a knife in the prosecutor's hand—he fell on top of the knife, and the prisoner fell on him, and took the knife from under him and I saw no more of it—no charge was made at that time of the prisoner having robbed the prosecutor—I saw the mother and the son come up.
Cross-examined by Mr. DE MICHELE. The 'prisoner lives in North Street, Stepney, two miles away—he works at the market where I work—I am a fish smoker now—I have been so eight years—I work all night at John Street, which is the next turning to North Street, Whitechapel—I have never been in trouble; no constable ever had me in my life—I know the prisoner's family—I have spoken to him, and I have spoken to Robert Bird several times—the prisoner is no friend of mine.
COURT. Q. Do you know where Mr. Rolfe the bootmaker lives A. Yes; it was right opposite his door—if he had looked out he had every bit as good an opportunity of seeing it as I had—he could have seen the knife displayed.
GUILTY.** of the Robbery, but not of the Violence — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. COLE conducted the Prosecution;
HENRY BARRER (Policeman X 259). On Saturday night, 25th July, about 11.20, I was in Prince's Street, Notting Hill, with 393 X, Jesse Couchman—the prisoner came up and said to him "Jesse, what the b----y hell have you been talking about me for?"—Couchman said "I have not been talking about you"—the prisoner then made a strike at him—he endeavoured to ward the blow off, and another person who was with the prisoner struck Couchman in the face, and went down St. Catherine's Road, pursued by Couchman—the prisoner followed me and tripped me up in the road, knelt on my chest, and stabbed me two or three times in the head—I saw something white in his hand similar to a penknife—he also cut me across the nose and kicked me on the ear—I called out "He has stabbed me" and other constables came up who pulled him off me and took him—I had never seen him before—I was examined by the Divisional Surgeon the same night.
Prisoner. I was going home from work and saw my sister standing with Couchman and Barber—I said "Come home," and he said "You go after that b----r." Witness. That did not happen—I saw a girl speak to Couchman, but she went away ten minutes before you came up—I did not trip you up in the middle of the road or kneel on you till Couchman came
up—I was on my back and you were on top of me—Couchman did not pull me off you, you were pulled off me.
JESSE COUCHMAN (Policeman X 303). I was with Barber, and a young woman, who I have since found out to be the prisoner's sister, called out across the read "Halloa, Jesse," and came across and spoke to me. I knew her by sight—it was after that that the prisoner came up and said "Jesse, what the b----y hell are you talking about me for?"—I knew him—I said that I had not been talking about him—he put up his fist and attempted to strike me in the face, but I pushed him away—another man struck me on the side of my head and ran down St. Catherine's Road—I ran after him, and Barber followed—the man went into a house—I did not go in, but I heard Barber say, "Come on, Jesse, I am stabbed"—I found him on his back in the road and the prisoner on top of him with his knees on Barber's chest and his left hand on his shoulder and his right hand up as if he was going to strike him—blood was streaming from Barber's face—I pulled the prisoner off him with another constable's assistance—there were, I should think 1,000 people there—I did not see any knife, it was impossible from the crowd.
THOMAS LEACH (Policeman X R 22). On 28th July, about 11.20, I heard cries in St. Catherine's Road, Notting Hill, and saw the prisoner on top of Barber, who was on his back in the road—he halloaed out that he was stabbed, and I took the prisoner—no knife was found—there was a great crowd.
ROBERT JACKSON . I am Divisional Surgeon of Police, of 53, Notting Hill Square—I examined Barber at the station at 11.45 p.m., and found two punctured wounds on his right temple, dividing an artery which was spouting with blood, and a long superficial wound extending from one" of those punctures across his eyebrow, also a wound about an inch long at the side of his nose—he had lost a good deal of blood—the injuries I saw could not be done by a stone, they were done by some sharp instrument—he was off duty twelve days—the wounds were not of a serious character, they appeared to have been done by a penknife and were down to the bone, but only the breadth of the knife.
Prisoner's Defence. If I had had a knife it would be found on me. I was on the ground and Baker was on the top of me.
GUILTY.*† of Unlawfully Wounding — Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
THIRD COURT.—Tuesday August 18th, 1874.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
527. HENRY HARCOURT (25) , to two indictments for stealing a bag and purse of Ann Evans, from her person, and a pair of boots, a coat, and other goods, the property of Albert Mussett, having been before convicted in September, 1868**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
528. GEORGE SMITH (23) , to stealing a watch, the property of Murrell Dawnay, from his person, having been before convicted in July, 1871**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
Upon the evidence of MR. JOHN ROWLAND GIBSON, surgeon, of Newgate, the
Jury found the prisoner insane and unfit to plead. Ordered to be detained during her Majesty's pleasure.
MR. METCALFE, Q.C., with MR. SLADE conducted the Prosecution; and MR. F. H. LEWIS the Defence.
HENRY GOODWIN . I am one of the inspectors of letter carriers at the South Western District office—the prisoner was a sorter in that office—he had been there about eighteen months—on Saturday evening, the 25th July, he was on duty there—in the early part of the evening he was stamping letters and packets and sorting, and the latter part he was making up the Southampton bag—about 7 o'clock my attention was called to him, and I saw that he was handling his letters in a manner which excited my suspicions—after he had finished sorting and had made up his bag he was about leaving the office—he had left his road some eight or ten yards and I saw that he was carrying his left arm close to his side, so that he could not use his arm—he could not take it away from his side—I went to him and asked him what was the matter with his arm, if he had got anything underneath, and as I was approaching him be turned his right side towards me and dropped these two packets on the floor—I picked them up and took him into my private room, and asked him if he had anything else about him that did not belong to him—he turned his pockets out and there was nothing else found—he said "Pray, let me go this time for my poor mother's sake"—I asked him if he was in want—he said no, he had got a good home and did not know what possessed him to take the packets—one of the packets is addressed "Mrs. A. P. Howell, Sisewell Gap, near Leiston, Suffolk"—there is no post-mark on it; the stamp has not been obliterated—it was the prisoner's duty that evening to obliterate the stamp—he should have done that between 5 and 5.30—in the usual course that letter would have been dispatched from our office to the Western Central at 5.20—the packet contains a brooch, a pair of earrings, and a small box—at the time I stopped him he had finished his duty and was leaving the office—he had his coat on his arm and his hat on—he had no other duties that night—he had nothing to do with the trollies—I was present when he was before the magistrate, and heard him make a statement there on the second occasion—he was remanded from the Monday till the Friday—he said that he found the two packets under the road where he was at work after he had made up and sealed the bag—he might have found them there—it would not naturally have been there—according to the routine of the office it should have been dispatched at the other end of the office two hours before—if he had found a mis-sort it was his duty to put that on a table behind him which is there for the purpose, without leaving his seat.
Cross-examined. I don't think he made use of the words "What possessed me?"—it was in answer to a question that I put to him, "What possessed you to take them?"—he did not say "What should possess me to take them, as I wanted for nothing?"-if ho had found a letter for Southampton after he had sealed his bag he would have to open the bag again—there is a porter there who goes to the station with the railway bags—he does not sometimes carry letters when they are left out of the bags—I should never ask him to take one or sanction his taking one—I did not see the prisoner put his bag on the trolly—the letters did not fall from him as he was putting the bag on the trolly because he had no bag.
ALBERT PARKINSON HOWELL . I live at 46, Desborough Gardens, Pimlico—on 25th July, I posted a letter containing a pair of earrings and a brooch in a little box to my wife, who was in Suffolk—I put it in the pillar letter-box in Desborough Gardens about 3.30 that afternoon.
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I beg to state, that I did not take the packets with any intention of stealing them—I found the two packets underneath the road where I was at work, after I had made up and sealed the bag, the one addressed to Suffolk, I was about to put with the mis-sorts after I had helped to load the bag on the trolly, and the one for Southampton, I was going to give the station messenger to save opening the bag—I put the packets under my coat, so that the station master should not see them, and throwing out the Southampton station bag, I dropped the packets."
Strongly recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his youth—Twelve Month's Imprisonment.
MR. METCALFE, Q.C., and MR. SLADE conducted the Prosecution; MESSRS. BESLEY and MEAD the Defence.
CHARLES DAVIS . I am a sorter in the Eastern District Post Office—I live at 8, Drum Yard, Whitechapel—I have been in the office about thirteen months—the prisoner was also in the office, and had been there about eight months—he left at the end of June, I believe—when he was in the office he lodged at my father's house for about three weeks, and slept in the same room with mo—when he left the office I believe he went to Saffron Waldron, and another boy, Robert Alabaster came to his lodgings—after the prisoner had gone to Saffron Waldron, I saw him again on the 29th July in Turner Street, Commercial Road—I was going to the Bethnal Green Office with the 6.30 p.m. mail bag from the Eastern District Office—the prisoner said, "I have been waiting for the boy that is going to the Bethnal Green Office"—that was me—he said, "I wish I could get a bundle of letters, of course it is no use asking you, but I will tell you how to do it, take out your pocket handkerchief and drop it on the bundle, and put them in your pocket"—I replied, "Certainly not, I would not do such a thing"—I asked him what he had got the sack from Saffron Waldron for, and he would not tell me—he said he had got no money, and I asked him if he was coming back to the District Office some of the boys might lend him two or three halfpence—he said, "It is no use going there"—he went on with me as far as the Bethnal Green Office, and then left me—on the Saturday, I made a communication to the inspector—I met the prisoner on the 5th August in High Street, Whitechapel, between 1 and 2 o'clock—he was talking, to Alabaster at that time—I asked him how ho was, and he said, "All right," he said he had got no work—I never saw him again until he was in custody—when he said, he wished he could get a bundle of letters, he also said, "A pound or thirty shillings would do me through next week"—that was after he mentioned about the pocket handkerchief.
Cross-examined. It was on Wednesday, 29th July, when I first saw him, and I spoke to Mr. Malony, the overseer, on the Saturday following—he told me to take the handkerchief out of my pocket and drop it on the bundle—I did not know what he meant exactly—I should think he meant
me to put them in my pocket, and give them to him when I next saw him—I don't know any boys who have tried it—I have not tried it myself—I was not shocked at all at what he proposed.
ROBERT ALABASTER . I am a sorter in the Eastern District Post Office—I live with Davis—I have been a sorter about thirteen months—the prisoner was in the office and he left about the end of June—I saw him at Davis' home on the Monday following the Saturday that he left—Miller, another sorter was there—he is now committed for trial for stealing letters—he was in the same office—I saw the prisoner again on the 28th July between 8 and 9 at night—I was down in the kitchen at supper time and Bensusan came down and gave me a message and I went out and saw the prisoner—there were two other sorters with him when I went up—we spoke together for a little while, and when I was coming away he pulled me on one side by the sleeve and wanted to know whether I would do him a favour—I said it would depend upon what it was—he said "Don't you think you could manage to get me a bundle of letters"—I said I would have nothing to do with anything of the sort—he said "It is very easily done, unbutton your tunic, and when you see nobody looking put a bundle of letters in your pocket and wipe you nose to take off suspicion, and don't keep them longer than you can help in the office, go out in the yard and place them on the parapet on the top of the closet, and let me know when you will be likely to have them, and you can hand them to me"—I said I would have nothing to do with it—our tunics have a pocket just inside—the prisoner said he thought he should try and get back into the service and he should only want to be in about three weeks as he should have sufficient by that time—I saw him again in August in Johnson's dining rooms, High Street, Whitechapel—I was having my dinner, and some one tapped me on the shoulder—I looked round and saw the prisoner—after dinner we came out together along High Street, and he told me had not any work, and asked me again to get him a bundle of letters, and he said "I have asked Davis and that fool is no good"—he told me had no work and nothing to keep him, and he said he had not got much of a chance of getting a place, because he had not got a good reference from Saffron Waldron, as he was dismissed—he said one bundle would be sufficient to keep him till he got another place—then we met Davis and I left him.
Cross-examined. I first met him on the 28th July, and I spoke to Mr. Maloney on the following Saturday, the same day that Davis spoke to him—I went to Mr. Maloney first—I had talked about it before—no inquiries had been made as to lost letters before I went to Mr. Maloney—I went because I thought it was my duty—I did not take much notice when he only asked me, but when I found he was asking others I thought it was better to report it—when Davis told me I thought it better to report it—Beardswell and Tipple were present, but they did not hear him ask me for letters—I have not heard of any other thefts or reported any to Mr. Maloney—there have been some thefts while I have been in the office, by Miller and Ticket—I don't know who found out Miller's affair—I don't know whether any of the other boys found anything out or that they have reported anything to Mr. Maloney.
BEARDSWELL. I am a sorter—on the evening of 28th July,
between 8 and 9 o'clock, I went out with Alabaster and saw the prisoner—I shook hands with him and asked him how he was getting on, and he said "All right"—I asked him if he had left his place—he said "Yes"—I asked him what for—he said the work was too hard for him, too much walking about—I said "There has been a rumour about you, Carbery"—he said "Yes, I know there is"—I said "Is it right," and he said "Yes," I have been in the service ever since I have lived at Davis'," and then he spoke to Alabaster—I asked him how Miller and Ticket were caught, and he, said they were down at Manchester Road and Ticket was inside the Post Office and Miller was outside, and the detective caught Miller—he told me he had a letter from Miller without a postage stamp, and it said "Please pay the, postage," and he expected another letter with money in it.:
Cross-examined. We four were all together—he said he had been in the service since he had lived at Davis'—I am not sure that he said he had been in the scrape with Miller—I. did not hear him say that if Miller had been going to split he should have heard of it before then.
RE-EXAMINED. I was out in the street about ten minutes during the conversation with the prisoner, and I went back to the office, and left Alabaster talking to him.
Cross-examined. I heard him say he had had a letter from Miller, and it said "Please pay the postage," and I believe he said Miller was taken down the road somewhere.
MALONEY. I am overseer, and was acting inspector on this occasion—a communication was made to me first by Alabaster, and then by Davis.
HENRY JAMES SLATES . I am a sorter—on 28th July I saw the prisoner in Warner Place, Hackney Road—he stopped me and asked me how I was, and he said it was a bad job about Miller—I said'" Yes, it is," and then he told me he had a letter from him, which had got on it "Please pay the postage," and it was to say he was in custady, and he said he thought it was a letter with some money coming to him—he said it was only the latter part of the time he was in the Post Office he had been doing it, and that Miller had put him up to it—he said if he came back to the office he should stop there all right for about three months, and then he should do it—he did not explain what he meant by "doing it."
GUILTY — Two Years' Imprisonment.
ABRAHAM WOOLFREY . I keep the Sea bright Arms at West Barnet—on Wednesday, 29th July, I went to bed about 10.40—I sleep on the first floor over the bar parlour—I put my watch on my dressing table—my wife came to bed after me—I stood my watch up by the looking-glass as I generally do—I woke next morning about 4.30, and looked for my watch, and it was gone—I made an alarm, and I never saw it again till I saw it in the hands of the pawnbroker—this is it (produced).—I never saw the prisoner to my knowledge.
—about 8.15 on the morning of Thursday, 30th July, the prisoner came in and pledged this watch for 2l. in the name of George Gaze—I have the duplicate here—on Tuesday, 4th August, be came in again and asked for Borne more money on it, and in consequence of what I had heard, I sent for a constable and gave him into custody.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I believe you bad a basket of tools when you came in to pawn the watch.
EDWARD SAYER (Detective Officer). On 4th August I received the prisoner into custody, and took him to Barnet Police Station—he said he would clear himself how be came into possession of the watch—he said about 7 o'clock in the morningof the 30th he met a man whom he had seen about five or six weeks before at Northampton, the man asked him to have a glass of ale, which he did; he afterwards asked him if he would pledge the watch, and he took the watch and pledged it for 2l., he came out of the shop and gave the man the money; the man asked him if he would take 2s. for his trouble or keep the ticket, and he said he would keep the ticket, and he went away, and afterwards saw the man again and they went to Brown's beer-shop in Shoreditch, where they stopped the chief part of the day drinking together, and he left him late that night at the beer-shop, and saw no more of him—he said he knew the man by the name of Dan, and that was all.
By the COURT. I went to Mr. Brown's beer-shop, and found that the prisoner and another man had been drinking there, and I also went to 4, Greville Street, which he gave as his address, and he had been there and had left.
ELEANOR WOOLFREY . I am the wife of Abraham Woolfrey—on the night of the 29th July I went to bed about 11.15, after my husband—I did not notice his watch on the dressing-table—he was asleep at that time—I shut the bedroom door, but did not lock it.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution; and MR. MOODY the Defence.
PATRICK SULLIVAN . I am a labourer, and live at 17, Blandford Mews—I saw the prisoner married at the Roman Catholic Chapel in Spanish Place by Canon Hunt, about twenty years ago—the person he married is in Court.
Cross-examined. The prisoner was a Roman Catholic, and so was Nancy Sullivan, who he married—I lost sight of her for a long time—I hear she went to America—I never heard that she lived with anyone else.
BRIDGET MACNAMARA . I was married to the prisoner on 26th February, 1872, at the parish church, Marylebone—I knew that he was a married man—he told me that his wife went away four different times and robbed him of what he had, and he said she was not worth living with—he told me that the last time she went away was five years next Christmas—that would be two years before I married him.
Cross-examined. He never deceived me in any way—he works for me and I work for him—I don't intend to desert him—he has been a good husband—we got married at the parish church—I am a Roman Catholic—we did not go to our own chapel, because it would take too much time going and coming, and that is the truth.
Cross-examined. I don't know that she has been living with another man.
GUILTY — Two Months' Imprisonment.
WILLIAM WARNER BINGEMAN . I am a commission merchant, at Mark Lane—on 24th July, about 10.30 at night, I was in Cornhill attempting to get into an omnibus—I saw the prisoner standing partly at my side and partly behind me, and I fancied I felt my watch being taken—I put; my hand to my pocket and discovered the watch was gone—I turned round and saw the prisoner handing it to another man—I had seen it within a quarter of an hour before—it was unhooked or else the bow was broken, for' the chain was perfect—I tried to catch hold of the prisoner—I said I had lost my watch and he bolted off directly—I followed him—I did not call "Stop thief" for some little time—I did eventually—he ran up Cornhill a little way and up an alley—I hit him on the head with my umbrella to stop him—it did stop him—an officer came up and I charged him.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not run after any other man and then come back to you and say "I think you have got my watch"
FREDERICK EASTAUGH (City Policeman 664). The prosecutor gave the prisoner into custody in Pope's Head Alley, and charged him with stealing his watch—he said he knew nothing of the watch—I asked him what he was running for—he said he was running to get away from the prosecutor, he thought he was drunk and tried to get away from him—I found nothing on him.
Prisoner. I said the prosecutor must be drunk to serve me like that; he has given me in charge and I know nothing about it—he was going in the crowd to a bus and I saw him come out and search himself, and I stood close to him with my hands behind me.
535. HENRY JOHNSON (30) , Unlawfully attempting to abuse Esther Waller, a girl under the age of ten years. Second Count—Indecently assaulting her. Third Count—Unlawfully taking her out of the possession and against the will of her father.
MESSRS. BESLEY and GRAIN conducted the Prosecution.— NOT GUILTY
MR. GOODMAN conducted the Prosecution.
THOMAS FREDERICK AVEY . I live at 8, William Street, New Road, Whitechapel—on Saturday, 4th July, about 9 o'clock in the evening, I went home and asked the landlady for a dress—the prisoner was there in the room at the time—the landlady said she would not give it to me and we quarreled about it, and she struck me in the eye—she shut the door in my face and I pushed it open three times, and her sister took hold of me and dragged me to the parlour door, when the prisoner took a knife out of his pocket and struck me on the head three times with it—I was sober—I could not swear to the knife; I only saw something shining past my eye—I was taken to the hospital and was there ten days—I had had one glass of stout and mild with the prisoner that night—I had had no quarrel with him when he struck me.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not tear your flannel shirt or strike
you on the nose and scratch your face—I was not drunk—I had not had more than I had usually of a Saturday at dinner time—I suppose we had three pots of beer between eight of us, that would not make a man tipsy.
MARY ANN AVEY . I am the wife of the last witness—the prisoner and my husband had a quarrel, and he took his knife and stabbed my husband in the head three times—I was between the passage and the parlour door—I could swear that he had a knife—it is not true that my husband was drunk—they dragged him into the parlour.
JOHN KNOPE . I live at 25, Thomas Street—on the night of Saturday, 4th July, I was standing near the door of 8, William Street—I saw the prosecutor and a lot of people round the door—I went up and looked and I saw two women come up to Mr. Avey and pull him, and he shut the door—I was on the step of the door—they were all rowing—I did not see the knife—I don't know who had it.
ROWLAND SMITH . I am house-surgeon at the London Hospital—on 4th July, Avey was brought there—he had three lacerated wounds on his scalp, one was a serious wound, and penetrated deeply—there was a little hemorrhage, not much—it could have been caused by such an instrument as this knife—if he could have fallen on three sharp things at the same time, it might have been caused by a fell.
GEORGE PITMAN (Policeman H R 17). On the night of the 4th July, I was called to 8, William Street—I saw the prisoner in his shirt sleeves, and his hands and face, and everything were covered with blood—he had a cut or scratch just on the nose—I told him to put on his coat, and asked if he had a knife—he said, yes; he had got a coat and a knife, he put his coat on, and he pulled this knife out of his right-hand pocket—I asked him to go to the hospital, and going there Mrs. Avey said "That is the man that stabbed my husband, and he is in the hospital, and he will die"—I took him to the hospital, and showed the doctor the knife—there was no mark whatever on the knife—it" was about fifteen or twenty minutes after it happened—the prisoner said "You make a lot of fuss about trifles, they take no notice of it in my country."
The prisoner's statement before the magistrate was, that the prosecutor was drunk, and wanted to fight, and scratched him, that he pushed the. Prosecutor into the street, and shut (the door, which was pushed open, and that he struck his head against something, which cut it, as he had no knife in his hand.
Witnesses for the Defence.
EMMA SMITH . The prosecutor was a lodger in my house, and I offered to make his wife a dress for nothing, it was not done when the prosecutor wanted it, and he came and demanded it—I said "It is not quite ready, it will be ready this evening"—he said he would have it done or undone, and I said, "Now, if you offered me 20l., I would not finish it," and he abused me, and offered to fight any one in the house—I said "I am not a man to fight you, but there will be a man here presently"—when the prisoner came in, I said "He can't fight, he has got a bad hand," and the prosecutor said "You have not a man who will fight, fetch your b----man out of the grave"—he said he was a man that was not worth twopence, and he tried to tear the prisoner's shirt—he struck the prisoner on the face, and cut his nose, and got him down in the passage—I did not see any knife used—the prisoner had no knife in his hand—it was in his coat pocket in my room.
Cross-examined. I did not see the prosecutor bleeding until he was being
taken to the hospital, when he got to the Duke of York, he fell down, and asked for a glass of water—I did not see the cut, and I did not see any blood—when the prisoner pushed him out of the room, he fell down near the street door, which has been standing in my passage three weeks, and the clasp of the street door is almost as sharp as a knife, and there was blood on it afterwards—there are not three clasps—I did not see any signs of blood from the prosecutor in my room.
MARIA SMITH . I was going up to my sister's about 8 o'clock in the evening—I saw the prisoner swearing at my sister—I pushed him on one side—I did not know the man—he said "Fetch your b----man to fight me, and if not, I will fight you"—I said "My husband is at home, and in bed, and if he was here he would not fight"—he went up and quarrelled with his wife for some minutes, and came down to the parlour, and he wanted the prisoner to fight—I said "He can't fight you, for he has a bad hand—he said" I will fetch him out, and he caught hold of him and punched his nose, and cut his face, and afterwards I heard the policeman say the man's head was cut, and he was gone to the hospital.
Cross-examined. I was not there when the man's head was cut.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT, Wednesday, August 19th, 1874.
Before Mr. Baron Pigott.
MR. BESLEY conducted the Prosecution; MR. WARNER SLEIGH the Defence.
MARY ANN LEMON . I am the wife of George Lemon, a joiner; we did live at 10, Albert Road, Kilburn—the prisoner and his family came to lodge in that house about three months before he "was taken into custody—about a week after they had been in the house the eldest daughter brought the deceased child down, for me to look at, and I afterwards spoke to the prisoner about it—about a fortnight before Whitsuntide I said I did not think the girls were capable of taking care of the child, they were in and out and racing about so much—he made use of very bad language, to me, and said what was he to do, he was out at work all day, and they must do the best they could, and he went out and came home drunk—when I saw the child in the girl's arms it looked very whining—I did not see it undressed—I only saw it's face then—it's flesh hung very loose—it was not the face of an ordinary child, it appeared as if it wanted nourishment—I did not speak to the prisoner again about it after he was so abusive—he mostly came home about 6 o'clock in the evening—I don't think he ever came in without he was intoxicated, he was in and out of the public house all the evening, except in Whitsun week, and then he was at home all the week, and never went out—I believe that was the week he was out of work, and that week he was sober—the child seemed to be getting smaller every time I saw it—I think I saw it about once a fortnight, for after I spoke to the prisoner I was out at work—I never saw him leave any money or provisions—I saw some Sisters of Mercy once at the house after the child was christened—I can't tell the date—I believe it was before Whitsuntide—on one occasion, about a week before he was taken, I heard him make use of bad' language, and tell the girls to give him the brandy, for he wanted it as much as the child did—on two occasions
I provided the child with some milk and sugar—the last time was about a fortnight before it's death—I told the prisoner when I spoke to him about the child that I considered it was grossly neglected, and I did not consider it had proper nourishment—he made use of bad language, and said he could not help it, he left what he could—I saw the child twice with it's bottle about three weeks before it's death—it took it as if it had a sore throat—it did not draw from the bottle as it ought—it was corn flour, I believe—it seemed as if it could not get it fast enough, it was ravenous; but it could not swallow it sufficiently, it was too weak, as if it had not strength to draw it—on the Friday week before it died, the 26th of June, I went to Mr. Judd, the relieving officer—at that time the prisoner did not come home till past 9 o'clock, and sometimes 12 o'clock, and then he was so drunk he could not open the street door, and the daughter had to do it for him—on the Friday before the child died on the Sunday, I told him that the child was starved—he made use of very bad language, and said I was a liar.
Cross-examined. I don't think I stated that before the magistrate—my first complaint was that the girls were so giddy they did not take proper care of the child—that was a fact—they were in the habit of locking it up in the room, and leaving it alone—the last time they left it was about three hours—they did that about three times—I spoke to them about it—the prisoner told me that the child was not neglected, and was not starved, he left what he could—the girls told me that it had Swiss milk, corn flour, and barley milk—I say that the family was left destitute by the father—I can't answer for the elder children, the child was, by what the girls said—I don't know of my own knowledge how much nourishment was provided for it.
Re-examined. I told the girl that the child looked to mo as if it did not have enough nourishment, and I asked what she gave it—she said she gave it what she could get, that she had some from the Sisters of Merey, but before that the father had not given her sufficient for the child—I asked if she had taken it to the doctor's—she said "No, she gave it a little castor oil when it wanted it, but the father would not allow her to take it to the doctor's"—when I was out at work I asked her to do me a little bit of cleaning—she said she should be very glad, as they had had nothing to eat,—that the father only gave her 6d. or 8d. at a time to procure things—I gave them a few halfpence for doing that on a Saturday—at one time they left the child four hours, and during that time the prisoner came home, and the child was screaming "dreadfully—he went upstairs and came down again, and said "I can't do anything, the girls are gone away, and the child is locked in"—that was about a month before it died—there were five children altogether when they came, but one went away—one was three years old.
EDWARD ROBERT JUDD . I am Relieving Officer to the Hendon Union—in consequence of Mrs. Lemon's complaint, on 26th June, between 3 and 4 o'clock in the afternoon, I went to 10, Albert Road, Kilburn, to the room occupied by the prisoner and his family—I found the deceased child lying on the bed—it was in a very weak, low state, very much emaciated, it did not look more than two months old from its size, it had a feeding'bottle by its side with a little milk in it, and its face was covered with' a veil—I called the eldest girl out of the next room—the child's face was drawn up very much, its hand was contracted, and one eye was blind or deformed—in consequence of what I saw I directed Dr. Mullar, the Medical Officer, to go there—I saw
the child again the following week, it was then gradually sinking—the prisoner was taken into custody that same evening—I went with the constable to point him out—he was in liquor—this was before the child was dead—the constable told him he had a warrant for his apprehension and he should take him to the station—the warrant was read to him—he said he should not go, he was not the man—I have known him for some years.
FREDERICK GEORGE WILLIAM MULLAR , M.D. I am a registered medical practitioner—on an order from Mr. Judd I went to see the child on the 26th June—its state was scarcely describable, it was a perfect skeleton, shrivelled up to almost a mummy, the left eye was thoroughly destroyed and sunk into the head—I examined it all over, it was nothing but skin and bone—it was suffering from starvation, and from the post-mortem examination I should say of long continuance—I mean by starvation not that the food did not nourish it, but from want of food—I saw the prisoner nest morning, between 11 and 12 o'clock, in his own room—I told him I thought the child was sadly neglected and he ought to have had a wet nurse to it—he made no remark—upon, application the child would have been taken into the workhouse or provided with a wet nurse—if I had seen it at an earlier stage I should have prescribed for it—I did prescribe a little brandy and milk, but only as a sort of placibo, it was too late to be of any use, the child was dying—I weighed it with its clothes on after death, and it weighed 4 lbs. 6 oz.—the average weight of a healthy child at birth is from 3 to 4 lbs. Up to 16 lbs.—I have repeatedly had 16 lb. children—the average weight at five months would be from 18 to 20 lbs.—when I opened the abdomen there was not a particle of food in the stomach or any fatal matter in the bowels, and not a particle of adipose tissue between the skin and bones—the organs were perfectly healthy—I did not examine the brain, it was too decomposed—the loss of the eye might be from carelessness or neglect, or it might have been injured—the penis was diseased, that indicated neglect, want of washing.
Cross-examined. To the best of my belief, on 26th June, nothing could have saved the child—I did not notice that the place was very poverty stricken, I don't remember saying so before the magistrate, or that the child might have refused its food, and so sunk—when I saw it had not the power to suck, it was too weak—I said before the magistrate that if it got all the nourishment mentioned in the depositions it would not have died of starvation, to the best of my belief—in ray judgment it did die of starvation.
EDWARD ROBERT JUDD (re-examined). The prisoner lived in our union—no application was made by him from the time of his wife's death—we do not take children into the infirmary to be wet nursed—in the case of a mother's death I should provide a nurse for a short time, I don't say a wet nurse—in this case I should not have provided a nurse, I should have found milk—I should have found a nurse and milk for the first month, although the man was earning wages.
Cross-examined. I do not know that the prisoner was a teetotaller for some years up to the death of his wife—I had charge of him once out of doors as a lunatic from drink—that was at his own house for a week—I believe he has drank more since his wife's death.
SUSANNAH MARY NOTTINGHAM . The prisoner is my father—I am 17 years old—before my mother's death I was in a situation—she died on 12th February, seven days after her confinement—I came home the next day—we afterwards removed to 10, Albert Road—there was then my father,
myself, my sister (aged 15), the child of.3, the baby, and my brother—he was put in a reformatory on the 2nd June—I had the care of the baby—my father did not give me any money to get food with—I did as much as I could for it—I had to pawn some clothing to get the food with—I did not get any money elsewhere—I did some work for Mrs. Lemon on Saturdays—I used to get two or three halfpence for that, and I used to buy the baby some food with it—the Sisters of Mercy came after the child was christened—I can't tell you when that was, I think it was after my brother went away—it was christened before he left—they did not bring anything for the baby, they came to see it, they sent some brandy, that was about a fortnight before it died—they also sent some beef tea, about half a pint every night for about three weeks up to the time it died—my father, drank the brandy once or twice—they used to send a drop in pretty nearly every night, about an ounce—they sent that when they sent the milk—I used to give the child a little brandy in milk—it could not take all the things they sent—the child looked ill from its birth, from the time I first had it in my arms, and it was always getting worse—I don't know what made it ill—I used to feed it when I thought it wanted food—I was not always able to get food—I told father about a month after I came home that the child looked very ill indeed, I ought to take it to the doctor's—he did not say anything then—I asked him again soon after, and he said he could not do anything for it, he was out all day at work, and we must do the best we could—I did take it to Dr. Davinson, of Carlton Road, Kilburn, and he said he could do nothing for it—father used not to give me any money to get things, he used to provide everything—I don't know how the child's eye came bad, it was not hurt at all—father used to buy bread and meat, tea and sugar and milk—when he was earning 30s. a week he would, perhaps, bring home a piece of beef on Saturday—I did not get milk very often—the child had the Swiss milk at first, father bought it, there was enough for it, he used to send my little sister to the tea grocer's for it—I think the baby had between three and four tins a week, it cost 8d. a tin, I mixed it with warm water and gave it through the bottle, it liked it very well and bad it for two months—I then tried it with Dr. Ridge's food to see if it would fatten any better—I left off the Swiss milk because father did not have any money to get it with—he was at work, but he used to come home drunk at night,' he spent the money. Another way—the baby liked Dr. Ridge's food, it got plenty of it, it was 6d. a packet, I think it had enough of it—I tried it with cornflour after that—I got that from the baker's—it did not have enough—I had to pawn something to get it with—J mixed it with milk—I had to pawn things to get the milk with—it had brandy and milk after the cornflour—it did not go without it, but it had to go, without till I got some for it—my father only came home sober one week in five months—he was earning 30s. a week the last three months before Whitsuntide.
Cross-examined. My father did not always bring the baby food, because he has spent it in other ways—he did not give the money to me to buy it—he gave it to my sister—he told me to pawn the things to get food with, if I had not money enough—it was my mother's clothing that I pawned—he approved of it—I don't think he showed any fondness for the child—I am quite sure of that—he said he could do nothing for it—I said before the magistrate "My father showed some affection for the child; he used to nurse it occasionally, I mean take it on his lap"—he did sometimes take it on his lap—very seldom—Dr. Mullar ordered some barley for the child at the end
of June—I don't think father procured it—I said before the magistrate "My father found the prepared barley ordered by Dr. Mullar; he found whatever barley was ordered"—we four children did not always have enough to eat—I said before the magistrate "I think we four children had enough to eat"—I told father three or four times before Mrs. Lemon spoke to me, that the child looked very ill indeed—I said before the magistrate "Except on the occasion when Mrs. Lemon noticed the condition of the child, I never alluded to its condition to my father"—he had about half a wine glass full of brandy on each occasion—except that the baby had all that was sent by the Sisters—we removed to Albert Road about two months after mother died—it was about a month after her death that I went to Dr. Davinson—he said the child would die; he could do nothing for it—he did not. Say what was the matter with it—I gave it the food Dr. Mullar ordered—sometimes it took it, but sometimes it refused it—I told the magistrate that from the time mother died the child got all it could take—I don't think it was ever short of food—it always had food when it wanted it—I am quite sure of that.
Re-examined. It had to go without sometimes till I went and pawned things to get it with—I don't think it ever went without food—I fed it several times a day—I said before the magistrate "I don't think the child ever got food enough, or at any rate the food did not agree with it"—it was growing thinner every day—it was that made me take it to the doctor—I did not know what was the matter with it—it was often sick and threw up phlegm and blood—it is true that it did not have food enough because there was none for it to have; it had to-go without sometimes—I mean there was not enough for it—the other children had not enough always—we had a piece of bread sometimes that father left us—we had not bread enough—we had enough for the last three months, when father was earning 30s. a-week—he was always earning 30s., he told me so—he sometimes earned a guinea a week—his wages differed at different times.
MARY BRODIE . I am the wife of Henry Brodie, a surgical instrument maker and cutler—the prisoner is my step-brother—the same father but different mothers—I was present at his wife's death on 12th February—they were then living at 121, Pembroke Road, opposite me—they continued living there two months after his wife's death—they then moved to 10, Albert Road, about five minutes' walk away—the child was seven days old when the mother died—I advised him to put it out to nurse as I thought it would be much better for him—he said no, he had his daughter of seventeen in service, and another fifteen, and what was to become of the younger ones, he would have her home to manage his home—I could' not say for certain what his wages were, but of late he had done very little but hay-making—he was hay-making up to the day he was taken in charge—I washed and fed the child for two months after its mother's death, and washed its clothes—I always saw a good supply of food—the child began to waste at three weeks; it got thin—I only went four times to Albert Road, on account of my health—since the death of his wife the prisoner appeared quite lost, not conscious of what he was saying, and on one occasion he upset me—I was very ill—he has been given to drink since his wife's death.
Cross-examined. I am sorry to say the girls were gad-about giddy girls, and on that account I told the prisoner he had better move—on several occasions he came home and said he could get no tea, and he did not know what he should do with the girls—once he said the child was locked in the
room for two hours—he was a teetotaler till his wife's death, and since then he has taken to drink—as far as I know he was a kind husband and father—I did not visit them a great deal until they sent for me when the wife was dying—I saw him take the baby once or twice—there never appeared to be any want of food either for the child or the rest of the family—I told the girls if they wanted food at any time in their father's absence to apply to me and I would supply them as far as my means would allow—I was always willing to do so—on one occasion they said they were rather short of milk and I gave them some pence to get it with, and I would have done it on any occasion—that was during the last three months when I was unable to attend to them or my own family on account of my illness—I gave them sometimes 4d., sometimes 3d., whatever halfpence I had got—that happened once or twice—I could not say for certain how many times—when they lived opposite me I took the child to Dr. Davinson's—I saw the house-surgeon—he did not tell me that the child was dying and he could do nothing for it—I know the eldest girl took it afterwards to Dr. Davinson.
Re-examined. I told them to come to me because I knew that the father was short of work, only a little hay-making that he could get occasionally that was the last month or six weeks of the child's life—I did not know that it was dying of starvation between 26th June and 6th. July—the last time I saw the prisoner was about three weeks before the child's death—he came to my house one evening—I don't know how much a day he was paid for hay-making—I think the last day's work he did was 2s. 9d.—I don't know that he was not sober except for one week during the last five months—he did not appear tipsy when he came to me—he did not suffer from delirium tremens before he became a teetotaller—he had a sunstroke about twelve years ago—he was a teetotaller for a great number of years—since the death of his wife he has drunk very hard.
MARY ANN NOTTINGHAM . I am the prisoner's daughter, and am 15 years of age—I and my sister were left to take care of the baby—my sister attended to it, I used to feed it sometimes—I noticed, it getting ill—my sister told father it was very ill—she did not say what was the matter with it, some brandy was sent for the baby by the Sisters of Mercy, the baby always had it—father had about half a wine glass of it twice, that was about three weeks before the baby died.
Cross-examined. We used to lock the child in the room for an hour and a half at a time alone with the bottle in' a little cot—it did not get hurt in the eye that I know of, it was bad ever since it was born, it could never see out of it—on Easter Monday my sister went out and left me in charge of the child till 11 o'clock at night—father did not know that—I did not leave the child part of that time, I had it to take care of; it was left alone for about an hour and half once in each week while we went out to play; we were not away as much as two or three hours, I am sure of that—Mrs. Lemon complained of our leaving it for two or three hours at a time, that was true—my sister and I were left in charge of our brother Henry, we let him run about the streets, and he had to be locked up in a reformatory.
NOT GUILTY .
There was another indictment against the prisoner for unlawfully neglecting the child, and thereby endangering its life, upon which no evidence was offered.
NEW COURT, Wednesday, August 19th, 1874.
Before Mr. Justice Quain.
MR. MEAD conducted the Prosecution; and MR. WARNER SLEIGH the Defence.
EDWIN SUMMERS . I am Assistant High Bailiff of the Westminster County Court—I produce the proceedings in an action of Woolhams v. Sparks, in which the plaintiff obtained judgment, part of the sum was paid, 4l. 3s. 6d.—this (produced) is the judgment debtor summons—I have the appointment of Mr. Woolhams for serving the summons—this is an appointment by the Court—the officer does not serve it, a person is appointed to do so—this (produced) is the original appointment—I keep one copy of the judgment debtor summons, and give the other to the plaintiff—they are both of the nature of originals, and both are signed with the seal of the Court; they are in duplicate.
Cross-examined. I do not produce the plaint book or the summons, I have had no notice to do so, I produce the judgment summons—this appointment of Mr. Woolham's is sanctioned by the Judge of the County Court under 9th and. 10th Victoria, sec. 31.
THOMAS WOOLHAMS . I am a surgical instrument maker, of 239,. Tottenham Court Road—I was plaintiff in the action of Woolhams v. Sparks, and on 1st July having obtained a judgment debtor summons, I went to Mr. Spark's office, 3, Craven Street, Strand, to serve it—he calls himself a broker, but it is a long firm of swindlers—I saw the prisoner there, who said that Mr. Sparks was not in, and he could not tell me when I could see him, or make an appointment—I then watched the house from the outside, taking care that the prisoner should not see me, end in about half an hour he went out with an envelope in his hand, as if he was going to the Post Office, but he did not cross over to the Post Office, he turned round the corner at" Charing Cross, and I followed him up Trinity Court or Place, where he met Mr. Sparks, and they walked up to the top of the Court by themselves—nobody else was in the Court—I followed them up the Court, and as they turned round, I confronted them, looked at Sparks, and said in the prisoner's hearing "You have given us a great deal of trouble over this judgment summons by keeping out of the way; it is no use now, here it is, and if you wish to see my authority for serving it, you can see it"—he stood motionless, and looked very angrily at me, but did not speak, nor did the prisoner—Sparks wore a waistcoat which was very open in the bosom, and I was about to put the summons into his bosom, but I offered it to him first, and he would not take it—the prisoner reached over my arm., snatched it oat of my hand, and began tearing it up, and threw the pieces into my face, his fingers touched my cheek the first time he threw them, and he continued tearing it and throwing the fragments for about a dozen yards—I said "You give me your name, will you?"—he said "I'll name you with the devil to you"—he appeared so fierce, that I thought he would strike me, and ran out of the Court to a policeman who was at the entrance of the Court who went down, and the prisoner gave his name and address.
Cross-examined. I had had some difficulty in serving the summons on Sparks, and I was considerably annoyed about it—when I went to the office the prisoner was very anxious to know what my business was, and I declined
to tell him—I dare say I gave a false name—I believe I said that my name was Robinson, and that I would come back in an hour—I said that I came from the East-end—I was between the prisoner and Sparks, but did not push in abruptly—Sparks never had the summons in his hand—he looked angrily at the clerk, because he thought it was through his carelessness I had caught him—I had told him what it was, and being a solicitor he ought to know—I have a copy of a writ which he issued, and a letter in which he says that he is a solicitor—I have seen a gentleman this morning who has a writ in which the prisoner is down as a solicitor—his clerk had been issuing cheques without the money to meet them—I think the gentleman is in Court—I did not call out "That is a County Court summons," after it was torn up—the only sounds I uttered after it was torn up were, "Give me your name, sir"—I did not say "It is a County Court summons; I have had plenty of dancing about, and intend having no more humbug"—nor did Sparks say "Where is your authority?"—I did not then say "Here it is," and take a paper out of my pocket—we had no conversation at all—I did not say that I would give the prisoner in custody for assaulting me, because the assault was not serious enough to induce the policeman to take him.
Cross-examined. I received the writ from Henry Newton.
JOHE LANGLEY (Policeman A 136). On 1st July I was on duty at Charing Cross—Mr. Woolhams spoke to me in the prisoner's presence, and Mr. Sparks was there—I did not notice Mr. Carroll—I got the prisoner's address.
Cross-examined. The prisoner did not come up and give me his name and address of his own free will—I asked him for it—Mr. Woolhams was a little excited—he had to come some distance, and running would excite him a little.
Witness for the Defence.
JOHN CARROLL . I am an advertising agent, but have no office at present—I was in company with Mr. Sparks on 1st July in Trinity Place—the prisoner came towards us—I did not see Woolhams at that time, but he afterwards rushed between Churchill and me with a piece of paper folded in his hand, which he thrust into Mr. Sparks' breast, inside his waistcoat, saying "You know all about it"—Sparks said "What is it?" and took it out of his breast, and handed it to the prisoner, who immediately tore it in pieces, and threw it out of his hand—the prosecutor said" I will give you in charge for an assault," and ran out of the passage into the street—he was very much excited indeed—neither the prisoner nor Sparks said anything after it was torn up—the three of us walked out of the passage after the prosecutor—he turned to the right, and we turned to the left towards Scotland Yard, and in about five minutes we were stopped by a policeman—I did not hear anybody state what the paper was till after the policeman came up—when the prosecutor said "I give this man in charge for an assault"—the policeman said "I don't see that he has assaulted you"—I said "It is merely a piece of paper may have blown upon him"—there was at no time any description of what the piece of paper was which was torn up.
Cross-examined. I spoke to the policeman, and demanded the prosecutor's address—I was not in Court when the officer was examined.
COURT. to John Langley. Q. Did you see Carroll A. Not that I am aware of—all I saw was the prisoner, and Woolhams, and Sparks.
MR. WARNER SLEIGH to J. CARROLL. Q. Had you met him by appointment?
A. No, by accident—I had not seen him in Trinity Court before that day—I am not in the habit of meeting him there, but I have met him there several times—he does not do his business there—I believe he has business with a solicitor there—I have been to Sparks' office three or four times a week—I did not go to Trinity Court to see him there—I have never been examined in this Court as a witness—I might have been in Court to hear a case—I have been convicted for a false order—I suppose it must have been forgery—it was sixteen or seventeen years ago—I have not been convicted of passing bad coin.
GUILTY — Three Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. POLAND and BEASLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MR. STRAIGHT the Defence.
After some evidence had been given, Mr. Straight stated that he could not resist a verdict; and the prisoner, having stated that he was Guilty, the Jury found that verdict. The prisoner received an excellent character— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
540. WILLIAM STAPLETON, WILLIAM BAKER, JAMES CHEESMAN, JOSEPH GILL, THOMAS CRANMER, HENRY MAYLING, WILLIAM SNEAREY , Junr., CHARLOTTE SNEAREY, EMMA SNEAREY , and HENRY GILES , were indicted for riotously assembling together and assaulting John Jarvis and others.
The prisoners all PLEADED GUILTY to a common assault. To enter into their own recognizances in 100l. to appear and receive judgment when called upon, to keep the peace towards all Her Majesty's subjects, and to give up possession of the house in question within a week.
THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, August 19th, 1874.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
542. THOMAS CARTER (25) , to embezzling and stealing various sums of money and a cheque for 10l. 0s. 6d. of George Isaac Goyder and another, his masters; also to feloniously endorsing the said cheque— To enter into recognizances to appear and receive judgment. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]
MR. POCOCK conducted the Prosecution; and MR. G. S. GRIFFITHS the Defence.
HERBERT WEBB . I live at'17, Manor Road, Holloway—I am a clerk in the Whitechapel County Court—I produce a certified extract from the minute book of the Court of 24th June, 1874, relative to an action in which Joseph White was plaintiff, and John Gray defendant, showing amount claimed 7l. 9s. 11d.—there is another certificate of 8th July, 1874, showing judgment for the plaintiff 7l. 9s. 11d.—order made 22nd July, 1874.
Cross-examined. A minute book is kept, of which this a copy—I have a copy of the original summons here.
9, New Square, Lincoln's Inn Fields—I was present at the trial at the Whitechapel County Court, on the 24th June, in which the prosecutor was defendant and the prisoner plaintiff—I had the management of the caso for the prosecutor—I saw and heard the prisoner sworn, examined, and cross-examined as to two payments alleged to have been made by the prosecutor to him of 5l.—I think the date of payment was the 19th March—he was asked whether he had received payment of 5l. on account—he denied having received it—he was then asked whether he had not received the first 5l. on the 19th March—he denied it—he was then asked whether or not he had received any sum on account from the defendant—the answer was that the only money he received was a sum of 22l. which he had received through our firm, and that he had not received any other sum from the defendant—this is the cheque (produced) for 22l—when that was paid we were paying Mr. John Gray's debts, and ho made out a list of his liabilities—the date is the 15th April, 1873—I paid Mr. White 22l., which I understood was the whole amount—nothing was said about any further liability—I said "You had better not discount any more bills for him"—he did not say anything else was due, on the contrary, if he had said there was anything more due to him I should have paid him at once.
By the COURT. The cheque was for an overdue acceptance—I do not know the date of the acceptance—it was overdue some two or three months, I think—I said to the prisoner" We have paid you up down at Mile End two or three times, and you had better not give any more credit, because if you do it may not be paid again"—he made no reply, there was an end of the transaction.
By MR. GRIFFITHS. I will not pledge myself as to any particular dates of payment—it was the 21st February and 19th March so far as my recollection goes—I do not know whether the judge made notes at the trial, I dare say he did—they were not produced before Mr. Paget—the case was adjourned for the production of the certificate laying the foundation of the charge, without which the Magistrate had no jurisdiction—the County Court case we defended for the then defendant—Mr. Pocock appeared—I instructed him—Mr. Gray is a tobacconist—he has a freehold down in Essex, and he has leaseholds—in Mile End—our firm were solicitors for the trustees of his father's will—we had acted for him for some years—I do not know that there have been many monetary transactions between him and Mr. White—on the contrary, Mr. White said there was only one transaction between them, this particular transaction of 22l. which I had paid—I do not know that that bill had been renewed from time to time—I advised Mr. White not to let Mr. Gray have any more money—that action was not brought for any bill transaction, but merely for goods Hold and delivered—White did not mention to me, after I gave him this cheque for 22l., anything about this bill for goods sold and delivered until I saw him about twelve months afterwards if he had mentioned it I should have added it to the debt and given him a cheque for the amount—I was then paying all Mr. Gray's liabilities—that was in April, 1873—the case in the County Court was adjourned on the 24th June for further evidence to show that Mr. Gray had paid White one or two sums of 5l., and I then brought two witnesses to prove it—the County Court Judge did not hear them—on the first occasion the Deputy Judge was sitting and heard the main facts of the case—on the second occasion the Judge himself sat, who had not heard the case, and I brought two witnesses to prove that they had heard Mr. White acknowledge that ho had
received these sums of 5l., and the Judge would not hear them, because, it seems that he had made a note in his book that Albert Gray was to be produced, who was a brother of the prosecutor—Albert Gray was in Lincolnshire, and I considered it far better to bring independent witnesses of the payment of 5l. than the production of his brother, but the Judge refused to hear them—he asked Mr. White whether he would consent to Mr. Priest and Mrs. Gray being called to prove having received these 5l. and Mr. White would not consent to their being called—the name of the Judge who refused to hear the witnesses was Sir Walter Riddell—judgment was given against Mr. Gray—I do not know that Mr. Bustle, the now Solicitor for the Prosecution, has applied that execution should be stayed—I believe it has been talked about—ho may or may not have done so—I think he ought to have done so—I have no belief on the subject—we have no interest in the matter—Judgment was given on the 8th July for 9l. 9s. 11d. altogether, with costs—I understood from Mr. Bustle that Mr. White had not appeared, and that a warrant had issued for his apprehension—I do not know of my own knowledge that ho was arrested on the 23rd and locked up all night—Mr. Paget heard the two witnesses that Sir Walter Riddell refused to hear—they were not my witnesses—I am not identified with this prosecution—the witnesses for the prosecution were, all heard—Mr. Paget did not commit for trial, he declined to commit—he was called upon under the Vexatious Indictment Act to bind the prosecutor and his witnesses over to prefer a bill at these Sessions—my advice to Mr. Gray was to pay the money over again—that letter (produced) is signed by me on behalf of the firm—it is written under ray dictation—I was at the Police Court before Mr. Paget—I did not see Mr. Gray hand Mr. White my letter—I have a doubt, I cannot say—I certainly tried to get it back from Mr. White—I never asked him—I had no reason to get anything back from Mr. White—I did not see the prisoner hand that letter of mine to Mr. Pdget—I saw Mr. John Gray, under my advice, hand Mr. White a notice—it was sent to Mr. White at his address, and returned through the Dead Letter Office, and I told him to serve him personally—Mr. Gray filed his Liquidation in Bankruptcy on the the 27th July—he will pay 20s. in the pound—he has got an estate of 3,000l. Against 300l. debts—I have no doubt he could pay 40s. or 60s. in the pound—I am not sure that Mr. Paget read the letter. (The letter, being read, was a Notice of Liquidation). Mr. Paget did not dismiss the case directly he read that letter the letter was handed up to him by consent of Mr. Pocock, who said he had no objection to his reading it—it night have been an hour after that the case was dismissed—I will swear it was more than 20 minutes—I will swear to half an hour—I think there was another witness examined after he read that letter—I will not pledge my oath.
Re-examined. I was responsible for the Judge's refusal to hear the two witnesses, in this way, I had no knowledge of the Judge's note, it was adjourned to produce further evidence confirmatory of John Gray's evidence that he had paid then two sums of 5l.—his brother, a ward of Court, was in Lincolnshire, and he gave me his name as being prepared to prove it, but when I found I could get the same witnesses in London I thought it more advantageous to our client to produce independent witnesses than his brother, and Mr. White refused to give his consent to their being heard—Mrs. Gray is here—Mr. Priest, I believe, is ill—with reference to the prisoner being given into custody on the 23rd July, I believe the first hearing before the Magistrate was the time when he did not appear—I do not know
anything about the summons being issued—the prisoner handed up some letter to the Magistrate, and the Counsel wished to see it previously to its being handed up—no objection was offered to its being put in.
By the COURT. The question before the County Court was whether the two sums of 5l. had been paid, and I was prepared to show by the testimony of these witnesses that they had been paid—the allegation on the part of the plaintiff was that after the bill had been given, or during the time it was running, he had trusted Mr. John Gray for goods sold and money lent, and the issue was this, whether that money was lent before the renewed bill was given, or subsequently—the defendant's case was this "You had a bill for 22l.; part of that was for goods supplied, and the other money lent at interest; that is all I owe you, therefore, this bill for goods sold and delivered is included in the 22l. and has been paid you"—that was a separate transaction.
JOHN GRAY . I am the prosecutor in this case—I am a tobacconist, living at 75, Mile End Road—I was present on the 24th June in the Whitechapel County Court—I was the defendant in the action brought against me by the prisoner to recover 7l. 9s. 11d.
By the COURT. I heard the prisoner deny that he had received two payments of 5l.—I have paid to the prisoner two sums of 5l. each, namely, on the 21st of February and 19th March, 1873, respectively—he gave me no receipts—the consideration for the payment of these two 5l. notes was 8l. that I received from him in January, 1873—10l. was repaid for the 8l.—2l. for the loan of it—I gave the prisoner an acceptance for 22l. on December 16th, 1872—the consideration for this was 13l. then owing on an acceptance then due, the sum of 7l. goods supplied, or thereabouts, and interest upon it in consideration of his taking an acceptance—this was the account on which I was sued on the 24th June, this year.
Cross-examined. I cannot say whether my father and Mr. White's father were very intimate, and did a good deal of business together—my father has been dead fifteen years, and I cannot remember what took place then—I have not had a good many monetary transactions with Mr. White—I remember his lending me 10l., and my giving him a bill for 13l. in November, 1872—I paid it when it became due by another acceptance—I could not meet it at that time—the prisoner did not then advance me 8l. more, and take a bill for 22l., payable in a month—my solicitor has the account of the goods supplied me for the 7l. (produced)—the goods contained in this account, supplied up to the 14th December, were articles named in the acceptance—the acceptance for 22l. was given about the 16th December—I will not pledge myself to a date, but it was in December—to the best of my recollection it was payable in a month—if so it would be due about the 17th January—it was never presented—very likely I told the prisoner I could not pay until I got my Christmas rents in—he allowed the matter to stand over until April, 1873—I believe Mr. Todd then gave him a cheque—the prisoner did not buy any wine I liked after April—if he bought it I have not had it—he bought some wine in December, 1872, or thereabouts—he did not buy any after the acceptance was given, and charge it in his account—I positively swear that I had no transactions with him excepting the acceptance for 22l. and the 8l. borrowed money—he supplied me with flour, pork, and potatoes—they are all in the account—he came to my shop in the early part of the present year drunk, and asked me to lend him 2s. 6d., or pay him 2s. off a sovereign he said I owed him, and I, being in doubt as
to whether I owed him a sovereign or not, gave him 1s. 6d. and a pipe to make up 2s. 6d., and I said I would look into the matter, that is all I did—he never said I owed him 7l.—I believe I was short of money, and had only 3s. or 1s. in the shop, and I could not give him what I had not got—if he had asked me for it he would not have got it—he has sent me a good many letters for the 7l.—I have denied it from first to last—I was never absolutely asked for it until his solicitor had sent me a letter—I was first asked for 1l., which he said I owed him—when I denied my liability he sent me an account for 7l.—I have seen the prisoner's brother several times—I did not tell him that if White would give me a receipt for all demands I would not prosecute, but if he would not give a receipt that then I would lock him up the next day, for I was determined he should never have the money—I said I did not owe the money, Mr. White knew it—that was immediately after the County Court case was heard—I said what I did not owe I would not pay, and I said that as he had taken a false oath he would have to stand the consequences of so doing—I have not tried to settle this matter since—I have told White since that I did not owe the money, that I would not pay it—that I have not the slightest ill-feeling against him—what I wish to do is to escape from payment of an unjust claim—the evening the bill was found by the Grand Jury I wished to serve a notice of the true bill upon him—he was not at home—there was great difficulty in getting into the house—I told Mrs. White I should like to see him with regard to the liquidation proceedings, which are at present taking place, and to which he was a party—I presume it was about 8 o'clock—I presume the time the notice was served upon him was about 10 o'clock—it was not 11 o'clock—I was sent to a beer-shop by his wife to find him—I did not find him there—I was not going to tell his wife I wanted to serve him with a notice of this Court—I prosecute him for two things—I do not prosecute him to avoid paying—my annual income is about 400l.—my present liabilities about 200l.—I filed a' petition merely to gain time—I do not know that I get 164l. a quarter for my rents—I told you my net income is about 400l.—it does not come in quarterly—I find people take about sis months' credit—the prisoner's is an unjust claim—I prosecute him because he told a lie—I did not say I prosecuted him to get rid of an unjust claim—no one but ourselves was present when this first 5l. was paid—it was paid in gold, in a potato shed in one of the back streets of Mile End Road on the 21st February—I remember the date, because, in the first place, I pawned some silver in order to pay the money to the prisoner, and the second reason I have for remembering it is because being in a public-house with the prisoner, and both having had rather more than was needful, a quarrel arose between us, and he locked me up for fighting him—there was a row—I was discharged—I was not locked up all night—I was sober when I paid the 5l.—the money was paid about 11 o'clock in the morning, and I was locked up about 4 o'clock—I cannot give the name of the street where the money was paid—it was a house at the back of the beer-shop which the prisoner rented—it was an appendage to the potato house—the second payment was made in the Royal Hotel, Burdett Road, Bow, on the 19th March, in the forenoon—there were present, my brother, Mr. White, a man of the name of Max, and myself—it was paid in gold.
Re-examined. No receipts were given for either of these payments—the shed was rented by the prisoner—I went to him there—I do not know whether he is a potato merchant—he sells corn, potatoes, and" one thing and the other—there was no security given for the 8l.
By the COURT. The row, when we were drinking together, arose from ray demanding a receipt for the 5l. I paid him, which he refused, and it ended in my being locked up for assaulting him—when I paid him the other 5l. on the 21st March, I asked for a receipt and he told me he would send a receipt for the full amount—we had made the quarrel up as it were—ho promised a receipt in the evening—he said ho had not one of his bills with him—I cannot say whether the receipt was to be for the 5l. or 10l.—the words he used were ho would send me over a receipt for the whole amount—the 8l. was a loan or personal security without any acknowledgment.
MARIA GRAY . I am the wife of the prosecutor—I remember, early in 1873, the prisoner coming to my house—I think it was the 21st or 22nd February I answered the door myself—he stood at the street door—it was between 6 and 7 o'clock in the evening as near as I can remember it, and I said "My husband is not at homo"—he said "I know ho is not at home, I have locked him up"—I said "What for?"—he safe "He paid me 5l., I didn't want the 5l.—I want my money; if I don't have my money I will give him a month, and take the home from over your head"—ho was tipsy and he used very bad language.
Cross-examined. I did not see anyone present when he came—I answered the door myself—I and my children were in the house—I could not see whether the girl was there or not—it was some time after I had had my tea—I usually have my tea about 5 o'clock—ho did not say how much the money was, but for the money that my husband had had from him.
By the COURT. He had locked my husband up—he was very tipsy—I saw my husband again between 9 and 10 o'clock—I learnt from him what had happened—I told him the prisoner had been there—he told me ho had been locked up—my husband was not tipsy when I saw him, but it appears he had been tipsy when he was locked up.
ALBERT GRAY . I live at 22, Baker's Row, West Ham, and am apprenticed to a farmer at Grantham—I remember being present, in March of last year, at the Royal Hotel, Burdett Road, Bow, the 19th March—there were present with mo Mr. White, my brother, and my uncle—I saw my brother pay Mr. White the 5l. in gold—he took it up and put it in his pocket—he said he would send over a receipt in the evening.
Cross-examined. I was not at the County Court—I did not know that the case was adjourned for my attendance—I know it now—Mr. Paget heard my evidence—the 5l. was paid in a side entrance to the Royal Hotel, round opposite the cab stand—it was belonging to the public-house—it was not in the bar—it was five sovereigns—I am quite clear about that—it was about 12 o'clock in the day time—there was not a man of the name of Marquis present that I know of—it was on a Wednesday I think—my uncle is dead—I know Mr. Marquis by seeing him along with Mr. White—I will not swear ho was not present—he has been present on one occasion when we three were together.
By the COURT. I do not know that my brother made an appointment to meet me at the Royal Hotel—I had come up from Grantham for a holiday—we were going to have a glass of ale—my brother was there when I got there, as near as I can recollect—I do not remember who first said anything about money—I saw the money laid down and Mr. White take it up—that signature is mine. (The depositions being referred to, contained the words "on account.")
mother of the prosecutor—I remember having an interview with the prisoner last year, twelve months ago, in my parlour at West Ham—he told me that Mr. Todd had paid all accounts that my son John owed him.
Cross-examined. My name was Maxey at one time—it is now—I go by the name of Gray—if I were asked whether I was Miss Maxey or Mrs. Maxey I should say yes—Mr. White known me by the name of Gray and sometimes by Maxey, but not of late years, unless anybody pleases to call mo so—I may have been before a police magistrate for having a piece of work at my place—it might be I was locked up in a police station once for being drunk, but I was bailed out—I cannot say whether that has occurred on more than one occasion—the prisoner came to my house to buy some fowls which I had to sell—I believe his brother was up with him for a holiday—ho said "Mr. Todd has paid mo all he owed me—this was about last June twelve months—it was this year that I was before the magistrate in this case—the time of day that Mr. White came to see me was between 3 and 4 o'clock—he sent out for a quartern of gin.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. GRIFFITHS applied to the Court for costs under the Vexatious Indictmaits Act; the application was refused.
MR. SIMS, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
To enter into his own recognizances in 100l., to come up for judgment, if called upon.
MR. CROME conducted the Prosecution.
JOHN BUTLER . I am a seaman—on the night of the 14th August last, I was in Shorter Street, Wollolose Square, at about 11.30 or 11.45, I will not say what time exactly—while walking along Shorter Street, three or four men seized mo round the arm and body, and nearly threw me down—the prisoner was in front of me—they tore the buttons off my trousers, and took my meerschaum pipe and my purse—I do not know whose band it was that wont in my pocket—there was from 16s. to 15s. in my purse—the value of the pipe was about 15s.—I paid for it the day before—I had a good opportunity of seeing the prisoner—I could not help myself—I cried out "Police!"—they then fled from me—I followed after them—as I was following thorn, I saw Policeman Murphy pass me—he came back to me shortly after with the prisoner, and I recognised him as one of the men—I have no doubt as to him.
Prisoner. I was running along when I heard a cry of "Police!" and when I was brought back, the prosecutor said, "Where is the woman?—he said ho was going home with a prostitute.
Witness. I was, but I did not say so—she was amongst the crowd, but whether accompanied by the others, I cannot say.
WILLAM MURPHY (Police Constable H 69). I was on duty in Shorter Street on the night of the 14th August—I hoard a cry of "Police!"—I ran in the direction, and saw a number of men running, and the prisoner included
—I ran towards him, confronted him—he turned in a different direction to the others—I ran after him and stopped him—I took him back—the prosecutor said "That is one of them"—the prisoner said nothing in answer to that.
GUILTY **— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
MR. J. P. GRAIN conducted the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS the Defence.
NOT GUILTY .
FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, August 19th, 1874.
Before Mr. Recorder.
549. GEORGE ROBERTS (24), WILLIAM SHIPGOOD (34), WILLIAM HASELL (30), and JOHN COLLINS (46) , Stealing four bushels of horse provender, the property of Frederick Wiggins. Second Count against Hasell for receiving the same.
MESSRS. F. H. LEWIS and SOULSEY conducted the Prosecution; MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS defended Roberts and HASELL; and MR. WEATHERSBY defended Shipgood.
JOHN DAVIES (City Detective). On Saturday morning, 18th July, a little before 8 o'clock, I was with another officer named Roper, and saw Roberts, Shipgood, and Collins leaving Mr. Wiggins' premises in the Goswell Road they went to Messrs. Price and Co.'s premises in Upper Thames Street—I there saw Hasell—he had one of the Charity School boys in uniform minding a one-horse van—I saw him get out of the van and go into Messrs. Price's yard and speak to Roberts—Roberts looked up and down Thames Street, and then Shipgood came out and looked up and down, and he was joined by Collins—they had a conversation for about twenty minutes, and then Hasell got on his van and drove away—that was all I saw on. That day—on the morning of the 25th I saw the first three prisoners leaving Wiggins' yard—they had five horses between the three of them and three sacks of provender—they went to Price's yard in Upper Thames Street—it was about 7.45—a little after 8 o'clock I saw Hasell senior and Hasell junior, the prisoner, come in a van—they stopped just round the kerb from Messrs. Price's premises, out of sight of the premises—Hasell senior remained in the van and the prisoner Hasell got out—he went up to Roberts, Shipgood, and Collins—they took a portion of the provender out of each bag and put it in that larger one and gave it to Hasell, who took it outside and threw it in his van—Collins, Shipgood, and Hasell had some conversation, and Roberts remained against the wheel, then they went down the yard again and this other sack was given to Hasell from the van just as it had been brought out of Wiggins' yard, and Hasell put it in his van—I then followed the van away a little distance, and then Hasell called to Roberts and stopped his van—Roberts left Shipgood and Collins and went up to Hasell, and I saw him pass some money to Roberts—I could see it was silver, but what it was I could not tell—I followed the van as for as Bridge Street and got the assistance of officers and took the two Hasells into custody—the elder Hasell was discharged by the Lord Mayor—I told them I was a City detective officer, and I said "I shall take you in custody for
being concerned in stealing two sacks of provender, the property of Messrs. Wiggins, and also with receiving the same"—the prisoner Hasell began to cry, and said "I am very sorry, I should not have done it only the others told me they bad got a little stuff and asked me to buy it"—I afterwards took Roberts and Shipgood into custody—they said they knew nothing about it and they had not seen Hasell that morning—there was no provender in Roberts' van at that time at all—he gave the whole of his as he brought it out of Price's yard—Roper took Collins—I searched the lodgings of all the men—I found four or five camphine cans and a gallon tin at Roberts' lodging—they were all empty.
Cross-examined by MR. WEATHERSBY. I did not search Shipgood's van that morning—I saw him take a portion of the provender out of his soak previous to putting it in his van the same as the other one did about four or five handsful each—they were all four together when the money was being passed to Roberts by Hasell, Shipgood stood at the gate where be could see them, he was looking at them in fact.
THOMAS ROPER (City Detective 925). I took Collins into custody On the afternoon of 25th July in Messrs. Price's yard—I told him he would Be charged with others already in custody for Stealing provender, the property of Messrs. Wiggins—he said he admitted being in their company that morning, but he had nothing to do with it—I took him to the station.
FREDERICK WIGGINS . I am a contractor, carrying on business in Goswell Road—I contract for horses and provender with Messrs; Price and Co., of Thames Street—the provender in those sacks corresponds in its mixture with the provender that I supplied "To the horses oh that particular occasion, because we were using rather peculiar clover Having more straw than usual—the value is eight or ten shillings—the provender I supply is for the daily consumption of the horses while they are absent.
JOHN DODD . I am manager to Messrs. Charles Price and Co., oil Merchants, of Upper Thames Street—they hire horses of Messrs. Wiggins, and he provides the provender—Roberts, Shipgood, and Collins were in our service as carmen—I don't know Hasell at all—the carmen had no authority to sell any of the provender.
Cross-examined by MR. WEATHERSBY. Shipgood has been in our employment about two years I think—it is not my department to inquire after the carmen's characters, so I don't know what characters they have borne.
MR. WILLIAMS stated that with regard to Roberts and Hasell he could not resist the facts.
Collins' Defence. I am innocent of it. I was not in the yard Altogether a quarter of an hour, because I was loaded away and went down to the Aberdeen Steam Wharf, and I was there from 9.15, and my horses were eating all the while; all the food I had for my horses, I can assure you they eat, barring what was in the nose-bags.
ROBERTS and SHIPGOOD— Three Months' Imprisonment HASELL— Six Months' Imprisonment; and COLLINS— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
550. GEORGE ROBERTS was again indicted, with JOSEPH JAMES ARCHER (39), and CHARLES GREY (50) , for stealing a keg of driers of Charles Price and another, the masters of Roberts and Archer. Second Count against Grey—for receiving the same.
ROBERTS PLEADED GUILTY .
MESSRS F. H. LEWIS and SOCLSBY conducted the Prosecution; MR. CHARLES MATTHEWS defended Archer, arid MR. BCOE defended Grey'.
JOHN DAVIES (City Detective). On Friday, 24th July, I was at Messrs. Price's premises and saw Roberts loading a one horse van there—Archer was in the warehouse against where he was loading—I saw them speak to each other, and then Roberts handed Archer out a bag from his van—I saw Archer put his keg of driers (produced) into Roberts' provender bag—he handed it to Roberts and Roberts took it in the van—he took the van outside and left it there to go back, I think, for his bill, because he brought some papers out in his hand—I got up in the van while he was away and marked the keg with a piece of chalk—the van was then driven away and I followed it as far as the new street and left it there—on the Sunday, in consequence of a communication I received from the officer Roper, I went with him to Grey's house, 2, Stacey Street, Soho—he is a painter and has a workshop and cellar there—I told him we were two detective officers, and said "You were seen by this officer to take a keg of driers from a man of the name of Roberts, in the employ of Messrs. Price, on Friday morning"—he hesitated a little and then said "Well, yes, I had it"—he said that a man had left it at his place and that he had not paid anything for it—he said he had never seen the man before and did not know who he was—I said "Where is it," and he said" Down in the cellar"—we went into the cellar and I pointed to it and said "That is the one"—the chalk mark was on it then—Grey said "Well there are only three of us here, you need not take any notice of it unless you like; if a little feeing will do it I am your man, although only a little one"—when I got upstairs he said "Will you go and square it with your mate, I will give you 5l., the stuff shall be taken away from here, and it shall never be seen by anyone again"—I called Roper up then and Grey stated the same in his presence—I took him to the station.
Cross-examined by MR. BUCK."There was also about thirty-five gallons of colza oil in the cellar—I asked him where he got that and he could not give any account of it—there were there about 500 packets of white and red lead, and the cellar was full of materials relating to his trade—the drying stuff is used in the course of his business I suppose—I think it was seven or eight weeks ago that I first knew Grey—I remember Roberts going to his place once before with his van, and that was what caused my suspicion, and I found from the firm he was not a customer—he offered me the 5l. when he called me up to look at his bills—I went to make a general inspection of the place, as we generally do when we have a receiver in custody—it was about 3 o'clock on the afternoon of Friday, the 24th, that I saw the keg transferred to the cart, and I went to Grey's house first on the Saturday afternoon, but I could not see him then—I asked his wife if he was in and she said no—I did not search then—I did not look anywhere else besides the room upstairs and the cellar—he did not seem to be executed when I told him I was a detective.
Re-examined. I asked him how he could account for the colza oil, and whether he had got any bills for it—he said "No"—he did not remember how he got it or where he got it from—I said "Painters don't use colza oil, what are you going to do with it?"—he said "I don't know."
THOMAS ROPER (City Detective). I followed the van which contained the keg of driers to Grey's house—Roberts was the carman, and there was another man with him, who is not in custody—when he got to Stacey Street there was a little girl standing at the door, and she recognised him—he laughed at the little girl, and spoke to her, and took the keg into the passage, he came out again followed by Grey and Roberts, led his horses
down to the corner of Crown Street, and they went into a public-house—I went into another compartment—Roberts asked 7s. for the keg first, and Grey told him he could not give him 7s., as he was full of driers—Roberts then asked him to give him 6s., and he said he could not, he could give him 5s., that was all—had it been oil or turps he could have done with it—Roberts said "Well, let us have that," and I heard the jingle of money, as if it was passed, of course I could not see it—I was with Davies at the time he took Grey—I have heard his statement of what took place, and it is correct.
Cross-examined by MR. BUCK. I had not seen the little girl before—she smiled at Roberts—I believe the average price of this keg is about 12s.—there was no one in the compartment of the public-house where I was, and there was no one in the other compartment—a female was serving in the bar—she was attending to her business—I could not say whether she was attending to what they were saying—the partition was a wooden one half way up—I did not see the landlord—he might have been in the bar parlour—I did not see any customers coming in and out—there may have been some.
Cross-examined by MR. BUCK. Driers is very largely used by painters for causing paint to dry more rapidly—I produced a stencil plate which corresponds with the mark on the keg, and there is one keg deficient in our stock—the stencil plate is not here—it was at the Police Court, and it was fitted on by Roper, who can swear that it matched.
Re-examined, We are not makers of driers—the wholesale price would be about 10s.
ARCHER and GREY received good characters.
ARCHER— NOT GUILTY .
GREY— GUILTY — Eighteen Months' Imprisonment. ROBERTS— Fifteen Months' Imprisonment.
The Court ordered a reward of 2l. each to Davies and Roper.
MR. PALMES conducted the Prosecution; and MR. BROMBY the Defence.
JOSEPH LE GUAY . I am a merchant commission agent, having offices at 19 and 20, Walbrook—on the 22nd May the prisoner came to me there, under the introduction of a gentleman with whom I have some business transactions, wishing to obtain an advance of money—a bill was produced, and having suffered from discounting bills in former years—I refused point blank to discount it—the point of the conversation was, that he wanted an advance of money, and the purport of my reply was, that I would not do it on that bill—he then urged his position as being the occupier or possessor of these premises in 15, Crooked Lane, and that he only wanted a small advance on the bill, say 10l. or 12l.—I then called my clerk, and said "Go down with this man, and if you are satisfied that what he says is correct, then come back and let me know"—the prisoner went away with Mr. Martin, my clerk, who subsequently returned to my office, and stated that there was evidence of a large amount of stuff in his cellars, and I believe the words were, that it was equal to ten times the amount that was
wanted—I gave the prisoner a cheque for 10l.—that cheque was afterwards returned to me paid—I next saw the prisoner on 2nd June, and made him another advance at his request—at the time I made those advances,.1 had not the remotest idea that he was not the proprietor of 15, Crooked Lane—I made the advances on the belief that he was.
Cross-examined. I really don't know myself what a merchant commission agent is—I am so described in the lease of my premises—my business is making advances on real securities, and raising loans for those in want of them—what is vulgarly called a money lender—if a person offers good security, and good interest, we advance the amount required—the amount of security would not depend upon the interest at all—Mr. Martin is my clerk, and he writes letters for me—sometimes I see them and sometimes I do not—I wrote this letter on 22nd May—I was particular in having that written, because I wanted it placed beyond the possibility of doubt that I had not discounted the bill, that it was a loan—I ordered some wine from the prisoner, and he supplied it—it was a verbal order—I don't know whether the wine came from that office—I had no transactions with the prisoner till this advance—that was the first time I saw him to my knowledge.
Re-examined. The wine I had from him was a dozen, which he brought to my house in a cab—I believed he was a wine merchant.
FREDERICK MARTIN . I am clerk to Mr. Le Guay, at Walbrook—I saw the prisoner there on 22nd May, and Mr. Le Guay directed me to go down to his place at Crooked Lane—he said when could I go, and I said I would go at once, and I went with the prisoner—I was to go and look at the place, and see what it was like, and so forth—when we got to 13, Crooked Lane I went into a little office—the prisoner said it was not much of a place to ask people into, and he thought of moving to other offices, or if he stopped where he was he should have it boarded and painted over, to make it look a little smarter—I said "If you are doing any trade at all, you had better stop where you are, I think"—he said he was doing a nice, comfortable trade, and thank God all the stuff in the place was paid for—he asked me to have a glass of sherry, and I did—we walked to the end of the cellar—he turned the gas up, and showed me what was in the place.
Cross-examined. I walked with him from Mr. Le Guay's premises—he preceded me by a few seconds or half a minute down the stairs—I did not notice the name of Tilley over the door—I know it is there now—I did not notice it at first, because wine merchant's names are written small—I should think the name is two inches long—I have seen Mr. Tilley in those cellars several times, and I have had a glass of wine once or twice with him—I don't swear that he was not there on the first occasion that I went in with the prisoner—it might have been Mr. Tilley who brought me the glass of wine—I did not notice who it was—I will swear I did not go into the cellars before the defendant, and have the wine before he came—it was on a subsequent occasion that I saw Mr. Tilley, and had a glass of wine with him—I have been in the cellar three times—I gave a little order myself, but that was on 13th July, long after—I wanted some old Irish whiskey—the order was not sent to the cellar—it would have been sent in five minutes, but the prisoner happened to come into the office, and I said "You have just come in time to save me a penny," and I gave him the letter I had written—I have written one other letter to the defendant, and
I took that to the cellar myself—if the bill had been paid, these proceedings would not have been taken, because we should have had to give him a balance—we have been anxious to get the bill paid—I wrote to the defendant on the very day it was due, because he had promised he would bring the money himself the day before—he was not threatened with criminal proceedings before the bill was due—I told him there would be a row, and I also said there would be fireworks let off on Monday—I presented the bill as a matter of course.
By the COURT. We had the bill as security, and when he did not pay the day before I took it up to where it was payable, and of course'you know the result.
JESSE TILLEY . I am a wine dealer at 15, Crooked Lane—I rent the office and cellars there, and have done so since October last—the stock in those cellars is mine—no one but myself has any interest in the office or the stock in those premises.
Cross-examined. I have known the defendant twelve or eighteen months—he has been to my cellars a great many times, and has made himself familiar there—he was there as a customer, nothing else—he used to be in business himself, and of course he had customers, and I sold to him for him to sell to his customers—I allowed him ray wine at a certain price for him to serve his customers—he dealt with me—persons who had been his customers before used to come and see him in those cellars, and they would transact business with the wine I had sold to the defendant—that "was the case with Mr. Martin—I have seen him in my cellars two or three times—he did not buy any whiskey of me—I know he bought a dozen of wine from the defendant—that was not my wine—I know that he served a gallon of whiskey, but it did not come from me—he would sell for a little bit more than he would buy from me—he did not assist in my business—I did not want any assistance—I bought two casks of wine from him, but I paid him for it—I believe the claret that went to Mr. Le Guay was brought to my cellar because I had not that class of wine, and I permitted him to bring it.
Re-examined. I allowed him to bring orders and customers to me—all the wine in the cellar I had bought and paid for myself.
GUILTY — Six Months' Imprisonment.
MR. J. P. GRAIN conducted the Prosecution.
HENRY JOHN THOEN . I live at 34, Grafton Street, Mile End, and am employed in the Great Eastern Railway—on 27th May, 1873, I saw my premises safe about 2 o'clock—I did not go to bed, as my wife had just been confined—I sat in a chair and went to sleep—when I woke in the morning to go to my work I found the doors open and the window had been forced and the flower pots taken, from the window and placed on the pavement—I missed my great coat then, and I afterwards found the drawers almost empty, except a few things at the bottom.
JOHN NEAL . I live at 20, St. Dunstan's Road,—on 27th May, 1873, about 2.25. in the morning I saw the prisoner come over a wall—I asked him what his little game was, and he said he was waiting for his mates to go to work—I get my living by calling people up who want to be up early regularly
—I turned round to tap at some one's window and the prisoner struck me on the breast and knocked me down—he had a carpet bag in his hand and it was full, the lid would not come over—I am certain the prisoner is the man I saw—he had a cheese cutter cap on, a square peeked cap.
By the COURT. I saw him again in August the same year at the Thames Police Court—I was taken to see him—he was then alone in the dock, and I was asked te say if I knew him—he was 300 or 400 yards from the prosecutor's house when I saw him—the wall he came over had nothing to do with the prosecutor's house—he struck me in the breast and knocked me down and then went over the wall again—I did not follow him—he had a long blue coat on with the collar turned up.
H. J. THORN (re-called). The coat I lost was a long blue uniform coat—you can't see the letters when the collar is turned up.
GEORGE SMITH (Detective). I took the prisoner last Monday morning about 9 o'clock—I took him to Arbour Square and sent for the last witness—I placed the prisoner with eight or ten others and Neal identified him—I told him the charge—at first he" said he knew nothing about it, but on the way to the station he said "I daresay they will make it hot for me as it is near where the other job was done."
Prisoner. First he told me where it was done and what time it was done—I said "If it is like that it will sure to make it hot for me because I was taken near there"—the witness picked me out another man first. Witness. He did pick out another man first, but he did not touch him—he pointed to one, but he did not speak—he went by three or four' men and he took hold of the prisoner's collar and said "This is the man," and brought him out in front.
Witnesses for the Defence.
REBECCA SAGE . The prisoner is my brother—in May last year he lived at 2, George Street, Spitalfields, and I lived there—from the 2nd March till 2nd July the prisoner and his eldest brother were at work in Spitalfields Market as porters—I don't remember the 26th May, but I remember one day in May that my husband went to the play and my brothers had supper on bread and cheese and pickles, and sometimes they slept together, and sometimes in a different bed, but never away from each other—he was taken on 25th August—he never got up before 6 o'clock or 6.30—he never wore such a thing as a peak cap—he wore a soft felt round hat at that time.
CHARLES COOPER . I am a brother of the prisoner and the last witness—I remember one time when we had some bread and cheese and pickles for supper—that was the night before my brother went out and got locked up, or the same night, I believe—that was in August—that used to be the regular supper once or twice a week—I don't know anything about any day in May last year—I don't know where Mr. Thorn lives, or anything of his house being broken into—just a week or so before the prisoner got locked up I was living away, but from Christmas time up to about August he was working with my brother, and he was always home at night, and he had to get up about 4 o'clock and go to the work in the market—I never knew him to be away at night—he had one of those felt hats—I never knew him to wear a peak cap.
Cross-examined. I did not sleep with him every night—one week I used to sleep with him, and one week I might be away a night—I slept in the same bedroom every night except Sunday—it is a kind of lodging-house—
was with my brother in the same room every night except Sunday from the 21st March till August, so that I could tell he was in bed.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. LILLET conducted the Prosecution; and MR. STBAIGHT the Defence.
DANIEL HUNT . I live at Little James Street, Poplar, and am a labourer—about 10.30 o'clock on "Wednesday, 22nd July, I was in Penny-fields—I was called into the Commercial Tap—I saw the prisoner there with a companion—I did not say a word to him—he and his companion went out, and I went out about five minutes afterwards—I saw two men fighting—the mate of the prisoner and a man from Blackwall Cross—the prisoner was amongst the crowd—I was standing outside the crowd, and the two men fell—I made a rush towards the crowd to get in amongst them, and the prisoner came up behind me and, as I thought, punched me in the back, and I fell—it took my breath away—I tried to get up, but could not—I got on my left leg, although it is all numbed now—I fell again, and some one came to my assistance—the prisoner ran across the road after he had punched me in the back, into his boarding house, I believe—I found shortly afterwards that I was stabbed—I did not see whether the prisoner had anything in his hand when he ran away—I was taken to the Police Station, and then to the Poplar Hospital—I came out last Thursday morning—I never spoke a word to the prisoner, and never interfered at all with the men who were fighting.
Cross-examined. There were a good many people in the public-house—they were rather a rough lot—I could not say that it was a rough house, because I don't suppose I have been there three times in my life—I should think there were about ten people there—I don't know how many women—the prisoner's friend was fighting a Blackwall Cross man—that is, he comes from Blackwall Cross—I believe they are a roughish lot, but I have not seen much of their company—I did not strike anyone that evening—I did not hit anyone in the face—I did not see anyone hit in the face besides the two men who were fighting.
JOSEPH GRIFFIN . I am a labourer, and live at Mary Street, Poplar—I was in Penny-fields about 10.30 o'clock on the night of 22nd July, when the two men were fighting—one appeared to me to be a Blackwall Cross man, and the other a seafaring man—the prisoner pulled up his sleeves and said "We will stick you if you come near me"—he had something in his hand, which appeared to me to be a dagger—the two men fell, and Hunt ran towards the prisoner, and the prisoner struck him a downward blow in the back—he ran into a boarding-house, and I pointed out the boarding-house to the constable—Hunt fell down on his face and hands, and he could get up without any assistance—the doctor came and cut his shirt off his back—he was bleeding through the shirt.
Cross-examined. I did not see any other foreign sailors there—they were all English sailors—I did not hear one of them say one of the foreigners had been knocked about—I am a stoker—I am English, and the two men who were fighting were English.
THOMAS FINN . I live at Silver Line Court, Poplar—I saw the prisoner in the public-house pulling some girl about—some one took the girl's part, and the prisoner and his friend went out, and then a fireman and the
prisoner's friend were fighting—the prisoner tucked up his sleeves, and I saw something glitter—I turned away, and as I turned back I saw Hunt fall, and the prisoner ran away into the boarding-house—there was no one near Hunt at the time but the prisonor—Hunt halloaed out "I am stabbed."
CHARLES BURDEN (Policeman K 293). I saw a crowd at the corner of Penny-fields—I went up and saw Hunt on his hands and knees—from what Griffin said I went into a boarding-house on the opposite side of the way and searched—I found the prisoner underneath his bed—I told him the charge and asked him for the knife—he said he had no knife—I took him into custody.
JOHN WILLIAM LAY . I was house surgeon at the Poplar Hospital on 22nd July—the prosecutor was brought in on the morning of the 23rd and I examined him—I found a punctured wound between the shoulders and I found that he could not stand, and he had loss of motion in his right leg, and I conjectured that it had punctured the spinal cord—I could only judge from the effects, but I have no doubt at all—it was an incised wound given in a downward direction—it was a dangerous wound decidedly and would have been caused by a narrow-bladed knife—he was under treatment about three weeks.
Cross-examined. He is out of any danger of his life now, but ho can't walk very well, and it will very likely lay the foundation for a future disease.
GUILTY — Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
MR. LILLEY conducted the Prosecution; and MESSRS. MONTAGU WILLIAMS and CHARLES MATTHEWS the Defence.
MARY ANN WHITE . I am the wife of George Edward White and live at 15, Felton Street, Hoxton—the deceased young woman, Julia Georgina Murphy, was my daughter—she had been married to a man named Henry Murphy—she was twenty-one years old last November, and she had been cohabiting for about twelve months with the prisoner—I saw her in the middle of the day on the 18th—I saw her on the Sunday evening, the next evening, and she then seemed to be ill—a medical man was called in on Monday afternoon, and she died on Tuesday the 28th.
Cross-examined. When I saw her on the afternoon of Saturday, the 18th, she had been drinking and she was rather inclined to be quarrelsome—she was generally quarrel some when she had had anything to drink—I saw the prisoner several times on the Saturday—ho was sober.
MARTHA HARMSBURY . I am a domestic servant at Bridport Place—on the evening of 18th July I saw the prisoner outside Brady's alehouse, in Dorchester Street—I also saw the deceased there—I saw the prisoner hit her with his doubled fist on the side of the ear—she fell down and ho picked up—she was bleeding from her ear—I washed her ear and she went indoors where they lived, some doors from the beer-house.
Cross-examined. She was very much in liquor—there were other persons standing by capable of seeing what was done.
WILLIAM BRADY . I am a beer retailer, at 87, Bridport Place—on Saturday, 18th July, the prisoner and the deceased woman came into my hones between 7 and 8 o'clock—the deceased did not have anything—the prisoner
and two others had a pint of ale and two bottles of ginger beer—the deceased said something to the prisoner and he ordered her out, and then he carried her out and I saw no more of them—he took her round the waist and put her into the street and he followed—her bonnet came off.
THOMAS SMITH . I am a painter and live in Dorchester Street—I was outside the beer-house, 87, Bridport Place—I saw the prisoner push the deceased out of the beer-house—he asked her where she had boon—she made some answer, I don't know what—he said "I will let you know whether you can go and spend my money along with them b----cows"—he struck her on the head and she went down by the force of the blow—he picked her up—she fell on the stones that go across the street—on the crossing—she was bleeding from some part of her head—they put the deceased up against the wall, and I went away and did not see any more.
Cross-examined. I have been examined before—it is correct that she was drunk and could not stand when she came out of the public-house, and she fell on the stones on her left side—I said that the prisoner struck her—she did fall on the stones, but it was by the force of the blow.
CHARLES EDWARD COCKERTON . I am a surgeon, at 177, New North Road—on Monday, 20th July, about 3 o'clock in the afternoon, I was called to see the deceased—she was lying on the bed in the front room of her own house—she was suffering from severe pains in the head and symptoms of fractured skull—there was a bruise behind the right ear and a slight graze on one of the arms—I discovered the fracture afterwards by the result of the post-mortem examination—the skin was contused, and by taking away the skin behind the ear I found a fracture about an inch long through the temporal bone corresponding with the bruise, and then it extended two inches through the base of the skull—the fracture was the cause of death—she died on the 28th.
Cross-examined. The appearances that I saw might have been caused by a fall on stones, or a hard substance—it would not be impossible—the bruise might have been caused by a fall, but not the fracture—if he had fallen on a hard substance, I should not expect to find the fracture sthere, but in a different part—I think it would be impossible to fracture the skull by a hard substance in that part—if it had been a fall, I should expect to find a bruise at the back of the head, not behind the ear—it might have been done by a fall.
Gross-examined. I live at 41, Dorchester Street—on Saturday, 18th July, the deceased came home about 9.30 intoxicated—she went out at 3.30, and came homo at 6.30 very much worse—I was with her two hours before she died—I think she know at that time that she was going to die, because she said to her mother, "Mother toll all," and she told me she was not a married woman—I believed she was before—she said "Should I die, don't judge him too harshly, for I was greatly in fault"—she did not say ho never knocked her in any way—on the 18th, when she came in at 6.30 her arm was bleeding, and I wiped it for her—she vomited very much on the 19th, and she smelt very bad of rum.
Re-examined. I saw her on the evening of the 18th, between 7 and 8 o'clock—I went up stairs while Mr. Greonwood went to fetch her mother—I opened the door a little, and she was lying on the floor, and I came down directly to my children, and in a short time Mr. Greenwood came homo with her sister—I saw her that evening—her head was bleeding at
that time—I saw her again on the Sunday morning, and took her a cup of tea, and I saw her from time to time till her death.
The prisoner received a good character— GUILTY—Strongly recommended, to mercy by the Jury — One Months' Imprisonment.
OLD COURT.—Thursday, August, 20th, 1874.
Before Mr. Justice Quain.
MESSRS. BESLEY and SIMS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS the Defence.
GUILTY. of the Attempt — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, August 20th, 1874.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS for the Prosecution, offered no evidence; the prisoner having withdrawn the offensive letter, and consented to pay 10l. towards the costs of the prosecution.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. BROMBY conducted the Prosecution.
ROBERT HARRIS (Detective). On the evening of the 29th June, between 8 and 9 o'clock, I saw the prisoner under the West Ham Park wall, trying to put a coat over his other coat, and close to where the coat was lost from—I met him on the 13th July in Stratford Broadway, and he was then wearing this coat—I asked him where he got it from, and he said he bought it three months ago in Petticoat Lane—I said "I do not believe that, I believe it was the coat that was stolen at West Ham Park, and you will have to go to the station while I make inquiry"—he said "I don't want to go to any station, I did not steal it"—I took him to the station and sent for Taylor and he identified the coat.
Prisoner's Defence. I bought the coat in Petticoat Lane and wore it times and times. I have been in Stratford fifty-three years, and always carried myself respectable. That policeman knew me for years and never knew me in trouble. I did not know it was stolen, or else I should not have worn it.
GUILTY — Four Months' Imprisonment.
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
558. JAMES WALLER (48) , PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully and maliciously pulling down seven doors, seven stoves, and fourteen shutters, belonging to a dwelling-house, the property of Frederick Augustus Snow, which he held for a term of years. To enter into recognizance in the sum of 50l. to appear and receive judgment when called upon. There was another indictment against the prisoner for stealing the same things, upon which no evidence was offered and an acquittal was taken.
JOSEPH NEEDHAM . I live at Beaufort House, West Ham—on the evening of 23th July I went to bed about 11 o'clock and shut up the house in the usual way—the dining-room window was closed, but I am not certain whether I fastened it—I came down about 5 o'clock on the morning of the 26th and found the dining-room window open—a cruet stand and the opera glasses and a lady's case were gone from the dining-room, and an umbrella from the hall—I had seen them safe the day before—I afterwards found the cruet stand in the front garden—any one could have put the lady's case and the opera glasses in their pockets.
FREDERICK BUCKINGHAM (Policeman K R 39). I am stationed at West. Ham—on the morning of 26th July, about 3.30,1 was near a house called the Cedars, which is about three-quarters of a mile from Mr. Needham's, I saw the prisoner and another man—I did not speak to. Them there—I saw them again at 4.30 in the Romford Road, that was about half a mile from Mr. Needham's—when I first saw London he had no umbrella, and when I saw him the second time he had one—I said "Where have you been this morning"—London said "I have been for a walk"—I said "Where have you been for a walk?'—London said "Round the Cemetery"—I said "Where did you get the umbrella you are carrying?"—he said "I gave 4s. 6d. for it"—this is theumbrella—I said "Have you anything else about you?" and I made an attempt to search and the other man said "Come to Jack, you fool," and he went away—London said "I will go, sir"—I said "All right, you will"—I took him to the station—the prosecutor's servant came to the station and identified the umbrella.
Prisoner. The other man ran away because I had bought the umbrella from him.
GUILTY — Five Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Baron Pigott.
MESSRS. POLAND and. Beasley conducted the Prosecution.
CHARLES JOSEPH CARTTAR , I am coroner for the county of Kent—on 7th July last, and on 16th and 27th, I held an inquest on the body of an infant child called Joseph Hines, at Woolwich—the prisoner is the father of the child—he was sworn and examined before me as a witness—I took down his evidence; it was read over to him and he signed it—it is correct (Read: Thomas Hines says, "I live at George Place, Woolwich, and am a labourer—I am one of the sect called 'The Peculiar People'—the deceased was my son, Joseph Hines, aged two years—he was taken with a fit in Whitsun week last, about 27th May—he recovered from it—he afterwards had the measles—on 24th June last he was seized with another fit, and conculsions followed for two or three days at intervals—I did not call in any medical advice or give any medicine; it is contrary to my faith—the elder anointed, him with oil and laid hands on him, and prayed to the Lord—during his illness he had been well nourished with port wine, brandy, arrow root, milk,
and tea—about four o'clock in the morning of 6th July he appeared seized with death—Mrs. Savill was present at his death."
GEORGE HURRY . I live at 42, Richmond Place, Plumstead, and am an engine driver—I have known the prisoner about fourteen years—I heard of his child, Joseph, being ill—I was called in to visit the child about 24th June; it seemed very ill—I don't know exactly what the nature of the disease was—it seemed as though it was convulsed, or something after that nature—I was called in to pray for it as a rule of our faith—I laid my hands on it in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and prayed over it, and I believe I anointed it with oil in the name of the Lord Jesus—I believe it was with salad oil—I did no more than that, and get on my knees and pray for it—I suppose I saw it from that time every other day until it died—it remained ill all that time—it seemed to be gradually declining—for the last four days I saw it every day; it was continually declining—I left it on the Sunday night about 10 o'clock and it died on the Monday—during that time no doctor was called in or any medicine given to the child—a little weak brandy and water was given to it, a little weak wine and water, and there was arrow root and, I believe, a little mutton broth occasionally—every care was taken of it—I sat up one whole night with it, and there were several nursing mothers engaged in the case—the prisoner is a labourer—he was in work at this time.
Prisoner. The witness asked me whether or not there was a dairy handy, so that I could get for the child some pure milk; one was sought and milk was obtained. Witness. I asked him whether he could not consult with a dairyman concerning the nature of the child, that he might be able to get some pure milk for it, and I believe it was got.
By the COURT. Every care was taken of the child—everything I thought judicious was given to it—we did not call in a doctor, because we have such proofs of answer to the prayer of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, we have so many living witnesses that God has undertaken even when they have been at the point of death; we have some now living who have been raised up—in not calling in a doctor we did what we believed to be for the best—I believe that the prisoner did what he considered to be best for the child—I do not know of any founder of our sect but Jesus, he was the founder of it—we did supply all the means we could and all that we had at hand—we did not apply medicine, because it is not the rule of the word of God.
MARIA RAVEN . I am the wife of William Raven, a labourer, at Plumstead—I know the prisoner and knew his child—I visited it when it was ill—it died on 6th July—it was first taken ill at the latter end of June—that was the first time I saw it—I did not see it at the end of May when it had the fit—when I saw it it was in strong conculsions; they continued for some time, all the sickness pretty well—it was convulsed up to the time of its death—I saw it pretty well every day for nearly a fortnight—it got no better; every time I saw it it was in conculsions, shrieking conculsions, as though it was in pain—I sat up with it one night about a week before it died—other sisters sat up with it besides me—somebody sat up with it every night—it was kindly treated in every way—it had the best attendance—the mother is a very kind woman to her children—no doctor was called in or any medicine given—we are people entirely trusting in the Lord for our bodies.
July, about 11.15, the day on which the child died—I had not seen it during its illness—it was in a very weak state—I thought it was dying—it had shortness of breath—I don't know what the complaint was that it was suffering from—it was not in conculsions—it appeared to me to be in a dying state—the mother administered some weak port wine and water to it—no medical man was called in—it died about 11.30—I was there at the time.
By the COURT. I heard from the mother that it had had a fit a month before and got well of that, and that it had had the measles and got well of that under their treatment.
ALFRED SHARP . I live at Woolwich, and am an M.D. and surgeon—on 8th July I made a post-mortem examination of the deceased' child—it was apparently about two years of age, well developed, and well nourished—there were no external marks of any importance about the body—on opening the head the vessels of the membranes of the brain were much distended and generally congested—there was a quantity of serum in each ventricle—on opening the chest I found extensive adhesions of the pleura on both sides, and a quantity of pus in each cavity—the pericardium was entirely distended with turbid serum, and the head itself was covered with a fibrinous deposit, indicating acute inflammation of the pericardium, and acute pleurisy—all that may arise from various causes, the original cause in the majority of cases is cold—all the other organs of the abdomen were healthy—the cause of death was inflammation of the pericardium—it is difficult to fix an exact limit to its existence, it must have taken some time, some ten days I should say must have elapsed since the commencement of the pericarditis—the stomach contained a "little semi-fluid matter, mixed apparently with a small quantity of tea leaves—the cause of death was clearly indicated—if I had been called in ten days before I could have ascertained the nature of the disease—there was no obscurity, about it whatever, the symptoms would be very well marked, it was a disease amenable to treatment—I mean in contradistinction to other diseases—fortunately there are few that are unamenable to treatment, which must run on to death—if I had been called in ten days or so before its death, I believe I could have applied remedies that would have been beneficial to health, which would have increased the chances of recovery—I cannot presume to say more than that—a child may die of the slightest disorder, as well as of a more serious one—I have heard the term "conculsions" mentioned, but that is a term used in such a very loose way by that class, of persons that I do not attach any importance to it—I do not believe that real conculsions existed—the child must have been in great pain, and unable to lie down—with such a chest as I found the breathing would be much oppressed—there were symptoms of fever, of course.
COURT. Q. Is that sometimes a complaint that yields to the treatment of good nursing. A. I don't know that I have ever known an instance where that has been tried without medical aid—my treatment for inflammation of the pericardium would depend a good deal upon the stage at which I saw the patient—if I saw a robust child suffering acutely, I should probably employ a few leeches, and that might be followed possibly by blisters there would have been internal medicines as well, to lower the symptoms as they arose, for lessening the inflammatory action as indicated by the pulse—they might be nauseating medicines very probably, possibly calomel—that is a matter that could only be judged of by seeing the case—in the latter stage of any case, where debility existed, weak brandy and water
and weak wine and water would be desirable—there are differences of opinion in the profession as to the use of calomel, some approving and others disapproving of it—no doubt leeches would be very strongly objected to by homceopathists, they would think it very injudicious—probably they might think the same of calomel in the doses in which I should administer it—I should administer larger doses than a homoeopath—if I am to give an opinion I should certainly say it would be almost useless to apply homoeopathic medicines in a case like this.
The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I don't wish to say anything particular, what I have done I have done with a pure motive to God's laws."
At the opening of the case, MR. BARON PIGOTT expressed a very strong opinion that it could not be sustained MR. POLAND referred to" Russell on Crimes," p. 80, to the case of "Reg. v. Smith," 8, Carrington and Payne, and to "Reg. v. Hurry," Central Criminal Court Reports, vol. 76, p. 63. After hearing the evidence in the case, and Mr. Poland in support of it, MR. BARON PIGOTT said: "I am of opinion that there is no case to go to the Jury of any crime; I think it is one of those cases in which a parent, instead being guilty of anything like culpable negligence, has done everything that believed to be necessary for the good of his child; that he may be one of those persons who have very perverted views and very superstitious views, and may be altogether mistaking that doctrine of Scripture from which he has taken his course of proceeding in this case, may be perfectly true; but that there is anything in the nature of a duty neglected, that is, a duty which he believed or knew to be such, in this instance I am clearly of opinion the evidence does not show; on the contray he believed his duty to be in the direction in which he acted, and he carried out that duty to the utmost of his ability. He may altogether have mistaken what his duty was; still I believe it was an honest mistake. It may be an ignorant mistake, in all probability it is the result of ignorance and superstition, but certainly there is not, a trace" of anything like an intentional omission of duty or a culpable omission of duty within the meaning of that expression as used in the Criminal Law., I am therefore clearly of opinion that it is not a case for an indictment, nor a case for a judge to deal with in a Criminal court; if the Legislature (as they have done in dealing with the case of the prevention of small pox), are minded to pass a law on the subject, that, is a different matter, and it would be quite right then that persons should be cornpelled to conform to it although they themselves may personally object to it, because it is the law of the society in which they live, and they are bound by that law if society chooses to enact it. But I am clearly of opinion that no judge sitting in a Criminal court, without any direction or enactment of the Legislature, would be justified in saying that a parent who exercised his best judgment though a perverted one, in dealing with his child by nursing and care instead of calling in a doctor to apply blisters, leeches, and calomel, was guilty of criminal negligence. I may say that I had an opportunity before coming into Court, knowing that this case was coming on, of speaking of it to MR. JUSTICE QUAIN and the learned Recorder, and they quite concur in the view that I have propounded and upon which I am acting.
NOT GUILTY .
There was another indictment against the prisoner for the manslaughter of the said child, upon which no evidence was offered .
Before, Mr. Common Serjeant
MR. BIAH conducted the Prosecution.
WALTER BRETON . I am an analytical chemist, living at 93, South Street—on the 7th August last, I was going home after taking a lady friend of my wife's home, and on my return from Blackheath Hill to my residence in South Street, I called in at the Guildford Arms, and had a small glass of brandy and water. It was as near as possible about 10.15 at night—I took out my purse to pay for what. I had, and I left by one door, and those two women (the prisoners) left by the other—I do not know whether they saw my purse—they left at the same time I did—I went out of the door and went down by the wall, and one of the prisoner's came on one side of me, and the other on the other—Crew deliberately hit me on the left side a violent blow, which I felt for some days, and do at the present time—the other prisoner also did the same—in fact for some moments I scarcely knew whether I was in my senses or not—the blow was just above the hip, on the lower rib—immediately I found I had been robbed—I put my hand to my watch, and found that safe—I put my hand in my pocket and found my purse was gone, and Green said "What have you lost?"—I said "My purse," and she at once picked it off the ground empty, and I said "You must go with me to the station"—the other prisoner remained at a short distance—I attempted to take both of them, but finding that useless, I secured Crew, took her to the station, and gave her in charge—I returned in search of the other, and found her at the Guildford Arms in company with a man—I also attempted to take her to the station, but fearing that I might be molested by this man, desired the landlord of the house to send for a constable, and with some hesitation he did so—the constable came and took her to the station, and she was charged with the other prisoner—I had a pain in this side—it laid me up for two or three days completely—there is no truth in the prisoner's Crew assertion that I gave the other prisoner 6d. to watch, while I remained with Crew for an immoral purpose.
JOSEPH WALSH (Policeman R 96). On the night in question the prosecutor brought in Crew, and charged her with stealing 2l. 10s. from his pocket in the Devonshire Road—she denied it, and said the prosecutor had given the other woman 1s. 6d. for some immoral purpose—she was searched and nothing found upon her—a short time after the other prisoner (Green) was taken into custody by another constable on the same charge—she was searched, and 1s. 8d. found upon her—a shilling in silver, and 8d. in coppers—the prosecutor was perfectly sober.
JOHN KAY (Policeman R 178). On the night in question—I went to the Guildford Arms, and took Green into custody—she denied all knowledge of the case—she said "I was not there, I know nothing about it"—I was then informed by the prosecutor there was another prisoner in custody at the Police Station, and said "You will go to the Police Station along with me, "and in going along the road, Green said "Well I was there, but he gave me 6d. for an immoral purpose."
CREW—PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at Greenwich. Police Court on 8th November, 1869. CREW— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. GREEN— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. BIDLE conducted the Prosecution.
LAVINIA HOGG . I am barmaid at the Powis Arms public-house, Powis Street, Woolwich—on the evening of the 24th July the prisoner and another man came into the public-house, and were served with beer—I afterwards heard my mistress scream, I ran upstairs, and she was struggling with the prisoner.
By the COURT. I do not know whether he had drunk all his beer—he was upstairs, and I saw him hit my mistress in the breast by my bedroom door—she could not stop him, he hit her about so—he got away and ran down stairs and got out of the house—his pockets seemed full of something—I lost a muff, a silk bodice, and some letters were taken out from my bedroom cupboard—I have not seen any of them since—I saw them safe at 7.30—it was a few minutes after 8 o'clock when I heard this.
Prisoner. When you came upstairs and saw me struggling with the missus where did you go? Witness. I was frightened to touch you—I hallooed—my mistress's screams were something unbearable—I did halloo—I don't know whether anybody heard or not—the prisoner got over a door 6 feet 3 inches high—we always lock the landing door—there is a space between that and the ceiling.
AGNES HARRIET VERITY . I am the wife of the landlord of the Powis Arms—on the 24th July the prisoner came into my bar and had some beer and another man with him—my laundress brought the clothes in and I went upstairs with her and the clothes, and when I got to the first landing I heard a "hush"—I said "What is that, Mrs. Simpson?"—I heard a "hush" again and I pushed the door, and there I saw the man not in custody waiting—he was looking up over this door, and I looked back and saw the sealskin cap which belongs to the barmaid—I then went to the third flight of stairs, unlocked the landing door, and when I came to the barmaid's bedroom the prisoner was in the bedroom and he had stripped off the bedclothes off the bed and everything was in very great disorder—I asked him what business he had there, and he made use of very bad language, and he said if I attempted to say a word he would knock my brains out—he used worse language than that—I caught hold of him and struggled with him, and he knocked my head against the wall, and knocked my breast—it has been black and blue, and also my arm—my ear is very bad now—I have had no rest with it for the last month—he ran down stairs and I did not see him till the following Monday, the 28th, "when he was taken into custody—his pockets were full—I am sure he was the man—I missed two pinafores, belonging to my little girls—they sleep with the barmaid—I have not seen those articles since—I picked up the sealskin cap—he got over the landing door which is 6 feet 3 inches high.
CATHERINE SIMPSON . I am the wife of John Simpson, a private in the Army Service Corps—I went to the prosecutor's house on the evening of the 24th July with the washing—I went upstairs with the landlady—I was going up the third flight and I heard some one say "hush" Three times, and I said "look," and she went to look and there was a man in the place, the other man that got away—he was on the first floor and then she went up the third flight and unlocked the door—she was in front of me—I entered the bedroom door—a man came out, and when I saw the man Mrs. Verity said "What business have you here?"—I turned round as quick as
I could and hallooed out "Run, run, there are two men in the house, there is a man in the bedroom"—the prisoner is the man who was in the bedroom and he made his escape as quickly as he could possibly get out.
Prisoner. Who came down the steps first, you or I? Witness. I came down first, I gave an alarm—there was one young man there, but you looked so vicious that he was frightened—there was no one to protect her—no one to fetch a policeman.
WILLIAM MORGAN (Policeman R 155). The prisoner was pointed out to meat about 4.45 on the 28th July by Mrs. Verity and Lavinia Hogg—previously to that I went into the house, and they told me they had been robbed and described the man and while talking to me they saw this man and another pass the door, and they said "That is the man"—I followed them some distance from the house, took the prisoner into custody and he said, "Oh, I suppose you have got this up very nicely for me"—a little further on he said "I don't deny being in the house, because I went there for a certain purpose"—I found the doer he climbed over was 6 feet 3 inches, and I examined Mrs. Verity's lock and found it had been tried by a chisel or screw driver—the other door was not fastened, I believe.
Prisoner, in a written defence, stated to the effect that he had gone upstairs to the water closet when the landlady, finding him there, accused him of the robbery.
He also PLEADED GUILTY to a former conviction at this Court in February, 1859— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. BESLEY and Moody conducted the Prosecution; MR. M. WILLIAMS and MR. SIMS appeared for Street, and MR. STRAIGHT for Rudderwood.
MATTHEW HERBERT MUNYARD . I am in partnership with my father in London Street, Greenwich, as butchers—Street was there for six weeks before he was taken, and Rudderwood was in the habit of coming to cut chaff in our loft with his machine—on 17th July, at 4.30, I examined the contents of the loft, and found twenty-four trusses of clover, and half a bushel of oats in a bin in which we only have one sack at a time an empty sack was lying in the other bin—it was a strange sack, but I had seen it before—the police showed me a sack containing two and a half bushels of oats, that was the same sack which I had seen in the loft—I had employed the police in consequence of suspicion—I had arranged that. Gallehawk was to send his man—I was not present at the mingling of the seeds—after the police had taken Rudderwood I went to the premises, the Back was gone, and there was about a bushel and a half in the bin—that was about 5.30 p.m.—none had been used in the course of the day, the oats had not long been in.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMS. I keep five horses—Street was the only ostler I kept—he had only been with me six weeks.
Cross-examined by MR. STRAIGHT. Rudderwood came to my place to cut chaff at any time, and he cut what he thought proper.
millet seeds with Mr. Gallehawk in his loft, which we mixed with the oats—at 11 a.m. Barry took the sack up and I gradually dropped the seeds in as they were shot out of one sack into the other—we watched from a neighbouring window from about 2.45, and saw George Worsfold come from Gallehawk's with a sack of oats, which he took up into the loft where Rudderwood was cutting chaff, and Street got a ladder to let the man go up with the sack—I saw the man come back with the empty sack and go away—Street came round at about 4.40—he looked towards the back of Munyard's house, and opened a large stable door to hide the view from the back of the house—he then went to the back gate and brought an empty hand barrow, which he placed under the window, and looked up to the loft where Rudderwood was, and called out something—I believe he said "All right'—Rudderwood then came to the loft window with a sack containing about two bushels and a half which he dropped and Street caught it in his arms and placed it in the barrow, which Rudderwaod wheeled away—I followed him about a mile, stopped him, and asked him whathe had got and where he was going to take it to—he said "Why do you ask me such a question?"—I said "Because we are police officers"—he said "I am a dealer if you must know, and I had two bushels and a half of oats ordered, and when I took them they were not at home, and I brought them back"—I told him that he would be charged with stealing them—I afterwards took the sack to the station, and found it to contain the four kinds of seeds which we had previously placed there—I also went to Mr. Munyard's bin and found a bushel or a bushel and a half in it—I took a sample of it, and it contained the same four kinds of seeds.
Cross-examined by MR. SIMS. I was 30 yards away at an open window looking through the blinds, and could see quite clearly what they were doing—the open doors did not obstruct my view, but they would Mr. Munyard's if he had been looking out at his parlour window—the door led into some waste ground, it is the back door to the premises.
Cross-examined by MR. STRAIGHT. There was not more than half a pound of seeds, which were brought out in a bowl and dropped into the oats.
WILLIAM BABRY (Policeman R 141). I was with Goodwin at the window, and saw what he saw—I took Street at his lodgings, and told him I was going to take him for stealing corn from Mr. Munyard's premises with Rudderwood—he said "I never stole anything"—I was present when the seeds were mixed.
Cross-examined by MR. M. WILLIAMS. I was 30 or 40 yards off, looking through a Venetian blind—the corn went into the stable at 4.40 and part of it was taken out at 5.10—I saw Street several times during that time—I saw a butcher go through into the slaughter house, but he did not go near the premises—I saw nobody else go near the premises all the time, and if they had I must have seen them.
Cross-examined by MR. STRAIGHT. I do not know George Tanner—I did not see him go into the yard while I was watching Rudderwood's barrow, and I must have seen him if he had—Street brought the barrow and placed it there, and if Tanner swears that he brought it into the yard it is not true.
CHARLES GALLEHAWK . I am a corn dealer of 69, London Street, Greenwich—on 7th July I sent my man, Roscoe, with a sack of oats to Mr. Munyard's place, into which I had see Goodwin and Barry pour some bird seed.
GEORGE WORSFOLD . I am clerk to Mr. Gallehawk—on 7th July I delivered a sack of oats which he gave me at Mr. Munyard's stable—I shot them into the bin, and brought the sack away—I saw the two prisoners there, but no body else.
GEORGE ROBINSON . I live at Straight's Mouth, Greenwich, and am a labourer—on 7th July I was sitting at my door with my child in my arms, and saw an old man bring a barrow to the outside of Mr. Munyard's premises—nothing was in it—after it had been there a little time Rudder-wood came out from Mr. Munyard's place, and put a sack on the barrow half full—he wheeled the barrow on, and in about two minutes Goodwin, the detective, ran across the open ground.
M. H. MUNYARD (re-examined). Rudderwood has never taken things away with my permission, only a few sweepings of dust and hay seed—he would have to put it in a sack—he said he would put a few of them on the field.
Witnesses for the Defence.
GEORGE TANNER I am a chaff-cutter of East Greenwich, and sometimes work for Rudderwood—on 7th July I borrowed his barrow to go to George Street to cut some chaff—I brought it back to Mr. Munyard's—took it into the yard, and saw Rudderwood and Street in the loft—I asked Rudderwood to lend me a sack—he at first said that he could not, but afterwards Street said that he could shift his corn into another sack, and he lent me one—I did not see anything done, I was down at the bottom—I did not see them shift it, but I got the sack; but it was more like a bag to hold three bushels—I wanted it to take some fodder down.
Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I am not related to Rudderwood in any way—I lodge at the Red Lion public-house—I have a chaff-cutter of my own. COURT. Q. Why did not you take the barrow back to Rudderwood's? A. He requested me to bring it not to his place but to the prosecutor's—he wanted it to take his chaff home.
JOHN THOMPSON . I am a straw dealer of 80, Regent Street, Deptford—on 7th July I made arrangements with Rudderwood to meet him at Greenwich old church, about 2 o'clock, for two bushels and a half of oats—I was there two days previously, and ordered it of him, and some clover—it is not a market—I was not able to keep my appointment, I was at Nine Elms, and could not get away.
Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I did not go to his house afterwards and say "I am sorry I could not keep my appointment"—I heard nothing more till I heard he was in prison—his shop is about half a mile from old Green-wich church—I keep two horses—Rudderwood has not always supplied me with oats for them—I buy oats as I can afford them—T had something like two sacks from Rudderwood in June in small quantities, two bushels or two and a half at a time—I never fetched any of them from old Greenwich church—Rudderwood is a corn dealer, and I did not inquire where he bought them—as I could not get the food for my horses I bought some of Mr. Murray, of High Street, Deptford—I cannot say for certain when I bought it—I cannot tell you now what I bought of Murray—I did not leave the horses without corn that night—I will swear I. got some that night—I send a horse into the country, and send two and a half bushels to last him five days—I can buy corn for my other horse—I was asked a fortnight or three weeks ago to become a witness—Rudderwood asked me if I remembered this and I told him yes—that was the first time I saw him after I failed to keep my appointment.
Re-examined. I have been to his shop—the magistrate let him out on bail—a man can carry two and a half bushels of oats with ease on his back.
THE COURT to H. GOODWIN. Q. You followed Rudderwood with this barrow? A. Yes, he had got about 100 yards from Mr. Munyard's premises before I overtook him; he passed Greenwich old church before I stopped him, and he did not stop to look for anybody.
Rudderwood received a good character.
The Jury recommended Rudderwood to mercy on account of his character— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment each.
Before Mr. Justice Quain.
MESSRS. BESLEY and TICKELL conducted the Prosecution; and MR. RIBTON the Defence.
GEORGE GILLEY . I lived at 146, Evelyn Street, Deptford—in May last I was foreman to my brother, a wood dealer—I have known the prisoner eight or nine years, and last November she threatened that she would blind me with vitriol and that my brother should keep me all the days of my life—on 24th February I complained of her at the police court for an assault—Mr. Henry Pook was my solicitor there and the threat in November was mentioned—the prisoner was bound over in 30l. to keep the peace towards me—I had ceased to visit her about Christmas last—during the nine years I knew her I never allowed her any agreed sum—I was not providing a home for her—only what I thought proper to give her—on 1st April there were other proceedings before the magistrate, in which I was defendant, and the prisoner complainant, and after several adjournments, that matter ended in April in my favour—the summons was on account of two children which I believe I had by her—on 23rd May, when I had not seen her or communicated with her since Easter Tuesday, April 7th, I was in Evelyn Street, just after midnight, and saw her and another woman; she said "You are the young man. I want to see"—I stopped and said "Indeed"—that was just outside Mr. Watts' shop—she said "I want to know what you intend doing"—I said "You have done all you can, and you will have to do the beat you can"—she then drew her arm from under her shawl and threw something in my face, saying "Take that"—I felt burning and said "Oh, I am blinded"—I have never seen anything since—I struggled towards the fence and heard something fall and break on the pavement—a young man who I knew led me home and I. have been under medical care ever since.
Cross-examined. I have never lived with the prisoner, but I have been nine years cohabiting with her—I don't know how many children I have had by her, but she has had three children I believe during that time—I saw her sometimes once in two or three weeks—she used, to work at our place till I seduced her, and after which I went to see her occasionally—she has been out of our service eighteen months—the eldest child is, I think about five years old, and the next about three, I think—there is a third, I believe, and I think that is the last—I was summoned for the maintenance of the children—I never declined to give anything to support them—I always allowed support for her, but I never lived a day with her—I have discontinued my visits ever since last February, when she took the summons out—I have never been summoned for assaulting her—I think
she did once complain of my giving her a black eye, which I believe, I did—that was the only time I struck her—I never slept there, but I have been there up to 1 or 2 o'clock in the morning—I may have slept there some nights, but never till 6 a.m.; I was always at work by 6 o'clock—she had not to go to the hospital sixteen months ago on my account, not when I knew her—I remember her saying that she had a fractured rib, and she said that I had fractured it—I cannot recollect when that was—I think the last money I sent her for the support of the children was about the 6th or 7th May this year, and this happened on 24th May—I know I sent her money in May by one of my chaps—I sent her money up to the very night the summons came, but not afterwards—I did not appear before the magistrate—the result of the summons was in my favour—I knew that she was married, she was living with her husband when J. first knew her—I knew him before I visited her, but I believe she was separated from him when I visited her.
Re-examined. My age is thirty-one—she is older than me, I believe, I first had criminal connection with her about eight years ago—I do not believe her husband had left her then, but I don't know—I know I hit her when she complained of a black eye, she met me one evening and molested me, and drove my pipe into the roof of my mouth, and I got so riled, that I hit her in the face—that is the only time I hit her to disfigure her—on another occasion she hit me twice, and knocked my hat off, she threatened several times to blind me, and to make a curiosity of me—I am not guilty of any violence which fractured one of her ribs, that I am aware of.
FREDERICK FISHER . I am a surgeon of Emblin Street, Deptford—on Sunday morning, 24th May, I was called and found Gilley suffering great pain in his eyes, and there was an appearance of whiteness in them—there were marks of vitriol on the under side of the brim of his hat (produced)—he was suffering from the throwing of some irritant fluid into his eyes such as vitriol—he has been to the senior surgeon of Guy's Hospital, but he has not recovered his sight, and I am afraid he never will.
Cross-examined. I really think that—I have had a long experience of injuries from vitriol, being connected with the police force—my opinion is that his eyes will never be of service to him again—his vision is of no use to him; he fancies that it is, but it is not—I never knew anyone recover who was so bad as he is—the humours of the eye are thickened and opaque, so that the rays of light are not concentrated—that is caused by thickening through the burning—there was much vitriol on his coat and trousers.
Re-examined. I examined one of the prisoner's eyes on the day this occurred—I don't think it was much hurt, but she told me that she had got something in her eye, and I told them at the station what to do.
JAMES GOULD (Policeman R 198). On 27th May, about 1.15, I went to the prisoner's house, 6, Ropemaker Street, Deptford—she was up, and was in the ground floor front room crying—I told her I had come to take her in custody for throwing vitriol in Mr. Gilley's face—she told me she should not have done it if it had not been for. Mr. Pook, the solicitor, mentioning it in the former case—I took her in custody—she said at the station that she bought a pennyworth of vitriol three months previously, a pennyworth a few weeks previously, and a pennyworth) on Saturday, the day before, and that it was in a bottle.
Cross-examined. I saw about four children there—she was not in bed—it was past midnight—the children were not in bed, they were crying and
making a great noise—it is a private house—I think it is her own house—I saw no servant there.
CHARLES FODEN (Police Inspector). I saw Gilley at 146, Emblin Street suffering great pain—I went back to Mr. Watts' house, and found traces of vitriol on the pavement, and parts of a broken jug in the road with a burning substance adhering to it—I saw the prisoner afterwards at the station, and asked her what was the matter with her—she said that in throwing the vitriol at Mr. Gilley a portion of it had gone in her own eye.
Cross-examined. Gilley's hat, vest,. and necktie were very much burnt—his tie has tumbled to pieces since—I only noticed a few spots on his trousers and coat—his brother is a large firewood merchant, and I believe she has been working there some time with the prosecutor.
Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of the provocation she had received—Five Years' Penal Servitude.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MR. POLAND conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM EDMUNDS . I am manager of the Bridge House public-house, Borough Road—on Tuesday, 28th July, about 9.30 a.m., the prisoner came in and handed a florin to the young man for change—it was handed to me and I found it was bad—he ran out of the house before I had time to turn round to him—I followed him and stopped him—he said "What do you stop me for?"—I said "Come back to the house and you will see"—he put his hand behind him and threw a blue paper parcel away which Biggs picked up and gave to me, and I gave it to the constable—it contained three florins—he was given in custody.
JOHN BIGGS . I live at 33, Borough Road, on the same side as the Bridge House—I was outside my house and saw the prisoner running and the barman after, him—he was taken about three doors beyond my place—I saw him throw a blue paper packet behind him—I picked it up—it contained three florins which I gave to the barman.
FREDERICK SMITH (Policeman M 139). The prisoner was given into my custody—I found on him 2s. 3 1/2 d. in copper and 6s. 6d. in silver all good—I received these four bad florins (produced) from Mr. Edmunds—there is a bit of blue paper with three of them.
Prisoner's Defence. I never had the things in my possession—all the money I had was good.
GUILTY — Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MR. LILLEY conducted the Prosecution.
ELLEN STEPHENS . I live at 1, Wood Yard, and am servant to Mr. Godberry, whose father keeps a hair dresser's shop in Red Cross Street, Southwark—on 3rd August, about 8.30 p.m., I went home to feed my baby, leaving the shop door double locked and no one within—the windows were safe—I returned about 9.5 (I had taken the key with me, but Mr. Godberry
jun., came to me for it; I gave it to him, and he afterwards returned it to me)—when I opened the door it was only single locked, and I found the prisoner standing in the shop with a candle in his hand looking under the sofa—I had left the candle in my room on the first floor—a pane of glass was broken in the window—the prisoner said "Don't be frightened, let me get to the door"—I said "No; you must wait till William comes"—that is my young master—he put the candle on the table, and sat down till the prosecutor came—I did not know him before—he said that he came to see Mr. Currie, who is the master of the house—I noticed a mess in the fender which was not there when I went out.
Prisoner. Q. Did you open the door, or did I open for you? A. You opened it for me—you said that you found the door open and the candle burning, but it was not so—I am sure I had not left the candle burning—you said "It is all right, I came to see Mr. Currie, let me stand by the door," and I said "Wait till I send for Mr. Godberry, and let me see what he says"—you had had some beer, you staggered and threw yourself down on the sofa and said "All right, I will remain"—there was a knife on the table, and I reckon that that was what you opened the door with, by putting your hand through the pane you would take up the knife from the table and push the bolt back with it, I had not seen you before—we had no lodgers then—there is only one key.
Re-examined. Mr. Currie did not come home till afterwards—he is not here, as he did not see the prisoner—this knife was on the table when I came back, but I do not know whether it was in the same place.
WILLIAM GODBERRY . I assist my father, a hair dresser, of 24, Union Street—on the morning of 3rd August, I left the house at 7.45—Ellen Stephens left before me, and took the key with her—I went to her for the key, and afterwards took it back to her—when I left I double locked the door—no window was broken then—I saw no candle at all—a white handled knife was on the table—I was sent for about 9.20—I then returned to the house and found the prisoner in the shop with a candle in his hand, and the servant in front of him—the window was broken, and a person could put his arm in and open the door—I once saw the prisoner in the shop when he came to ask for a job—I asked the prisoner what he wanted, he said he saw the door open and a candle there, and he thought he would walk in to see Mr. Currie—I asked him what he broke the window for, if the door was open, he said that the window was broken as well—the candle was in a candlestick—there was no mess in the fender when I went out, but I noticed it on my return—I did not point it out to him only to the prosecutor—I gave the prisoner into custody.
Prisoner. When you came in, did not you say "It is all right, go on? Witness. Yes; but the young woman said "No, lock him up, he did not come here for nothing"—no one else has a key—I positively swear that I left the door locked—you were under the influence of liquor, I could see it in your face—there was a little curtain to the window, but anybody passing could see in with the candle alight.
ELLEN STEPHENS (re-examined). The prisoner held the candle in his hand till 9.20 because we would not let him move one way or other—he put it on the table afterwards, and sat on the sofa—two other girls who were passing stopped at the door till the prosecutor came.
William Godberry, who was also there gave the prisoner in charge—the prisoner said "So help me God, constable, I did not break in at ail, I was passing the door and saw a light on the table and the door open, and Mr. Currie being an intimate friend of mine I wished to speak to him and went in. I found there was no one in the house, and met the girl coming out"—the glass was broken from the outside because the fragments were inside—I found that I could easily pull the bolt back from the broken window without using a knife—I could not open it from the outside when it was double locked, but when it was on the single lock I could.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.
MR. CROOME conducted the Prosecution; and MR. CHARLES MATTHEWS the Defence.
GUILTY — Five years' Penal Servitude.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, 21ST SEPTEMBER, 1874.