CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
THIRD SESSION, HELD JANUARY 11TH, 1875.
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, January 11th, 1875, and following days,
BEFORE THE RIGHT HON. DAVID HENRY STONE, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; The Hon. GEORGE DENMAN , one of the Justices of Her Majesty's Court of Common Pleas; THOMAS QUESTED FINNIS, Esq., Sir ROBERT WALTER CARDEN , Knt., WILLIAM FERNELEY ALLEN , Esq., Sir JAMES CLARKE LAWRENCE , Bart, Aldermen of the said City; The Right Hon. RUSSELL GURNEY , Q.C., M.P., Recorder of the said City; JAMES FIGGINS Esq., and JOHN PATERSON , Esq., others of the Aldermen of the said City; Sir THOMAS CHAMBERS , Knt., Q.C., M.P., Common Serjeant of the said City; and ROBERT MALCOLM KERR , Esq., Judge of the Sheriffs' Court; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery of Newgate, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal court.
CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
STONE, MAYOR. THIRD SESSION.
A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—an obelisk (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.
LONDON AND MIDDLESEX CASES.
OLD COURT—Monday, January 11th, 1875.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MESSES. BESLEY and M. WILLIAMS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. F. H. LEWIS the Defence.
WILLIAM MITCHELL I live at 272, Buchanan Street, Glasgow, and am agent for Herbert & Co. there—I was in London about 10th July and on that occasion paid the prisoner two sums of 9l. and 2l. 5s. 6d.—I paid it him at the desk at 54, Ludgate Hill, one of Herbert's places of business—the 9l. was brought to me from Mr. Brass and the 2l. 5s. 6d. from Mr. Farquhar—I paid those two sums in gold and silver.
FREDERICK BULMER . I am a clerk in the Money Order Office, St. Martin's-le-Grand—I produce a post-office order, No. 1,017, for 3l. 5s. 5d. from Bishops Waltham, payable at Ludgate Hill, also one, No. 2,219, for 7s. 6d. from Sloane Street, payable also at Ludgate Hill—one, No. 2.461, for 13s. 4d. from Farnham, payable at Ludgate Circus; also an order, No. 1,113, for 4l. 18s. id. from Beecles, payable at the Post-Office, London.
HENRY JOHN BARCLAY . I am a tea dealer at Bishops Waltham, and am the son of the Postmaster there—I owed Herbert & Co. 3l. 5s. 5d. and procured this order, 1,017, for that amount, which I sent in a letter on 2nd November with an order for more tea—I afterwards received this receipt.
JOHN LISTER . I am employed by Captain Layland, of Hyde Park House—I forwarded this post-office order for 7s. 6d.—I afterwards got a receipt, which I gave to Captain Layland—he is now at Pau, in the South of France.
THOMAS POULTER I am in the service of Mrs. Ward, of Farnham—I procured this post-office order, No. 2,461, for 13s. 4d—I saw my mistress place it in an envelope with a letter and direct it to Herbert & Co. on 3rd November—I produce the receipt.
SIMON BORRITT . I live at Beecles and am a tea-dealer—I owed Herbert & Co. 4l. 18s. 4d. for goods—I procured this post-office order, 1,113, and enclosed it in a note with the invoice for the goods—I afterwards received it back receipted.
FREDERICK BEVERTON . I a clerk in the employment of the prosecutor—on 4th November, by the prisoner's direction, I cashed these two post-office orders for 3l. 5s. 6d. and 7s. 6d.—the prisoner put the signature "Herbert & Co."—I handed the money to him—on 5th November I cashed this other order for 13s. 4d. by his direction—he signed "Herbert & Co."—I handed the money to him—I did not see what he did with the money on the second occasion—on the first occasion he put it in his pocket in a purse.
Cross-examined. I have been in the prosecutor's employment about two months—Mr. Good engaged me to act as invoice clerk, nothing more—I was not directed to keep a watch on the prisoner; I was told to watch the post-office orders that came in, and to take notice of the general business—I was not examined before the Magistrate—I was to watch what the prisoner did with the monies and so on—I did not know that these post-office orders were for my employers—I did not know whose they were—when they were signed "E. Herbert and Co." then I knew—I had not received any direction with reference to the signatures to the post-office orders—I thought the prisoner had no right to put the money in his pocket—it did not occur to me at the moment that he was doing wrong—I made a note of it and communicated with Mr. Good on the following day, after I had cashed the three orders—I am quite certain I saw the prisoner put the money in his pocket the first day.
JOHN JONES . I am the proprietor of the London Coffee-house, Ludgate Hill—I have known the prisoner over twelve months as the manager of Herbert & Co.—I was under the impression that he had the whole management of the firm's business; they have various branches—on or about 4th or 5th November this post-office order, 1,113, for 4l. 18s. 4d. from Beecles was brought to me, I am not certain by whom—I gave cash for it—it was signed "Herbert and Co." when it came to me—I passed it through my bankers—I believe I did not see the prisoner in reference to it.
JOHN CHARLES GOOD . I am a tea merchant at 106, Fenchurch Street—on 19th October I became trustee of Mr. Dummere's estate, and as such I saw the prisoner and told him that in future the money was to be paid to me, and on 30th October I told him for the future to send me all cheques unendorsed and all post-office orders unsigned—there was a clerk in Mr. Dummere's employment named Clisby—he had written a letter and signed it in the name of the firm, and I reprimanded him for it in the prisoner's presence, and the prisoner said he ought not to have done so—on the 4th November the prisoner sent me this daily cash return and with it these two post-office orders for 3l. 12s. 8d. and 1l. 17s. 4d. (The return consisted of gold 20l. 10s., silver 1l. 0s. 3d., cheques 18l. 10s., 18l. 1l. 16s., and 5l. 12s. 6d., and post-office orders for 3l. 12s. 8d. and 1l. 17s. 4d., total 70l. 18s. 9d.) He did not on that occasion send me two post-office orders for 3l. 5s. 5d. and 7s. 6d. or account to me for those sums—on 5th November he sent me this cash return with two post-office orders unsigned for 3l. 7s. 6d. and 16s.; he did not send me two for 4l. 18s. 4d. and 13s. 4d. or account to me for those sums, he never informed me that he had received them. (This return was gold 25l. 10s., silver 2l. 18s., and Post-Office
Orders for 3l. 7s. and 16s.) I produce the rough cash-book—the four post-office orders not accounted for are not entered there, the other four are entered—there is no entry in the day-book or ledger of the goods referred to in the invoices; they are entered in the order-book, the small book, and the word "paid" is written there in cisby's handwriting—I have got the invoice and receipt for the 13s. 4d.—the goods referred to in that are entered in the small book by the prisoner and the word "paid" is written on it, I am not certain in whose writing—it is not carried out in the day-book and ledger—the receipt for the 13s. 4d. is the prisoner's writing and the receipt for 3l. 5s. 5d. is Clisby's—on the morning of 9th November the prisoner said "I should wish to leave you next Saturday"—I said "I would rather you spoke to Mr. Dummere"—he said—"No, you are the party to give notice to"—I said "The notice ought to have been given on the Saturday instead of the Monday, but under the circumstances I will accept the notice"—on that same evening I went again to the premises on Ludgate Hill and there saw the prisoner destroying papers from a file—I asked him what he was doing—he said he was only destroying papers, that they were done with—he continued to go on destroying them—I insisted upon his leaving off as he was going to leave, knowing the position, every scrap of paper might be useful—he then said "You d----scoundrel, you have been trying to catch me with marked money"—I said I never allowed a servant to address me in that way—he also said "Don't think you will catch me in that kind of way, I know well what has been going on"—I then handed him a cheque for 5l. for his week's wages and told him to put on his hat and walk out of the place—there had been some money marked, gold—after this I went to Guildhall Justice Room and obtained a summons against the prisoner—in the rough cash-book I find an entry under the date of July 15th of 9l. received from Mr. Brass in the prisoner's writing; it was his duty to keep that book—there is no entry of 2l. 5s. 6d. from Farquhar—the 9l. is entered in the cash-box and ledger—in the ledger under the date of February 6th I find an entry of Farquhar's 2l. 5s. 6d. written over an erasure—there is no entry of it in the cash-book on that date—I have found the four letters referring to the four post-office orders that he accounted for, but I have not been able to find the four letters referring to those orders that were not accounted for—the gold was marked on the Saturday preceding the 9th.
Cross-examined. I was surprised when he gave me notice—I did not ask him not to go or say how sorry I should be to lose him, nor anything to that effect—he did not call me a snake in the grass, and say that I complimented him to his face and at the same time was trying to catch him with marked money, and had spies in and out of the shop—I did not lose my temper, he lost his—private detectives were employed to watch his habits, and I had a clerk, Beverton, inside—I had been in want of a clerk before Beverton came—no one had applied for the place and refused it on my requesting him to watch some one in the employ—I swear that—Beverton was told to watch generally—I also told him specifically to watch the prisoner—he was to watch generally—his other employment was to enter the cash, write some of the letters, and the general duties of the place—he made a communication to me about the post-office orders the day after, or the next day after the last one was cashed, that would be on the 6th or 7th of November—I did not then go to the prisoner and say, "Is this true?"—because so much robbery had taken place, and we were determined to prosecute—I
made no accusation against him when he was leaving the employment—my solicitor applied for a summons—Clisby has pleaded guilty to some indictments for embezzlement, and I believe his sentence is standing over—he was in Mr. Dummere's employ—it was his duty to keep the ledger, I think, but I don't know what post he occupied—a person named Simpson was in the employ at Ludgate Hill—I was asked at Guildhall whether the prisoner had not told Simpson at the time he signed these post-office orders, that he had done it—I don't know that Simpson is here to-day; I have not spoken to him about it—the four orders which have been appropriated are marked paid in the order-book—if the goods were bought at the counter, and the money paid, there would be no necessity for any entry whatever—if instead of post-office orders cash had been sent from the country, it would have been marked off as paid by Simpson, the head accountant, or by anybody who received the money—if the prisoner received the money, it would not have been his duty to hand it to Clisby—Clisby sometimes sat in the shop nest to the prisoner, and sometimes upstairs—the till is behind the counter—they both sat equally near the till.
Re-examined. If goods had been sent out and remittances made by Post-office orders, they would properly go through the cash book or ledger—neither the prisoner or Clisby had any authority to sign Herbert & Co. to post-office orders.
By THE COURT. There are no books in the prisoner's hand writing showing how the cash was made up on 4th or 5th November—it appears that they kept no counter-book—there is nothing to show the amount taken over the counter.
STEPHEN DUMMERE . I carry on business as a tea-dealer, at 54, Ludgate Hill and elsewhere, under the name of Herbert & Co.—in 1870, I engaged the prisoner as warehouseman, at 3l. a week, and in 1873 I appointed him as manager at Ludgate Hill, at 5l. a week—it was his duty to take the general management under me—he was to superintend and assist in keeping the books—on 19th October, I executed an assignment of my estate and effects for the benefit of my creditors, and paid them 20s. in the pound—from that date it was the prisoner's duty to account to Mr. Good for the moneys daily received—I have not received any money from him since 19th October—he did not at any time give me any information with regard to the three Post-office orders that he had cashed through Beverton—I discovered the 4l. 18s. 4d. order cashed through Mr. Jones, after he was in custody—he has never given any explanation of those post-office orders—I know his hand-writing—the post-office orders signed "Herbert & Co.," were written by him—on 10th July, 1874, I was managing the business without any reference to Mr. Good—the prisoner never accounted to me for the 2l. 5s. 6d. from Farquhar—in the ledger, the 9l. from Brass is entered by Clisby over an erasure—that would prevent any application being made for payment—I made that discovery after he was in custody—I have not been able to find the counterfoils of the banker's paying-in slips—I had seen them on the premises a day or two before the destroying of the papers—at that time Clisby was in custody—I found some papers lying about, and other remnants on a file, some of which I have here, they are somewhat torn—I never saw the banker's counterfoil book again, or the letters that accompanied the four post-office orders that were not accounted for.
Cross-examined. In some cases, the documents I found on the floor enabled me to collect a debt—I then destroyed the fragments of that one,
I have others—I have ten or twelve shops in different parts of London—Ludgate Hill was the head-quarters, and supplied all the other shops—the prisoner would see all the goods in and out—he had nearly the whole control of the business—I looked over when I came down, which I did daily—sometimes I was there the whole day—I did not visit the other shops every day—I had the control of the business, the prisoner simply had the receiving of the goods, and sending them out, and the receiving the money, I suppose about 10.000l. or 15,000l. a year—he did not draw cheques—he endorsed those received, and post-office orders up to 19th October—he generally signed "E. Herbert & Co.," when it was necessary, in the course of business—he did that for nearly the whole three years, thousands of times—I don't think he helped to enlarge the business very materially—I did not hear that he was going into business himself before I applied for the summons—I did not hear that from a traveller who had been in my service—I did not hear it at all—I do not attend sales and purchase on behalf of Mr. Good.
Re-examined. The prisoner never complained that his duties were too much, and that he could not attend to them properly—after Mr. Good came, I never authorised the prisoner to endorse a cheque or sign a post-office order.
MR. GOOD (re-examined). I was not aware, before applying for the summons, that the prisoner was entering into business on his own account.
GEORGE ROBERT CUBBY (a prisoner). I pleaded guilty at the last Sessions to indictments charging me with embezzling sums of money, the property of my master—I come now from the gaol of Newgate—this entry of Farquhar, on February 6th, of 2l. 5s. 6d. written over an erasure in the ledger, is my writing—I do not know that I wrote that by anybody's. direction—I wrote it because I knew it was paid, at least I thought it was paid to the firm—I don't think I had it—I cannot recollect 9l. paid on account of Mr. Brass—this receipt for 3l. 5s. 8d. is my writing—I did not have the money—I signed that receipt by the prisoner's direction.
NOT GUILTY . (See New Court, Wednesday.)
The, following prisoners PLEADED GUILTY.—
104. JAMES CHARLES SMITH (30) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to embezzling 80l. is. 6d., of Benjamin Halford and others, his masters— Recommended to mercy by the. prosecutors— Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.
106. DAVID GODBOLD (18) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to stealing two post letters whilst employed in the post-office, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General— Five Years' Penal Servitude. And
NEW COURT.—Monday, January 11th, 1875.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution.
ELIZABETH CUNNINGHAM . I keep the Thistle and Crown, St. Martin's Lane—on 18th December, between 8 and 9 p.m., the prisoner and a tall man came in for two glasses of rum hot, which came to 4d.—the prisoner gave me a florin, which I put into the till, and gave them 1s. 8d. change, and they left—they returned in half an hour, and asked for two glasses of gin hot, which came to 4d.—the prisoner gave me another florin, which I put into the till with the other—his friend wished him to leave the bar, but the prisoner laid down a penny and a florin and called for some ale—I told him that I did not require the florin and the penny—he said that I was very honest, and gave me another penny and took up the florin, which looked bad—I immediately tried the two florins in the till, and they were bad—there were no other florins there—I sent a customer after the prisoner, and saw him looking out of a ham and beef shop, a few doors off on the same side of the street—the prisoner was brought back by the customer, and I told him that the two florins' he had given me were very bad, and that he had another florin about him—he turned out his pockets, and gave me four good shillings, he also had some small silver and coppers—he denied having a third florin—I gave him in custody with the two florins—I had taken no other florins that evening.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. There is some red glass on the side of the lamp over my door—you both came in together—the other man drank the ale, and you paid for it with a penny and a bad florin—you afterwards gave me a half-penny—your friend wished to get away, but you did not seem to wish to go—when you came in the second time, you said "We have returned again"—the ham and beef shop is four or five doors off—the other man did not come back—you came into a different bar the second time—I had never seen either of you before.
TIMOTHY COTTBELL . I keep a ham and beef shop at 43, St. Martin's Lane—on the night of 18th December, about 10 o'clock, the prisoner came in for a 2d. pie—a man was standing at the door watching him all the time—he put down a penny and a bad florin, picked up the pie and rushed out of the shop before I could pick up the money—I could see that the florin was bad before I took it up—I put it on my back counter—a policeman brought the prisoner back eating the pie—I charged him and he offered to pay the 2d.—he said "I gave you two penny pieces"—I said "You gave me a bad florin"—he said that it was nothing of the kind—I gave the florin to the constable.
JAMES REEVE (Policeman E 171). I was called to the Thistle and Crown about 10.30 and found the prisoner in front of the bar—he was charged by Mrs. Cunningham with passing two bad florins—he made no answer to me—I searched him and found a good florin and some silver and copper, and on the counter was more silver and copper—I took him to Cottrell's shop, who gave me this coin (produced).
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You objected to be searched at first—I found no bad money on you.
The prisoner being called upon for his defence inquired whether the indictment was for felony or misdemeanor, and being informed that it was both for felony and misdemeanor, he called the following witnesses in anticipation
of the felonious part of the charge, which, was that he was convicted of a like offence in December, 1871, and sentenced to two years' imprisonment.
WILLIAM COLEMAM . I am sergeant of the First Royal East Middlesex Militia—I have known the prisoner for five years in the Militia in the name of Albert Thomas—they are called up for a month at a time in each year, and the prisoner was never absent from August, 1868, till he bought himself out last May—he was present at each training in 1869, 1870, 1871, 1872, and 1873. (The indictment charged that the prisoner had been convicted and was under sentence of two years' imprisonment in 1871.)
Cross-examined by MR. CRAUFURD. From 23rd July to 23rd September, 1871, the prisoner was serving with his regiment at Aldershot—he attended again from 6th May to 1st June, 1872—I saw him again on 1st September, 1873, he was in training there for twenty-seven days—he purchased his discharge about April, 1874—his. character was generally good. (The prisoner here produced his discharge.)
Cross-examined by MR. CRAUFURD. He has no brothers—he is a working jeweller at Debenham & Storr's—he has been there lately.
EDWARD FISHER (Detective Officer E). I know the prisoner—I remember his being concerned in a case at Bow Street; he had bought a chain for 6d., which he afterwards discovered was gold, and he gave it up at Bow Street without any reward whatever on 9th September, 1872.
Cross-examined by MR. CRAUFURD. I only know him by his attending Debenham & Storr's, and buying jewellery—I am positive he is the man who gave up the chain. (MR. CRUFURD here stated that he would not proceed upon the charge of the previous conviction.)
The Prisoner in his defence stated that he got into the company of a man who offered to treat him, and who said that he had been robbed of his watch by a girl at a house in St. Martin's Lane where there was a red lamp over the door; that they went to the house, and the man asked him to pay and gave him the money to do so, he not knowing that it was bad: lie contended that he would not have called attention to their return the second time hoi. he known that the man was passing bad coin. He stated that he did not see that the man had given him a penny and a florin instead of twopence, but that when he discovered it he ran out after him, and was sent by him into the pie-shop, and that it was not till he was taken in custody that the truth flashed upon him; that the fact that nothing was to be gained by passing a bad florin instead of a penny ought to be taken in his favour, especially as the witnesses he had called had established his good character.
GUILTY of the uttering only. THE COURT reserved the question for the Court of Criminal Appeal, whether this verdict was good in law, the former conviction not being proved— Judgment respited. The conviction was afterwards annulled on appeal.
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM ALFORD . I am assistant to Mr. Hamburgh, a tobacconist, of Great Smith Street, Westminster—on 19th December, about 5.45, I served the prisoner with half an ounce of tobacco, which came to 2d.—he gave me a bad florin; I gave it to Mr. Hamburgh—I had just given change for a half-sovereign to a gentleman, but he had got his change before the prisoner
called for the tobacco—I said to Mr. Hamburgh "This is bad"—the prisoner beard that, and said "I gave you a good 2s. piece; that must be one out of the change you gave to the man just gone out"—he tried to get away, but was given in charge.
HERMAN HOWSON HAMBURGH . I am a tobacconist, of 41, Great Smith Street—I saw the prisoner come in; his manner was suspicious, and I looked at him particularly—when another customer had taken up his change for a half-sovereign, I saw the prisoner put a florin into my man's hand, who rang it on the counter, bent it in the detector, and then passed it to me and said that it was bad—I asked the prisoner what he meant by passing such money as that; he said "It must have been some of the change you gave for the half-sovereign"—he could only find a penny in his pocket—I gave the coin back to him, and he made a rush to the door—I detained him by force.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. The customer was picking up his change before my man began to serve you—your money was never on the counter till he rang it.
Prisoner's Defence. I can almost swear that my florin was good, and that it was given in change for the half-sovereign.
He was further charged with a previous conviction of a like offence in May, 1869, when he was sentenced to Five Years' Penal Servitude. To this he
PLEADED GUILTY— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution; and MR. C. MATHEWS defended Smith.
JOHN DOWNING . I am landlord of the New Duke's Head, Great Smith Street, Westminster—on 16th December the prisoners came in between 9 and 10 o'clock, and remained till past 12 o'clock—three or four others were with them, all drinking together—they ordered drink in turns—Smith ordered some drink at a little before 12 o'clock which came to 10d.—he gave me a bad florin—I took no notice as I thought I should have some more given to me—I gave him 1s. 2d. change—about ten minutes afterwards Murray called for a pot of ale which came to 6d. and gave me a florin—I gave him the change but did not think of looking at it because I knew him and did not think he would be Guilty of it—I afterwards tried it—found it was bad and told him so—he said "I will give your money back" and he gave me the 18d. and I gave him the florin broken—I afterwards gave Murray in charge, but not Smith as there was only one constable, but next morning while I was talking to a policeman I saw Smith and gave him in charge—when I cleared the till I put the money in my pocket—I afterwards found five bad florins among it—I handed them to the constable—I had no other money in my pocket.
Cross-examined by MR. MATHEWS. I said nothing about Smith when the constable was there, but I did when I got to the station—he was crossing the road 40 yards from my house when I gave him in charge.
Cross-examined by Murray. When I gave you the 18d. change I saw you walk over and give it to the other man; I believe you are only a dupe—I
have known you as a hardworking man for a long time and know nothing against your character.
Re-examined. I received the other four or five florins myself from the prisoner's party—I took no florins from anybody else—I think there were four from the same mould.
WILLIAM WILSON (Policeman B 68). About 12.15 on 17th December Mr. Downing called me in and charged Murray with passing a bad florin—Murray handed me a bad florin broken and said "This is what Mr. Downing returned to me. I gave it to him. I was not aware that it was bad"—I found nothing on him—Mr. Downing gave me this other coin on the way to the station.
GEORGE HUCKLE (Policeman B R 29). On Thursday morning about 9 o'clock, I was speaking to Mr. Downing outside his house, and saw Smith about 30 or 40 yards off—Mr. Downing pointed him out and I went up and took him—I told him the charge—he said "Oh, very well"—I found on him 1s. 6d. in silver and 3d. in bronze—I received five florins from Mr. Downing but I unfortunately lost them this morning between Blackfriars Station and this Court through a hole in my pocket which I was not aware of—I have been back to look for them but cannot find them—"1871" was on three of them, "1872" on another, and "1873" on another.
Murray's Defence. A man who I was drinking with gave me a florin to pay for a pot of ale. I did not know it was bad. Mr. Downing gave me 1s. 6d. change, which I gave to the other man, as it was not mine. Mr. Downing then said "This is bad!" I said "Is it?" I went over to the man and said "You gave me a bad 2s. piece, give me the 1s. 6d. to save a bother." He said "I have no 18d. to give you." I took out 18d., gave to Mr. Downing, and said "There is your 18d., and there is your ale not touched. "He gave me the florin, and I gave it back to the man who gave it to me.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution.
EMILY GLANCY . My husband keeps Wood's Hotel, Portugal Street—on Thursday night, 24th December, about 11.57 I served the prisoner with a bottle of gin which came to 2s. 6d.—he handed me two florins—I gave him 18d. change and put them in the till—he ran out and two minutes afterwards my husband came in and said that they were bad—there was no other silver in the till—when the prisoner was given in charge my husband said "You are the man who had a bottle of gin of me"—he said "Yes"—I said "You gave me two florins"—he said "Yes, and you gave me 18d. change."
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I am positive you ran away—I ran out, but could not tell where you had run to—I thought the coins were good or I should not have taken them.
JOHN GLANCY . I am the husband of the last witness—she said something to me, I looked into the till, and found two bad florins—there were no other florins there—I gave them to the constable—I had cleared the till a minute or two before the prisoner came in—I went out and gave him in custody.
Cross-examined. I ran after you, and found you down Clement's Lane, getting away as fast as you could—I followed you out of my house—you did not come out of your mother-in-law's house.
ALFRED BROWN (Policeman E 330). I saw Mr. Glancy overtake the prisoner in Clement's Lane, he gave him into my charge—the prisoner said he did give the two coins for the gin, but he did not know that they were bad—I searched him at the station, and found thirteen bad shillings and two sixpences in a bit of rag and paper as well in the lining of his inside coat—I produce the two florins.
The Prisoner in his defence stated that he received the money in change for a sovereign from a man who he met at a public-house, and that it was bad.
GUILTY . He was further charged with having been convicted of a felony on February 7th, 1866, when he was sentenced to Five Years' Penal Servitude, to this he
PLEADED GUILTY**— Five Years' Penal Servitude.
113. JOSEPH THOMPSON (33), PLEADED GUILTY to feloniously forging and uttering an order for six umbrellas with intent to defraud, also to unlawfully attempting to obtain the same— Recommended to mercy by the prosecutor, he having been in the greatest distress, and having already suffered three weeks' imprisonment— Three Days' Imprisonment. And
114. JOHN GARRETT (23) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial images] , to two indictments for feloniously forging and uttering orders for 69l. 7s. 3d., and 112l. 3s. with intent to defraud— Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
OLD COURT, Tuesday, January 12th, 1875.
Before Mr. Recorder.
115. ALEXANDER ROBERTSON (50), was indicted for unlawfully publishing a false, scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libel of and concerning Howard Paddison. The Prisoner put in a plea of justification.
MR. STRAIGHT conducted the Prosecution.
CHARLES HOBSON . I am a secretary to Milner's Fireproof Safe Company (Limited), 7, Finsbury Place, Moorgate Street—I received this letter on Monday morning, 28th December—Mr. Howard Paddison is solicitor to the Company.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I have been acquainted with Mr. Paddison about eighteen months—no attempt was made to introduce anybody else to our Company instead of Mr. Paddison—if the charge against him were true, it would certainly be important to our Company to deal cautiously with such a person.
JOHN MCDONALD . I am a clerk, in the employ of Messrs. Paddison & Son, of Lincoln's Inn Fields—I have been with them since 1869—Mr. Howard Paddison is a member of that firm—this letter is in the prisoner's hand-writing—I received another letter from Spittle, the officer, also in the prisoner's writing.
(The Prisoner objected to this letter being put in evidence, as there was no publication. The Recorder considered it better to confine the inquiry to the published letters. The alleged libel was contained in the letter to Mr. Hobson, it stated that Mr. Paddison had left no stone unturned to accomplish the defendant's ruin; that in order to attain that object he had resorted to felonious expedients, that he had committed perjury, and was a villain of considerably darker hue than even Jean Lane.)
Cross-examined. I have known you about three years I think—I first became acquainted with you in 1871 I think, or 1872—I can't say for certain without referring to the books—you were introduced to us by Mr. Macrae Moir, a member of the bar, for the purpose of undertaking a suit in the Scotch Courts—I know the nature of the business—I had frequent interviews with you and no doubt took a few notes—I was frequently consulted as to the nature of the arrangements that you were negociating with Mr. Paddison; the arrangement was that Mr. Paddison should find somebody who would advance 1,000l., and the party advancing it was to get 4l. for one, and you said that was very reasonable—I never said that I was so satisfied of the bona fides of the affair that I would myself become a speculator—I have an interest in the case, I had some Murthley bonds, I have not now, 800l. was the extent of my speculation—I advanced 800l.—I did not get 3,200l. in return for it—I am not bound to answer what I got—Mr. Henry Robertson for whom you were acting did not immediately conclude the bargain you had made on his behalf, but he did before you left Mr. Paddison's office; he said he considered the terms most reasonable and equitable—about 26th January, 1872, I went down to Aldershot to serve a writ upon Henry Robertson; this (produced) is the writ—I did not serve it, I did not obtain a retainer from him to defend him—you told Mr. Paddison that you had incurred numberless expenses in Scotland to get up evidence in support of the case, and as you could not get the money from Henry Robertson it was necessary to sue him, and Mr. Paddison asked me to go and see Henry Robertson to see what the disturbance was between you; I did not serve the writ because I found I should not be serving your interests by doing so; the only difference between you was that you had made it a condition that Mr. McCaul the agent in Scotland, should be turned out of the case, and he did not wish it, and I thought it unadvisable to commence war between you, therefore I came back without serving the writ, as I told you the following day, and I had your written instructions showing that I had discretion what I should do with regard to that writ—you-were not entitled to a settlement unless Henry Robertson should refuse to go on with the case; you were undoubtedly entitled to your expenses if he refused to go on, and if he did go on you were entitled when the time arrived for payment as you will be when there has been a final success—I made an arrangement with Henry Robertson to come to London to see Mr. Paddison and I considered I was serving your interests in doing so—there was no conversation between Henry Robertson and myself as to the amount of your expenses in the case, except that I said I had come to serve him with the amount on the back of the writ, 462l.—the business that took me there was either the serving of the writ or getting some arrangement as would be satisfactory to your interests—the first meeting with Henry Robertson in London appears to been on 3rd February, I was present; this is the entry "Attending Mr. Henry Robertson as to his claim and his wife's, and especially as to Mr. Alexander Robertson's as to which he would be willing to give a bond for 2,000l. and 100l. and a 200l. bond, the latter being for expenses—the word "bond" occurs here; that word I see is not in your copy, that is a mistake—I did not, the morning after I returned from Aldershot make you a proposal of 50l. down as part of your expenses if it met with Mr. Paddison's concurrence—no part of your expenses have been paid so far as I am aware—you were at our office on
5th and 8th February, and then you appear to have left, because Mr. Strong, a solicitor, on your behalf called on the 10th—we have never ceased to take an interest in your affairs, we do so up to the present time; that is with a view of getting payment for your expenses when the time arrives, when the appeal is decided in favour of the claimants—Henry Robertson was willing to grant you a bond for 2,000l. and 100l. and 200l. for expenses—we did not obtain that, because you acted in such a manner as to refuse to allow Mr. Paddison to take the bond or to act for you—a suit was raised by you two and a half years ago against Henry Robertson to obtain payment of your expenses—I had to do with that suit, not in your interest, because you were claiming the money when you were not entitled to it—that action was defended by Henry Robertson, and very properly so—Mr. Tripp was the solicitor in that case; Mr. Henry Robertson employed him I believe—I do not know anything of Mr. Paddison employing him—he continued to act until the case was closed, he was at Guildhall at the time the case was tried; he instructed Counsel; we assisted Mr. Tripp in getting evidence in the case, we were then acting as solicitors for Mr. Henry Robertson in the Murfchley case; we had no retainer; it was not necessary, the case was carried on in Scotland, and the retainer, if any, is held by the solicitor in Scotland, not in England—we have no retainer from Mr. Henry Robertson, except a retainer that may be made out from written correspondence, no actual retainer—I had never seen Mr. Henry Robertson till I went to Aldershot, nor had Mr. Paddison to my knowledge—I was at Bow Street on the hearing of the summons against Mr. Paddison for perjury, it was postponed for a week to give an opportunity for discontinuing an action at your instance against Mr. Paddison for the money alleged to be due on the Murthley estate; I was in and out of Court and really can't say what took place—the shorthand notes are in Court, you can refer to them—in the hearing before Sir F. Truscott I simply attended to prove your handwriting—I stated that you had to fly from Scotland; I had been told in Scotland that you had left in consequence of a warrant being out against you for breach of interdict by the Duke of Athol for going across Dunkeld Bridge, and that the warrant could not be served in England.
Re-examined. The defendant came to Mr. Paddison in 1871 in reference to the case of a gentleman, his wife, and child, who were interested in the Murthley succession; that gentleman was Mr. Henry Robertson, at that time a sergeant-major in one of the cavalry regiments at Aldershot; he had married the widow of a Major Stewart, who was the direct heir to the baronetcy and estates of Murthley: the offspring of that union, her union with Major Stewart, was a son; there was a suit to declare his legitimacy and claim to the estates, and after the child died there was a second suit for the widow to claim her rights through her child; Henry Robertson was without funds—it was at the invitation of the defendant that Mr. Paddison was induced to take up the case—the defendant was to take his chance of the success of the suit—the second suit was decided in favour of the widow, the pursuer; one of the defenders, appealed to the House of Lords, and that stands for trial at present—the action brought by the defendant against Henry Robertson was tried at Guildhall before Mr. Justice Mellor, and the defendant was non-suited after having been examined; he then brought an action on the same facts against Mr. Paddison, in the course of which he delivered certain interrogatories to Mr. Paddison, and while that action was pending he preferred a charge of perjury at Bow Street upon Mr. Paddison's answer
to those interrogatories; that charge was dismissed—this (produced) is a letter that he wrote to Mr. Paddison, dated 14th March, 1872; it is the defendant's writing. (This stated that unless an answer was sent by return of post he should prosecute Mr. Paddison for 50l. damages on account of his false and fraudulent scheme in connection with the Murtldey case). Until that action was brought no claim whatever was made by him against Mr. Paddison for money.
By the Prisoner. In the first action there was unquestionably a claim of the child's right to the Murthley estates, claiming that he was the son of the late Major Stewart, of Murthley, and grandson of Sir William Stewart—of course the legitimacy of the boy could not be declared unless the marriage of the father and mother was proved—that action had to be abandoned on account of the death of the child on 14th March, 1872—the change that took place in the litigation was entirely in consequence of the child's death.
HOWARD PADDISON . I am a solicitor, of 57, Lincoln's Inn Fields—I have been in the profession since 1859; until recently I was practising with my father—Mr. Macrae Moir is a personal friend, of mine—on 7th December, 1871, he came to see me with reference to the defendant and introduced him to me on the evening of the same day—there was ultimately a conversation between myself and the defendant in reference to the claim of the wife of the deceased Major Stewart and her child to the Murthley estates; there were various negotiations between us after that with a view of prosecuting that suit—I never undertook any personal responsibility to the defendant for expenses that he had incurred or was incurring in that matter—the parties themselves were without funds, and I was to undertake to see that a certain amount should be found—I was informed that proceedings were then pending, and when the child died all proceedings were abated—prior to any proceedings my clerk, Mr. Macdonald, was instructed to proceed to Scotland and make inquiries; one of the conditions was that I should make inquiries and satisfy myself—after that the matter was proceeded with, after the death of the child—it is not true that I have left no stone unturned to accomplish the entire ruin of the defendant—I have not in order to reach that object resorted to felonious expedients; I nave not committed perjury—I do not consider myself a Willian of a considerably darker hue than Jean Luie—there is no pretence whatever for using those epithets towards me—in the event of the ultimate success of the suit the defendant will be entitled to remuneration from the Robertsons, not from me—he brought an action against Henry Robertson in respect of services rendered and was nonsuited—he then brought an action against me for the same thing and withdrew the action.
Cross-examined. I first heard about the Murthley estates on 7th December, 1871, when Mr. Macrae Moir gave me a letter that you had addressed to him. This is the letter dated 4th December, 1871. (This contained a statement of the case, and of the writer's desire to raise a sum to prosecute the suit through some solicitor who might be recommended). I have not got the papers that were enclosed in that letter—I have not been served with a subpoena to produce them—it was through Mr. Macrae Moir, and of course through you that I became acquainted with the Murthley case—Mr. Macrae Moir gave me no information about it—I read some extracts from the papers with him, and asked him a few questions as to the position of the Counsel in Scotland who had expressed an opinion favourable to the case; but of
course with reference to the details of the case, he gave me no information—I do not recollect that the first question I asked you was "I decline to have anything to do with this case until I first know the terms upon which I undertake it"—I think it exceedingly probable that in the course of the interview I may have asked such a question—I do not recollect your telling me that the sum you required for expenses incurred before I took possession of the papers, and got an introduction to the claimants, was 250l.—I don't recollect your mentioning any sum that I should have to pay for expenses; the only sum mentioned was fees to McCaul and Armstrong, the agents in Scotland—I can't tell the exact amount, but it was considered that it would be between 30l. and 40l.—you told me that you had incurred expenses in connection with the case—I absolutely declined to have anything to do with the case if it was to be saddled with the expenses previously incurred—I would only take up the case on condition of its coming to me unincumbered, with the exception of some fees that had to be paid in Scotland, and some other small amount—you told me that you were to be very heavily remunerated by the claimants in the event of success, that you were to obtain from them a bond for 5,000l., and I considered that would be remuneration sufficient—you told me that according to your agreement with Henry Robertson, you were entitled to current expenses from a date which I believe was June or July, 1871—you, no doubt, explained to me that the claimants were not in a position to pay your expenses—you did not explain that the loan was intended to cover your expenses as well as other expenses in the case—there was no reference whatever to your expenses in the loan—I would not consent to your previous expenses being paid out of the loan—I considered that you had rendered such material service in the matter, and also were capable of rendering such material service, from your knowledge of the witnesses in the case, that I absolutely declined to take up the case unless it were to be with your assistance, and for your subsequent expenses you were to be paid out of the money that was to be raised—I was informed by you that there was a case then pending in Scotland about the Murthley succession, but I never took part in that case; the nature of that case was to prove the marriage in order to obtain the widow's dower, to obtain for the child the baronetcy and estates, which you told me were worth between 16,000l. and 20,000l. a year—no doubt explanations were given to me as to the time when that suit began and ended, but I have no distinct recollection upon the subject—my impression is that it was actually going on at the time the child died; but I also recollect that you told me there had been some error in the summons, and that other proceedings would be advisable in consequence—it was. very likely in the beginning of February that I came in connexion with Henry Robertson and his wife—the 40l. was paid to McCaul & Armstrong some considerable time after the death of the child—I can't give you the exact date it was when it was resolved that litigation should be commenced upon an entirely new basis, rendered necessary by the fact that the succession to the estate had lapsed or abated by the child's death, and the widow only being entitled to some small portion, 8,000l. or 10,000l.—I wrote to Messrs. Bellamy & Strong on 16th February, stating that the original suit had to be abandoned on account of an error in the date of the marriage—besides the 40l. to McCaul & Armstrong, I think 30l. was paid to a Mr. McQueen for something in connexion with the proceedings in 1871, through McCaul; I think about 90l. was paid altogether—I distinctly stated that I would not pay you
any amount on account of previous expenses; you came in for a very heavy claim of an uncertain amount, but told me that about 700l. would be all that was necessary to be raised for the conduct of the suit, but it might be well to provide 1,000l.—your claim was a fluctuating one; one day it seemed to be 150l., another day 250l., then it sprang up to 300l. and 370l.—you never were able to name any definite sum, or give details of your outlay—I did not know of McQueen's claim until quite recently, within the last two, three, or four months—you must no doubt have incurred expenses, because you were exceedingly active and useful in the case at that time—I have the papers in the second suit—the nature of it was briefly this: to establish the validity of the marriage between Major Stewart and Margaret Wilson, now Mrs. Robertson, the wife of Lieutenant Robertson—I have my diary of 7th February—I have an entry that it was determined in Scotland to proceed with the case of the child first—of course the marriage must have been established; if there were no marriage there would have been no succession—I knew the child so far as having seen him in February, 1872—I believe Mr. Scott and Mr. Young were the Counsel who gave opinions in the case—I believe McCaul & Armstrong were the solicitors in the first suit, but I am not certain whether they were the first" to institute proceedings; they were in the second—I believe the first time I saw Henry Robertson was on the 3rd February, 1872; that was through you—in all probability he came to see me at your request—I recollect sending Mr. Macdonald to Aldershot to serve a writ on Henry Robertson; that was arranged between you and me on 22nd January—he did not serve it—this is the writ; it was issued by our firm—it was not done on purpose to scrape acquaintance with Henry Robertson; it was in consequence of your disagreement with Henry Robertson, and it was believed if he was served with a writ there would be an end of the disagreement—as to acting as your solicitor, you were introduced to me in order that I might act for the Murthley case, not for you, distinctly; afterwards, when it became a question of acting for Henry Robertson or you, I said you had better go to another solicitor—when I took out this writ I was acting for you simply as I have stated; it would have the appearance of acting for you, but it was simply in accordance with the arrangement I have already stated—about the 22nd December I wrote a letter to Henry Robertson, complaining that he had not paid—this is a letter in your handwriting, containing in the first few lines some pencil interlineations made by myself; this letter was never sent by me, I declined to send it—this is the letter I did send. (This was dated 21st December, 1871, requesting payment of 400l. for expenses incurred by the defendant, together with a bond for 5,000l., as agreed, for his services). I was acting as your solicitor in writing that letter, but I must explain, you told me on the 7th or 8th December that you could bring the Murthley case to me; subsequently you found that you could not, because Henry Robertson, through a Mr. Crawford, was negotiating and raising funds elsewhere, and you had a disagreement with Henry. Robertson and then did not see your way to getting your expenses paid, and you thought that if I wrote that letter to him it would be the means of settling the matters in difference between you and placing affairs in such, a way that there would be a settlement, and in point of fact the case would be placed in my hands—I am not acting for Henry Robertson—I believe there was a reply to that letter, but I handed over to your solicitors, Bellamy & Strong, all the letters I received
from Henry Robertson—this is a copy of a letter written by my authority to Henry Robertson. (This was dated 30th December, 1871, acknowledging the receipt of letters, and concluding from them that both Henry Robertson and Mr. Crawford were desirous that the defendant should continue to act for him.) I recollect on one occasion it was arranged that you should go down to Aldershot to see Henry Robertson, and I gave you two guineas to go—you afterwards told me that you had been, and on your return negotiations for the loan of 1,000l. were renewed—this is the letter stating the terms. (This was dated 6th January, 1872, from the defendant to Henry Robertson, setting out in detail the terms upon which the suit was to be proceeded with) That was the basis upon which I subsequently conducted all the Murthley proceedings—there was some alteration in the terms, but substantially, no doubt, that was the basis—sums were from time to time advanced on the footing that 1l. was to be charged at the rate of 4l., that is to say, after expenses were incurred bonds were given for four times the amount advanced—all this was simply negotiation, but after the death of the child matters was talked over again; those were the terms substantially, but there were certain alterations verbally agreed upon—the fourth clause states "The claimants to be assisted in paying any previous claims apart from the law expenses to be afterwards incurred"—the interpretation put upon that clause was, the expenses incurred in Scotland through McCaul & Armstrong, and some few incidental expense; it was not to include your expenses, distinctly not—I did not arrange on behalf of Henry Robertson to pay you 300l., nor any sum whatever—there had been an immense deal of discussion about your expenses, and at an interview between Henry Robertson and myself, he stated that he would give you for your services a bond for 2,000l. instead of for 5,000l., which he said he had never agreed to give you; he also stated that he would give you 100l., and a bond for 200l., the latter being for expenses—he would have to give you the money, but I should have to find the 100l. for him to give—I did not find it—when this was mentioned to you you said that you had commenced proceedings at once, as you had been trifled with too long, and I said, as it seemed that you and the claimant would be likely to differ so seriously, I would give up all interest in the matter, and that I could only act for one party—you declined to take the 100l.—I don't say that it was offered to you—you subsequently brought an action against Henry Robertson, I think, for more than 300l., and were non-suited—I did not defend that action, Mr. Tripp atced on that occasion for Henry Robertson—I was in Court, and was also a witness; Mr. Tripp acted as my agent in the matter—I was responsible to him, and have paid him—on 8th February, I think, you sent your solicitors, Bellamy & Strong, to me with a letter you had addressed to them asking for all correspondence and papers between yourself and Henry Robertson—I did not authorise Mr. Philbrick to state that 300l. would be paid for your expenses as soon as the suit was gained; what I did state to Mr. Justice Mellor was that no doubt you would be liberally remunerated after the successful issue of the litigation, and that I state now—the litigation has not been concluded in Scotland; there is an appeal pending in the House of Lords—there were two defenders; one was the Baronet Sir Douglas Stewart, and the other a man called Nicholls; so far as Sir Douglas Stewart is concerned, he has succumbed, and he has paid a sum of money by way of compromise—I am not quite clear as to the amount, but 5,500l. or 5,700l.—Nicholls has paid nothing; Oh, yes, I believe he has paid
about 1,000l.—am not clear about the amount, but that is in Court in Scotland, or in the hands of McCaul & Armstrong, simply by way of guarantee, in the event of the proceedings in the House of Lords being unsuccessful—not a sixpence of that sum has been touched and cannot be touched till after the issue in the House of Lords—5,500l. or 5,700l. had been received—no part of that has been handed to you for your expenses—in May, 1874, you commenced an action against me for 300l.—I was ordered to file certain answers to your interrogatories in that case and I did so—this is a copy of my affidavit. (This was dated 10th June, 1874, and stated "the plaintiff told me that he had incurred expenses, but no definite amount was mentioned; it was not arranged that I should pay him 300l. or any other sum for expenses on being retained in the suit") In my letters of 21st December I did not specify a certain sum as the charge for your expenses it includes liabilities as well—a sum of 400l. was named for expenses, disbursements, and liabilities—your claim was 462l. for work and labour done and money lent and paid by you for the use of the plaintiff, it was not expenses—I am not aware that a certain commission was to be given for obtaining the money in London; that was disputed by Henry Robertson, but you did state that a distinct sum 300l. was to be given to you for raising the money necessary to prosecute the litigation—I don't know whether that 300l. was to cover all—I did not obtain your authority to compromise the whole matter for 300l—I can't say how the 300l. was fixed upon, it was simply a round sum for a claim as to which you were not in a position to give any details or particulars—I was not quite agreed that 300l. would be a proper sum, it was simply a round sum named in the first instance by Henry Robertson or myself, as a sum which might be offered for settling the whole of your expenses—I don't know what sum Mr. Philbrick mentioned—I say that you never mentioned a definite sum to me and you never were in a position to do so, you did not know yourself what outlays you had incurred—the 300l. was not the definite amount of your expenses, it was the sum you might accept—300l. is not the exact sum stated in my diary of 3rd February, it is a sum of 100l. and 200l. in bonds and those bonds were not equivalent to cash—on behalf of Henry Robertson I offered those bonds to you on 3rd February and" you would not take them—on 7th February I have an entry that I was to go to Scotland and see Mr. McCaul and ascertain what would be a reasonable sum to offer you as an ultimatum; it was desired to take their opinion about it; I had never seen the correspondence and had no means of judging what the agreement between you and Henry Robertson was—it did not depend upon the. decision of Mr. McCaul whether you were to get any money at all, it was to depend upon the correspondence which was in their possession—the difference between Henry Robertson and you was this, he said that you had sent him a draft bond for 5,000l. and he would not sign it, you on the other hand acknowledged that there was a distinct agreement on his part to give you that bond for 5,000l.—no doubt there was reference to your expenses in getting up the case in my communication to Mr. McCaul, but it was considered that about 150l. or something like that at the very outside was all that you could have incurred—I did not offer you the 150l.—I did not inform your agents, Messrs. Bellamy & Strong, that you had no claim either under the bond or for your expenses on account of the death of the child—Henry Robertson is clearly liable to pay you your expenses if due, and to remunerate you for your services in the event of
success, but not in the event of non-success; that was the understanding upon which you took up the case—I can't tell you the date when the first payment was made off the loan of l,000l. it was some time after the death of the child—I believe the first payment actually made was to McCaul & Armstrong it April, 1872—I had incurred certain expenses in reference to journeys to Scotland, but all that was preliminary investigation which I insisted upon before I would touch the case—that was no doubt ultimately charged as part of the loan, but not in the first instance—no bonds were taken or papers signed by Henry Robertson until after March, that is to say, after the death of the child, because it was not determined then whether I should proceed with the case or not—of course your expenses might have been charged if I had chosen, but I did not choose to do so—I do not recollect promising you that I would advance to Henry Robertson certain sums when he got his commission, to enable him to purchase furniture and clothing; there was about 30l. or 40l. to McCaul & Armstrong and some few incidental expenses amounting to a small sum, certainly not to buy furniture or clothing, that he has already; I never advanced him any money for that purpose, certain sums were advanced at a later period, but no bonds were ever taken for that, it was simply a personal matter between him and myself—to the best of my belief they are not charged in the account', I am not quite sure about it; if they are it was contrary to my instructions—with regard to your expenses for the past I have already told you I would not consent to their being paid out of the fund, but with regard to the future your expenses were to be paid as the case proceeded, and I have already told you that I considered your help indispensable; but you went to other solicitors and it was also found that your help would not be advisable in Scotland, in point of fact that you would do more harm in Scotland than good; that I did not know at the time—you did not ask me to accept of your assistance afterwards—you told me you were very ill off for money, that you had expended all your spare money in this Murthley case—I had reason to believe that you were exceedingly poor at that time—I advanced you several sums, altogether I think 9l.—if the case had proceeded and your services had been available of course you would have been paid as the case proceeded—my reason for not advancing the 100l. was not because I was short of money at the time.
Re-examined. I have expended upwards of 3,000l. out of pocket in the course of this case.
Witness for the Defence.
ALFRED HOWARD . I am a solicitor of Godliman Street, Doctor's Commons,—you were introduced to me about two years ago in connection with the claim against the Murthley estate—I adopted certain proceedings to obtain a settlement of your claim for expenses in that suit, 300l. as far as I remember—I believe one or two letters passed between Mr. Howard Paddison and myself as to the subject matter of the suit—he did not admit to me that you ever had any claim whatever in connection with that suit—I never had any verbal communication with him, so that there was no admission from him at all—I have no personal knowledge of a letter written by Mr. Debenham—I have talked with Mr. Debenham about the letter.
The Prisoner in a very long address entered into the circumstances of his connection with the Murthley case, the substance of which is embodied in his cross-examination of the witnesses; and stated that being convinced that Mr. Paddison
son was betraying his interests in the matter, he had perhaps taken a stronger view of the case than he ought to have done: but he had acted fairly and honorably towards him, and his conduct in return had been unprofessional and unjust.
GUILTY — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
NEW COURT.—Tuesday, January 12th, 1875, and following days.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
116. CHARLES BEARDSELL (37), WILLIAM McCORKELL (47), ALEXANDER McEWEN (52), and SAMUEL MARTIN ( ), Unlawfully obtaining two cases of chocolate, value 64l. by false pretences. Other Counts for conspiring to defraud divers persons.
The Jury in this case being unable to agree, after being locked up nine hours and a half, were discharged without giving any verdict, and the trial was postponed to the, next Session.
THIRD COURT.—Tuesday, January 12th, 1875.
123. EDWARD LANE (24) [Pleaded guilty: see original trial image] , to seven indictments for forging and uttering cheques for the payment of 51l. 14s. 6d. and other sums, and also to two indictments for stealing valuable securities for the payment of 36l. 6s. 2d. and 15l. 17s. 5d., the property of William George Blagden and another his masters— Two Years' Imprisonment.
MESSRS. CRAUFURD and DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution.
WILLIAM BROTHERHOOD . I keep the Exmouth Arms, Exmouth Street—on Friday night, 1st January, the prisoner came in with three men—I served him with a pot of 6d. ale, and he gave me a bad shilling—I told him it was bad—he said he did not know it, and he had not got any more money—the date of the shilling is 1834—I sent for a constable and charged him—when the constable turned to search him something dropped, and my lad picked up a shilling which he gave to me, and that was also bad—he was taken to the station, and I went too, and afterwards I returned with the constable, and we found two more shillings close to where the other shilling was picked up—the date of one of those shillings is 1834—I handed them to the constable.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not see you drop the coin.
near the prisoner on this evening when the shilling was tendered, and I heard something drop—I picked up a bad shilling about a yard from the prisoner, and gave it to Mr. Brotherhood—later in the evening I helped him to search, and we found two more bad shillings near where I found the other one—there were only three persons in the bar where the prisoner was—they came in with him, and they were all standing in front of the bar close together.
GEORGE PAKES (Policeman G 116). I was called to Mr. Brotherhood's and the prisoner was given in my charge—I told him I should search him—he shuffled about a good deal, and I heard something fall—the potman picked up a shilling and gave it to Mr. Brotherhood—I asked the prisoner where he got it from, and he said he carried a gentleman's bag in the city and got a shilling for doing it—I did not see the shilling fall, but I heard it, and it was found close to the prisoner—I had him up in the corner, and the three men stood two or three yards behind me—I produce the four shillings.
The Prisoner in his defence stated that he carried a hag for a gentleman all round the West End, for which he received a two shilling piece, which he afterwards changed to pay for a game of bagatelle, and got the shilling, a. sixpence, and 6d. of coppers in change; that he afterwards went to the Exmouth Arms to treat some men and paid with the shilling, but did not know that it was bad.
NOT GUILTY .
MESSES. CRAUFURD and DE MICHELE conducted the Prosecution.
JOSEPH HILLYER . I am manager to Hill & Son, 3, Albert Mansion, Queen Victoria Street—on Sunday 29th December, the prisoner came and asked for a half-quartern loaf which would come to 4 1/2 d.—I handed him the loaf, and he gave me in payment a half-crown—I said directly "This is bad!"—I knew by the feel, and I put it in the tester and bent it—he said, "Oh, is it, my sight is not very good give it me back ", previous to that he gave me a good one, and I gave him change, a florin and 1 3/4 d.—I said I should not give him the half-crown, I should detain it—he walked out of the shop with the loaf under his arm—I followed him and crossed over the road until I came to a constable—I spoke to him, and he went up to the prisoner and brought him back to the shop, and I gave him in charge—he said his eyesight was very bad, and he was not aware the half-crown was bad, and he begged me not to give him in custody.
THOMAS PEARCE (Policeman B 24). I was on duty in Queen Victoria Street—the last witness spoke to me, and. I went up to the prisoner—he was trying this two-shilling piece under a lamp post—I asked him what it was, and he said "It is my money, you need be careful now, somebody has attempted to give me a bad shilling"—I said "When, to day?"—he said "No"—I said "Have you had any bad money in your possession to-day?"—he said "No"—I said "Not a bad half-crown)"—he said "No"—I took him back to the prosecutor's shop, and Hillyer charged him, and gave me a bad half-crown which I produce.
WILLIAM STOCKMAN . I am a shopkeeper in Peter Street, Westminster—on 19th November last, the prisoner came in between 6 and 7 o'clock in the evening, and asked for a penny candle and a penny herring—I served him,
and he gave me a shilling—I went round the counter and fried it—and I said "It is a bad shilling; remember, you gave me one on Saturday night, I will swear to it"—he said "A man gave it to me"—I said "Where?"—he said he did not know where, and he did not know his name—I said if it was not for his mother being respectable I should give him into custody at once—he had been in the Saturday before for a quarter of an ounce of tobacco, and paid with a shilling—my brother said he believed it was bad, and I said "We will mark it"—on the Monday, I went to the bag where the silver was, and turned it all out—I found six bad coins, and one was the shilling I had marked.
By THE COURT. His mother was a weekly customer of mine—when the prisoner came in, I identified him as having passed a bad shilling on a previous occasion—I swear that—I marked it on the Saturday evening, and found it was bad on the Monday—there were five or six bad—I could not swear they were all passed by him.
GEORGE EDWARDS . I am barman at the Silver Cross public-house, Charing Cross—on 26th September last the prisoner came in and asked for a glass of stout and mild and a screw of tobacco, which was 2 1/2—he tendered a half-crown in payment which I found was bad—I detained him until my employer came, and he was given into custody—he was taken to Bow Street Police Court, and ultimately discharged.
Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You said you would show me where you got it from—you wanted me to go and see the man, but I could not go because there no was one to leave in the bar.
JOHN HAYLER (Policeman A R 20). I was called by Edwards to the Silver Cross, and the prisoner was given into my charge—I received a bad half-crown, which I destroyed after the case was settled at Bow Street—I told the prisoner the charge, and he said "A man gave it me for some work I did; if you will allow me to go, I shall find him out"—I said "You are in my charge, I shall not allow you to do anything of the kind"—he was taken before the Magistrate, remanded until the 5th October, and then discharged.
By THE COURT. I heard him ask the potman to go with him to the man who gave him the money, and he asked me as well—he did not tell me who the man was—I asked him who he was and his address, and he said he did not know.
Prisoner's Defence. I was selling some writing paper in Queen Victoria Street, and a gentleman bought 2d. worth of me, and gave me a half-crown—I told him I had not sufficient change—I gave him 1s. 4d. and another 1d. worth of paper, and he gave me the half-crown, and that is how I came with it, not knowing it was bad.
GUILTY — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. SIMS conducted the Prosecution.
fastenings were all in order and the house properly fastened up—I was awakened about 1.50 by a sound as if in the house—I got out of bed and looked at my watch—I waited till I heard a constable coming along his beat about 2.40, and I called him from the window, and then went down and let him in at the front door—I went over the house with him—I went down to the basement floor and found one of the iron bars protecting the window of the wash house bent on one side and forced from the socket—the bars are inside, and the window must have been opened first—the door leading from the wash house to the kitchen was open, and had been forced—the window of the kitchen was partly opened, but was secured by a screw at the side, which prevented it opening more than 2 or 3 inches—the drawers in the kitchen were open, and had been ransacked—I found a large bundle of linen done up in the table-cover, and a parcel of cutlery on the top of it—in the parlour, the cheffonier and a writing desk had been opened, and the contents strewed about—I missed my overcoat from the lobby, in the pocket of which was a handkerchief, and I also missed a scarf—when I got towards the foot of the stairs, I saw a person making his escape by the back door—I found a pair of boots, one in the kitchen and another under the table in the parlour—there were a large number of foot-marks—I found a chisel on a chair in the parlour, and I saw marks which had no doubt been caused by the chisel—this this my coat and handkerchief which were in the lobby that night.
WILLIAM CLARKE (Sergeant N 26). I was on duty in Southgate Road, Hackney, on the early morning of 8th January—I was not the first constable called by Mr. Brander—I came immediately afterwards—I went over the house with him about 3 a.m. and found it in confusion.
JAMES KEENAN (Police Sergeant N 18). I was on duty in New North Road, on the morning of the 8th January—I saw the prisoner coming along without any boots—I went towards him, and he ran away—I pursued him—he ran down East Road into Nile Street, and into Chatham Gardens, and I afterwards saw him in the custody of 435 N—I asked him where his boots were—he said he had lost them while he was drunk—I took him to the station and searched him—he was wearing this overcoat—I asked him how he accounted for that—he said he had had it for the last two years—I found a handkerchief in the pocket with the name on it—I asked him what name was on it—he said he did not know he had it that night from a young woman at the Grecian Theatre—the prosecutor's name was on it—I found a small chisel, some matches, and keys.
EDMUND SCANLIN (Policeman N 435). I was in Nile Street about 3 a.m. on the 8th January and saw the prisoner running—I tried to stop him, and I fell down—I got up and pursued him again, and caught him—he said "Let me go, I have done nothing, I have only been fighting."
Prisoner's Defence. I was intoxicated and sat down on a door step. I don't recollect anything till I awoke up, when I found I was in possession of that coat, and my boots had been stolen; the keys fit my own boxes at home.
GUILTY — Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
MR. F. H. LEWIS conducted the Prosecution; and MESSRS. BESLEY and MOODY the Defence.
the early part of November the prisoner called upon me with a sample of these knives (produced)—he told me there were twelve dozen of them, and asked me 5s. a dozen for them—I bid him 4s. 9d—he said he had to sell them on commission, he could not take that money for them, but he would let me know—I met him afterwards, and he said he would let me have them at 4s. 9d., and I took six dozen from him—these knives are similar—Messrs. Hyam & Co. came to me, and I gave them information.
Cross-examined. I have known the defendant a number of years, and have been dealing with him in hardware articles all the time—he showed me one knife as a sample—I met him afterwards quite accidentally, and he sold me the six dozen—I believe I have seen grosses of the same knives before—some are marked "spring" and some "superior"—the person named Marks is not the manufacturer of the knives, he is the factor—I can't see any difference between these knives (produced by the defendants solicitor), and those said to be taken from Messrs. Hyam—I am unable to distinguish them—I did not look at the knives particularly when I bought them, as I knew the articles well, and had bought grosses before—the defendant has borne a good character during the time I have known him or I should not have bought them of him.
JOHN HYAM . I am a warehouseman, in Houndsditch, with my brother, and we employ between 100 arid 150 people—these knives are marked "spring cutlery"—I buy my knives of Mr. Marks, and pay him 5s. 9d. for them wholesale—I sell them for 7s.—as far as I know, that "spring cutlery" was made expressly for us—the knives were first branded in that way in the early part of November—I deal in albums similar to these, but I can't swear to them—they are made by the hundred—their value is 17s. 6d. each—this musical box is worth 2l. 10s. or 2l.15s.; the number on it is 290—I have searched for No, 290 in my stock and can't find it; I found 29l.—I did not search for 289—I commenced to look for 290—I went with Davies to the prisoner's shop—he sells chocolate at a penny a cup, and cakes at a penny each—after Davies went in he called me in and said "That the prisoner did not recognise the knives"—the detective produced the receipt, and the prisoner said "That is my signature"—I asked him whether he had any more goods in the house, and he said "No," and then the detective found the three albums and the musical box—he said he bought the knives in the street of a man with a black beard, and he thought he got the albums and musical box in the same way; he could not exactly say.
Cross-examined. I have about fifteen managers of departments—my business is very extensive—I have three houses, 58, 59, and 60, Hounds-ditch, extending front and back; they are very large premises indeed—I have a particular man for the buying of knives—he is here—I can't swear to the albums at all; they are similar to those we have in stock—the musical boxes are made in Switzerland—I have never been there—the person who buys them is not here—I don't know that the makers in Switzerland never carry their numbers above 500—I have never heard that before—I could not swear that any one of the articles produced here has been missed out of my stock—we have about 400 or 500 sorts of knives.
----PETERS. I am manager of the cutlery department—Messrs. Hyam & Co. sold "spring cutlery" in the early part of November—I do not know of any other firm who dealt in knives of that brand at that time—we had forty dozen of them I believe.
Cross-examined. I bought them from Mr. Marks—he is not a manufacture
to my knowledge—the knives which you produced are precisely like those said to have been stolen—as far as I know every knife which I bought of Mr. Marks has been sold legitimately in our trade—I have not missed any from the stock.
JOHN DAVIES (City Detective). I went to the prisoner's shop in Wentworth Street on the 12th December, and spoke to him about some knives—I was with Roper, Mr. Hyam, and Mr. Van Pragh—I produced this six dozen knives and asked the prisoner if he knew anything about them; he said he did not—I produced this bill, and said "Do you know that that is your signature?"—he said "Yes"—I said "I have received this from Mr. Van Praagh, who states that you sold them to him"—he said he bought them of a man in the street—I asked him if he had any other goods in his house, and he said he had not—I then searched, and found in a Cupboard in the kitchen the three albums—I asked him how he accounted for them—he said "I suppose they came the same as the others"—Roper went upstairs and brought this musical box down, and I asked him how he accounted for that, and he said he bought it of a man in the street whom he did not know—he said he bought the knives weeks before, and the others two or three days before.
THOMAS ROPES (City Detective). I found the musical box—the prisoner said he bought it of a man in the street, the same he bought the knives from; he had had dealings with him twelve months on and off; he should know him if he saw him in the street.
CHARLES GEORGE BRITTEN . I am manager of the musical box department at Messrs. Hyam's—I can't say that we had a box 290—I can't say that I ever saw this box before; I have seen hundreds exactly like it.
NOT GUILTY .
MR. GOODMAN conducted the Prosecution, and MR. GLYN the Defence.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT—Wednesday, January 13th, 1875.
Before Mr. Justice Denman.
MESSRS. STRAIGHT and GOLDMAN conducted the Prosecution; and MESSRS. MONTAGU WILLIAMS and SOULSBY the Defence.
ANTOINETTA CURA (interpreted). I am the wife of Augustina Cura of 17, Eyre Street Hill—Domenica Volante was my mother—the prisoner Mariana and her husband lodged in the first-floor front room and my mother lived in the back room ground-floor—on Tuesday morning 29th December about 12 o'clock in the day I went with my mother to their room and saw Mariana and her husband there—Philomena had gone out to work—my mother asked for the rent and Mariana's husband said "It is not due till to-morrow"—my mother said "Very well" and walked out and went down into the front kitchen with me—there had been no words—my mother then started washing
—there were also in the kitchen an English young lady Marie Massarelli and Joseph Massarelli, my husband and an English boy who they call Stephen, but I don't know his surname—Mariana's servant Paolo Ferri came down to the kitchen about ten minutes after we went down—he asked for a saucepan—he did not then go away—he did not get one—about five minutes after he had come down Mariana's husband and Philomena came down into the kitchen together, and while they were in the kitchen I saw Mariana standing at the door with her hands under her apron—her husband aid "What do you want from me?"—my mother said "I want the money as you owe me"—he then began to use foul fanguage and my mother responded the same—they were angry with one another—the words went on for about a minute and Mariana's husband and Philomena made use of words but not Mariana—she was standing at the door about a yard, and a half from them—I saw Mariana's husband push my mother who stood facing him, with both hands—they were close together—he had not told her to go out—my mother then got hold of his whiskers and Philomena got hold of my mother's hair and dragged her towards the door—Mariana then went near to my mother and gave her three blows with her right hand in this way (describing) close upon one another—Domenica leaning down at this time, because Philomena was pulling her hair—Mariana's husband. was behind his wife at the time—she was leaning against the wall—they were pretty close together—he was not doing anything—my husband was on the stairs out of the room—Stephen and Ferri were in the kitchen, and Joseph' Massarelli and his wife and Cortzi—Lutezzi came afterwards—those were all the persons that were in the kitchen—the foot of the stairs faces the kitchen door and between them is a very small passage where Mariana stood—the door towards which Philomena dragged my mother was another door where there is a small room—she was dragging her towards the door that leads from the kitchen to the foot of the stairs—my mother was leaning against the door at the time she received the blows and Philomena had her by the hair—when my mother received the blows she said "Fetch the police"—Joseph Massarelli was the first that went up to her, and he and Cortzi put her on the bed in the little room outside the kitchen—I then saw that she was bleeding—she lived about three-quarters of an hour.
Cross-examined. I saw the wound after she was on the bed—it was under the right breast—the persons in the kitchen were not halloing and shouting at the time the three blows were given—they were making a little noise, not much—there were-plenty of people in the kitchen afterwards—the other people in the kitchen did not rush towards the group who were fighting and try to separate them—Marie Massarelli tried to pull her husband away—I did not see either of the prisoners with a knife—Massarelli was close to them parting them when his wife tried to pull him away—that was before the three blows were struck—I can't say whether Ferri was trying to part them—I did not see him—there was a regular crowd round them trying to part them—it was not very dark; it was rather dark at the time the struggle took place—Cortzi was in the kitchen doing his work—he went with the others to try and part them—a man named Pachetti was there—I did not see him trying to part them—it is a small place about two yards square where this took place—my husband rushed among them while they were fighting—before the fighting commenced I saw Cortzi doing some work with a knife, he was cutting a piece of cane in the shape of a skewer—I saw no. knife, stiletto or weapon of any kind in the prisoners' hands—I was the first
witness examined before the Magistrate—I was in Court when my husband was examined—I did not say anything before the Magistrate about Mariana having her hands under her apron—my husband and I have talked about the matter since—Ferri was there the whole time—I did not see Cortzi take Philomena by the hair with one hand and strike her with the other—when Mariana was going away from the place my husband put his hand on her chest—that was after my mother was wounded—I did not hear Mariana shriek out "He has got a knife"—I gave evidence before the Coroner.
Re-examined. I don't remember the names of all the persons who were in the kitchen, because there were so many of them—there were about four or five—Joseph Massarelli, Cortzi, Ferri, my husband, and Pachetti, trying to part them—my mother and the prisoners were fighting together—I did not see Pachetti—Cortzi was working with his knife 3 or 4 feet from the door, he was standing up—when my husband went to separate them, I did not see any knife in his hand—I did not see any knife in Cortzi's hand, he left the knife on the table—I saw him put it down at the time he went to part them—I did not see any knife in Massarelli's hand.
By THE JURT. Cortzi laid his knife down on the table before my mother received the stab—it was done momentarily—he left it there, and flew to the rescue of the party, and as he went Mariana was dealing the three blows—the knife was on the table at the time the three blows were struck.
LUIGI CORTZI (interpreted). I lodge at 17, Eyre Street Hill—on 29th "December, I was in the front kitchen, sitting on the table, near the window working with a knife and a piece of wood—Mariana's servant, Paolo Ferri, came down and asked for a saucepan—Mariana's husband and Philomena then came down, and Mariana followed them—Domenica was in the kitchen washing—I heard her and Mariana's husband disputing together, but I was minding my work, and did not understand what they were saying, they seemed to be quarelling—they were all talking together, Mariana, her hus-band, Philomena, Domenica,* and Ferri—I saw them altogether in a lump—I got up from my work, and went among them to part them—it is our fashion when we see anybody fighting to try and part them—they were fighting—they were all hitting one another, and I was trying to part them—they were just outside the kitchen door—I left my knife on the table—the fighting went on for near ten minutes—after they were separated Domenica fell down—she said "I am dead, some one go and fetch the police"—she was leaning against the door of the little back room—before she fell she was taken up and put on the bed in the little room—she was afterwards brought into the front kitchen, when the police brought the prisoners down—it was five or six minutes after the deceased fell down that I went back into the kitchen, and I then found my knife where I had left it, and the piece of cane also—there was no blood on it—when the two prisoners were brought into Domenica's presence by the police, I asked Domenica in Italian what was the matter, and she replied "Mariana is the woman who killed me"—I said "Dominica, here is the police, and they want to know who has done it"—she said "Philomena was holding me by the hair, and Mariana she killed me '—Mariana said twice "I have not done it"—Domenica said "Yes, you have done it"—Philomena did not say anything—I did not see Mariana's husband there then.
Cross-examined. He was afterwards given into custody—Ferri was the first person who went to part these people when they were fighting, and then Augustina Cura, and then me—there was plenty holloaing and screaming
—I did not see Massarelli interfere to part them, in the confusion she might be with them—there were not above eight or nine people there—the place is so small I could not tell exactly who was there—it was dark—they were not fighting with their fists, they were pulling one another, one by the hair, one by the clothes, dragging one another—the fighting continued two or three minutes after I interfered before the deceased fell—I did not see her, because they were keeping her under—she was with her back, towards the door—Philomena had got hold of her hair, and Mariana was standing on the other side of her—I saw that, and the others were round her—I have got the skewer that I was cutting at home now—I have put it in some work—I made it for a man who performs on it—it was for a popgun—it was a piece of cane about the length of the palm of my hand, very thin and weak, and very sharp at the point—I showed my knife to the police that same evening, not the cane—I have the knife here (producing it)—it is id the same state as it was then, broken at the point—the distance from where I put the knife to where the' deceased fell, was 4 or 5 yards.—I did not see any one take up the knife—I was smoothing the cane to a point to use for a conjuring trick—the knife was on the table when the police came in, and after the prisoners were taken away, I started at my work again.
AUGUSTINA CUBA (interpreted). I lodge at 17, Eyre Street Hill—on 29th December I was in the front kitchen—I saw Mariana, her husband, and Philomena come downstairs—Philomena and Mariana's husband came into the kitchen, Mariana was at the door—Domenica was in the kitchen—I heard her and Mariana's husband and Philomena rowing together, Mariana began falling out with Domenica, but I could not understand their language because they talked mountaineers', language—Mariana was then at the door, but she went between the door and the stairs—I saw Philomena have my mother-in-law by the hair and Mariana struck her twice like that and then I saw blood on the floor—I put my hand on Mariana's chest and said "Don't you hit my mother-in-law any more," and she put her hand under her apron and said "Let's go, that is enough," and she she went upstairs—I went out to fetch the police.
By THE COURT. When Mariana struck the two blows Philomena had hold of the deceased's hair.
JOSEPH-MASSARELLI I was lodging with my wife at 17, Eyre Street Hill, on Tuesday, 29th December—I was in the front kitchen on that day—I remember Mariana, her husband, and Philomena coming down into the kitchen and a quarrel taking place—I saw Philomena catch hold of Domenica's hair—I went towards them to separate them and my wife came behind me and pulled me back—I got away from her and went up to them and saw some blood—Mariana and Domenica and Philomena were against the kitchen door, near the door of the little back room, about 2 or 3 feet from it—Domenica said "Go and call the police, they have killed me"—upon that Mariana told her husband to come upstairs and she and her husband and Philomena went upstairs—the police were sent for—Domenica was brought into the front kitchen and the two prisoners were then there—I heard the deceased say "Mariana struck me two or three times"—she pointed her hand to Mariana—the police asked me what she meant (she spoke in Italian), who struck her and I told them that Mariana was the person she spoke of—she also said that Philomena had caught bold of her hair—Mariana said "I did not done it."
Cross-examined. There were four or five persons in tie kitchen trying to part them and I tried also—Philomena had hold of the deceased by the hair and the deceased had Philomena by the hair—Mariana's husband was close by—they were all struggling together—it was a regular scrimmage between the three of them.
By THE COURT. Cortzi was there trying to part them and Augustina Cura and Antoinetta Cura and myself—Mariana's husband was not taking any part in it—there were a lot of people there whose names I don't know—I did not see a knife or anything—Ferri was in the kitchen and Pachetti—I did not see Lutezzi there—he came afterwards—I should think there were eight or nine of them at the time this happened.
MARIE MASSARELLI . I am the wife of Joseph Massarelli—I was in the kitchen on the 29th December when Philomena, Mariana, and her husband came down—a quarrel took place with Domenica and a struggle—I could not see what Philomena did to Domenica, there were too many together—I can't say how many—I should think there must have been about a dozen of them together—I don't know all their names—they were at the bottom of the stairs by the kitchen door in the little passage—my husband rushed to separate them and I rushed after him to pull him back—he got away from me and went in the midst I believe—I did not see any more until the deceased was put on the bed—I then saw the blood—I saw Cortzi go to separate them—he came from the table in the kitchen—I believe he got up before my husband—they were talking very loud and there was a little Screaming between them—it was very angry loud talking—I did not take much notice because I was sewing—all the people have their food in the kitchen and do their work there most of them—I can't say how many there were in the kitchen when they began—Cortzi was at work, the deceased was washing and I was sewing, and I think some of the others were talking to each other.
Cross-examined. Mariana's husband came down first with the servant, and about two minutes after that Mariana came down—she laughed at the deceased—I saw the deceased go to Mariana and I saw her talking to the husband—it was a kind of quarrelling; abusing—the deceased rushed from the husband to Mariana—it was not exactly a run, but she went very fast to her and began to say something to her in coarse words; I can't say what they were—Mariana was then by the kitchen door—there were a great many other people in the kitchen—the prisoners and the deceased were halloing and talking and appeared to be fighting—they were very cross one with the other—the other people in the kitchen rushed towards them to try and separate them—I did not see any blows struck—the kitchen is underground and rather dark—at the time of the disturbance there were the two prisoners, Mariana's husband, the deceased, her daughter, and her husband, Cortzi, Pachetti, my husband, an old Italian who was lodging in the house, two Englishmen, and some others—I saw Cortzi rush in the midst of them—I could not say whether he struck Mariana or not—I believe Cura rushed amongst them too; I saw him amongst them—I can't say who went up first the confusion was so great.
blow—the deceased was in bed when I came down—I did not hear any one ask her who struck her.
Cross-examined. I have stated that my mother when she was asked who struck her said "The woman in the family way."
Re-examined. She did not point to any person when she said that—I was told by Cortzi and Massarelli what my mother said—Mariana was in the family way at that time.
THOMAS GEORGE DAVID DAVIS , M.R.C.S. I live at 44, Hatton Garden—on Tuesday, 29th December, about 3.45, I was called to 17, Eyre Street Hill—I found a woman sitting on a sofa in the front kitchen, supported by an Italian roan and woman—I removed her clothes and found a spot of blood about 1 1/2 or 2 inches in diameter—there was no wound apparent at first—the left breast was hanging over the wound, but upon lifting it I found a wound about five-twelfths of an inch in its long diameter—I did not probe it—I advised her removal to the hospital—the room was full of people—it was a wound that might have been caused by a sharp pointed instalment, and I believe a metallic one—I don't think such a knife as this (produced by Cortzi) would have caused it.
JOSHUA POWELL . I was house-surgeon at the Royal Free Hospital when the deceased was brought there by some constables; she was dead—I at once examined her and found a small wound immediately below the left breast, nearly over the heart—it was about half an inch long—that was the only wound—there was a post-mortem examination—there was nothing else to cause death except that wound—it penetrated the chest wall and into the left ventricle of the heart; it was about 2 1/2 inches deep—a sharp pointed instrument of some kind would have caused it—I think a very sharp pair scizzors would have done so—it was hot a clean out; it was rather jagged—many things might have caused it—in my opinion that wound was the cause of death.
JOHN FRASER (Policeman G 199). I was called to the house and flaw the deceased there—the two prisoners were given into my custody and were taken by a constable to the station—I asked who did it, but the answer was in Italian and was not interpreted to me.
Cross-examined. I also took Mariana's husband into custody—he was taken to the station with the others and kept there four hours.
WILLIAM FRESTON (Police Inspector G). I was at the station when the charge was brought and have since had the investigation of the matter—I have been to the premises, 17, Eyre Street Hill—there is a front and back kitchen—the front kitchen is about 12 or 15 feet square—there is a door which leads into a small passage and a door leading upstairs—on going out of the kitchen and turning to the right there is the door of the small room—I told the prisoners the charge at the station through the interpreter, and Mariana said that Cura had got a knife in his sleeve—he and the others said that was not so—Philomena said nothing.
Cross-examined. I did not take a rule to measure the passage, but I did it as well as I could without that—it was about 5 feet 5 inches by 4 feet, and dark—there was no evidence against the husband.
NOT GUILTY .
FOURTH COURT—Wednesday, January 13th, 1875.
Before Mr. Common Serjeant
MR. POLAND for the Prosecution stated that the prisoner teas convicted at this Court of a libel on the same person in 1871 (See Vol. 75, page 5) when he was sentenced to two years' imprisonment, that upon his release he again commenced libelling Mr. Batten, who believing him to have a craze upon this subject only wished him to be bound over to keep the peace for the future.
Judgment respited till next Session for the prisoner to find two securities in 501. each to answer for his good conduct.
NEW COURT.—Wednesday, January 13th, 1875".
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. A. B. KELLY conducted the Prosecution; MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS defended LLOYD and MR. RIBTON defended Sizeland.
CHARLES FROST . I am a lighterman living at Stratford Place—on the evening of Boxing night, the 26th December, I was going to the Standard Theatre with my wife, my brother and his wife, and two friends—they left me to go to the Norfolk Hotel, and I was about to go to one of the stalls in the main road—my attention was called to several young chaps behind me, one said "George this hat does not seem to suit me to-night," and another one said "No"—I turned round to see if my hat was going to be taken from me, and as I did so I felt Lloyd's hand touch me, and then he laid hold of my chain—he was in front of me then—I put my hand up to my pocket to stop my watch from going, but he had got it out—I took hold of his collar and he threw me to the ground—while on the ground I was kicked by Lloyd under the right eye, and I received several kicks in the left shoulder and arm, and I can't do any work with it now—my coat was cut where I received the kick in the elbow—there was another one kicked me, and I believe that Sizeland kicked me—he tried to rescue Lloyd—I am not quite certain that he kicked me, my face was towards the ground—I held Lloyd and called out for my brother who was in the house—I held him till the constable came up and I gave him into custody.
Cross-examined by Mr. Williams. This was 5.30 in the evening—we were waiting to go to the theatre—there was a crowd—there were five men when I turned round when the remarks were passed about the hat.
THOMAS WELSH . I am an upholsterer at Sea bright Street, Bethnal Green—I was going towards the Standard Theatre about 5.30 on the evening of Boxing night—I saw four or five men standing round & window—one of them, I believe it was Sizeland, took his hat off and said "George, I don't believe the hat seems to suit me somehow," and the others said "No it don't"—the prosecutor turned round and Lloyd snatched his watch-chain—he caught hold of Lloyd, and Lloyd threw him to the ground, and while he was on the ground he kicked him in the eye, and Sizeland came up and kicked him on the shoulder—the prosecutor called out to his brother "Soldier! soldier!" and his brother came to his assistance, and when they got to the public-house Sizeland came to the rescue of Lloyd—when the policeman came up Sizeland went away and Lloyd was taken into custody—I am positive Sizeland was the man who came up to the rescue.
Cross-examined by Mr. Montagu Williams. There was a whelk stall where Mr. Frost was standing—Lloyd and the others were at his back about 2 yards away.
Cross-examined by Mr. Ribton. Sizeland came into the public-house and attempted to take Lloyd away from the prosecutor and his brother—that is the first time I can speak to Sizeland with certainty—they had got Lloyd into the public-house, and Sizeland came there; that was after the watch was taken, and after Frost had been knocked down.
WILLIAM MAKSON (Policeman G 185). I was on duty near the Standard Theatre, on the 26th—I saw Frost struggling with Lloyd, and on going up he informed me that Lloyd had stolen his watch, and violently assaulted him—I took him into custody.
WILLIAM FROST . I am the prosecutor's brother—about 5:30 on Boxing night, we were going to the Standard Theatre—there being a crowd outside, we walked a little way down the street to avoid it—we went into the Norfolk Hotel to have something to drink—my brother left us to go to the stall to see if he could get some oysters—I had no sooner got to the bar than I heard my brother calling out "Soldier! Soldier!" which is the name they call me on the water—I ran to my brother's assistance—he had got Lloyd by the neck—I seized Lloyd by the collar, and gave my. brother a chance to get up—he got on his feet and held Lloyd—when we got him towards the public-house door Sizeland came up and got hold of his coat and said "Let him go, he will stop till the policeman comes"—at that moment a policeman came up, and we gave Lloyd into custody.
JAMES COWLEY (Detective Officer H). I was at the Police Court on Monday, the 28th, when Lloyd was brought before the Magistrate—the proseutor and his brother pointed out Sizeland to me, and I took him into custody—he said "I was not there, I am innocent; I was at Brown's beershop at the time"—he also said the reason why he was at the Police Court was because he knew Lloyd, and worked with him, and he came to see how he got on.
SIZELAND received a good character.
— NOT GUILTY . LLOYD— GUILTY . He also PLEADED GUILTY to having been before convicted in June, 1873**— Seven Years' Penal Servitude, and Twenty Lashes with the Cat.
SAMUEL HARMAN I am in the service of Smith and Turner, brewers, and live at 4, North End, Chiswick—on 30th December, about 11 p.m. I was in Morson Road, Chiswick—I saw some one come out of the door of No. 4, Morson Road—he had two pictures under his arm—he put them through the rails of the gate on to the path—he returned to the house again, and brought out two bags, which he threw over the gate—he pulled the door behind him as he came out—he got over the gate on to the path, picked the bags up, and put them on his shoulder, and the pictures under his arm—I pass this house every day—no one lives at No. 4—Mr. King lives at No. 3—I followed the man and spoke to him; the man was the prisoner—I told him he had not shut the door—he said he had not come out of any door, nor yet bean near any door, he only put the things down on the path to have a rest—I told him he must go back with me—he said if he had to go
back I should have to carry the things—I said I should not do any such thing—he turned round, threw, the things down close to my feet, and ran away—I ran after him, and he was eventually stopped by a man named Charlton—I kept him in sight all the time he was running till he was caught by Charlton—we brought him back to where the things were, and then took him and them to the station—these are the pictures (produced).
Cross-examined by the Prisoner, I was standing against No. 2, wishing a friend good-night, and I saw you come out of the house—I did not take you at the time I saw you come over the gate, because I wanted to see which way you were going, and perhaps you might have run back into the house—you did not place the things against the wall—no one was with me when I came up to you—there were two more brewery servants behind, and I thought they might help me to take you to the station—I did not say to the two men "Knock him down and kick him"—I said "You must have been a thief, I believe you have been into No. 3."
GEORGE CHARLTON . I am a bootmaker, and live at Chiswick Lane—on the night of 30th December I heard a cry of "Stop him!" and saw the prisoner running—I stopped him, and kept hold of him till Harman came up—we took him to where we found the property, and then went on to the station.
JAMES PORTER (Policeman T 146). On this night I met Harman and Charlton with the prisoner—Hannan said "Here is a man for you; he has been into No. 3, I believe; I saw him come out of No. 4"—I said "You hear what they say, have you anything to say?"—he said "Nothing"—they were carrying two pictures and these other things—I took the prisoner to the station—I afterwards went to 4, Morson Road, and found the door open—I traced footsteps from No. 4 over the wall to No. 3—I found the window broken open and raised; the hasp was broken—I got through the window, and went into the front parlour, and found these two chisels and this crowbar (produced)—most of the drawers and cupboards in the house had been forced by one of the chisels—I went in all the bedrooms, and in one room I found seventeen keys lying on the bed, tied together.
WILLIAM FRANCIS (Police Sergeant T 50). I was on duty at the station when the prisoner was brought in—the charge was read over to him; he said "I have not been to the house at all, I have been to see a friend named Edwards at Chiswick, facing the water, and brought the things from him"—I said "If they were your own, why did you run away)"—he said "I thought I should be locked up"—I searched him, and found a small morocco leather case containing four gold studs and a pair of sleeve links, a small box, and a small silver key which would open a box that was in the house—I also found seven or eight common door keys—I examined the house—the account given by Porter is quite correct.
ELIZABETH WALKER . I am housemaid to Mr. William King, No. 3, Morson Road—the house had been shut up since the Saturday week previous; they went for a holiday down to Cornwall, and I had had a holiday too—they are back in the house now—when we left, all the fastenings were secure, and I fastened the-back dining-room window myself—I saw it afterwards, and it was then not in the state I had left it—the things produced are the property of my master.
The Prisoner in his defence stated that he never was in the house, but that he was carrying the things for a man named Edwards, for which he was to receive 10s., and that he had placed them against the wall to rest when Harman saw him.
GUILTY — Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MR. ST. AUBYN, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence.
NOT GUILTY .
WILLIAM THOMAS HUNT . I live at 1, Pembridge Villas, Notting Hill—about 1.30 on Christmas morning 1 was aroused by the police, and I let them in—we walked straight through the hall from the front door to the back entrance and I noticed spots of blood—I let another: policeman in at the back door, and we walked through the conservatory into the drawing-room—I went to the door but I did not enter the room with the police—I went in afterwards and saw the prisoner in the hands of the police—I saw him searched at the station and saw fourteen photographs and eight or ten Christmas cards found in his pocket—they are my property and were kept on the drawing-room table—I examined the premises and found the whole of the coal cellar window broken in; the frame work all broken and it was sufficiently large for a man to get through—from the coal-house the knife-house would have to be passed through—I saw a coat found in the knife-house which did not belong to me—I had never seen a coat there before—I did not examine the lower premises on Christmas Eve as I generally do.
Cross-examined. We were in bed and it took the police a quarter of an hour before they could wake me up—it was a very cold night—I did not hear the glass broken—the police were in the drawing-room with the prisoner about half a minute before I saw him—he had no boots on and no coat—I did not see the police beat him very much—I did not see any blows at all—I went to the station with them—he was very violent and kicked the police about—he walked to the station without boots what little he did walk he was carried some part of the way—I can't say that he was the worse for liquor—he was sober enough when I saw him in the drawing-room I think the drunkenness was put on—I have spoken with his uncle or his father since—the coal cellar window had four panes of glass; all four were broken and the framework—the boots-were found in the drawing-room—there was a great deal of valuable property there—there was a clock—this box was broken—it was standing on the table and had been unbroken the night before—nothing else was disturbed—the photographs are of no value to sell; they are photographs of my wife and myself and some friends which we had discarded from the album because it was full.
HENRY ENTICUT (Policeman X 368). About 1.15 on Christmas morning I heard a noise like the falling of glass at the back of the prosecutor's premises and I made an examination—I found the coal cellar window and the framework broken; pushed inwards—I went for another constable and rang the bell—we were afterwards" let in by Mr. Hunt—I was let in at the back door and I passed through the conservatory where I noticed stains of blood on the handle of the drawing-room door—I entered the drawing-room and found the prisoner concealed behind the curtains—I seized him by a scarf he had on his neck and he struck me a violent blow on the chest—a struggle ensued—the other constable was close at hand—he struggled till we got to the hall where I received another blow—he was sober to the best of my
knowledge—he had no shoes on and no hat or coat—we took him to the station and found on him fourteen photographs, nine Christmas cards, 3s. 6d. in silver, a key, and a pocket knife—I afterwards returned to the house and made an examination—I found the zinc work of the larder window, which is in front of the house, had been cut by a knife and pulled outwards—it was not sufficiently cut to allow a person to get through—I produce the pocket knife which I found in the prisoner's pocket—the blade is jagged like a saw, as if it had been cutting something hard—it would cut the zinc work.
Cross-examined. I say that he was perfectly sober—I believe the knife was used for cutting the zinc work, but it could have been done in many other ways.
BENJAMIN COULTON (Policeman X 384). I went with the other constable to Mr. Hunt's house, and followed him into the drawing-room; he seized the prisoner, who struck him, and I seized hold of him—I found the prisoner's hat and boots in the drawing-room and his coat in the boot-house, leading out of the coal cellar—it was hanging on the door.
Cross-examined. He was sober—I saw the zine; it was outside, and there was a bar inside—the zinc appeared as if it had been pulled.
ELIZABETH NICHOLLS . I am cook to Mr. Hunt—I was in the coal cellar about 9 o'clock on Christmas Eve—the window was not broken then—the larder is under the front steps looking into the front garden—that was not cut the night before.
Cross-examined. The larder window is a small window about a foot square—no full-grown man could get in there, and the gas metre stands on a shelf on one side—the zinc was not cut the night before—it is under the steps, and you would have to pass the kitchen window to get to it—the coal cellar is at the back of the house—that had a window which did not open—there were four panes of glass—they were smashed in, and the frame also.
The Prisoner's statement Before the Magistrate was read, in which he stated that he had been to Notting Hill to see some friends and got drunk, and mistook this house for his own.
Witnesses for the Defence.
THOMAS PLANT . I am a mason's labourer, and live at 6, Upper Carlisle Street, Marylebone—the prisoner is my stepson—he lives with me, and has done so about eight or nine years—he is a plumber and glazier, and had good employment—he worked for Mr. Stubbs—on Christmas Eve he came home about 5 o'clock to have his tea—he had had something to drink then—he left home afterwards, and said he was going over to Notting Hill to his uncle—I did not hear of him again till he was in custody—during the whole of the time I have known him he has always borne an irreproachable character—I have known him to enter my premises by the window when he has been in liquor—he got in that way one night.
Cross-examined. That is not his usual way of entering the house—it is about 2 miles from my house to his uncle's at Notting Hill.
RICHARD LEAHET . I am a porter at Messrs. Harvey and Sons, grocers—I live at 13, Upper Uxbridge Street, Notting Hill—I saw the prisoner on Christmas Eve between 9 and 10 o'clock first—he was then under the influence of drink—he was with a friend—I saw him again about 11.30 against my place of business—he was worse then—I spoke to him and told him I should see him directly I had done business—we closed at 11.30, and I saw him about 12 o'clock outside my house—I asked him to come indoors,
and he refused to do so, and said he was going home—he was the worse for liquor then, and worse than he had been at 11.30—I wanted him to stay all night—he was able to speak distinctly, and said he was going home to Paddington; that is where Carlisle Street is—I asked him to come indoors, and he said he would rather not—he left me at 12 o'clock, and I heard no more of him till he was at the Police Court—his uncle lives at 11, Palmer Terrace, Notting Hill, about a minute's walk from my house.
Mr. Stubbs gave the prisoner a good character.
The Jury stated that they believed he was under the influence of drink at the time— Six Months' Imprisonment.
MESSES. BESLEY and MONTAGU WILLIAMS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. F. H. LEWIS the Defence.
HENRY JOSEPH BROWNING . I am a linendraper at 349, Mile End Road—the prisoner dealt with me for linendraper goods on the 1st February, 1873, and he owed me 9l. 3s. 8d.—I bought goods of him on 16th January to the amount of 6l. 6s. 8d.; on 18th January, 2l. 18s. 4d.; and on 17th February, 1l. 8s. 4d.; amounting altogether to 10l. 13s. 4d.—I received a statement, and came to a settlement with the prisoner by paying him the balance, 1l. 9s. 8d., about the 14th June—I gave him a receipt for his account, and he gave me this receipt—I went on dealing with Herbert & Co. after that—a traveller used to call, a person of the name of Montague, and I gave him an order from time to time, and he used to bring it perhaps the same evening or in a couple of days—I paid for the goods when they were brought to my place—it is not true that on the 10th January, 1874, I paid Herbert & Co. any such sum as 10l. 3s. 4d.—I have given up to the trustee my receipts for all the sums—I don't recollect such a sum as 15s. 8d.
Cross-examined. This is the first time I have been examined in any Court on this subject—I believe the set off was paid at our own shop—I am positive I did not go to the prosecutor's house and apply for the account—all the money I gave to the prisoner was 1l. 9s. 8d.—I knew he was in a very excellent position at Herbert & Co.'s—I knew he was not the proprietor—he told me he was in a position to sign cheques and Post-office orders—I don't know that he was to pay into his master's account the amount he owed to me; I don't know what he was to do—the account was sent to me, and Mr. Maylin called for the money, and he said "I shall be in a position to pay my account if you will give me the balance"—that is all I know of it—I wanted payment of course from some one—I had a previous. transaction with Mr. Maylin, which was very honourable, and I always" trusted him and would have trusted him—all I paid him was 1l. 9s. 8d.
Re-examined. These (produced) are my receipts for goods supplied since the time of the settlement in June, 1873; in fact since the time of the account being opened—I should think it was about 5 weeks ago when I was first spoken to by any one connected with the prosecution.
By the Court. All these receipts are signed by Montague—this is the only occasion in which I have settled with the prisoner.
I delivered goods there from time to time, and received moneys and gave receipts—all these receipts are in my handwriting—sometimes I paid the money I received to Mr. Clisby, and sometimes to Mr. Maylin—I paid it to the one who was there—I have paid Clisby when Maylin was absent, and sometimes I should inform Maylin of it.
STEPHEN DUMMERE . I have been carrying on business for some years under the style of Herbert & Co.—I have three shops in the City within five minutes' walk of each other and seven railway stalls—I first employed the prisoner as warehouseman at a salary of 3l. a week three or four years ago, and afterwards I gave him 5l. a week as manager at Ludgate Hill to receive and send out goods—I attended there every day—he had to superintend the keeping of the books with Mr. Clisby's help and two clerks—he had the management of the cash and no one else had a right to receive cash—there was a daily takings' book for putting down sales over the counter and that would show the daily receipts—I can't find that book now; it has gone—I saw it last a few days before the prisoner left, which was November 9th I saw it safe on the premises after Clisby was in custody—there was also a banker's counterfoil paying in slip book—I can't find that—I saw that a few days before the 9th November—I saw it on the Saturday as the prisoner left on the Monday, because we always paid into the bank on Saturday—I (saw the daily takings-book I think a day or two before the Saturday—this produced) is the rough cash-book—I find there an entry under the date of 10th January, 1874, to Browning of 10l. 3s. 4d.—that is Mr. Maylin's handwriting—the amounts entered into this book would be afterwards copied into the clear cash-book and would find their way to the ledger—the prisoner did not account to me on the 14th June, 1873, for 10l. 13s. 4d. or 1l. 9s. 8d.—there is no entry on or about that date to Mr. Browning of any sum whatever—I don't think I could have received it and forgotten it—on the 19th October I made an assignment of 20s. in the pound to my creditors, and from that time Mr. Good was on the premises.
Cross-examined. I prosecuted the prisoner at Guildhall and he was committed for trial for embezzling some post-office orders and was tried and acquitted—this charge has never been investigated before a Magistrate—I recollect that he applied for his trial to stand over last Sessions on account of this fresh charge—I believe he applied to be admitted to bail and my solicitor opposed it—Herbert was the name that I took when I first commenced business because at that time I was doing a large trade at the West End of London, and the reason I traded under that name was because I was leaving the wholesale trade to go into the retail trade, and I cleared my teas under the name of Herbert and Co., so as not to interfere with one till I felt I was safe in carrying on the other—I only had one shop for a considerable time—I afterwards had two; and during the last few weeks I had four—up to the time I made an assignment the prisoner had authority to endorse post office orders and cheques—he had not a right to sign my name in all matters of business, it was a matter of convenience to send those things to the bank, and permission was given him—he had no right to sign letters with the name of Herbert and Co.—I was there every day—the time varied—I had little to do beyond going there—as head quarters I was naturally there the greater part of business hours of the day, 10 o'clock in the morning till 5 o'clock in the afternoon—sometimes I went to my other shops—the railway stalls did not require going to day by day—they had their goods sent in to them—the prisoner had the feeding of the shops and railway stalls
from the central place—we had a number of agents in England for tea and coffee—I dare say there were as many as 300 or 400—he had to correspond with them and send out the orders and invoices—he had to see that the orders were properly executed—I saw the orders by day and anything that was required in the way of instruction or advice I gave it—the prisoner was with me three or four years—nothing like 30,000l. a year passed through his hands—it might have amounted to 20,000l. the last year, when he was at Ludgate Hill—it was nothing like that during 1870—the business increased—I have charged Glisby with embezzlement and he has pleaded guilty—it was on the 10th that I first missed the daily takings book, and Mr. Maylin left on the 9th—I had made use of it a few days before—I have not asked the prisoner to give account of this transaction—I used to see the returns day by day and initial them at the end of the week—that would be the daily takings book which has not been found—the counterfoils would contain an account of the money, what was in gold and what in cheques—I don't think the original slips exist.
Re-examined. I was salesman for many years in the house of Moffatt & Co.—I wished to go into the retail trade—I kept the other employment till I saw my way clear—the prisoner never complained of his duties in any way.
JOHN CHARLES GOOD . I carry on business in Fenchurch Street as a tea merchant—I accepted the office of trustee of the business of Mr. Dummere for the purposes of an assignment on the 19th October, and from, that time I attended at Ludgate Hill from day to day where Maylin was employed—I went there daily up to the 9th November—I did not see the banker's paying in slip book while I was there—I had a conversation with the prisoner on the 9th November—I found him destroying papers from files—I told him to leave off; he still continued—I insisted on his leaving off and told him that under the circumstances every scrap of paper would be useful—he said "You d----scoundrel, you have been trying to catch me with marked money"—I told him I did not allow servants to talk to me in that way—I gave him a cheque for 5l. and told him to put on his hat and walk out of the place—that was on Monday and I paid his salary up to the following Saturday—it is a fact that gold had been marked on the previous Saturday.
Cross-examined. He was tearing up the papers quite openly in his desk—the files were in the desk—it was between 6 and 7 o'clock—he said they were his own papers, and I pointed out to him they were not—he did not tell me they were of no further use—he had given notice to leave that morning.
Re-examined. I examined the papers and saw they belonged to the firm, and some of them are now in the possession of Mr. Dummere—these were the next on the file which would have come to his hand.
STEPHEN DUMMERE (recalled). The papers which I have produced, and" which were on the file, refer to various items, sales to customers of tea, some of empty packages, and one refers to coffee—the papers destroyed were similar to these.
FREDERICK BERTRAM SMART . lam public accountant—I find that the entry 10l. 3s. 4d. passed through the clear cash-book into the ledger as a payment of the date of January, 1874—the. original entry in the rough cash-book is in Maylin's handwriting, but is carried into the clear cash-book by Clisby—think the debits in the ledger account of Mr. Browning's are correct up to the
20th May, 1873, according to the receipts—there is no credit given up to that date for 10l. 13s. 4d. as of June—perusing the matter further up to the 10th June, 1874, on the debit side, many goods are omitted and they are charged in the ledger, but I believe that is not in Maylin's writing—the last entry on the credit side is in a different handwriting—I can't swear that it is Maylin's—I have examined the rough cash-book and the amounts that do appear in the ledger are correctly posted through from that book—there are items between May and January which ought to come in.
STEPHEN DUMMERE (recalled.) By the Court. Mr. Maylin had the management of the ledger—I occasionally went through it with him—I believe the last entry of the 10th June, 1874, of Browning's account, to be in his handwriting.
By MR. LEWIS. Clisby was the ledger clerk, acting under the instructions of Maylin, but that last entry is Maylin's.
FREDERICK BERTRAM SMART (continued). Where amounts are entered in the ledger they correspond with entries in the other books—with the receipts produced by Mr. Browning, I saw that after June, 1870, and before January, 1874, seventeen amounts are omitted—I find one credit 16s. 8d. entered as 15s. 8d., and an item of 11s. given credit for, but no corresponding debit made for it, making a deficiency of 10s.; and 10l. 3s. 4d. was a necessary sum to be entered to balance the account which is ruled off in the ledger.
HENRY CUMMING KNIGHT . I am a solicitor, at 90, Queen Street, City, and was employed by the prosecutor in this case—I conducted the case at Guildhall—I knew nothing of Browning's case till after the committal, and on the matter coming to my knowledge, I gave notice to Messrs, Wontner, the prisoner's solicitors, on 12th December last—no application was made to me by them to inspect the books—application for admission to bail was made to Sir Thomas Chambers, and it was refused by him after facts had been laid before him.
Cross-examined. The prisoner was summoned to Guildhall on the charge on which he has been acquitted—he surrendered to that summons, and was admitted to bail until he was committed for trial—he surrendered on each occasion—I gave particulars of this charge to Messrs. Wontner, on 12th December, and also the names of the witnesses, and subsequently I gave them an abstract, of the evidence.
Re-examined. He was on bail twice.
NOT GUILTY .
There were four other indictments against the prisoner for embezzlement upon which no evidence was offered.
NOT GUILTY .
WALTER ELIJAH ROWE . lam a porter in the employ of Messrs. Josiah Parker & Co., silk manufacturers, St. Paul's Chain, City—on 24th December, about 3 o'clock, I was coming up the warehouse stairs—when I got to the top, I saw the prisoner couching down with a box of velvets in his hands—I touched his shoulder, he immediately stood up and dropped the parcel—I took him towards the counting-house, and called the clerk—this is the parcel he had in his hands—it contains a piece of velvet of 40 yards, worth 15l.—it is the property of my employers—I had seen the prisoner a number of times before in the warehouse—he had come in and asked for employment, but we never had any to give—I suppose he has been in and
out for over two years—I had placed this parcel myself in the fixtures at the top of the stairs about 3 feet from the ground, and about 4 yards from where the prisoner was.
By the Prisoner. I did not call to the two gentlemen who were in the office first—I touched you on the shoulder, and you stood up and said "Let me go, let me go "I might have pointed to the case on the ground—I went for a policemen, and left you in the warehouse—you might have tried to escape—there are a great number of pieces of goods about the warehouse some on shelves and some on a counter in front of the counting-house—I can't say that some were on the ground—the inspector might have said "What do you charge this man with"—I have no recollection as to the exact words I used, but the effect of it was that you were charged with stealing the goods, whether I said attempt or not I can't say—I don't recollect the Inspector saying "You had better charge him with stealing it, and then at the Police Court you can do as you like with it."
GEORGE TAYLOR . I am in Messrs. Parker's employ—on 24th December, I saw the prisoner in the warehouse about 2.45—he rose up from behind a pile of velvets, he saw me, and walked about 3 yards towards me, and then stopped—he said "Do you know of anything!"—I said "No, nor are we likely to"—he then left.
By the Prisoner. I came down to the door with you—I did not Bay "If you go to the office they will let you know."
GEORGE WALTER WALTER (City Policeman 491). I was called to Messrs. Parker's premises on the afternoon of 24th December, by Rowe—I found the prisoner in the middle of the warehouse—they told me he had stolen this velvet, and he was given into custody—on the way to the station, he said when he went up the staircase he kicked this out of the rack—I said, It is impossible for you to kick it out of the rack—he said "I did not kick it out of the rack, it was lying on the top of the stairs, and I put it in the rack again"—I said "You told me just now you kicked it out of the rack"—he said "If I told you so, it was a mistake"—I found nothing on him.
The prisoner in his defence stated that he went to Messrs. Parkers to ask for employment, and on going to the office, he knocked the velvet down, and was going to replace it, when the porter came and charged him with attempting to steal it.
NOT GUILTY .
OLD COURT—Thursday, January 14th, 1875.
Before Mr. Justice Denman.
Second Count—With intent to do him some grievous bodily harm.
MESSRS. GRIFFITHS and W. J. ABRAM conducted the Prosecution; and MESSERS. M. WILLIAMS and A. METCALFE, the Defence.
CAROLINE ROWE . I am the wife of John Abraham Rowe of 128, Pimlico Road—we keep a lodging house there—I have a son named Joseph nine-teen years of age and another named John who is seventeen—Joseph lodged with us—the prisoner William Bagley lodged with us—I do not know how many lodgers we had in the house on 26th December—there might be twenty, thirty or forty—we have a room downstairs for ourselves and there is a kitchen upstairs, a very large room, for the lodgers—on the evening of 26th December about 6.30 my husband, my son Joseph and I were having supper
in our apartment downstairs—I heard the footsteps of five or six persons go up into the kitchen—my husband and Joseph went up to see what was the matter and I followed in about two minutes—there were about five strangers in the kitchen and William Bagley—my husband said to the strangers "Young men go out, you don't lodge here"—Patrick Bagley who was one of then said "We wants John Rowe we will murder him"—my husband said "Go out young man, you don't lodge here"—Patrick then took up a shovel from inside the fender, which was formerly used for digging, a kind of spade that we used to put coke on the fire—it had a short handle, about 10 or 12 inches of wood and the rest was iron—he felled my husband to the ground with it—Joseph said "Do not kill my poor father for he is an old man;" he is 65—with that Patrick knocked my son down with his fist—I did not see the shovel after that—then three or four of them started kicking him when they had got him down—both the prisoners took part in that—I said "Do not hit my poor son, you are killing him"—William Bagley then fetched me a severe blow in the face and knocked me down and kicked me in the back severely—I got up again and they were pushing and dragging my son towards the window—both the prisoners had hold of him—they kicked him severely and another man not in custody as well—they took him to the window and William Bagley said "Up with the window and throw him out, that will be the last of the b----"—I came out as well as I could into the passage and Patrick Bagley met me and said "If you take up a weapon I will do for you you b----"—that was. after they had thrown my son but—I escaped into a private room for about two minutes and when I found the way was clear I came down and found my son insensible on the ground—he was thrown out at the window before I came out—they threw him out; when William Bagley said "Up with the window" he was thrown out by the two prisoners and the man not in custody and another young man whom I do not know—there were five altogether but four helped to do it—I cannot say who opened the window, but I saw it opened and saw my son thrown out—there had not been any quarrel or dispute between my son John and the others to my knowledge—he was not at home at this time—three weeks before this there was something about a shirt—my son had let William Bagley have it and he did not pay for it and when he was asked for it he took it off and gave it to my son Joseph—but there were no words nor yet blows then—my son was attended by two doctors—he was insensible and bleeding from the mouth.
Cross-examined. I did not take up any weapon—I had not power to do so—we were all peaceable and quiet, and offered no violence whatever—I did not take up a broom; there was one there—I did not use it, or any of our party—there was no provocation that I know of from us—the height of the window is 13 feet 10 inches from the ground; it has been measured—a wall runs up about 10 feet outside the window, which is about 4 feet wide—there was nothing between the window and the ground to prevent my son falling—I have never known any of the lodgers get through the window by means of the wall—the window is 3 feet from the wall—I never knew any one to get in or out that way—there was only my son, my husband, and myself in the room of our party—it lasted about ten or twelve minutes altogether.
JOHN ABRAHAM ROWE . I am the husband of the last witness—between 6 and 7 o'clock on the evening of 26th December, I was with my wife and son Joseph having supper down stairs—I heard some persons go upstairs
into the kitchen—I went up immediately afterwards, hearing rather a row over head; my wife and son followed—I saw the prisoners there, and four or five young men with them, who did not lodge there—I begged of them to leave the house quietly—I asked them to be so kind as to leave and not kick up any row at all—the prisoners called out "We wants John Rowe, we will murder him"—my son Joseph went and shook hands with Patrick and asked him to be quiet, and to be so kind as to leave the room—Patrick went to the fire-place, took up a shovel, brought it across the room, and struck me on the head, and cut my head open—it knocked me down—Joseph said "Don't kill my father," and he was immediately knocked down by William Bagley, and when he was down they kept kicking him over the room, they kicked him to the fire-place—both the prisoners did so, and three or four more besides—after that I left the room to see if I could get a constable, and when I came back my son was lying on my bed bleeding very much from the mouth and nose—we had not done anything to excite the prisoners or had a word with one of them.
Cross-examined. There was no disturbance by our party while I was there—I civilly asked them to leave the room, that was all—I did not see a broom there—I do not know Thomas Browning, a gardener, that I am aware of (Browning was here called in)—I know that man, I did not see him there that night; he might have been there—it is a large room, and it turns round in one part—I did not take off my coat—my son did not strike either of the prisoners—I do not know a man named Aldis that I am aware of (Aldis was here called in)—I saw that man; he was in the kitchen that night—he did not take any part in the proceedings, he rather drawed the table aside; he was very tipsy—I am-not aware that complaints have been made against my sons for violence before this—my son John was not charged with stabbing a man, he was stabbed by a man—I never heard of his striking a woman and cutting her eye never heard, of either of them striking anybody—I did not see my wife with a broom that night—my son did not do anything when I was knocked down; he was knocked down directly afterwards.
Re-examined. It is a month or six weeks since my son John was stabbed—that was not in the house, it was in the street—I do not know who it was who stabbed him—I measured the distance from the oil of the window to the ground, it was about 14 feet, less 2 inches.
JOSEPH ROWS I am a son of the last witness, and am twenty years of age I think—I went upstairs on this night with my father, hearing a disturbance—there were six or seven altogether in the room and five or six strangers among them—they were all the worse for drink—my father said "You young men who don't lodge here I wish you would go out"—directly he said that Patrick Bagley went and picked up a shovel and struck him on the head—when I first went up they were calling out for John Rowe, the prisoners and two or three more of them—they said "We want John Rowe, we will do for him"—I put up my hand and said "Don't strike my father like that, you will kill him," and directly I said that I was hit by William Bagley in the mouth—I was then pulled down by a tallish man who I don't know and kicked by the prisoners and all the other five—they kicked me as far as the fireplace—my mother came to my assistance—she had no broom or weapon in her hand that I could see—William Bagley caught hold of her by the shoulder, pulled her down and kicked her—I was kicked to the window and thrown out—I was insensible then—the next thing I remembered
was that I was thrown out at the window on the flagstones on my hip bone—I tried to get up, but fell again—I cannot remember anything afterwards till my mouth was being sewn up by a doctor—I believe I was in bed then—the doctor was there, But I don't remember seeing him—I do not remember anything after that till I came to next morning—I did not hear my father or mother do anything to provoke this assault—I am pretty nearly well now, but I can feel my hip if I walk or stand.
Cross-examined. I did not strike either of the prisoners—this was on Boxing Day—I did not say a word to any of them, I had not time to open my lips—no violence was used by our party—I do not know Browning, I know Aldis; I believe he was there—he stood against the table as I went up—I did not try to get out of the window myself—I am quite sure I did not fall in trying to get out—it was the prisoners who caught hold of me I was then against the window—they kicked me all the way round from the door to the window, right round the room—I did not go to the hospital at all—they kicked me in the mouth and the head—they did not hurt my head much, but I was black and blue all down my hip—I did shake hands with Patrick Bagley for. friendship's sake, I thought if I seemed friendly it might make them quiet—I did not say anything, I only asked how he was, I did it to try and keep him quiet—on Christmas Eve, between 12 and 1 o'clock, as I went upstairs to bed I saw William Bagley on the landing beating a boy named William Palmer and kicking him in the eye, and I picked Palmer up from under him—he did not seem angry with me for that—the boy and he had had a row—I had had no quarrel with either of the prisoners; I do not know whether my brother John had—about a month or a fortnight before this he had lent William Bagley a flannel shirt, I asked him for it and he pulled it off and threw it on the floor—he seemed angry at being asked for it—I had no quarrel with him on Christmas Day, I don't remember seeing him on that day—my father had his hat on at the time he received the blow with the shovel and the hat was cut through; I saw it afterwards.
JOHN QUIN . I lodged in this house in December—on the night of the 26th I was in the kitchen—a lot of people came up, and the two prisoners with them—they asked Mrs. Grant, who attended to the place, for a lodging—she said that they had spare beds—then some more of them came in, and William Bagley came in with that lot, and then Mrs. Grant said to William Bagley "Is this a fad?"—I don't know what that means—about a minute or so after that Mr. and Mrs. Rowe and Joseph came up—there was not much noise in the room, only they made a noise on the stairs as they came up—I heard them say "We want John Rowe"—I cannot say who said that; they were all together—they said "We want John Howe and Joseph Rowe"—Mrs. Rowe asked them to go away—she said "You do not lodge here"—she said it very civilly—Patrick Bagley then picked up a shovel standing near the fire-place and struck Mr. Rowe on the head—it cut through his hat and made a wound in his head; it knocked him down—Joseph Howe came between the prisoners and his father, and said "Don't kill my father," and he shook hands to make peace—one of the men then struck Joseph and fell with him on the floor, and then they all commenced kicking him, six or seven of them—he was kicked out at the kitchen door and back again—he tried to rise and made a stumble, and they went on kicking him till he was near the window, and then one said "Let us throw him out, and have the last of him"—I don't know who said that—they
used a bad expression at the time—there were four of them, the prisoners being two of the four, and he was thrown out like a sack—he did not appear to be conscious at the time—he was caught up and thrown out between them—he could not resist—that was the last I saw—I then went downstairs, and saw him lying on the stones below the window, and his mother came up directly after—I saw a soldier catch hold of William Bagley—all the men went down stairs directly they had thrown him out of the window—there is a court-way leading from the lodging house into the street—I cannot say what way they went, they walked away quickly—I did not see Mr. or Mrs. Howe or Joseph do anything to promote this attack.
Cross-examined. There were six or seven men by the window at the time he was thrown out—I was standing by the fire-place—I saw him actually thrown out by the four—I could not see whether he went-out head first or sideways, but I could see him go out—his head went first out at the window and his feet last—I am not a lodger there now—the door is always open for the lodgers to come in—I have never heard of them coming in by the window—I should not like to do so; it would not be possible; there is no place to put your feet.
WILLIAM BEECH . I am a private in the 2nd batallion of Grenadier Guards—on the night of 26th December, between 6 and 7 o'clock, I was near this lodging house—I was standing about two or three feet up the court from the main road; I saw a window heaved up by three or four person—it was shut when I first saw it—it was dusk—there was a light in the room, and I saw the persons by the light—I saw the three or four persons heave the window up, and about a minute afterwards I saw them take hold of this young fellow and chuck him out of the window—they took hold of him by the arms and legs and chucked him out all-fours on the level—his face was upwards when he fell—he did not get out himself—I am sure of that—he fell right on his hip—I did not go up to him, I stood where I was, and two or three minutes after three or four came down stairs—I recognised William Bagley as one of the men I had seen at the window, who had hold of the young man and helped to chuck him out, and I gave him in charge to a constable before he got into the street—I then went and helped the mother to take the young fellow in—he was lying on his back insensible, and all over blood—I don't know what became of the others—they got by me into the street—they all came down helter-skelter, what we call at the double, and got by me while I was giving this one into custody.
Cross-examined. All the men came out at the door—I don't know any of the others.
Cross-examined. Mr. Bagley's eye was not black or his lip cut.
WILLIAM TAYLOR (Detective). From information I arrested Patrick Bagley at his lodging, 2, Eaton Court, Pimlico—I told him he was charged with being concerned with his brother in throwing a man out of a window at 128 1/2, Pimlico Road, Chelsea, on Boxing night—he replied "We did not throw him out of the window, he got out himself"—on the way to the station he said "It was a general fight between them."
conscious, his conservation was perfectly cherent in every respect—I found several bruises in various regions of the body, particularly the region of the hip—they were not severe bruises—the bruise on the hip was the most severe—there was very little discolouration—he has complained since of considerable pain—he is a very wiry sort of man, not the sort of man that would be easily bruised much—there were superficial bruises on the back of the head, and under the external lip I found a horizontal wound about an inch long in length, but internally about 1 1/2-inch in length, the two wounds being separated by a very thin partition, the lip was almost cut through—he was not in any danger—he could not leave his bed, and I gave him directions not to leave it—I stitched up the wound—the bruises about the head and body were such as I should expect to find if he had been kicked—there were four or five bruises on the head, and six or seven on the body—the wound on the lip was most likely caused by a blow with the fist—I attended him for nearly a fortnight—I found that necessary—I thought, considering the height of the window, that the injuries he sustained were very slight indeed—I thought some of the bones would have been broken, it was am acadamised road with rough stones—he did not fall on his head, at any rate.
By the Jury. He was quite conscious when I saw him, and when my assistant flaw him before me—it was between eight and nine when I saw him.
Witnesses for the Defence.
THOMAS BROWNING . I am a gardener, and live at 128, Pimlico Road,. Chelsea—on boxing night I was in the kitchen—I saw William Bagley there—I can't speak to Patrick—I saw several persons come in, and there was a regular public-house or lodging house brawl—I don't know how it commenced—Joseph Rowe said to me "For God Almighty's sake protect me"—no one was hurting him that I could see—he said "They intend murdering me, and I intend jumping out of the window"—I said "For God Almighty's sake don't do that"—and he went and got out of the window himself—I was close to him—he put one leg over first, and then the other, and got out—he opened the window himself, and I supposed he was trying to get on to the wall that is close underneath, whether he got a slip or no I can't say, he let himself down somehow or other—the Bagley's were nowhere anigh him at the time—there was no one near him but me, and I am an old man and meant to get out of it as quickly as I could—he was trying to escape from the row, to escape from these people—I believe he was excited and did not know what he was doing, but he certainly got out of the window of his own accord—he went out altogether.
Cross-examined. I work for different gentlemen in the neighbourhood of London—the last person I worked for was Mr. Gay, of 9, Beaufort Street, Chelsea, the last day of December—I have been drinking to-day.
WILLIAM ALDIS I did live at Rowe's lodging house at the time in question—I do not now—on boxing night I was in the kitchen—the prisoners and some two or three others came up into the room, and Wm. Bagley gave Mrs. Grant the present landlady, some money to go and fetch some beer for his brother and friends—soon after Joseph Rowe and his father came up, and the father pulled his jacket off and said he would fight the best man in the room, that was without any provocation of any sort—there was not a word said before—I don't know what he was going to fight them for—soon after a row occurred in the kitchen among them, and when they were fighting some of them were on the floor and some of them were standing up—I can't say who were on
the floor—Mr. Rowe was standing up and kicking a man violently—I can't say who he was kicking, because they lay five or six thick—I was not taking any part in the row, I was standing in the room against a table taking no notice of any one—I had not had more to drink than I have to-day, I might have had a pint or two, I was sober—Caroline Rowe came in at the same time, ran to to the fire grate and fetched up the frying-pan and very much used that about the party that was in the room—I saw Joseph Rowe go out of the window—they all went downstairs first, Joseph Rowe and all—I remained in the room and then Joseph Rowe came running upstairs and said "Oh, dear! what shall I do V and he made no more to do but went and pushed up the window with his hand, put his right leg out of the window and dropped down—there was no one in the room at that time, none of the party that he had been quarrelling with—I believe there was some old gentleman not so far off him, named Brown or something of that name, he was nighest to him—no one helped him out of the window, there was no one nigh him—I did not see him fall—he went out with his head first and his right leg.
Cross-examined. I am now lodging at the next lodging house, of the name of Adams—I came from there this morning—I have had a pint of beer today—I dare say I may have had half a pint more.
JOSEPH ABRAHAM ROWE (re-examined). It is not true that I said I would fight the best man in the room, or anything of the sort—I never was a fighting man—I was not in the room when my son was thrown out of the window—I was gone for the constable.
CAROLINE ROWE (re-examined). I was in the room when my son was thrown out of window—Aldis was not there at all—he had been there in the morning but not in the afternoon—it it is not true that before my son was thrown out they all went downstairs—they never left the kitchen—they lifted him and threw him out—I saw that with my own eyes, and then they left—my husband never said he would fight anyone.
GUILTY of wounding with intent to murder. Both prisoners had been more than once in custody for assaults— Twenty Years' Penal Servitude.
THE COURT ordered a reward of 40s. to the soldier William Beech.
NEW COURT.—Thursday, January 14th, 1875.
Before Mr. Recorder.
139. CHARLTON HOWARD WHITTALL (27), PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully obtaining by means of false pretences a sealskin jacket and a muff from Henry Shotton with intent to defraud. The prosecutor did not press for any punishment, and it was stated that the prisoner would be sent out of the country— To enter into his recognizances in the sum of 200l. and one surety in 200l. to appear and receive judgment when called upon. And
BLYTHE— Three Months' Imprisonment.
PRENTICE— One Months' Imprisonment.
MR. ST. AUBYN conducted the Prosecution.
GUILTY — Twelve, Months' Imprisonment.
MR. W. J. ABRAM conducted the Prosecution; and MR. RIBTON the Defence. WILLIAM KEELEY. I am a warder in the House of Detection—I produce the commitment of Henry Williams for trial at the Middlesex Sessions from the Clerkenwell Police Court, on the 18th December.
SAMUEL FOULSHAM . I am a clerk in the office of the Clerk of the Peace for Middlesex—I produce the recognizance of Agnes Wiggins, who was bound over to appear at the Sessions on 18th December—I produce the indictment against Henry Williams, which has a record of the conviction upon it "To be kept in penal servitude eight years."
FRANK CUBSONS (Policeman G 100). On the 11th December a man named Henry Williams was charged at the Clerkenwell Police Court with felony, and on that occasion Agnes Wiggins was a witness for the prosecution—Henry Williams was remanded until the 18th December—Agnes Wiggins did not come to the Police Court on that day and I went by the direction of the Magistrate to her house, 18, Liverpool Road; a mob followed me from the Police Court to the house—I can't say how many, but there were forty or fifty round the house—I saw the prisoner there amongst them—I asked to see Mrs. Wiggins and she came part of the way down the stairs and I told her I was come after her—she refused to go as long as the mob was outside, without protection—her husband was there—I went and fetched Sergeant N 39 and we took her to the Police Court—when we brought her out of the house the prisoner was outside the door and followed to the Police Court—I daresay as many as twenty followed—I did not hear anything said on the way—at the Court I heard the prisoner say to Wiggins "If you are going to swear false against my brother, if you do I will do for you if it is outside of the gaol gates"—that was said inside the Court—I put the prisoner out—I afterwards went back again with Agnes Wiggins to her house—I took her back alone—only one or two followed-a little way and then turned back—the prisoner did not follow—I fetched Wiggins to the Sessions House on Monday, 21st December—the indictment was tried on the 30th—on the 21st I was outside the Grand Jury room waiting to go before the Grand Jury, and I heard the prisoner repeat the same words to Wiggins, that she would do for her if she went and swore false against her brother, and she should not live to enjoy her Christmas dinner—I called Wiggins away from her.
Cross-examined. As a rule there are a good many people waiting outside the Police Court—ten or eleven followed when I went to Mrs. Wiggins'; the prisoner and some friends of her's, I suppose, and the mob increased as they went on, and when I got the second constable the same crowd went back again to the Court—it was after Williams was Committed for trial and after Wiggins had given her evidence that the prisoner said "If you are going to swear false against my brother I will do for you"—that was said in the passage of the Police Court after she had given her evidence and signed her paper—I went back with Wiggins to her house—it is a beer-shop—there is not generally a crowd round there that I am aware of—the Sessions were on the 21st—we did not go before the Grand Jury that day—we were waiting to go, and she used the words again—Wiggins went before the Grand Jury when she was called, and she appeared at the trial.
Re-examined. I heard her claim the protection of the Deputy-Assistant
Judge in consequence of the prisoner's threat, and he told me to see Mrs. Wiggins home.
LABAN PHIPPS . I am a carman, and live at Milton Grove, Upper Holloway—on Friday, 18th December, between 1 and 2 o'clock in "the day, I was in the American Stores, 18, Liverpool Road, where Mrs. Wiggins lived—I remember a policeman and another man coming and asking for her—her husband came downstairs, and she came after him—the door looking into the street was ajar, and the prisoner was pushing against it trying to get in—there was one with her appeared to be a companion, but there were a quantity of people round the door—when Mrs. Wiggins came downstairs, I heard the prisoner say "That is the b----bitch, and if I could get at her I would limb her b----eye out, if she swears against my brother"—I stood at the door, at the request of the landlord to prevent the prisoner from coming in, about twenty minutes or half an hour—another constable was fetched—the prisoner still continued to make use of very abusive language, but I can't recollect it now.
Cross-examined. When I heard the words used, I was standing against the door, just inside—the door was on the jar—the mob was outside—I should think there were forty or fifty people about the door—I could see the prisoner through the door, she was standing with her head partly in the door, and would have got in if I had not kept her back—the landlady was in the bar—I don't know whether she could hear what the-prisoner said.
THOMAS WIGGINS . I am straw hat blocker, and live at 18, Liverpool Road—I, was at home on the 18th December, between 1 o'clock and 1.30; it was my dinner hour—I saw the prisoner there—she was hitting one hand in the other when I came down to see my wife—I did not hear her say anything—there were a quantity of people round the house—100 G was downstairs in the bar, when I came down—in consequence of what I saw, I refused to allow my wife to go the Police Court until assistance was fetched—I followed down to the Police Court behind the prisoner—I did not hear her say anything to my wife. "
GEORGE ROLPH (Police Sergeant 39 N). I was called to 18, Liverpool Road on 18th December, and saw the prisoner standing against the side door with her left hand close against it, and between forty and fifty people round—she was trying to get in at the door—I afterwards went to the Police Court with Mrs. Wiggins, and we were followed by a crowd of people, the prisoner being most prominent.
AGNES WIGGINS . I am the wife of Thomas Wiggins, and live at 18, Liverpool Road—on the 11th December I was a witness against a man named Henry Williams at the Clerkenwell Police Court—he was remanded until the 18th, and I was required to be in attendance—I did not go on, the 18th—nothing was said to me on the 11th—I remember the policeman coming on the 18th—I refused to go with him, on account of the prisoner and several more threatening to ill-use me when I went outside—I would not go until assistance came—there was a mob outside—the prisoner and another woman were nearest the door when I came on the stairs, and I went back—the prisoner had her knees against the door and her hand on the handle, and she was using bad language—I did not come down till I was taken out of the house—Phipps prevented them from coming in—I was very much afraid—I afterwards went to the Police Court with two constables—after I had been inside, "the prisoner followed me up, the passage; the policeman had gone to sign the papers for the expenses—she
doubled her fist in my face, and said "You b----, you have sworn against my brother, and if he gets sent away I will do for you before Christmas, that you won't live to enjoy your Christmas dinner; if it is outside a gaol gate, I will do for you"—she repeated that several times—I was very much frightened—a constable was sent home with me—I recollect being at the Sessions House; the policeman Cursons took me there—I would not have gone or come home by myself; I dared not—as I was waiting to go before the Grand Jury the prisoner said that I had sworn against her brother, and she would do for me before Christmas, that I should not live to enjoy my Christmas dinner, and she would do what she said if it was outside a gaol gates—I was very much frightened—I gave evidence, and complained to the Assistant-Judge, and he directed the prisoner to be taken to be taken into custody and taken to the Clerkenwell Police Court—I have not been like the same woman since it occurred.
Cross-examined. I was waiting to go before the Grand Jury when she made use of those words—I don't know whether she was excited or not—the charge against the man was stealing a watch—I did not see him take the watch—I happened to be there before the constable came and when he was taken.
Re-examined. I saw the prosecutor seize the man by the arm and say "You are the man who has got my watch, I swear your hand was in my pocket," and his chain hung down.
By THE COURT. The prisoner was very near to me when she doubled her fist in my face—she had a jug in her hand, going to take the man something—she did not strike me, she was near enough to have done so.
THE COURT considered there was no evidence on the Conspiracy Counts.
GUILTY the other Counts—Twelve Months' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. F. H. LEWIS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS defended Russell.
DONALD MACAULAY . I am third officer on board the British steamship Greece belonging to to the National Steamship Company—we came into dock on the 5th January—the two prisoners were able seamen on board the vessel, and on the 25th December she was coming from New York to London on the High Seas—we were about half way—I went down into the hold between 9 and 10 o'clock and found White there, coming from where there was a case of silk ribbons stowed—he tried to hide himself—I said it was no use trying to hide as I had seen him—he put his hands to his face and made a rush at me—I dropped the light and took hold of him—I asked him why he was there—he said there was no occasion for him to say why he was there, that I ought to know what he was doing there as he had no business to be there—I arrested him—the following day he made an accusation against somebody else—while I held White down
I heard a footstep—Roberts the quartermaster came down into the hold with me, and I had sent him up with a light—I heard a footstep behind me, and a match strike—I said "Is that you, Roberts? and Russell's voice answered "No"—I said "Have you any matches?" and he said "Yes; but I can't get them to strike"—Roberts came down with a light and I left go of White and went in search of Russell—I found him stowed in amongst the cargo behind the bulk head—I asked him how he came to be down there—he said that he had heard Roberts when he went up for the lights saying that I was down there in difficulty, and he came with a box of matches to strike a light for me—both the men ought to have been in bed an hour and a half before—I did not arrest Russell.
Cross-examined. Russell was near the ventilator at the time—it is not an opening into the hold—I can't tell you whether White slept immediately above Russell's berth.
RICHARD ROBERTS . I am quartermaster on board the Greece—I went down into the hold with the last witness—I saw White there coming off the cargo from the port to the starboard side—there was a struggle and I went to get a light—I did not see anything of Russell at that time—I saw him on my return.
ALFRED HEELRY . I am fourth officer on board the Greece—I went down into the hold between 12 and 1 o'clock on the morning of 26th December, and found that a large case containing silk ribbons had been broken open—the head of the case was completely off—I found this bag (produced) next to it containing silk ribbons corresponding with those in the case less the rollers—I found a knife there, and a file about six hours afterwards—the file had been used for the purpose of opening the case—on the 2nd of this month Russell came to me and said that he believed I had a knife of his—I said I had had a knife which I had heard belonged to him, but I had given it up to the chief officer—he described the knife as a white handled one with a string to it.
Cross-examined. He said he had lost it, and he gave me the description.
JOHN GALEY . I am carpenter on board the Greece—on 26th December I saw a case which contained silk ribbon, and which had been broken open—I had repaired that case on the 24th, and made it sound—there were marks on it corresponding with this file.
BARTLEY CANADY . I am cook of the forecastle on board the Greece—this knife is mine—I lent it to Russell the second day after we left London I asked him about it on the 26th December—I believe that he said he had lost it.
Cross-examined. I subsequently obtained it from the chief officer—Ruasell sleeps on the port side at the top berth—White sleeps on the star-board side.
ROBERT RICHARD HUBBARD . I am chief officer of the Greece—Charles Thomas is the master—I produce the official log, which is written up by the purser under the superintendence of the captain—I was present when the entry of the 27th December was read over to the prisoner—it was read to White first, and afterwards to Russell—there were not both present at the same time. (This contained a statement by White that another person was along with him in the hold, and that they were working together in concert, and also mentioned one or two persons who had been guilty of dishonesty). Russell said he was innocent.
in the log was read over to White—he said it was quite true, and he should speak the truth—when Russell was charged, he said he was innocent.
THE COURT considered there was no case against RUSSELL— NOT GUILTY .
White's Defence. I was down there, there were a lot of things such as apples and different kinds of eatables, but as to silk, I know nothing about it—I have been going to sea since 1862, and always got an honest living.
GUILTY .— Nine Months' Imprisonment.
MR. F. H. LEWIS conducted the Prosecution; and MR. MONTAGU WILLIAMS the Defence.
ROBERT RICHARD HUBRARD . I am chief officer of the British steamship Greece, Charles Thomas, master—we had a great number of passengers bound for New York, and several lady passengers—when the vessel got to New York there were a great many complaints of loss of luggage, and a claim of about 850 dols. made—amongst other complaints, a lady complained of the loss of a small gold watch—the prisoner was an able seaman—on the homeward voyage, on the 26th December, I was present in the forecastle when the second and third officers examined it—the prisoner and two men of the name of Dixon and George Cam, lived in the forecastle—they were also charged before the Magistrate and discharged—on searching the forecastle, we found two bundles of sarsaparilla, four bird's wings, three sharpening stones, three pairs of new kid gloves, two pieces of silk, seven pairs of new socks, one spectacle-case one work-case, a pincushion, a dress, three skirts, a polonaise, and a jacket—they were stowed underneath the lining of the ship—an entry was made in the official log the next day, and it was read over to Ireland, and he said he did not know anything at all about it.
JOSEPH WHITE (the prisoner.) I was able seaman on board the Greece—I had a fall, and I was lying in my bunk on the third or fourth day before arriving at New York, and Ireland came to me with a watch, I distinctly heard it ticking, I did not see the watch, at the time—the next I saw of the watch, was in New York—he gave it to a man named George Carn—I saw the watch given—it was a very small gold watch, a ladies' watch with an open face—I don't know anything about the other things—I know they were stolen—Ireland told me he had been over all the cases in the hold with Cam and Dixon—he said if anybody said anything about him he had that in his bunk that would do for them.
RICHARD ROBERTS . I am quartermaster of the Greece—on 26th December, I was in my room on deck—Ireland brought me a small gold watch and asked me to take care of it until the vessel arrived—I said I would not take care of it under any consideration.
Cross-examined. Ireland was not given into custody till we arrived in the river here—he went on doing his duty on board the vessel.
Cross-examined. The bunks are open.
Re-examined. His things were all packed up at that time.
THE COURT considered there was no case, as there was no proof of the loss of the watch
— NOT GUILTY
Before Mr. Justice Denman.
MR. REBTON conducted the Prosecution; and MR. STRAIGHT the Defence.
FRANCES LORD. I am the wife of Charles Lord and live at 16, Pages Walk, Bermondsey—the prisoner kept the house, he was foreman at a dyer's—he occupied the ground-floor and I live in the front room first-floor, his children occupied the back room; there were six children with the baby, that was a female child—his wife had been confined about ten or eleven days before this occurrence—on Friday evening, 11th December, about 7 o'clock, my attention was attracted by some screams of murder from his room—I ran downstairs and saw Mrs. Hayes with the baby in her arms by the fire-side—the prisoner was in the act of getting out of the bed, he was not dressed—I said "Mrs. Hayes what is the matter)"—she said "He has murdered my baby"—I said "Don't say that, give me the baby," and I took it out of her arms and gave it to the prisoner's little girl, who took it up into my room—I then went in again and took Mrs. Hayes upstairs with my two sons—I passed in again and the prisoner was in the act of palling the quilt over his legs—two or three gentlemen then went in—I don't know who they were—the prisoner said "All of you has been the cause of this"—he did not say why—we tried to humour him—there had not been any quarrel—he had been ill and in bed for several days, pretty nearly ever since the baby was born—on the Tuesday before this Friday I went in to ask how he was—his wife said to him "Jem, Mrs. Lord wants to know how you are"—he put his hand out to shake hands with me and said "As well as can be expected, Mrs. Lord"—his hand was in a burning heat and he turned round to the wainscot and began to talk and said there was a policeman by his side—he said it very quietly, as if he really believed it—I said "Don't say that, Mr. Hayes, it is only your wife and family"—he said "It is very well for you to talk like that, I know," and then he began to mutter something, I don't know what, and Mrs. Hayes said "He has been talking worse than that all day"—he said nothing to that—I then came out—when I took the baby and gave it to the little girl it was dozing like, it had no sense or motion; I did not see any blood, it was bruised a little across the forehead.
Cross-examined. I have known the prisoner several years, we have lived there four years; he has always been a kind-hearted, hard-working man, a good father and a good husband, he always lived on affectionate terms with his wife and children, he belonged to a sick club and was attended, by the club doctor; he was suffering from bronchitis and pleurisy—he complained of the medicine that was given him—he said the last draught was murdering him, he said that on this very Friday afternoon—when I went into the room I noticed that he seemed to stare very much at me—they tried to humour him, to get him back to his bed—his wife did not sleep with him at first during his ill-uses, but afterwards she brought him downstairs, as he was very bad and she could not attend to him.
JANE PETERS . I am the wife of Joseph Peters, of 17, Pages Walk, which is the adjoining house to 15—I heard cries of murder from the prisoner's children and ran into the prisoner's room, I got, in before Mrs. Lord—the prisoner stood in his shirt near the fire-place, close to the bedside—he
had his right hand stretched out towards his wife trying to get at her—I ran in between them and laid hold of him—the baby was lying on the ground at the foot of the bed—he said "I will kill her as well, she detains me, four men is ready to execute me"—there were no men there at that time; he was under that impression for days that four men were going to execute him; he had said it before—I had seen him twice on Wednesday, twice on Thursday, and twice on Friday, and he said so then and he also said "If I can get out of the back-room window. I know the back road to Scotland, there I shall get clear off"—I took the blanket to put round his nakedness and four men came in and Laid hold of him and put him in bed and the police were sent for.
Cross-examined. I have known him ten years, he has been a kind-hearted, good-tempered man, a good husband and father in every way.
By THE COURT. He said "I mean to do for my wife, and Bobby too"—that was his little favourite boy.
MARIA ELLIS . I was in the kitchen adjoining Mrs. Hayes' parlour on this night—I heard Mrs. Hayes scream murder—I ran up the passage and saw Mrs. Hayes picking the baby from the floor and asking for me—I went and sent Mrs. Peters in and then went across to the Crown and fetched some men—I then went back and helped Mrs. Hayes upstairs into Mrs. Lord's room, the baby was given to Mrs. Peters, who took it into her house and bathed it—it had a blow on the right side of the head, and the right cheek, and a graze on the right hip.
By THE COURT. He has always been extremely kind to his children—I have been in their room a good deal, and had dinner and breakfast with them—I never saw any violence—he was very fond of the little boy Bobby—I don't know that he noticed one child more than another, he was kind to them all—the little boy is five years old.
THOMAS HURSON (Policeman M 108). I was on duty in Page's Walk on this night—my attention was attracted by a crowd outside 17—I went in and saw the child, its forehead was black and blue, and blood was coming from the right side of the mouth—I then went into No. 15, and saw the prisoner sitting up in bed in the back parlour—he had nothing on but his shirt—I asked him what was the matter with him, he replied "Oh, there is nothing the matter with me, I have killed my young one"—he was very excited, and spoke very quickly, he added "and I would have killed her too if I had got hold of her"—I asked who he meant by "her," he said his wife—I told him he would have to come out of bed, and dress himself, as he would have to come with me—he wanted his clothes, I believe they had hid his clothes away—they were produced, and I assisted him in getting them on—as he was dressing he said he would go with me anywhere as he wanted protection from those people that were assembled round him, they were going to murder him—I took him in a cab to the station he talked a good deal of random talk—he said he had to kill this child to save his own life, and he meant to kill Bobby too as he was as bad as the rest of them—he wanted to show me some medicine that was in a bottle, that he had got, drugs, and he said they wanted to poison him—he said the doctor had drugged him and wanted to poison him.
JAMES CHARLES WORTH (Police Inspector). The prisoner was brought to the station and charged with felloniously wounding an infant—when I read the charge over to him ho said "Yes, I dashed its brains out against the bedstead, and should have served the other the same, and my wife too, if I
could have got at them"—he said the doctor who had been attending him wanted to poison him, that his wife had taken away his clothes, and that. at night he could not sleep for he felt things crawling over him.
RUPERT CECIL CHICKEN . I was house-surgeon at Guy's Hospital—between 10 and 11 o'clock on the Friday night, my attention was called to a woman with a baby in the surgery—the child was alive—I examined the head, the skin was unbroken, but the bones of the head were broke, and there was evidence of the severe nature of the injury by blood being be been the bones and the skin—they were just such injuries as might be produced by dashing the child against the bed-post, it must have been done with pretty considerable violence, the child died in a few hours—there was no other cause of death except the injuries—in some forms of" insanity it is a very common delusion to imagine things crawling over the body, a patient suffering from delirium tremens would bo very liable to that; it is not usual in the generality of cases.
WILLIAM SQUIRE . I am a M.R.C.S. and a licenciate of the Apothecaries' Company—I was doing the duty of Dr. Green, the doctor of the club to which the prisoner belonged—I attended him on the Monday as this took place on the Friday—he was suffering from acute bronchitis when I first saw him—I saw him every day except Tuesday, he was in bed up to the Friday—I prescribed the ordinary medicine, on the Wednesday he had other symptoms and I altered the medicine—on Wednesday he bad symptoms as if he had been drinking hard and left it off suddenly, and so got symptoms of delirium, tremens setting in—he complained of things crawling about him, which is a very strong symptom of delirium tremens and he had all the other symptoms of it—there was no fever about him—his hand was moist and quite clammy—when I first attended him I had not the slightest idea it arose from drinking, I did not find it out till the Wednesday.
FRANCES LORD (re examined.) The prisoner was not in the habit of being occasionally intoxicated—I never saw any symptoms of it—at Christmas time he might with some of his mates, but nothing to speak of—he did not drink hard for several days, I should have known if he had—I never knew him drunk.
NOT GUILTY on the ground of insanity. Ordered to be detained until Her Majesties pleasure be known.
In this case, after hearing the evidence of Mr. George William Nicholls, M.R.C.S., Dr. William Peach Johnston, Mr. John Rowland Gibson, surgeon of Newgate, and Dr. W. C. Parraquer, the Jury found the prisoner to be of unsound mind and unable to plead to the charge— Ordered to be detained until Her Majesty's pleasure be known.
MESSRS. POLAND and GILL conducted the Prosecution.
ELLEN BALDWIN . I am assistant to Mr. William Baldwin, draper, 87, Newington Butts—on the 19th December, about 11 a.m., Knevitt came into the shop and asked for two penny stay laces—she gave me a florin in payment, which I examined and found bad—I broke it in the tester, called Mr. Bald-win and gave it to him.
WILLIAM JAMES BALDWIN . I saw the last witness serve Knevitt on the 19th December—she afterwards gave me a florin which I examined and found bad—I broke it—I said to Knevitt "Have you any more money, I firmly believe you knew this was bad and I have two minds to lock you up"—she said she had it given to her the night previous—I allowed her to go and kept the florin—about two or three minutes after she had left a constable came in and I went out with him and found Knevitt and she was taken into custody and I gave the pieces of the florin to the constable.
WILLIAM TIPPETT . I am a house decorator and live at 12, Canterbury Place—on the 19th December I was at Mrs. Bounder's shop, 50, St. Georges Road, Southwark, doing some repairs—about 9.45 a.m. I was coming through the shop and saw Knevitt there—I heard her ask for two or three little articles which were weighed out and I heard Mrs. Bounder say "I never saw a worse one in my life," and she handed me a florin which I took in my hand—it was a bad one—I said it did not want looking at, you could see what it was—Knevitt said she got it at a greengrocer's in the London Road, and she went out of the shop—Mrs. Bounder gave her back the florin and said "The sooner you get it changed the better"—I followed her into Marshall Street, two turnings from the shop, and there she joined the two male prisoners; they went into the London Road and crossed over to Newington Butts—I saw a constable and spoke to him—we following the prisoners as far as Kennington Lane and then they turned back as far as Draper Street, when the two men stopped and Knevitt went into Baldwin's shop—I saw her come out and the constable took her into custody—I followed the two men, they went round near Newington Church and turned up a gateway—one of them came down the gateway and presently he came back and joined the other, and from there they went to the Elephant and Castle—I could not say which it was went down the gateway—they were afterwards taken into custody—I afterwards pointed out the gateway to the constable and I saw him find a paper containing four bad florins.
Brown. I never went up no turning at all.
Shaw. I never went out of the main road.
ELIZABETH MART BOUNDER I keep a shop at 50, St. Georges Road—Knevitt came in about 10 o'clock on the morning of 19th December—she asked three times for something that I could not understand, and I was obliged to ask her to speak out distinctly, for I did not know what she said, and then she asked for a loaf of bread—I said "We don't keep bread, you can get it next door," and then she said I will have 2 ozs. of butter"—she gave me a bad florin; I tried it—she said she took it at a greengrocer's in the London Road the night before, and I said "The sooner you take it back the better"—I handed it to Mr. Tippett and then gave it her back and she went out.
JAMES MCAULIFFE (Policeman L R 18.) On the morning of 19th December I was on duty in the London Road—Tippett spoke to me and pointed out the three prisoners who were coming through Marshall Street together—I watched them; they went through Newington Butts as far as Kennington Park Road, when they came back and spoke together for a few
minutes opposite St. Mary's Church and then the female prisoner went into Mr. Baldwin's ahop—the two men walked some yards down Draper Street—I waited outside Mr. Baldwin's till the woman came out and then I went in and from what I was told I took her into custody and charged her with uttering a counterfeit florin—she said "It was given to me last night by a gentleman"—I took her to the station—I afterwards saw the two boys by the station and took them into custody for being concerned with the woman—they said they knew nothing about it—Tippett showed me a gateway in Parsonage walk; I looked about there and noticed the earth had been freshly turned up, and about an inch and a half underground I found a packet containing four counterfeit florins—I produce them and also the broken florin which I received from Mr. Baldwin.
Brown's Defence. I was walking down Newington Butts, and saw the young woman being locked up and stood there till Mr. Baldwin came out and the policeman came out and took me and charged me with this.
Shaw in his defence stated that he teas with Brown and saw Knevitt taken and that neither of them went up any gateway.
SHAW PLEADED GUILTY to having been before convicted in November, 1873— Two Years' Imprisonment. KNEVITT and BROWN— Two Years' Imprisonment.
Before Mr. Recorder.
MR. STBAIOHT conducted the Prosecution; and MR. BESLEY the Defence.
ARTHUR HOLLOWAY . I am an auctioneer at 10, Trinity Street, Borough—in October last I was acquainted with a personamed Cogswell, and he introduced the prisoner to me about the 1st or 2nd of that month—at first Cogswell came and arranged for me to advance the prisoner some money, and I afterwards saw the prisoner—he represented to me that Captain Bayard was about to foreclose on His goods, and that there was a balance of 38l. owing to Captain Bayard—he said he was behind and Captain Bayard had threatened to send a man in possession, and that Captain Bayard held a bill of sale as security—I said I would agree to lend him the money if Captain Bayard was going to sell; I would lend him the money if I had a proper security—he said he would agree to any security in reason—I said "You are a stranger to me, Mr. O'Neill; I don't know what your position is, but I will advance the money, but I must have your authority to sell by auction as an auctioneer"—he agreed to do it and signed this document (produced)—that is the authority to sell, and under that authority I put a person into possession of the premises in Tooley-Street—I asked him at the time he signed that if the goods were encumbered, and he said "Certainly not, not a shilling, barring Captain Bayard's claim"—I went to Captain Bayard and paid him out—that was on the 6th October, the same day the authority was signed—I paid him 33l. in gold and a cheque for 5l.—I took a receipt but I have mislaid it—I got the bill of sale from Captain Bayard, but the satisfaction was registered on it, and I had to give it up to the solicitor—on the 7th or 8th October I advanced a further sum of 5l. to Mr. O'Neill—he came with Mr. Cogswell to my office, and I gave the money to O'Neill in his presence—on the 9th October I received a bill of sale in the place of
the authority to sell—the defendant came to me with reference to it, and he said that a Dutchman was about taking him in partnership, and he would be able to pay the money in about fourteen days, but the Dutchman had a great objection to a registered bill of sale, and if I would allow him to enter satisfaction that he could get the money and pay me, and I agreed to do so—the bill of sale was given after that—this is it. (This was dated 9th October, and was a bill of sale by way of mortgage to secure 50l.) That has never been registered—I thought the money would be forthcoming—I only agreed to charge him 2l. for all my trouble—I first found out there was a prior charge nine or ten days afterwards—a letter was sent to me by my man, and I went to the premises in Tooley Street and found other persons in possession—I was induced to pay the 38l. to Captain Bayard and the 5l. to the prisoner on the faith that the goods were unencumbered, and I knew there was sufficient security to pay—I should not have advanced another 5l.
Cross-examined. I told Mr. Benson the only matters that influenced my mind was this document and the possession of the goods, and that is what I say still—I certainly thought when I had possession it was my furniture—I did not think there were other claims—I was satisfied with having that authority and having possession of the goods on the faith of what he said—he distinctly said there was no claim upon them—I can't say that I should have advanced the money if he had said nothing one way or the other—I did not give the prisoner any money at all on the 6th October—he said he thought he might be able to get the money in fourteen days, and I said "If you can I shall charge you 2l. for my trouble, will that hurt you V and ho said "No"—at that time I had paid away no money at all—my man started away to take possession at the same time I went to the City Road to pay the claim of 38l. to Captain Bayard—I paid it on the 6th October—Mr. O'Neill proposed that I should have a bill of sale—I had paid Captain Bayard's bill of sale at that time—I don't recollect that I said to Mr. Benson that if I had kept Captain Bayard's bill of sale it would have been all right and I should have got my money as it would have been prior to Mr. Bryant's bill of sale—I may have said so—there was a bill of sale of, Bryant's a month before Bayard's—I signed this document after Mr. Bryant had come in and claimed the goods. (Read: "27th Nov., 1874. Thomas Bryant and Arthur Holloway are both contending that they have a first claim to the goods and effects of Mr. John O'Neill, Tooley Street; they do by this agreement consent to the following terms, that Mr. Cutler shall sell all the effects on the premises and that the nett proceeds be paid into the hands of Mr. Jennings, 18, Bennet's Hill, Doctor's Commons, and he hold the same in trust until it be settled by law or arbitration who is to be entitled to the money"—that was drawn up by my consent—I have had small bills of sale before and used to buy the forms—I was clerk to a money lender—I did not ask for a statutory decalration—if 1 had known what the money lenders do I should have been all right—I have been told by people since—I was told that was a good form and I bought it—I thought the man was honest and I did not think he had got five other bills of sale on the same goods—I went to the premises with Cogswell and saw his business—he did not offer me a second charge on two houses at Teddington—something was said about Teddington, but I had nothing to do with the matter then—I have known Mr. Cogswell three or four years, but have only done business with him the last seven or
eight months—I have had five little transactions with him—I did-not-say I had discounted bills to the amount of 120l. for him—he paid me a shilling in the pound on two dishonoured bills, that was before he introduced O'Neill to me—I put a man in possession of O'Neill's goods on the 6th.—I did not sell some of the goods on that day—when I found out the other men were in possession I went down, and there were some eggs getting rotten and the man said he would go and get somebody to buy them and I sold 150 eggs for 1l. 8s.; nothing more—I shut the shop up when I found there were four other men in and then I applied for a. warrant-a meeting of the bill of sale holders was called and we. discussed this man's affairs—if I had got my money I should have been perfectly satisfied and I would have withdrawn from the prosecution with the Magistrate's. consent—I said if he would, allow me to withdraw money would do me more good than see the man go to prison.
Re-examined. I found a bill of sale had been given to Mr. Bryant only three days before I paid out Captain Bayard, and there was another one a month before that.
THOMAS BRYANT . I live at 18, Bennet's Hill, Doctor's Commons, and am in partnership with Mr. Cutler, as auctioneers—I produce a bill of sale given by the prisoner on the 17th April, to secure an advance of 35l. 17l.; out of that was paid, leaving 18l. due—on the 3rd October he gave me another bill of sale for 35l., which I produce, that left him indebted to us in the sum of 53l.—the first bill of sale was in respect of furniture and effects in Church Board—he afterwards removed from Church Road to Tooley Street, and the second one was given in respect of the. same furnirture and effects there, and also on some stock and fixtures in addition.
Cross-examined. The 17th April is the date of the first bill of sale; an advance was made at that time by me, and Mr. Cutler—we acted together—18l. was left unpaid, and then 35l. was added—I seized, on the 11th or 12th October, for the 18l. on the first bill of sale, and on the 13th, for the second, which was dated the 3rd October—the April bill of. sale still existed—they were both on the same property—I discounted a bill for Mr. O'Neill on 14th August, and the consideration was 30l., and the 5l. added—the bill not being met, I obtained the second bill of sale from him—the property in Tooley Street sold for 56l. 11s. 6d., and we had to pay 5l. or 6l. for taxes, and 7l. or 8l. for rent—I should think the shop had been shut up at least six or seven weeks before the sale took place—there was a little stock of a grocer—I believe Mr. Holloway sold some eggs—I heard incidentally about some houses at Teddington, but I really know nothing about it.
Re-examined. I wanted 53l. and expenses out of the 56l. 11s. 6d.—I was not present at the sale of the eggs by Holloway, and I know nothing about it—the document between myself and O'Neill was entered into after the eggs had been sold.
DONALD MCKINNON . I am clerk in the Judgment Office of the Queen's Bench—I produce five copies of bills of sale registered in the office purporting to be executed by John O'Neill—there is. one before the 1st of October, of 17th April, and 28th May—that is given by John O'Neill to James Bayard—that was satisfied on the 18th October, 1874—there is one of the 31st October to Thomas Bryant.
WILLIAM MITCHELL . I live at 51, Wandsworth Road—I was instructed to take possession of the premises in Tooley Street on the 6th October, and I handed over possession, on behalf of Mr. Holloway, the next day.
THOMAS HENRY MUST . I am clerk to Mr. Holloway—the authority to sell, which has been produced, is in my handwriting—I was present when it was signed—Mr. O'Neill said to Mr. Holloway "I suppose there is no other charge except this?"—Bayard's bill of sale was lying on the table at the time, and Mr. O'Neill said "Certainly not."
Cross-examined. Cogswell was not present, I believe—I have seen him several times.
EDMUND COGSWELL . I live at Vernon House, Amherst Road, Hackney, and have an office in Railway Place, London Bridge—I introduced the defendant to Mr. Holloway—I don't remember the conversation I had with him prior to that.
Cross-examined. This (produced) is my circular—I believe I sent Mr. O'Neill one—I had had four or five transactions with Mr. Holloway before—he has discounted bills for me—I asked him to introduce persons to me who would lend money—when I first saw O'Neill some mention was made about his property at Teddington—he represented that he had some beneficial interest; I don't think he mentioned any sum—he said he wanted a loan of 80l. for twelve months—he might have said he had been carrying on business for three or four years, and he believed it was a business that would answer—he gave me the address in Tooley Street—I believe he said he would be able to get rid of all his liabilities if he had 80l. for twelve months—I asked which was the most pressing of them, and he told me that Captain Bayard had lent him 50l. and he had paid it off except 38l.—he showed me a memorandum from Captain Bayard to that effect—I think the original loan from Captain Bayard was 80l., leaving a balance of 36l.—he told me that was the most pressing claim upon him—I went down to his place with Holloway—I think he brought some books out relative to a Building Society in connexion with the Teddington houses—it was suggested that Holloway should take a second charge of those houses, but at that time Mr. Followay was not introduced as a party to advance—O'Neill told me in my office that he would give a second charge on the Teddington houses—I may have told Mr. Holloway that—I told O'Neill that I would go and see the houses—I did not go—I have no recollection that Holloway agreed to go with me—there was some conversation about fourteen or twenty-one days, but nothing about a renewal of the loan—this receipt is for my fee for taking the inventory at Tooley Street—I think it was 38l. that was paid to Captain Bayard—I might have been present when the bill of sale to Holloway for 50l. was signed, but I don't think I was when the order was signed for going into possession—I know the prisoner has stated on one or two occasions that he did not owe a shilling—I don't remember any discussion when I have been present except with reference to Captain Bayard's bill of sale—my receipt is "Commission on loan and cash to satisfy bill of sale of Captain Bayard's," and from first to last that was the subject of my business relation with O. Neill—I have seen; thousands of bills of sale executed, and I am obliged to take people to money-lenders—it is the general custom for money lenders to require a statutory declaration when taking bills of sale.
Re-examined. I have had four or five transactions with Mr. Holloway in which he has found money for persons I have taken to him—the loan of 80l. was talked about seven or eight days before the 6th October, and as far as Mr. Holloway was concerned he had given up any thought of advancing that amount for that length of time.
NOT GUILTY .
Before Mr. Common Serjeant.
151. WILLIAM SHERWOOD (47), PLEADED GUILTY to feloniously forging and uttering an order for the payment of 13l., also an order for the payment of 50l. with intent to defraud. He received a good character— Judgment respited.
ADJOURNED TO MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1ST,1875.